Douglas Island news., 1898-12-21
CHURCH INFLUENCES.

we stepped luIO H AdW Oh0S0 HI "N
 neau few days ago and were there | told by student that he was much
 pleased with Che spirit and tone of a recent article that appeared in these columns, in which we expressed our belief in place of future happiness.
 Our attention has been so often direct
 ed to the subject that we are led to again refer to the bible and the man. ner in which it is now taught. What ever our conduct may be, it is apparent that there are few people at the close of the nineteenth century who would desire church influences removed from the community in which they live. We may not attend church and in fact disbelieve many things that the scrip ture contains, but still the fact remains that truly good man, where guidance and daily actions are in harmony with the teachings of the bible, is honored and respected in his belief. Any min ister, with fair ability, who will teach christianity to his congregations as Christ and Paul taught it, need never want for hearers, although what he may say has been taught the people for more than eighteen hundred years.
 What there is about christian teaching that fascinates the human mind it is not our desire to discuss at this time, but admitting that church influences are desirable, we are led to enquire if that influence is made as effective as it could or should be.
 We have often heard it said from the pulpit that the world is getting better, that with the increase of knowledge and advance of thought, the teachings of the bible are becoming more and more acceptable to the human mind. In our opinion the ministry of today IS laboring under an erroneous impression and from a christian standpoint is ret rograding. The modern or advanced ideas of the scripture, as 1t IS called, as taught by many ministers, tends to, and does create doubt in the minds of many as to the sacredness of the bible. We are referring to the general tenden- cy of the age. We do not claim that there are no exceptions. There are many ministers who are not led away from the scripture and it's teachings,
 but the general tendency at present is the contrary. Why is this? What is making this great change?
 One of the reasons is that the col Ieges of the country are hotbeds of infldelity. No opportunity is allowed to pass, to impress upon the mind of the student that where modern thought and ideas, common sense, as some say, does not agree or conflicts with the bible, the former must prevail. That science has so far advanced that, when the bible conflicts with it, the scriptures must be set aside. That those things which can be explained upon natural causes should be accept ed and all others must be swept aside. The result is that every preacher has his own ideas of what common sense is, his own ideas as to what the con- 1 fiict between science and the bible is and from the pulpit you get such con- glomerate mass of. stuff that those who ! really desire the truth are soon num-
 bered among the largly increasing
 number of agnostics, to which class
 the preachers are gradually drifting
 if not already within the fold.
 What the churches need are preach ! CTS who will teach the bible. They need more church trials. Preachers
 who refuse to believe the bible and
 teach it, ought to be fired out of the de-
 nomination to which they belong. If ! those things which the bible contains
 that cannot be explained upon natural causes must be rejected, how much IS
 there left? What will become of the
 immaculate conception? Who will be-
 Iieve in a God that could not cause
 miracles to be performed? If you
 commence rejecting the bible in part,
 where will it cease? But above all,
 what does the ministry accomplish in
 teaching this modern idea of the script
 ure? Will it make anyone better?
 We fail to see how a preacher can ex-
 pect any great amount of good to re-
 suit from saying to his congregation
 that this or that part of the scripture l is nonsense.