The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1872-12-13
principles. Herein is the very point

/
men than Darwin assert that it re-
mains to be proven that one single
correct example fully substantiating
his conclusions has been found in the
fossil remains of past ages. The great
connecting link in the chain of his
argument is wanting; viz: the fos-
sill remains of one distinct genera
merging into q higher genera, yet
retaining the peculiar characteristics
of both. For this manifest reason
what Darwin teaches is called the
development theory. 1t Is not
fact, established by conclusive evil
dence; it is simply speculation. We
need entertain no apprehensions
from this source, therefore, for why
should we anticipate objections?
The oRus probendi is on their side,
and until they furnish the facts on
which their conclusions must rest,
and pass from q theory into an es-
tablished scientific law, we have
little or nothing to do with them.
| except to remind them of the old
| adage: "Those who live in glass
houses should never throw stones"
In reference to prayer, the Bible
does not. in our estimation, teach
us that we have q right TO ex-
pect any direct physical effect
in answer to prayer. The age
of miracles is past and we do not
claim the. ability to perform them.
We do hold, however, that prayer
has an effect upon the mind and
soul, both of him who prays in faith
and the one for whom the prayer
of faith is offered. Every true chris
tan has the internal witness"
which is sufficient to convince him
of this truth, In his experience,
too, he has known instances of its
effects upon others, leading the
openly profane and abandoned sin
ner, like Saul of Tarsus, suddenly
to become champion of the truth as
| it is in Jesus.
Trace the effects of prayer as de-
veloped in the recent revivais of re-
Iigion at Topeka and Lawrence, in
this State, and you will discover
sufficient evidence that the sim
cere prayer of unfaltering faith
will be answered. We would
not expect God to answer
prayer to convince sceptics. He
does not work in this manner, for
when the Jews came to Christ seek
ing after special miracle to con-
vince them, he refused to crafty
their unreasonable demand. The
| works which he had openly per-
formed were sufficient evidence TO
satisfyany candid mind. So it is now.
The evidence which God has album
dainty furnished in reference to the
| effects of prayer is more than suf-
| ficient. Ii we do not believe now,
| neither would we believe If he
/ oh 40
special miracle for us.
Finally, it is to be remembered
that the world has gone through a
long experience on these very sub
jects, and it has shown US "that not
one new discovery has been made III
| science which has not at the time
| been supposed to infringe on some
! doctrine of revealed religion, and
| which has not caused monetary
alarm to the friends of religion and
| momentary triumph to its foes. Yet
| Christianity has survived them all.
| So it may be in regard to the sci
| ences as understood now, and those
| which remain to be disclosed in the
advancing periods of the world"
| We are willing to accept facts and
to follow truths but we cannot ad-
nit every new theory until it be-
comes Q LdiU. c.
We haye given place to the above
because it is direct illustration of
the attitude of certain advocates
of religious belief of which we
complained two weeks ago. Nor
are we disposed to abate one
jot from the position we then
took. We believe that there should
be no quarrel between science and
religion-but we do know that
there is a quarrel, and that this is
confined by no means to any one
sect; and we do know just as posi-
lively that in the discussion, thus
far continued, it has been aggres-
sive on the one side and defensive
on the other. Personally we are
strong in .e belief that true relig-
ion has nothing to fear, and hence
we deprecate any evasion of an issue
upon fact between herself and
science. The best way 10 reconcile
parties in dispute is to bring about
q discussion between them, when, if
both are fair-mindcd, all cause of
difference will be removed; and
this is just what science proposes,
but religion, or rather a portion of
its defenders(O, will none of it.
We give below an extract from &
very recent article by Henry Ward
Beecher, which, so it seems to us, is
a fair showing of the case. We
commend its careful pcrusal:
"The present discussion about
prayer is to some extent an instance
of mutual misunderstanding. The
general attitude of religious teach
ers toward the ideas represented
by Tyndall and his school, is one of
unmltigated hostility, and frequent
ly of indignation. They are treat
ed as assailants of mans chief treas
ure. The first and last thought
with many is not to understand,
: but to refute them. But, since these
gentlemen are neither stark fools
/ nor foes of mankind, why not at
least listen to them-listen, not
only with ears and eyes, but with
3 the mind? Whoever so listens,
. will, we think, understand what
, they say to be in substance this:
"We are in the habit of subjecting
everything to the test of fact. We
) care more tor an ounce of Well-es-
t tablished fact than for q ton of alb
: stract discussion. We apply this
!. test, in sll sincerity, to prayer. If
prayer works genuine effects, we
. may reasonably expect to witness
those effects. We do not ask If God
3 can answer prayer, but wherher
= there is evidence that he does. II
there is such evidence, let us have it,"
'' So far the question propounded
. by Natural Science is perfectly
!, legitimate. Instead OF attacking
? science for asking IL, the thing for
Christians to do is to consider what
the answer is-for their own beEeflt
Q quite as much as for the inquirer's.
Q Into the tempting field which the
i question opens, it is aside from our
! present purpose to enter. Bnt, as
: showing that inquiry is fruitful,
l that its tendency is not simply to
5 reopen old questions, but TO enrich
q Christianity by positive additions,
we may suggest that from the re-
cent discussion two effects are al
ready perceptible-a tendency on
the part of Christians to emphasize
n the interior, spiritual effect of prayer
n In contradistinction from purely
physical effect; and, correspond
! ingiy, the urging upon the scientists'
D minds that facts of spiritual expert
Y ence, of soul-life, are as truly facts
= IS the phenomena of outward ma
t1Fe.
: We have used this ;n.tanca