Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2007 with funding from IVIicrosoft Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/churchpeopleageOOscotrich THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE €i Caspar Ben^ Gregory The Church, The People, and the Age EDITED BY ROBERT SCOTT GEORGE WILLIAM GILMORE Editors op The Homiletie Review Bnalpiisi anb ^ummarp BY CLARENCE AUGUSTINE BECKWITH PROFESSOR OF SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY, CHICAGO THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY FUNK & WAGNALLS COMPANY NEW YORK AND LONDON 1914 Copyright, 1914, bt FUNK & WAGNALLS COMPANY Published March, 1914 i>^ [PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA] CONTENTS List of Contributors ...•••• vii List of Portraits ..*.••• xi Preface and Introduction ...••• xv CHAPTEB L Contributions: Group One 1 to 120 Group Two 121 to 413 Group Three 415 to 479 IL Analysis and Summary .... 481 to 508 IIL The Historic Creeds .... 509 to 530 IV. Established Forms for Reception of Members ..... 531 to 546 V. Forms for Reception of Members Sug- gested BY Contributors . . . 547 to 552 Index 553 to 671 [v] 303995 CONTRIBUTORS Lyman Abbott, D.D., LL.D., L.H.D., New York, N. Y. James Granville Adderley, Birmingham, England Walter Frederic Adeney, D.D., Manchester, England Sir Robert Anderson, IjL.D., London, England Svante August Arrhenius, Ph.D., M.D., Stockholm, Sweden Hugh John Dukinfield Astley, Litt.D., F.R.Hist.S., King's Lynn, England Baron Avebury (Sir John Lubbock), P.O., D.O.L., LL.D., F.B.S., Lon- don, England William Gay Ballantine, D.D., LL.D., Springfield, Mass. Samuel Augustus Bamett, D.C.L., London, England James Levi Barton, D.D., Boston, Mass. Joseph Agar Beet, D.D., Richmond, England Arthur Christopher Benson, F.R.Hist.S., F.R.S.L., Cambridge, England Amy Gaston Charles Auguste Bonet-Maury, D.D., LL.D., Paris, France Gottlieb Nathanael Bonwetsch, Th.D., Goettingen, Germany Arthur Elmore Bostwick, Ph.D., St. Louis, Mo. Charles Augustus Briggs, D.D., D.Litt., New York, N. Y. John Wright Buckham, D.D., Berkeley, Cal. Samuel Parkes Cadman, D.D., Brooklyn, N. Y. Alexander Francis Chamberlain, Ph.D., Worcester, Mass. Henry W. Clark, M.A., Charisma, Harpenden, England Frank Wiggleswoith Clarke, D.Sc, LL.D., Washington, D. 0. Henry Sloane Coffin, D.D., New York, N. Y. John Merle Coulter, Ph.D., Chicago, HL Philip Wendell Crannell, D.D., Kansas City, Eans. George Cross, Ph.D., D.D., Rochester, N. Y. Charles Benedict Davenport, Ph.D., Cold Spring Harbor, N. Y. George Ellsworth Dawson, PIlD., Springfield, Mas& William James Dawson, D.D., Newark, N. J. James Denney, D.D., Glasgow, Scotland August Johannes Domer, PIlD., D.D., Eoenigsberg, GeimaDy Dyce Duckworth, M.D., LL.D., London, England Charles William Eliot» Ph.D., LL.D., Cambridge^ MaSB. Havelock Ellis, London, England [vii] CONTRIBUTORS Bndolf Cliristoph Eucken, PIlD., D.D., I1I1.D., Jena, Oeimany Milton G. Evans, D.D., Chester, Pa. Irving Fisher, Ph.D., New Haven, Conn. G. Walter Fisk, Oberlin, Ohio George Holley Gilbert, Ph.D., D.D., Dorset, Vt, George Milbry Gould, M.D., Atlantic City, N. J. Caspar Rene Gregory, Ph.D., D.D., S.T.D., I1L.D., Leipsic, Germany E. Griffith-Jones, D.D., Bradford, England William Elliot Griffis, D.D., L.H.D., Ithaca, N. Y. Almon Gunnison, D.D., LL.D., Canton, N. Y. Theodore Haering, Th.D., Ttibingen, Germany Granville Stanley Hall, Ph.D., LL.D., Worcester, Mass. Edward John Hamilton, D.D., S.T.D., Plainfield, N. J. Paul Henry Hanus, I1I1.D., Cambridge, Mass. Adolf Hamack, Ph.D., Th.D., D.Jur., Berlin, Germany Eugene Bussell Hendrix, D.D., LL.D., Kansas City, Mo. Herbert Hensley Henson, D.D., Westminster, England J. Arthur Hill, Bradford, England Newell Dwight Hillis, D.D., L.H.D., Brooklyn, N. Y. Henry Scott Holland, D.D., Litt.D., Oxford, England Jesse Herman Holmes, Ph.D., Swa-rthmore, Pa. John William Horsley, M.A., Detling, England Theodore Whitefield Hunt, Ph.D., Litt.D., Princeton, N. J. Henry Hamilton Johnston, K.C.B., K.C.M.G., D.Sc, Arundel, England David Starr Jordan, Ph.D., LL.D., Stanford University, CaL Henry Churchill Bang, D.D., LL.D., S.T.D., Oberlin, Ohio Irving King, Ph.D., Iowa City, Iowa George Trumbull Ladd, D.D., LL.D., New Haven, Conn. James Henry Leuba, Ph.D., Bryn Mawr, Pa. James Lindsay, D.D., F.R.S.L., F.R.S.E., Irvine, Scotland Friedrich Armin Loofs, Ph.D., Th.D., Halle, Germany Charles Stedman Macfarland, Ph.D., New York, N. Y. John Stuart Mackenzie, Litt.D., LL.D., Cardiff, Wales Edwin Markham, West New Brighton, N. Y. James Gore B:ing McClure, D.D., LKD., Chicago, EI. Samuel McComb, D.D., Boston, Mass. Allan Menzies, D.D., St. Andrews, Scotland Eduard Montet, D.D., Geneva^ Switzerland [ viii ] CONTRIBUTORS Edward Caldwell Moore, PI1.D., D.D., Cambridge, Mass. Edgar Young Mullins, D.D., LL.D., Louisville, Ky. Scott Hearing, PI1.D., Germantown, Pa. James Orr., D.D., Glasgow, Scotland Francis Greenwood Peabody, D.D., LL.D., Cambridge, Mass. William Matthew Flinders Petrie, D.C.L., Litt.D., LL.D., London, England James Bissett Pratt, Ph.D., Williamstown, Mass. Walter Bauschenbuscb, D.D., Bocbester, N. Y. Junius Benjamin Bemensnyder, D.D., LL.D., New York Archibald Thomas Bobertson, D.D., LL.D., Louisvillo, Ky* Bobert McWatty Bussell, D.D., LL.D., New Wilmington, Pa. Paul Wilhelm Schmiedel, Th.D., Zurich, Switzerland Charles Monroe Sheldon, D.D., Topeka, Kans. Henry Clay Sheldon, D.D., Boston, Mass. Hermann Siebeck, Ph.D., Th.D., Giessen, Germany William Macdonald Sinclair, D.D., Henfield, England Gerald Bimey Smith, D.D., Chicago, IlL James Henry Snowden, D.D., LL.D., Pittsburgh, Fa. Theodore Gerald Soares, Ph.D., D.D., Chicago, HL James Stalker, D.D., Aberdeen, Scotland Augustus Hopkins Strong, D.D., LL.D., Bochester, N. Y. Josiah Strong, D.D., LL.D., New York Milton Spencer Terry, D.D., LL.D., Evanston, HL William St. Clair Tisdall, D.D., Bedford, England W. Van der Vlugt, D.U.J., Leyden, Holland Bernard Hendrick Cornelis Van der Wyck, L.H.D., Utrecht, Holland David Van Home, D.D., LL.D., Dayton, Ohio Philip VoUmer, Ph.D., D.D., Dayton, Ohio Benjamin B. Warfield, D.D., LL.D., Litt.D., Princeton, N. J. John Watson (Ian Maclaren), D.D., Liverpool, England Lauchlan MacLean Watt, M.A., B.D., F.B.S.E., Edinburgh, Scotland James Morris Whiton, Ph.D., New York Frederick William Worsley, M.A., Cambridge, England Andrew C. Zenos, D,D., LL.D., Chicago, HL [ix] PORTRAITS PACK Lyman Abbott, D.D., I1L.D., I1.H.D 424 James Granville Adderley 120 Walter Frederic Adeney, D.D 232 Sir Robert Anderson, LL.D 424 Svante August Arrbenius, Ph.D., M.D 360 Hugh John Dukinfield Astley, Litt.D., F.R.Hist.S 184 William Gay Ballantlne, D.D., I1L.D 424 Samuel Augustus Bamett, D.C.L. 184 James Levi Barton, D.D 472 Clarence A. Beckwitb 9MMIi|HHII 5b Joseph Agar Beet, D.D 56 Arthur Christopher Benson, F.R.Hist.S., F.B.S.L 184 Amy Gaston Charles Auguste Bonet-Maury, D.D., LL.D 56 Gottlieb Nathanael Bonwetsch, Th.D Frontispiece Charles Augustus Briggs, D.D., Litt. Frontispiece John Wright Buckham, D.D 296 Samuel Parkes Cadman, D.D..«. 120 Alexander Francis Chamberlain, Ph.D 472 Henry W. Clark, M.A 184 Frank Wigglesworth Clarke, D.Sc, LL.D 472 John Merle Coulter, Ph.D 360 Philip Wendell Crannell, D.D 232 George Cross, Ph.D., D.D 56 George Ellsworth Dawson, Ph.D 360 William James Dawson, D.D 120 James Denney, D.D Frontispiece Charles William Eliot, Ph.D., LL.D 232 Rudolf Christoph Eucken, Ph.D., D.D., LL.D 296 Milton G. Evans, D.D 232 Irving Fisher, Ph.D 472 G. Walter Fisk 424 George Holley Gilbert, Ph.D., D.D 424 George Milbry Gould, M.D 472 [xi] PORTRAITS PAGE Caspar Rene Gregory, Ph.D., D.D., S.T.D., I1L.D Frontispiece E. GrifBth-Jones, D.D 184 WiUiam Elliot Grifls^ D.D., L.H.D 472 Theodore Haering, Th.D 56 Granville Stanley Hall, Ph.D., I1L.D 232 Edward John Hamilton, D.D., S.T.D 296 Paul Henry Hanus, LL.D 36d Adolf Hamack, Ph.D., Th.D., D.Jur. 66 Eugene Russell Hendrix, D.D., I1L.D 120 Herbert Hensley Henson, D.D 184 J. Arthur Hill 472 Newell Dwight Hillis, D.D., L.H.D 184 Henry Scott Holland, D.D., Litt.D 120 Jesse Herman Holmes, Ph.D 424 John William Horsley, M. A 184 Theodore Whitefield Hunt, Ph.D., Litt.D 472 Henry Halcro Johnston, D.Sc, M.D., O.B 360 David Starr Jordan, Ph.D., IjL.D 232 Henry Churchill King, D.D., I1L.D., S.T.D 232 Irving King, Ph.D 360 George Trumbull Ladd, D.D., I1L.D 296 James Henry Leuba, Ph.D 360 James Lindsay, D.D., F.R.S.L., F.R.S.E Frontispiece Priedrich Armin Loofs, Ph.D., Th.D Frontispiece Charles Stedman Macfarland, Ph.D 424 John Stuart Mackenzie, Litt.D., LL.D 296 Edwin Markham 472 Samuel McComb, D.D 120 Allan Menzies, D.D 360 Eduard Montet, D.D Frontispiece Edgar Young Mullins, D.D., LL.D 232 Scott Nearlng, Ph.D 360 James Orr,. D.D. Frontispiece Francis Greenwood Peabody, D.D., LL.D 296 William Matthew Flinders Petrie, D.C.L., Litt.D., LL.D 472 Walter Rauschenbusch, D.D 424 Junius Benjamin Remensnyder, D.D., LL.D 120 Archibald Thomas Robertson, D.D., LL.D 56 [xii] PORTRAITS P'-OE Eobert Mc Watty Russell, D.D., I1I1.D 232 Paul Willielin Schmiedel, TIlD 424 Charles Monroe Sheldon, D.D 120 Henry Clay Sheldon, D.D 56 Hermann Siebeck, Ph.D., Th.D 296 William Macdonald Sinclair, D.D 120 James Henry Snowden, D.D., LL.D 296 Theodore Gerald Soares, PIlD., D.D 360 James Stalker, D.D Frontispiece Josiah Strong, D.D 424 Milton Spencer Terry, D.D., LL.D 56 W. Van der Vlugt, D.U.J 296 Bernard Hendrick Cornells Van der Wyck, L.H.D 296 David Van Home, D.D., LL.D 232 Benjamin B. Warfield, D.D., LL.D., Litt.D 56 Lauchlan MacLean Watt> M.A., B.D., F.B.S.E 120 James Morris Whiton, Ph.D 184 Frederick William Worsley, M.A 184 Andrew C. Zenos, D.D Frontispiece PREFACE Those who are endeavoring to serve their day and generation will not shut their eyes to facts. To do so is moral suicide. Acquaintance with facts and condi- tions is essential to the proper consideration of ques- tions affecting the life of the individual and of society. There were two facts uppermost in the minds of the editors when the question before us was first mooted. (1) There appeared to be a widespread indifference to the claims of the Church. (2) There were many who might easily be numbered as having the interests of the kingdom of God at heart yet were not enrolled members of the organized church. Concerning the first statement it has been amply confirmed by the opinions expressed in the following pages. As to the second statement there can be little doubt that there are many who, like Mr. Lincoln (see next page), are deterred from joining certain churches because of the peculiar and complicated tenets professed. Believing that a distinct service could be rendered to the entire Church and the kingdom of God, the editors communicated with leaders of thought in Europe and America to ascertain their views concern- ing the indifference of a considerable number to the organized Church and also as to the basis and direction for a fundamental theology of the Church for the age in which we live. The contributions received number one hundred and five, and represent the fields of re- [xv] PREFACE Hgion, theology, science, and literature. Still further they represent, as would be expected, varied points and types of view. There are those who believe with Mr. Lincoln, while others dissent, with different degrees of emphasis, from his proposition. Some either uphold or assail creeds, others again hold that creeds should be plastic, so as to allow for the developing thought and life of the time. The substance of the letter sent to each contributor was as follows: Why is it that there are so many persons who are indifferent to the claims of the Church? For reasons best known to themselves there are thousands upon thousands who refuse to become identified with the Church in any of its numerous denominations. We may get some basis for their attitude by pondering what Abraham Lincoln has to say on this question. To quote : "I have never united myself to any church because I have found difficulty in giving my assent without mental reservation to the long complicated statements of Christian doctrine which characterize their Articles of Belief and Confession of Faith. Whenever any church will inscribe over its altar, as its sole qualifica- tion for membership, the Saviour's condensed statement of the substance of both Law and Gospel, *Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor as thyself,' that Church I will join with all my heart and all my soul." Is it true that this experience is typical of thousands of others? Do you think it wise to ask the great majority of people to subscribe to statements that deal with debated and controversial questions? Or do you think the Church should limit itself to a declara- tion that seeks a common purpose of love and service to God and man, or, as Abraham Lincoln put it, "as its [ xvi ] PREFACE sole qualification for membership" the brief statement of our Lord, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor as thyself." And this leads to a further question, a natural corollary of what has been stated. What should be the basis and direction for a fundamental theology of the Church? In what way is it to be related to the literary, scientific, and philosophical certainties of our time? Can a theology be unassailable and final that does not accord with the assured results of science? Is it not true that a message to be effective must stand for and teach those things that constitute the sum total of the values of human life, whatever their source may be? While it is true that in some churches the formula required for new members is not of a controversial or metaphysical nature it is nevertheless true — and this also the editors had in mind — that what is preached frequently partakes of that nature. As Professor Gilbert remarks, "It is not merely the door of the Church that is forbidding to many but what one hears within." ( See page 228. ) Within the limits set for this work it was impos- sible to produce in toto the historical creeds, but we have given the "ecumenical" creeds and the chief facts concerning the post-reformation creeds, so that the reader may get some conception of the stress and im- portance that the theologians of an era now gone put upon formulated statements. This is in marked con- trast with what is found in this volume, where the emphasis is upon the Master's teaching: "I came that they may have life, and may have it abundantly." Comparison of some forms for admission of mem- bers with the creeds of certain churches will show that [ xvii 1 PREFACE this stress upon formulated statements is not altogether a thing of the past, that some churches still require of entering members assent to extended statements which commit them to complex affirmations. These affirmations include alike matters of a recondite nature (such as the procession of the Spirit) and those which deal with the authorship of certain books of the Bible. Proof of the Trinity is in some of these confessions derived from Gen. 1 and 3 and from 1 John 5: 7, a verse which is excluded from modern texts and versions as not belonging to the original. The new member is committed to denial of the free will of man, and to the belief that babes in the womb are "infected" with "original sin." (See page 544, and cf. Belgic Confes- sion, Articles IV, IX, XIV, XV.) In editing the contributions we found that it would be possible to adopt a grouping system that would bring similar opinions under one head. It is to be understood that these divisions do not indicate precisely the particular school of thought of the writers. Occa- sionally we came across a manuscript that was diffi- cult to classify. In that case editorial judgment (which is always fallible) located the contribution for the sake of convenience where the trend of thought seemed to locate it. Some of the articles contain suggested formula. These we have deemed it wise to bring together in a separate chapter. At the time this symposium was planned Professor Rudolf Eucken kindly consented to lead in the dis- cussion. We have therefore put his contribution at the beginning of the volume. This unique production has been made possible by I xviii ] PREFACE the generous response of the contributors. What do these many expressions yield and what is the next step? Professor Beckwith in his "Analysis and Sum- mary" has endeavored to answer the first question; the other is for individuals and religious organizations to determine. I xix I INTRODUCTION RUDOLF CHRISTOPH EUCKEN, Ph.D., D.D., LL.D., JENA^ GERMANY Professor of philosophy in the University of Jena since 1874; born at Aurich, East Friesland, Germany, Jan. 5, 1846; educated at Gottingen and Berlin; professor of philosophy at Basel, 1871; member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Science since 1908, of the Finnish Society of Science since 1911^ and of Accademia dei Lincei (Rome) since 1912; won the Nobel Prize for Literature, 1908; author of Geschichte und Kritik der Grundhegriffe der Gegenwart, 4th ed., Geistige Stromungen der Gegenwart, Eng. transl.. Fundamental Concepts of Modern Philo- sophic Thought; Die Einheit des Geistes Lebens; Die Lebensanschauungen der grossen Denher, Eng. transl.. Problem of Human Life as Viewed by the Great Thinkers; Der Kampf um einen geistigen Lebensinhalt; Der Wahr- heitsgehalt der Religion, Eng. transl.. The Truth of Relig- ion; Grundlinien einer neuen Lebensanschauung ; Haupt- probleme der Religionsphilosophie der Gegenwart; Der Sinn und Wert des Lebens, Eng. transl.. Meaning and Value of Life; Einfiihrung in eine Philosophic des Geisteslebens, Eng. transl.. Life of the Spirit; Religion and Life; and Erkennen und Leben. There can be no doubt that the churches of to-day do not fully satisfy the religious needs of mankind. Often the most religious natures are those that hold themselves aloof from the Church. I find the main reason for this in that the churches cling too tenaciously to some old formula that is becoming more and more antiquated, so that the Church loses touch with the spiritual life of the present. The crisis of the present day can be overcome only when the time-dimmed truths [xx] INTRODUCTION. of Christianity, the original elements of the Christian life, are again clearly set forth and brought into fruit- ful relationship to the position and advancement of the present. That which has become obsolete or of minor impor- tance should no longer be regarded as eternal and indis- pensable and laid as a heavy burden upon mankind, but rather should be energetically put aside. If the churches cannot find the courage and strength for such a course, they will find themselves becoming more and more estranged from mankind. [xxi] GROUP ONE [1] \ ,' ' '• SIR ROBERT ANDERSON, LL.D., LONDON, ENGLAND Justice of the peace for London; born May 29, 1841; educated at Trinity College, Dublin; received his LL.D. degree from that college in 1875; adviser in matters re- lating to political crime, 1868; assistant conmiissioner of police of the metropolis, and head of Criminal Investiga- tion Department from 1888-1901; author of The Com- ing Prince; Human Destiny; The Gospel and Its Minis- try; Daniel in the Critics' Den; The Silence of God; The Bible and Modern Criticism; Pseudo-Criticism; For Us Men; The Way; Sidelights on the Home Rule Movement; In Defense: A Plea for the Faith; Criminals and Crime; The Lighter Side of My Official Life; The Bible or the Church?; The Lord from Heaven. There are only two books from which we can leam anything about God. The first is the book of nature. In view of the wonders of nature the atheist is — ^well, he is the opposite of a philosopher! And the God of nature claims our reverence and awe, and above all our fear; for, as a French infidel phrased it, "Nature knows no such foolery as forgiveness of sins." But to speak of love in this connection is either poetry or nonsense. But the book to which alone we owe our knowledge of a personal God is the Bible — and the Bible as a divine revelation; for if it have not that character, we are thrown back upon natural religion. The Bible reveals a God who is "gracious and full of compassion" and, above all, who is love. And this it was, no doubt, that President Lincoln had in view when he used the words which are given me as a text for this article. But it is precisely in this revelation of mercy and love that the Bible seems opposed to the voice of nature — "nature [3] TtiE dHTlliGH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE red in tooth and claw." How utterly unreasonable then it would be to adopt its teaching here, while discarding it in all besides. The Bible, moreover, is a progressive revelation, and it reaches its climax in the advent and work of Christ. In and through him it was that "the kindness of God and his love-toward-man appeared." Or as the Apostle John writes, "In this was manifested the love of God toward us, that God sent his only-begotten Son into the world that we might live through him." And he adds, "Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins." And this is "the Christian creed"; not (as Harnack puts it) , "that a man of the name of Jesus Christ once stood in our midst," but that the Son of God came down to earth to die for the sins of men. If we shake free from the superstitions which cluster roimd the word "church," we shall recognize that the enfranchised citizens of Ephesus were as really a church as were the Christians of Ephesus. But the citizens were not a Christian church. Neither would Lincoln's ideal church have any claims to that designation. And yet this symposium will probably show that his views are approved in many unexpected quarters. For the churches of the Reformation have drifted from their old anchorage in the Bible as a divine revelation. The facts of the life and death of the Nazarene are enshrined in human history; but our knowledge of him as Son of God, and as the propitiation for human sin, depends entirely upon revelation. And if the various theological colleges and "Christian ministers" who have accepted "the assured results" of German rationalism respecting the Bible still cling to belief in the deity of Christ and [4] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE the atonement, the fact bears testimony to then* piety, but at the expense of their intelligence. Here the ways divide. If any one could draw "the lapsed masses," or even the socialists, into a "church" pledged to the principles of love to God and man, he would deserve well of this generation. But the scheme is chimerical. There are some infidels whose outward life might put many Christians to shame; but cases of the kind are rare. And they are usually the outcome of a Christian training or environment. Being myself a skeptic by both temperament and training, I can sympathize with honest skepticism. But Lincoln's thesis is pure agnosticism. And agnosticism is Greek for ig- norance. And if God has given us a revelation, igno- rance is not a misfortune but a high-handed sin, for it implies contempt of the revelation. I will only add that President Lincoln was too en- lightened to confound "Christendom religion" with the Christianity of the New Testament. And his scheme of an ideal church was probably intended as a "back- hander" at the religion, not as a slur upon Christianity. To reject Christianity because of the prevalence of superstition and error would be on a par with refusing all money because there are base coins and flash notes in circulation. [5] CHARLES AUGUSTUS BRIGGS, D.D., D.Litt., NEW YORK^ N. Y. Late professor of theological encyclopedia and symbolics at Union Theological Seminary, New York, since 1904; born in New York, Jan. 15, 1841; died June 8, 1913; studied at the University of Virginia, 1857-60; Union Theologi- cal Seminary, 1861-63; University of Berlin, 1866-69; or- dained Presbyterian minister, 1870; pastor at Roselle, N. J., 1870-74; professor of Hebrew and cognate lan- guages at Union Theological Seminary, 1874-1891; professor of Biblical theology, 1891-1904; author of Biblical Study; American Preshyterianism; Messianic Prophecy ; Whither? A Theological Question for the Times; The Authority of Holy Scripture; The Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch; The Bible, the Church and the Reason; The Messiah of the Apostles; The Messiah of the Gospels; The Case of Dr. Briggs, 3 parts; General Introduction to the Study of Holy Scripture; The Incar- nation of the Lord; New Light on the Life of Jesus; Ethical Teaching of Jesus; Commentary on the Psalms; Church Unity; New Hebrew Lexicon (with Francis Brown and S. R. Driver) ; The Papal Commission and the Pentateuch; editor of the International Critical Commen- tary, International Theological Library, QUALIFICATIONS FOR CHURCH MEMBERSHIP In response to the question asked whether "the sole qualification for membership in the Christian Church should be the statement of the substance of both law and gospel, *Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor as thyself :' " I do not hesitate to say, that no church could make this the sole qualification for membership without divesting itself of its Christianity, and ceasing to be a Christian Church. 1. It is not true that this ethical summary is a sum- [6] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE mary of the gospel. There is nothing peculiar to the gospel in it. Jesus, in his use of it (Matt. 22: 34-40; Mark 12: 28-34; Luke 10: 25-28) was simply replying to the question of a lawyer: "What is the great com- mandment of the law?" He answers: "What is written in the law? How readest thou?" and then quotes Deut. 6: 5, and Lev. 19: 18, giving thereby a sunmiary of the law from itself. To this the lawyer assents; and so every Jew acknowledges these words of Jesus as valid, jews, Mohammedans, and, if I am not mistaken, any pious monotheist of ancient or modern times, would agree to this summary of the ethical law. It might be suitable as an ethical basis for a syncretistic religion, but there is nothing specifically Christian in it. The Christian principle of love is infinitely higher than this. It is Christlike love (John 13: 34; 15: 12); Godlike love (Matt. 5: 43-48) ; self-sacrificing love; a love not merely of neighbors, but of enemies and persecutors, seeking above all things their salvation; a love not measured by self, but by God and Christ. 2. This ethical summary of the law given by Jesus is based, in Deut. 6: 4 ff. and in the earliest narrative of this conversation with the lawyer, Mark 12: 28-34, upon the fundamental doctrine of the faith of the Jews : "Hear, O Israel; the Lord (Yahweh) our God, the Lord is One." This doctrine of the unity of God implies, in the original passage, and in the universal interpretation of Jew, Christian, and Mohammedan, faith in the reality, unity, and personality of God as the God of love and salvation, excluding every kind of atheism, polytheism, pantheism, mere deism, and agnosticism. But even with these excluded, devout monotheists could subscribe to [7] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE this faith, and there is nothing specifically Christian in it. The God of the Christian is not only the God of the Old Testament, but the Father of his only Son Jesus Christ. There can be no Christianity without Jesus Christ. No one can be a Christian and be entitled to entrance into the Christian Church, who does not believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Saviour. This was required of the apostles themselves, and of all Christians from the beginning until the present day. Furthermore this faith in Jesus Christ as Son of God, Saviour, always has implied that he is the divine Saviour. Christianity stands for this as its essential principle, without which it could not be Christianity at all. The Koran distinctly recognizes Moses and Christ as prophets, and many Jews have done the same. If a man cannot rise above the humanity of Christ to his divinity, he cannot be entitled to membership in a Chris- tian church. The Church cannot renounce her divine Saviour without renouncing her Christianity; and those who cannot accept Christ as such, cannot be admitted to the Church without unfaithfulness on the part of the Church itself. 3. The apostles were conmianded by our Lord to wait in Jerusalem for the coming of the divine Spirit upon them before they began the work he entrusted to them (Acts 1-2). The Christian Church is built on the Pentecostal gift of the divine Spirit. Therefore faith in the divine Spirit became the third great principle of the Christian creed, implying, with the divine Father and divine Son, the Christian Trinity in unity. Christianity is now, as it always has been, trinitarian. The Church cannot relinquish her trinitarian creed without ceasing to be Christian. Those who cannot acknowledge the [8] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE holy Trinity, have no right or title in the Christian Church. 4. Our Lord recognized with the Jews the divine inspiration and authority of the Old Testament Scrip- tures. He commissioned his apostles to teach the world his gospel. The teachings of the apostles, as recorded in the apostolic writings of the New Testament, have always been regarded by the Christian Church as alike divinely inspired and authoritative with the Old Testa- ment. Even apostolic tradition unrecorded, so far as it can be authenticated, has been regarded as authori- tative ; although there is a difference of opinion as to the measure of its authority. The Bible is the written con- stitution of the Church, which it cannot lay aside with- out infidelity to the divine Master. There are different theories as to the inspiration of the Scriptures ; but these differences do not involve a departure from the apostolic doctrine of their real divine authority as the rule of faith and practice. Those who cannot accept the authority of the Chris- tian Bible, rule themselves out of membership in the Christian Church. 5. Our Lord commissioned his apostles to organize his Church, to admit members by baptism and retain them in the Christian communion by participation in the eucharist ; and they ordained properly qualified men to assist them and to succeed them in the ministry of the Church. The Church has always had an ordained ministry, and the two sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper. Any church that divests itself of these ceases to be a church; and if any one unites with such a society, he does not really unite with the Christian Church. [9] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE 6. The Christian Church at a very early date found it necessary to instruct converts and prepare them for holy baptism. The Apostles' Creed was formulated as the baptismal creed, which all Christian churches have confessed from the early second century until the pres- ent time. It gives nothing more than the simplest teachings of Holy Scripture ; faith in the three persons of the holy Trinity, the six great saving acts of Jesus Christ, and the three most important works of the divine Spirit. The Christian Church cannot put aside its Apostles' Creed simply because some people cannot reconcile their speculations with the virgin birth of our Lord and his bodily resurrection. The Church may tolerate those who, in the stress of modem controversy, have doubts about these doctrines, or certain explana- tions of them which have been given. But these doc- trines are so essential, that the Church could not reject them without ceasing thereby to be a Christian church. 7. The Christian Church in the fourth century had to define the faith, taught by the apostles in the New Testament, in the Holy Trinity and the incarnation, over against monarchian, Arian, and semi-Arian, Apol- linarian, Nestorian and Eutychian heresies. The Nicene Creed, as further interpreted in the Constantinopolitan and the decrees of the Council of Chalcedon, was com- posed for this purpose ; and the Christian Church in all its divisions has stood firmly on this creed ever since. Its statements are faithful to the teaching of Jesus Christ and his apostles; and the Church cannot put it aside without ceasing to be Christian. These mon- archian theories have been revived by modem Ritsch- lians; and Arianism, Apollinarianism, Nestorianism, and all the ancient heresies, by various modem thinkers. [10] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE The modern Christian Church cannot tolerate them, any more than could the ancient and medieval Church ; because they undermine and destroy Christianity itself. It is significant that these moderns propose no new heresy, no new explanation of the mysteries of the Holy Trinity and of the incarnation of our Lord. It is quite evident that they cannot. The debate was exhausted, and settled once for all in the fourth Christian century; and they must either acquiesce, or separate eventually from the Christian Church. I do not mean to imply that every one who unites with the Christian Church should fully understand these great mysteries. It is sufficient that they accept them, as the teaching of the apostles and the Church, in a humble, teachable spirit. But the Church cannot lawfully receive and tolerate those who deliberately and aggressively reject these doctrines. 8. Jesus Christ required something more fundamen- tal still than these ethical, doctrinal and institutional principles; namely, regeneration (John 3: 3-7) and a new life in vital union with him (Gal. 2 : 20) , and under the guidance of the divine Spirit (Gal. 5: 25). The Church often fails by its exaggeration of external re- ligion and its comparative neglect of vital religion; its undue emphasis upon forms in the direction of scholas- ticism, ecclesiasticism and ceremonialism, often at the expense of vital religion. This common fault is due to the weakness of human nature, which finds an external religion easier than a vital and spiritual one. The Church has, in its pity for poor sinners, been exceedingly tolerant as regards piety and morals, and has even extended that toleration to the ministry. At the same time it has often been exceedingly rigid in its [11] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE formal requirements. The Church cannot win men to Christ by lowering the Christian ideal to that of the dominant world-spirit of any particular period of his- tory, or to the theories of any set of men, whether they call themselves philosophers, or scientists, or men of affairs. It is the vital piety, the heroic element of con- secration to Christ and the salvation of men, and faith- ful adherence to the institutions and doctrines of Christ and his apostles in spite of every obstacle, that alone will satisfy real Christians. Merely nominal Christians the Church has no use for; and it cannot receive them without peril to them and to itself. It was the faithful, heroic Church that conquered the Roman Empire, not- withstanding centuries of oft-repeated persecution. That is what conquered the hordes of barbarians that overran the empire and brought on what are known as the dark ages. That is what enabled Christianity to resist the Mohammedan domination in the East, and to remain faithful for centuries in the midst of seem- ingly intolerable situations. 9. It is quite true that a Christian theology cannot "be unassailable and final that does not accord with the assured results of science," and that "a message to be effective must stand for and teach those things that con- stitute the sum total of the values of human life, what- ever their source may be." I have always maintained that position. Indeed it is the statement of the Council of the Vatican with which all Christian Churches agree : "But although faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason, since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith, has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind; and God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contra- [12] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE diet truth. The false appearance of such a contradic- tion is mainly due, either to the dogmas of faith not having been understood and expounded according to the mind of the Church, or to the inventions of opinion having been taken for the verdicts of reason." After upwards of eighteen centuries of fidelity to the Christian faith and the consensus of Christianity, both in doctrine and in institution, can any one suppose that the Church will in these late days lower its stand- ard in the dust, merely to adapt itself to modem the- orists, and give them an equal place in her ranks with holy apostles, saints and martyrs? What great pre- sumption these modern theorists must have to challenge this consensus of Christianity for eighteen centuries, because it cannot be reconciled to their novelties. Let them first win consent to their speculations in philos- ophy, science, sociology, and other departments of hu- man thought and life from competent scholars of their own calling, before they dare to challenge the Church of Jesus Christ. The Church of Christ abides firm on her everlasting consensus; and these modern speculators, who value their own opinions more than the faith of centuries, can do nothing more than undermine the faith of the weak and the ignorant, and annoy timid believers, for which they will be called to a strict account before the judgment seat of Jesus Christ. It is well known that I have contended for many years for liberty of opinion and practice in the non- essentials of Christianity, for the reunion of Christ's Church on the basis of its historic consensus, for charity in all things, and the recognition of real Christians out- side of the organization of the Church in various heret- ical and sectarian bodies; but I must resist the ex- [13] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE tension of liberty of opinion on the part of office-holders of the historic churches into the realm of the essentials ; for these constitute the historic basis upon which it is alone possible to reunite Christ's Church, and upon their maintenance depends the continued existence and extension of Christianity itself. [14] SAMUEL AUGUSTUS BARNETT, D.C.L., LONDON^ ENGLAND Late Canon of Westminster since I906; born at Bristol, Feb; 8, 1844; died at Hove, June 17, 1913; educated privately and at Wadham College, Oxford; ordered deacon in 1867 and priested in the following year; curate of St. Mary's, London, 1867-72; vicar of St. Jude's, Whitechapel, 1872- 93; curate of St. Jude's, 1897-1903; the founder and first warden of Toynbee Hall, Whitechapel, 1884-1906; presi- dent of Toynbee Hall since I906; chairman of the White- chapel Board of Guardians, the Children's Coimtry Holi- day Fund, the Pupil Teachers' Scholarship Fund, and the Whitechapel Art Gallery Trustees; appointed canon of Bristol Cathedral in 1893; select preacher at Oxford, 1896-97, and at Cambridge, 19OO; author of Practical Socialism (with Mrs. Barnett) ; Service of God; Religion and Progress; Towards Social Reform. The phrase "comprehension without compromise" de- scribes the direction which, in my opinion, would lead to the best results. The people will not join a vague Church such as Lincoln suggests, they must have some- thing which can be defined, something which expresses truth for themselves, something they can die for, some- thing to hold "without compromise." At the same time people are shocked by the loss which comes from sect animosity ; they want to be friends with those who differ, they want to be at one with those who follow not with them, they want "comprehension." If all who profess to be followers of Christ could think out their own theology and then act with — even at times worship with — others who with the same profes- sion have a different theology, I believe the Church would make greater way. This variety in unity would keep the Church in touch with scientific and artistic development. [15] GOTTLIEB NATHANAEL BONWETSCH, Th.D., GOTTINGEN, GERMANY Professor of church history in the University of Gottingen since 1891; born at Norka, Russia, Feb. 7, 1848; edu- cated at the universities of Dorpat, Gottingen and Bonn; privat-docent and docent at Dorpat, 1878; associate pro- fessor of church history, 1882; full professor at Dorpat, 1883-1891 ; author of Die Schriften Tertullians untersucht; Die Geschichte des Montanismus ; JJnser Reformator Mar- tin Luther; Kyrill and Methodius, die Lehrer der Slaven; Methodius von Olympus; Studien zu den Kommentaren Hippolytus sum Buche Daniel und Hohenliede; Hippoly- tus Werhe; Die Apokalypse Abrahams, Das Testament der vierzig Mdrtyrer; co-editor of Thomasius's Dogmen- geschichte der alien Kirche; Studien zur Geschichte der Theologie und Kirche; and thirteenth and fourteenth edi- tions of J. H. Kurtz's Lehrbuch der Kirchengeschichte, etc. To "love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and thy neighbor as thyself," would indeed be a splendid stand- ard for Christianity — if I had in me the fountain of such love. But such love is found only in the love of God as revealed to us through Jesus Christ. Therefore the only foundation of the Church to-day must be, as it was in the days of the apostles, "Jesus Christ, the same yester- day, and to-day, and forever" (Heb. 13: 8). Through him alone, in spite of the perversity of my will and the gravity of death, I am comforted in God. This abso- lute significance of Christ — ^not identical with any par- ticular formula — ^would seem to contradict scientific re- lativism, but it is the mission of religion to save us from relativity, and just because of this our natures cannot do without religion. No progress in science can ever make religion superfluous. A satisfying religion is per- sonal communion with God, and this we can have only, as we can have it truly, through Jesus Christ. [16] HENRY SLOANE COFFIN, D.D., NEW YORK, N. Y. Associate professor of homiletics at Union Theological Seminary, New York, since 1904, and pastor of the Mad- ison Avenue Presbyterian Church since 1905; born in New York City, Jan. 5, 1877; educated at Yale University, New College (Edinburgh), University of Edinburgh and Union Theological Seminary; ordained to the Presbyterian ministry, 1900; pastor of Bedford Park Presbyterian Church, 1900-5; author of The Creed of Jesus and Other Sermons; Social Aspects of the Cross; The Christian and the Church; Some Social Aspects of the Gospel. You begin with the query, "Why is it that there are so many persons who are indifferent to the claims of the Church?" and then quote from Mr. Lincoln a statement not of indifference, but of incomplete intellectual agree- ment with the Church. There are doubtless a good many persons who hold aloof from the Church because they disagree with some of its beliefs or supposed be- liefs; but this is certainly not the sole or chief cause of indifference, or churches, like the Unitarian, which have a minimal creed, would not be as seriously affected as others. In fact they are as much affected, and perhaps more. Mr. Lincoln might, on his own terms, have en- tered the conmiunion of almost any Protestant church. In his statement he speaks of Jesus Christ as Saviour and expresses his willingness to share his devotion to God and man. He could certainly have been a Pres- byterian, for our conmiunion has never asked more than this of would-be members, and I imagine that he would have been welcomed on his own basis by most Protestant churches. Were the main point of your letter to answer [17] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE its first question, I might allege many more potent reasons for the indifference on the part of numbers of persons to the claims of the Church: — an unawakened religious sense, an undeveloped conscience, the unad- mirable characters of church-members, dissatisfaction with the church's timidity or ignorance in dealing with social injustice, the Church's class-consciousness, the dulness of many preachers and church services, intense individualism allowing a man to feel satisfied with his personal religion while he keeps apart from its collective embodiment in an organization, etc., etc. You next ask, speaking of Mr. Lincoln's statement : "Is it true that this experience is typical of thousands of others?" It probably is; but, as I have pointed out, this is far more often due to ignorance of what the quali- fications for church membership actually are, than to too elaborate doctrinal requirements. Again, you ask: "Do you think it wise to ask the great majority of people to subscribe to statements that deal with debated and controversial questions?" Cer- tainly I do not; nor do many others. A sincere ac- ceptance of Jesus as Lord is all that any church has a right to ask of those seeking to enter its communion; and, as a matter of practise, any man willing to make this statement, or Mr. Lincoln's statement, will find little difficulty in becoming a member of most Prot- estant churches. I should personally think it imfortu- nate to phrase the declaration of purpose as you do (and as Mr. Lincoln did not), as "a common purpose of love and service to God and man," without mention- ing Jesus. Love and service require more specific def- inition as Jesus' love and service, as Mr. Lincoln con- nects them with him. A Christian church, as distin- [18] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE guished for example from a synagogue of Reformed Jews, is a body which accepts the lordship of Jesus; and a personal loyalty to him is an indispensable quali- fication of fellowship. This Mr. Lincoln implies plain- ly in his statement. He takes Jesus' summary of the law and the gospel, and incidentally speaks of Jesus as "the Saviour." This brings me to your questions concerning a fun- damental theology. You ask: "Can a theology be un- assailable and final that does not accord with the assured results of science?" I reply. No theology can be un- assailable or final. Any theology is a man's best at- tempt to express his religious convictions; it will be necessarily imperfect and so assailable, and it will cer- tainly not be final, for theology is as living, and there- fore as growing, as any other science. Again you ask, "In what way is it to be related to the literary, scientific and philosophical certainties of our time?" It must certainly take account of all truth, and avail itself of all accessible knowledge in