What Conflict?
The University Senate is a policy
making body composed largely of facul
ty members and a smattering of ad
ministrators with some student
representation on a number of its stand
ing committees.
Students, however, have voting
rights only in the Senate's standing
committees, they have no voting rights
on the floor of the Senate itself.
Therefore, the student body really has
no say in the making of University
policy.
In a speech given as part of the Ar
tists and Lecture series last term, Clark
Kerr, former president of th e
University of California at Berkeley,
talked about the problem of giving stu
dents more power. Kerr said that stu
dents would surely be given a greater
role in the making of policy at
Universities throughout the country.
Kerr also said that, since the
legislature and other outside forces are
taking away some powers, the ad
ministration and the faculty will be
extremely reluctant to part with the
power they have left.
It seems that this phenomenon has
happened at Penn State recently. The
University Senate is adamant about
relinquishing any power to students
through voting rights on the Senate
floor.
The Senators are obviously feeling
the pinch of the Board of Trustees and
the Administration. These groups are
also worried about relinquishing any of
their power since there is the possibility
that the legislature of this state might
usurp it.
The legislature is talking and vot
ing on measures to control campus
dissent which would, in effect, make the
Trustees and the administrators more
responsible to the hand that feeds the
University. Therefore, the faculty mem
bers must also feel this pinch. especially
since there has been talk in the
legislature about faculty loyalty oaths
being strengthened and calls for throw-
TO Battu Taltrutan
Published. Tuesday through Saturday during the Fall, Winter and Shrine Toms, and Thursday during thu Summer
Term, by students el The Pennsylvania State University. Second class hostas* gall at State Collette. Pe. Mal.
Circulation: 12400.
Malt Subscriallan Prism 212.60 a year
Malfine Address Box 447. Slate Callum. Pa. HIM
Editorial and Business Office Basement of Sackett (North Ind)
=TM
JAMES R. DORRIS
Editor
Fallowing is a list of the 6xetutive officers of collegian, Inc., the publisher of The Daily Collegian:
Gerald G. Eggert, Pres. T A. Florio, Vice Pres. Mrs. Donne S. Clemson, Exec. SeA
110 Sparks Bldg. 4M Packer Hall 20 Sackett Aids.
University Park, Pa. University Park, PA Unlvers ltY
THURSDAY, JULY, 3, 1969
PAGE TWO
Accident of Birth
Religious preference is, for most of us, but an accident of birth. We belong
to different faiths because the ancestors of each accepted the faith of the
community where they happened to live,' and we in turn accepted without
question the faith of our family. Thoughtful people know there is no reason
to believe then• religion is the one true religion.
"The faith of your choice" is misleading. We do not choose our religion—
it is indelibly branded into us by indoctrination in childhood much as calves
are branded on a Western ranch. THE GREAT AND INEXCUSABLE TRA
GEDY IS THAT PEOPLE OF THE HIGHEST INTELLIGENCE IN NON
RELIGIOUS FIELDS AND OF THE GREATEST GOOD WILL REMAIN
DIVIDED AND IN CONFLICT BECAUSE THEY REFUSE TO EVALUATE
OR PERMIT OTHERS TO EVALUATE THAT WHICH THEY ACCEPTED
IN IMMATURE AND INEXPERIENCED CHILDHOOD.
The Sectarian Mind
Members of the board of trustees and faculty of a college in Rhode Island
subscribed annually to the doctrinal statement following: "We believe in the
Scriptures of the Old and the New Testament as verbally inspired by God and
inerrant in the original writings, and as the supreme and final authority in
faith and life." Untold millions of people agree. Could any but a sectarian mind
believe that a loving, merciful, just God wculd harden Pahroah's heart (Exodus
11:10) so that he would not let the Israelites go, then kill in each Egyptian
family because he would not (Exodus 12:29)? Or kill everybody on the earth
except the few people in Noah's Ark? Surely the slaughtered children were
not to blame! Your sectarianism may be less crude than at the Rhode Island
college, but sectarianism is basically the same everywhere—a blind and blind
ing belief which will not permit the sectarian to make free use of accumulating
knowledge or other evidence which disproves or casts doubt on the basic
sectarian commitment.
