| OCR Text |
Show B. Y..0- CONTROVERSY ON HIGHER CRITICISM College Students in Well Worded Letter Sustains the Professors' Stand , ,, . T EVOLUTION NOT RETROGRESSION BUT PROGRESSION 41 Wo have Just reached the point in our educational career as a college where our work la being recognized by up-to-date universities.. This recognition recog-nition means considerable to us educationally edu-cationally and to our hopes as a church of wielding an Influence among humanity. If tho proposed restrictions are adopted It needs only common foresight to foretell the effect upon our credit abroad. "Those of us who have had work under tho men who aro being criticised criti-cised nro unanimous In denying tho alleged evil effects of their teachings. "Thoy aro all leaders In their respective re-spective Jlncs. They are eminently successful as teachers, and for our present needs wo consider them to bo """""""without peers. Aside from our appreciation appre-ciation of their scholarship, wehavo tho highest respect for their Integrity as men and as loyal members of the church. Need of Such Courses . "Thoso of us who have had missionary mis-sionary experience realize tho need of Just such a course as wo are getting get-ting now to enable us to defend the truth against all comers. Whllo wo are free to admit that In tho now light I wfc somo points of doctrine, as we havo understood them, lose tholr former color, wo seen a deeper meaning In life than before, additional evidence of an all-wlso God, and a new and holler significance in the messago of Mor-monism Mor-monism and all other rovelatlons of God to man. "It Is not simply a question of dropping drop-ping tho professors who havo been criticised ,but we believe that tho proposed pro-posed policy, if persisted In, can amount to nothing else than a deathblow death-blow to our college work, because It " Is Impossible to secure men equal in scholarship to the, ones wo have, who .are so thoroughly In sympathy with tho church, who do not glvo credence cre-dence to the same objectionable theories. the-ories. We havo great faith in tho church and can hardly Imagine that any policy pol-icy contrary to its best needs will bo adopted, but wo ask you to consider con-sider what ho proposed restriction would mean for, us educationally, and what It would mean to our critics, and what It would mean to our standing In tho educational world. Somo of our fondest hopes havo been for tho fu-turo fu-turo of tho "dear old . Y. U." that it would continue to grow and continue contin-ue to adapt Itself to tho growing needs of. humanity nnd demonstrate to the world, as only that can demonstrate, thai Mormonlsm is a real, vitalized divine Institution. VSlgned: C. H. Carroll, G. L. Luke, I C.-W. Whakes, Hober C. Snell, Fred Buss, Andrew Gibbons, II. W. Wood-wardj Wood-wardj lSyrlng Thompson, J. I). Storrs, Anna Ollorton, G. I'. Olson, M. O. Paulson, S. II. UIgby, J. Morrill Gcorgo Lola Ollorton, Alma Esplln, J. W, Nixon, Jr., Ilobuon Hill, Chas. Sell-wenckc, Sell-wenckc, Kimball Young, Charles Redd, Hay Oborhansley, M. W. I'oulson, D. It. Mitchell, Eli F. Taylor, Samuel rinlrd, Harrison Hurst, Carl F. Gyving, Gy-ving, Emily Woodward, Loroy Nolson, I Gcorgo Haws, F, L. Hickman, J. M. I Pond, Paul Minor, James Jensen, Hay I Monson, Mario Clar'lc, Zlna Johnson, I f"Tl n-Tucker, II. L. need, Harold I Finch, William Baker, Carlos Wood- I ward, Thomas h. Martin, David Gour- I oy, A. n. Overlade, Mary Hill, James 1 Clove, Jr., Josoph, D. Fostor, Hyrum I Harris, Charles Hafon, A. L. Kolly, I Hans Potofson, L. It. Nolson, Juanlta Johnson, Elva Kolly, Archlo Thurman, Kenneth Dorg, 8. W. Williams, Bessie Flmlloy, Aubroy Andelin, J. n, Tip- pets, F. Wm. Hacking, Arthur h. Hcosloy. Odocn Luko, Vlrglo h. John, son, Dottlo Doal, Goo. Worthon, Eras- tus S, Roninoy, Margaret Crook,-Chnr- lotto Greenwood, Hugh Holdaway, G. Hay HaleJ. G. G. Moldrum, Laura Hickman, Emily Wanlass, Satllo Lloyd, Dora Day, Pearl Holdaway, J. L. Lybert, Hyrum Manwarlng, W. L. Wanlass, Laura Ulrd, Preal Kelsey, Samanthn Thornc, Pearl Kelsey, Her-schel Her-schel Pearson, A. W. Tracy, Arthur Hafcn, Ivy Hall, LaPreal Straw, Aim-io Aim-io Taylcr, A. T. Rasmusn, B. F. Larson. Latest developments lnvthe n. Y. U. controversy Inv6lvlngtne attlude of Professors Joseph ani' 'Henry Peterson Pe-terson and It. V. Chamberlain on evolution evo-lution and higher criticism aro to the effect that tho students aro taking a hand. Tho college students of tho university un-iversity of which there are 114 enrolled enrol-led held a meeting at yhteh a protest pro-test or "petition" agalnslVthe dismissal dismis-sal of the professors Involved was drawn up nnd ratified by 93 out of the 114. Text of Petition.. Tho complete text of the "petition" Is as follows; "Wo believe that we have sincerely at heart tho