Ben Spackman

Fault Lines within Faith: Geologists and the LDS Evolution/Creationism Controversy

On October 16th, Ben Spackman spoke on the conflict between religion and science within the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints during the 20th century. He explored the nature and history of the argument, highlighting the key role that geologists played in helping to resolve it.

"Science" and "religion" didn't exist as categories until the 1800s. Prior to that, science was seen as a facet of theology. Nature was created by God; thus, studying how nature worked was simply an extension of learning about God. The two became divided as people began to study nature without caring about what implications it carried about God. With this shift, questions arose. What is the relationship between science and religion? Who has the authority and expertise to interpret nature? These questions were especially prevalent regarding the topic of evolution.

From this heated debate came several competing models. The warfare model proposed that science and religion were separate, opposing ideas that couldn't coexist. Science disproves religion. It painted religious persons as uneducated and backwards. On the opposite end of the spectrum, a different model called the fundamentalist religion model subsumed scientific authority under religion. It assumed that scientific discoveries couldn't be true if they weren't directly supported by scriptural knowledge.

In 1909, aware of the rising conflict, the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ sought to publish a statement that addressed the controversy, titled "The Origins of Man," in the Deseret News. Before publication, they sent it to BYU's first geologist, James E. Talmage, and his colleague John A. Widtsoe for review. These men were unique in that they were converts, immigrants, and extremely well-read, giving them a much different perspective than other Latter-day Saints. They brought invaluable assumptions and knowledge to the debate. During their review, they suggested cutting a section of the statement that expressed anti-evolution ideas in favor of a more neutral stance. The First Presidency readily embraced these changes.

Another geologist who counseled the First Presidency on the debate was Frederick J. Pack. A returned missionary with a PhD in geology and paleontology from Columbia, Pack worked to demarcate science and religion within the Church. He became particularly influential when he married the niece of Heber J. Grant—who was the president of the church at the time—and maintained a close friendship with James Talmage. He wrote an article in response to anti-evolution pamphlets as well as statements from Joseph Fielding Smith, who was adamantly against the theory of evolution. However, rather than attacking their stance, Pack sought to readjust how they saw the relationship between science and religion by attempting to redefine their framework. He explained that science and religion should be separate categories. Religion should not be used to try to disprove science; it's not designed for that purpose. The critique of science must be made on a scientific basis, not a religious one. For most of the first half of the 20th century, this was the stance that the First Presidency held.

In 1953, however, Elder John Widtsoe passed away, leaving the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles without any scientists. His death began, as Spackman described it, a new stage of the church's relationship with science, with Joseph Fielding Smith at its head. Smith, who was now President of the Quorum of the Twelve, began pushing New Earth and anti-evolution ideas once more, even printing a book and claiming it as doctrine as he sent it out to local church and seminary leaders, without the permission of the First Presidency. He was largely influenced by the fundamentalist religion model peddled by Seventh Day Adventist and pseudo-geologist George Price. In his opinion, the doctrines of the Bible were inerrant, and if science contradicted what it said, then the science was wrong.

During this time, a professor of geology at the University of Utah named William Lee Stokes emerged as another advocate of science, publicly opposing President Smith's view. He was an excellent paleontologist with a PhD from Princeton, having had eight species of fossils named after him. Unlike his predecessors, he was forced to be largely at odds with church leaders and spent his life fighting misinformation. He and President Smith exchanged dozens of heated letters arguing their differing views. He spent 15,000 dollars of his own money publishing books on creation, religion, and science as he tried to debunk President Smith's teachings.

Stokes wouldn't see much progress until the late 80s, when he would send a letter to the First Presidency in regard to evolution. President Gordon B. Hinckley was the only functioning member of the Presidency at the time; the others were too sick. Perhaps not coincidentally, President Hinckley had once been a student at the University of Utah, and one of his favorite classes had been geology. His professor? It was none other than Frederick Pack, the very same man who had once counseled the First Presidency. In a full circle moment, President Hinckley released the minutes of the meeting that had led to the 1909 statement, reaffirming what had once been said. Leave science to the scientists.

Geologists have profoundly impacted our church history and our understanding of God and His creations. Spackman implored students to learn from our history so that we aren't misdirected by our past fallacies. We need to understand the paradigms of other people. Otherwise, we are talking past them. By being peacemakers and by working together, we can discover truth.

Learn more about evolution and religion at BYU Biology's Reconciling Evolution or at Spackman's website