The Militant Moderate

During one of several trips to London, the Militant Moderate had an opportunity to spend several hours wandering around Westminster Abbey.  He found it interesting to look at the names of those honored individuals buried vertically beneath the flat stones of the floor.  There he saw a stone with the name of Isaac Newton, of “apple” and laws of gravity fame.  Then nearby, what to his wondering eyes did he behold but the name of Charles Darwin, buried there in the area in front of the altar with high honors.  

Researching this surprise later, it was found that although Darwin’s writings were debated among the British religious and scientific community, Darwin himself was honored as a scientist, researcher, and writer.  His appearance in Westminster is not an effrontery to the Church.  This contrasts sharply with the arch-evil image and opprobrium he has been given in much of America during the past one hundred and fifty years.

Charles Darwin (1809-1882) was educated for the clergy, for medicine, and then emerged as the world’s foremost geologist and naturalist of his era.  Having already written, documented, and displayed artifacts of his five-year, around the world voyage on HMS Beagle, and describing the differing species found in South America, Galapagos, and other sites, Darwin hastened the publication of his “Origin of the Species” in 1859 supporting his theory, first discussed decades earlier.  Another scientist named Wallace, working in Borneo, was about to publish a similar theory.  

Although widely accepted among scientists, Darwin’s writings provoked much controversy among the religionists.  While Darwin simply relied on his writings, others debated in his defense.  The most famous debates were between Thomas Huxley and Bishop “Soapy” Sam Wilberforce.  Darwin was not an atheist, as accused, but in later life considered the organized church as somewhat irrelevant to his thought and his work.  He stated that a scientist’s duty is “to explore the wonders of God’s creation.”  Contrary to some reports, Darwin never “repented” or denounced his work and writings.  The burial honor at Westminster exemplified the high honor in which he was held by persons of influence.  

In this country, the most famous, relevant event was the Scopes “Monkey” Trial in 1925 in Dayton, TN.  Tennessee had a law against teaching evolution in the schools, and some 15 other states were considering such under the urging of a national group led by perennial democratic presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan.  A local drugstore conspiracy, opposed to the law and seeking fame and fortune for Dayton, sought out the high school coach and substitute biology teacher willing to cooperate, and then had charges filed against him to force a test.  

The trial pitted the orator Bryan against the calculating Clarence Darrow, employed by the ACLU.  It ended with a guilty verdict and a $100 fine, which pleased the conspirators.  They then appealed as planned to the Tennessee Supreme Court, which dismissed the case in 1926.  Although the goal of having the law ruled unconstitutional at the higher level was not accomplished as hoped, it slowed the movement.  Only Arkansas and Mississippi followed in passing such a law.  Bryan died two weeks after the trial.    

The controversy over evolution appeared to take the back burner for a few decades, largely kept alive in the pulpits of fundamentalist churches.  It emerged with renewed vigor as the pseudo-science of “creationism,” touted in scientific sounding publications and pushed by fundamentalists for inclusion in the science curriculum.  In Oklahoma and in other states, textbook committees or others in authority attempted to have inserts put into science texts.  Laws were sought.  Finally, a U.S. Supreme Court decision declared “creationism” to be religion, and that it could not be taught as science.  President Bush entered the more recent version of the controversy favoring the teaching of “intelligent design.”  The December, 2005, federal court decision on the Dover, PA, board mandate of teaching “intelligent design” affirmed it to be “creationism” in disguise (thus religion), and it is therefore prohibited from being taught as science as per the previous Supreme Court ruling.  

One might have thought that such decisions should settle these matters in secular institutions, but not so.  The Kansas State School Board case continues until a higher court intervenes.  And, in Oklahoma five different bills by five different republican authors, pressing for the teaching of intelligent design, are pre-filed and awaiting the 2006 legislative session.  

Indeed, in this advanced age of science and technology, ignorance and superstition appear as prevalent as ever to the Militant Moderate and others.  Just consider the stem cell controversy.  But, alas, that is another topic.  

               ……………… Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard

Note:  For more discussion, see the Militant Moderate’s previous blog on Intelligent Design.  He favors that religious concept, but opposes the teaching of it as science in the schools.