there is one God, the heaven and earth, that important of all truths; and it is on this account that we insist it should make a fundamental point in the instruction of youth, and cannot concede that on any grounds it should be omitted.

Father Almighty, maker of article is by far the most

The second article of the creed is also one which must be considered, by those who believe in it, an article of fundamental importance. No man, indeed, can deny that faith in the revelation made through our Lord Jesus Christ, must assume, in the mind of one who holds it, a central position controlling and modifying all his course of thought. Our entire views of theology and morality are dependent on the views we take of Christ, and we cannot, therefore, put Christianity among the unimportant parts of religious instruction. That some disbelieve in it, and that there is warmth of feeling connected with the discussion of its truth, cannot justify us in omitting the subject, any more than the differences of opinion upon questions of chemistry, physiology, and geology, would justify a teacher of those sciences in omitting all reference to allotropism, to therapeutic agencies, or to glacial and diluvial action. The evidences of Christianity occupy a central position in theology, which is a fundamental science; and those to whom these evidences are sufficient are justified on every conceivable ground in assuming always in their public instruction the authority of the New Testament; and whenever

unjust in compelling them to pay taxes to sustain such schools? The writer of this article is a Protestant of the most radical t does not stop with Martin Luther, but who protests against all of

their school is of such a nature as to permit it, in showing with some minuteness the various branches of evidence that tend to establish the fact that Jesus was proved to be the Son of God with power by his resurrection from the dead, and by wondrous works that no man could have done except God were with him. I am well aware that there are persons at the present day who claim to have outgrown the necessity of attending to this evidence; some by having grown so spiritual that the religious truths proclaimed by our Lord commend themselves directly to their minds and hearts as true, as needing no external proofs of having been uttered by authority; others, by having grown too wise to be convinced by such proofs, who have set up for themselves new canons of criticism that render the falsehood of the gospels demonstrable, and who therefore justify themselves in passing by all the evidences of their truth. I am well aware of the existence of these persons to whom and for whom the evidences of Christianity are nothing, and who would claim that in consideration of their existence, we should omit all distinctively Christian instruction from our public course of education. But I do not see how their requirements should be granted, any more than I see why the existence of persons incapable of receiving the Newtonian laws of philosophy should cause us to omit the recognition of those laws from our text-books on physics. In order to omit Christianity and the evidences of its truth from our

course of studies, we must show, not that there is not a perfect unanimity of opinion upon the matter, but that it is a question which does not connect itself vitally with our views of history, which does not throw light upon any physical sciences, which does not bear directly upon the moral character of the pupil, — which does not affect his religious character, his habitual tone of thought on religious things. Now no sane man, however strong he may feel himself in his rejection of Christ, can deny that the question of the reality of the revelation through Jesus does connect itself, vitally, with all our views of history. According to the believer in revelation, all previous events prepared the way for the coming of Christ, all succeeding events have been modified by it, and Calvary is the central point in the great historic picture of this world. Even the unbeliever in Christ must acknowledge that never man spake like that man; that never did the word of prophet or sage produce so sudden, so extensive, and so lasting an effect upon civilized and enlightened nations as that produced by the preaching of the gospel. What think ye of Christ, is therefore a fundamental question in the survey of human history.

Neither can any sane man deny that our reception or rejection of Christ affects our views of physical science. If we reject Him, then we are naturally led to reject the views which he gives us of the freedom, the sovereignty, and the forgiving love

unjust in compelling them to pay taxes to sustain such schools? The writer of this article is a Protestant of the most radical t does not stop with Martin Luther, but who protests against all ob

of God; if we accept Him, we of course accept these views, and are ready to receive the doctrines of geology which declare that God has frequently acted upon our planet in circumscribed limits and at definite times, fulfilling through the long course of geological changes one plan, which He had in view from the beginning, the preparation of the earth for the abode of his children, - those doctrines of physics which find in all material things the expressions of wisdom and of personal kindness, those doctrines of history which recognize a ruling Providence, and devoutly acknowledge that

"There's a divinity that shapes our ends,
Rough hew them as we will.”

No sane man can deny that the reception or rejection of Christ will naturally have a tendency to affect the moral character of the pupil. To reject him and his doctrines, to claim that he was inspired in no other sense and in no other degree than we may each of us be inspired, if we will pay the price, what can be the effect upon us if not to weaken in us the sentiment of reverence, and to strengthen out of due proportion the consciousness of our own dignity and worth? But to admit the authority of Jesus, to acknowledge and open our hearts to the love of Him who though he was rich yet for our sakes became poor, who though clothed

with divine powers did not ask divine honors, but submitted to poverty, to suffering, and to death, in patient attestation of his mission, still offering forgiveness and help from God to those who were seeking his life; to admit the authority of such a master,what can its natural tendency be, if not to soften the fiercer passions of the believer, and to bring him, at least partially, into a likeness of this divine example?

Nor can any sane man deny that the acceptance or rejection of the claims of Jesus to direct authority from God, must in general have a marked effect upon the religious character of the pupil. Few men have that strength and depth of religious character, which can make them, after rejecting the claims of Jesus to direct authority, feel that in their own souls they have a direct vision of religious truth, a direct internal vision of the presence of an infinite Father. With by far the larger part of the human race, experience has shown that if they do not see God revealed in the face of Jesus Christ, they do not see him clearly at all; their rejection of Jesus' authority is usually, and I think naturally, followed by their neglect of Jesus' precept to pray, by their disbelief in his doctrine of a special Providence, and finally, by a rejection of his doctrine of the Fatherhood of God. When a man rejects the evidences of Christianity, he usually, and I think naturally, slides towards Pantheistic views of the divine nature.

4

unjust in compelling them to pay taxes to sustain such schools? The writer of this article is a Protestant of the most radical tyl

does not stop with Martin Luther, but who protests against all obsta