uttering its convictions. Theology is simply the attempt to ex- press men's religious experience in adequate language, and to relate it to all his other experience. No man can shut up his creed in one compartment of his brain and keep the rest of his brain open to welcome literary, and scientific, and philosophical discoveries. It is be- cause new truths are being discovered in these and other realms, as well as in the realm of religious ex- perience, that no man can hope to arrive at a final theology. This brings me to your last request, for an expres- sion of what I think constitutes a theology for our time. I am not a competent theologian, but simply a preacher. [19] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE I do not think it possible or desirable that any man, or any body of men, should put forth a creed that should be binding upon their fellow-Christians. That, to me, is the fundamental error of Roman Catholicism. It is a good thing that the Church should attempt to phrase its convictions, not with a view to forcing them on its adherents, certainly not to exclude those who cannot give them their intellectual assent, but in order to teach the world what Christians believe, and to lead the Church into larger truth. It is also a good thing for the individual member to try to make out his own creed, and very necessary for the preacher to state his, and to keep restating it from year to year as he grows in religious experience. I hesitate to accede to your request, for I feel that no theology of mine can be of value to any one else; but with the distinct understanding that I give it merely as the working creed of a pastor, I subjoin the following: I believe in Jesus Christ according to the Scriptures: in the authority of his religious experience as Son of God; in the supremacy of his character as revealing what God is and what man may become; in his victory for himself and for us over the world, and sin, and death. I believe in God, the Father of Jesus Christ, whom he trusted, loved and served : that he is my Father and the Father of all men ; that he is love as Christ was love ; that he is Lord of heaven and earth, of whom and through whom and unto whom are all things; and that he is ever present in his Holy Spirit, striving to draw all men unto himself and to conform them to the likeness of his Son. I believe in man as a child of God: that he is capa- ble of attaining the divine sonship realized by Christ, which is eternal life; that all men are brethren one of [20] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE another, and that to live as a son of God is to serve one's brethren as Christ served them. I believe in the gospel of salvation : that God was in Christ reconciling his sinning children unto himself, and that whosoever repents, and trustfully commits himself to him, is freely forgiven and enabled more and more to live as a son of God. I believe in the kingdom of God — the social order in which love is supreme ; in the Church of Jesus Christ — the fellowship of all his followers for the establish- ment of the kingdom; and in the ultimate triumph of the kingdom in glory everlasting. This is by no means a complete theology. It gives no answer to scores of questions which a thoughtful mind must raise. It purposefully leaves many things indefinite. I do not think a creed ought to aim at ex- haustive completeness; it must be agnostic on hosts of subjects if it is to be honest. This brief statement ex- presses the fundamental convictions which I attempt to proclaim to men and women who share the literary and scientific and philosophical knowledge of our day. [21] PHILIP WENDELL CRANNELL, D.D., KANSAS CITY, KANSAS President of Kansas City Baptist Theological Seminary since 1903; born at Albany, N. Y., Dec. 26, 1861; edu- cated at Albany High School, Dartmouth College, and Rochester Theological Seminary; principal and superin- tendent of schools at Le Raysville, Pa., 1882-83, and Luverne, Minn., 1883-84; pastor of the First Baptist Church, Baldwinsville, N. Y., 1888-94; First Baptist Church, Corning, N. Y., 1894-1900; First Baptist Church, Topeka, Kans., 1900-1904; professor of homiletics and pastoral theology at Kansas City Baptist Theological Sem- inary since 1902. AS TO SIMPLIFIED CREEDS AND ADJUSTED THEOLOGIES There are really four questions here: First, as to the place of creeds at the entrance to our churches ; second, as to whether Abraham Lincoln's or any similar state- ment could furnish a sufficient basis for Church unity or Church life ; third, as to whether a creed, or working program can be found sufficiently definite and at the same time sufficiently elastic, for the great mass of earnest Christians to work under it; and fourth, whether to meet the modern conditions our working theology needs to be modified in accordance with the current thought in science, philosophy and criticism. Touching the place of creeds as tests of church mem- bership and conditions of entrance, it is hard to believe that very many people are now kept out of our churches in any such way. Doctrinal stiffness is no sin of the present hour. A distinction must be made between the necessary fidelity of any given denomination to the great [22] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE fundamental principles which constitute what it believes to be its trust from almighty God, and the requirements that denomination makes of those who would enter its ranks. As a teaching body, and of its teaching force, the Church must require a genuine fidelity to its prin- ciples, while careful not to push its demands for con- formity beyond the real essentials. The test for mem- bership, however, ought to be not intellectual, but vital and spiritual. Among the himdreds whom, as a Baptist minister, I have led into the churches of which I have been pastor, I do not recall one case where any theo- logical test was applied. Our one anxiety was to dis- cover whether the candidate had had, and was then having, a genuine "religious experience" of regenerat- ing and sanctifying grace. No doubt implicit in such an experience was an underlying acceptance of the doc- trines usually called evangelical, but the vital thing was what we were searching for. If Abraham Lincoln could have (without anachronism) appeared before us, giving, as it is my belief that he could, really credible evidence that he had been "born again," expressed a wish to "follow his Lord in baptism" and a determina- tion to "learn the way of the Lord more perfectly," few or none would have "said him nay." If after- ward becoming a teacher in the Church, he had pro- mulgated doctrines radically inconsistent with our fun- damentals, fidelity to those fundamentals would have compelled us to withdraw from him our approval as a teacher, and if as a member he continued to cause active trouble and discussion by actively advocating such views, it might have been a duty to proceed against him as a disturber, and simply as a disturber. But as one of "Christ's little ones," though very "strange," it [23] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE would be our duty to retain him long. Spirit, and not doctrine, life and not creed, should be the test of church membership. Of course it is the Church's duty gently to lead its members to intelligent discipleship. As to the second point, Lincoln's statement is utterly inadequate for the purpose proposed. It is law and not gospel, spiritual law so searching and profound that neither Lincoln nor any other of the sons of men could ever attain unto it. It is a purely intellectual proposi- tion which contains in itself no power to make it prac- tical and real. It has little, if any more, ability to secure its own following than has some lofty canon of art or literature or ethics. Nor can the possession of a common ideal unite men into a real church, but rather the constant approach to that ideal through the power of a common spiritual life. Lincoln's proposal does not furnish a platform and a program definite enough for the close-knit relation- ships, strong fellowships, and concerted and mutual sacrifices and enterprises which church membership im- plies. But its chief and absolutely fatal defect is that it is not definitely, clearly, strongly crystallized about Jesus Christ. "Kuriake," "kyrke," "kirk," "church," mean absolutely "the Lord's," and that, not the "kurios" of the Old Testament, but the "kurios" (who is the same "I am") of the New. Nothing can be "a church" which does not exist definitely for, around, through, by, and in Jesus Christ. Love for him is its mo- tive; obedience to him is its law; his indwelling through his Spirit is its life. Compared with that glorious con- ception of the vine and the branches, of the body and the head, of the temple and its Indweller, how empty and jejune is Lincoln's statement! For how infinitely in- [24] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ferior is even the spiritual "law" of the New Testament itself to the glorious gospel of the Son of God. What- ever "creed" can do, the extremely little that any creed can do to unify the children of God must have Christ as its center, a living force pulsating through every de- tail to its remotest circumference. Can such a unify- ing doctrine and program be found? The discovery draws closer every hour. It does not tend to a formal union of the denominations, which for a long time yet will not be either practical or desirable. But in one way or another the growth of agreement as to funda- mentals goes steadily on. In the past we have mag- nified both the extent and importance of our disagree- ments. Some of these are disappearing. Others are quietly retiring to the rear. To the root doctrines of God, the deity of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, the inspiration of the Bible, the future life with its two destinies, the atonement of Jesus, the regeneration of the believer, let all the followers of Jesus go on and add the liberty of the single soul, the sole lordship of Jesus, the independence and democracy of the local church, the necessity for the implanting of a spiritual life before church membership, and that method of formal entrance into the local church which the universal verdict of modem scholarship agrees upon as being of Christ's institution, if he instituted any Church or bap- tism at all, and the thing is done! To be sure, that is the Baptist position. But as in so many ways, the Christian world has swung over to that position, why should it not now come the whole distance? Shall we modify our fundamental theology to bring it into accord with the present state of thought — ^philo- sophical, scientific, critical? [25] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE That the form and hue and flavor of our religious thinking and life is and must be affected by the sur- roundings of the time, as rivers take their hue from the soil through which they flow, is indubitable. And it ought to make us hesitate to modify the fundamentals, since a new adjustment would be necessary in the com- ing age. In our present adjustment to the Copernican universe instead of the Ptolemaic, we are not likely to have to shift again, but the changes which are taking place in the scientific conceptions of the ultimate con- stitution of matter may well make us pause before we abandon any essential or fundamental article of faith at the behest of any far-reaching scientific theory of the universe. Philosophy has assumed so many Protean shapes within the past few years that the effort to adjust to that would keep us in a continual flux. The literary and historical criticism of the Scriptures, Old and New, has brought many precious gains in breadth of view and vividness of apprehension, but its con- clusions are yet subject to many revisions which will greatly change them. And on the showing of the reverent critics of even the somewhat advanced school, what essential doctrine stands in need of modifica- tion? Does the personality of God, the deity of Jesus, the religious value of the Bible, the atonement, the power of the indwelling Christ to transform the life, the life after death? While some of us fear that too many and some rather dangerous concessions in details have been made by reverent students, still, as they do not feel the necessity for any fundamental changes on their part, we cannot see any need for it on ours. And these fundamental doctrines are so witnessed by the Christian experience of all the past, so corrob- [26] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE orated by our own, that any modification must needs be minor. We simply need to distinguish between the handful of great rock-foundation facts of our religion, and the theologies which have grown up beyond those facts, or around them, in the endeavor to explain or relate them. It would be folly to ignore, or despise, or neglect those theologies wholly. We must "theologize" or die, mentally and spiritually ; our minds crave reason and must have system. But truths are more than sys- tems. The great facts we can and must retain with a grip that cannot be unloosed. The theologies we can well hold more or less tentatively, using whatever new light or fresh molds of thought our day may furnish, but being very sure that no present phase of thought, any more than any present theology, is cer- tainly final. [27] SIE DYCE DUCKWORTH, Bart., M.D., LL.D., LONDON^ ENGLAND Consulting physician to St. Bartholomew's Hospital, Lon- don, England; senior physician, Seamen's Hospital, Green- wich; member of court. University of Liverpool; born at Liverpool, Nov. 24, 1840; educated at the Royal Institution School, Liverpool, Edinburgh University, and St. Barthol- omew's Hospital; Member Convocation, Queen's Univer- sity, Belfast; assistant surgeon. Royal Navy, 1864-65; Treasurer of the Royal College of Physicians since 1884; Senior Censor, 1903-4; representative of Royal College of Physicians in General Medical Council, 1886-91; author of numerous contributions to medical literature, addresses, etc. Me. Abraham Lincoln's formula for church mem- bership is certainly not sufficiently explicit or definite enough, and leaves unconsidered several matters which every convinced Christian must afiirm and give his con- sent to. There are, alas, many churches not Christian. I note, first, that the word Christianity is not mentioned in your prospectus. Secondly, that no allusion is made to Jesus Christ, who uttered and enforced the precept in his Father's law, which you suggest as the sole basis for universal churchmanship. Assuming that you accept Christianity as the fun- damental fact in your suggested formula, I think that you have left out the essential figure in the whole matter — the divine God-man, who was sent into this world by our Father, the great All in all, in order to teach man for all time how to live and how to die. According to Christian belief, everything for humanity, here and [28] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE hereafter, depends on the manifestation, birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, the Son of God, in this world. His teaching reenforced the divine law, and ren- dered it easy for wayward man to keep it as the law of his life. The Christian faith is, happily, a very simple matter, and is, and ever will be, outside all theological doctrines and disputes of man, learned or unlearned. It only requires to be tried to prove its power and certainty. If it is to be of any avail for fallen man, it must be, and it truly is, readily understood, and can be used, by all mankind the world over. Faith can be secured only by living the Christ-life, and by earnest prayer. It is not mere credulity. The divinity then of the second person in the holy Trinity is the essential feature of Christianity, and with- out a full recognition of this I recognize no "universal Church" for our humanity. This is the only basis that commends itself to me, and I am entirely satisfied with the beliefs and the faith that have sustained the lives of martyrs, saints, the best people that I have ever known, and brought the only comfort and satisfaction to many of the death-beds I have witnessed. The faith which sufficed for Kelvin and Pasteur is surely good enough for all scientists to hold, and that was the simple Chris- tian faith. In my belief, the only basis for a fundamental the- ology of the Church is the thorough conviction of the divinity of Jesus Christ. I thank God that that is suffi- cient for all men for all time. This signifies no less than the firm belief that Jesus, the Saviour of the world, was a manifestation to mankind of the real nature of God, his Father and our Father. [29] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE We are in no need of a new church or a new creed. There are too many of these already. Neither do we need a new theology, I do not agree with your sug- gestion that Mr. Lincoln's experience is "typical of the views of thousands of others." [The words used in our letter (see introduction) were "Is it true that this experience is typical of thousands of others?" — ^the EDITORS.] This may be the case in the United States of America, where, as I found for myself, religion — so- called — ^is more than in this country broken up into multitudinous bodies, largely officered and supported by persons of ill-informed, unfaithful, or unstable minds. In this country, at all events, I have come to regard indifference to any serious thinking, and the living of irreligious and ease-loving lives, as the main things which are wrong with nominally Christian people. What I feel most sure of is that if people would simply live the Christian life and practise it daily, they would cer- tainly "come to know the doctrine," and would find no need to vex themselves over "debated and controversial questions." Neither theology nor science, per se, will ever upset the simple Christian faith and teaching. God, the Holy Spirit, the third person in the blessed Trinity, can only assimilate himself with the inborn spirit of man in response to prayer and a holy life. The- ology and science by themselves can never accomplish this, or satisfy the instincts of man made in the likeness of God. The claims of the holy Catholic Chiu'ch will not fail to appeal powerfully to those who hold the Christian faith and its doctrines and carry them into daily prac- tise. [30] EBENEZER GRIFFITH-JONES, D.D., BRADFORD, ENGLAND Principal of Yorkshire United Independent College since 1907; born at Merthyr-Tydvil, South Wales, in I860; ed- ucated for the Congregational ministry at the Presbyterian College, Carmarthen, 1875-78 and New College, London, 1880-85; junior master at Normal College, Swansea, 1878-80; has held pastorates at St. John's Wood, London, 1885-87; Llanelly, Wales, 1887-90; Mount View, Stroud Green, London, 1890-98; Balham, London, 1898-1907; author of The Ascent Through Christ; Types of Christian Life; The Master and His Method; The Economics of Jesus; Faith and Verification. WHY ARE SO MANY INDIFFERENT TO THE CHURCHES? Abraham Lincoln^s celebrated saying is one of those obvious but inconclusive utterances that hinder more than they help the cause of clear thinking. I heartily sympathize with the first part, in which long and com- plicated statements of Christian doctrine as a basis for religious faith and fellowship are declared to stand in the way of many earnest-minded people joining the churches that demand such tests. I do not, however, know of any churches on this side of the water which do this nowadays, whatever may have been the case half a century ago. The trouble we seem to be suffering from in England just now is rather in the other direc- tion. It is the vagueness of the position taken up by religious teachers which is complained of by many who refuse to join us. Personally I believe that more peo- ple are keeping away from us for this reason than for the opposite. A vague creed always makes lukewarm [31] THE CHUKCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE disciples. Why, if Lincoln suggests the true basis of a church, has no one ever thought it worth while to found a church on such a basis? There has been per- fect liberty for a long while for any one to do this if so disposed. It is indeed a remarkable fact that while our Lord's saying is a matchless statement of the cen- tral law of life, no one has ever founded a church on it as a credal basis. That is probably because, while ostensibly avoiding a credal basis, it does not really do so. As a matter of fact a very large creed lies implicit in this condensed statement of the substance of the law and the gospel. It presupposes the per- sonality, holiness, lovableness, and nearness of God — facts which demand a very large draft on the "bank of faith." It also presupposes the inalienable value and spiritual significance of every human being. These beliefs have been historically substantiated, and so made accessible for faith through the progressive revelation embodied in the Old and New Testaments, culminating finally in the incarnation of the Son of God, which is the ultimate guarantee of both the Christian doctrine of God and of man. Lincoln's saying thus presupposes the Christian creed practically in its entirety. Is it not best that this fact should be fairly faced and acknowl- edged? The answer to the second question (the natural corollary of the first) — ^What should be the basis and direction for the fundamental theology of the Church? — follows naturally from what has just been said. The only valid basis for such a church is the revelation of God's will and purpose for man in the perfect life, the atoning death, and the resurrection-life of our Lord Jesus Christ. Every historic church that has had any [32] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE independent vitality and power of persistence has been founded on this basis in the past, and I see no prospect whatever that it will be otherwise in the future. It has always struck me as a remarkable fact, that while it is open for any enthusiast for a "simpler creed" to initi- ate a church on his own lines, the practical impulse to do so seems lacking. The reason why the churches that do exist are at present failing to reach the masses is be- cause their faith in the historic creed is in a weak and anemic state. This may be inevitable under present conditions, but till a fresh realization of the central fact that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto him- self comes home to us, it is not likely that we shall re- cover lost ground, much less make fresh headway. We are living largely on our past. The present tendency to conciliate non-believers by attenuating our credal basis to the level of their inability to accept it in its fulness, is in my judgment a disastrous mistake. What we need is to restate the Christian re- ligion in its fulness in terms that are true to the con- ditions of present-day thought. Faith thrives not on a minimum, but on a maximum creed. Not how little must we believe in order to be Christians, but how much can we believe, is the question we should ask, if our spiritual life is to be strong and happy. This puts a heavy burden on our present-day apologists and theo- logians, for it is their business so to retranslate the his- toric faith into terms of present-day thinking, that it shall appeal to every thoughtful man. The task, how- ever, if great is noble, and the reward when done will be immense, for there has never been an age when a revital- ized faith would transform life so radically, or bring more glorious results in its train. [33] EDWARD JOHN HAMILTON, D.D., S.T.D., PLAINFIELD^ N. J. Born at Belfast, Ireland, Nov. 29, 1834; graduated from Hanover College, Hanover, Ind., 1853, and Princeton Theological Seminary, 1858; ordained to the Presbyterian ministry, 1858; pastor at Oyster Bay, L. I., 1858-61; in charge of a congregation at Dromore, West, Ireland, 1861-62; chaplain of the Seventh New Jersey Veteran In- fantry in the Army of the Potomac, 1863-65; pastor at Hamilton, O., 1866-68; professor of mental philosophy, Hanover College, 1868-79; acting professor of ethics, economics, and logic in Princeton College, 1882-83; professor of philosophy, Hamilton College, 1883-91; on the staff of the Standard Dictionary, 1891-94; professor of philosophy, Whitworth College, 1894-95; and of the same subject. State University of Washington, 1895-1900; retired from active life; author of A New Analysis in Fun- damental Morals; The Human Mind; The Modalist; The Perceptionalist: or. Mental Science; The Moral Law: or. The Theory and Practice of Duty; Perzeptionalismus und Modalismus, eine Erkenntnistheorie; Erkennen und Sch- lissen, eine theoretische Logik. CHURCH MEMBERSHIP AND CREEDS The writer, who is a minister of "the Presbyterian Church of the United States of America," speaks en- tirely on his own responsibility, yet he is confident that his opinions do not differ much, if at all, from those commonly held by that large body of professed Chris- tians. Possibly some subordinate statements or expla- nations may be his own, but any such will be intended not to weaken, but to confirm the general Presbyterian position. First we desire to disabuse any mind of the impres- sion that the Presbyterian Church requires of its mem- bers the adoption of any denominational creed. Our [34] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE doors are open to all who profess their belief in the Lord Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Saviour of the world, and who solemnly declare their intention to live in accordance with that belief. So soon as one realizes that he needs the forgiveness and grace offered in the gospel and is earnestly set on living a Christian life, we Presbyierians believe that he is fit for membership in any Christian organization and heartily welcome him into our communion. When, however, the Church of God is regarded as the pillar and ground of the truth, or any denomination of it as a body instituted to pro- mote right views and principles among men, another case arises. We naturally expect from the wisdom of such a body more or less formal instruction in regard to points both of doctrine and of practise, not indeed that ecclesiastical deliverances should ever be binding upon the mind and conscience, but only that free private judgment may receive any assistance to be derived from the deliberate collective judgment of the Church. More- over, when the qualifications of men to be ordained as ministers of the gospel are to be passed upon, we deem it right that candidates should be examined in respect to all those teachmgs of Christianity which conduce to the best edification of God's people. It certainly would not be wise formally to set apart young men to be preachers if they were not well acquainted with religious doctrines, or if they were likely to mingle serious error with their teachings. Then, too, the question arises as to the honorable recognition of ministers of the gospel in general and as to friendly cooperation with them, whether they belong to one's own denomination or not. For, however we may differ from others in matters of faith, we should cherish hearty fellowship with all whom [35] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Christ has received and who are laboring to extend his kingdom in the world. These things being so, it is evident that the use of creeds or forms of confession is not a matter to be de- termined by one simple rule, as if there were only one case to be considered; on the contrary, the situation calls for a thoughtful reply to at least four important questions. We ask, first, what declaration of faith may be expected as a condition of church membership? Sec- ondly, what function may a general ecclesiastical coun- cil assume in declaring and interpreting Christian doc- trine? Third, what statements of belief should the authorities of a church require from those who are seek- ing the office of the sacred ministry? And fourth, what rule should govern our attitude toward all those who not only are professed followers of Christ, but are also devoting their lives to the preaching of the gospel? The topics submitted to the symposium relate more to the first and fourth of the foregoing questions than to the second and third, yet it will contribute to clearness of understanding if we consider briefly each of the four points just mentioned. The Presbyterian Church does not require of its members the adoption of any denominational creed; nor indeed does it call for the acceptance of any formal creed at all. Some individual churches may use simple doc- trinal confessions, but this is not common among us, as it is with the Congregationalists ; such confessions are, however, not conditions of membership prescribed by ecclesiastical authority; they are rather helps given to the candidate for the clearer expression of his faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as the Son of God and our loving Saviour. If any one should prefer to express his faith [36] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE in other words than in the formula provided, he would be at liberty to do so. Besides, as already stated, for the most part, no formula is used by the Presbyterians. What the offi- cers of the Church chiefly desire to know is not whether the applicant understands the gospel offer of salvation, but whether he has heartily accepted of that offer and whether he has resolved to become a follower of Christ and to live a life of new obedience. For the faith which saves the soul is not the mere intellectual acceptance of any truth however important; it is the practical adoption and realization of the gospel as the law of one's experience and conduct. If we were asked to state in two sentences that profession of faith which the Pres- byterian Church expects from its members, they would be as follows. The first declaration alone, indeed, might be taken as a complete confession, but the second is added to show that the faith professed is not to be a mere speculative assent but a deep operative convic- tion: 1. I believe that God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 2. I accept the Lord Jesus Christ as my personal Saviour, and am resolved, with the help of God, hereafter to abjure all evil ways, and to live according to the faith of the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me. Of creeds and doctrinal deliverances by general church councils or judicatories, we have this to say: No one can dispute the right, and we believe we all should recognize the duty, of the Church to set forth in a formal way those views of truth upon which its wisest and best men have agreed after prayerful and studious consider- [37] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ation. Some doctrines of Christianity are quite plain and obvious, but others are abstruse and liable to be misunderstood; besides even those which are the most evident and comprehensible are sometimes obscured by plausible arguments, which originate mostly in false theories of nature, of life or of morals. Moreover in the wisdom of the Almighty truth is not revealed to the human mind in an abstract and systematic form, but in the separate concrete manifestations of creation and providence. It is the office of the analytic and synthetic power of reason to ascertain and to coordinate the laws of nature and of the divine government. Even the sacred Scriptures do not contain any formal system either of theology or of ethics, but rather give us facts and examples, rules and laws, which should be carefully studied, compared and construed together, and upon which we have the right reverently to philosophize. The various creeds and confessions of the Church, whether in ancient or modem times, were intended as methodical statements of Christian truth, as this was seen by the fathers assembled in solemn council. It is to be acknowledged that excessive claims of authority were sometimes made — and are even yet made — for some of these confessions as if they were absolutely in- fallible. But Presbyterians, and most Protestants, re- gard creeds and confessions not at all as binding upon one's acceptance but simply as aids to the understanding and acceptance of the truth. For man is not blessed because he believes that the Church understands and believes the truth, but because he himself understands and believes it; nor is it possible for a rational being truly to accept any statement which is unintelligible to him or for which no adequate evidence appears. For [38] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE this reason we find an obscurity in the words of the venerable Cardinal Gibbons when he said lately, "The mission of the Church is to defuie faith and morals. In other matters individuals decide for themselves." The mission of the Church is indeed to express clear views respecting faith and morals, but in doing so the Church does not decide for the individual but only seeks to aid him in deciding for himself. In the Presbyterian Church no blame attaches to any one who does not be- lieve some doctrine of our Confession, either because he does not understand it, or because with the understand- ing which he has of it, he thinks it contrary to fact and reason. As regards those who would become ministers of the word and official expounders of God's truth, Pres- byterians naturally demand higher doctrinal attain- ments than can be required for simple membership in the Church or even for participation in its subordinate activities. Formerly our ministers were asked to sub- scribe to the whole Westminster Confession of Faith, but that is no longer the case. It is now deemed suffi- cient that one declare his approval of the "system of doctrines contained" in that Confession, by which sys- tem we are chiefly to understand what are known as "the doctrines of grace." These contemplate the hu- man family as hopelessly lost, were it not for the in- tervention of divine help and mercy. While man is — and must be — active in his own salvation, his efforts would be unavailing without aid from heaven. And even the first beginnings of the Christian life are to be ascribed to the influence of the Holy Spirit. For it is God that worketh in us to will and to do of his own good pleasure. All the doctrines of grace are in- [39] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE volved in the one thought of man's utter dependence on God as the source of spiritual good. Yet while Presbjiierian ministers assent to a given system of doctrines, it is to be observed that a certain liberty belongs to each of them to interpret every doc- trine in his own way. This arises because of a distinc- tion which can easily be made between a dogmatic statement and the reason for it or the explanation of it. For example, the present writer sees no reason to be- lieve that all men will be saved. Such a result may be impossible in the very nature of things. But he be- lieves that the divine aim and purpose is that as many men as possible shall be saved. He does not believe that the present condition of our race, who are born sinful beings into a world of sin and suffering, should be regarded as a punishment inflicted on them because of Adam's first transgression ; yet he perceives in this a righteous legal consequence of the trial which human nature had in our first forefather. He does not believe that Christ literally bore the guilt of our sins when he died upon the cross. Guilt is not a thing transferable. But he does hold that our Lord's sufferings were vicarious in the sense that they justify the cancellation of guilt — the forgiveness of sin — in the case of all peni- tent believers in God's mercy. Together with this freedom in the interpretation of doctrines, which at the same time are sincerely and hon- estly accepted, there is also noticeable in Presbyterian judicatories a certain relaxation in special cases of the terms of admission to the ministry. It is the part of a wise man to govern by rules, yet not to be himself absolutely governed by them. Ordinarily candidates for the ministry must fulfil all requirements. Never- [40] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE theless Presbyteries sometimes ordain a man to be a preacher or a missionary when he has not had that education which is commonly a prerequisite. Occa- sionally too a faithful and able minister of the gospel may be received into our communion and installed as a pastor, even though from the Presbyterian point of view, he may be somewhat doctrinally deficient. The paramount questions in such a case are: What is the best thing to do in the interests of God's kingdom? and: Does the present case really justify any departure from our ordinary regulations? With regard to ministers of other denominations Presbyterians cultivate fraternal relations with all who preach Christ and him crucified as the Son of God and the Saviour of the world. Such ministers are sometimes distinguished as "evangelical," because they preach the gospel as it is plainly set forth in the sacred Scriptures. Evidently fellowship with them is not based on any formal creed but only on that simple profession of faith which admits to membership in Presbyterian and other churches. But while the acknowledgment of Christ as the Saviour of the world is the sufficient ground of gen- eral ministerial fellowship, all preachers of the word are held in special honor, because they have devoted their lives to a sacred calling, and because they may be supposed to have progressed further in the knowledge and realization of divine things that can be expected of the ordinary church member. On account of this maturity of apprehension and for the purpose of clearer understanding, ministerial asso- ciations sometimes adopt a simple statement of evangeli- cal views. For such a use we know of no better docu- ment than the so-called Apostles' Creed which, though [41] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE probably not written by the apostles, is undoubtedly the production of a very early age. The striking feature of this document is that it emphasizes the supernatural character of the gospel. Jesus Christ is indeed repre- sented as truly a man both in body and mind, yet also as being sent into the world by his divine Father to be the representative of God's love and the Saviour of sinners. He was so possessed by the control of a divine personality that he became, as no other man ever was or can be, a divine person, and so he fulfilled a mission for the redemption of the world which only such a per- son could accomplish. Many things told of our Saviour would be incredible and inexplicable, were he not, as he himself claimed to be, the only begotten Son of God. While Presbjrterians do not recognize as preachers of the gospel those who do not preach it, they acknowl- edge the sincerity and earnestness of many teachers who cannot accept a heaven-sent supernatural gospel, but who yet advocate noble theistic doctrines. We have friendly feelings for such and gladly cooperate with them in movements for the betterment of mankind. Besides, we know that men who profess orthodox views are sometimes sadly wanting in that living faith which works by love, and that others are often deeply in- fluenced by truths which they do not clearly and fully comprehend. If the great president were seeking to-day a church which demanded no subscription to "a complicated creed," and which required of its members only that they should accept the law of love as stated by our Saviour, we Presbyterians would say: "Well, Mr. Lincoln, what do you mean by speaking of Christ as *our Saviour'? Do you take him to be your Saviour? [42] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Do you believe that the Son of God loved us and gave himself for us, that we might be his people, filled with love and zealous of good works? If this be your posi- tion (and we believe it is) come right in; we welcome you to our communion; we do not ask you to sign any creed at all." [43] HENRY SCOTT HOLLAND, D.D., Litt.D., OXFORD, ENGLAND Canon of Christ Church, Oxford; born at Ledbury, Here- fordshire, England, Jan. 27, 1847; educated at Eton and Balliol College; senior student at Christ Church, Oxford, 1870-85; theological tutor at the same college, 1872-85; honorary canon of St. Petroc in Truro Cathedral, 1883- 84<; canon of St. Paul's since 1884; examining chaplain to the bishop of Truro, 1883-91; examining chaplain to the bishop of St. Andrews, 1893-1908, and to the bishop of Oxford, 1893-1908; author of Logic and Life; Creed and Character; Christ or Ecclesiastes; On Behalf of Be- lief; Pleas and Claims; God's City; Personal Studies; Vital Values; Apostolic Fathers; Life of Jenny Lind; Old and Nerv; Fibres of Faith; essay on "Faith" in Lux Mundi. **Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor as thyself." No wonder that the noble words seem to hold the whole secret of life, and that we begin to ask whether a church could not make such a declaration of love and service to God and man its "sole qualification for membership." Yet the mere sound of the words might surely have served to remind even the devout and simple-hearted American president of how and when they were spoken. They came from a man who was challenged by our Lord to say what he had found in the Scriptures of the older covenant. He was asked to give his reading of the law, and he gave it in this formula. The words then are pre- Christian; they come from a man who has had no experience at all of what Jesus Christ stood for on this earth; they belong to a period before the name and power of Christ had even begun to tell upon the relig- [44] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ious story of man, and there is nothing in them which belongs to that which has made Christianity a religion. Yet, I suppose when we are asking how to unite in a conmion church, we are intending a Church of Christ. We are asking how Christ can in the simplest possible terms bind us together. It is no good for this purpose going back behind Christ, and omitting from our declaration of membership everything that has made him our Redeemer and our King. Again, the words were intended as spoken to sum up the significance of the law; but the law is a religion that came to an end of its resources; it declared itself impotent to accomplish its own mission. That is why Christ stood on this earth. The law had made a promise which it was unable to fulfil. Under its terms man could not be saved. That is what John the Baptist was sent to declare down by Jordan. That is what was known to all those who confessed and repented, and washed in the Jordan water, and yet found that no change had passed over their life. "Thou shalt love." That is the law. "But we cannot love." That is man's response. "If only we could love God with all our heart all would be well, or our neighbor as ourself . But the more we try to realize this love, and the more we under- stand of its height and of its depth, the more bitter becomes the confession of our own shame and impotence. What we will, we cannot do. Oh ! wretched man that I am !" Here is a religion then which has proved its ineffi- ciency. It was declared to be obsolete nearly two thou- sand years ago. What is the good of going back to that? Back to a condition which has long ago worked out its own failure? The whole question for a church to-day IS "How can I love God, and how can I love [45] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE my neighbor?" It is to that question that Christ gives the answer. He offers the change of heart, the new spirit, the new creature, by which alone the religious desire can consummate itself. He does this by his cross and passion, by his resurrection and royalty; and the only membership in any church which is to bring salva- tion must involve membership in the Christ. That is why it cannot be reduced to the simple terms of a religion which had broken down before Christ appeared. [46] THE REV. JOHN WILLIAM HORSLEY, M.A., DETUNG, ENGLAND Vicar of Detling, Kent, since IQH; honorary canon of Southwark; born at Dunkirk, near Faversham, England^ June 14, 1845; received his education at King's School^ Canterbury, and at Pembroke College, Oxford; curate at Witney, 1870-75; curate of St. Michael's, Shoreditch, 1875-76; chaplain of Her Majesty's Prison, Clerkenwell, 1876-86; vicar of Holy Trinity, Woolwich, 1888-94; rec- tor of St. Peter's, Walworth, 1894-1911; Mayor of South- wark, 1910 ; author of Practical Hints on Parochial Mis^ axons (with Bishop Dawes) ; Jottings from Jail Notes; Prisons and Prisoners; I Remember; How Criminals are Made and Prevented; Some Alpine Prophets. The questions seem to me, as a student (and no more) of both theology and science, to be four in number: 1. What are the causes of indilBPerence to the claims of the Church? 2. Could a "sole qualification for membership" in any organized society be found in a somewhat vague statement of a subjective mental and emotional atti- tude, without its being conditioned and tested by obedience to the rules found in, and necessary to, any society? 3. Is not the necessity and value of a creed an ex- perience of humanity? 4. Are there any "literary, scientific, and philosophi- cal certainties" which contradict any dogma of the Catholic Church? Let me deal briefly with each of these questions. 1. IndiflFerence to claims is no doubt more in evi- dence in our times than in some previous times, and this indifference is chiefly based on a preference of pleasure [47] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE and convenience to duty. It is not merely the claims of the Church which are ignored or resisted. The claims of politics, and of social service, are also notoriously little or nothing to "thousands upon thousands." "I will not, because I ought" is at the bottom of much neglect of duty. It is not merely a reproduction as regards Christ of the cry "we will not have this man to rule over us," but it is the objection of self-will and pride to any rule. That typical drama of humanity which goes by the name of the parable of the Prodigal Son suggests that the fault is not in the Church or in its claims, but in the desire for an independence of any control. The Church is from one point of view a friendly society. No friendly society can exist without rules and obedience to rule. Therefore we must either, as George Herbert wrote, "Give to thy mother what thou wouldst allow to every corporation," or prove that the Church is an exception in this respect. When in some "silly season" a newspaper fills its columns with letters on why we don't go to church, the plenitude of excuses, and in many cases their absurdity, is as obvious as the fact that they are but excuses, and as such pitiable or even contemptible when proceeding from men who have reason and should find a reason for all action or inaction. 