272

A RATIONAL CHRISTIAN

A Vigorous Thinker and a Christian Gentleman in the Best Sense.

Ecma Extracts From the Writing of the Late Gilbert C. Monell - His Work and Influence in Omaha.

"All study of science is based upon the idea that we can learn more; but nearly all dogmas of a spiritual kind are based upon the spiritual idea of perfect knowledge - at least so far as the dogma is concerned."

These are the words in which an old citizen of Omaha defined the difference between the scientific search after the useful and the good and the religious search after the same dearable things.

"Any theological creed," he maintianed, "formulated by a human device is not necesarily religion, nor are we bound to accept is as a standard of faith or rule of life, unless it expresses our intelligent belief. There were people here once who, when they heard of read such expresions as this, said this man was an athelet. But an athelet does not love God, and this man said:
"If we know but little, our faith will be limited and simple; if we know more, our religion and our responsibilities will be of a higher grade; but, however much we may learn, we can never harm religion by learning all there is to be known of truth."

By which it will be seen that he loves truth. And no one can sincerely love truth without loving God.

He who wrote this was Gilbert Chichester Monell, and he was a physician in this city, well known to all who have lived here long. He has been dead several years.

It is one of the greatest tragedies of life that so many foolish men put their thoughts into words, and that so many good men die without having preserved one of their convictions in such form that it will be of any use to other men.

Life is a series of experiments, And most of the experiments are failures. Therefore, the conscientious writing of a man who lived noble server the same purpose that a beacon does. It teaches one when to make for the open sea.

Perhaps Dr. Monell might have objected to the title of rationalist, because to some that conveys an idea that christianity is renounced. (Although it must be confessed that a poor estimate is placed upon christianity when it is assumed that it cannot hold its own in a mind which is given to rational modes of thinking.) If Dr. Monell is termed a rational Christian, possibly a term will be used which will most nearly describe that fearless yet reverential thought with which his mind appraoched all things connected with the Delty. The following long extract from his volume called "The Creation and the Scripture" will express in part the earnest simplicity of his belief:

"Theology is yet confounded with religion, and men are still debarred from church privileges for heresy, though leading a righteous life. The pulpit still sneers at the science it does not understand, and misrepresents the religion of scientific men it cannot persecute in the flesh. This is done in the face of fact that the study of science does not encourage infidelity or unbelief, and in the face of a long array of men eminent in science who have been [?] supporters of christianity. It may be that intellectual development tends to explode theological absurdities, but it is not true that science has ever sought to lessen the distance between right and wrong, or render [?] less sinful and odious, but establishes with more and more certainty that a right life is obedience to God. Caste in India and elsewhere has heretofore been an almost impassable barrier to the introduction of christianity, but when the locomotive and the railway carraige entered the land, and the [?] must walk or ride beside a meaner brother, he soon found a text allowing him to ride without pollution. When water was introduced into Calculia the proud Brahmin would not drink from the hydrant to which the lower class had access; but when he saw the only alternative was to drink the foul water of the River Hoogly, he soon found a license to drink the pure water of the hydrant without realizing, as we do, that the first blow was then struck on the entering wedge that was to break-up caste. Thus the introduction of steam, the telegraph and other triumphs of science are prompt missionaries of Christian qualities where other agencies have falled. Thus science at least prepares the way for religious light, and in a few years the Bible of the missionary, instead of the miserable Pundit, will have a controlling influence. Let it be clearly understood that science is not religion, but that it furnishes an everwidening foundation upon which is outside of and beyond us, and works for righteousness, clearly proving that there should be no barrier to intellectual development this side of heaven's perfections."

This is a full illistration of the view he held of the relations between science and religion. They suggest those of Draper. Whether he was influenced by Draper or not I cannot say. But what finally became his convictions appear to be the fine result of a life of studious and beautiful thought, in which the attitude of the mind was always inquiring an never dogmatic. Surrounded by the influences of the orthodox Prolestant church he appears to have been aggressive only when he fought against the arrogant attitude it held toward men who accepted without inquiry any scheme of philosophy or receipt of salvation.

"A religion," he says, "that involves our eternal existence should not be determined by doubtful speculation or tabooed by too sacred or further investigation."

This which follows has even a stronger hint of his irritation concerning this attitude of the church.

"Men organized as a church may show more religion than the unorganized messes outside of such bodies, but this gives the church no authority to adopt a shibboleth of membership and forbid all access to Christ except by its use as a password."

