314 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



of Christ, heaven and hell, forgiveness of sins, the law of love. In the 

 same way, in controversy with Science, Christianity (not theology) 

 and supernaturalism are convertible terms. That is to say, if super- 

 naturalism is refuted. Science wins and Christianity loses in the par- 

 ticular controversy in which they are engaged. In the conti'oversial 

 sense this is the destruction of Christianity, but only in the controver- 

 sial sense. For when the worship of God outside Nature is taken 

 away, the worship of God in Nature remains. Whether this residue 

 is impoi'tant or unimportant will be considered later ; at any rate, it 

 is there ; and we may say at once that it would not be surprising if it 

 should turn out more considerable than controversialists believe, when 

 we remember how habitual it is for controversialists to exaggerate 

 their diflerences, and generally how prodigiously exaggerated is the 

 common estimate of the province of debate and dispute in human 

 affairs. 



At any rate, it is evident that the theology of the book of Job, of 

 many of the Psalms, e. g.,the 104th, of many passages in the Prophets, 

 of many discourses of Christ, of many passages in the Epistles, would 

 remain unaffected if supernaturalism were entirely abandoned. I will 

 say no more at this stage. 



On the whole, then, when we look at the great controversy of the 

 age, what do we see ? It is said that a furious attack upon theology 

 is being made by the two distinct though allied hosts of Science and 

 Revolution. But we see something essentially different. We see that 

 what is called Science is indeed a most formidable power, against 

 whomsoever she may declare war, but that her enemy is not theology, 

 but supernaturalism, and that Science herself has all the character of 

 a theology, not comforting or elevating like that she opposes, but not 

 less capable of inspiring zeal and subduing the mind with conviction, 

 and bearing in her hand a budget of practical reforms ; and, moreover, 

 that the Deity of her devotion is not different, but only a too much 

 disregarded aspect of the Deity of Christians. The host of Revolution 

 which we see approaching from another side is far less formidable. 

 It is infuriated, but neither knows what it would overthrow nor what 

 it would build. But we can see that its enemy is not theology at all, 

 nor even supernaturalism, except in a secondary degree. It is en- 

 raged against an ancient corporation, which, having something medi- 

 aeval in its constitution, like so many other corporations, has been led 

 in tlie latest centuries to make common cause with other mediaeval 

 institutions which were endangered by the modern spirit. This cor- 

 poration happens to be the depositary of a theology partly super- 

 naturalistic, but we can see plainly that had it been the depositary of 

 modern science itself it would have excited just the same animosity, 

 nay, probably very much more, for in fact its creed in some aspects is 

 in most remarkable agreement with tlie revolutionary creed itself. 



The result, then, is this of atheism, that demoralizing palsy of 