2. Then we come to the dictum of Abraham Lincoln, which seems to me as vulnerable as vague. First of all, is the Apostles' Creed (to which alone, had he been a layman of the Church of England, he would have been required to pledge himself) either "long" or "com- plicated?" In proportion as it is the soundness of his premise is impaired. Secondly, if a church has an altar over which his desiderated inscription might be put, is [48] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE not an altar for use, and does not that use connote a good deal more in way of faith and practise than his "Love God and love others"? Thirdly, he has fallen into the common error of forgetting that love must be tested and proved and not merely professed. "If ye love me, keep my commandments." Imitation and obe- dience must be fruits to demonstrate the vitality of the love of the Saviour. The imitation of Christ must not omit the following of his example of joining in common prayer and of fulfilling that duty of common and regu- lar worship which is instinctive in humanity. Lincoln's position might have justified, from his point of view, his forming a new church for himself and the like-minded, but not his self -excommunication from any and every religious body. His words remind me of the inci- dent in John 6, when after our Lord had given very definite and dogmatic teaching, then and therefore "many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him" because they found Lincoln's difiiculty in "giving their assent without mental reservation to that statement of Christian doctrine," that "hard saying," as they describe it. 3. With all desire for comprehension, with every hope that men may more see that unity, and by no means uniformity, is consonant to the mind of God as evidenced in the regions both of nature and of grace, I am bound to find in my idea of a Christian Church an irreducible minimum in the Apostles' Creed and in the sacrament of baptism. I cannot regard a pious aspiration as the equivalent of a creed. Structurally a love of art will not produce a stable or a beautiful build- ing without a definite design and plan to which men may build. Even a creed that seems to err by the [49] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE addition of unnecessary articles or by the subtraction of those which are necessary has a value in the forma- tion of character. I am neither a Calvinist nor a Mo- hammedan nor an Ultramontane ; but I can see advan- tages accruing to them from their creeds which without such backbone to their subjective faith they would not possess. There is theology which is not "fundamental" ; but if your symposium resulted in a common assent which was fundamental, or in other words to the clearer distinction between matters of faith and matters of pious opinion, I am afraid the objectors to what resulted would not be reduced to numerical insignificance. 4. A great deal of definition and of explanation is necessary before your fourth question could be an- swered, or even understood^ I cannot conceive of a theology that would not "accord with the assured re- sults of science." But has science said its last word when it cannot even say what electricity is? I began to study science in the sixties; but I have seen not a few dicta of science discarded in view of greater and newer light. Science means: I am learning, rather than : I have learned. To take the most crucial instance. Science once denied the possibility of the virgin-birth of Christ. Science in the same generation came to dis- cover parthenogenesis, and can hardly deny the possi- bility of a unique happening of this sort in the human race where Haeckel and Weissman frankly admit par- thenogenesis as an incontestible fact in the animal king- dom. Darwinism has to me explained, not controverted. Genesis. Therefore there lurks a fallacy, a petitio prin- cipiiy in your use of the words "assured" and "certain- ties." By the literary certainties of our time I presume you mean the results of biblical criticism. But here [50] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE there are maximizers and minimizers, an English school and a German school, and to which is certainty to be predicated? The one has blown dust out of an old in- scription; the other has obliterated the letters. And what are the "philosophical certainties of our times?" On what are philosophers agreed? and on such points as are undisputed (none probably the invention of our times) in what way do they not accord with theology? What is the philosophical certainty as to the nature and object of conscience, for example? Spencer and Bain call it fallible, educable, vacillative. John Foster defines it as a mere "bundle of habits." But Kant says that "an erring conscience is a chimera." One agrees with him when ceasing to confuse cuvetdrjfft^ and ffuvTijpyjfft^, self-consciousness and the soul's unerring sense of right and wrong in motives; but where is the assured certainty of philosophers on this point? Science is continuously learning: theology has learned. Science brings forth by the inspiration of God, which in many ways and sundry fashions speaks to men, some new illustrations, some fresh elucidations of old truths, and theology (though not always or at first all theolo- gians) thankfully accepts its aid. [51] THE REV. THEODORE WHITEFIELD HUNT, Ph.D., Litt.D., PRINCETON^ N. J, Professor of English language and literature, Princeton University, N. J., since 1873; born at Metuchen, N. J., Feb. 19^ 1844; graduated from Princeton College in 1865, and from Princeton Theological Seminary, 1869; tutor in the English department of Princeton College from 1868- 71; studied at the University of Berlin, 1871-72; author of Caedmon's Exodus and Daniel; Principles of Written Discourse; English Prose and Prose Writers; Studies in Literature and Style; Ethical Teachings in Old English Literature; Literature; Its Principles and Problems; etc. The various questions submitted are practically re- ducible to one comprehensive inquiry — "Why is it that there are so many persons who are indifferent to the claims of the Church, and refuse to become identified with it in any of its numerous denominations?" Some of the reasons are as follows : 1. Because many are, out and out, unbelievers. They have no faith in any system of Christian doctrine or any of the so-called institutions of the Christian re- ligion. They are, in reality, atheistic. No conditions of church relationship, however accommodating, would attract them. 2. Because the claims of church membership and even of church attendance are based on the necessity of personal religion. While not denying the validity of the Christian religion in the abstract, many prefer and pursue the unreligious or non-religious life, if not, in- deed, the irreligious. No terms of church connection would at all appeal to them. [52] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE 3. Because of the decline of faith and the conse- quent weakening of the religious sense. It makes but little difference what this is called — agnosticism or materialism, or naturalism as distinct from supernatu- ralism — the disastrous result is the same, the deadening of ethical and spiritual impulse and the growing indif- ference to the interests that pertain to the higher life. Here is a manifest modem drift away from convictions that were once considered unchangeable, and straight toward the acceptance of beliefs wholly questionable in their character and bearing. This negation or denial of fundamental truth has been partly the result of an unchristian science and philosophy, and partly induced by the overwhelming absorption of the modern world in the tangible and temporal. Something more than a modification of creed is here needed. Nothing, as we believe, but the regenerative potency of the divine Spirit can successfully oppose this perilous drift, found even within the bosom of the Church itself. 4. Because of the multiform attractions and diver- sions outside the sanctuary, many of them, perchance in themselves legitimate, but in the main subversive of sabbath observance. It is here that the stress and strain of modern American life enter as a distinctive and disturbing factor. The intense engagements of the secu- lar week convert the sabbath perforce into a day of recreation. It is not the question as to what the terms of church communion may or may not be, but simply a question of bodily and mental relief from the oppressive pressure of the week. It is this as much as anything else that depletes or prevents church attendance, not confined, by any means, to the laboring classes, so-called, or the miscellaneous pleasure-seeking public, but in- [53] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE eluding members of the various liberal professions, and those engaged in journalistic and educational work. It is here that the Sunday newspaper enters as a promi- nent diverting agent that must be reckoned with. So potent have these determining factors become that the Church, in sheer self-defense, has often sought to meet and counteract them by methods so exceptional as to deserve the condemnation of all right-minded men. Christian worship has thus often been reduced to the character of travesty and evangelical preaching given way to a semi-theatrical presentation of what are called "the issues of the day." Some of our institutional churches are here in danger of making the bazaar and the soup-kitchen more conspicuous than the pulpit and the altar. We need another Cowper to satirize such desecration. 5. Because many are unwilling to submit themselves to the ecclesiastical or ceremonial restrictions of any church organization. If Christians, as some of them are, they are Christians at large, preferring to express their religious life in their own way, altogether apart from any prescribed system or church order. It is probable that there are large numbers of such persons outside the pale of the Church, nor would any conditions of ecclesiastical relation at all influence them. They are, out and out, independents. In so far as religious instruction is concerned, they prefer to obtain it out- side the established ministrations of the sanctuary, in forms which appeal to them as more attractive and helpful. It is highly significant to state that this reason for absenteeism applies to numbers who, having been, for a time, identified with church organization, have withdrawn therefrom and sought their religious teach- [54] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ing in religious literature. The average preaching of our clergy seems to find no response in such minds, be the reasons valid or not. We are bound to confess that in this class there are many of the most thoughtful and conscientious persons of our time. The responsibility of the ministry at this point is, mdeed, momentous — how to recover this disaffected constituency, how to present the gospel so as to be true to its essential teach- ings and yet "commend it to every man's conscience in the sight of God." If, as we are told, the gospel can be made interesting to the hearer, even though he be unchristian, the problem is how to make it so. Our theological seminaries in preparing students for the ministry may well give heed to this responsibility and seriously inquire how it may best be met. Here, again, it is not a question of terms of membership. 6. Because in the nation at large and, especially, in our cities, the old-time pastoral function of the ministry has passed into abeyance, through whose beneficent agency the personal appeal of the clergy in the inti- mate relationships of family life had a potent effect in securing church attendance and membership. The rapidly changing residence of our traveling public and the consequent abolition of much of our wholesome home life are largely responsible for this result. Here, again, it is not a question of terms of membership. To this particular reason, however, we are now brought. 7. Because many are influenced adversely by what Mr. Lincoln called "the long and complicated doctrines which characterize articles of belief and confessions of faith" and which, by Mr. Lincoln's own avowal, made it impossible for him to identify himself with any organ- ized church. Partly, on intellectual grounds and, 1552 THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE partly, on grounds of conscience such persons cannot subscribe to the credal conditions with which they are confronted at the church door. They question the validity or necessity of any such detailed statement of terms. If a creed is necessary, as they do not alto- gether deny, then they insist that it shall be divested of all "controversial questions" and reduced to the shortest and simplest terms possible to language, ex- pressing the general faith of Protestant Christianity. Here is a problem of imminent seriousness and difficulty confronting the Church of to-day — ^how to conserve the essential values of Protestant reformed doctrine and yet so embody and interpret them as to meet the ever-chang- ing conditions of modern thought. The essentials must, at all hazards, be preserved, while the forms of these statements may, perchance, be so modified as to appeal effectively to the great body of those who are religiously disposed and would be willing to identify themselves with the Christian Church. Here is the crucial prob- lem — to be safely conservative and safely progressive, to present a system of doctrine quite divested of merely local and denominational peculiarities, as true in the twentieth century as in the first, and commending itself to sincere seekers of the truth as a reasonable credal re- quirement. It is interesting to note the various at- tempts that have been made to reach this result. Mr. Lincoln would reduce the conditions of membership to the biblical summary of the law and the gospel. The scriptural compends — "Fear God and keep his com- mandments," "Cease to do evil and learn to do well," "Do justly, love mercy and walk humbly with thy Gk)d," would satisfy others. The late Dr. Watson in his Mind of the Master j oifers us his well-known sum- 19poiunio8 'j^ lav^ I • • • p / THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE mary. Bodies of divinity, such as the Anglican and Calvinistic, have been restated in deference to this desire to formulate a simple workable creed, built up on the broad basis of generally accepted Chris- tian truth. All this is full of promise, and the more distinctive the federation of the churches becomes and the effort to minimize differences and emphasize agree- ments, the more rapidly will the unification of our Protestant faith result in a system that will commend itself to earnest minds. One thing is certain, be the results what they may — the great distinctive doctrines of evangelical Christianity must be maintained — the divinity of the Father, Son, and Spirit; the divine origin of the Bible; the atone- ment of Christ as an offering for human sin and guilt; the need and duty of repentance and faith and holiness of life; the immortality of the soul and the final judg- ment. These are fundamental factors, nor will any mere device of pew-filling make it possible or desirable to ignore these cardinal canons of the Protestant Church. Never has this sinful world needed the gospel of divine grace more than it does now, and never has the Christian Church been more alive to the meeting of that need in every legitimate and divinely sanctioned way. Never, as we believe, have we had in our land an abler and a more devoted Protestant ministry, or a more co- operative Christian laity, and how to invigorate the church of Christ and bring it into more vital contact with the Christian and unchristian world — this is the dominant duty of the hour. [57] EDWARD CALDWELL MOORE, Ph.D., D.D., CAMBRIDGE^ MASS. Parkman professor of theology at Harvard University since 1902, and chairman of the Board of Preachers to the University since 1905; bom at West Chester, Pa., Sept. 1, 1857; received his education at Marietta College, Ohio, Union Theological Seminary, and at the Universities of Berlin, Gottingen and Giessen; ordained to the Presbyte- rian ministry, 1884; pastor of the Westminster Presby- terian Church, Yonkers, N. Y., 1886-89; Central Congre- gational Church at Providence, R. I., 1889-1902; author of The New Testament in the Christian Church; History of Christian Thought Since Kant, The larger number of those who have been asked to take part in this discussion will probably be found to be Christian men. To them religion is dear. In their view it is necessary for the world. The Church is the organ of the social influence of religion, and the instru- mentality for its perpetuation. The indifference of men to the Church is therefore a painful fact, a problem which these men would try to solve. One gets sometimes the impression that this indif- ference is greater now than ever before. Statistics do not show that in our own country this is true. In this country the growth of church membership in propor- tion to the population, the increase of church property, the wide ramifications of church life and influence, are among the notable facts of the nineteenth century, and of the last generation in particular. Yet we all know that there is a deep alienation from the Church, a wide- spread antagonism toward it, a vigorous denunciation of it. When one considers the frivolous and sordid ex- [58] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE pectation which many men and women cherish concern- ing life and their intolerance of that which does not subserve their purposes, when one considers, moreover, the maladjustment which often characterizes the Church in its relation to purposes in man's life which it might well subserve, one wonders that the indiflference is not even greater than it is. The citation, in the editors' letter, of famous words of Abraham Lincoln gives the impression that in the editors' view, at least, one main cause of this indiffer- ence to the churches lies in the fact that they insist upon long and complex statements of faith, dealing with re- mote questions and phrased in conformity with a mode of thought which no longer reigns in our day. We all admire the candor with which the great liberator set forth the kind of statement of faith which would be congenial to him. I can but think that this objection, though still often urged, has lost some of its significance in our day. Do the churches for the most part, nowa- days, insist on elaborate creeds, as if the assent to them were the main matter? It is not my observation that they do. On the contrary, one might sometimes raise the opposite question, one might ask how they can still say that they hold to be of first importance traditional statements of which in practice they make so very little. Have we not among us churches which have reduced their creeds to the lowest possible terms? Are these the churches to which men are the least indifferent? I am not saying that if they were to adopt again a long creed, old or new, they would immediately be filled. I am only saying that the fact that they have no creed has not wrought the miracle which the arguers against creeds prophesied that it would work. [59] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE We should perhaps be not too much moved by criti- cisms of the Church which palpably betray that the authors have little knowledge of that which in our gen- eration is being said and done in churches. We are told with urgency that ministers in their sermons should dis- cuss, and churches with their activities should further, the life of man in this world. They should deal with things political, economic and social. If they would concern themselves with these things men would not be indifferent to the Church. I submit that it is exactly this which, for an eager moment and in all good con- science, numbers of our ministers are doing. Does the world crowd to these discussions? At all events, it soon wearies of so doing. Men can hear those subjects discussed at least equally well elsewhere. Men hear them perennially discussed in any case. They some- times wish to hear something else discussed. They have the instinct that in the Church they might naturally expect to hear some other discussion. Without doubt religion has a thousand applications by which it should serve all worthy ends of man's life in the world. I am merely saying that it has also another service, namely, the reminder of another life. Perhaps its greatest serv- ice to this world is the reminder of the other world. It is a great compliment to the Church that men should be indifferent to it — ^under these circumstances. It is possible for men to be indifferent to the Church because they want religion. Again, is it not the very highest tribute to the success of the Christian Church that there are now so many other instrumentalities through which the Christian spirit may be expressed? There are many channels through which its energies may be put forth, many [60] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE forms of work through which Christly service may be rendered and the satisfactions of such service drawn. Yet because of the multiplicity of these opportunities many men and women who would once surely have found their outlet and satisfaction through the Church are now classed as among those indifferent to the Church. What is the Church of God in the world? Is it only the worshiping community? Or is the worship- ing community, with its place of prayer and praise, its hour and fellowship of devotion, its opportunity of con- trition and of divine enduement, only the hearthstone and home of the soul of those who serve God and their fellows in any way at all and in any walk in life? Nothing which I have written is to be taken as mini- mizing the duty and privilege of restating faith, re- modeling practice, reorganizing the institution of the Church in such fashion that all of that which it says and is and does shall be a part of the life of our own time. Nothing could be further from my purpose. If men with an artificial or obsolete theology, or again with an antequated or inadequate view of the relation of religion to life, have nevertheless fostered godliness and spread the air of piety about them, it has not been be- cause of, but rather in spite of, their ancient theology and their narrow or timid and other-worldly view. Similarly, if men have been so contentious about a mod- em theology and a social view of the gospel that others have not been able to hear the gospel because of the contention, it has not been owing to the modern views or the socially directed energies that the effort has failed. It has failed in spite of these, which should have been valued accessories. It is religion itself which really moves men and so commands men that it is difficult [61] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE for them to be indifferent to it. Religion has, however, apparently been capable of combination with many bad theologies and partial or passing world views. It has also signally failed in combination with views which in themselves considered we might have said were better views. Religion, the joy in God, love of the souls of men, the enthusiasm for goodness, is a different thing from a world view. It is a life in the soul which cul- ture may wisely guide but for which culture is no sub- stitute. Finally, we may remind ourselves that the judgment of majorities is not infallible as to the highest things in the world. Our churches, like all our other institutions, are carried away just now by extravagant reverence for that vague power called the public. We are told that the day of the church of authority is gone, the day of the church of the people has come. Even if that were true we might still ask whether it were not a state of things which we should do well to try to reverse. At present I am content to point out that it is not true. It is not an anomaly ; on the contrary, it is one of the evi- dences of the fundamental soundness of life, and a fact which only our stupid fear of demagogues prevents us from recognizing, that exactly the churches of au- thority, the churches which have not sacrificed the prin- ciple of leadership, are those which are successful in holding the people. People need leadership. They want leadership. They go where they get it. The most popular churches are either not holding their people or else are holding them to something else than religion. One of the things which would make men less indifferent to the Church might be that some of our churches should be less indifferent to themselves, that they should know [62] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE what they stand for, and stand for it, whether men will hear or whether they will forbear. There is no necessary virtue in being unpopular. There is sometimes great virtue in not being anxious about being popular, so only that one is sure that he is right. This virtue men do us the honor to expect us to have. We need not argue for defiance flung out over the backs of empty pews. I simply say that one can fill a church at any moment by doing that which will put the church and them that fill it only further than ever from the fulfilment of the divine ideal of the Church. C6S] EDGAR YOUNG MULLINS, D.D., LL.D., LOUISVILLE^ KY. President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and professor of theology since 1899; born in Franklin Co., Miss., Jan. 5, I860; educated at the Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas, the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md. ; ordained to the Baptist ministry, 1885; pastor at Harrodsburg, Ky., 1885-88; Lee Street Church, Baltimore, 1888-95; First Church, Newton, Mass., 1896- 99; author of Why is Christianity True?; Axioms of Re- ligion: A New Interpretation of the Baptist Faith; Free- dom and Authority in Religion. WHY MEN ARE INDIFFERENT TO THE CHURCH One might begin discussion of the question with a broad denial. More men are interested in religion to- day than ever before. But it remains true that thou- sands are indifferent to the claims of the Church. What are the causes of this condition? The first and most obvious answer, of course, is that Christianity has failed to fulfil its mission completely. It has not been morally and spiritually and intellectually as persuasive as it should have been, with the result that men are uncon- vinced. The age is materialistic in a great degree. The passionate pursuit of wealth and of material good in general is an outstanding mark of the age. This is not because men are more depraved than in other ages, but because the opportunities for making money and the instruments of gain, facilities for acquiring it, are ex- traordinary. Now to spiritualize such an age is a tremendous task. It is like trying to overcome the power of gravitation. [64] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE The pull downward seems well nigh irresistible. This fact is clearly understood. What Christians have not understood so well has been the spiritual forces required to overcome this downward pull. It is a problem in spiritual mechanics. The train is prevented from going off at a tangent when rounding a curve by the fact that the outside track is raised above the level of the inside one. The centripetal overcomes the centrifugal tend- ency. Our modem Christianity has failed in large measure because it has attempted to round the curve on a level track. It has not grasped the problem of spiritual mechanics adequately. All metals may be melted if the temperature is high enough. Instead of raising the temperature (increasing the power of the spiritual causes) we have tried other methods. This raises the further question: how has the power been drained off? How has spiritual energy come thus to fail. One phase of the answer is that Christianity has not had an opportunity to develop normally. By normal, I mean ethical development. The spiritual life in Christianity blossoms and fruits in ethics. Read the New Testament anywhere for confirmation of this state- ment. Paul's epistles, as well as the gospels, throb with ethical passion. Our age calls for ethical readjustment in a thousand forms. Civilization is complex. It is like an automobile in complexity and rapidity. But it has been too largely without the ethical lubricant essen- tial to smooth-running. The moral sense of the modern man has revolted at what he regarded as the indifference of Christianity to moral and social relations. This defect is in process of correction, however, and social questions are gradually coming in for proper attention. The ethical and social shortcoming of the Churches [65] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE has been due in part to the new intellectual issues. Ultra-conservatism has often rendered Christian think- ers rigidly inflexible in their attitude to scientific and philosophic truth. On the other hand modern culture, scientific and philosophic, has often made false issues with Christianity. The legitimate moral and social task has thus often been neglected for an intellectual one. The train stops running when you begin to tinker with the running gear. You cannot repair the driving-wheel of the engine and run sixty miles an hour at the same time. This fact is one of the most important keys to the present situation. This leads, naturally, to the question of creed sub- scription. Are men kept out of the churches by creed requirements? The question is not easy to answer. As a matter of fact few, if any, evangelical churches require subscription to elaborate creeds in order to gain church membership. Some denominations require teachers and preachers to sign such creeds, but not the membership at large. Many denominations require exceedingly simple beliefs for church membership. The lordship of Jesus Christ, faith in him, submission to him, and to baptism in his name, practically cover the requirements for church membership in the denomination to which I belong. Yet, no doubt, many stay out of the churches because of supposed credal requirements. This point needs clarifying to the general public. The question has been raised whether a simple creed like that advocated by Abraham Lincoln would remove the indifference of men to the churches. Lincoln is quoted as saying: "Whenever any church will inscribe over its altar, as its sole qualification for membership, the Saviour's condensed statement of the substance of 1661 THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE both law and gospel, *Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor as thyself,' that church will I join with all my heart and all my soul." To my thinking, it is perfectly clear that such a simple creed would not remove the indifference of men to the claims of the churches. This conviction is based on two facts. First, the proposed creed does not express the substance of the law and the gospel. It does sum up, broadly, the law and the prophets. But nowhere is it given in the New Testament as the "substance of the gospel." The further fact is, that there is already in existence a church which has this simple creed as the basis of membership : Love to God and love to man. This church makes little or nothing of Christ's relation to faith, and thus avoids the sharp clash with modern thought at the most vital point. And yet, this church, with this creed, is one of the smallest and weakest of all American Churches. Men do not flock to it because of its simplified creed. Two things have been established by history. One is that ethical culture alone does not and cannot an- swer man's religious needs. The second is that re- ligion apart from Christ's revelation and his personal mediation of the knowledge and power of God has never proven ethically and spiritually effective on a large scale. Most modern philosophic views of God implicitly borrow from Jesus even where they deny him as revealer of God. When the conception of God becomes simply philosophic it at once becomes abstract, unstable, and remote. As a vine cannot climb a moon- beam so the soul cannot subsist on such an abstraction. This is not to deny the validity of philosophy or its [67] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE function, but only to assert that it must reckon with Jesus and his creative work in the soul. It is with Jesus as a Doer, as a historic Energy, that modern culture must reckon. I come thus to the most central phase of the modem indifference to the claims of the churches so far as intel- lectual culture is involved. In our time the reality of the spiritual world has been called in question in many ways. Doubt has been diffused from a thousand sources. Already borne on a strong tide of materialism men have readily set their sails to catch the winds of doubt. The breach between "faith" and "thought" has thus become wider, until within the last decade or two. Most of the indifference to religion has not been due to clearly defined anti-religious views, but to a widely diffused atmosphere of doubt and uncertainty. This has arisen from a widespread confusion of thought regarding a number of fundamental points. Most of them have been as unnecessary as they have been inevitable under existing conditions. The remedy lies in a clearer grasp of fundamental principles in the worlds of thought and of religious experience. I proceed to note some of these confusions. The first and fundamental confusion of thought has been with regard to spheres of reality. There is a physical, and there is a spiritual universe. But in much modern thought the spiritual universe has been cancelled entirely. Men have been so overpowered by the great- ness of nature that they have been unable to hear the voice of God within. Yet we are rapidly coming back to the spiritual interpretation of the world. Philoso- phers and scientific students of religion alike are recog- nizing that the world of spirit is as real as the world of [68] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE matter. I name as representatives of this type of thought men like the late Professor Borden P. Bowne and William James in America, and Professor Schiller in England, Professor Eucken in Germany and Pro- fessor Bergson in France. Bitter attacks are being made upon these thinkers by advocates of the mechan- ical theory of the world, but in vain. The data of re- ligious experience are slowly yielding an impregnable foundation for philosophy, and reality is acquiring even for the philosophic and scientific thinker a new dimen- sion. A second confusion of thought has grown out of the one just named. It is a confusion as to the stand- ards or criteria of truth. Science has insisted that "ex- planation" is simply showing the quantitative equiva- lence of cause and effect. Conservation or continuity in the physical sense, is thus made the measure of all things. A "truth" is whatever can be so demonstrated. But we are coming to see that truth is not so limited. There are personal causes as well as physical. The soul of man and the Spirit of God interact and truth arises thus. The world of spiritual reality yields truth then, just as does the world of physical reality. But the criterion of truth here is no longer continuity. It is not a physical standard of measurement at all but spiritual. A recognition of this distinction will clear up a great deal of confusion of thought among moderns. A third form of confusion of thought has been in relation to the distinction between religion on the one hand and science and philosophy on the other. Science in the strict sense has nothing to do with the religious life. It deals with phenomena. Philosophy rationalizes [69] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE the data supplied by science. Neither of these processes is identical with religion. Religion is a life adjustment of man toward God in order to moral and spiritual redemption. Religion equips man for life's battles. Primarily it is not intended as a solution of his intellec- tual problems, although, of course, intellectual problems always follow. But religion need not wait on rational- ism, and this is the fundamental fact. A man has a right to trust God and experimentally demonstrate his existence and redeeming power without waiting for a coercive philosophic demonstration of God's existence. And yet a great part of modem indifference to religion is due to the supreme fallacy of supposing that the right to believe is based on such demonstration. Philosophy as a merely rational process is forever in a state of un- stable equilibrium, and hence cannot afford a basis for religion in the broad sense. That is to say, religion is under no necessity of waiting for philosophic credentials before beginning its work. A new philosophy indeed is arising which starts from religious experience itself, and its stability is guaranteed by the solid foundation thus secured. The philosophy of religion is more and more becoming not an abstract or speculative system, but the rational and systematic explanation of religious experience. Now, to sum up what has been said above, the chief need to-day in order to remove the indifference of men to the church (so far as the hindrance is intellectual) is a clarification of the relations between science and philosophy and religion. The independent rights of religion, in other words, must be asserted. Confused and false conceptions of the function of science and philosophy must be removed. A clear grasp of the real E70] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE and fundamental place of religion as a human necessity must be achieved. When the above confusions of thought are removed; when the spiritual imiverse is recognized as a sphere of reality in contradistinction to the physical; when per- sonality and personal interaction are recognized as data to be accepted, not explained away; and when physical continuity ceases to be the sole criterion of explanation and standard of truth, then two results will follow. The first will be the disappearence, in great measure, of al- leged contradictions between science and religion. It will be seen that the right of each to its criterion of truth and explanation is unquestionable. Theology will be absorbed less in defending Christianity against attacks of science because it will be seen that the al- leged' conflicts do not exist. The energy of the Church can then expend itself normally in the constructive work of building the spiritual edifice in the human soul and in society. The second result of the removal of confusions of thought will be the return of men to religion like thirsty travelers across the desert who see an oasis and the gleam of a fountain in the distance. The false barriers being removed, the needless obstructions destroyed, the eternal quest of man for God will reassert itself. By a law of spiritual gravitation men will turn to Christ for the surest and most adequate knowledge of God. He is the "substance" of the gospel and of the law. Love to God and to our neighbor as mediated through him will become the ideal of religion and of ethics. Let it be understood that I am not here speaking of the metaphysical doctrine of Christ's person in any of the speculative forms in which it has appeared in history. [71] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Nor am I referring to creed subscription as a mere in- tellectual or formal matter at all. I am referring rather to the religious act and process, the vital union of man with God, and redemption from the corruption and power of sin. The problem of his person will, of course, always arise with men who know experientially his redeeming power. And this will find various forms of statement and solution. But the intellectual phases of religion will be secondary. Vital religion will precede the intellectual formulation thereof. I said men will come to Christ by a "spiritual gravi- tation." This assertion is based on two facts. One is the inconclusiveness of mere intellectual formulations of the doctrine of God and the religions of life. They do not answer man's religious needs. The other fact is that Christ includes all the values in other forms of teaching. He cannot be transcended. He is our re- ligious horizon in spite of ourselves. We may ascend to undreamed of heights of thought. He expands with our intellectual horizon. Above all, he supplies the power men need for the realization of the religious and ethical ideal. Churches will grow in wisdom in pro- portion as they make Christ central in their life ; in pro- portion as they refuse to bind elaborate metaphysical creeds upon men's consciences and hearts ; in proportion as they clear the way for the approach of men, who hunger for religion, to the Redeemer of men. The doing of his will will be found to be the road to blessed- ness and peace and power. [72] JAMES ORR, D.D., GLASGOW^ SCOTLAND Late professor of apologetics and theology, Theological Col- lege of United Free Church, Glasgow, since 1901 ; born in Glasgow, April 11, 1844; died Sept. 6, 1913; educated at Glasgow University and the Theological Hall of United Presbyterian Church; minister of East Bank United Pres- byterian Church, Hawick, 1874-91 ; professor of church his- tory at Theological College, Glasgow, of the United Pres- .byterian Church, 1891-1901; author of The Christian View of God and the World; the Supernatural in Christianity; the Ritschlian Theology and the Evangelical Faith; Neg- lected Factors in the Study of the Early Progress of Chris- tianity; Early Church History and Literature; Elliot Lectures on the Progress of Dogma; Essays on Ritschlian- ism; The Image of God in Man and Its Defacement; The Problem of the Old Testament; The Bible Under Trial; The Virgin Birth of Christ; The Resurrection of Jesus; Sidelights on Christian Doctrine; Revelation and Inspira- tion; Faith of a Modern Christian; Sin as a Problem of To-day. I AM not sure that I can contribute anything that will be felt to be of much value on the questions you send me as to the indifference of multitudes to the claims of the Church, and the form to be taken by a present-day creed and theology for the Church. The religious indiffer- ence of a vast number of people is unquestionable, but, great as is my respect for Abraham Lincoln, I do not think that the remedy would lie in such a simplification of the qualifications for church membership as he pro- poses. The "rock" on which Jesus himself proposed to build his Church involved confession of his divine son- ship and messiahship, and it is not my experience that it is the churches which depart from a warm faith and earnest preaching of the truths hitherto called [73] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE evangelical which succeed in attracting members, but the churches and congregations which are most faith- ful in their adherence to and preaching of these truths. "The power of God unto salvation" lies as much as ever it did in the preaching of "Jesus Christ and him crucified," with all the implications which these words contained in the mind of the apostle about man's need as a sinner, and Christ's redeeming work as a Saviour, applied by the Holy Spirit to the individual heart and conscience. I quite agree that there is room for much simplification of statement in the creeds of the churches, but I look with complete dis- trust on many of the new theologies which seem to me to part with most things that are vital in the Christian gospel, and am disposed to attribute to the prevalence of these defective teachings much of the powerlessness of the churches, and increase of indifference of which com- plaint is made. I agree also, of course, that any true theology cannot be out of accord with "the assured re- sults of science," but then I am by no means disposed to take for granted that all the things which are sometimes proclaimed as "assured results" of science are really so, and am far more convinced of the assured character of the fundamental truths affecting Christ's salvation, than I am of many of the theories put forward in the name of science, which may seem to conflict with these truths. I do not believe there is the slightest hope of checking the present-day rush of so vast a part of our popula- tion into materialism, secularism, and sensuous pleasure on any lower ground than that which I have indicated. I read, for example, the other week a report of the au- tumnal meetings of the British and Foreign Unitarian Association at SheflSeld. It was there laid down that [74] THE CHUKCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE the missionary work of the churches was a mistake, and that Unitarians did not feel it their business to take part in such work. I read at the same time an article in the Christian Register, the organ, I imderstand, of American Unitarianism, in which the writer, a Mr. Sunderland, deplored that the American Unitarians were doing nothing to engender missionary interest. It was added that, as a matter of fact, it cannot even pro- vide men for its own ministry. The president of a Unitarian school in Pennsylvania had declared that not a single one of the twenty-one students in his care came from a Unitarian home. As to the creed, I expressed my views on that subject at some length in a paper sent on request to The Homiletic Review for April, 1907, and need not do more here than refer to that article, which expresses my present sentiments. (We have deemed it advisable to give the article referred to by Professor Orr. — Editors.) : "What are the essential articles of a present-day theology such as may be used as a system of faith by the Church?" There is a prior question which might be raised — How far is it desirable