The morning journal-courier., 1908-03-18
REPLY TO HAYNES
Objector Differs as to Logical Consistency of Pastors
 Conclusions.
QUESTION OF MIRACLES
They and Christianity Must Stand or Fall Together Is Writers
 Argument.
To the Editor Journal-Courier:

To the Editor Journal-Courier:
 Sir-The sermon of the Rev. Arte- mas ]. Haynes, like most sermons from the pulpit of Higher Criticism contains more scepticism than faith in the Gospel which ministers are sup posed to preach for the redemption of the world, We do not question the sincerity or ability of so gifted and candid a man and we must certainly give him credit for that moral cour- age and intellectual daring that makes men heroic, but we beg to question logical consistency of his premises and conclusions in referance to Christian ity and so called Christian Science.
 Briefly, we cannot reconcile his negations with his affirmations, Whether miracles be false and absurd or not Christianity certainly lays claim to them and its very genius is supernatural. If miracles are false and absurd Christianity Is false and absurd. They stand or fall together. Miracles are absurd to the natural but they don't claim to be natural but su- | pernatural; not effects of nature but natures God; not laws, but volitions so that negation of miracles is a negation of voluntary activity or pow CT in Deity. It makes God a mere fixture without the power of a worm When God made man He made a greater God than himself-a being that could make or break law and act at will The supremacy of law
 makes the Almighty as helpless as q statue: law is not the ruler but th, rule of a ruler: 1t is not a regulator but regularity, and any act of voll.
 ton is reputation of the Reign oi
 Law Laws don't make rulers, ruler.
 make laws and govern by laws.
 The so-called miracles of Christian Science are not receivable into natura
 or physical phenomena, unless yo,
 can reduce mind to matter, yet thos,
 miracles are limited to human DOW
 CTS while the Christian miracles tran
 scend Those limits: they are SUI Y perphysical and superhuman. O, the other hand Christian Science mir
 acles have all the marks of human weakness, ignorance and imported ton. Christian miracles were imme , diate, complete and perfect. Christ al not give sight to one eye and leay the other blind or drive one dlsea. out of man and leave a legion q other diseases behind He never pai his patients more than one visit an he never sent in his bill for profes sional services To compare suc miracles as his with those of Chris tian Science simply covers that pre tended science with shame as a lib, against Gods anointed The miracle !, of Christian Science are it's dlsproC . and l have seen too many of them ' believe any of them. They arc yer : much like auack medicines, they cur ? some, kill others and scken ever, U body else Where they do cure th process is always slow and gradu; 7 while, the results are partial and ii
 complete. Such cures can be effecte
 without any religious pretense an il hypnotism. even in the hands of a n atheist, can eclipse all the miracles , - Christian Science.
 a Well. a man must have a God , s a ghost. a religion or a superstitio Y But I pity the genius of hight \ criticism that makes no distinctic Q between them.
 e Again, Christ did not appeal to Y mans faith as a cause of the mirac if but as the moral condition of the mi d acle. He ascribed all power, eve y his own to God. the source of q Is power. His miracles were not subie n tive but objective, not human b e divine.
 n Yours truly.
 is JOSEPH HALL,
 Eychanpa Sire,