interests of tho Brlgham Young university, and perhaps our own selfish Interests as. co.Uege students, stu-dents, and wo respectfullyylask that our voice bo considered 'nVa matter that Is of vital concern to the school and to every Individual connected therewith, viz., tho question ns to whether somo of tho subjects of scl-enco scl-enco which are being taught from tho modern scientific viewpoint arc to be excluded. We take It for granted that the question at Issue Is mutually un derstood without detailed explanation nnd will proceed at .once with our roa-sens roa-sens for asking that Dr. Joseph Peterson, Peter-son, Dr. nalph V. Chamberlain and Prof. Henry Peterson shall bo retained retain-ed by tho faculty . In tho first place, wo bellovo that freedom of Investagatlon is a fundamental funda-mental necessity for all scientific, religious, re-ligious, or any other kind of progress, and that we, of all people, can least afford -to take any Btand against it, or do anything that will be Interpreted Interpre-ted as such a stand. "Wo bollovo that tho great problems of modern science are worthy of our most respectful consideration, and wo rcallzo tho folly of attempting to solve them Independently and alone by Ignoring Ig-noring tho findings of the past and the work that is being dono at present pres-ent by othors who aro striving with honesty and sincerity equal to our own nnd with better facilities. Evolution a Working Hypothesis. "Even If It were desirable for a church school to maintain an attitude contrary to tho generally accepted stand of the scientific word, It Is absolutely ab-solutely Imposslblo for the reason Continued on Page 8. B. Y. U, CONTROVERSY ON, HIGHER CRITICISM (Continued from Pago 1) 1 that, except In theology, the church does not furnish adequate materials for college, work, and we must necessarily neces-sarily look elsewhere. "From some of tho printed statements state-ments of tho first presidency wo take It Hint It Is not the function of tho church to pnss upon scientific qucs-"tlons, qucs-"tlons, but rnthor to furnlBh theological theologi-cal direction. Tho genernl theory of evolution Is not put forth ns theological theolo-gical doctrine, but Is held to simply as a working hypothesis, becnuso of tho great number of obsorvnble facts In nnttiro which It explains nnd to which It gives meaning. It will bo discarded dis-carded without a tear Just as soon as nnother hypothesis Is brought forth which explains a larger number of facts, but.wo bellovo that wo ought not to condemn this vnluablo theory until we are able to cxamlno tho evidence evi-dence upoji which It Is based moro carefully jind moro. completely than It hns over boon examined before nnd produce abetter explanation of tho workings pf nature with which to con-damn con-damn tho(1old one. No other soro of condemnation can over bo offectlvo. Shall wo acquire the power to do this by excluding tho subject from our schoolB? freedom of Inquiry. In vtow, oftho fact hat lito best modern educational thought takes as a basis tho theory of evolution, we feel that It should be taught here. This doos not moan that wo thereby assume that tho theory Is true or false, but simply that becauso It Is commanding the attention of the great est thinkers, It should bo open to Investigation. In-vestigation. As college men nnd women wo hnvo confidence that If tho evidences which tend to support tho theory of evolution evolu-tion to bo presented simply for what they arc worth wo will have sufficient discretion to determine whether or not we wish to accept them. In so far as wo have studied' the subjects In question wo feci thnt we have broadened, broad-ened, In that wo have seen both sides of a mooted question. Wo bellovo that It Is not tho proper attitude to fight a proposition by ruling it completely out of consideration. We feel that It our gospel Is true It will triumph over error wthout nny nrtificlal protection. pro-tection. Wo understand that It Invites us to Investigate anything that Is "praiseworthy or of good report," henco to prohibit the investigation of n scientific theory so well established as the theory of evolution, Is scarcely living up to our understanding of the gospel. Would' It not be better to throw the question open to study nnd Investigation, If Torino other reason than that we stand 'for fair play and toleration of tho beliefs of all men? Is this not our missionary watchword? "Wo nro convinced thnt nothing can be gained by excluding these subjects from our college, since every man or -woman who goes east or west, to col-legos col-legos of high rank must face tho ques-. tlons. Wo believe that wo should provide pro-vide for him to meet them hero un-der'clrcumfltances un-der'clrcumfltances that will assist him In making for sane, conservative and logical adjustment, . |
