Earlier this year, Michael Reiss, educator and Anglican priest, admitted to the BBC that he was "forced to resign" from his position at the Royal Society for reported remarks advocating the teaching of creationism in Britain's science classrooms. This followed an earlier quip from Richard Dawkins that his dual role, as Royal Society director of education and an Anglican priest, was like something from "a Monty Python sketch".

Reiss, of course, never advocated the teaching of creationism. Instead his years as an educator have taught him that by ignoring the growing numbers of students who believe in creationism we leave unchallenged their base convictions. Rather, critical discussion of creation and evolution in the science classroom can encourage, as Adam Rutherford has noted, more informed debate of what counts as valid science. Michael Reiss should know. As an evolutionary biologist and priest, Reiss is well positioned to provide an insight into how faith can comfortably accommodate a scientific worldview. Dawkins critiques this accommodationist stance – of course Reiss sees no fundamental disagreement between science and religion, he's a priest, "he would say that, wouldn't he!"

However, Professor Reiss stands in a long line of clergymen-scientists whose work was fundamental to the growth of modern science. Suitably, his controversial comments were made at the British Science Festival, the antecedent of which, the British Association for the Advancement of Science (BA), was a popular, annual, travelling festival in the 19th century. Of the first 14 presidents, six were Anglican clergy and they were responsible for widely promoting and directing scientific research across Britain.

The BA is popularly associated with an emerging conflict between science and religion in the 19th century, with two events significantly contributing to this view. At the 1860 meeting, Thomas Huxley championed Darwinism in a mythical battle with the Bishop of Oxford, Samuel Wilberforce. Similarly, physicist John Tyndall attacked the encroachment of religion on scientific knowledge at the 1874 Belfast meeting; igniting a fervent religious backlash. Yet recent historical scholarship has modified the popular view of a straightforward dichotomy between science and religion. These accounts obscure the longer-term efforts of religious scientists who were actively involved in making the BA a scientific and public success.

Early 19th-century science was dominated by clergymen-scientists; men dedicated to their scientific work but still mindful of their faith. Geologist William Buckland, mathematician Baden Powell and polymath William Whewell found little conflict in their roles as clergymen and men of science. The young Charles Darwin even considered taking holy orders – had the HMS Beagle not provided such an alluring distraction. And although the situation had changed by the late 19th century, this can't be simply explained by an erosion of religious faith among practising scientists.

More recently, it has been reported that 50% of all UK residents are sceptical about evolution; thus the censoring of Professor Reiss can be seen as having risked much. Not only is Reiss part of a historically significant tradition, his interventions have helped keep open a space for positive and sympathetic dialogue in an otherwise acrimonious and polemical situation. His suggestion that "when teaching evolution, there is much to be said for allowing students to raise any doubts they have" is a useful pedagogical tool. Science teachers should be encouraging scientific debate between religious individuals, especially Islamic and Christian creationists; individuals who otherwise view the mainstream scientific establishment as hostile and atheistic. Engaging the students in scientific discussions has a greater chance of affecting their views than simply ignoring the problem.

The total secularisation of science education risks marginalising a broad spectrum of the population who remain religious; especially the 10% of UK residents who espouse young-earth creationism. Professor Reiss' role as priest, educator and evolutionary biologist, provides students with a prominent example of an individual who has accommodated science in his religious worldview. Thus, despite objections from Dawkins and others like him, the clergyman-scientist continues to provide a tried and tested contribution to the harmonising of relations between science and religion.