Weekly expositor. (Brockway Centre, Mich.) 1882-1894, 1893-09-15

heart Oh, you know as well as l do
Il shall not dwell on it any longer
the Church of God, instead of being
worn ouG institution, stands nearer
the sympathies OF the people than it
ever did and eclipses all other institu-
tions.
But our antagonists go on and say
that Christianity is falling back, in the
fact that infidelity is holder now and
more blatant than it ever was / deny
the statement. Infdelity is not near
so bold now as it was In the DAYS of
our fathers and grandfathers. There
were times in this country when men
who were openly and abOve-board in
| ddel and antagonistic to Christianity
could be elected 70 high Office. Now,
let some man wish ng high position in
the state proclaim himself the foe of
Christianity and an infdel, how many
states of the Union would he carry?
how many counties? how many wards
in Brooklyn? Not one.
Ali my friends, infidelity in this
! day is not half as bold as it used to be.
If it comes now, it is apt 10 come un-
der the disguise of rhetoric or fantas-
tic sentimentality. i know ii a man
with great intelligence does become
an intdel, and begins an attack on
| Christianity, it makes great excite
ment-of course it does, and people
come to the conclusion, wealS-minded
Christians come to the conclusion,
that everything is going overheard
because some man of strong intellect
assails Christianity.
If a man jumps overheard from a
| Cunard steamer, he makes more ex-
element than all the tive hundred
/ sane p ssengers who continue in the
berths or on the de ks; but does that
stop the ship? Does that wreck all
the five hundred passengers? 1t makes
! great excitement when man leaps
from platform or a pulpit into in
/ fidelity; but does that hinder our
glorious bihle from taking its millions
into the skies. l tell you intidelty is
not half as bold now as it used to be.
Do you suppose such things could be
enacted now as were enacted In the
daysof Robespierre, when a shameless
woman was elected to be goddess, and
she was carried on golden chair to
cathedral, and the people bowed down
| to her as a divine being, and burned
! incense before her-shc to take the
place of the bible and of Christianity,
and of the Lord Almighty? And while
cathedral, in the chapels, and in the
corridors adjoining the cathedral,
scenes of drunkenness and debauchery
and obscenity enacted such as the
world had never seen. Could such
thing as that tran>pire now? No, sir.
The police would swoop on it, whether
in Paris or New York. Infidelity is
not half so bod now a. it used to be.
nut say our antagonists, Chris
tianity is falling back because science,
its chief enemy, is triumphing o Ell it,"
! Now, / deny that there Is any war be-
! tween science and revelation. There
! is not fact in science that may not
be made TO harmonic with the bible
So said Hugh Miller, so said Joseph
Henry, so said Prof. Hitchcock, so said
Prof. Silliman, so said Prof. Mitchell
Joseph Henry, the leading scientist
of America, better knownan honored
in the royal societies transatlantic
than any other American, lived and
died believer in the religion of Jesus
Christ. Joseph Henry knew all the
facts of geology, ana yet believed the
book of Genesis He knew all the
facts of astronomy, and yet believed
the b ok of Joshua, the sun and moon
standing still. Joseph Henry knew
all the anatomy of man and fish, and
yet believed the book of Jonah.
If the scientists of the day were all
agreed, and they came up with solid
front to attack orr Christianity, per-
haps they might make some impress
sion upon it; but they are not agreed.
1t is often said that we religionists
are failing in our advocacy of Chris
tianity because we differ in our
theology. / tell you we do not differ
inside the church in theology half as
much as they differ outside toe church
in science. If they reject our religion
because we differ on some minor
points, we might just as well reject
science because the scientists differ;
but as far as / can tell, the war of
intidel science against Christianity is
not SO severe as it used to be, because
these men are antagonistic TO each
other; and As far as l can tell, it is
going to be war between telescope
and telescope, Leyden jar and Leyden
jar, chemical apparatus and chemical
apparatus They do not agree ON any
thing.
Do you suppose that this bible
theory a bout the origin OF life is going
to be overthrown by men who have
different theories-ffty different the
| ories-about the origin of life? And
when Agassiz comes out and puts both
feet on the doctrine of evolution, and
says in regard to many scientists, Il
notice that these young naturalists
are adopting as theories in science
things which have not passed under
observation" Agassiz saw what we all
see-that there are men who talk very
wise y who know but very little, and
that just as soon as a young scientist
finds out the difference between the
feelers of wasp and the horns of
beetle, he begins to patronize the al
mighty, and go about talking about
culture as though it were spelled
u1-c-h-a-r-culcharl
1t makes me sick to see these literary
tops going down the street with a
copy of Darwin under one arm and a
case of transfxed grasshoppers and
butterflies under the other, talking
about the survival Of the fittest and
Huxley's Protoplasm, and the Nebular
Hypothesis, and talking to us common
men as though we were foo;sl If they
agreed in their theories and came up
with solid front against Christianity,
l lay perhaps they might make some
| impression; but they do not agree
| m H. Il L..