wwrwf "wn
The Commoner
JUNE, 1921
The Modern Arena
Paul, in his First Epistle to the Corinthians,
(15, 32) says that he fought with heasts at
Ephesus. He does not refer to his experience
boastfully, but to emphasize the statement that
it was of no advantage to have done so if the
dead rise not.
Several of our state universities, some of our
denominational schools and even a few of our
theological seminaries furnish arenas in which
young Christians, not so firmly rooted in their
faith as Paul, have to fight for their spiritual
lives against a brute doctrine that is quite popu
lar among some teachers. It is the doctrine to
which Darwin's name is attached that links
man in blood relationship with the beasts of
the jungle.
Christian parents may not be aware of the
extent to which the religious faith of their
children is being undermined by an hypothesis
a guess without a fact in the Bible or in
nature to support it. It rests wholly upon
imagination and is defended with fiction that
surpasses the wildest flights of the Arabian
Nights.
Having had opportunity to make a personal
investigation I feel it my duty to warn the lov
ers of the Bible of the insidious attacks which
are being madp upon every vital part of the
Word of God. A father tells me of a daughter
educated at Wellesley who calmly informs him
that no one believes in the Bible now; a teach
er in Columbia Univers.ty begins his lessons
in geology by asking students to lay aside all
that they have learned in Sunday school; a
professor of the University of Wisconsin tells
his class that the Bible is a collection of
myths; a professor of philosophy at Ann Arbor
occupies a Sunday evening explaining to an
audience that Christianity is a state of mind
and that there are only two books in the Bible
with any literary merit; another professor in
the same institution informs students that he
once taught a Sunday school class and was ac
tive in the Y. M. C. A. but that no thinking man
can believe in God or the Bible; a woman teach
er in the public school in Indiana rebukes a
boy for answering that Adam was the first
man, explaining to him and the class that the
"tree man" was the first man; a young man in
South Carolina traces his atheism back to two
teachers in a Christian college; a senior in an
HLnois high school writes that he became skep
tical during his sophomore year but has been
brought back by influences outside of school
while others of his class are agnostics; a profes
sor in Yale has the reputation of making
atheists of all who come under his influence
this information was given by a boy whose
brother has come under the influence of this
teacher; a professor in Bryn Mawr combats
Christianity for a session and then puts to his
class the question whether or not there is a
God and is happy to find that a majority of
the class vote that there is no God; a profes
sor in a Christian college writes a book in which
the virgin birth of Christ is disputed; one pro
fessor declares that life is merely a by-product
and will untimately be produced in the labora
tory; another says that the ingredients neces
sary to create life have already been brought to
gether and that life will be developed from these
ingredients, adding however that it will require
a million years to do it. These are a few of
the illustrations furnished by informants whom
I have reason to believe.
My own experience confirms the information
that has been brought to me. For instance, I
spoke recently at Madison, Wisconsin, to an
audience of more than nineteen hundred, most
ly students. The president of the university,
with whom I had a pleasant chat at dinner,
heard with complacency that one of the pro
fessors in his institution had told his class
that the Bible- was a collection of myths but
was very angry when I presented to the stud
ents the other side of Darwinism. In an interview
given the following day he is- quoted as saying:
"I must plainly say that when one attempts
to induce young people to unite their religious
faith to discredit scientific doctrines he com
mits a grievous error and endangers the re
ligious life of those whom he is trying to help,"
adding that the address (the substance of this
address was printed in The Commoner in April
under the title "The Menace of Darwinism),
was of the kind listened to ,by their fathers and
grandfathers. He does not complain of the kind
of teaching the students under him are receiv
ing but he looks with contempt upon the inter
pretation placed upon the Bible by the fathers
and grandfathers of Jiis students.
The Christians ofoday who believe in the
Bible as it has been interpreted for centuries
may find it worth while to inquire into the ef
fect of some of the things that are taught in
these days by those who call then. selves scien
tists. Christianity has no reason to fear any
FACT that science can discover because truths
never conflict. Christianity has no reason to
fear any scientific theory supported by FACTS.
Christianity is not opposed to science; it wel
comes light from every bourco and it appreciates
the real work done by science. Science is classi
fied knowledge and knowledge is power. When
science builds upon facts it is invincible. Science
has given us remedies for diseases remedies
for yellow fever and typhoid fever recently
but is built upon facts; science has given us
rules for the use of electricity, steam, water and
gas, but is built upon facts; science has im
proved agriculture, industry and commerce, but
is built upon facts. It is scientific guessing,
UNSUPPORTED BY FACTS, that Christianity
rejects; it is the guessing of so called scientists
that is today a menace to Christianity and
civilization.
If the University of Wisconsin is to discard
the Bible and substitute the guesses of scien
tists in its place as it does in teaching uur
winism and then objects to the students hear
ing the other side, it should take the public
into its confidence and reveal what is going on
within its walls. It might, for instance, issue an
announcement like this: Our class rooms furn
ish an arena in which a brutish doctrine tears
to pieces the religious faith of young men ana
young women; parents of the children are cordi
ally invited to witness the spectacle.
Why should Christian taxpayers permit the
Bible to be attacked by their hired servants
where defense is not permitted? Why should
the children be taught that it is more import
ant to know the age of the rocks than to) trust
in the "Rock of Ages?" Why should the
emphasis be placed on the distance between the
stars rather than upon Him who binds "the
sweet influences of Pleiades," "looses the bands
of Orion," and "guides Arcturus witli his suns?"