Conspiracy of Silence
Persistence of sectarianism is otomoted strongly by the "conspiracy of
silence" or so-called "religious toleration." There is a deadly parallel between
the "conspiracy of silence" on sectarianism today with the "conspiracy of
silence" on the "social diseases" a few years ago. So long as people were "too
nice" to mention gonorrhea and, syphilis, these diseases went largely untreated
and ate away at countless victims. Because we are "too nice" to call attention
to the errors and other evils within one another's sectarianism, they eat away
at our religious life. The less defensible the practices of a sect, the more it
stands to gain by the "conspiracy of silence." While critics of sectarianism
generally remain silent, zealous sectarians urge their points of view with emo
tional fervor. Free and frank evaluation would reduce many evils of sec
tarianism, but neither sectarian leadership nor sectarian dictatorship willingly
submits to such evaluation.
The "conspiracy of silence" seems as prevalent among educators as among
others. The president of the West Liberty State College of West Virginia wrote
me that he appr6ved of Truth First discussion groups in religion but that the
discussion should never question doctrine or belief.
Channels of Communication Closed
Many channels of communication are restricted or closed to those who
would evaluate sectarianism. The Editor of Free World wanted to publish my
article "Brotherhood: Neu; World Religion" but some members of the editorial
board objected and it was never published. A paper in a neighboring city has
refused to run the ad, "Which is Wiser? To remain divided into the
of religious sects into which we happened to be born, or to unite in an in
clusive Brotherhood to replace existing sects?" on the ground that "Our pub
,. •
Editorial Opinion
ing out faculty members who encourage
or participate in campus disorders.
On the low end of the totem pole
and, therefore, getting the raw end of
the deal, are the students, those poor,
lowly, transient souls who are trying to
become responsible and make decisions
for themselves, even though no one will
allow them to.
As a perfect example of the asinine
argument used to keep control away
from the students is the one which the
Senate used at its June meeting to re
ject allowing students to vote on the
Senate floor.
The Committee on Committees and
Rules, which has no student represen
tation but which met with some stu
dents, said that there were two reasons
that students should not vote on the
floor of the Senate. The first was
because the Senate was constituted
only three years ago "after an ex
haustive study" and the unanimous
adoption of the constitution, by-laws
and standing rules, indicating
"overwhelming approval" of the princi
ples—those of the composition. This is
known as the old "Never let the power
go" syndrome previously mentioned.
The second reason, and by far the
most hilarious, was because a conflict of
interest could arise if a person were vot
ing on academic policy while pursuing a
degree here. At Tuesday's Senate meet
ing the faculty members were debating
and discussing the term system, as op
posed to the semester system. The
discussion began academically but soon
turned to the finer points of the
systems, such as "will the faculty get
paid for nine or 12 months under the
semester plan? What will happen to
federal, state and foundation grants to
the faculty members if we leave the
term system? Will we be able to work
or do research in the summer?"
Conflict of interest???
Look who's talking.
Successor to The Free Lance, est. 1887
64 Years of Editorial Freedom
021=ZZED
lice hours: , Monday thrush Friday. 1:31) a.m. M 4 p.m
Member of The Associated Press
-413!10.
WHY NOT ONE RELIGION?
Quality Of Religion Is At Least As Important As Quantity of Religion
PAUL BATES
Business Manager
fisher feels that the interests of the greatest number of our readers are best
served by avoiding controversial subjects of a religious nature." A Boston paper
has rejected the ad, "Brotherhood Church is a free pamphlet."
When I submitted an ad of my Toward World Brotherhood to World Bit
port, its Vice President in Charge of Advertising returned the check with the
comment: "We do not think, however, that our columns can be available for
this type of advertising, since we are quite sure it will involve us in controversy
with other sects. If you feel there is some other way of writing your copy
so that the controversial angle will not appear, then we'd be perfectly happy
to run it Is there any field except sectarianism where a great national maga
zine feels it must avoid a controversial issue?
Calling itself "Holy" and its tradition "Sacred," a sect considers any
"attack on it too wicked to be tolerated in the public press. Would any but a
group unsure of itself deny its critics the opportunity to sell their points of
view in an open market of ideas? Is that which must protect itself by such
censorship really worth protecting?
Bulwarks of Sectarianism
These, then, are the four bulwarks of sectarianism: (1) Childhood indoc
trination; (2) Reluctance of sectarians to reexamine their beliefs and practices
freely; (3) "Conspiracy of silence;" (4) Closing of the lines of communication
to those who would evaluate sectarianism.
One Religion Offers Most
1. Refusing to examine itself critically or to face searching questions
by others, a religious sect retains obviously untrue and harmful—even degrad
ing—items side by side with items that are true, helpful and elevating.
