evolution at the same time; but the man who
holds that attitude toward the Bible =does not believe it at all=! No one
can accept the theory of evolution and the doctrine of an inerrant Bible at
the same time.

And yet the attempt is being very skilfully made by many leaders in the
Schools today to camouflage this impossibility. A very recent article by
Dr. Shailer Mathews on "Christ and Education" is a typical illustration.

In the midst of the article Dr. Mathews frankly indicates his acceptance of
evolution, because of which, he says, "the meaning of religion was
enlarged" for him. Then he leaves the impression with the reader that the
conclusions of modern science are to be taken without question, and also
that our faith in Christ and the Bible are to be brought into harmony with
these conclusions. That is, our faith must combine an acceptance of
evolution with whatever attitude toward Christ and the Scriptures the
evolutionary philosophy makes possible. This puts reason above Revelation
and makes the scientific realm primary in its relation to the spiritual.
The reader can judge, in the light of our previous thinking, whether this
procedure is scientific or not.

Then in speaking of the fact that the educated man as truly as the ignorant
man needs the saving power of Christ, he says:

But he must be saved as an educated man and not as an
ignorant man. He cannot be forced to give up what he knows to
be real. If he be told that Christian loyalty involves the
abandonment of the assured results and methods of scientific
investigation, he will refuse such loyalty.

This implied charge is later on in the article made specific when he says
that some schools

"are refusing to let their students know the results of
scientific investigation for fear lest such knowledge will
ruin certain theological beliefs for which the schools
stand"--a method he describes as putting a premium upon
ignorance as a prerequisite for faith.

The reader knows as well as the writer that the whole attitude of the
Christian Church, and therefore of true Christian education, challenges
those words and hurls them back at their author for proof. Both the implied
and the direct accusations are utterly without foundation. Indeed, the
thing Dr. Mathews charges is the one thing true Christian education does
=not= do.

When did the Church ever try to force a man, educated or ignorant, to give
up what he kno