for churches to have a creed, or articles of faith, to which subscription is required as a test of membership or office? Believing, myself, how- ever, that there is a common Christian faith (an old word for the creed was "the belief") , which the churches and the individual Christian ought to be able intelli- gently to state, and which it is the duty of the Church publicly to confess, preach, and defend, I have no pre- liminary exception to take to the form of the question as put. I have no favor for hazy, nebulous thinking on great Christian verities, and hold that a church will be [75] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE strong and robust in proportion as it throws its own mind on the things it believes, and is faithful and bold in its avowal of them. If I made any criticism on the question proposed, it would be in the expression "essential articles of a present-day theology." The first position I should be disposed to lay down is that a creed, to satisfy present- day needs, should be the simple expression of the faith of the heart, and should be as brief, untechnical, and un- theological as it is possible to make it, without parting with anything essential. Faith does not rest on the- ology, but theology is the elaborated result of intellec- tual reflection on the contents of the faith. The facts and doctrines of Christianity were there before men began to work them up into carefully articulated sys- tems. I am not sure, also, whether any special meaning underlies the phrase "present-daj- theology" in this con- nection. There may be attached to this expression, by some, the idea that theology is constantly changing, and that it is the business of the theology of to-day (the "New Theology") to provide the Church with a new set of articles in room of the obsolete creeds on which its faith has hitherto been nurtured. Old doctrines are to drop out and disappear; new formulations are to take their place in consonance with the new conditions of thought and ruling scientific ideas of the age (evolution and the like) . I may say at once that I have no faith in this attempt to make the Christian creed always express the last new thing in an age's philosophy, science, criticism, and religious speculation. To me the faith of the Church is not something always changing, but something which, in its essential contents and im- [76] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE mutable landmarks, lies already there before us, com- plete in the teaching of Holy Scripture. The only Christianity I am prepared to acknowledge is the Chris- tianity given to the Church and to the world in the first age by Christ himself and his apostles; vitally to alter this is, in my belief, to go back from the foundation of Christianity altogether. When, then, I am asked. What are the essential articles which may be used to-day as a system of faith by the Church? I reply with all good conscience that I am not in search of a new creed (except as to simplification of form), and that I do not know of any important article of the ordinary Protestant and evangelical faith which I am prepared to surrender, or think should be, or need be, surrendered by the Church. On particular points, as, e,g,, baptism or high theological questions like predestination, there probably will always be a measure of divergence of view ; it does not follow that at least the sharpness of divergence may not be consider- ably lessened. But taking the Protestant faith as a whole, I am perfectly convinced, notwithstanding all that is said of "new theologies," that, were the several churches to sit down together to-morrow to put in black and white what they conceived to be the essential and abiding contents of the Christian verity, the outcome would not be very different in substance from what we have been familiar with in the older creeds. I firmly believe that such a consensus of faith would leave intact, for example, all the articles of the old Apostles' Creed. I know the storm that rages in some quarters about the article on the virgin birth and the article on the Lord's bodily resurrection. I am greatly cheered to see Professor Briggs coming out so manfully [77] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE in defense of the former article, and I should like to see the Church that proposed to its members to eliminate either of these great articles from its creed, or even to make them open questions. It could not be done at this hour even in the Lutheran Church in Germany, despite all one hears (often with exaggeration) of the ration- alism of that country. Similarly, I do not believe that such a conference of churches would result in the elimi- nation of any important article of the later creeds which Protestant churches, reverting ever to Scripture as a basis, have generally accepted. The "fall" is put in question by evolution ; but unless sin is made a neces- sity, and deprived of its heinousness before God, which made redemption needful, its origin must ever be sought in the voluntary departure from rectitude of a creature who had the power to love obediently. The Trinity is called "metaphysical," but we can- not be faithful to the revelation in the gospel if we fail to recognize in it a God subsisting and re- vealed, in the words of the baptismal confession, as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The trend of the New Theology is to humanitarianism in Christology, but the Church, so long as she adheres to the faith of the apos- tles, will never, we may be sure, depart from her testi- mony to her Lord as perfect God and perfect Man — ^the Word made flesh. There are all sorts of speculations on the atonement, but any "moral" theory which denies the true vicarious death, and atoning cleansing power of the blood of Christ, will never satisfy the conscience or faith of the general Christian comjnunity or furnish an evangel to preach to the masses. "Justification" is thought a "forensic" term, but it can never be twisted to mean anything but what it signifies in Paul — a set- [78] THE CHUKCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ting right with God through his own free act of pardon and acceptance for Christ's sake. There are eschatolo- gies innumerable; but while the mysteries of the future are acknowledged, we have no expectation of seeing the Church commit herself to either universalism or annihilation, or even make a dogma of second probation. Let veils lie where Scripture leaves them. All this, no doubt, is dreadfully old-fashioned. Be it so; the time will show whether it is true or false. [79] JUNIUS BENJAMIjST remensnyder, D.D., LL.D., NEW YORK, N. Y. Pastor of St. James's Lutheran Church, New York, since 1881; president of the General Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in the United States of America since 1911 ; born at Staunton, W. Va., Feb. 24, 1843; graduated from Pennsylvania College, Gettysburg, I86I, and from the Gettysburg Theological Seminary in 1865; served in the Civil War in 131st Pennsylvania Volunteers, 1862-63; or- dained to the Lutheran ministry, 1865; pastor in Phila- delphia, 1865-74, and Savannah, Ga., 1874-80; author of Heavenward: or. The Race for the Crown of Life; Doom Eternal: The Bible and Church Doctrine of Everlasting Punishment; The Work and Personality of Luther; Lu- theran Literature: Its Distinctive Traits and Excellencies; The Sia; Days of Creation: Lectures on the Mosaic Account of the Creation, Fall, and Deluge; The Real Presence; The Lutheran Manual; The Atonement and Modern Thought; Mysticism: Psychology, History and Relation to Scrip- ture, Church and Christian Life; the Post-Apostolic Age and Current Religious Problems; The Problems of Life: A Study of Eucken, The Church was organized by Jesus Christ for many purposes. He preached a kingdom of righteousness, and the Church was to express the visible aspect of this kingdom. It was to be the communion of saints, the family of believers, the household of God. But first and foremost it was to be for the promul- gation of Christianity. It was when Peter had made his great confession of the truth of Christ's divinity that the Lord made answer: "Upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matt. 16: 18) . So St. Paul, who "had the [80] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE mind of Christ," calls it *'the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth." Again, "And the Lord added to the church daily such as were being saved" (Acts 2: 47). These Scriptural declarations make it clear that the primary purpose of the Church was to propagate the gospel. It was to preach and set forth to men the in- carnation. The Lord himself having ascended he founded the Church to continue his life, his truth and his work on the earth. It was to fulfU his last great command: "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to the whole creation." Now what is the gospel? The record of it is given us in the New Testament. Its distinctive features are that in Christ "God was manifest in the flesh" ; that he came as "the Lamb of God to take away the sins of the world" ; that he revealed the will of the Father to save men by faith in his well-beloved and only begotten Son ; that dying he rose again and thereby "abolished death, and brought life and immortality to light by the gospel." These New Testament statements the historic Church has summarized in brief and simple form in the Apostles' and Nicene creeds. They comprise the es- sential and distinctive features of Christianity. In the basis to which you refer, as presented by Abraham Lin- coln, our Lord is referring only to "the law," and not to the gospel. That was indeed an aldequate creed for Judaism, but "the law came by Moses"; Christianity stands for the gospel of "grace and truth which came by Jesus Christ." How could that be called Christianity which would have the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith omitted? It would be what even the modernist Loisy, in his book The Gospel and the Church, calls "a [81] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE religion without Christianity, a gospel without Christ." The Church exists as the instrument for the dissemina- tion of Christianity. And when it ceases to stand for those very doctrines which differentiate the Christian from the natural religions, it simply ceases to be Chris- tianity. To the objection: "But present-day people will no longer receive these doctrines, and the Church must adapt its faith to the demands of the natural reason," there are three answers. First, such action would be dishonest, if the Church is to keep the Christian name. Second, it would repudiate the whole historic prac- tise of the Church. From the very beginning, as through all the ages, the supernatural doctrines of Christianity have been opposed to the natural pride of reason, being "unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness" (I Cor. 1: 23), but never did Christian preachers on that account emasculate them, and pare them down until they were unrecog- nizable. And the third answer is, that it is just in these dis- tinctive tenets, non-acceptable to the natural man and now proposed for rejection, has ever lain the might and power of Christianity. If the Church would cease to preach a divine, atoning and death-conquering Saviour, doubtless Unitarians, Jews, Mohammedans, Hindus, Confucianists, rationalists, and mere moralists would have no objection to accepting him, but inasmuch as this acceptance would involve no new creation by the Spirit of God, it would have for them neither in- terest nor spiritual value. It would be as Amiel protests in the Journal Intime, when he went to hear a rationalist minister: "The com- [82] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE mon people complain of such a barren gospel, *they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him,' and I agree with them." So ex-President Eliot, when lately declaring that the orthodox doctrines are unpreachable, at the same time admits that these same orthodox churches are ardently carrying the torch of light to the darkened lands of heathendom, "while the liberal churches are the ones who sit complacently at home and never lift a finger." So Professor Kahnis, in his History of Ger- man Protestantism, shows that the great movement of rationalism in the middle of the nineteenth century in Germany was so barren of spiritual fervor that it de- populated the churches, and only a genuine revival of faith saved Christianity from destruction. And Pro- fessor Kuenen, the great modern apostle of negative higher criticism, bewails the fact that if it is found out that a theological student has been educated at the Leyden University, no congregation will extend him a call. Mystery and the supernatural must ever be of the essence of a real religion, since it deals with God, the soul, the spiritual, the eternal and infinite. "Great is the mystery of godliness," cries the apostle (I Tim. 3: 16). Let Christianity yield these great features at the subtle invitation of its merely ethical advocates or op- ponents, and it will be shorn of the locks of its power, and will disappear from the arena, instead of pressing onward, as it ever has, to the conquest of the world. Truth is one, and so the Church will never oppose established scientific facts. But the correlative is equally true, that science must never contradict the [83] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE great mystic, spiritual and historic facts of religion, which lie beyond its sphere. As to theology, it must naturally change, adapting its philosophic presentation of the faith to enlarged knowledge and changed environment. As Cardinal Newman, in his Development of Christian Doctrine, points the striking aphorism: "a truth must often change to preserve its identity." But it only changes in outer form, while it preserves its essence. Such essential identity Christianity has ever re- tained, amid the superficial changes of human progi'ess that have beset its history. In this identity lies its vi- tality, as "the power and the wisdom of God unto sal- vation." And in this, too, lies the secret of its ever growing life and power, until it will establish its ascend- ency as the one universal religion of mankind. [84] HENRY CLAY SHELDON, D.D., BOSTON, MASS. Professor of systematic theology at Boston University since 1895; born at Martinsburg, N. Y., March 12, 1845; graduated from Yale, 1867, and from the Theological School, Boston University, 1871; ordained to the Metho- dist Episcopal ministry, 1871; pastor at St. Johnsbury, Vt., 1871-72, Brunswick, Me., 1872-74; studied at Leipsic, 1874-75; professor of historical theology in Boston Uni- versity, 1875-95; author of History of Christian Doctrine; History of the Christian Church; System of Christian Doc- trine; Unbelief in the Nineteenth Century; Sacerdotalism in the Nineteenth Century; Nero Testament Theology. Several negative propositions are naturally suggested as we seek to define the theology adapted to meet pres- ent-day demands. In the first place, it would not be wise to attempt to reduce theology to a minimum out of mere deference to current expressions of impatience with this order of subject matter. Even if it be granted that a valid occasion for impatience has been afforded, we need to inquire whether the occasion was anything more substantial than the intrusion of a scholastic form of theological discourse in connections where that form was not appropriate. That this is very frequently the ground of complaint and disparagement cannot be doubted. Evidence to this effect is afforded by the ap- peals often made to the teaching which flowed from the lips of Jesus. This, it is assumed, was undogmatic, scarcely weighted at all by theological matter. Now what are the facts? The words of Jesus are permeated with theological substance, with fundamental concep- tions respecting God, man, the interrelations between God and man, the underlying design of human history, [85] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE and the great facts of human destiny. In wise accom- modation to the situation Jesus taught theology, not as the scholastic, but as the prophet and poet; but most assuredly he taught theology. His example furnishes no basis of appeal against a good round measure of the- ology, but only against obtruding the scholastic form where it is unsuitable. A second negative proposition takes this form: It is not wise to press overmuch the antithesis between the theoretical and the practical, to the disparagement of the function of theology and the limitation of its scope. Doubtless a caution against unbridled theorizing has its place. A man may mount so high into the cloud-land of speculation as to get out of sight of recognizable con- nection with the domain of practical interests. But this possibility in no wise justifies an emphatic disparage- ment of the theoretical as such. Good theories furnish an excellent ground for the right ordering of life. The wider, deeper, more harmonious, more thoroughly based, and more thoroughly grasped the theories are, the better will be the effect upon the practise. Teaching that is armed with eminent efficiency always links practise with theory, conduct with fundamental principles. It is not to be overlooked, however, that the utility even of good theories is largely dependent upon free and hearty ap- propriation. To impose by authority strict adherence to a great complex of theological conceptions is an ill- advised procedure, not to say an odious usurpation. At the same time it needs to be affirmed that a Church which does not nurture sufficient intellectual life to sus- tain a perennial ambition to interpret the universe, God, and man, up to the limit of available data, has evident occasion for shame and contrition. [86] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE A third negative proposition incorporates the judg- ment that we are not under bonds to suppose that the scientific or literary research of the modern era has im- posed a demand for a fundamental revision of theology. The occasion for revision which comes from the specified domains pertains almost wholly to peripheral matters. Even the most comprehensive induction of modern science, the doctrine of evolution, touches nothing that is central in theology. It may not fully agree with some overtechnical structures which have been reared by this or that party on isolated portions of the Bible, but it takes not one stone out of the foundations of the great catholic doctrines, viewed according to their essential aim and significance. The standard theistic and soteriological conceptions which enter into the warp and woof of the biblical revelation have by no means been routed by modem science. And a like verdict may be pronounced respecting the results of the literary criticism which has been so energetically cultivated in recent times. The larger occasion for doctrinal change has come from viewing in better perspective the data of reason and revelation which all along have been ac- cessible to unbiased vision. Room needs to be made for one more negative proposition, namely, that which denies that a theology approaching to normal efficiency is at all likely to sur- vive within a so-called Christian constituency which rejects, or reduces to a meager renmant, the historical basis of Christianity. According to all appearances an abstract religion is an utter misfit for this world. It lacks power to grip the minds and hearts of embodied human beings. Talleyrand spoke wisely when, in an- swer to the complaint of the theophilanthropist, that [87] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE his finely concocted religion would not work, he ad- vised him to get himself crucified and to rise from the dead on the third day. It was the unwavering convic- tion that the gospel dispensation was founded in great and marvelous historical verities that armed its early votaries with victorious power. No theology which dis- cards or discredits those verities can supply a compen- sating inspiration and energy. Recession toward a ghostly and ineffective role will be its inevitable fortune. Coming to positive propositions we wish, in the first place, to express the conviction that a theology suit- able for this or any other age, must be stanchly theistic, imambiguous in its afiirmation of the personality of God. It need not construe divine personality in a crudely anthropomorphic fashion; but the essential at- tributes of personality — self -consciousness, intelligence, will, and purposive action — it must conserve. The mo- ment a theology relinquishes any one of these, or begins to prate about the suprapersonal, it brings in an empty substitute for the living God. In the second place, a theology adapted to meet the demands of this age, or of any future age, must ap- propriate essentially the New Testament valuation of. the person and work of Christ. The plain reason is that the New Testament Christ is so linked at once with divinity and humanity that, on the one hand, he makes God supremely near, apprehensible, and effective in appeal, and on the other hand, in uplifting men into union with God he never transports them into an un- social transcendentalism, but rather fosters in them an intimate sympathy and sense of relationship with their fellows. In the third place the theology which squares with [88] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE the requirements of the age will take an honest account of the adverse elements in the world system and of the evil in men. While distant by a whole diameter from a sour pessimism, it will eschew affiliation with a weak or mendacious optimism. Instead of attempting to put affliction and sin out of sight by the silly expedient of denying their real existence, it will advise every hard- pressed wayfarer to grasp the sure means of victory over them by close union with him who has overcome the world. Again, the theology which measures up to present- day demands will strongly insist that heart fellowship with God is a spring of satisfaction and spiritual fruit- fulness for which there is no equivalent. Without mak- ing any false antithesis between the sacred and the sec- ular, or separating any part of life from the domain of piety, it will proclaim that one who does not find in the depths of his soul that God is his portion has not yet grasped the secret of true living. Again the theology suited in tone and content to the age will unite with a high valuation of the individual a profound stress upon the obligation to work toward a social ideal. The two things are evidently quite har- monious, since the individual cannot come to his best save as he fulfils the law of equal love to the neighbor and improves opportunities to bless as well as to be blessed. Once more, the theology which can claim to be nor- mal, and thus suited to fulfil the deeper requirements of this as of every other age, will stress both the neces- sity of a resolute purpose to bring in the kingdom of righteousness here and now, and the need of a serious regard for the life to come. It will enforce considera- [893 THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE tion of the latter interest, not only because it is too great in itself to be reasonably ignored, but also because it is intrinsically linked with the former interest. A man can work with better courage for the present tri- umph of righteousness under a sky which has become as a transparent curtain, through which he catches glimpses of an incomparable inheritance, than he can under a firmament which shuts him up to a purely ter- restrial prospect. [90] AUGUSTUS HOPKINS STRONG, D.D., LL.D., ROCHESTER^ N. Y. President and professor of systematic theology at Roches- ter Theological Seminary, 1872-1912; born at Rochester, N. Y., August 3, 1836; studied at Yale and Rochester Theological Seminary, and in Europe; ordained to the Baptist ministry, 1861 ; pastor of the First Church, Haver- hill, Mass., 1861-65; First Church, Cleveland, O., 1865- 72; author of Systematic Theology; Philosophy and Re- ligion; The Great Poets and Their Theology; Christ in Creation and Ethical Monism; One Hundred Chapel Talks to Theological Students; Miscellanies, Historical and Theological. Abraham Lincoln's creed is only a statement of the law of God, and it contains no gospel. Christianity means more than this, in that it provides a way of escape from the penalty and the power of sin. It is a divine revelation. That revelation is contained in the Holy Scriptures. Christ is the center of it. No creed is a sufficient basis of Church unity that does not de- clare Christ's deity, preexistence, incarnation, miracles, atoning death, resurrection and omnipresence with his people. These will stand the tests of science, and by them Christians must stand. [91] WILLIAM ST. CLAIR TISDALL, D.D., DEAL, ENGLAND Vicar of St. George the Martyr's, Deal, Kent; born at Mil- ford, England, Feb. 19, 1859; was graduated (M.A., 1st class honors) from University of New Zealand; honorary D.D., of University of Edinburgh; deacon, 1882; priest, 1883; Hebrew and classical lecturer, Bishopsdale Theo- logical College, Nelson, New Zealand, 1883-84; Vice- principal of St. John's Divinity School, Lahore, 1884-85; Principal of the Church Missionary Society Training Col- lege, Amritsar, India, 1885-86; missionary-in-charge of the Church Missionary Society Muhammedan Mission, Bombay, 1887-90; Long lecturer on Islam, 1890-92; on Buddhism, 1900-2 and 1904; on Hinduism, 1905; and on comparative religion, 1908-09; secretary of the Persian Mission, 1892-94; literary missionary and translator, Ispahan, Persia, 1894-1900; author of The Triglott Gospel of St. John; The Religion of the Crescent; The Conver- sion of Armenia; Sources of Islam; India, its History, Darkness, and Dawn; Persian Grammar; The Noble Eight- fold Path; A Manual of Muhammedan Objections; The Original Sources of the Qur'an; Hindustani Grammar; Grammars of Gujarati and Panjabi; Religio Critici, Chris- tianity and other Faiths; Mythic Christs and the True; etc. PRESIDENT LINCOLN'S IDEA OF WHAT THE CHURCH SHOULD BE President Lincoln's opinion, which you quote in your letter, sounds at first very plausible. It is only when one comes to examine it that one sees that it is not so simple as it appears, but involves a great deal more than many people think. What the president probably meant was that "prac- tise is better than precept," and that "right knowledge is not saving faith." This, of course, is very true. But there could be no practise without precept, whether [92] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE voiced or only conceived in the mind. It is not neces- sary for the engine-driver to know all about the science of dynamics, nor can the man who has thoroughly stud- ied that science make the engine go merely through his knowledge of abstract principles. Yet the engine could not be driven if the principles of dynamics and a good many other sciences were not true. Long before the modern science of astronomy had arisen, it was as true as it is now that "man goeth forth to his work and to his labour until the evening." Yet if there were no truth in the principles of astronomy, in the facts upon which the science is based, there would be no evening and no morning, — and no man to go forth. In order to be a good and true Christian it is not necessary to be a profound theologian: and a profound theologian may not be a true, practical Christian, or a Christian at all. Yet, were there no truth in Chris- tian theology, were its principles baseless, there would be no Christian faith, no Christian precepts, and hence no Christian practise. To love God and one's neighbor is very easy in- deed in theory: it is only in practise that we find any difficulty about the matter. Even to support the theory certain very definite, dogmatic information is logically needed, about God in the first place, and about our neighbor in the second. The precept does, perhaps, seem axiomatic to us now; but no nation, no philoso- pher, ever discovered it until Mosaic times, and then it is rightly claimed to have been a revelation. For ages afterward no one except a few Israelites accepted the precept as even theoretically admirable. Even to-day none but people brought up amid Christian surroundings pay it so much as the tribute of barren 1932 THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE admiration. A Moslem would not admire it at all, still less would a Hindu or a genuine Buddhist. Nietzsche and his followers would hold it to be per- nicious nonsense. Before we can reasonably accept "the Saviour's con- densed statement of the substance of both law and gospel," as Lincoln calls it, we need to know that God is worthy of our love. We also need a very strong motive-power to set us working, if we are to put the rule into practise. How are we to know him whom many wise men call "the Unknowable" ? What motive- power can we find? For the quality of love is no more "strained" than that of mercy, — ^much less so in fact. Of course, if our Lord Jesus Christ has truly revealed the Father, if "God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son," then everything is quite easy, for "We love him, because he first loved us." But this involves the truth of the whole Christian faith, the ac- ceptance (ultimately) of the articles of the so-called Apostles' Creed. We thus get dogmatic theology. Theology is merely the attempt to express scientifically the facts of the case. When we remember that Christ is quoting from the law, from what he taught that God had revealed to Moses, the whole question of the cor- rectness of the higher critical hypotheses also is in- volved in our acceptation of what to Lincoln seemed so simple. How again can we logically avoid asking ourselves the question which Christ himself propounded to his opponents, "What think ye of the Christ? Whose son is he?" It is true that theology must be sharply differen- tiated from Christian faith. Theology is only the the- oretic or philosophic statement or explanation of the [94] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE facts on which our faith rests. Theology may err, like all other sciences, and may require revision in the light of new facts, or old ones better understood, or more fully co-ordinated with one another. But the facts themselves do not change, for truth is eternal. If a man accepts these facts, he has no excuse for not joining some one of the different regiments which to- gether form the army of Christ. If he denies the facts, then he can hardly expect Christians to modify the "faith once for all delivered to the saints" in order to secure his approval and adherence. On the other hand, he may justly doubt whether certain of the theological ex- planations of the facts are correct, and he should then examine them and state them more correctly if he can. But that has nothing to do with the facts. The simple, uneducated Christian is not forced to study theology at all deeply. He must, however, know and believe the main facts upon which that science — like every other science — is based, otherwise how can he be a Christian? None the less the theologian has his place. He has to know the original languages in which the Holy Scriptures were written, otherwise the simple believer could not hear the facts stated in his native tongue. No one has any right, on the other hand, to prevent the simple believer from studying theology, if he wishes to do so. Nor can its doctrines in the main be repudiated without overthrowing the foundation of the simple man's faith and the ground for his obedience to Christ's precepts. If Christ were not what he claimed to be, then his conmiands would have no authority be- hind them. If he did not "die for our sins and rise again for our justification," then love for him cannot rightly exist, and the engine cannot run on the rails, C95] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE however admirably laid, for its motive-power is gone, the fire is out, the boiler is cold. As there cannot be more than one true science of medicine, of dynamics, of astronomy, of chemistry, so there can be only one true science of theology. Our knowledge of not one of these sciences is perfect, though in each case the facts on which our knowledge (or "science") is based are unchangeable, or at least un- changing. Like all other sciences, theology is progres- sive, and some of its theories are still imperfect. But this no more justifies a reasonable man in rejecting the teachings of theology than the same fact justifies him in rejecting the laws of acoustics or optics. In each case our aim should be to become better acquainted with the basal facts, in order that we may the better under- stand how the doctrines founded thereon accord with these facts. The faith which we need and which alone can satisfy is that which is founded upon no mere human guesses at truth, but on the "divine word" for which Plato longed, and for want of which he wandered in the dimmest twilight. But at least the faces of such men were turned toward the light, toward the dawning of the Sun of righteousness. Those of many of the would- be wise men of the present day are, alas! turned away from the Light of the world. 1961 WILLEM VAN DER VLUGT, D.U.J., LEYDEN, HOLLAND Professor of the philosophy and encyclopedia of juris- prudence at Leyden University since 1880; born on March 12, 1853; educated at Haarlem and at Leyden University; member of the Second Chamber of the States-General, 1902-6; author of De Rechtstaat volgens de leer van Ru- dolf Gneist, 1879; "The Development of Dutch Learning in the Latter Half of the Nineteenth Century'* in Histor- isch gedenkboek, 1898; Transvaal versus Great Britain, 1899; Finland, de rechtsvraag, French translation, Les Vrais coupables: lettre a M. Tallichet, I9OO; Un Nouveau Conflet russo-finlandais, 1909-10. Widespread indiflFerence to church life, and even to matters of religion is now a fact indeed. The chief cause of this is found by tracing back its origin to an initial mistake of theology and then in connection with this, to a misunderstanding of modern science. For centuries theologians were wont to look at man's knowledge of nature, organic and inorganic, as if it were the stepping-stone to a reasonable faith in God. The heavens (it was believed) proclaimed his glory and the earth told his omnipotence. That method seemed un- exceptionable so long as to man's naive wonder the uni- verse presented itself as an immensely skilful piece of workmanship. To praise the Master on account of his creation was (it might be supposed) a legitimate in- ference. But since science, awakened to self-under- standing, proved ever more successful in its endeavor to explain natural events by means of purely natural laws, the inference gradually lost ground. "God's finger" vanished from physical theory. Still, for a [97] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE while, the admirable fitness in the structure and behavior of living organisms was thought to provide the decay- ing faith in nature's ends and means with a last buttress, where it might hold its own against the elsewhere vic- torious opponent. But then came Darwin, and he leveled against that buttress his well-known master- stroke. Ere long it was preached in the streets that the cause of those who had presumed to demonstrate God's existence by pointing at the works of his hands was irretrievably lost. And the man in the street agreed with such an assertion. One could hardly expect him to be aware of the truism that a defeat encountered by a false theology does not mean the defeat of religion. I believe that theology to have been a false one. It should never have taken the scope of Christian faith to be the synthesis of a set of existential propositions con- cerning the visible and tangible world. What matters chiefly to the Christian mind is not how yonder out- ward "macrocosmos" is working, but, how this inward "microcosmos" of its own should be and ought to work. The atmosphere in which it feels at home is the con- sciousness of lofty aims and helpless sinning, in short, of those alternating experiences which were so strikingly compared by Pascal to the conflicting remembrances and hardships of a dethroned king. You may (like Professor Campbell Frazer) define religious faith as the assurance that this universe is eternally working for good to those who strive to realize the true ideal of man ; or you may be persuaded by William James that our religion implies the certitude of an unseen presence, forwarding that sort of happiness in the absolute and everlasting which means an enthusiastic temper of espousal in regions where morality, strictly so-called, [98] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE can at best bow its head; it is always man's being sum- moned to and striving after holiness which you pro- claim as the pivot of every Christian craving or ful- filment. When we understand the Christian spirit in that way, it ought to be clear to us beforehand that here are deeply rooted needs which modem science is forever debarred from administering to. The scientific attitude is essentially that which takes the objects of its research, one and all, as elements in a naturally connected whole. And nature ceases to be itself the moment it admits any single causal process to be of higher value than another. So far as they form part of scientifically explainable nature, holiness and sin are equivalent things, standing on the same plane. This self-evident consideration leads me to a further question, which I find put in your letter, "Can a theology be unassailable and final that does not accord with the assured results of science?" The an- swer to be given to this is, it seems to me, implied in what has just been stated. If you intend to get at a positive accordance between the gospel which you feel bound to preach and the results of science which you feel bound to accept, your aim is foredoomed to failure. For there can never be any tenet in common between a turn of mind which gives up, proscribes a priori the very thought of valuation and a world of experiences to which valuation, praise, and doom are nothing less than its life-atmosphere. The message of Christ, to be effective, must not "stand for and teach" the things that are stood for and taught by science. The utmost to be realized by the pacifists, protesting against warfare between the scien- tist and the Christian, is mutual acknowledgment of L991 THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE the other party's right within its own sphere. But then tho pleadings for such a modus Vivendi seem to me per- fectly justified. In order that it may be attained and secured, there needs be made but a single concession on each side. Faith, on its part, must abstain from med- dling with that descriptive and explanatory work in the performance of which science has long since proved its superior. The man of science, on the other hand, ought to desist from that overestimation of his task which ends in the denial of objective truth to any proposition short of his axioms and his results. If there is truth to be attained in the realm of description and causal explana- tion, the same thing cannot but hold in the norma- tive sphere, the realm of approval and rejection. The irrefragable argument in favor of that point is this, that to the normative sphere belong those principles of logic on whose objective validity the truth of science itself finally depends. So, though there be no possibility of mutual understanding, as long as you consider the fundamental differences in the spirit by which, on either side, all thinking is directed, the tables are immediately turned the instant you take in view the unquestionable parallelism of the ultimate pre- suppositions from which both parties start. These are, in a nutshell, the reasons which (I think) justify the hope that the indifference to things not tangible, so common for some time in the rising generation, will soon prove to have been a passing cloud. As for my own country, I even feel sure that the moment of deepest darkness has already passed. It would be an event to be hailed if, wherever the same crisis ends in an equally hopeful turn, the churches and the sects might seize the opportunity and bring back to the fold [ 100 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND" ^fi^^AGliJ those young men and women who had for a whUe gone astray from the flock. Only (and here I approach the principal question laid before me) let clergymen and Christian laymen, whenever that moment arrives, be- ware of rashness and hurry; beware of that inconsider- ate propagandism which, in its impatience to gather a host of converts, not only throws the church or chapel doors wide open, but even breaks down these beautiful Gothic buildings, that seem to them perhaps somewhat too narrow, and venture to replace them by some un- couth barn ; in short, let them beware of Abraham Lin- coln's receipt. "Non omnia possumus omnes/^ Abraham Lincoln was a successful statesman. But his advocacy of what I might call "universal philanthropy tinged with emo- tion" as the desirable motto for a church affords ample proof that he would have made a poor churchman. The capital fault in his advice, truly the common blunder of well-intentioned broad-church people in quest of the most capacious "formula concordise," is that it proceeds by elimination. It keeps in view only those fellow- Christians, who, like himself, in reading through any "symbolum fidei," are shocked now by this positive article and then by that; and so he endeavors to gain them all by wiping those controversial assertions out. What he fails to perceive is the multitude of differently formed minds, in whose eyes the erasure of the said articles, instead of enhancing the value of the whole, rather disembowels it of its most precious contents. And thus he is unaware of the fact that, while his method may succeed perhaps in winning to his flock the sympathies of liberal brethren, whose piety acqui- esces in an inevitable amount of vagueness, it vainly [101] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE strives, on the other hand, to retain the men of positive Tvants, who deem a creed as nothing if not concrete. For every thousand of congenial souls, who meet him by the >vay and join his van, he loses at least an equal number of other-minded comrades, who after some straggling drop out from the rear ranks, till at last, on turning to review the uncounted masses of what he hopes may have expanded into a universal church, he perceives with bit- terness that he has but succeeded in shaping a new sect besides the existing ones. We should humbly subscribe to the wisdom of so early a Christian thinker as Origen, who taught his contemporaries that to different spiritual needs there cannot but correspond equally different conceptions of religious bliss. And we are bound to do so the more since the contents of the gospels are of a literally tran- scending richness. So much so that, even for the pro- foundest thought and the deepest feeling, they still ad- mit of but a fragmentary appropriation. The true mark of genius is many-sidedness. It is among his- torians, who deal with the life and deeds of mankind's heroes, a common experience that they never approach afresh a great character — say Socrates, or Saint Francis, or Luther — without discovering on the brilliant sur- face of his active personality to-day this facet and to- morrow that other one, which so far had escaped their attention. What, then, of the central figure in evan- gelical tradition! No mortal man, no church, dares boast to have exhausted the treasures which that tradi- tion keeps in store for ages still to come. Here, not only all that are tired and burdened find rest, but even those numerous "once born children of God," who (to quote Francis W. Newman) constantly refuse to see [ 102 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE their heavenly Father otherwise than as "the animating spirit of a beautiful harmonious world." These, too, may easily gather quite a collection of metaphorically interpretable texts, wherewith to adorn their Christian- ity as the hopeful religion of indefinite progress. Yet, even more among those whom a painful insight into the tragicality, yea the ultimate nothingness, of merely earthen existence compels to interpret the Lord's utter- ances and achievements as promising redemption, not perfection, how manifold are the types of piety, of whom no one ever approaches in vain that inexhaustible fountain. You belong (I suppose for a moment) to the broad masses of Christians, to whom the stanch reality of salvation speaks clearest if they are allowed to ac- cept it as an accomplished fact. If so, you will almost inevitably read the Old Testament and the New with the eyes of a St. Augustine; you will try above all to find vindicated there the holy right of a church, claim- ing to have been invested by God himself with the guardianship and the dispensation, either by its sacra- ments or by its teaching, of his unlimited grace. And lo! you will meet in abundance with the proofs you seek. Or perhaps you may not find an escape from the pangs of compunction unless you feel sure that God's mercy has acquired so much strength within you as to be now the all determining power in your life's practise. Is this your frame of mind? Well, then, you will search out in the Scriptures and find there on page after page such sentences as have proved in the main to sect builders the signal posts of their career. Or, lastly, some mystical trend in your being may make you indif- ferent to any kind of associational Christendom; your soul but longs to become immersed in the beatitude of [ 103 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE undistinguishable oneness with its Creator. Can it be denied that again the classical expounders of that spirit have vied with churchmen and sectarians in digging after and unearthing from the Sacred Book a mine of precious passages, favoring their particular sigh- ings and encouraging their characteristic hopes? So true is it that every shade of Christian life meets some- where in the Bible with its echo. And may we not even go