2. Mutual frank evaluation of points of view by various sects is very
much better than silent indiscriminate toleration by each of anything and
everything that another calls religion.
3. A great proportion of the resources of each sect, given in the name
of religion, is wastefully used up in just keeping alive and in promoting self
centered sectarian ends rather than in ministering to the religious needs of
individuals and communities.
4. Unless Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and other
sects are merged into or replaced by a great One Religion, sectarianism will
continue to divide the world and communities into self-centered groups, isolate
peoples, use sectarian prejudice for political advantage, and stimulate conflict
which is deadly dangerous in the atomic-space sects.
5. Religious life should and will be integrated in One Religion which
should and will absorb or replace existing sects.
6. The intelligently religious person, knowing that religious preferences
which divide people into sects are the result of indoctrination in childhood
rather than of the greater truth, plausibility or superiority of any sect, will
not hesitate to change to One Religion.
Are Brothers Fools?
Are those who try to organize One Religion of Brotherhood but fools
rushing in where even the bravest angels fear to tread? At least we. have
received-much encouragement from many who could scarcely be called foolish.
Some comments on my Toward World Brotherhood which suggested and ex
plained the Brotherhood Movement are:
"You have struck a very important note in the problem of world organiza
tion and unity. In fact I think the most important one as well as the most.ne
glected and most needed. There is almost a conspiracy of silence on this phase
of the problem—not deliberate, but certainly testifying to the immense strength
of the sectarian evil you so ably, discuss. Yours is almost a voice in the wilder-
IrIP EA N CTS HEREs t ak
I l
'' l FlgiM p e 5 - AWING
~ 7:10 N FRANCE..
,
~ ,5 LONELY
,,,i ..) -
" . .".-ii (14-6 rh - / C 4-
.„.m. ..-f. .
I SMALL TAKE NER 6(1 THE
HAND, AND INVITE HERTO HAVE
A ROOT BEER WITH ME ...
CIO
_ NAY
Letters to , the Editor
(Editor's Note: Following is a letter to the editor of the
University's Alumni News which was also sent by the
writer to The Collegian for publication. The writer asked
that a copy of President Walker's article be published
also since most students do not receive the alumni publi
cation. That article appears elsewhere on this page.)
Alum Attacks Walker Column
TO THE EDITOR: This is an open letter to President Walker
from a recent meteorology graduate.
Dear Dr. Walker
On June 14, 1969, when you told us not to merely hold a
specialized job but to be thinking citizens and to work for the
benefit of all monkind, your speech brought my four-year ad
miration for you to a peak. However, when I got home and.
read "The President's Page" in the May Alumni News, I could
not believe my eyes. The only reasonable statement you made
was that you don't understand the reasons for destruction on
college campuses. I agree wholeheartedly. You don't even
seem to realize that most destruction is caused by reactionary
"vigilante" groups and by police. Furthermore, the
assumptions . you have made about militant students are un
fair, insulting, and in most cases false.
First, you refer to working your way through college.
Most of the protesting students I know have good summer
jobs, and some pay all their expenses by working in the school
year also, though these days the study load is considerably
greater than previously.
Second, you say students "...can 'goof off' and the welfare
state will keep them." For one thing, even the "uneducated"
ghetto people would rather work than be paid not to, let alone
my fellow students. Furthermore, I don't mean to brag—just
to show how unfairly you have insulted me. I "goofed off" so
much (I hardly had time to demonstrate in Old Main
February 24) that I got a 3.70 that term—my best average
ever! The only other protesting meteorology major in my
class makes the Dean's List quite often. Others in there I
know have excellent grades. The students who "goof off" are
the reactionary ones who were outside Old Main February 24.
They were the violent ones: some threw eggs, one of Which
broke a student's glasses and cut his eye. Some swung at us as
we peacefully marched out of Old Main singing. I heard they
were angry because they had just flunked mid-term ex
aminations.
Finally, the ultimate insult to my fellow protestors:
"Whet they want to do mostly is take." No. Dr. Walker, my
generation does not want to take like yours did—from the
poor: exploiting the black man and the non-white peoples of
Latin America, Africa, and Asia. We do not want to dress as
though we're better than other people not as fortunate. We
want to change society and not just be a cog by doing what, is
expected. We want to give to those in need and help them help
themselves. Like you, we want to make a break in the social
structure, but in a different way. You wanted to do what you
thought was right; now we want to do what we think is right.
