Oh! there is no getting out of the mighty hand of God." Three years later, John Adams, speaking of a conversation with Arbuthnot, a Boston physician, says: "He began to prate upon the presumption of philosophy in erecting iron rods to draw the lightning from the clouds.

He railed and foamed against the points and the presumption that erected them.

He talked of presuming upon God, as Peter attempted to walk upon the water, and of attempting to control the artillery of heaven." As late as 1770 religious scruples regarding lightning-rods were still felt, the theory being that, as thunder and lightning were tokens of the Divine displeasure, it was impiety to prevent their doing their full work.

Fortunately, Prof.John Winthrop, of Harvard, showed himself wise in this, as in so many other things: in a lecture on earthquakes he opposed the dominant theology; and as to arguments against Franklin's rods, he declared, "It is as much our duty to secure ourselves against the effects of lightning as against those of rain, snow, and wind by the means God has put into our hands." Still, for some years theological sentiment had to be regarded carefully.

In Philadelphia, a popular lecturer on science for some time after Franklin's discovery thought it best in advertising his lectures to explain that "the erection of lightning-rods is not chargeable with presumption nor inconsistent with any of the principles either of natural or revealed religion."(261) (261) Regarding opposition to Franklin's rods in America, see Prince's sermon, especially p.