a step farther still? Imagine one of us to be either a devout son of his church, or an ardent believer in the distinctive proprieties of his sect, or perhaps a fervent follower in the steps of the great mystics. May yet not even he be struck at times by the fact that some variety of Christian devotion, which, as a whole, is far aloof from his, nevertheless seems to have seized upon a cer- tain side of truth in a more direct, more telling way than he himself and his brethren in belief? Christians at least of the more liberal type will not shrink from such avowals. They will candidly recall how now and then a visit to a grand cathedral has stamped upon their soul a deep impression of the superior suggestive- ness wherewith a church, measuring its life by centuries, appeals to men's esthetic faculties; their awe in the presence of tradition, their respect for world-wide ex- pansion, their sensibility to that joy forever which hails all things of beauty. Or else with equal sincerity they may testify to an involuntary reverence, not quite un- mingled with a drop of jealousy, which once pervaded them at momentary contact with a group of sectarians. It may have been that those people were of a somewhat Pharisaic sort; and yet they may have displayed after all, thanks even to the plain concreteness of their tenets and their austerity in point of morals, such calm re- [ 104 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE liance on the righteousness of their course as infallibly to command a certain amount of esteem, however re- luctant. I think these not uncommon experiences af- ford abundant proof in favor of the conclusion which was suggested above. Truly, Christian faith is a thing so many-sided that it may well require henceforth, for its even approachingly adequate expression, a sim- ilar variety of churches and chapels and hermitages as have hardly sufficed to encompass its richness hereto- fore. And if you really want our youth to long for the spiritual comfortings and blessings of old, you must not expect to get your ideal fulfilled by ways of simpli- fication and uniformity. Let the existing manifoldness subsist. Once aroused from their slumber, the needs of younger men will prove as diverse as those of their seniors. What will not do for one may well do for another. And he who does not feel comforted in this tabernacle may find what suits him in yonder house of prayer and meeting. Before laying down my pen, I wish to secure these concluding sentences from one, at first sight plausible, objection. Is it not (one might ask) to be feared that the continuance of existing divisions, while it never ceases to foster the ill-famed "odium theologicum," will deter the age of generous aspirations from adhering to any form of creed? Where is the attractiveness of sym- bols the partizans of which are again and again dis- avowing their so-called evangelical maxims by most unevangelical mutual proceedings? To apprehensions of that sort, the answer should be plainly this : It is not existing divisions which breed the bitterest strife, the sourest polemics. It is, on the contrary, the forever de- ceitful illusion of an outward, all encompassing unity. [105] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Look at the ages of crudest intolerance. Even then the infidel, he who had never dwelt within the pales of .Christianity and so could not have broken away from them, was an object at most of scornful disdain. Over whom, on the other hand, were the vials of truly fierce theological wrath constantly being poured out? It was the provokers of schisms, the professors of heresies, in short, those fellow-Christians, who, after having been baptized into that unrealizable phantom in- stitute, the "imiversal Church," had dared to put to naught its ever vain pretenses. So undeniable it is, that the foulest enmities are bred, not by accepted multi- formity, but rather by conformity fruitlessly striven after. Moreover, and above all, I am steadily growing confirmed in the persuasion that theological ardor, so far from being the normal companion of religious faith, is in most cases but its surrogate, not to say its carica- ture. Thence, instead of presenting itself as a trust- worthy thermometer of evangelical warmth, its own de- gree of heat or cold often stands in an inverse ratio to the real temperature of the heart. The truly Chris- tian spirit is, in the main, too much absorbed by thoughts and things positive to feel tempted often to indulge in such a merely negative business as making war against heterodoxy. It feels, moreover, too deeply the pangs of its own unceasing shortcomings eagerly to assume any judiciary prerogative over its neighbors. The more, therefore, you favor the awakening of that spirit by abstaining from a hopeless search after formulas of uni- versal concord and allowing its free scope to every par- ticular shade of religious needs and hopes, the firmer may be your reliance on the gradual quenching of those fratricidal quarrels. [106] THE REV. DAVID VAN-HORNE, D.D., LL.D., DAYTON^ OHIO President and professor of systematic theology at Central Theological Seminary of the Reformed Church, Dayton, Ohio, since 1888; born at Glen, N. Y., Dec. 11, 1837; edu- cated at Union College and New Brunswick (N. J.) Theo- logical Seminary; ordained to the Reformed (Dutch) Church ministry, 1867; pastor at Greenwich, N. Y., 1867- 68; at Dayton, O., 1868-75; First Reformed Church, Philadelphia, 1875-88; author of Shorter Heidelberg Cate- chism; Zwingle, the Mountain Boy of Wildhaus; Tent and Saddle Life in the Holy Land; Religion and Revelation; The Church and the Future Life, A TEST FOR CHURCH MEMBERSHIP There are many persons in agreement with President Lincoln's statement that he preferred a brief formula as a test for admission to church membership rather than one lengthy and complicated. He cited the fact that a long, complicated statement of Christian doctrine was to him a hindrance in taking this step, which, he im- plied, he was ready to take if an abridged test had been presented to him. That he had strong religious con- victions cannot be doubted. His request of his fellow- townsmen, when departing from Springfield, 111., for Washington, in 1861, that they should pray for him, proves it. The dreadful days and nights at the White House, during the civil war, when he was bitterly hated by those of the Confederacy and, at the same time, cruelly criticized by many in the North, led him to say that he was less anxious to know if the Lord was on our side, than he was to know if we were on the Lord's side. [107] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE He was the man who could truly say, "It is better to be right than to be president." In the statement of his conviction that those seeking entrance to the church communion should be cited to Matt. 22 : 37, which passage requires a profession of love to God and to men, he has undoubtedly taken a wise and fundamental position. But in order to adapt this text to the native Chinaman, Hindu, or African, it would be necessary to explain what is meant by the phrase, "Lord thy God," for there are "gods many and lords many," and the inquirer needs help at this point. In answer to this the Christian missionary could scarcely do better than quote the first article of the Apostles' Creed: "the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth." Again President Lincoln here commends "the Saviour's" condensed statement of both law and gospel, found in Matt. 22 : 37. But the inquirer might reason- ably ask for an explanation of the word used by him, "Saviour," and in what sense it is to be understood. Then the second article of the creed would be in place : "I believe in Jesus Christ, his only begotten Son, our Lord." Following this the history of Christ's life would be needed, as found in the following articles of the same symbol, including the doctrines found there, even to the statement concerning, "the life everlasting." The fact that the President selected a text found in the synoptic gospels, as spoken by Christ, which is a compoimd of passages of the Old Testament at Deut. 6: 5 and Lev. 19: 18, further indicates his acceptance of both the Old and New Testament Scriptures as authoritative in even a brief test for church membership. Were it possible for President Lincoln to return to [108] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE earth and knock at the door of any of our evangelical churches for admission, stating meanwhile his belief in the Scriptures and the Apostles' Creed, I do not be- lieve that any of them would refuse him. Is not this, then, the best short test for admission to church mem- bership, belief in the Bible and the Apostles' Creed as a suitable statement of its fundamental teachings? [109] BENJAMIN BRECKINRIDGE WARFIELD, D.D., LL.D., Litt.D., PRINCETON^ N. J. Professor of didactic and polemical theology at Princeton Theological Seminary since 1887; born at Lexington, Kj., Nov. 5, 1851; educated at Princeton University, Prince- ton Theological Seminary, and the University of Leipsic; ordained to the Presbyterian ministry, 1879; instructor in New Testament language and literature, 1878-79, and professor, 1879-87, Western Theological Seminary; editor of the Presbyterian and Reformed Review, 1890-1902; author of Divine Origin of the Bible; Inspiration; Intro- duction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament; Augustine's Anti-Pelagian Treatises; The Idea of Sys- tematic Theology; On the Revision of the Confession of Faith; The Gospel of the Incarnation; Two Studies in the History of Doctrine; The Right of Systematic Theology; The Significance of the Westminster Standards; Acts and Pastoral Epistles; The Power of God unto Salvation; The Lord of Glory; Calvin as a Theologian and Calvinism To-day; How Shall We Baptize f CHRISTIANITY AND OUR TIMES When we are asked why it is that there are so many persons who are indifferent to the claims of the Church, no doubt the safest answer to give is that it is for rea- sons best known to themselves. It seems, however, only a voluntary humility to profess to be ignorant of the fundamental basis of this indifference; an indifference, let it be well borne in mind, which is in no sense "mod- ern," but has characterized ever greater numbers as we go back in the history of the Church to the very begin- ning. It lies in a weak sense of sin and the natural un- concern of men who do not feel themselves sinners with respect to salvation from sin. For Christianity ad- [110] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE dresses itself only to sinners. Its Founder himself de- clared that he did not come to call the righteous but sinners ; and its chief expounder declared with energetic emphasis that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners. When Sir Oliver Lodge announces, in words the truth of which is sufficiently avouched by the chorus of approval with which they have been greeted by those presumedly spoken of, that "as a matter of fact the higher man of to-day is not worrying about his sins at all, still less about their punishment," he has uncovered the whole explanation of the current indifference to Christianity. He might have extended his remark, in- deed, to cover the lower as well as the higher man, of other days as well as this: there have always been men in sufficient abundance, both higher and lower, who have not bothered themselves about their sins. The open secret of the indifference of men of all classes in all ages to Christianity, so far as that indifference has existed, lies in the indifference of men to sin, and their consequent indifference to salvation from sin. Chris- tianity makes no appeal to men who do not feel the burden of sin. And here we have already exposed the reason why no Christian Church can take up the position recom- mended to it on the strength of a declaration attributed to Abraham Lincoln. This declaration is to the effect that a simple requirement of love to God and our neigh- bor constitutes a sufficient foundation for a church, and the churches would profit by making the profession of such love, or of the wish or purpose to cherish such love, their sole qualification for membership. The moment a church took up such a position, however, it would cease to be a Christian Church: the core of Christianity is [111] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE its provision for salvation from sin. No doubt by the adoption of such a platform many would be recovered to the Church who now stand aloof from it. But this would be not because the world had been brought into the Church, but because the Church had been merged into the world. The offense of Christianity has always been the cross ; as of old, so still to-day, Christ crucified is to Jews a stumbling-block and to Greeks foolish- ness. It would be easy to remove the offense by abolish- ing the cross. But that would be to abolish Christian- ity. Christianity is the cross; and he who makes the cross of Christ of none effect eviscerates Christianity. What Christianity brings to the world is not the bare command to love God and our neighbor. The world needs no such command ; nature itself teaches the duty. What the world needs is the power to perform this duty, with respect to which it is impotent. And this power Christianity brings it in the redemption of the Son of God and the renewal of the Holy Ghost. Christianity is not merely a program of conduct: it is the power of a new life. It is a matter of complete indifference how much de- bated the constitutive doctrines of Christianity are, or how "controversial" they may be. Everything impor- tant is debated, and everything that is precious will certainly be dragged into controversy. If we are to hold to nothing that is questioned, we shall hold to nothing at all: we shall be as the beasts which are beyond good and evil. The very "brief statement" which is pro- posed as a sufficient creed bristles with questions which are sharply debated and are in the highest degree con- troversial. If any one thinks it does not, let him ask Friedrich Nietzsche, or if that seems going too far [112] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE afield, even J. M. E. McTaggart; or let him ask merely the man in the street whom he may haply find in some doubt whether it is better to do righteousness or to "do" his neighbor. What is important with respect to the doctrines which we lay at the basis of our church life and make the animating principles of our church organi- zations, is not that they shall be incapable of being de- bated and cannot raise "controversial" questions, but that they are sound, "wholesome," for the soul's health, the indispensable foundations for a life of service here to the Gk)d whose very name is holy and of communion with him and of rejoicing in him forever. Of course, they must be true. But that does not mean that they must be nothing but rational axioms which are intrin- sically incapable of being denied, or ethical common- places to which all moral beings must assent, however far they may be from obeying them. They may — or, rather, they must — embody the great historical occur- rences in which the God of grace has intervened in the life of sinful men for the purpose of redeeming men from their sins and restoring in their dead hearts the love of God and of their neighbor. Since these great historical verities are constitutive of Christianity, wherever they are rejected or neglected Christianity has ceased to exist. This used to be well understood and candidly acknowledged. When a David Friedrich Strauss, for example, had drifted away from these great historical verities and sought the support of his religious life elsewhere, he asked himself straight- forwardly, "Are we still Christians," and frankly an- swered, "No." Nowadays this seems to be all changed. Men cheerfully abandon the whole substance of Chris- tianity, but will hardly be persuaded to surrender the [118] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE name. Thus, Rudolf Eucken asks, "Can we still be Christians?" and answers with emphasis. Of course we can; . . . providing only that by Christianity we do not mean — Christianity. Thus also Ernst Troeltsch declares himself still a Christian (a "free Christian"), though his "Christianity" has been so "refashioned" that it has become nothing more than an "immanent theism," the quintessential extract of the religious development of mankind, still holding to the name of Jesus only be- cause it needs a rallying point for its worship and a name to conjure with. It is no doubt a tribute to the significance of Christianity in the world that men who are quite out of harmony with it should manifest such reluctance to surrender the name. But it certainly is very misleading to insist on calling by this name, which should have a definite content, the various congeries of notions each several man has picked up from the sur- face of the stream of modern thought as it flows by him and wishes to substitute for the thing itself to which the name really belongs as the substance of his religion. If the term "Christianity" is to be as fluid as this, it has become in the strictest sense of the words an empty name. It no longer has any content of its own. It has become a purely formal designation for whatever may chance, in any age or company, to be thought the sum of the conclusions commended by the science, philos- ophy, or scholarship of the day. This is what it really comes to when it is demanded, as it so frequently is, that theology shall be kept in harmony with what are for the moment called "the assured results" of science, philosophy, and scholarship. The thing is, of course, impossible. Science, philosophy, scholarship, represent not stable but constantly changing entities. And noth- [114] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ing is more certain than that the theology which is in close harmony with the science, philosophy, and scholar- ship of to-day will be much out of harmony with the science, philosophy, and scholarship of to-morrow. A theology which is to be kept in harmony with a growing science and philosophy and scholarship, breaking their way onward by a process of trial and correction, must be a veritable nose of wax which can be twisted in any direction as it may serve our temporary purpose. If it be asked, therefore, in what way "the fundamental the- ology of the Church" "is to be related to the literary, scientific, and philosophical certainties of our time," the answer certainly cannot be that it is to be subordinated to them and made their slave, tremblingly following their every variation as they zigzag their devious way onward toward the certainties, not "of our time," but of all time. Theology is itself a science, with its own proper object, method and content: it has its own certainties to contribute to the sum of ascertained truth ; and it dare not do other than place these certainties, established by their own appropriate evidence, by the side of any other certainties which may exist, as equally entitled with the best attested of them all to the accept- ance of men. And if seeming inconsistencies appear, then there is nothing for it but patiently to await the coming of the better day when trial and correction have done their perfect work and the unity of all truth shall be vindicated by its realized harmony. By "the fundamental theology of the Church" is meant especially the Church's confession of that series of the redemptive acts of God, by which he has super- naturally intervened in human history for the salvation of sinful man, as interpreted and given their full mean- [115] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ing in the revelation which he has made to his people in time past at smidry times and in divers manners through his servants the prophets, and in these last times in his Son speaking through the apostles whom he ap- pointed as his representatives in founding his Church. This is not a mass of cunningly devised fables, but the substance of saving truth. And no message can be ef- fective for the salvation of a lost world which does not stand for and teach in the face of all hesitation and unbelief, denial and opposition, those things which con- stitute the sum-total of this saving truth, as it has been set down for us in Holy Scripture. The message of Christianity concerns, not "the values of human life," but the grace of the saving God in Christ Jesus. And in proportion as the grace of the saving God in Christ Jesus is obscured or passes into the background, in that proportion does Christianity slip from our grasp. Christianity is summed up in the phrase: "God was in Christ, reconciling the world with himself." Where this great confession is contradicted or neglected, there is no Christianity. [1161 THE REV. FREDERICK WILLIAM WORSLEY, M.A., CAMBRIDGE^ ENGLAND Curate of St. Giles, Cambridge; born at Singapore, Straits Settlements, June 26, 1873 ; educated at University College, Durham, and Clare College, Cambridge; ordained deacon, 1897, and priest, 1898; curate of Barnes, 1897-1901; St. Stephen, S. Kensington, 1901-05; vicar of Corringham, Lincolnshire, 1905-07; author of The Gospel of the Cath- olic Church; The Fourth Gospel and the Synoptists ; The Theology of the Church of England. The question raised by the religious views of Abraham Lincohi is a very timely one. We constantly hear peo- ple speak of "our common Christianity" ; and each time one wonders whether there is any meaning in the phrase. In these days we are face to face with an extreme de- velopment of Protestant thought in certain German cir- cles. It is a phenomenon which cannot be ignored; in- deed, it is an important factor in the situation. There are those who will tell us that herein we see the logical development of Protestantism. At any rate it has been made quite clear that the Jesus Christ of the Catholic cycle of thought is not the same as the Jesus Christ of modern Protestant theology. In consequence the two systems are as far apart as the poles. The extreme Protestantism of which we have spoken will probably accept as a basis of agreement the deistic basis, "Thou shalt love the Lord, thy God, and thy neighbor as thy- self." But many Protestants will still stand out for the Apostles' Creed as the irreducible minimum; while the minimum of the Catholic will undoubtedly be afforded [117] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE by the three Christian symbols, known as the Apostles' Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Creed of St. Athana- sius. Here is your deadlock; and even if ultimately all Protestants find themselves able to combine upon a de- istic basis — which is for many of them unthinkable — they will only be the more patently separated from the (Catholic faith. Nor can it be maintained that it is really desirable to attempt to procure a superficial union of religious thinkers upon so frail a foundation. The bedrock upon which the Church is founded is the belief in the divinity of Jesus. Those who are willing to attempt to build a new structure upon a foundation of shifting sand, would be ill-advised indeed. Development is a needed article in the Christian creed, as the fourth evangelist clearly saw; but it must be a development which is safeguarded by certain unalterable principles. History has often shown the futility of a one-sided development of re- ligious belief; at one time intellect, true knowledge, gnosis, at another, emotion, has been the determining factor; now head, now heart, has decided the terms. The true principle is that the Church is like the wise scribe instructed in the kingdom of God; she brings forth out of her treasures things new and old. The old are the guiding principles, the central tenets of the faith. The new are the fresher aspects, the newer activities which are necessitated by the changing circumstances re- sultant upon invention and discovery. But they do not, cannot alter, still less eliminate, anything of the old, any more than they can create new articles of faith. The- ology is a science, and all sciences are progressive. But progress does not consist in abandoning facts which need newer interpretation. Because earth and air and [118] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE fire and water are no longer acknowledged as elements we do not abandon them as out of date and useless things. We explain them in fresh terms; they have assumed new aspects for us, and this is the most that we can say of such central points as the incarnation and the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. "But the end of the charge is love out of a pure heart and a good conscience and faith unfeigned: from which things some having swerved have turned aside unto vain talking" (1 Tim. 1 : 5, 6) . So St. Paul, and the Johannine writer places before us this great test with his resistless logic, "he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, cannot love God whom he hath not seen" (1 John 4: 20). Here is a basis of agreement, if not of actual intercommunion, which is of great beauty and power and utility. Upon this platform all thinkers can meet to fight unitedly against all that is debasing and ignoble. Love minimizes differences and holds out at least a hope of ultimate reunion; love brings out all that is best and makes for the conmion weal; love adjusts the balance and corrects one-sidedness in aims and interest and development. In short, "Love never faileth." But love is not a minimum, for love is infinite, seeing that God is love. To love the Lord God is an ideal which will never be finally reached; it involves an infinite progression Godwards. Heights that are won with much labor and pain and sacrifice are seen to be but tiny hills from which the greater heights before us are the more plainly visible. The glory of true life and real religion lies in the undeviating pursuit of the unattain- able. The important things about God, the God of love, are not so much the things which we know or think [119] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE we know, as those which we all have yet to learn. It is true that before we can construct our sentences we must have some correctness of spelling in the matter of our words. But so long as we all speak in different languages we must not look for exact verbal or literal similarity. Love is the Esperanto of the spirit life. The search for a lowest common denominator is mun- dane and cramping and futile ; the quest of the greatest comjnon measure is spiritual and heavenly and glorious. Similarly no one in their senses would deny that science and religion should go hand in hand. They are both seeking the ultimate Cause; they both desire to spell out syllable by syllable the writing of the finger of God upon the papyrus roll of human history, and upon the inscriptions of the universe. Both are in part agnostic. Each in turn says, "We speak that we do know," but each in turn is led also to newer experiences and fresh discoveries, from the known to the unknown, from the visible to him who stands behind. Science is religion, and religion is science; but when science be- comes a religion, , or religion becomes a science, their votaries try to measure the ocean by thimblefuls, or to count the sand grain by grain. "Earth's crammed with heaven, And every common bush afire with God; But only he who sees takes off his shoes. The rest sit round it, and pluck blackberries, And daub their natural faces unaware More and more from the first similitude." (E. B. Browning, Aurora Leigh,) Truly "the end of the charge is love," one can say no more and no less. [120] James Or. Adderley (C) Sarony & Co., Ltd. GROUP TWO [121] LYMAN ABBOTT, D.D., Lt.D., L.H-D., NEW YORK^ N. Y. Editor-in-chief of The Outlook since 1893; born at Rox- bury, Mass., Dec. 18, 1835; admitted to the New York bar, 1856, and still a member of the New York State bar; ordained to the Congregational ministry, I860; pastor in Terre Haute, Ind., 1860-65; New England Church, New York City, 1865-69; secretary of the American Union Commission, 1865-68; in literary work, 1869-88; pastor of Plymouth Church, Brooklyn, 1888-99; editor of the Literary Record of Harper's Magazine, Illustrated Chris- tian Weekly; associate editor, with Henry Ward Beecher, of The Christian Union; author of Jesus of Nazareth; Old Testament Shadows of New Testament Truth; A hay man's Story; How to Study the Bible; Illus- trated Commentary on the New Testament; Dictionary of Religious Knowledge (with late T. J. Conant) ; A Study of Human Nature; In Aid of Faith; Life of Christ; Evo- lution of Christianity; The Theology of an Evolutionist; Christianity and Social Problems; Life and Letters of Paul; The Life That Really Is; Problems of Life; Life and Literature of the Ancient Hebrews; The Rights of Man; Henry Ward Beecher; The Other Room; The Great Companion; Christian Ministry; Personality of God; Industrial Problems; The Home Builder; The Tem- ple; The Spirit of Democracy; America in the Making, *SoME of my unknown friends apparently think that I have too little regard for the importance of a creed as the basis of a church organization. I confess frankly to a prejudice on this subject, growing out of two chap- ters in my life-experience. Perhaps the narration of these two chapters may serve partially to explain my attitude respecting creeds to some of my unknown friends, and perhaps to justify that attitude to others among them. * Quoted by permission of Dr. Abbott from The Outlook, Jan. 4, 1913. [123] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE The first church to which I was invited was the First Congregational Church of Terre Haute, Indiana. I went there knowing nothing of the church; the church knew nothing of me except through a letter of recom- mendation from a common friend. I went to supply the pulpit during the temporary absence of its pastor for a year of vacation, and, on his resignation before that year had expired, I was chosen as his successor, I found there a Congregational church, the strongest Protestant church, financially and socially, in the grow- ing city, with practically no Congregational churches in the vicinity. There was one small Congregational Church ten or twelve miles to the west; the nearest Congregational church to the east was in Indianapolis, and that was not a strong one. The history of this Congregational church in Terre Haute, Indiana, inter- ested me. ... As I recall the history, it was some- thing like this : Dr. Jewett had been educated under an Indepen- dent Presbyterian minister in Baltimore, Maryland, and twenty-five years before I went to Terre Haute had started for the West to find a missionary field, for he was full of missionary enthusiasm. This was, if my recollection serves me aright, about the year 1835. He landed in Terre Haute, Indiana, on a Friday night, made the acquaintance of a Terre Haute citizen in the hotel, and went with him on a hunting expedition upon the prairie on Saturday. There was only one church in the town, an Old School Presbyterian church of the Southern type, extremely Calvinistic, extremely narrow, and with a very small congregation. The only other preaching place was the court-house. When any itiner- ant minister happened that way, the court-house bell [ 124] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE was rung and he preached to such congregation as might chance to gather. Dr. Jewett's Terre Haute acquaintance was at- tracted toward him and invited him to preach on the Sunday following their hunting expedition. He ac- cepted the invitation ; the bell was rung, a congregation came together, and heard a sermon such as they had perhaps never heard before, for Dr. Jewett was a nat- ural orator, as his subsequent history proved. The people gathered about him at the close of the service, and urged him to remain another week and preach the following Sunday. . . . He yielded to their per- suasions, preached the following Sunday, and at the close of the sermon called on all those who were willing to imite in forming a Christian church to meet upon the next day for that purpose. Something like a score answered the invitation — a few men, more women — ^who had come from different localities and had been brought up in different churches, and whose traditional creeds were widely different. They agreed to form a Christian church. This was not, however, the only support which this church in its cradle was to have. There were business men in the town who desired its prosperity, and who argued, very wisely, that they could not expect immigrants to settle in the town, which had already reached a considerable size, if there were no growing church in it. So they were willing, for real estate and business reasons, to contribute to the cause. Thus the First Congregational Church of Terre Haute, Indiana, was born by the spontaneous coming together of Christians of different traditional creeds, different temperaments, different religious habits. For [125] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ten years this church went on without any creed of any description. It grew apace. It became the church of the town. It raised the necessary funds to put up a church building adequate for its purpose. Then, partly because it felt the need of fellowship, partly because other Congregational churches had been formed in the vicinity and wished its fellowship, it adopted a simple Congregational creed and became a Congregational church. But when I went there, fifteen years after this creed had been adopted, I did not find that this creed was the real basis of church fellowship. That basis was a common purpose to promote Christian life in the com- munity. And yet this church had not only the largest and best church edifice in the city, and the widest moral influence; it had sustained for twenty-five years a preacher of rare pulpit power, one who was regarded by many as the rival in eloquence of Henry Ward Beecher, who was then settled over a Presbyterian church in In- dianapolis. It had gathered a church membership of some two hundred, and a successful Sunday-school of perhaps two-thirds that number. And under the joint ministry of Henry Ward Beecher and Dr. Jewett re- vivals had been conducted with remarkable success in western Indiana, affecting not merely the churches of those two pastors, not merely the two cities of Terre Haute and Indianapolis, but also all the region round about. But the bond which united the membership of this church was not a common creed, it was a common pur- pose to do the Master's work in the spirit of the Master. One illustration of this fact may serve to make the spirit of the church clear. A member of the congregation, [126] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE brought up as a Quaker, and therefore not believing in the church ordinances of baptism and the Lord's Supper, desired to unite with the church because he desired to confess his faith in Christ. He objected, how- ever, to baptism. I told him that I would submit to the church the question whether they would admit him with- out baptism. I promised to urge his admission, and I thought it would be granted, though not without ob- jection; but I asked him if he had an objection to baptism if his views on the subject were frankly stated, and he said no. I stated his views to the church; he was unanimously admitted and received baptism, it being explained at the time to the congregation that he re- ceived it as a concession to others, not because it was in accordance with his views of the teaching of the New Testament. I was pastor of this church throughout the Civil War, which in that portion of the West was a far greater trial to Christian fellowship than in most East- ern communities. We were not far from the border line; we were surrounded by men who sympathized with the South and hoped for its victory; we were on more than one occasion threatened with raids by Southern cavalry. A considerable proportion of the congregation had come either from Southern or from border States. They were loyal to the Government, but were either in favor of or indifferent to slavery. In fact, I can recall only one family in the church that could have been called anti-slavery according to the New England standards. I went there fresh from the inspiration of Henry Ward Beecher's preaching, and carried into the pulpit the lessons which I had learned from him and the spirit with which he had imbued me, though without the eloquence [127] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE which he possessed. Nevertheless, this church remained united, with only three or four secessions from it, throughout the war, bound together, not by the creed which was in its archives, but by the Christian purpose which had brought its members together and kept them in a brotherhood for ten years without any creed what- ever. In 1887, on the death of Henry Ward Beecher, I was called at first to supply the pulpit and then to be- come the pastor of Plymouth Church, to which he by his preaching had given an international reputation. . . . This church had, since 1870, ceased to require the assent of members to its simple creed, which re- mained in the records of the church for historical rather than for doctrinal purposes, and had substituted there- for the following simple covenant : "Do you now avouch the Lord Jehovah to be your God, Jesus Christ to be your Saviour, the Holy Spirit to be your Sanctifier? Renouncing the dominion of this world over you, do you consecrate your whole soul and body to the service of God? Do you receive his word as the rule of your life, and, by his grace assisting you, will you persevere in this consecration unto the end?" In the membership of this church were men who theologically believed with John Calvin, or at least in modern Calvinism, and men who believed in the the- ology of John Wesley; men who believed in infant baptism and men who believed only in adult baptism; men who believed in eternal pimishment, men who be- lieved in universal restoration, and men who had no definite belief on the subject; men who believed in the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity and men who declined to have any opinion on the metaphysical relations of [128] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Jesus Christ to the Eternal; men who accepted the verbal inspiration of the Bible and men who regarded the Bible with reverence, but with discriminating rever- ence, as a revelation of the Father, but a revelation in and through the experience of his children. But all of them agreed in a very sincere desire to learn the truth of life from Jesus Christ and to do Christ's work in the Christ spirit. This church had been through fiery trials. And yet I venture to say that a more united church was not to be foimd anywhere throughout the American Republic. It was united, not by its creed, that is, not by a common opinion, but by its covenant, that is, by a common purpose. I draw no moral from these two incidents in my own experience. I tell the story, and leave the story to carry its own moral. My unknown friends, however, will not perhaps be surprised to know that these experiences have had their effect upon me and have strengthened my conviction that the true bond of unity of a church is not a common opinion but a common purpose and a common spirit. In The Outlook of May 31, 1913, in reply to the question, "Can you suggest to me a simple creed as basis for a church?" Dr. Abbott has the following: I have long since reached the conclusion that the basis of church fellowship should be a covenant, not a creed ; that is, it should be an agreement in purpose and aim rather than in opinion. This is partly because when we attempt to define our opinions we analyze, discrim- inate, separate instinctively our opinion from other opinions that are analogous ; partly because all religious terms are necessarily indefinite, and the same word con- [129] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE veys different meanings to different persons. "Who," says Boutroux, "can express in real, intelligible terms what he means by the Divine Personality, by the action of grace within the human soul? Who can say, so as to satisfy his own intelligence, what he means by God?" On the other hand, action tends to unity. We work to- gether animated by a common purpose, although we differ in our definitions of our opinions. Again to quote Boutroux: "What is the Divine Personality? Having regard to the understanding, I can make no answer. But I can grasp immediately such a precept as this: Behave in your relations with God as in your relations with a person." For this reason I should like to see church creeds as conditions of church membership en- tirely abandoned, and in the place of them substituted a covenant, or agreement for cooperation in the accom- plishment of a common purpose — such a covenant as the following, which is employed by the Central Congre- gational Church of Boston in receiving to temporary membership students who are temporarily residing in that city. I would like to see such a covenant made the permanent bond of union of permanent members in every Christian church: "With the members of this Church and by God's strength I do make this Covenant : that I believe in Jesus Christ and his teaching; that I will try to make his will my own and to do each day what I think he would have me do ; that I will study his words and strive so to walk that my life may not be controlled by the desires and passions of the flesh, but by the spirit of love and truth; that so long as I remain in Boston I will be true to this Covenant and to the fellowship of this Church." [ISO] THE HON. REV. JAMES GRANVILLE ADDERLEY, BIRMINGHAM^ ENGLAND Vicar of St. Gabriers and honorary canon of Birming- ham; bom July 1, 1861; educated at Eton and Christ Church, Oxford; head of Oxford House, Bethnal Green, 1885-86; deacon, 1887; priest, 1888; head of Christ Church Oxford Mission, 1887-93; curate of Allhallows, Barking, 1893-94'; St. Andrew's, Plaistow, E., 1894-97; minister of Berkeley Chapel, Mayfair, 1897-1901; vicar of St. Mark's, Marylebone, 1901-4; author of Stephen Remarx; The New Floreat, a Letter to an Eton Boy; St, Francis of Assist; Monsieur Vincent; A Nero Earth; Be- hold the Days Come; A Piece of New Cloth; The Parson in Socialism; The Creed and Real Life. I TAKE it that the object of this symposium is a prac- tical one, and that we sincerely desire to discover di- rections in which the religious leaders of the day may proceed in order to meet more effectively the spiritual needs of the multitude. We make a great mistake in talking of "attractive" services, doctrines which "attract," etc. We are not advertisers of a patent pill but physicians anxious to heal or to administer strength. We are surrounded by men and women yearning after spiritual life. Our object, then, should be to discover that need and to sup- ply it, not to force a uniform medicine upon everybody without inquiry. There is too little spiritual diagnosis. Again, even when we have discovered the need, we are rough and unscientific in our manner of dealing with it. We do not discriminate among our hearers and our patients. I should recommend a much more careful study of men's minds, manners, and tastes, and a much [131] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE more restrained and gradual application of the healing and comforting influences of religion. The Christian faith is not a solid block to be "planked down" before everybody, to be accepted whole and complete whether he wants it or not. The "take it or leave it" style of preaching has no future of spiritual success. This does not mean that creeds and set forms of worship are of no use. But it does mean that there must be life and therefore flexibility and change and freedom in the way those creeds and set forms are put before men. The essence of Christianity is that it is not "Christianity" but "Christ," not a system (primarily) but a person. It began with the contact of persons, the religious minds of the disciples seeking for spiritual things under a Master, intensely human and therefore intensely divine. It is still the same after all these centuries. The "Holy Spirit" is the perpetuation of the personal Christ: the holy catholic Church is the continuance of a body of disciples, a body with a spiritual desire for Christ, not a corpse or a mummy unable to move. If, when hu- manity touches the Church, it finds it cold and lifeless, it is repelled. All the sermons and services, however out- wardly "attractive," can have no effect if they lack life. They are like jewels in a shop window, quite unsatis- factory to the mob that cannot buy. Once again, by way of general remark. Are we not very narrow in our idea of what spiritual life is? By "spiritual life" we so often mean the life of church prayers and devotions. How many clergy are there who believe that the artist and the poet and the play- wright are engaged in work similar to their own? In what we call "material" matters we fully recognize that a doctor and a hospital nurse are our com- [ 132 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE panions, but with these others we are inclined to claim no relationship. Whereas in a case of sick- ness we frankly join with the doctor and the nurse in giving medicine and food to the patient, in a case of spiritual disorder we imagine that it is our affair only, and reject the assistance of others. When we put a statue or picture in our churches we think it quite unnecessary to consult an artist: we are content with miserable specimens of poetry for our hymns, and shocking compositions for our music. Even when we do take trouble over our architecture, or our organs, or choirs, it is more as an advertisement to attract crowds to hear us deliver our "spiritual" message, than as being part of the message itself, probably more potent than our sermons. Let us begin then by enlarging our view of the spiritual life and welcoming all contributions to its enrichment. Now as to the Church of England, We are very much handicapped (to my mind) by our antiquated forms of service ; also by the fact that we have only one form provided for so various a flock. I am well aware that bishops and others do