To the liberal minded it may seem as if Dr. Monell had here said something superfluous, because among the liberal minded it is so generally admitted that the churches hold only a small part of those who try to make the most of the life that God has lent them. But he who has much attended church will remember many occasions upon which clergy men have, with a great show magnaninity, admitted that there might be without the pale a few who would enter heaven. But - they have always solemnly warned thier listeners - the true way to do was to openly acknowledge Christ by becoming one of his flock. And they never suspect the stupendous egotism of the easy assumption that His flock is compased of those who are speaking.

There are many to whom religion can never be a rite. It must be a communion. Prayer meetings are to them a profunation. They would no sooner pray before others, than they would declare to the mortal object of their dearest love, all those emotions which are so instinctively hidden from the world. The badly frescoed roof of a meeting house [?] the vision that in lifting the eyes to God would encounter nothing but the stare. The interposition of another [?][?] between the soul and God is a degrading interruption and putsa leaden weight upon the wings of the devotion which would soar through the great Silence to that beneficient Unknown which loving faith has named the God.

Dr. Monell seems to have felt this- and he is the first man I ever chanced to meet- in flesh or in books- who feels as I have always felt about prayer place first I heard men and women kindly directing the Creator how to run the universe, and fled the prayer meeting with checks burning at the intolerable impudence toward Divinity. Indeed, I think I have never heard a prayer offered in public yet which did not state a case for God, and then in effect tell him he could draw his conclusions as to what ought to be done. Remember this flippancy is mine. Dr. Monell is never flippant. He was too cultivated and too earnest [?] man. He seems to have been striking with the tense hands of a liberator at the chains of superstition on the wrists of his follows. Talking about enchantments Christian and pagan, he says:
"The modern pagan has there [?] ments still, and relies on their use as hopefully and trustfully as modern christians do on their formal prayers, long [?], and [?] platitudes, though the pagan does not know that he thus violates the teaching of Jesus. The teachings of Jesus wre so precise as to the equal and universal application of God's laws to material things that is is hard to understand how intelligent minds can believe that mere mortal prayer can change or arrest the operation of a law of all creation, and instituted for all time, in order to accomodate man's fallen estate and temporary desire. The teaching of Jesus is so precise in confining prayer to the closet as a personal communion with God, and forbidding it as public worhsip in the synagogue as well as in the street to be seen of men, that it is hard fro true reverence to understand how ministers can makea merit of long prayers in the pulpit, and how other professors do not merit the rebuke of Jesus to the Pharisees for thus assuming a personal influence with God which would render a prayer more effectual from their lips than from the lips of a publican."

But though Dr. Monell does not lack in emphasis, he quite understands the point of view of other men, and he is patient even with determined ignorance. He tries to see, without heat, the aspects of each case. Concerning Darwin, he says:
"If we have once forced upon our intelligence a law of life to [?] Darwin believes he has the clue, we must openly deny allegiance to the Maker, or else we must admit our personal responsibility more practically than we do now; for it is only by so doing that we can preserve our bodies pure, as temples of God, and make habits of body, as well as emotions of mind, an essential part of practical religion. Thus parents, instead of transmitting to thier children anger, pride and self-indulgence, would seek to transmit the better qualities, and thus render it easier to train them to love, temperance and virtue. Whether Darwin's doctrine be true to the fullest extent or not, enough has been established to teach us more than we ever understood before, how children suffer unnecessarily for a parent's fault, and how, without implicating the justice for tender mercy of God. He visits the sins of the fathers upon the children. If teachers of religion and Christian parents, instead of sneering at Darwin, would inform themsevles of just what he does teach, they would find enoug which, if well enforced from the pulpit and well [?] in the new, would soon not only improve bodily health and happiness and promote spiritual religion. Let a parent fully realize by proper knowledge that a sin of the soul, when indulged. modifies and degrades his physical structure, and that the brain itself and every molecule of the body is thus made a partaker of sin, and if he is not not worse than a heathen, he will correct bad habits of mind as well as body, instead of transmitting them to the children."

A man has a right to think what he chooses of Darwin, and not be frightened out of his opinions by the easy sneers of those who imagin that J. Darwin's theories interfere with the truths taught in the bible. Mr. Newton was once also thought to advance a theory which was opposed to the teachings of the bible. But this theory was true. It is now looked upon in a very different way even by those who first insist that a truth must agree with the bible before they accept the truth, whatever it may be. The nebular hypothesis was once also considered as not in accord [?] bible teachings.

