464
T H E K I N G ’S B U S I N E S S
does th is differ from th e purpose and action of the bandits who force th eir way into a home and compel its occu pants to throw up th e ir hands or yield th e ir property and th e ir lives? In the case of the bandits, th e only question is, Has the man of the house power to resist? If not, all is lost. If the church has not th e power to resist, she, too, will he devastated.” Then the Editor, afte r quoting from the Constitution of th e P resbyterian Church and showing how Dr. Fosdick is violating th a t Constitution by his radical u tterances from th e pulpit of th e F irst P resbyterian Church of New York, says in closing: “W hat is all th is bu t concentrated lawlessness, and we ask Dr. Fosdick how, as a professed Christian, a gen tleman, and a fair man, he justifies himself in being a p arty to such vio lence and lawlessness in th is tw entieth cen tu ry ?” So far as th is w riter is concerned, he- is perfectly frank in saying th a t he th ink s th e Ed ito r of THE PRESBY TERIAN has a full rig h t to sta te the case as he has stated it and to- ask th e question w ith which he closes. R ighteousness Recognized by th e Secular P ress That was a strik ing and profoundly wise editorial in THE NEW YORK TIMES, a little while ago, in which, in commenting upon th e dism issal of Professor Slaten from W illiam Jewell, the E d ito r made th e point th a t a man has^ th e rig h t to believe and teach any thing th a t he conscientiously holds to in th is free country; bu t th a t he hasn ’t th e -rig h t to teach w hat is destructive erro r to the very people who are giving him his support while he teaches. • During th e controversy some years ago over th e teaching of Professor George Burman F o ster of th e Univers ity of Chicago, th e E d ito r of THE DAILY CHRONICLE of th a t city w rote a leading editorial, called fo rth by the
opposition of th e B aptist M inisters' Conference to the teaching of P rofes sor Foster. The E d ito r of THE CHRONICLE used th e following strong words in his editorial: “We are struck w ith th e hypocrisy and treachery of these attacks, on Christianity. This is a free country and a free age, and men can say what they choose about religion w ithout be ing called to account for it; b u t th is is not what wfe arraig n these divinity professors for. They are to be criti cised upon other grounds. Is th e re no place to assail Christianity bu t a di vinity school? Is th ere no one to w rite infidel books except th e pro fessors of Christian theology? Is a theological sem inary an appropriate place for a general massacre of Chris tian doctrine? Mr. M angasarian de livers infidel lectures every Sunday in O rchestra Hall, and no one is shocked, bu t when professional defenders of Christianity jum p on it and assassinate it, th e public— even th e agnostic pub lic— cannot but despise them . If the expression of these infidel sentim ents by Christian teachers makes a marked and saddening impression on m ature minds, how must it affect th e young people in attendance a t th e University? 'These young people are not contam i nated by Mr. Mangasarian nor by the teachers of spiritualism , theosophy and free-thought, who abound in Chicago, bu t when the very men whom they regard as th e p illars of faith bend under them like a broken reed, it is inevitable th a t they will ieave th e uni versity confirmed infidels. Even so, we aré not championing either Chris tia n ity or infidelity, bu t only condemn ing infidels masquerading as men of God and Christian teachers.” And th e Ed ito r of THE WATCH MAN-EXAMINER a t th a t tim e wisely and tru ly said: “L iberty to teach is not license to teach erro r on foundations erected by
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker