SCIENCE AND THEOLOGY 19 



grace," etc. ? Simply nothing. These things ■were 

 to the Jews a stumbling-block and to the Greeks 

 foolishness, and to the man of science they are like 

 an utterance in an unknown tongue. He has no 

 means of verifying them ; they lie in a region en- 

 tirely beyond his ken. 



Witness the efforts of the Andover professors, in 

 their latest manifesto, " Progressive Orthodoxy," to 

 give a basis of reason to the dogma of vicarious 

 atonement. The result is mere verbal jugglery. To 

 say that Jesus, laying down his life, makes you or 

 me, or any man capable of repenting in a way or in 

 a degree we were not capable of before, or that a 

 man's capacity in any direction can be increased 

 without effort on his part, and by an event of which 

 he may never have heard, are assertions not credible, 

 because they break completely with the whole sys- 

 tem of natural knowledge. 



In short, the truth of this whole controversy be- 

 tween science and theology seems to me to be this : 

 If we take science as our sole guide, if we accept 

 and hold fast that alone which is verifiable, the old 

 theology, with all its miraculous machinery, must 

 go. But if there is a higher principle by which we 

 are to be guided in religious matters, if there is an 

 eye of faith which is superior to the eye of reason, — 

 a proposition which I here neither affirm nor deny, 

 — then the whole aspect of the question is changed, 

 and it is science and not theology that is blocking 

 the way. 



But the attitude of Professor Drummond is that 