A RATIONAL CHRISTIAN

A Vigorous Thinker and a Christian Gentleman in the Best Sense.

Ecma Extracts From the Writing of the Late Gilbert C. Monell - His Work and Influence in Omaha.

"All study of science is based upon the idea that we can learn more; but nearly all dogmas of a spiritual kind are based upon the spiritual idea of perfect knowledge - at least so far as the dogma is concerned."

These are the words in which an old citizen of Omaha defined the difference between the scientific search after the useful and the good and the religious search after the same dearable things.

"Any theological creed," he maintianed, "formulated by a human device is not necesarily religion, nor are we bound to accept is as a standard of faith or rule of life, unless it expresses our intelligent belief. There were people here once who, when they heard of read such expresions as this, said this man was an athelet. But an athelet does not love God, and this man said:
"If we know but little, our faith will be limited and simple; if we know more, our religion and our responsibilities will be of a higher grade; but, however much we may learn, we can never harm religion by learning all there is to be known of truth."

By which it will be seen that he loves truth. And no one can sincerely love truth without loving God.

He who wrote this was Gilbert Chichester Monell, and he was a physician in this city, well known to all who have lived here long. He has been dead several years.

It is one of the greatest tragedies of life that so many foolish men put their thoughts into words, and that so many good men die without having preserved one of their convictions in such form that it will be of any use to other men.

Life is a series of experiments, And most of the experiments are failures. Therefore, the conscientious writing of a man who lived noble server the same purpose that a beacon does. It teaches one when to make for the open sea.

Perhaps Dr. Monell might have objected to the title of rationalist, because to some that conveys an idea that christianity is renounced. (Although it must be confessed that a poor estimate is placed upon christianity when it is assumed that it cannot hold its own in a mind which is given to rational modes of thinking.) If Dr. Monell is termed a rational Christian, possibly a term will be used which will most nearly describe that fearless yet reverential thought with which his mind appraoched all things connected with the Delty. The following long extract from his volume called "The Creation and the Scripture" will express in part the earnest simplicity of his belief:

"Theology is yet confounded with religion, and men are still debarred from church privileges for heresy, though leading a righteous life. The pulpit still sneers at the science it does not understand, and misrepresents the religion of scientific men it cannot persecute in the flesh. This is done in the face of fact that the study of science does not encourage infidelity or unbelief, and in the face of a long array of men eminent in science who have been [?] supporters of christianity. It may be that intellectual development tends to explode theological absurdities, but it is not true that science has ever sought to lessen the distance between right and wrong, or render [?] less sinful and odious, but establishes with more and more certainty that a right life is obedience to God. Caste in India and elsewhere has heretofore been an almost impassable barrier to the introduction of christianity, but when the locomotive and the railway carraige entered the land, and the [?] must walk or ride beside a meaner brother, he soon found a text allowing him to ride without pollution. When water was introduced into Calculia the proud Brahmin would not drink from the hydrant to which the lower class had access; but when he saw the only alternative was to drink the foul water of the River Hoogly, he soon found a license to drink the pure water of the hydrant without realizing, as we do, that the first blow was then struck on the entering wedge that was to break-up caste. Thus the introduction of steam, the telegraph and other triumphs of science are prompt missionaries of Christian qualities where other agencies have falled. Thus science at least prepares the way for religious light, and in a few years the Bible of the missionary, instead of the miserable Pundit, will have a controlling influence. Let it be clearly understood that science is not religion, but that it furnishes an everwidening foundation upon which is outside of and beyond us, and works for righteousness, clearly proving that there should be no barrier to intellectual development this side of heaven's perfections."

This is a full illistration of the view he held of the relations between science and religion. They suggest those of Draper. Whether he was influenced by Draper or not I cannot say. But what finally became his convictions appear to be the fine result of a life of studious and beautiful thought, in which the attitude of the mind was always inquiring an never dogmatic. Surrounded by the influences of the orthodox Prolestant church he appears to have been aggressive only when he fought against the arrogant attitude it held toward men who accepted without inquiry any scheme of philosophy or receipt of salvation.

"A religion," he says, "that involves our eternal existence should not be determined by doubtful speculation or tabooed by too sacred or further investigation."

This which follows has even a stronger hint of his irritation concerning this attitude of the church.

"Men organized as a church may show more religion than the unorganized messes outside of such bodies, but this gives the church no authority to adopt a shibboleth of membership and forbid all access to Christ except by its use as a password."

