But when you apply for a JTF grant, one of they things they ask is how does your project further the ideals of John Templeton. Here’s how Wikipedia describes some of that:
As a member of the Presbyterian Church, Templeton was dedicated to his faith. However, Templeton eschewed dogma and declared relatively little was known about the divine through scripture, espousing what he called a “humble approach” to theology and remaining open to the benefits and values of other faiths. Commenting on his commitment to what he called spiritual progress, “But why shouldn’t I try to learn more? Why shouldn’t I go to Hindu services? Why shouldn’t I go to Muslim services? If you are not egotistical, you will welcome the opportunity to learn more.”
And here’s from the JTF website itself:
Although Sir John was a Presbyterian elder and active in his denomination (also serving on the board of the American Bible Society), he espoused what he called a “humble approach” to theology. Declaring that relatively little is known about the divine through scripture and present-day theology, he predicted that “scientific revelations may be a gold mine for revitalizing religion in the 21st century.” To his mind, “All of nature reveals something of the creator. And god is revealing himself more and more to human inquiry, not always through prophetic visions or scriptures but through the astonishingly productive research of modern scientists.” Sir John’s own theological views conformed to no orthodoxy, and he was eager to learn not just from science but from all of the world’s faith traditions.
As he once told an interviewer, “I grew up as a Presbyterian. Presbyterians thought the Methodists were wrong. Catholics thought all Protestants were wrong. The Jews thought the Christians were wrong. So, what I’m financing is humility. I want people to realize that you shouldn’t think you know it all.” He expected the John Templeton Foundation to stand apart from any consideration of dogma or personal religious belief and to seek out grantees who are “innovative, creative, enthusiastic, and open to competition and new ideas” in their approach to the Big Questions.
That doesn’t sound like a narrow minded crazy religious nut.
I recently sent in a pre-proposal to JTF and I really don’t see where it was trying to force any particular view. If you look at what gets funded (even on the religious side) it’s very diverse. I’m not really that invested in JTF that much (other than some funding for my project would be nice) but I think some of the negative characterizations are over blown.
It reminds me of when chemists apply for research funding from the Petroleum Research Fund (an endowed research fund of the American Chemical Society that gave out $17 million last year). It’s funded by “big oil” but they don’t govern the specifics of the research, they just want it to be (vaguely) petroleum related.