Dr. Walker, you have talked about the necessity for an
open mind. If your mind is open, perhaps you will read, and
appreciate, an article by your colleague Dr. Holloman, Presi
dent of the University of Oklahoma, in Sunday Roto magazine
in the June 15 Pittsburgh Press. This should give you some
insight on student dissent.
Michael H. Merry, '69
Can anything be done to break through or by-pass the bulwarks?
One Religion defends six theses
AM A q 00146 GIRL
APPROACHES...IT'S THE COMM/
LAGG I MET "THE OTHER
u t ,
f
'
SHE'S KIND OF UGLY,AUT
'THAT CAN'T DE HELPED..
Presidenigo alker s
Letter to a Roommate
(This column takes the form of a letter
written by President Walker‘to his former col
lege roommate.)
Dear Bill
It was good to hear from you again: I
figure that in the.3s years since we graduated
from college we have written to each other
seven times or at about the rate of once every
five years. And we have seen each other no
more than four times.
But it is good that college friendships still
remain, and I get considerable strength know
ing that you are
,there and I can still talk with
you. We both have achieved some measure of
success. You have become a "tycoon" in in
dustry, and I have put in my share of work in
public (?) service.
I must say that the last paiagraph in your
letter and the question on which it ended has
stirred me to try to reply. You say that you
can't understand the reasons for destruction on
college campuses, and I must admit that I
can't either. And you say. "Who in the heck are
these kids that would destroy the colleges that
meant so much to you and me?"
I am not sure that I can answer that
question, but it deserves some sort of an
answer if one can give it. First let me tell you
who these young militants are not. They cer
tainly are not people such as you or I. Both of
us were the first of our families to go to col
lege. You once told me that your father could
not quite grasp the idea c•f your going fifteen
hundred miles east to Harvard. I am not sure
that mine could either. ,
But you and I were both looking for
something a device by which we could make
/ a break in the social structure and rise above
the status in life that our parents had. My
father was a blue-collar worker; and even
though he worked with his mind, he was still a
factory employee. I wanted something better
than this and was determined to get it. A col
lege education, I felt, was the key to the
situation. You once told me this was your
position too.
Both of us worked to get through college. I
remember we both started our freshman year
as waiters in the dining halls. The next year we
went to work for the Georgian you as a bus
boy and I on the front end of the dishwashing
machine. We stuck to it during the long and
horrible depression when jobs were hard to get
seven long years, in my case, until I got my
doctor's degree.
Well, things are somewhat different today.
Almost no one works his way through college.
If the "old man" can't provide junior with a
college education fully paid for tuition, room
and board he expects to get it as a gift from
somebody in industry or from the. government,
not as a favor and not as a privilege, but as a
right. And since the person getting an
education benefits from it more than anyone
else, this is a point of view that I can't unders
tand and I'll bet you can't either.
Now let's look at it from the other end.
Who are these militants who would destroy our
campuses? Usually they come from fairly af
fluent families. Both father and mother have
had a college education and usually father has
a fairly important job in life. Junior, as he sees
it, cannot possibly end up better than the "old
man."
College is not a chance to break out of the
social structure; it is merely a must to keep up
ness."—John Dewey.
. . your book which I am sure will make a real contribution to our
present day thinking."—Rabbi Joshua Loth Liebman, Temple Israel, Boston.
"I am confident that it will do much to contribute toward the advance
ment of the high objectives which it so eloquently urges upon American
public opinion"—Sumner Welles, former Under Secretary of State.
' "You are stressing one of the most important phases of religion that the
world needs at the present time."—Ernest John Chave, Divinity School, Uni
versity of Chicago.
"I am referring your book immediately to certain members of our faculty
and a committee which is now concerned with the development of a program
in religion and ethics for The State College of Washington."--E. H. Hopkins,
Vice President.
"Your booklet is a fine statement."
president of Vassar College
Its contents are undeniable facts . : . It is a masterpiece, and should ac
complish the purpose for which it was written."—Thomas L. Clarke, Justice
of the Peace, Brown City, Michigan.
"I have placed it in the Library of International House where I am sure
it will be profitably read and appreciated."—Helen Taubenblatt, Director of
Admissions, International House, Chicago.
"It will prove a fine addition to our reference shelves."—Jean M. Mur
dock, Librarian, Public Library, West Bridgewater, Massachusetts.
". • . it will be the re-making of the world."—Eleanor V. Young, Boston.