To the liberal minded it may seem as if Dr. Monell had here said something superfluous, because among the liberal minded it is so generally admitted that the churches hold only a small part of those who try to make the most of the life that God has lent them. But he who has much attended church will remember many occasions upon which clergy men have, with a great show magnaninity, admitted that there might be without the pale a few who would enter heaven. But - they have always solemnly warned thier listeners - the true way to do was to openly acknowledge Christ by becoming one of his flock. And they never suspect the stupendous egotism of the easy assumption that His flock is compased of those who are speaking.

There are many to whom religion can never be a rite. It must be a communion. Prayer meetings are to them a profunation. They would no sooner pray before others, than they would declare to the mortal object of their dearest love, all those emotions which are so instinctively hidden from the world. The badly frescoed roof of a meeting house [?] the vision that in lifting the eyes to God would encounter nothing but the stare. The interposition of another [?][?] between the soul and God is a degrading interruption and putsa leaden weight upon the wings of the devotion which would soar through the great Silence to that beneficient Unknown which loving faith has named the God.

Dr. Monell seems to have felt this- and he is the first man I ever chanced to meet- in flesh or in books- who feels as I have always felt about prayer place first I heard men and women kindly directing the Creator how to run the universe, and fled the prayer meeting with checks burning at the intolerable impudence toward Divinity. Indeed, I think I have never heard a prayer offered in public yet which did not state a case for God, and then in effect tell him he could draw his conclusions as to what ought to be done. Remember this flippancy is mine. Dr. Monell is never flippant. He was too cultivated and too earnest [?] man. He seems to have been striking with the tense hands of a liberator at the chains of superstition on the wrists of his follows. Talking about enchantments Christian and pagan, he says:
"The modern pagan has there [?] ments still, and relies on their use as hopefully and trustfully as modern christians do on their formal prayers, long [?], and [?] platitudes, though the pagan does not know that he thus violates the teaching of Jesus. The teachings of Jesus wre so precise as to the equal and universal application of God's laws to material things that is is hard to understand how intelligent minds can believe that mere mortal prayer can change or arrest the operation of a law of all creation, and instituted for all time, in order to accomodate man's fallen estate and temporary desire. The teaching of Jesus is so precise in confining prayer to the closet as a personal communion with God, and forbidding it as public worhsip in the synagogue as well as in the street to be seen of men, that it is hard fro true reverence to understand how ministers can makea merit of long prayers in the pulpit, and how other professors do not merit the rebuke of Jesus to the Pharisees for thus assuming a personal influence with God which would render a prayer more effectual from their lips than from the lips of a publican."

But though Dr. Monell does not lack in emphasis, he quite understands the point of view of other men, and he is patient even with determined ignorance. He tries to see, without heat, the aspects of each case. Concerning Darwin, he says:
"If we have once forced upon our intelligence a law of life to [?] Darwin believes he has the clue, we must openly deny allegiance to the Maker, or else we must admit our personal responsibility more practically than we do now; for it is only by so doing that we can preserve our bodies pure, as temples of God, and make habits of body, as well as emotions of mind, an essential part of practical religion. Thus parents, instead of transmitting to thier children anger, pride and self-indulgence, would seek to transmit the better qualities, and thus render it easier to train them to love, temperance and virtue. Whether Darwin's doctrine be true to the fullest extent or not, enough has been established to teach us more than we ever understood before, how children suffer unnecessarily for a parent's fault, and how, without implicating the justice for tender mercy of God. He visits the sins of the fathers upon the children. If teachers of religion and Christian parents, instead of sneering at Darwin, would inform themsevles of just what he does teach, they would find enoug which, if well enforced from the pulpit and well [?] in the new, would soon not only improve bodily health and happiness and promote spiritual religion. Let a parent fully realize by proper knowledge that a sin of the soul, when indulged. modifies and degrades his physical structure, and that the brain itself and every molecule of the body is thus made a partaker of sin, and if he is not not worse than a heathen, he will correct bad habits of mind as well as body, instead of transmitting them to the children."

A man has a right to think what he chooses of Darwin, and not be frightened out of his opinions by the easy sneers of those who imagin that J. Darwin's theories interfere with the truths taught in the bible. Mr. Newton was once also thought to advance a theory which was opposed to the teachings of the bible. But this theory was true. It is now looked upon in a very different way even by those who first insist that a truth must agree with the bible before they accept the truth, whatever it may be. The nebular hypothesis was once also considered as not in accord [?] bible teachings.