Are There Heathen Americans?
By George McCready Price
HE term “heathen” is applied to those peoples who are ignorant of the true God. Are there really heathens here in America? Some time ago, several articles appeared in Current Literature on “The Passing of Materialism.” These remarks were called out in view of the astonishing change that has come about in the last ten years or so in the religio-scientific world. In the seventies and eighties of the last century the Darwinian doctrine was supreme in scientific circles, and the world seemed entering on an age of stark materialism. But of late years, while evolution in some unknown and undefined form is growing even more fashionable as the “method of creation,” the materialistic view has been almost wholly discarded, and the God of the Hebrew and Christian religions has been charged with having made the world by the process of evolution—charged, I say, for I consider it a libel on the God of the Bible to attribute to Him such a bungling, heartless piece of business as the evolution theory describes,—a crude, un- workmanlike piece of work, and therefore unworthy of one all-powerful and all-wise; a fiendish process, and therefore unworthy of a God of love. But tho so inconsistent with the most fundamental ideas of natural and revealed religion alike, this “theistic evolution” has become quite popular everywhere, so much so that the current secular literature laughs at the most recently issued of Haeckel’s works, and talks about the “Passing of Materialism.”6 As a contrast and a relief from the voluminous nonsense now being sent forth to the world in an attempt to “reconstruct” the fundamentals of Christianity so as to accord with this essentially heathen doctrine, the present writer not long ago took up an old volume by F. W. Faber, author of “Hark! Hark, My Soul!” “The Creator and the Creature.” This book was written in 1856, or several years before Darwinism was sprung upon the world; and so far as the discussion of his main question is concerned, Faber is in full accord with sound philosophy and primitive Christianity. One of his chapters is entitled “What It Is to Be a Creature;” another is, “What It Is to Have a Creator.” The broad fact is dwelt upon and illustrated in detail that in this mutual relationship between creature and Creator lies the whole essence of moral obligation. We may admit that even if God had created us by the process of evolution, this fact would still not in any measure diminish our obligation to Him as our Creator. But when we consider what a changed aspect this gives to the whole problem of evil and the doctrine of divine love, and how it inevitably leads to a view of the divine immanence not distinguishable from pantheism, it ought to be evident that so far from such a doctrine's being worthy of the name Christian, it is as far removed from the Gospel of Christ as is Buddhism or any other heathen philosophy. A False Religion in Embryo
In short, the modern doctrine of evolution, and its outgrowth, the so-called “new theology,” are but the embryonic stage of another great system of false religion, arising in a manner very similar to that in which Buddhism, Brahmanism, Parseism, etc., had their origin. For it is a mistake to think that the religions of Greece and Rome, of Egypt and Babylon, any more than those of modern India and China, consisted merely of forms and ceremonies and idol-worship. Such both the ancient and the modern systems may have been or may be to a large class of their unthinking devotees. But in their beginnings, and to all their more intelligent followers, they were much more than this. Rather must we say that all are philosophic systems for explaining the phenomena of nature, the origin of things, and man's relationship to the universe and to the Power at the head of the universe. The forms and ceremonies of worship came in only incidentally. Each of these systems of man-made religion took whatever degenerate relics of more ancient and purer forms of faith were nearest at hand, and after changing and adapting them to suit its theories of cosmogony and philosophy, incorporated and assimilated them, and thus grew into the system of world-religion as we know it. During the last quarter century or so we moderns have been witnessing the embryonic development of another great system of heathen religion, “theistic evolution.” Like the systems of religious philosophy already mentioned, it deals primarily with man's origin and his relationship to the universe. And in its essential nature it is as really heathenish as anything that ever grew up in Chaldea, Greece, or India. Let us illustrate this point by showing what evolution and the “new theology” teach on two very fundamental points, namely, the reason for sin, and the remedy for it. Evolution Can Not Admit Sin
(1) Evolution has no explanation for the sin and misery of our world except to make it a part of the nature of things which God Himself could not avoid when He started the world evolving. Here are the words of Le Conte: “What we call evil is not a unique phenomenon confined to man,” and is not in any way connected with man's free will as an intelligent being rebelling against his Creator. It “must be a great fact pervading all nature and a part of its very constitution.” But man having ascended from the lower animals through the long-drawn-out struggle for existence, still carries about with him as an heirloom a large inheritance of animal selfishness and passion. Hence, for any of us to sin is simply to give way to the animal within us. Or, to quote John Fiske: “Theology has much to say about original sin. This original sin is neither more nor less than the brute inheritance which every man carries with him.” Making God the Author of Sin
But it is evident that evolution thus makes God the author of sin, and hence also of the misery which is sin's natural result. The fundamental evil, which Le Conte says pervades all nature and is a part of its very constitution, must be something which God deliberately saddled upon the universe when He started it evolving, or else He is not all-powerful and all-wise. According to evolution, sin and misery are either the deliberate result of God's purpose, or something which He could not help, being inherent in the very nature of the material (matter) on which He was working. Certainly, according to this theory, it is not man's fault, but his misfortune, that he is a sinner; and if there is any being in the universe who is responsible for the present sin and misery of our world, “here where men sit and hear each other groan,” it must be God Himself. Only a Human Remedy for Sin
Must we not call this a heathenish doctrine? Let us see if its remedy for sin and misery is any better. (2) In view of such teaching concerning the origin of sin, it might well be supposed that regeneration and conversion would be diluted and explained away until they would simply mean to combat the animal within us, and to struggle for the higher nature. And it is a fact that all “Christian” evolutionists, who hold sin to be inherited animalism, invariably substitute development and culture for regeneration and conversion. In the words of Fiske, “The process7 of evolution is an advance toward true salvation.” Another enthusiastic exponent of these views, a one-time celebrated evangelist, the Rev. B. Fay Mills, declares, “What is needed more than anything else to-day is to get rid of the idea that the human race needs redemption or a mediator, and to understand that we are a part of God ourselves.” Not long ago the editor of the Independent reviewed a new book which taught the old-fashioned doctrine of the sacrificial death of Christ. He criticized the book severely, saying that this book is arguing a lost cause, and affirming that there is actually a generation growing up who never heard the sacrificial explanation of the death of Christ. The learned editor even went so far as to say that many young people in the churches would be shocked by the statement that Jesus died that we might not die. Then Is It Not Cultured Heathenism?
Is it at all extravagant or unjust on our part to speak of such people as heathens? They may have been born in luxury, may have been educated at Harvard or Yale, they may be descended from the most select families of old Puritan New England or Virginia. They may now ride about in automobiles and private cars, and be twentieth century Chesterfields in point of manners and culture. But it remains a fact that a generation that as a result of early training in an atmosphere of evolution, “higher criticism,” and “new theology,” ignores or denies the claims to homage of the Creator of the heavens and the earth; who “never heard” the doctrine of the sacrificial death of Christ; who “would be shocked” at the suggestion that Jesus died in our stead in order that we might live,—can only be appropriately described by the old-fashioned word “heathen.” Thank God, there are still those who have not bowed the knee to this modern Baal, some few who are encouraged to greater faithfulness by the very universality of this false doctrine, for they know that it is quite full time for the great Jehovah to arise and vindicate His name as in ages past. And from the way in which God’s buried witnesses are arising from the dust heaps of Babylon and Egypt, and from the rocky strata all over the world, we know that the day of this vindication of God’s two great books, and the proof of their divine harmony, is drawing on apace.