EDITOR'S TABLE. 



365 



EDITOR'S TABLE. 



WnO ARE THE PROPAGATORS OF 

 ATHEISM f 



THE hope is indulged by many that, 

 with the progress of intelligence 

 and the increase of liberal feeling, the 

 old conflict between religion and sci- 

 ence will either die away, or lose so 

 much of its rancorous spirit that it 

 may be coolly and rationally consid- 

 ered, like any other question. But 

 there are parties who do not seem to 

 think th'is result desirable, and do all 

 they can to perpetuate the acrimonies 

 that h:ive marked this controversy in 

 the past; and, while we will not say 

 that this bad spirit is all on one side, 

 we will say that the most of it and the 

 worst form of it are on one side, and that 

 the side which makes special preten- 

 sions to a higher guidance and the lof- 

 tier virtues. There are religious teach- 

 ers who habitually make use of science 

 as a scarecrow and bugbear to arouse 

 popular prejudice, and, in doing this, 

 they have not the smallest possible scru- 

 ple in their representations. We ask 

 attention to the latest illustration of 

 these tactics. 



It may be news to some ot our read- 

 ers that there has recently been a 

 vicious attack, on the part of divers re- 

 ligious editors, upon the revised edition 

 of Appletoxs' Cyclopedia, now go- 

 ing through the press, on the ground 

 that the work is being done in the in- 

 terests of Romanism. As that charge 

 begins to grow stale, a new cry is raised 

 by the same parties, that tlie Gyclop.e- 

 DiA is being revised in the interest of 

 atheism. The first attack did not in- 

 terest us, both because our enthusiasm 

 has never run in the direction of eccle- 

 siastical history, and because we knew 

 the character of the men engaged in 

 the revision to be a perfect guarantee 

 for the intelligent, impartial, and thor- 

 ough performance of their duty to the 



public. The revisers of the Cyclopae- 

 dia are our nearest neighbors, and their 

 proceedings have interested us from the 

 beginning. What have especially and 

 constantly attracted our attention have 

 been, the vigorous discipline maintained 

 in carrying on the work, and the inces- 

 sant solicitude and inflexible determina- 

 tion manifested to make it, in the high- 

 est degree, truthful and trustworthy. 

 Knowing this so well, we had not the 

 slightest apprehension that a petty on- 

 slaught, inspired by sectarian jealousy, 

 could seriously afi:ect the character of 

 the work with the intelligent class to 

 which such a Cyclopedia must mainly 

 appeal. But in this second attack, which 

 is of wider import, we find ourselves 

 personally implicated, and it therefore 

 becomes proper to notice it ; ;md, when 

 we have shown what it amounts to, the 

 reader will liave a pretty good basis for 

 judging the quality of other criticisms 

 emanating from the same source. 



In a late number of the Christian 

 at Worh^ a newspaper edited by the 

 Rev. De Witt Talmage, there is a lead- 

 ing article which contains the follow- 

 ing j)assages : 



" In the fifth volume of the new and re- 

 vised edition of Appletons' (Jyolop^dia., 

 Prof. E. L. Youmans, treating of the Cor- 

 relation of Forces, says : ' Therefore, it is 

 now regarded as a fundamental truth of 

 physical science, and a fundamental law of 

 Nature, that force, like matter^ is never cre- 

 ated or destroyed.' To affirm that matter is 

 never created, is to affirm that it is eternal. 

 If God and matter are coeternal, then they 

 are identical ; and if identical, it follows that 

 God is but an impersonal force acting in and 

 through tlie inherent properties of matter. 



" We are sorry to see Appletons' Cyclo- 

 pedia giving its sanction to a doctrine so 

 thoroughly unscientific and radically anti- 

 christian. 



" Last week we were compelled to show 

 that Appletons' Cyclopedia had made some 

 very gracious concession in the field of his- 

 tory to the behests of Eomanism. If it is 



