THE BATTALION.
9
had hardly hoped to see more, and soon
we steamed into our New Orleans dock.
Our trip over, thanking the reader for
his kind attention through this rather
dry narration of a few of our experiences,
I will now conclude with a hearty
good-bye.
A Religious Animal.
Somebody, I have forgotten who—but
That makes, no difference—defined man
as “the religious animal.” It was claim
ed by some that this definition was com
plete, because no other animal could
be thus defined. But certainly it is not
complete unless it includes all men as
well as excludes all other animals.
This brings up the question, are all men
religious? If there is or was such a
creature as a man utterly devoid of re
ligious sentiment or capability, and the
fact could be demonstrated, it would
overthrow the theory that man is neces
sarily a “religious animal” and vitiate
the above definition, and also there
ought to have been at some time and at
some place a race or nation of people
totally without this distinguishing at
tribute ; but history shows conclusively
that every race of men, no matter how
ignorant or degraded, worship in some
manner some reai or supposed superior
being. True, many people may seem to
us to be entirely without religious senti
ment. But if we think of the matter
closely we arrive at the conclusion that
they are merely lacking in the manifes
tation of some particular religion—the
religion around about them. In this
•Christian land we call a man irreligious
who does not conform to the Christian
religion. True he may not be a Chris
tian, but he may be a heathen, or a Mo
hammedan, or a Confuscian. But some
may ask about the Atheist? My opin
ion is that a man who can look abroad
on creation and deny the existence of a
creator, should be classed either as an
idiot or a liar.
The Lord of heaven and earth will
provide for the former, and Satan knows
his own children and will take charge of
the latter. I do not believe that an in
telligent atheist exists. A man may de
clare himself an atheist, but I am glad
that no law compels me to believe him.
For these and many other reasons I be
lieve that the definition in question is
complete. B. C. P.
A Leaky Th-eopy.
A well known Texas newspaper writer
says boys ought not to be sent away from
home to be educated, and gives as a
reason that “they are liable to learn
somethings not in the books.” If the
facilities for an education exits “at
home” there can be no question as to
that being the best place to acquire it.
But these facilities do not exist every
where, or at all homes. How then? If
an education were a thing that could be
ordered by mail or express, or shipped
as freight, then it might be best not to
be had at home, one Tnust go where it is
to be had, or do without it. To adopt
the views of the writer in question would
be to deny to a large majority the ad
vantage of an education, except possibly
the merest rudiments—the three R’s for
instance. The objection that the boys
a way from home are apt to learn some-