their best to allow a certain elasticity in the use of the Prayer Book, but when all is said and done the church is prevented from minister- ing freely to all kinds of spiritual necessities. A great deal of time and energy is spent on that which satisfieth not. Whole tracts and departments of human life are left out of the purview of the average Church of Eng- land minister. Numbers of the best minds in all classes are wholly uninfluenced by the church and will continue to be so until the authorities recognize that the ordinary apparatus with which a clergyman is equipped for work is utterly unsuited to the work he has to do. The pres- [133] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ent agitation for a revision of the Prayer Book exposes our impotence. We cannot revise our services because we still hanker after a uniformity and inoffensiveness which it is either impossible to get, or, if got in the form of a compromise, is not worth having. Having rejected the absolutism of Rome we shall be even worse off if we try to attain to a modem uniformity which cannot satis- fy anybody. But to look at our services more closely. They fail utterly to meet the need of the learned or the unlearned. The language is beautiful as literature, but almost imin- telligible to the ignorant. The Lectionary and the Psalter are arranged with little regard to edification. We should recognize the fact, unwelcome as it may be, that the vast majority come to church only on Sunday evenings. This means that there are only 104 readings of the lessons which are likely to be heard widely. How very important it is, then, that those 104 passages should be carefully chosen so that only the most important parts of the Bible should be read! By our present arrangement it often happens that the Sermon on the Mount and other classical parts of Scripture are not read on a Sunday evening at all. To my mind they should be read two or three times a year (at least) and explained. What, again, can be more futile and even dangerous than to read the Old Testament without comment? Much of the unbelief of the present day is due to the fact that ignorant people have taken their crude ideas of God or of religion generally from an unexplained Bible. They have naturally supposed that we are com- mitted to any idea of the Deity which finds a place in the Old Testament. The average poor person (and [134] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE many a rich one too) imagines, if he thinks about it, that he is obliged to believe, as a churchman, in all the im- moral and impossible views of God which any Hebrew writer may have believed himself or put into the mouth of his heroes. The intellectual man, of course, is not led astray, but neither is he led inside the church. He simply ignores the whole business and pities the people who go to matins and evensong. In this, and in much more besides, the whole affair is remote from life, as people know it. Is it surprising that the trades unionists and the socialists in one class, and the scientists and generally well-read people in the other do not look to the Church for inspiration. I do not agree that all that is wanted is a church that will preach "Love one another." No- body feels it necessary to go to church to learn that. We all know it already. But we want religion. We want something to raise us up beyond the thought of this present life, something to inspire, something to feed our imagination, to give us a vision. To get this the clergy must be more human. It is more a question of getting Christian people to go into the world and re- main Christian than of getting worldly people to go to church. At present, if the thoughtful, active people of any class go to church they are "choked oflf" religion. It is all so stiff and dull and uninspiring. I cannot imagine a keen politician or sociologist, an engineer, an actor or an artist finding much to help him in an Angli- can church. For the moment the need seems rather to be to revise our methods, to concentrate ourselves on producing a more spiritually efficient circle within the Church. We must ourselves believe in the capacity of our own religion if we would inspire others. Take any [135] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE great movement of the present day and ask why it is outside the Church. You will generally find it is not because the promoters of the movement are troubled about "ritualism" or "higher criticism," but simply be- cause they cannot see what inspiration they are likely to get from the Church which they cannot get without it. Mr. Keir Hardie and Mrs. Pankhurst are not, I sup- pose, against the Church, but neither are they very keenly for it. They find their inspiration elsewhere. Mr. Bradlaugh in old days, and Mr. Blatchf ord in these, only flogged a dead horse when they set themselves to caricature the Christianity of the churches. Nobody cared. Life, life, life, that is our need. The dry bones can live and men can and will grow into the fulness of the stature of Christ. But it is the "body of Christ," the Church itself, which must begin to resemble Christ. It used to be said that we were buried in the grave clothes of Christ and had not risen. It is rather that we have dressed up the risen Christ in clothes that prevent his being recognized. Brotherhood, justice, peace, lib- erty, the kingdom of God. These are Christian words which are heard with more meaning outside the temples of Christ. Make them realities within the holy walls and we shall light a candle that can never be put out. [136] WALTER FREDERIC ADENEY, D.D., MANCHESTER^ ENGLAND Principal Lancashire Independent College since 1903; born Ealing, Middlesex, England, March 14, 1849; edu- cated at New College and University College, London; minister of the Congregational Church at Acton, 1872-89; lecturer in biblical and systematic theology at New Col- lege, London, 1887-89; professor of New Testament exe- gesis and church history, 1889*1903; lecturer at Hackney College, London, 1898-1903; lecturer on the history of doctrine at the University of Manchester since 1905; au- thor of The Hebrew Utopia; From Christ to Constantine; From Constantine to Charles the Great; Theology of the New Testament; Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther; Canticles and Lamentations (Expositor's Bible); Women of the New Testament; Hon) to Read the Bible; A Century's Progress; St. Luke, and Galatians and Thessalonians (Century Bible); History of the Greek and Eastern Churches (International Theological Library); The New Testament Doctrine of Christ; The Christian Conception of God. I DO not think that the imposition of elaborate doctrinal statements is a cause of non-attendance at the churches that I know best — ^the Congregational; because such statements are not in use among them. I would not ask people to subscribe to statements that deal with debated questions or any others, but leave freedom. Membership in a Congregational Church is only con- ditioned by personal loyalty to Christ as Lord and Master and an honest effort to live the Christian life. I think the theology of the Church should be founded on the personality of Christ as he is seen in the gospels, interpreted by the apostles, especially as this is verified by Christian experience. Ultimately the gospel mes- [137] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE sage must agree with the sum total of philosophic and scientific truth. There must not be inconsistent ideas in separate compartments in the final synthesis. But we are not ripe for that yet. We cannot make the com- plete circuit — therefore seeming contradictions may have to be endured if each fact and truth is guaranteed on its own evidence — the religious evidence being as real in its sphere as the scientific is in the sphere of science. I doubt whether these questions have much to do with the decline of church attendance, which I attribute in part at least to the decay of vigorous, orthodox Sab- batarianism that compelled church-going for the sake of respectability; to the force of counter attractions — week-ends, excursions, golf, motoring, etc., — among the well-to-do, and to dissatisfaction with the supposed class favoritism of the churches among working men. I be- lieve the thoughtful are more interested in religion than ever. But the stiffness and formality of church meth- ods repel them and they decline to submit in silence to authoritative pulpit dictation — especially from second- rate men. [138] SVANTE AUGUST ARRHENIUS, Ph.D., M.D., STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN Director of the Physico-Chemical Department of the Nobel Institute since 1905; born at Wijk, near Upsala, Sweden, Feb. 19, 1859; educated at the Cathedral School and Uni- versity, Upsala ; privat-docent at the University of Upsala, 1884; teacher of physics. University of Stockholm, 1891; professor of physics at same university, 1895; rector, 1897-1902; received the Davy Medal, 1902; Nobel Prize, 1903; has received honorary degrees from Heidelberg, Oxford, Cambridge, and Leipsic; originator of the the- ory of electrolytic dissociation; author of Lehrbuch der Tcosmischen Physih; Electrochemistry; Immunochemistry ; Theories of Chemistry; Worlds in the Making; Life of the Universe (the English titles are of books translated from the Swedish). Certainly it is of great practical value that different individuals, belonging to the same state and still more to the same family, have not too discordant opinions in religious questions of practical importance. That is the real background of the peculiar Protestant device "Cujus regio ejus religio" (To every land its own faith). Experience shows that the princes ojBFend more than other people against this maxim, which really has an altruistic meaning. Regarding theoretical questions in theology the opinion is subject to the general development, which is now going on very rapidly. Opinions which forty years ago were regarded as incompatible with the Christian religion are now expressed officially by members of the theological faculties in the universities. It seems quite clear that the belief of one individual cannot completely coincide with that of another. For [139] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE what we believe is a product of our previous experience, and this cannot be identical for two persons. There- fore the scientist generally differs in a high degree from a philologist or still more from a theologian in his views of the imiverse. And it will prove impossible to unite the ideas because the theologians and allied philosophers believe in an absolute truth, whereas the scientist only hopes to reach a certain probability and admits that all our knowledge is a fruit of our experience which changes with time. [140 3 THE REV. HUGH JOHN DUKINFIELD ASTLEY, Litt.D., F.R.Hist.S., KING^S LYNN^ ENGLAND Vicar of East and West Rudham, Norfolk, since 1896; born Sept. 29, 1856; educated at Trinity College, Dublin; ordained in 1881; incumbent of St. John the Evangelist's Church, Brixton, S.W., 1894-96; honorary editorial secre- tary of the British Archaeological Association, 1897-1906; librarian of the British Numismatic Society, 1903-6; Donnellan lecturer at the University of Dublin, 1906-7; fellow of the Royal Anthropological Institute; member of the Royal Archaeological Institute; author of The Resur- rection and Modern Thought; The Date of the Samaritan Pentateuch; Anglo-Catholic Teaching on the Holy Eu- charist; The Higher Critics and Holy Writ; Prehistoric Archaeology and the Old Testament; History of Lindis- farne; Roche Abbey, Yorkshire, and Its -Associations; Tree- and Pillar-Worship; Portuguese Parallels to the Clydeside Discoveries; Scandinavian Motifs in Anglo- Saxon and Norman Ornamentation; Norman Fonts in Northwestern Norfolk; Notes on the IXth Iter of An- toninus; The Housing Problem in the Country, A CREED AND THEOLOGY FOR OUR TIME No words can convey better the "marching orders" of the Church than our Lord's summary of both law and gospel which President Abraham Lincoln wished to see inscribed over every altar. They are the founda- tion and the crown, the beginning and the end, of every ethical system that is worthy the name. But the mo- ment the average man attempts to put the command into practise he finds the dynamic force wanting. What then is the basis on which power to obey the injunction in both its aspects to the fullest extent may be founded? Many answers have been given. In the [141] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE one which limitations of space will only allow me to outline here I shall endeavor to show my conception of a creed and a theology for our time. The God of the deist will not do. He is too far oflF, too careless of the universe and of the creatures he has called into existence to have any eflPectual influence over them. The pantheist's God will not do. He is, so to say, too much mixed up with his universe in all its categories to have any eflicient control over it. We want a God at once transcendent and immanent — a God over and in his imiverse and all his creatures. This God is revealed in the writings of the prophets of Israel and in the New Testament, and is also postulated, if not taught, by science. For, first, science has nothing to say against the transcendent God, the creator and upholder of all things. On this she is, at the lowest, agnostic. She pushes her investigations back and back till she comes to a point where she must stop. She unifies the ele- ments and breaks up the atoms, but whence came the original creative force that set all things in motion ex- cept from the Absolute, who is God? That which is relative must have a beginning. Matter, though ever- lasting (as far as science can judge), is not eternal. Of her, as the Arians said of the Logos, it may be said, riv iroTe ovk ^v — "there was a time when it was not." But, secondly, evolution steps in and shows that "force" which originally evoked the primal "stuff" out of which all things have been built up always at work, immanent in all things, guiding, controlling, molding all to predestined ends. We see the inorganic universe, and imaginative pic- [142] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE tures unending, universes beyond our ken, gradually taking shape, and becoming such as we know it to-day through age-long processes of unnumbered eons; we see life beginning, and again advancing through age- long processes of vegetable and animal till man appears, a being conscious of himself, able to stand upright and survey the universe, of which he is a part, as it were from the outside, with god-like gaze. We know that a hundred millennia, and perhaps more, have passed since first a creation worthy of the name of "man" trod this globe of ours, and through them all he has been advancing, growing first physically, then mentally, and in these latter ages, spiritually — progressing in the higher races, whose environment has been favorable, from savagery through barbarism to civilization. The mighty "force" that had been at work through all the ages "informing" the material universe, and in due course producing an ever-increasing complexity of living things through the transformations of the primi- tive cell or cells of protoplasm, now manifested itself in the spiritual sphere until it concentrated itself in the Christ, who is himself the life and the light of the world ; and when he departed it diffused itself, so to say, once more through the Church which is his body, in all its ever-widening ramifications, for the imparting of that Spirit which shall lead men toward, and give them the necessary motive power, for the display of that "love" to God and man which is "the fulfilling of the law" and of the gospel. All through his gropings after the In- finite, man had been conscious of the efficacy of ma- terial objects in producing spiritual states. In animism and fetishism, in the gradually advancing ideas of Mana and taboo, he had adumbrated the sacramental system of [ 143 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE the Church, and had set forth that which is the kernel of all sacramental teaching — ^that in the due use of ma- terial aids and symbols, such as the Church calls "means of grace" and "sacraments," is to be sought and found the power to live ethically, which is otherwise wanting. Thus we have given us the triune God of the Christian faith, at once immanent and transcendent — ^the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Understood in this way, from a twentieth century standpoint, the Apostles' Creed, as it is called, to which alone the lay Christian is pledged, still expresses, with- out pressing literally the details of its every clause, the best belief of the highest, that is to say, the spiritual man; and by means of the grace that iBows through sacramental channels from the Holy Spirit we are made one with the Christ, and receive power to love and serve the Father and our brethren of mankind, that is, to practise, however feebly, the great injunction, and thus to lend our finite efforts to the carrying out of the eter- nal purpose of the infinite God from whom we come and to whom we tend. [144] BARON AVEBURY (SIR JOHN LUBBOCK), P.C., D.C.L., LL.D., F.R.S.> D.L. Late banker, head of Robarts, Lubbock & Co.; commander of the Legion of Honour; German Ordre pour le Merite; president of the Society of Antiquaries, Sociological So- ciety, and Royal Microscopical Society; foreign secretary of the Royal Academy; born in London, AprilSO, 1834; died May 28, 1913; educated at Eton and home; member of Parliament for Maidstone, 1870-80; University of Lon- don, 1880-1900; has been at various times president, chairman, and secretary of many scientific and bankers' societies; author of The Use of Life; The Beauties of Nature; The Pleasures of Life (Parts I and II) ; Scientific Lectures; Addresses, Political and Educational; Fifty Years of Science (British Association) ; British Wild Flowers, Considered in Relation to Insects; Flowers, Fruits and Leaves; The Origin and Metamorphoses of Insects; On Seedlings (2 vols.) ; Ants, Bees, and Wasps j On the Senses, Instincts and Intelligence of Animals; Chapters in Popular Natural History; Prehistoric Times; The Origin of Civilisation and the Primitive Condition of Man; On Representation; The Scenery of Switzerland; The Scenery of England; Coins and Currency; Essays and Addresses; Free Trade; On Municipal and National Trad" ing; On Peace and Happiness, The Church of England seems to me to fulfil closely the conditions formulated by President Lincoln. The "complicated statements" comprised in the creeds and the articles, are as I understand the con- clusions adopted by the learned theologians of the Eng- lish Church, but are not imposed as binding on, or neces- sarily subscribed to, by the laity. They are deduced from, and not categorically taught in the gospels, and Christianity, as I understand it, rests not on dogma, but on the spirit of Christ's teaching. [145] WILLIAM GAY BALLANTIISTE, D.D., LL.D., SPRINGFIELD^ MASS. Professor of the Bible, International Young Men's Chris- tian Association College, Springfield, Mass., since 1897; born at Washington, D. C, Dec. 7, 1848; was educated at Marietta College, 1868, and Union Theological Seminary, New York, 1872; studied at the University of Leipsic, 1872-73; received his D.D. degree from Marietta College and LL.D. from Western Reserve University; member of the American Palestine Exploring Expedition, 1873; professor of chemistry and natural science, Ripon Col- lege, 1874-76; assistant professor of Greek, Indiana Uni- versity, 1876-78; professor of Greek and Hebrew, 1878- 81 ; professor of Old Testament language and literature, Oberlin Theological Seminary, 1881-91 ; president of Ober- lin College, 1891-96; author of Inductive Logic. Only yesterday (May 9, 1913) an earnest but per- plexed young man sought my counsel. He is about to join a church with whose life and work he is in hearty accord. But now he finds that in joining he must give assent to a long theological creed. He does not under- stand it, and he suspects that if he did understand it he could not believe it. Still he must assent to it or be excluded. This young man represents a large class to whom the Church does a cruel wrong on the very thresh- old of their Christian lives. I am one of those who are longing for the time when the churches shall realize Abraham Lincoln's ideal. [146] JAMES LEVI BARTON, D.D., BOSTON, MASS. Foreign secretary of the American Board of Commission- ers for Foreign Missions since 1894; born at Charlotte, Vt., Sept. 23, 1855; educated at Middlebury College and Hartford Theological Seminary; ordained a Congrega- tional minister in 1885; missionary of the A.B.C.F.M. at Harpoot, Turkey, 1885-92; professor in Mission Theo- logical Seminary, 1888-92; president of Euphrates Col- lege, Harpoot, 1893; member of a deputation to Japan, 1895, Ceylon and India, 1901, China, 1907; author of The Missionary and His Critics; The Unfinished Task of the Christian Church; Daybreak in Turkey; Human Progress through Missions; etc. WHAT SHOULD CONSTITUTE A PROPER CREED FOR A CHURCH? Content : The creeds of Christendom are for the most part guide-posts to the ancient battle-fields of the Church. They have been framed to defend one side of a controversy over against other creeds that cham- pioned the opposite side. They have not claimed to set forth all the truths of Christianity but have made only such declarations as their writers deemed essential in view of the theological discussions of the place and age in which they were written. Purpose : The historic creeds were prepared to make it difficult for people to get into the Church, in fact to keep them out. Creeds were intended to be barriers to divide the orthodox from the unorthodox, the sheep from the goats, each new creed providing for a new process of exclusion. The creed was the shibboleth by the use of which final tests were made. [147] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE I see no reason why a Christian of this twentieth cen- tury should be expected to take sides upon theo- logical controversies that have been buried for genera- tions, and maybe for centuries. These creeds are of rare historical interest as marking the road by which the Church has traveled, but they can have little or no vital interest to one who is eagerly seeking after God and who is conscious of a longing to be like Jesus Christ. I would eliminate the elaborate creeds of historic controversy as tests and demand for church membership but the simplest statement of purpose in the spirit of Jesus Christ to love God and man and serve both with soul, might, and strength. It is hardly reasonable to demand of new converts assent to a creed over which theological experts sharply differ, and which none are able to explain to the satisfac- tion of all. Practical Theology of the Church: I am confident that the fundamental and practical theology of the Church will increasingly become stripped of those fea- tures which have led to controversy in the past, and that it will put on that which in all ages and countries has been acknowledged to be vital to the Christian life. It is trite to say that no true science or philosophy can con- flict with true religion. If they seem so to do, a restate- ment is imperative, possibly for both. If divine revela- tion and science and philosophy seem to conflict, the difficulty is in the expression and not in the substance back of the expression. A Christian should no more fear a restatement of religious belief than a scientist should deprecate the introduction of new scientific for- mulae and nomenclature. The more simple and prac- tical the expression of our fundamental religious be- [148] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE liefs as applied to life and to the Church, the less diffi- culty shall we experience when new conditions require new declarations of purpose and new methods of ap- plication. The underlying theology of the Church should be broad in its conception, fundamental in its character, and adapted to meet the requirements of its member- ship and the community in which it is placed and to which it is privileged to minister. We should never lose sight of the fact that the the- ology of the Church exists not for the sake of the Church, but that the multitudes outside may be brought within its influence and fired with its self-sacrificing de- votion. It must be light and produce it : it must reach life and create it. [149] JOSEPH AGAR BEET, D.D., RICHMOND, ENGLAND Theological writer and lecturer; born at Sheffield, Sept. 27, 1840; educated at Wesley College, Sheffield, and Wesleyan College, Richmond; theological tutor, Wesleyan College, 1885-1905; one of the original members of the faculty of theology. University of London; Fernley lec- turer, 1889; lecturer at University of Chicago and at Chautauqua and Ocean Grove (U. S. A.) Summer Schools, 1896; author of Commentaries on St. Paul's Epistles; Cre- dentials of the Gospel; Through Christ to God; The New Life in Christ; The Last Things; The Immortality of the Soul; A Manual of Theology; Church, Churches, and Sacraments; Shorter Manual of Theology; The New Tes- tament, its Authorship, Date and Worth; Holiness, Sym- bolic and Real; The Old Testament, its Contents, Truth, and Worth. CONDITION OF CHURCH MEMBERSHIP It seems to me in the last degree inexpedient to im- pose, as a condition of private membership in any branch of the Christian Church, any expression of theological belief. To ask for such expression, is to ask candidates to accept and profess a belief touching sacred mysteries for which, with few exceptions, they have no adequate rational grounds : a most unwholesome intellectual disci- pline. The Church is the school of Christ. Its doors should be open, with all privileges, to all who desire en- trance, except to such as prove by their disobedience that they refuse to bow to his authority. Once within, we must give them, to the best of our ability, the mes- sage of Christ as we understand it. With those who seek admission to the pastorate the case is different. For harmonious cooperation there [150] THE CHUKCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE must be substantial agreement. But even here subscrip- tion to written forms does little to secure unanimity. For each one will interpret the form, with great latitude, to include his own belief. In every case, the formula of subscription ought not to go beyond the intelligent con- viction of a majority of the associates. Every one who seeks office as a teacher in a Christian community should with great frankness state, when asked, his theological opinions. Others will then judge of his fitness. Creeds and other formulated statements of doctrine are valuable as easily accessible records of Christian thought; and as permanent embodiments of the wisdom of days gone by. But they are very uncertain as foun- dations of faith, which can rest securely only on de- cisive historical evidence and on careful consecutive study of the sacred records. Before this supreme tribu- nal all creeds and Christian beliefs must be judged. Our safety lies in the comparative unanimity of all Christian Churches on all those matters which bear most closely on the inner and outer life of men and women. In nearly all these we find the same essential faith. The differences have arisen chiefly from unwarranted addi- tions to these broad fundamental principles. This unan- imity finds expression in the abundant and various pop- ular religious literature of our day, and especially in religious hjrmns. On the other hand, in some churches and in some preachers of the same church, certain im- portant elements of the gospel have been more, and others less, prominent. The more carefully our preach- ing is kept within the broad unanimity of the various sacred writers and the more completely we reproduce that unanimity, the nearer shall we come together. It seems to me that the chief reason why so many [151] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE refuse to join one of the various sections of the Church is not theological, but an unwillingness to undertake the responsibilities involved in membership. They loiter outside the temple of God, leaving to others the toil and cost of building and the nearer presence of the great Architect which this fellowship in sacred work im- parts; thus forfeiting the worker's joy in the eternal contemplation in the city of God of the abiding results of his own toil. [152] ARTHUR CHRISTOPHER BENSON, F.R.Hist.S., F.R.S.L., CAMBRIDGE^ ENGLAND President and fellow of Magdalene College, Cambridge; born April 24, 1862; educated at Eton and King's Col- lege, Cambridge; master at Eton College, 1885-1903; commander of the Royal Victorian Order, 1907; Fellow, Vice-President and Professor of English Fiction in the Royal Society of Literature; member of the Court of the Fishmonger's Company; author of Memoirs of Arthur Hamilton; Archbishop Laud: a Study; Men of Might (with H. F. W. Tatham) ; Poems; Essays; Lord Vyet and other Poems; Life of Archbishop Benson; The Professor and other Poems; The Schoolmaster; The House of Quiet; Tennyson; Selections from Whittier; The Hill of Trou- ble; The Isles of Sunset; Rossetti; Edward Fitzgerald; The Upton Letters; Walter Pater; The Gate of Death; The Altar Fire; Selections from the Correspondence of Queen Victoria (with Viscount Esher) ; Collected Poems; The Silent Isle; Ruskin: a Study in Personality; The Leaves of the Tree; Thy Rod and Thy Staff, 1. I THINK that the scientific spirit, by reducing su- perstition, has tended to emphasize anti-denominational- ism. It seems to me that there are increasing numbers of intelligent people who dislike affirming abnormal things, the evidence for which they cannot test, who shrink from accepting, as historical, statements which do not stand on a verifiable basis, and are reluctant to gen- eralize upon insufficient or incomplete data. This feeling militates strongly against detailed creeds and pseudo-scientific theology. 2. I am inclined myself to look forward to the sort of expression of religion of which George Tyrrell speaks. I cannot quote his exact words, but he said that he thought the religion of the future would be a [153] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE belief in the fatherhood of God, and an active charity, with the sacraments as a symbol of strength and unity. And this, in my personal judgment, was what the gospel essentially aimed at. 3. The really difficult things will be, I believe, to reconcile religion, which in its mystical form is an es- sentially individualistic emotion, with the growing in- stinct in favor of social cooperation. But denomina- tionalism seems to me to be the foe both of individualism and of social cooperation. [154] AMY GASTON CHARLES AUGUSTE BONET-MAURY, D.D., LL.D., PARIS, FRANCE Professor of church history at the Protestant School of Divinity of Paris; born at Paris, Jan. 2, 1842; educated at the Lycee Henry IV and the Sorbonne, Paris, and at the universities of Geneva and Strasburg; pastor of the Wal- loon Reformed Church at Dort, 1868-72, and the French Reformed Church at Beauvais, 1872-79; lecturer in church history at the Protestant School of Divinity of Paris, since 1879; librarian of the Musee Pedagogique, 1885-89; au- thor of Les Origines de la re forme a Beauvais; Gerard de Groote, un precurseur de la reforme au quatorzieme Steele; Des Origines du christianisme unitaire chez les Anglais; Arnauld de Brescia, un reformateur au douzieme siecle; De opera scholastica fratrum vitce communis in Nederlandia; Ignace Doellinger; Le Congres des religions a Chicago en 1893; Histoire de la liberie de conscience depuis I'Edit de Nantes jusqu'a juillet 1870; Les Precurseurs de la reforme et de la liberie de conscience dans les pays latins du dou- zieme au quinzieme siecle; Edgar Quinei, son ceuvre reli- gieuse et son charactere moral; Ulslamisme et le chris- tianisme en Afrique; France, christianisme et civilisation; Unite morale des religions. You have done me the honor of consulting me on three questions which interest Christianity and homiletics particularly. Here is my reply summarized: 1. Why is it that so many persons are indifferent to the appeals of the Church? For reasons best known to themselves thousands upon thousands of persons re- fuse to become identified with the Church in any of its numerous denominations. Answer. — The chief cause is the decline, and even the death, of all faith, resulting from an excess of material pleasures and glorification of the natural and physical [155] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE sciences and of their application to the general welfare, or to the laborious acquisition of wealth to the detriment of the fostering of the ideal. Another cause among the poorer class is poverty. They are ashamed to enter the churches in clothing that is ragged or out of date. Among others it is avarice ; the fear of having to pay for the support of the cult and its clergy. But, among a large number of prosperous educated people it is due to the repugnance of a conscience free and reflecting to allow itself to be shackled by a dogmatic creed, written by theologians centuries ago, and which scarcely agrees with the present condition of biblical science and modern belief. One understands, therefrom, why very religious men, and Christians like Abraham Lincoln (in Amer- ica), Ernest Naville (at Geneva), and Frederic Passy (in Paris) would not join any particular church. 2. Is it true that this experience is typical of thou- sands of others? Do you think it wise to ask the great majority of people to subscribe to statements that deal with debated or controversial questions? Or do you think the Church should limit itself to a declaration that seeks a common purpose of love and service to God and man? Or else should it not exact as a condition of membership in the Church the summary of the law? Answer. — I think that the spiritual condition of Lin- coln, Naville, and Passy is shared by hundreds of free- thinkers, but that the summary of the law is rather a resume of moral life than a religious symbol. From my point of view such a symbol should be based on the Holy Scriptures, arid also be connected with the great Chris- tian traditions, and at the same time be sufficiently broad to allow full latitude to individual conceptions. The declaration of the principles adopted by the Reformed [156] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Church of the "Oratoire" of the Louvre (Paris) seems to me to answer this double condition and may be cited as a model. Here it is : "The Reformed Church of the Oratoire makes its appeal to all who desire to realize the Christian ideal of a fraternal church. Its members re- gard each other as brothers, even though theological differences exist among them. In communion with the holy scriptures of the Old and the New Testament, and with the different symbols of the Reformed Church of France, they profess the union of hearts, mutual re- spect, and complete loyalty in the entire Christian lib- erty. They affirm with joy their common faith in Jesus Christ and his disciples, concerning whom they find the substance in the following words of the divine Master: John 3: 16; John 17: 3; John 11: 25; Luke 19: 10; John 3:3; Matt. 22: 37; John 4: 24." 3. What fundamental basis for Christian theology may claim to be in harmony with modern philosophical thought? Answer. — To my mind the sole foundation that can be cited is the personality and the work of Jesus Christ such as may be drawn from the gospels and the epistles of the apostles. Jesus being the way, the truth, and the life, it is he who is the teacher who must bring us to the knowledge of God and of ourselves; make us conscious of our sins and point us to salvation, and instil in us his Holy Spirit, that we may be enlightened. Beyond this, all is vanity. By the cross and faith in Jesus we can conquer death in all its forms. CIST] ARTHUR ELMORE BOSTWICK, Ph.D., ST. LOUIS, MO. Librarian of St. Louis Public Library since IQOQ; born Litchfield, Conn., March 8, I860; graduated Yale Uni- versity, 1881; Ph.D., 1883; substitute instructor and proc- tor, 1883-84; teacher high school, Montclair, N. J., 1884)- 86; on staff Appleton's Cyclopedia of American Biogra- phy, 1886-88; literary work, 1888-90; assistant editor of The Forum, 1890-92; associate editor Standard Diction- ary and office expert in physics, 1892-94; chief librarian New York Free Circulating Library, 1895-97; librarian Brooklyn Public Library, 1899-1901; chief of circulation department. New York Public Library, 1901-9; editor of science department of The Literary Digest since 1891; author of Young Folks* Cyclopedia of Games and Sports; The American Public Library; The Different West, It seems to me desirable not only that some statement shall be formulated that can be subscribed to by all Christians, but also that some such statement be put into words capable of being approved by faithful ad- herents of all religions, or even by those who love and follow righteousness, apart from religious ties. Simple as this may seem, I do not believe that we yet have the data to do it. What we need is a survey of the beliefs and practises of all religious bodies. Such a catalogue, with the data placed in parallel columns and properly checked up, would enable us to answer such questions as: "What is the most comprehensive statement of be- lief to which all Protestants would be willing to sub- scribe? All Christians? All who believe in one God? All who recognize some supernatural power?" Not until we have a survey enabling such questions to be answered can we take the first step toward Chris- [158] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE tian unity. Unity should not mean compelling every one to subscribe to a creed, however simple; nor should it involve forcing any one to abandon a creed, however involved. Rather should its object be to ascertain what certain bodies believe in conmion and to overcome their reluctance to recognize and act upon this conmiimity of belief. [1593 JOHN WRIGHT BUCKHAM, D.D., BEEKELEY^ CAL. Professor of Christian theology. Pacific Theological Sem- inary, Berkeley, Cal., since 1903; born at Burlington, Vt., Nov. 5, 1864; graduated from University of Vermont, 1885; Andover Theological Seminary, 1888; ordained to the Congregational ministry, 1888; pastor at Conway, N. H., 1888-90; Salem, Mass., 1890-1903; author of Whence Cometh Help; Christ and the Eternal Order; Personality and the Christian Ideal, I WELCOME the opportunity to express the conviction, — which I expect to find in accord with that of most of your respondents, — ^that a doctrinal test of membership is wholly out of accord with the spirit and purpose of the gospel. A simple form of allegiance to Christ and of an earnest purpose to help to bring in the kingdom of God is, I think, all that should be sought. President Lincoln's statement, beautiful and appropriate as it is, fails to indicate that the God whom we as Christians reverence and love is revealed to us in Jesus Christ. I would not wish to see in such a statement as I have in- dicated, any definition of Jesus Christ, but only a recog- nition of him as vitally related to our religious life. The Apostles' Creed, while, as a venerable historic ex- pression of Christian faith, it may be of value ritually, is not adapted, it seems to me, to serve as a formula for introduction to church membership. As to the "basis and direction for a fundamental theology of the Church," I hold, — as is now so gen- erally held, — that it should be based upon Christian experience. By Christian experience I do not mean simply a definite and describable conversion, but the [160] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE total response to spiritual reality, — a consciousness of moral and religious values that calls for expression and interpretation. The need of the rational interpretation of religion inevitably leads to a theology, — a theology which should take the direction of reverent, vital, un- dogmatic explication of the content and implicates of religious experience. This involves, necessarily, the enriching and enlarg- ing contact of theology with literature, science and philosophy. It requires that theology recognize the validity of experiment, investigation and hypothesis in science, of introspection, and analysis in psychology, and of criticism and deduction in the realm of philosophy. At the sanie time theology has a perfect right to demand the recognition of its own province on the part of science and philosophy. Furthermore, in the adjustment of values, I do not see how theology can hold anything less than that religious values, so far as they can be distin- guished (they cannot be separated) from other values, are fundamental and ultimate. Upon some such basis as this, I expect to see the- ology gradually recovering, in general human esteem and interest, the strength and honor which, through its own dogmatism and obscurantism, it has so largely lost. [1613 SAMUEL PARKES CADMAN, D.D„ BROOKLYN^ N. Y. Pastor of the Central Congregational Church, Brooklyn, since IQOO; born at Wellington, Shropshire, England, Dec. 18, 1864; graduated from Richmond College (University of London) in theology and classics, 1889; ordained to the Methodist Episcopal ministry, 1895; pastor of the Metropolitan Temple, New York, 1895-1900; trustee of Adelphi College, Brooklyn, and the Brooklyn Institute of Arts and Sciences; author of Charles Darwin and Other English Thinkers; The Three Great Oxford Movements, I HAVE often pondered the words of President Lincoln, both for their own sake and because of the very great man who gave them utterance. I have no doubt that he expressed the experience of a large number who have hesitated or refused to join the Church of Christ, nor do I think it wise to ask candidates for membership therein to discuss or accept formulated statements of doctrine upon which even theologians themselves do not agree. The more simple and comprehensive the con- ditions of church membership are, the better, for every one concerned. At the same time the fundamental the- ology of the New Testament, which should also be that of the Christian Church, deals with the primary ques- tion, "How can a man be just before God?" It solves the long standing problem as to how we are made par- takers of the divine nature and heirs of the eternal life and glory. The incarnation, personality, teaching, work, death and risen life of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ are the very essence of the faith of Christianity. The text you quote, and which our Lord himself quoted, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart [162] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE and with all thy soul and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor as thyself," is of the fruit rather than of the roots of Christian faith. It is an effect arising out of a cause which must first be secured in the regeneration of man's nature. Unless men are "born from above" they cannot do this, and what we have to seek in Chris- tian thought and preaching is that vital relation with God in Christ which makes such ideals possible and enables men to realize them. So far as literary, scientific and philosophical cer- tainties are concerned, a true theology is in perfect accord with all such certainties. Literature is an agency for the inspiration and enlargement of human life with which no right-minded believer in Christian doctrines would seek to interfere for a moment. Science is su- preme in its own realm, deals with the evidence of the senses, uses the inductive method, practises experimenta- tion and hypothesis, seeks proof in demonstration. Be- yond this realm science is impotent and has nothing to say upon the deeper questions which will not submit themselves to such methods and proofs. Nor has true science anything to say of authority relative to the mat- ters with which theology deals. Philosophy is the proposal to unify all our knowl- edge under the control of certain great principles, and is, therefore, more akin to theology than science could possibly be. In reply to another question of yours, theology is unassailable when it keeps to its own dominion, and this is equally true of other branches of research and knowl- edge. All, however, are summed up in the total value of truth which must be divine, and intended for the sanc- tification of human life and the accomplishment of its [163] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE highest purposes. I have a strong belief that whatever is purely religious is finally reasonable, and that for Christian thinkers to desert any realm of knowledge or try to defeat its legitimate aspirations is a surrender to the enemy, and a surrender of the worst description. A living faith in God which finds its divine-human cen- ter in the Lord Jesus Christ, and firmly fixed there, is free to operate elsewhere for the good of that center, will in my judgment, prove victorious. Indeed it has already won such triumphs as to give certitude to this affirma- tion. [164] THE REV. HENRY W. CLARK, M.A., CHAEISMA, HAEPENDEN^ ENGLAND Has been engaged in literature since 1904; born in Lon- don, Feb. 8, 1869; educated at the University College School, private study in Germany, and at Hackney Theo- logical College; minister of the George Square Church, Greenock, Scotland, 1890-91, and of Congregational Church, Woking, 1899-1904; author of Meanings and Methods of the Spiritual Life; Echoes from the Heights and Deeps (poems) ; The Christ from Without and With- in; The Philosophy of Christian Experience; The Gospel of St. John (Westminster New Testament) ; The Chris- tian Method of Ethics; Laws of the Inner Kingdom; Studies in the Making of Character; History of English Nonconformity; The Book of the Seven Ages, In attempting a reply to the questions submitted, I must confess, as a preliminary, to some doubt whether the difficulty of accepting the Church's creeds is as powerful an influence in withholding people from mem- bership or adherence as is sometimes supposed. In point of fact, the greater number of churches do not re- quire acceptance of any elaborate doctrinal system as a condition of membership ; and a sort of general admira- tion of the Christian spirit is almost the sum total of what (whether rightly or wrongly) is called for. Cer- tainly the demand for acceptance of complicated doc- trinal propositions becomes less and less insistent with each passing year. The idea that the Christian Church imposes on its votaries a set of doctrinal articles which can only be accepted by an act of pure credence and which cannot be vindicated to active or critical thought — ^that idea serves, no doubt, as an excuse to a good many for remaining outside. But they who put in that [165] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE plea are very much behind the times. For the main question which most churches set before themselves just now would seem to be a question as to how little definite creed they can go on with — and some of them contrive to make it very little indeed. Nevertheless, the whole matter of insistence on doc- trinal standards merits inquiry. And if the absentees are mistaken in alleging such insistence as a sufficient reason for their abstention, it is well for the Christian Church to make plain what its attitude really is. And perhaps one might add that the Church fails to do this because in many instances it has not determined for itself what its attitude ought to be. 1. Of course the Church must recognize (as prob- ably the majority of churches do) that mere intellectual acceptance of elaborate creeds is neither sufficient nor necessary as a condition of Christian discipleship or of joining the Christian fellowship. It is not sufficient, inasmuch as no intellectual acceptance of doctrine can directly produce Christian character; it is not neces- sary, inasmuch as churches of all sorts and quantities of creed have possessed their saints. It must be admitted that the Church has made mistakes on this line ; and it is this fact — the fact that years ago the churches did make, or did seem to make, unquestioning belief of many mys- terious doctrines a sine qua non before applicants were allowed to pass the entrance-gate, requiring the said ap- plicants, not to come to the doctrines as an inference from an inward experience, but to start from them as in- dispensable before the inward experience could be at- tained — ^it is this fact which lends plausibility to the con- tention of those who say that the weight of creeds keeps them outside the Church to-day. Also, that certain [166] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE churches still hold to the platform from which the ma- jority have stepped is not to be denied. But the argu- ment against making assent to what may be termed the subtler mysteries of the "orthodox" scheme a condi- tion of church membership is really unanswerable. For there is no direct connection (though there may cer- tainly be indirect) between intellectual conviction and spiritual growth. A sacerdotal church — a church which claims to settle all things for its adherents and to minis- ter all grace to its adherents through the persons of its priests — ^might perhaps make out a case for itself by de- claring that the intellects, as well as the souls, of its members, are under its complete control. But in that case acceptance of the imposed creed does not mean in- tellectual conviction at all. It means merely the move- ment of the lips which say "yes." And such a church is quite outside the dominant tendency and movement of the day. In general, it would be admitted by everybody — ^whatever their own beliefs may be, and whether or not the doctrines usually termed "orthodox" find a place in their minds — that mere acceptance of creed cannot properly be set up as the testing line at which candidates for church membership must show themselves approved, that so to set it up is to inflict hardship on many sensi- tive souls and to offend not a few of Christ's little ones, and that in so far as the Church of the time keeps the old bad way it must for its own sake and the world's put itself right. 