Why are professors allowed to substitute Dar
win's fictitious history of man, and his fanci
ful description of man's progress up through
apehood, for the Bible's description of man's
creation by special act of the Alm.fehty, accord
ing to a divine plan and for a divine purpose?
Whyare Darwin's eight hundred repetitions of
"we may well suppose" substituted for the "thus
saith the Lord" of the Scriptures?
The natural and logical eil'ect of these teach
ings dreams that are in reality more fright
ful than nightmares is to convert the Bible
into a story book, reduce Christ to the stature
of a man with an ape for an ancestor on his
mother's side, at least, (and, as many evolution
ists believe, also on his father's side), to di
minish the student's faith in God, rob him of
his desire to pray, extinguish his hope of heaven
and his fear of future punishment. This is not
only the natural effect of such teachings but
it is what is being actually done.
Mr. James H. Leuba, professor of psychology
at Bryn Mawr College, Pennsylvania, issued
a book in 191G, entitled "Belief in God and
Immortality," published by Sherman French &
Co., Boston, In this book he presents evidence
to show that among the highly educated, be
lief in a personal God and personal immortal
ity is dying out. He assures his readers that
"the abandonment of the belief in a personal
God and personal immortality, THOUGH IT IN
VOLVES THE OVERTHROW OF EXISTING
RELIGIONS, need not bring to an end religious
life." That is to say, no one need be disturbed
by his predictions except those who believe in
"EXISTING RELIGIONS." He fortifies his
prediction with statistics. He has submitted a
questionnaire to a list of one thousand scientists
selected from a book entitled "American Men
of Science," which he says includes 5,500 names,
practically every American who may be called
a scientist, and reports their answers which
show that more than one-half of these promi
nent scientists do not, according to their own
answers, believe in a personal God or personal
immortality. He says that the percentage of un
believers is higher among biologists than among
other scientists. He finds practically the
same percentage of unbelievers among prominent
historian, psychologists, and sociologists as
umong scientists generally. He also questions
the students of nine representative colleges and
finds the largest percentage of believers, in the
freshman cluss and the smallest in the senior
class. This he regards as a striking result.
He finds that only 15 per cent of the freshmen
reject immortality while 30 per cent of the
juniors have given it up. I quote the following
rrom page 280 of h.a book: "The student
statistics show that young people enter college
with the beliefs still accepted, more or less per
functorily, in the average home of the land
and that as their mental powers mature and
their horizon widens a large percentage of them
abandon the cardinal Christian beliefs. It seeme
probable that on leaving college from forty to
forty-five per cent of the students deny or
doubt the fundamental dogmas of the Christian
religion. The marked decrease in belief that
takes place during the adolescent years In
those who spend those years in study under
the influence of persons of high culture is a
portentious indication of the fate which, accord
ing to our statistics, increased knowledge and
the possession of certain capacities leading to
eminence reserve to the beliefs 'in a personal
God and in personal immortality?"
Does any Christian believe that intelligence
is necessarily antagonistic to Christianity?
Certainly not; on the contrary, real Intelligence
will increase reverence for God and for his
Word. It is sham intelligence that leads men
away from God; it is sham intelligence that
had deluded students and denuded them of thp
spiritual element in life. No other sham intellf
gence has been so powerful for evil as the doc
trine that man, instead of being made in tlr
image of God, as the Bible declares, is a dc
scondant of the ape family. And yet a mult
tude of highly paid teachers teachers paid b
public taxation are so wedded to this unsur
ported and ridiculous hypothesis that they en
courage students to accept It and are indignant
when the other side is presented.
The tests by which we select university in
structors do not always give us the information
most needed. We get the measure of their
brains but that is no indication of the Htrenfth
of the spiritual in their lives. Darwinism had
led many into mind-worship a worship more
destructive than the worship of images. The
worshiper of Images may look through the
image to the God for whom the image stands,
but the mind-worshiper is too absorbed in medi
tation upon his own greatness to think of any
be'ng higher than himself. Darwinism, when
taken seriously, swells the head and shrivels
the heart.
Our religion is built upon love and love is
a heart quality. In the Old Testment as well
as in the New we are taught that "out of. the
heart are the issues of life." The real thinking
is done in the heart, Pascal says that the heart
has reasons which the mind cannot understand,
because the heart is of an infinitely higher char
acter. The mind is a splendid machine when
it is properly handled, but it has to be handled.
The principal work of the mind is to manu
facture reasons for doing what the heart wants
to do, and it is a poor mind that cannot manu
facture reasons satisfactory to the heart for
which it works.
Darwinism attacks the faith of the student
just at the time when the spirit of dependence
is giving way to the spirit of independ
ence. This is the age when self confi
dence reaches its maximum. It is the
time when he is inclined to think his parenU
are old fogy he does not need to have men
like the President of the University of Wis
consin ridicule the beliefs of hid father, mother
and grandparents. The student's attention ia
focused upon the physical sciences which deal
with the things which the senses can discern.
He is unduly impressed with the importance
of the things that are seen and is led to ignor
the things that are unseen, forgetting that "the
things that are seen are temporal; the thingi
that are unseen are eternal." What of the
things that are spiritually discerned? Should
they be overlooked? We cannot afford to bring
student life down to a materialistic basis; noth
ing that can be put into the head will offset
the heart's loss if faith is extinguished. It is
more important that the graduate shall be able
to say with Paul "I was not disobedient unto
the heavenly vision" than that he shall be able
to boast of a highly disciplined mind. What
is a mind worth to society or to its possessor1
without a heart to direct it? It Is of no more
value than the most expensive gun when the