"I agree with every word in the book."—Carl C. Taylor, foi;mer president
of the American Sociological Society.
"If at any time you form an active unit Of this sort, I should like to be
considered for membership."—Herbert J. Redfern, Keene Teachers College,
Keene, New Hampshire.
Just Another Brain-Washing Sect?
Is One Religion just another brain-washing sect to divide religious people
still further? There is a vast difference between an inclusive Brotherhood,
modern in outlook and knowledge, where varying points of view are adjtisted
in the search for a fuller brotherhood, and the excluding, binding authoritative
tradition built up over the centuries about a personal Savior or a chosen people.
One Religion is free to evaluate—free to accept or reject on the basis of
quality alone. It is truth-seeking. Adherents believe that an earnest, intelli
gent search yields far more religious truth than the blind acceptance of the
tradition of any sect.
Sectarianism is blindly propagandic. A sect has been defined as a group
with closed minds who propagate what it already "knows" is the truth. Sec
tarians who mistake gullibility for faith are prisoners within the shell of their
own sectarian tradition—no matter how fine or how foul the shell.
Brain washing, begun as early as possible and continued throughout life,
is the sectarian process. Prospective clerics are brain-washed for years.
Each sect has its own "reforms" from time to time and may talk of "unity,"
but that is like clipping a few whiskers off the sectarian tiger and leaving the
temper and the claws of the tiger intact.
IF YOU PREFER INTELLIGENT CHOICE OF RELIGION TO BLIND,
BRAINWASHED, CLERICALLY MANIPULATED ACCEPTANCE OF FAM
ILY TRADITION WHICH KEEPS RELIGIOUS PEOPLE SEGREGATED,
ASK FOR THE FREE PAMPHLET, "BROTHERHOOD: ONE RELIGION
FOR ALL."
with what the family expects. Moreover, money
is of no consequence to many of these students.
The "old man" will provide it anyway. There
isn't any desire to go into a profession to insure
a good job and a 'proper place in society. That
comes whether or not they have a good job,
and therefore, the idea of a professionally
oriented education does not loom as an impor-.
twit consideration.
Many of these "troublemakers,"' as you
Call them, go to college because it is expected
of them, and the only end in sight after getting
a bachelor's _degree is another free• ride in
graduate school before they have to put their
noses to the grindstone and do some.work.(or,
as a matter of fact, will they ever have to
work?) Perhaps they can "goof-off?.. and . the
welfare state will keep them, or they can
marry it, or the "old man" will go on forever
providing the wherewithal.
YoU have to remember that most of these
noisemakers have never known a war or a
depression. You and I knew two wars and two
depressions, and we still run a little scared. We
want the country to be in a position to defend
'itself, and we want to protect our families
against the disaster of a depression.
Many of these kids feel they are not
wanted, and the truth of-the matter is that they
probably aren't. They are not wanted because
they have never given anything of themselves
to an9body.
What they want to do mostly is take. They
have never done any chores; they have never
contributed to the upbringing, care, or
discipline of younger brothers or sisters. Many
of this kind are unbelievably unkempt and wear
the shabbiest of clothes, not out of necessity
as many in our generation did but because
they find something exotic about dressing as
though they were poor.
Frankly, it has been my obersvation that
you'll never see a student from a poor family
dress this way probably because the poor
know what it's really like, and find nothing
romantic about it. Ever since birth these dissi
dents have had things laid out on a platter; and
if they didn't get what they wanted, all they
had to do was to throw a tantrum and the
parents would settle with them by giving them
what they wanted.
Would you believe that a student a
seniore came into my office recently and
made what I thought was an impossible de
mand. I, from my point of view (over 30),
couldn't see why he would think it would be
granted anyway_But he certainly did. And
when I refused to grant him what he wanted,
he was not just awe struck but actually jumped
up and down and shrieked and howled like a
five-year old and apparently thought that his
noise and disturbance would make me change
a carefully considered decision.
Such behavior must work in . hi` awn
household, and this is a sad commentary on the
kind of upbringing he has received. What do
you think will happen to him if he ever joins
General Electric or any other firm? My guess
is he won't. He will probably go into welfare
work on the receiving end instead of on the giv
ing.
Well, Bill, it was good to hear from you and
maybe we can get together at our 50th reunion.
Sincerely yours,
ERIC
'—Henry Noble MacCracken, forrner
•
Joseph I. Arnold
16 Garden Street
Cambridge, . Massachusetts 02138