Grand Rapids morning telegram., 1885-05-13
REV Or. GILBERT REPLIES
His Answer to the Challenge Made o.
Mr. Watts tor a Publlc Debate

Mr. Watts tor Public Debate.
TO the EdItor II the MokNISs 1ukGRAA
Uutruthful representations have beeu
made concerning Mr. Watts challenge AZ
dressed 10 ne. never gave any encourage
lnent for discussion and never promised 10
meet ham Monday night, a. Mr. Blodgett,
the onl, hbsralist with whom / conferred OF
the subject, has confessed this moruing be
fore witnesses. The statement made In the
Opera House sunday night was therefore
wholly false. she object of which your read
ers may Judge / Immediately declined Mr..
Watts's challenge when presented, giving
these reasons. First. my time l. fully Ooea-
pied; second, without the consent of my
church oficiary II would be improper, and
with that consent IL would be unwise, 10 neg
lect pastoral duties for such encounters
third. the theme could not be profitably han
died ia debate.
That the force Of my last reason may ap-
pear let us consider the challenge. Ii pro
poses three nights public discussion Oh
the relative merits of Christianity and secu-
iarlsm, with the ayowed purpose of proving
the former to be ''impracticable and of
human origin" Christianity is an historic
fact; its fruits are known. Seeularism, pure
and simple. is mere theory, separate and
alone il does not exist, and hence has no
fruits. Who shall say what II is worth. A
discussion of their relative merits il, there
fore, Impossible. When, eliminating every
form of religion, purely worldly methods
have been applied to society, and not before.
We may discuss. Again. we employ for mans
good all the forces the secularlsts PROPOSE
education, government, etc, employ them
more than they do. Witness our colleges,
papers books. asylums. Hence the two are
not antagonIstic. Ii not antagonistic, the
worldly forces would not be better II religion
were omitted.
SfLook at the next Christianity of
human origin" Suppose IL is, what of itl
Ii exists just the same, a stupendOus fact.
more wonderful for this new discovery. And
II will not be destroyed by proving tins point.
For, then II has been evolved out of mans
nature. II so, man will cling 10 ii until his
nature changes. If the evolutionists are
correct you may burn all the Bibles, demolish
the churches, cruelty the ministers: and in
the course of time Christianity would be here
al,ain-Bible, churches ministers and all,
just as it Is now. Admitting the human
origin of our religion, iniidels are bound 10
let 1t alone. Ii has come 10 meet the con
sciOus need of some men, and will pass away
only when the need Is removed. If one-half
of the community has invented for its
comfort system of religion, what
miserable humanitarians are they
who would wrest it from them.
Mr.. Watts also srys ''iTnpracticaDle."
What does that mean! Christianity does all
that II processes TO do, besse- those who
embrace it, Thousands ali about us testify
in positive terms that they are helped by it
In life. We have all seen men made sober,
Industrious truthful, and honest by the
power of grace. aud we have heard their dy-
ing words of holy triumph. What more il
required? Is Christianity expected to bless
men who reject 1t? VIII food nourish him
even that. The language the infidel uses
has been cast in the mold of the Scrip
tures." as Lord Macauley afirms. The re-
public in which he lives is ''the product of
the Christian religion" as De Tocqueville
declares.
Comparative merits ~ Human origin ~
''Impracticabler ~ | am willing 10 submit
to the general public the question whether |
ought to decline the challenge. On its face
there is nothing but unbeatable nonsense.
Did any one think | would leave my parish
duties TO contend with one who comes on
such an errand? Three nights TO show that
a real thing is better than speculation
Contending for the existence of that which
cannot be destroyed Pleading for the worth
of that whose fruitage Is on every side
have better business.
Yours, cheerfully,
J. T.. GTTRETsT