admitting of many degrees; and that the unbaptised infant would not
suffer in that state the same punishment as the adult reprobate. While
the latter would suffer positive pains of mind and body for his sins,
the unfortunate infant would doubtless suffer no pain of sense whatever.
As to their being exempt from the pain of loss, grieving over their
exclusion from the sight of God and the glories of His Kingdom, it is
more commonly held that they do not suffer even this; that even if they
know others are happier than themselves, they are perfectly resigned to
God's will and suffer no pain of loss in regard to happiness not suited
to their condition.

The Presbyterian called upon them to witness that his church was thus
not unique in attaining this sentimentality regarding reprobate infants.

Then little Floud cited the case of still another heretic within the
church, a professor in a western Methodist university, who declared that
biblical infallibility is a superstitious and hurtful tradition; that
all the miracles are mere poetic fancies, incredible and untrue--even
irreverent; and that all spiritual truth comes to man through his brain
and conscience. Modern preaching, according to the book of this heretic,
lacks power because so many churches cling to the tradition that the
Bible is infallible. It is the golden calf of their worship; the
palpable lie that gives the ring of insincerity to all their moral
exhortations.

So the talk flowed on until the good men agreed that a peculiarity of
the time lay in this: that large numbers of ministers within the church
were publishing the most revolutionary heresies while still clinging to
some shred of their tattered orthodoxy.