2. But it does not follow that the matter is put right simply by reducing creed to a minimum, to a small number of religious and ethical propositions which the majority of people can easily accept. This is of course the method adopted by much "liberal Christianity" of [167] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE to-day. The essentials of the Christian faith are re- duced to a few cardinal ideas like those of the father- hood of God, the brotherhood of man, the supremacy of love, and the like ; and in the end it comes to this — ^that Christianity really says no more than the general moral and spiritual consciousness of mankind either already says for itself or recognizes as axiomatic when it is said. Superficially, doubtless, the method looks plau- sible. Certainly it gets rid of the "creed" problem in a very eflFectual fashion, even if it accomplishes this at the cost of getting rid of a good deal besides. But what needs to be noticed about it — and the one thing that never is noticed — is the fact that it reproduces the old error, even though it be on a smaller scale. According to the "creed at a minimum" method, Christianity is still a matter of creed, of ideas (ideas which ought to have some regulative effect upon conduct, of course, but ideas none the less) ; and the only alteration is that the would-be disciple gets off with believing little now instead of being called upon to believe much. Christian- ity is still an intellectual scheme, a matter of accepting certain doctrines, and is distinctive only in that it teaches the ideas of which a simple reading of Christ's words dis- cerns him — or thinks it does — to have taught. The method harmonizes religious truth with the average re- ligious ideas of the time by reducing religious truth to its lowest possible terms. This is what underlies the current attempts to rec- oncile religion with science, to find a basis for religion in scientific theory. Sin is "falling out of harmony with the order of the universe." Good is "that which pro- motes development." God is "the influence immanent in all the processes of the world." And so the "reconcili- [168] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ation" goes on. Religion is saved because it means nothing very special after all. Well, if this is the only way we can get over the "creed" difficulty, so it must be. Only let us understand what we are doing. We are "reconciling" science and religion much as the lion and the lamb are "reconciled" when the lion eats the lamb. It needs to be understood that if Christianity in any distinctive sense is to be preserved, any reconcilia- tion of it with science is impossible because the two things are on different planes. You might as well talk of reconciling music and vegetarianism. There need be no hostility, but there can be no reconciliation. Of course religious and theological methods must be scien- tific — but that is quite another affair. Religious in- vestigation must proceed as scientific investigation pro- ceeds, with attention to evidence and fact. But the very obvious distinction between the properly scientific char- acter of religious method and the impossibly scientific character of religious matter is, in spite of its obvious- ness, constantly forgotten. It is forgotten that Chris- tianity is ultimately concerned (if it is what it pro- fesses to be) , not so much with actually existing facts as with a creative force which is to bring into being new facts. And so the reconciler gaily goes on his way. He is just as much under the dominance of the notion that religion is an aflFair of creed as the most creed-insistent church has ever been. But he saves the situation by reducing creed to its lowest terms — to such terms as can win an almost unanimous "yes" from the crowd. Or does he save the situation after all? Does the "creed at a minimum" method achieve its aim? Are we really out of the wood when we have whittled down the whole thing, as Abraham Lincoln wanted to whittle [169] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE it down, to this — "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor as thyself?" Lincoln, by the way, was curiously astray in asserting that according to Jesus this constituted "the substance of both law and gospel." What Jesus said was that these were the greatest commandments in the "law and the prophets" — a very different proposition. But, in any case, the given commandments push us up against all sorts of theological questions which we may evade under a cloud of words if we like, but which are there all the same. Who and what is God? When you have settled that, what will love appear to be in relation to such a Being? And, above all, how are we to do what we are com- manded? The method of "reduction" or "reconcilia- tion" really comes to nothing more, in the end, than the ostrich-like procedure of burying our heads in the desert sand of words, and saying that the capital prob- lems are not there. At any rate, it means either this, or an assertion that Christianity contains nothing spe- cial to itself. And in any case, it perpetuates the very error against which it protests, and takes religion to be an affair of creed. It is merely a matter of less rather than more. 3. Where, then, does the real solution of the "creed" difficulty lie? It lies, I think, in this: The Christian Church must realize afresh that Christianity is not a matter of ideas or ideals only, but a matter of a veritable new life-force which came to the world in Jesus Christ and which in Jesus Christ's constant though invisible presence abides in the world still — ^not a matter of revelation in the sense of an addition to knowledge (that is, not only [170] THE CHURCH, THE, PEOPLE, AND THE AGE that), but a matter of a real inrush of spiritual life into the world from beyond the world for man to take by fastening his own personality into the personality of Jesus Christ — ^not a matter of reading off facts as they exist, but a matter of making a new fact. Christ came — so the Church must declare if it would keep clear of binding upon men's shoulders credal burdens too heavy to be borne and at the same time preserve Christianity's real distinctiveness — Christ came, not to reveal spiritual realities so much as to be himself a new spiritual reality, a new life able through all the ages to communicate itself to man and thus to produce upon the human plane of things a type of life (human life linked with and re- made by divine) not known there before. According to the Christian religion, humanity's spiritual duties and spiritual possibilities are not summed up in develop- ment under the guidance of ideals (which is all that the "creed at a minimum" theory can make of religion's message), but something more — development under the upward pull of a creative life magnetizing from Christ himself to man. And it is the fact that such a creative life is here that the Church must in the first instance, whatever may come afterward, proclaim to the world. "But this is in itself a creed" — is it said? It implies on the part of the Church and its ministers a conviction that Christ is here with "life in himself." Granted, else of course the message could not be delivered. But this one primary assertion — which is for the moment the only one to which the Church need ask the world to give heed — is one which the world can test; and, indeed, it is in order that it may be tested that the Church makes it. It constitutes, in fact, an invitation to men to test it. [171] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE It can be tested as to its theoretical plausibility, as to how far philosophy can find room for the appearance of such a new fact in the existing sum of things, as to how far the written documents of the New Testament sup- port it, as to how far religious history confirms it. Of course an inquiry of this sort cannot be attempted here.* But the test as to philosophical plausibility can be made. Still more, the assertion can be tested, as an assertion concerning any other "force" can be tested, by putting oneself in such a position (in this case, in such a morial and spiritual attitude of receptiveness) that the alleged force may produce its effect if it is really there. And, let it be noted, in order to make the second and final test, it is not necessary that a man should have carried the first through to its end. To test a dynamic, a man need get no farther than a hypothetical assumption of its existence, a feeling that to say the dynamic can be experienced is not in itself absurd. Of course, if in the case of Christianity a man comes to the conclusion that for Christ to communicate his own life to man is in the nature of things and by all reasonable philosophy im- possible, there is no more to be said : such a man can only be left to make the most of the "religion at a minimum" idea. On the other hand, it is not necessary, before a man makes trial of the Church's essential message, that he should be absolutely convinced of its truth. All he needs is the feeling that the matter is worth a test. And what the Church should call upon a man outside the Church to do is not to believe anything, but to test the one primary fact or force in which the Church believes. The Church itself, it should perhaps be added, may * May I be allowed to say that I have partially dealt with this in The Philosophy of Christian Experience, and also in an article in the Harvard Theological Review for July, 1911 [172] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE be sure that for those who make the test and enter into the resulting experience, other articles of belief, even the more complicated and subtle ones of the orthodox faith, will seem to possess a reasonableness they do not possess for outsiders now. And the Church may and must — for the sake of clearing its own mind and for the reflex spiritual influence this process would exert — weave these articles for itself, and preach them to itself, as it sees fit. But the Church has no business to ask for acceptance of these at the start. The fundamental fact of the situation is that the Church believes, or ought to believe, in a permanent and unfailing life-dynamic stored "yesterday, to-day, and forever," in Jesus Christ; and though the belief be a tremendous one, it is a belief no more difficult to test than the belief that fire burns or that steam will propel the train. And the Church's primary proclamation to the world runs something like this — "Because I believe this, I call on you, not to be- lieve it off-hand if you find the intellectual difficulty of it too great, but at least to try it. Because my creed tells of a dynamic, I ask you, not to accept the creed, but to test the dynamic. For I am sure that so you too will come to hold the creed." One has to admit that the churches — ^both those which have insisted on lengthy credal formularies and those which have reduced credal formularies almost to the vanishing point — ^have pitifully lost sight of the fact that there is a veritable life-force gathered up in Jesus Christ whereof they have been appointed apostles and priests. And they have done so precisely because all alike have held it their primary business to conmaend themselves to the intellectual acceptation of mankind — which it is not. The idea that Christianity can be so [173] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE commended is of course perfectly valid: there is a true and sound and reasonable theory of the life-force in Jesus Christ just as there is such a theory of light or heat or any other force the world contains. But the Church is in the position of a man who calls on a dark world to kindle its lamps and on a frozen world to set its fires burning, not in the position of an academic lec- turer on scientific themes. And through forgetfulness of this the whole question of creed and credal demands has become tangled : the tendency to excessive emphasis on creed has produced superstition, and the reaction from superstition has produced the minimum religion which is nothing more than a gracious bow to goodness in general; and the ceaseless combat between the re- ligions of maximum and minimum creed, born as it is out of a misapprehension of Christianity's central idea, can do nothing for Christianity's central idea except to obscure it still further for the eyes of men. And the Church will not see her way through the credal bewilder- ment until she takes her stand upon that central idea again. 4. I think, then — ^to sum the matter up — ^that when those outside the Church excuse themselves for their abstention by saying that the Church's creeds are too complicated for their minds, the Church must first of all repudiate the idea that the commendation of its special creeds to the general mind is in any way its primary care. But then it must go on to declare em- phatically that, nevertheless, it has something very spe- cial to commend, not as a doctrine which the general mind must embrace, but as a dynamic which human per- sonality must test. And the Church must then invite objectors to test the dynamic in one of two ways or in [ 174 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE two ways combined. If the outsider prefers to approach the thing first of all from the intellectual side, he may do so by inquiring how far the facts of Christ's life, the documents embodying them, and all other relevant things, make the existence of such a dynamic in Christ at least plausible, and how faith in it can be squared with philosophic and systematic thought. Only (the Church must go on to affirm) that is not the end of the test, though it may be the beginning. If the intel- lectual inquiry leads the inquirer to a negative view, the matter is still not closed for him until he has sought to submit himself to the dvnamic which the Church de- clares to be there; for unless he makes this attempt, he has not done his best to make his materials of judgment complete, and is unscientific to that extent, scientific as he may think himself to be. And it might be that, even after his negative bent, philosophically and intellectually reached, the practical test might show the dynamic to be there after all, and the philosophizing to have some- where gone wrong. On the other hand, if the outsider prefers to take the practical test first, he may do so, and instead of making experience test an antecedent plausi- bility, may build a positive theory upon what the prac- tical test has given. Or, as was said, the two testing methods may be run side by side. In this way the Church, while abandoning the imposition of creeds — offering no more than a suggestion of one great credal article which each man is to find true or false for him- self — by no means abandons the creeds themselves, and is left at liberty to develop out of its central and primary article whatever other articles appear to be involved. Against this the outsiders can have no complaint, for in the first instance they have with these no concern. [175] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE If the Church does not make acceptance of them a condition of discipleship, those outside the Church's ranks have on their part no title to reprove the Church for holding them. No opinion about them — since they are held by the Church as involved in, consequent upon, the primary article of a true life, dynamic in Jesus Christ — can be of any value so long as it is advanced by those who have not ascertained for themselves whether that primary article be true or false. In fine, what is called for is that the Church, while feeding its own mind and inspiring its own soul by creeds as complicated and profound as its spiritual experience demands for its explication, should confront the world with the one fundamental assertion that Christ has "life in himself," and with the one invitation, "Test for yourself whether or not the case is as I say." So approaching the world, the Church will be requiring no man to do despite to his own reason, but will at the same time avoid the "religion at a minimum" to which through the fear of doing such despite Christianity is so often reduced, will keep its own distinctiveness and be faithful to its own special call. And the Church which does this may be sure — this at least is the present writer's conviction — ^that those who respond to its invitation will come presently, through the sheer compulsion of experience, into posses- sion of the entire large catholic faith. To "harmonize" the statements of Christianity with philosophy, with science, with this or that, by reducing or translating them to the language which these other things speak, is to solve the "credal" difficulty and to answer the "credal" objection after a fashion, no doubt. But it is to do so at the cost of destroying Christian- ity's special character, and leaving us no more than [176] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Christianity's ghost. The truer solution, the truer reply, lies in the Church's new-found realization that its busi- ness is not to impose any creed, great or small, but to suggest confidently that one tremendous idea — ^the idea of creative life in Christ — is true, and to call for a per- fectly rational, because perfectly practical, test of that mystic idea. That is not to impose faith in a super- natural Christ upon men, but to ask men to find out for themselves how supernatural — if it may be so put — Christ is. Less than this the Church must not do. More than this it need not do. For it can have no fear as to results, if it — the Church itself — ^knows in whom it has believed. [177] JOHN MERLE COULTER, Ph.D., CHICAGO, ILL. Professor and head of the department of botany. Uni- versity of Chicago, since 1896; founder, and editor since 1875, of the Botanical Gazette; born at Ningpo, China, Nov. 20, 1851; educated at Hanover College and Indiana . University ; botanist for the United States Geological Sur- vey in the Rocky Mountains, 1872-73; professor of natural sciences, Hanover College, 1874-79; professor of biology, Wabash College, 1879-91; president and professor of botany, Indiana University, 1891-93; president of Lake Forest University, 1893-96; principal of Bay View Sum- mer University, 1893-96; Winona Summer School, 1895- 98.; author of Manual of Rocky Mountain Botany; Manual of Texan Botany; Plant Relations; Plant Structures; Plant Studies; Morphology of Gymnosperms (with Charles J. Chamberlain) ; Morphology of Angiosperms (with same) ; A Text-hooh of Botany. My own experience with students and with a large group of business and professional men has given me some appreciation of their attitude toward the Church. In general, they are very sympathetic with the motive of the Church, but they are not attracted by what they conceive to be its requirements for membership. In other words, they are very much interested in religion, and not at all interested in dogmatic theology. I be- lieve that the confusion of religion with dogmatic the- ology, a confusion largely due to inheritance, is respon- sible for most of the alienation of men from the Church. Religion is a sense of obligation to God and to man that expresses itself in service, and to this obligation I find most men ready to subscribe. The theology that the public has in mind is plainly philosophical specula- tion, which has developed great diversity of opinion. [178] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Once, men in general were interested in such specula- tions, and these speculations naturally became inter- woven into their religious organizations, so that dog- matic theology and religion appeared inseparable. But the men of to-day are not interested in such speculations, and it is natural for them to conclude that they are not interested in the Church, our historic religious organ- ization. When this entanglement is straightened out, and the two things are recognized as distinct, most of the troubles of such men disappear. The fact is that the Church in general has recognized this, and does not oflfer the obstacles to membership that these men imagine. It is obvious that if Jesus is to be taken as the em- bodiment of religion — certainly he could not be taken as the embodiment of dogmatic theology — the association of reason and religion is to be insisted upon. According to him we are to use the mind as well as the heart in service to God and our neighbor. This means that re- ligion cannot include anything that reason rejects; that all of the triumphs of reason must be consistent with religion. Of course the Church has often laid too exclusive stress upon the factor of affection (the "heart"), and the result has been blind devotion rather than intelligent devotion. It has even deplored intel- lectual triumphs because they tended to unsettle devo- tion. But it is clear that this was no part of the pro- gram of Jesus. Any study of history should straighten out the situation. Jesus found the Hebrew religion entangled in a meshwork of speculation, so completely that the meshwork obscured the religion. He disentangled it, and left religion in plain sight, but a philosophical age soon began to weave about it again a new meshwork [179] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE of speculation. It is this new meshwork that the mod- ern scientific attitude of mind is trying to cut through. It insists that the mission of theology, the noblest of sciences, is not to obscure religion, but to keep it in plain sight. The time has come to stop thinking of the Christian religion as defined by the "traditions of the elders," as a maze of irreconcilable speculations. Its obligations are not those of intellectual consent to ancient beliefs, but of progressive belief in all that increasing knowledge brings and of progressive service as new opportunities arise. As Peabody puts it: "The Church, the organized representative of religion, is to be regarded, not as a cold-storage warehouse, but as a power-house." If the Church would put religion to the front, as the well-nigh universal impulse that develops men into the highest efficiency in all their relations, it would meet men where they live to-day, and men would respond. The philosophical aspects of religion should be deferred to a time when religious service has developed some basis of experience. The men I have known are most attracted by an opportunity for service, and if this is true, this opportunity should be the open door to the Church, [180] GEORGE CROSS, Ph.D., D.D., EOCHESTER^ N. Y. Professor at Rochester Theological Seminary, Rochester, N. Y., since 1912; born at Bewdley, Ontario, Sept. 21, 1862; received his education at Woodstock College, Uni- versity of Toronto, 1888, McMaster University, 1894, and University of Chicago, 1897-98; ordained to the Baptist ministry, 1888; pastor at Ormond, Ontario, 1887-89; Cal- gary, Alberta, 1889-92; Carleton Place, Ontario, 1894-97; Aylmer, Ontario, 1898-1901; professor of history, Mc- Master University, 1901-9; professor of systematic the- ology, Newton Theological Institution, 1909-12; author of The Theology of Schleiermacher, CONCERNING A NEW CONFESSION OF FAITH A CHARACTERISTIC feature of the history of the Christian religion is the appearance from time to time of formal statements of belief issued by communities of Christians in justification of their corporate existence or for pur- poses of discipline. The most important of these creeds or confessions of faith arose on occasion of some crisis when the religious foundations were conceived to be in danger or some new religious enterprise was about to be undertaken. There are two periods of creed-making that stand out preeminently, namely, the Nicene age — when the Catholic Church took definite form, and the age of the Protestant -Reformation — when the great Protestant state-churches were established. Up to the present the whole course of Christian theology has been determined mainly by reference to the standards of be- lief then set up. Besides these historic creeds, however, there ap- peared many private formulations of doctrine by indi- [ 181 ] ^ THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE vidual thinkers or by smaller bodies or local congrega- tions. The most noteworthy of these are the early form of the so-called Apostles' Creed, the Arian Creed, and, in the later Protestant times. Congregational, or Baptist Confessions. The latter were mostly defensive utter- ances and modify the "orthodox" confessions in a few particulars. They are none the less significant as evi- dences of the inadequacy of the accepted standards to express the meaning of growing religious conviction and as f oregleams of a time when all the historic creeds and confessions should be set aside. The erection of these standard religious tests had at the time the double effect of constituting a bond of cor- porate unity for those who conformed to them and of driving dissentients to form rival ecclesiastical organ- izations. On the one side they came to have the force of ecclesiastical law and were viewed as identical with the conditions of salvation. On the other side they were felt to be arbitrary restraints upon personal freedom and, with the growing sense of the sacred character of liberty, created reactions of unbelief. Thus, while the orthodox creeds were used for a time as weapons of attack upon the right of dissent, they all found them- selves compelled at length to stand continually on the defensive against the attacks of the individual thinker. Inasmuch, moreover, as many of the assailants of the standards have been men of powerful moral fiber and devoted life, this very necessity of continual defense be- comes in each case evidence that the accepted creed cor- responds no longer with the character of the religious spirit of the coming age. Incontestably, at the present moment, we are in the midst of a great spiritual crisis. The complexion of the [ 182] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE inner life of Christendom is rapidly changing. The great mass of Christians have heard the call to new en- deavor and have felt the mighty impulse of new practical enterprise. What the nature of this new movement may be we shall inquire more definitely in a few mo- ments. Synchronously with this religious revival there has come an intellectual movement pervading the minds of the multitudes who have come under the influence of modern methods of education. So far as the creeds are concerned these two currents of life have coalesced to produce one effect. They are sweeping away — they have already swept away — the authority of the tradi- tional tests of faith. It is not merely that the scholars say so; in the religious activities of the day these tests are practically ignored by most people. If religious faith is still to find theoretical expression in doctrine, this expression must be largely different from what it has ever been, and the use to which it is to be put must be different. The principal reasons therefor may be summed up under two heads. The growth of intelligence has produced a demand for the restatement of the Christian faith if that faith is to be held by educated men. The scholarship of mod- em times has put within the reach of multitudes of intelligent men a knowledge of the history of the Chris- tian faith and especially of the origin, manner of composition, meaning and aim of the books of the Bible and of their collection in a canon, that was not available to the earlier interpreters of the faith and that must have deeply affected their statements had they possessed it. The result is that many of the theological assump- tions underlying the earlier theological use of the Bible have been set aside and at the same time a richer under- [183] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE standing of the meaning of the Christian religion has .been brought to the human heart. The legalistic use of the Bible must be abandoned. The non-theological pur- pose of the greater part of it must be admitted. The spiritual life exhibited in it is seen to be of greater worth than the particular methods the various writers used in setting it forth. Christianity is seen to be in itself a life of trust and love rather than a body of doctrine or a prescribed order. Conscientious men cannot overlook these facts when it comes to the matter of a confession of faith. The growth of what is commonly called secular knowledge is a factor of almost equal importance when we come to a statement of our faith. The stupendous results of the scientific study of the world of nature have been steadily forcing Christian people to a reconsidera- tion of the meaning of the world and of our life in it. The ancient cosmology (on which the ancient Christian creeds repose), with its geocentric view of things, has been overthrown. The sovereignty of law and the prev- alence of the natural order are now acknowledged to be essential to a truly moral life. The evolutionary char- acter of all life is a common premise of historical study. What a different view of God and of man and of the relation of both to the world must be held by the modern man, as compared with the view of our forefathers, if he is to be true to his intelligence and yet true to faith! We do well to remember that no religious community can fulfil its gracious mission to humanity if it sets itself in opposition to scientific fact or makes it impos- sible for a man of science to be a partaker of its faith. The present generation of young people has as keen a conscience for the facts of nature as for the beliefs of [184] Arthur C. Benson ( (C) EUiott & Fry THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE religion. God has joined these together. They must never be divorced. The value of this side of things is seen when we per- ceive that science is now consciously in pursuit of an aim that is at bottom one with the aim of religion, name- ly, to point out the way in which we may truly fulfil the meaning of a human life. To ignore its discov- eries is to be immoral and anti-religious. The most urgent call to a revision of our religious confessions arises from the fact that the Christian spirit has come recently to a fresh apprehension of the practi- cal issues of a religious life and of the aims of the gospel. In the theories of the past (though we may well thank God that the actual practises of Christians generally proceeded on a higher plane) the purpose of the Chris- tian revelation was to prepare men for the coming world- cataclysm, or to impart a metaphysical deathlessness to men, or to secure their final deliverance from the pains of hell hereafter, or to give them the present assurance of such ultimate deliverance. The value of the present life lay in its preparatory relation to a post-earthly life. Now, allowing for all the truth which men do well still to see in those theories, it must be said that none of them represents the view of life that appeals most strongly to Protestant Christians to-day, as a whole. The evidence of the change of attitude toward the natural world and the natural life is clear as soon as we turn to the prevailing forms of Christian activity and appeal. The foreign missionary enterprise has become all-engrossing. It is seldom now that we hear mission- aries pressing the necessity of rescuing from a hopeless hereafter the countless millions of heathens as men al- ready condemned by their very birth in sin. They rather [185] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE appeal to us to raise the whole mass of non- Christian peoples, in both their individual and social capacity, to a higher religious, moral, intellectual and physical life, with the assurance that eternity cannot reverse these values. Similarly, in Christian lands, the aim of active Christians is not to subject men to sacraments, or to orders, or to doctrines, in order to guarantee to them eternal felicity; but it is to elevate their whole being, to fill their whole personal, social, industrial and civil life with new and holy power that will bring to their being as its eternal possession the fulfilment of its potencies. It seems, then, that in Protestant Christendom, at least, the center of interest in the issues of life is found in the conviction of the unspeakable worth of a human personality and the obligation of all to fulfil it. So far as the knowledge of the present writer goes, there is no extant confession of faith that gives adequate expression to this conviction. Is such a confession of faith needed? Most certainly. The reasons are not far to seek. The Christian life is dominated by an ideal; its face is to the future, rather than the past. If this ideal be not intelligently defined the inexhaustible impulse to ac- tivity which is communicated in the Christian faith may lose itself in confused and meaningless effort. Chris- tians must be more than individuals. They constitute a communion. Their inner spiritual unity must find consistent expression if it is to grow. Moreover, this 'Christian life does not start afresh with each new con- vert, but it has been historically continuous from the beginning. The Christian life and effort of to-day must be consciously held as the continuance and fulfilment of itself from the first. It is in some deep sense one with the life of humanity. In order, then, to fulfil the [186] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE yearning after a universal human brotherhood which is essential to the Christian spirit, it is necessary that our struggle toward this great end be guided by the Chris- tian conception of the meaning of human life. The true purpose of a Christian confession of faith is evident. It is not an attempt to carry out the arrogant claim to lay down "the doctrines necessary to salvation." Nor is it to prescribe exclusive terms of church mem- bership. It is not to lay down the law of discipline. But it is to give definite intelligent direction and conscious inspiration to religious effort. It is to supply a watch- word, a rallying center and a bond of union to believers. It becomes in the end a form of self -commitment to a common cause. Therefore it must be simple, that the common man may grasp it. It must be brief that it may enlighten and not confuse. It must be general that it may be world- wide in its scope. It must be expansive rather than restrictive, that it may inspire noble, free natures. It must be true to the meaning of Christian history, that it may bring to the task of the present the strength that comes from a conviction of continuity with the past. Once more, it must interpret the practical issues of the coming day — it must be prophetical of coming achieve- ment — that it may nerve men to the highest endeavor. It must be understood, however, that the general confession which is here advocated for the sake of realiz- ing a progressive Christian unity of purpose and ac- tivity is not to be regarded as sufficient for all. I am no advocate of the formation of one vast religious corpora- tion that shall include all Christians. There must be room for distinct denominations of Christians within the Christian communion, since varieties of religious expe- [187] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE rience, diversities of purpose, and difference of environ- ment are inevitable and welcome. Within the all-inclu- sive unity minor unities will exist for the conserving of special interests. Indeed, each local religious commu- nity does well to preserve its right to individuality of life. Not a dead uniformity, but the harmony of differ- ence constitutes the living Christian unity. With this understanding it is herewith suggested that the confession of Christian faith for the immediate future may proceed somewhat as follows : 1. We believe in one supreme, personal God; Father of our spirits and Author of the universe; Ruler and Judge of all; loving and kind, just and holy, forgiving and true ; speaking to every human heart ; willing that all men should come into fellowship with him. 2. We believe in Jesus Christ; in whom the God of love has come to us; who gave himself for all; whom we own as Lord of our lives; who has revealed to us what we all may be; who is the Friend of sinners and Saviour of all who seek to be like him. 3. We believe in the eternal unity of the followers of Jesus in one Spirit; they are equal in the rights of spiritual brotherhood; they are servants to one another; they are ever to seek to bring all men of all races into the life of this one holy family. 4. We believe in the eternal worth of every man. The good gift of life is equally precious to all; the wealth of the good world of nature is for all ; every one has the right to the good- will and ministry of all; to fail to render this service or to wrong a fellow-man is to sin against God. 5. We believe in the sanctity of the wedded life of one man with one woman and of parenthood; in the [188] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE supremacy of the home and the right of all children to the means of attaining to true manhood and woman- hood ; in the sacred dignity of labor and of commerce in its products ; in the obligation of all men to a pure social and civil life. 6. We believe in the freedom of religious faith and of thought; in the prerogative of the individual; in his right to propagate his beliefs among all men without violence to or from any; that in the exercise of this liberty lies the way to the ultimate imity of all, 7. We believe that our God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ and our Father, will never leave us or for- sake us; all things shall work together for our good; even in death we shall be brought nearer to him; in his presence we shall live the life of unselfish and eternal blessedness. Therefore we do now unitedly yield our- selves to him that we may serve him forever. This confession is offered as a common nucleus of a statement of Christian faith. As has been said al- ready, it is not contemplated as exhaustive or final. It may be expanded by each several communion to ex- press the distinctive interpretation of the task of life for which the communion stands, and by each man to set forth his personal apprehension of the purpose for which he lives. It is to serve the aim of expanding and not of limiting the range and power of faith. As for the conditions of local membership, these should always be prescribed by the local communion. And the conditions on the spiritual side should be noth- ing more than the candidate's ability to assure the body of his sharing in the religious life and aim of the com- munion. It must also decide for itself what outer form of admission is to be followed. £189] WILLIAM JAMES DAWSON, D.D., NEWARK^ N. J. Pastor of the First Presbyterian Church, Newark, N. J.; born at Towcester, Northampton, England, Nov. 21, 1854; educated at Didsbury College, Manchester; ordained to the Wesleyan ministry, 1875; held pastorates at Wesley's Chapel, London, and in Glasgow and Southport, until 1892; in 1891 was a delegate to the Methodist Ecumeni- cal Conference at Washington, D. C; pastor of the High- bury Quadrant Congregational Church, London, 1892- 1905; came to the United States and has lectured widely on literary and historical subjects; author of A Vision of Souls (poems) ; Quest and Vision; The Threshold of Manhood; Makers of English Poetry; The House of Dreams; Makers of English Prose; The Man Christ Jesus; The Reproach of Christ; Quest of the Simple Life; The Evangelistic Note; The Forgotten Secret; The Empire of Love; A Prophet in Babylon; A Soldier of the Future; Masterman and Son; The Reader's Library (with C. W. Dawson) ; The Book of Courage. WHY INTELLIGENT MEN DO NOT BECOME CHURCH MEMBERS I DO not think that the indifference of great numbers of intelligent men to the Church, and their reluctance to enroll themselves in its membership, has very much to do with personal inability to accept certain statements of thought and belief. In Abraham Lincoln's day the conditions were very different. No doubt churches at that time did lay great stress on the acceptance of certain articles of faith, and men of Lincoln's freedom of mind and honesty of temper resented them. But that day has long since passed away. What church is there to-day that insists upon a profession of faith in certain intricate theologic statements before it will receive a [190] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE man into its membership? I am acquainted with none. For ministers, who are deliberately set apart as expo- nents of Christian truth, such tests do naturally exist, but even these have been greatly modified by the spirit of modern tolerance. They do not usually go beyond a general assent, and leave a large option of private inter- pretation. The general practise of all Protestant churches as regards individual members is to ask for a profession of faith in Christ as Saviour and Master, and a promise to obey his rules of conduct; and so far as my knowledge goes this form of profession is made as simple as possible. No intelligent man, seeking to join any one of the great Protestant churches could expect a less simple and exigent test, and no honest man would desire it. For myself, I may say as a minister who has served three denominations, that I have never sought from any applicant for membership anything more than the expression of a genuine love for Christ and a willingness to obey and follow him ; and I believe this to be the practise of the vast majority of Protestant ministers. Abraham Lincoln would have found no dif- ficulty in joining any church of which I have been the minister. The real reluctance of intelligent men to become members of churches is based upon quite another series of reasons, of which I select the following: 1. The absence of the modern spirit in preaching. The preacher is too often engaged in getting something off his own mind rather than getting something into the minds of his hearers. He is not aware of the thoughts that are most vital to the mass of men, or if he is, ignores them. He builds up a weekly essay upon things which please himself, without reference to the needs of his [ 191 ] THE CHUKCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE hearers. Even when such essays are well done, and dis- play a certain command of form and language, the in- telligent hearer is apt to say, "I can stay at home and find in my books better statements of the same themes." More frequently he says, "The themes that most inter- est me are treated by scores of clever writers in current journalism and literature, and I prefer listening to them." If any one will carefully study the themes an- nounced by preachers Sunday after Sunday, he will soon realize how remote many of them are from the thinkings of average men, and how little they can be expected to appeal to men who are not Christian wor- shipers by tradition and education. 