The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1890-12-21

things to say about her old comrades in ra-
tionalism who still march on without paus-
ing to rest on the pleasant camping ground
which she has at last discovered.
law and the prophets, ana the inspired
Word" and the apostles are subjected to
her keen analysis before that! And how the
great theologians catch it! Nothing very
new, perhaps, in her propositions. Most Of
them. indeed, are old acquaintance, and
she does not pretend that they are other
wise: but coming from Gail Hamilton, in
her own incisive way, they cannot fail to
be entertaining, and a consideration of the
character of the audience that listened to
them and clamored for more, and then
appealed for their publication. must result
in something very like painful shock to
many pious and conservative souls. The
representation of creation, and the
only revelation in it all that is vital is
the revelation of God appearing on
the face of it. Its historical or scientific
quality is interesting, but it is q question,
ward in Eden, just as he planted forest
westward in America, by the forces of ma
ture. whether through man with farming
tools, or by the winds of heaven, or the
wings of bird and bee and butterfly, scat
tering seeds. Nothing can exceed the mar
vel of such planting. We have seen the
forest primeval and have never lost our
selves IN that wood. What is there to be-
den Of God?'' Then the author says:
The story of Adam and Eve is a parable,
an alleRory by its own showing. In any
other book than the Bible story of ami
mails M talking would he. be called fable would
When we read in q story book, "The lion
said to the mouse We perceive at once
that it is fable. When We read in the
Bible, 1.-The serpent said unto the woman"
we call'it history. There il no reason why
We should. There is no more reason to
suppose that snakes talk in the Bible than
that they talk in other literature. There is
even less reason, for the Bible itself in
other places speaks of the serpent as not a
serpent, but an evil spirit, showing that the
Bible writer's considered it alleRory, To
say that it is a fable or allegory is not to
say that it is false. The very point and
pith OF fable is truth. An alleRory has no
What is rationalism?" she says a little
further on, "The bugbear of the churches
for one thing. Only bugbear go far as
the churches are alarmed. Rationalism is
reasoningisrn. No deeper insult can be put
s4sma the Bible than say that it can not
be we'll to learn who has authority to put
on the brakes. The attempt would be more
likely to throw off the brakeman than to
slow the train. 10 say
that rationalism is fatal to evangelical re-
ligion is to say that evangelical religion
can exist only among idiots"
The argument is presented at length. In
answer to Methodist opponent of ration
alism the writer says:
If the scholarship of the churches is not
amenable to reason, it is in the bonds of a
great imbecility. If the Methodist church
has no tendency to bring its theology to the
bar of reason, 1t is far more effete institu-
ton than its vigorous condition would indi-
cate. Put down the brakes on reason?
There is but ono way to do it. Burn the
reasoner! It is not the Methodist church
which is credited with that monopoly. It is
too late for the Methodist church to intro
duce it. Even Bruno does not stay burned.
But, say the literalists, rationalism takes
away our infallible Bible and puts reason to
judge revelation.
What is an infallible Bible? The multi
plication table is infallible, but is of no use
to us until we learn it. If we know nothing
of numbers and cannot read figures, the
multiplication table might as we'll be falli-
BILE, SO far as we are concerned. We must
put our memory to the multiplication tabl Q
and our reason to applying 1t before We get
any good out of it.
And what becomes of the infallible Bi.
BILE? It was not infallible in the hands of
Brigham Young, who interpreted its teach
ings into polyganly. Il WAS not infallible
his little daughter under it's inspiration.
It is not infallible to any man further than
the Spirit of the Almighty giveth him I'M
derstanding.
A theological reasoner not named. is
quoted. Summed up, Gail Hamilton finds
his propositions to be:
10 trust consciousness is at the very
foundation of right thinking and right liv-
To trust Christian consciousness, even
our own fortified by that of other men, is
to compass error and downfall.
Tho lance is in full play now. Here is
the way in which the fair manipulation is
using it:
And this writer is doctor of divinity, an
Andoyer graduate. a college graduate. a
New Highlander born and bred under Ply
mouth Rock. What do YOU suppose lie
thinks he means? What does a man do
with WITH; ms mind while he is putting two con-
the same page? What does he think we
are doing with our minds when we are
reading them? such irrationalism in a
teacher is unpardonable. You and l.
women-who are busy with the thousand
nnmeless, unnoted but imperative duties of
life
I've poor women. e,le natured large of heart,
in wisdom mn 4,
Who the wor d incessant battle cannot under
stand at all
we are not expected to be logical, or even
to understand logic. We may, in our small
way, jump syllogism. dash up against a
fallacy, and not forfeit our right to self
respect! But for man, a college graduate,
voter, a legislator, a theological professor
and teacher with the Westminster cate
chism at his tongues end, to put upon the
same page, fronting each other, two con-
Trajectory statements that can only devour
each other-is for man to invite woman
into the pulpit.
when protestant conservatism adds
Gail Hamilton, lis arguing against the
pope, it is as strong a nationalist as any
philosopher could ask. " and she clinches
her statement with long quotation from
an evangelical newspaper. Then she
charges that the same protestant RATIONAL
ism. wheR graphing With doctrinal ration
aNsm, turns its back on its own reasoning.
Here is her argument continued:
Assume for moment net the Christian
consciousness does not give Us assurance
concerning the divine authority and inspi-
ration OF the Scriptures; what does? The
church, The minister! The coupci? The
assemblies? The bishops! Your Christian
consciousness must give you assurance con-
earning them! The creed tells you what
Paul means, but what tells YOU that Won
may trust the creed? The church bids YOU
trust the catechism, but your own Chris
tian consciousness must answer for the