2. The suspicion of unreality in the life of the Church. The greatest moral force in the world, which is the Church, is by no means devoted with constant honesty and enthusiasm to the great moral problems of the day. While we may thankfully own that there are many ministers who are the outstanding soldier-saints of every moral and social cause, it is lamentably obvious that many others appear to be cloister-bred, with no real touch on life as it is. Hence the sense of unreality; of much speech and little result; the absence of practical value. And since this is the age of pragmatism, many intelligent men are ready to say of the Church, "It does little or nothing in the vital direction of the national life, and why should I join it?" 3. The dread of contention, which has been the scandal and the ruin of so many churches. Too often faction, jealousy, envy, and uncharitableness have found congenial soil in the churches. There have been bitter quarrels over ministers, and among members ; and even where these have not attained scandalous dimensions, [192] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE there has often existed an atmosphere of petty friction, very distasteful to a man of fine temper. I have known whole families, containing men and women of really fine qualities, who have been totally alienated from the Church by some remembered bitterness of long ago, whereby their parents suffered. I have also known many men of the highest character who have said, "I will thankfully attend your ministry, but I will never unite with your Church, because I dread being drawn into this or that faction." If we could take a canvass of the men whose fathers were life-long supporters of the churches, but who themselves have studiously held aloof, and often have drifted into positive hostility to the Church, I believe we should find a great mmiber who would give this explanation of their attitude. I do not seek to explain or combat these reasons; I merely state them. I have found them to be general and cogent. And I believe these are the main reasons, however fully or imperfectly justified, which deter mul- titudes of intelligent men to-day from becoming mem- bers of the various churches. [193] JAMES DENNEY, D.D., GLASGOW^ SCOTLAND Professor of New Testament language, literature, and the- ology. United Free Church College, Glasgow, since 1897; born at Paisley, Feb. 5, 1856; educated at Highlanders* Academy, Greenock, Glasgow University, and Free Church College; minister of East Free Church, Broughty Ferry, 1886-97; author of The Epistles to the Thessalonians, and The Second Epistle to the Corinthians (Expositor's Bible); Studies in Theology; The Epistle to the Romans {Expositor's Greek Testament); Gospel Questions and ^Answers; The Death of Christ; The Atonement and the Modern Mind; Jesus and the Gospel. In response to our communication Professor Denney wrote: "I have already said my say about this in my book Jesus and the Gospel, and I have not really any- thing to add." 'VV^e quote the passage :* "What Christ claims and what is his due is a place in the faith of men — in other words, it is an attitude of the soul to himself as he is presented to us in the gospel. We are bound to him, in that wonderful significance which he has for the life of the soul, that unique and incommimicable power which he has to determine all our relations to God and man. To be true Christians, we are thus bound to him; but we are not bound to any- thing else. But for what he is and for what he has done, we could not be Christians at all: but for our recogni- tion of what he is, but for our acceptance of what he has done, and our sense of infinite obligation to him as we realize the cost at which he has done it, we could not tell what Christianity means. But we are not bound * "From JesMS and the Oospelf by James Denney, D.D., by permission of George H. Doran Company. Copyright 1908.'* [194] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE to any man's or to any church's rendering of what he is or has done. We are not bound to any Christology, or to any doctrine of the work of Christ. No intellectual construction of what Christ's presence and work in the world mean is to be imposed beforehand as a law upon faith, or a condition of membership in the Church. It is faith which makes a Christian; and when the Chris- tian attitude of the soul to Christ is found, it must be free to raise its own problems and to work out its own solutions. This is the point at which 'broad' churchism is in the right against an evangelical Christianity which has not learned to distinguish between its faith — in which it is unassailable — and inherited forms of doctrine which have been unreflectingly identified with it. Nat- ural as such identification may be, and painful as it may be to separate in thought things which have coalesced in strong and sacred feelings, there is nothing more certain than that the distinction must be recognized if evangelical Christians are to maintain their intellectual integrity, and preach the gospel in a world which is intellectually free. We are bound to Christ, and would see all men so bound; but we must leave it to Christ to establish his ascendency over men in his own way — ^by the power of what he is and what he has done — and not seek to secure it beforehand by the imposition of chains of our forging. "It is one of the most urgent needs of the Church at the present moment to have both these truths recognized in their full extent. There can be no Christianity to maintain if the evangelical truth is not asserted that Christ must have in the faith of men no less or lower place than he has had from the beginning, or than he himself, as we have seen, deliberately assumed; but [ 195 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE there can be no hope of appealing to the world in which we live to give Christ such a place in its faith if we identify doing so with the acceptance beforehand of the inherited theology or Christology of the Church. This is not said with any indifference to theology or Chris- tology, with any feeling that Christ and his place in the world, and especially in the relations of God and man, are not worth thinking about. On the contrary, there is nothing which is so much worth thinking about, nor so certain to stimulate thought if only thought is left free. Nor is it said on the other hand with any indif- ference to the place of Christ: that is assumed to be indisputable from the outset. The problem is to find a way of securing the two things : unreserved recognition of the place which Christ has always held in evangelical faith, and entire intellectual freedom in thinking out what this implies. There is no necessary inconsistency in the combination ; it has been realized in every original Christian thinker, and the true teachers of the Church are one prolonged illustration of it. Not only great the- ologians, but great evangelists like Zinzendorf and Wesley have explicitly recognized it. To refer to the former. He was, says his biographer, indifferent to many things to which the theologians of his time at- tached supreme importance ; for he believed that all who love the Saviour meet in a spiritual unity raised infi- nitely above the barriers erected between the different churches by differences of rite and tradition; and even by their errors. 'Although,' he wrote, *I am and mean to remain a member of the evangelical {i,e,j the Luther- an) Church, nevertheless I do not bind Christ and his truth to any sect; whoever believes that he is saved by the grace of the Lord Jesus by living faith, that is to [196] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE say, whoever seeks and finds in Christ wisdom, right- eousness, sanctification and redemption, is my brother; and for what remains, I regard it as an unprofitable task, or as rather injurious than profitable, to examine what his opinions are, or what his exegesis. In that sense,' he goes on, *I admit that it makes no difference to me that a man is heterodox — ^but in this sense only.' Similar passages might be multiplied from Wesley. In his Journal, under date May 18, 1788, he says: 'I sub- joined (to his sermon on "Now abideth faith, hope, love; these three") a short account of Methodism, particu- larly insisting on the circumstances. There is no other religious society under heaven which requires nothing of men in order to their admission into it but a desire to save their souls. Look all around you, you cannot be admitted into the Church {i.e., the Church of England) , or society of the Presbyterians, Anabaptists, Quakers, or any others, unless you hold the same opinions with them, and adhere to the same mode of worship. The Methodists alone do not insist on your holding this or that opinion; but they think and let think.' No one will suspect Wesley of indifference to the place which Christ must have in Christian faith, but he was as clear as Zinzendorf that this place was one thing, and that the theological explanations of it or deductions from it were another. It is this distinction between soundness in faith — a genuinely Christian attitude of the soul to Christ, in virtue of which Christ determines the spiritual life throughout — and soundness in doctrine — the accept- ance of some established intellectual construction of faith, on which emphasis needs to be laid. Soundness in faith is that on which Christianity and the Church depend for their very being; but the construction of [197] THE CHUKCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Christian doctrine is one of the tasks at which Chris- tian intelligence must freely labor, respecting, no doubt, but never bound by, the efforts or attainments of the past. "This, it may be said, is generally admitted, and in one sense this is true. It is admitted by individuals. The vast majority of the members of the evangelical churches occupy practically the position described. They are loyal to Christ: their attitude to him is essentially the New Testament attitude ; they acknowledge that in their spiritual life it is his to determine everything, and that they are infinitely and forever his debtors. But to a large extent, and to an extent which increases as the mind realizes its independence in other regions, and cherishes ideals of what science and freedom mean, they have lost interest in the traditional theology. It is not that they actively disapprove of it or dissent from it, but they do not think of it. It is not their own, and they have a dim or a clear conviction that anjrthing of this kind, if it is to have interest or value for them, must be their own. It must be their own faith which inspires it, the action of their own minds which is em- bodied in it. It cannot be simply lifted, as an inheri- tance, or submitted to, as a law; it must be the free and spontaneous product of an intelligence energized by faith in Christ. Individual Christians understand this, and that is why they sometimes seem so indiffer- ent to doctrines. Preachers understand it, and try to present to their hearers, not doctrines about Christ, but Christ himself — ^not doctrines about Christ, for doc- trine always challenges skepticism, and skepticism the more searching in proportion as its claim to authority is high, but Christ himself, the sight of whom is the [198] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE supreme appeal and motive to faith. But though in- dividual Christians, and not only those who listen to the gospel, but those who preach it, are conscious of this distinction and accept its consequences, the churches can hardly be said to have done so. They are Christian organizations, yet they seem to be based on doctrinal statements which most of their members have realized are not the actual or the proper basis of Christian life; and they not only find it difficult to conceive any other basis, but seem to suspect those who speak of another of striking at the very heart of the faith. This want of accord between the intellectual attitude of the churches acting collectively, and that of their individ- ual members, is the cause not only of much discomfort and misunderstanding within, but of much scandal and reproach without. It seriously discredits the Church in the eyes of the world to which it wishes to appeal, and it is urgent to ask whether there is any remedy for it. "The responsibilities of a society, it must be frankly admitted, are other than those of its individual mem- bers. It is inevitably more conservative than they; it has to guard in some sense what the labors of the past have won, and not allow the historical inheritance to be repudiated or cast away by the juvenile petulance of those who know neither what it means nor what it has cost. Christian thought has been at work for centuries on the object and the experience of Christian faith, and it would be more than strange if all its toil has been in vain. There is a just and proper jealousy of an atti- tude to the past which virtually denies to it the presence and the providence of God, and assumes that where it is concerned we have everything to teach and nothing [199] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE to learn. This is not at all the attitude which we advo- cate when we urge that the intelligence of the Church in the present must be allowed free play. It is the denial of this freedom which more than anything else makes men unjust to the past. Nothing creates a stronger prejudice against a creed, especially if it is of any high degree of elaboration, than the necessity of signing it as a condition of membership or of minis- try in the Church. The main fact about it in those circumstances — ^that which weighs most upon the mind — is that it is imposed as a law upon faith; and the feelings which this infallibly engenders are those of resentment and suspicion. It is not paradoxical, but the simple truth, to say the influence of documents like the Westminster Confession, for example, or even the Thirty-Nine Articles, in the churches which require their office-bearers to sign them, would not only be more legitimate but indefinitely greater if subscription were abolished. Men would then apply themsdves freely to those historical expositions of Christianity with minds willing to be helped, not in a suspicious temper, or in the attitude of self-defense ; they would value them more highly and learn far more from them ; they would not be tempted to strain them into meaning what they were not intended to mean, so as to make subscription less of a burden to conscience. To say this is not to accuse the mind of childishness; it is only to recognize facts which every day's experience confirms. "In spite, however, of all their responsibilities and obligations to the past — in spite of the duty incumbent on them to conserve its intellectual as well as its moral attainments — the pressure put upon the churches, both from without and within, to recognize the claims of in- [200] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE tellectual liberty, is rapidly becoming irresistible. Chris- tian people, who are consciously at one in their attitude to Christ and in their sense of obligation to him, see that they are kept in different communions, and inca- pacitated from cooperation in work and worship, because they have inherited diflPerent theological traditions to which they are assumed to be bound. Without entering into any discussion of what these theological traditions — call them creeds, confessions, testimonies, or whatever else — are worth, they feel in their souls that they are not bound to them, and ought not to be, with the same kind of bond which secures their allegiance to Christ. For the sake of getting nearer to those who share this al- legiance and cooperating with them in the service of the Lord who holds their hearts, they contemplate with more than equanimity the slackening or dissolution of the bonds which attach them to the theology, or, if we prefer to call it so, the Christian thought of the past. They will think for themselves as they can or must, but the primary necessity, if not the one thing needful, is the Christian attitude of the soul to Christ, and union with all who make that attitude their own. Internal pressure of this kind is reinforced from without. In every country in Christendom the nation has outgrown the Church, or has to a large extent passed from be- neath its influence. Even of those who retain connec- tion with it, frequenting its worship and formally sup- porting it before the world, vast numbers are mentally in that strained relation to it wliich has just been de- scribed. It is not necessary to diagnose too narrowly the causes which have led to the estrangement from the Church of such masses of those who once found in it a spiritual home, and still less to suppose that they all lie [201] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE in the regions with which we are dealing; but it is cer- tain that readjustments must be made here before those who have been alienated can be won again. It is cer- tain also that before Christians can combine to face with effect the problems presented by society to the spirit of Christ they must overcome somehow the forces which perpetuate division among themselves. The important question is whether they can find the true principle of union. If the conclusions which we have reached are sound, it must be a principle which will secure the two ends we have now before us — that is, which will bind men to the Christian attitude to Christ, but which will leave them, thus bound, free to assume and discharge their intellectual and moral responsibilities with a con- science acknowledging no authority but that of the God in whom they believe through him. "It is very natural that the first steps toward the recognition of such a principle should be hesitating and uncertain. Churches which have inherited complex and elaborate creeds — creeds which, though they may be called confessions of faith, are not really confessions of faith, but more or less complete systems of theology — are apt to think that it is in the complexity and elabora- tion of their confessions that the difficulty lies. Their first thought is that what we need for union among Christians is the reduction or simplification of our elab- orate creeds. Why, for example, it is asked, should we cling to the Westminster Confession, a document con- taining hundreds of sharply defined propositions, about many of which there is no prospect of Christians ever agreeing? Why should we not recognize that it is hope- less to expect union on this basis, and go back to a sub- lime and simple formula like the creed of Nicaea? [ 202 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Would not all Christians gather round that? This has not only been ventilated as a possibility, but has been definitely proposed as the doctrinal basis of union be- tween the Presbyterians and Episcopalians of Aus- tralia. "Plausible as this may sound, it is plausible only to those who have never appreciated the nature of the difii- culty which has to be dealt with. What we want as a basis of union is not something simpler, of the same kind as the creeds and confessions in our hands; it is something of a radically different kind. To simplify merely by going back from the seventeenth century to the fourth is certainly an easy matter, but what a con- temptuous censure it passes on the Christian thought of the centuries between. When a man speaks of giving up the Westminster Confession for the Nicene Creed, one can only think that he has no true appreciation of either. The Westminster Confession contains every- thing that is in the Nicene Creed, but the writer has no hesitation in saying that this is the least valuable part of what it contains, and that which has least prospect of permanence. The valuable parts of the Confession, those which still appeal to the Christian conscience and awaken a response in it, are the new parts — those which represent the gains of the Reformation revival and the insight into Christian truth acquired there ; they are the parts which treat of the work of Christ and its consequences — of justification, adoption and sanctifica- tion ; of saving faith and repentance unto life ; of Chris- tian liberty and liberty of conscience ; of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God, as the supreme means of grace. To simplify the creed by omitting everything which can be verified in experience, and then to expect men to [203] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE unite in the purely metaphysical proposition — for what- ever religious interest it is supposed to guard, it is a purely metaphysical proposition — that Christ is con- substantial with the Father, is only to show that one has not diagnosed the situation at all. Very few peo- ple can tell what Athanasius and the Nicene bishops meant by this term. No one knows whether all who use it now use it in precisely the same sense ; or rather, it is as certain as anything can be that they do not. Every one feels that it is on something else than the understanding of such metaphysical propositions that the life and union of Christians depend; and it is this something else, and not what any one regards as its metaphysical basis or presupposition, which ought to find expression in the common Christian confession of faith. It is their attitude to Christ which Christians have to declare, and Christ can only be described in their confession in the character which justifies that attitude. He can only be described in the simple lan- guage of religion. What for theology or metaphysics is involved in this is a proper subject for theological or metaphysical study; but it ought not to have a place, and if Christians are ever to unite it will not have a place, in the confession of faith in which they declare the attitude of their souls to him. "But, it may be said, is it possible to separate in this way the Christian attitude to Christ from definite be- liefs and convictions about him? Did not he himself raise the question of Christology when he said to his disciples, 'Whom say ye that I am?' When we ask men to believe in him, must we not be able to tell them things about him which demand or justify the faith for which we appeal? When they ask who then the [ 204 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Person is for whom so incomparable a place is claimed, must we not be able to te]l them in direct and express terms? And in particular, it may be said, how is the work of Christian education to be carried on? How are the immature members of a Christian community to be reared in Christian intelligence if there is not some doc- trinal system on the basis of which they can be cate- chized? "All these are fair questions, and no one could be less disposed than the writer to dispute their fairness. What they rest upon, in the last resort, is the feeling that the Christian attitude to Christ, and a certain type of con- victions about Christ, are not unrelated to each other. There can be no such thing as a final schism in human nature, no possibility of permanently opposing faith and knowledge, or of permanently playing oflf the one against the other. The Christian attitude to Christ, and the Christian experiences into which men are initi- ated by it, must, in proportion as they are truly appre- hended in the mind, lead to a body of Christian convic- tions, or a system of Christian doctrine, in which believ- ing men will find themselves at one. This is not ques- tioned in the least. What is at issue is rather a question of order of antagonism: our concern is to see that we lay at the foundation only what is fundamental, and that we do not present to men as the indispensable pre- supposition of faith what is one of faith's last and most difiicult achievements. When we preach, we must cer- tainly be able to tell men things about Christ which justify the Christian attitude to him. But these faith- producing things are not dogmatic definitions of his person: they are not doctrinal propositions, such as those of the Nicene Creed ; nor are they less formal ex- [205] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE pressions of essentially the same character. They are such things as we have been in contact with all through our study of the gospels : they are the life, the mind, the death, the resurrection of Jesus. If the exhibition of these does not evoke the Christian attitude of the soul to him, the soundest metaphysical doctrine of his person is worthless. But if the Christian attitude is evoked by the revelation of Jesus in the gospel, we have found that in which all Christians can unite, and the theo- logical doctrine of his person may be trusted sooner or later to come to its rights. But it must not be taken out of its proper place and order, nor can we expect it to yield us what can only be found in the sphere of faith. The questions raised by the Christian attitude to Jesus, and the Christian's sense of debt to him, may have to be asked over and over, taking always a wider range, pene- trating always more deeply into the wonder of what he is and does; and with the widening and deepening of the questions the answers too must vary in form. That is why we cannot look to these answers, however pro- found or true they may be, to furnish the basis of union among Christians. They are always subject to re- vision, not because he changes — ^he is the same yester- day and to-day and forever — ^but because men change in their apprehension of him. And in such changes, even though they may sometimes be changed to an inferior or less adequate conception of him, we must bear with each other so long as the attitude of Christian faith in him is maintained. "If we look to the Church of the New Testament age, we shall find that this is essentially the situation in which it confronts us. As has been demonstrated above, there is one religion exhibited in every part of the New [206] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Testament; from beginning to end, in every writer represented in it, there is the same attitude of the soul to Christ. In other words, there is one faith. But though there is one faith, there is not one Christology. All the New Testament writers, it may no doubt be said, have a Christology of some kind. Faith always acts as an intellectual stimulus, and it never did so more irresistibly than in the first generation. When Christ constrained men to assume what we have called the Christian attitude to himself, he constrained them at the same time to ask who the Person was to whom such an attitude was due. He constrained them to think what his relations must be to God and man, and even to the universe at large, to justify the attitude he as- sumed to them. But though these questions stirred more or less powerfully, as they must always do, the intelligence of Christians, it is impossible for any scien- tific student of the New Testament to say that all the early believers, or even all who were regarded in the Church as divinely empowered witnesses to the gospel, answered them in precisely the same way. To take only one example, but that the most conspicuous: Paul's at- titude to Christ is exactly that of other New Testament writers, but his Christology is his own. It is not identical with that of Peter or John, or, so far as we can dis- cover it, with that of Matthew or Luke; just as little is it identical with that of the Nicene Creed. It does not follow from this that it is of no value, or of no authority. The great thoughts about Christ inspired by Christian faith in him, as the New Testament illus- trates it — ^thoughts about his relations to Gk)d, to men, and to the universe — always tend to reproduce them- selves in minds which share that faith; and it must be [207] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE a singularly powerful or solitary mind which in its Christian thoughts about Christ could own no debt to Paul. This is the guarantee we have, in a world in which the mind is once for all free, that the truth in Paul's thoughts about Christ will never be lost. But though it does not follow from what has been said that Paul's Christology is of no value, or has no authority for us, it does follow that neither his nor any other Christology can be the basis of imion among Christians of which the churches are in quest. It was not Chris- tology in any sense in which Christians were one from the beginning, and the Formula concordice which the perplexed conscience of multitudes in all the churches is at present seeking, cannot be a theological document. It must, we repeat, be a declaration which will bind men to Christ as believers have been bound from the be- ginning, but which also leave them in possession of the birthright of New Testament Christians — the right and the power of applying their own minds, with conscien- tious freedom, to search out the truth of what Jesus is and does, and to read all things in the light of it — the world and God, nature and history, the present and the future of man. "Reserving, then, this right and power, it only re- mains to ask whether we can put the religious truth about Jesus, the significance which he has for the faith of Christians, into words which all who adopt the Chris- tian attitude to him would recognize as the expression of their faith. Such words would not be doctrinal or dogmatic, in the sense of the Nicene Creed, or of the Augsburg or the Westminster Confession; they would not be an utterance the same in kind, but simpler in form, and less ambitious in aim; they would be the im- [208] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE mediate utterance of the Christian sense of what faith has in Christ, not the speculative or reflective statement — as these other documents all are in varying degrees — of metaphysical truths concerning Christ which must be admitted if we would justify our faith. The truth they embody would not be itself a creed, in the sense of a scientific or theologically defined statement; it would not be the substitute for a creed ; it would be the inspiration and the standard of all Christian thinking. Looking back to the investigations which we have just completed, and recalling the significance which Jesus had in his own mind, and has always had in the minds of Christians, it is perhaps not too bold to suggest that the symbol of the Church's unity might be expressed thus: "I believe in God through Jesus Christ his only Son, our Lord and Saviour." [209] AUGUST JOHANNES DORNER, Ph.D., D.D., KONIGSBERG^ GERMANY Professor of systematic theology at Konigsberg, Germany, since 1889; born at Schiltach, May 13, 1846; studied at Gottingen^ Tiibingen, and Berlin; vikar to the German congregation in Lyons and Marseilles, 1869; lecturer at Gottingen, 1870-73; professor and co-director of the theo- logical seminary at Wittenberg, 1874-89; editor of his father's System der christlichen Sittenlehre and Brief wech- sel zwischen H. L. Martensen and I. A. Dornerj author of De Baconis philosophia; Augustinus, seine theologische und seine religions philosophische Anschauungj Ueber die Prinzipien der Kant'schen Ethik; Predigten vom Reiche Gottes; Kirche und Reich Gottes; Das menschliche Erken- nen; Das menschliche Handeln, philosophische Ethik; Grundriss der Dogmengeschichte ; Grundriss der Encyklo- paedie der Theologie; Zur Geschichte des sittlichen Den- kens und Lebens; Grundriss der Religionsphilosophie ; Grundprobleme der Religionsphilosophie ; Individuelle und soziale Ethik; Die Entstehung der christlichen Glaubens- lehren; Encyklopddie der Philosophic; Pessimismus, Niet- zsche, und Naturalismus; Metaphysik des Christentums, The reason why many are indifferent to the Church is partly irreligion, partly mistrust of theology, and partly the idea that membership in a church and righteousness are not necessarily inseparable. As exemplified in Abraham Lincoln there are many people who do not wish to commit themselves to any particular church be- cause they cannot agree with everything in the Christian teaching. I believe, however, that here are some deep- rooted antinomies which were first revealed by Prot- estantism. Richard Rothe saw in Protestantism the dissolution of the Church in the State. He argued that the fostering of the purely religious life, such as the Church desired, neglected the moral life; that is, the [210] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE religiously moral life which is represented in the com- plete ethical life. It is indeed difficult to say what other task the Church should have than the fostering of the religious life. The righteous life has now made itself independent, and the belief is that the ethical life can also be fostered without religion, or at least without the Church, as is shown by Frankreich's school system (cf. my "History of Moral Thought and Life") . The antinomy which oppresses every church is, how- ever, particularly shown in that opposition between an inner righteousness which is represented by Protestant- ism and which must be free, and a righteousness for the fostering of free opinion in an organized institution with statutory orderliness, with a fixed worship, an ecclesiastical polity, and an established confession — a condition which by these means forces righteousness into certain forms. It is the antinomy which always exists between spiritual freedom and the mechanism of the statutory, which, if it exist, always has the tendency to become self-seeking and to suppress the freedom which it should foster. This antinomy has not thus far been resolved ; it is therefore comprehensible why many claim that the Church as an organized institution is not necessary. This is particularly true of that Protes- tantism which had written on its banner the freedom of the Christian, and yet became unfaithful to its prin- ciple when it organized itself into a pedagogical church. The fostering of the religious life can find a place in the kingdom of God, on the intellectual side through theoretical discussion, by which we enrich one another; on the esthetic side through art; on the emotional side through family and friendships, where also complete reciprocal spiritual care can alone attain its fullest [211] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE meaning. A false narrowness need be feared here the less in proportion as righteousness combines itself with sufficient culture. There have, no doubt, always been people who have not held it necessary to belong to a church, who were nevertheless in no way willing to give up the idea of a imiversal kingdom of God or to cease to labor for its coming. In fact, it is questionable if an organized church lay in the mind of Jesus; and it is doubly diffi- cult to maintain the claim that every one must belong to a particular church when in fact we have only many partial churches, and no church embracing all mankind, of which only an idea remains and which only too easily misleads into identifying this idea with one of the partial churches. Actual development has shown that the prin- ciple of individualism in Protestantism has brought forth such an abundance of denominations that the hope, for a return to a universal church is very slight, while surely no Christian would dispute the uni^rersality of the kingdom of God. What, however, particularly affects the relation of the churches as regards the general ethical life, which has culture as its consequence and concentrates itself in the State, is that one church claims superiority over the State, and becomes worldly because it interests itself in all sorts of problems that are foreign to religion. Others become instrumenta regni, lose their independ- ence and no longer foster religious thought as their proper sphere. Others again, being independent, turn away from culture and the State and fall into dan- gerous narrowness. It is because of this that Protestantism makes the belief in a direct relation to God the central point, and [212] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE in proportion as the inner character of the belief asserts itself, the personal feeling of responsibility develops itself, and the sense of truth pushes itself energetically to the fore, the more justified is the supposition that the interests of the Church will recede. For the Church is inclined to act as guardian in the matter of free knowledge as well as that of free action. It is sup- posed that reverence for the Church will arise in a cer- tain dependence upon the Church by the pious person who desires some objective guarantee, or hopes to im- prove himself through the influence of the common life; so that naturally it comes to be supposed that the Church has control over a religious vigor which the in- dividual does not possess but which would be of service. The Church has been designated as a community of be- lieving persons. But if under community of belief is un- derstood the strengthening of belief through mutual ex- position, there will again be required statutory methods for such exposition of Holy Scripture or of symbolism, just as the Confessio August ana took Word and sac- rament for their definition of the Church. These stat- utory methods, however, become themselves objects of belief, and in this way belief becomes again belief in means of grace. Here the danger is that direct relation to God will be displaced by all sorts of intercessory meth- ods having a fixed or statutory character, which may stimulate and invigorate, but may also easily weaken the feeling of personaV responsibility. The extreme point of this weakening shows itself when the sacraments are held to operate ea^ opere operato, or when Scripture is to be interpreted only through the Church and her creeds. Because of this Fichte speaks of churches that met [213] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE some need ; and one must admit that an Abraham Lin- coln surely had a moral right to abstain from joining any existing church if it did not satisfy his sense of truth. On the other hand, there are many who feel com- fortable in their church, and here the question could be raised whether in consideration of these it should be insisted upon that every one remain in his "partial church" and take it as it is, or whether it is a duty to stand in a critical attitude toward the church to which one desires to belong. This question will be answered variously, according to the point of view which a church takes. The Roman Catholic Church is one which claims authority, and those who consciously belong to her take the position that this church has the Spirit of God, and that they must therefore obey her. The Protestants deny the infallibility of the Church, assert her need for improvement, and are consequently under obli- gation to work together for her improvement as far as possible. Here, however, is again presented the difficulty that, once a religious organization with statutory regulation is established, a tendency to improve it will be resented as a rebellion against the authority of that Church. In this regard there is a difference between Germany and North Amer- ica and England. In the latter countries the attempt toward improvement, particularly if there is a new individualistic modification of Christianity connected with it, generally leads to new religious institu- tions. In spite of the fact that among certain de- nominations there have been formed confederations (Pan-Presbyterian Council, Evangelical Alliance, and others), within any definite denomination complete as- sent to its specific acquirements is desired, and each [214] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE denomination fortifies itself in its nuances and permits small freedom of movement within its narrow bomid- aries. It was just this that led Lincoln to make his reservation. In Germany on the contrary the tendency, in spite of differences, is to hold fast to the solidarity of the State churches, which at the same time are to be the churches of the people. Here, however, arise diffi- culties in regard to establishing the extent of the ac- knowledged differences. This has been caused by the fact that the difference between the essential and the circumstantial has been introduced into the conduct of affairs. But there is also a strong difference of opinion as to what is essential; and if appeal is made to Scrip- ture and creeds to determine this, the result is to raise up critics of both, so that there again dispute arises as to what is really determinative in Scripture and creeds. Then too a more extended belief is demanded of the clergy than of the laity, although the theologian feels the difficulties much more keenly. He to whom these controversies concerning belief are repugnant feels him- self estranged from the Church. If here it were desired to find an outlet by permit- ting freedom of conviction to every one through render- ing the statutory as elastic as possible — perhaps by the adoption of alternative formulas in the liturgy and else- where, or by admitting free discussion — it would be said: the Church already possesses certain truths which she cannot give up; science only seeks truth, and may therefore admit discussion. Here, once more, the result is that for the individual the difference between scien- tific interests and religion becomes negligible, because he can adjust himself between the two according to his point of view. The Church, however, through her [215] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE creeds fetters the spirit and, at the least, hampers a reconciliation of differences. Only then can a general agreement be reached on which a universal church can be built, if not the positive and the historical (over which in the sphere of religion there will always be bickering) be made essential, but rather that which is generally valid in religion and which every one can freely appropriate to himself — the direct relation to God. This is what was originally intended by natural religion, and what was meant when a gen- erally valid ideal of religion was spoken of, or when the general validity of the truth contained in religion was referred to. Such a religion also could not get into any quarrel with science, except perhaps, at most, with certain one-sided scientific conclusions. If it be denied that there can be an ideal of religion that is universally valid, or that there is a recognizable universally valid truth contained in religion, then unity cannot be achieved in the sphere of religion. If the thesis is insisted upon that the contents of religion cannot be recognized as truth, then again unity will not be at- tainable, because in that case the most diverse religious assertions will be regarded as truth. Or, once more, dependence might have to be placed on such experience as is obtainable by every one. In this case it would either be necessary to make an appeal to the consent of the will and to furnish arbitrarily religion based on the authority of claim to general validity, wherein the unproved authority of the revelation should be vindi- cated, or it would have to be shown that some definite religion answer the ideal of religion. Such an ideal of religion, established on the reasonable nature of the people, must, however, be recognized. And when this [216] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE has been attained, since religion has nothing to do with illusions, it would be further acknowledged that the idea of God is also attainable for us; that is, there must be a rational, even if restricted, knowledge of God. It will then be seen that this knowledge agrees with the fundamentals of science. If, however, the absolute incognizability of God were insisted upon, it would lead to a double truth — for the religious the deity would be an irrefutable truth, and for the man of science it would at best be a matter of doubt. It would then be necessary to feign belief in the existence of God, and such skepticism would cripple piety, which is more the case in present-day Protestantism. If a religion could be attained which contains a universally valid truth and corresponded to a uni- versally valid ideal of religion, full ecclesiastical fellow- ship would also be possible. But is this absolutely necessary? This question cannot be answered off-hand in the affirmative, since the Church would always re- main only a means for the fostering of religious thought that might perhaps be replaced by other means. But in the kingdom of God such a religion would neces- sarily demand a communion of spirits who would in all dealings acknowledge their ideas as God-given. We are, however, far from this goal, although new efforts are continually being put forth to make Chris- tianity, or at least the Christian principle, a universally valid and rational religion. And so, in view of this fact, we must be satisfied with admitting that there will always be Christians for whom the boundaries of any positive church will be too narrow, and that it must be impressed on the existing churches that it is their duty, [217] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE with such means as are at their disposal, to foster a personal piety, to prepare mankind for a religious- ethical maturity that shall further belief in the kingdom of God, that man must more and more make statutory methods means to freedom, and at last admit that God alone can create men anew, and that the Church can only incite thereto. [218] MILTON G. EVANS, D.D., CHESTER, PA. President and professor of comparative theology at the Crozer Theological Seminary since 1909; born near Ebens- burg, Pa., Dec. 7, 1862; educated at Bucknell University, Pa., and graduated from Crozer Theological Seminary; teacher at the Keystone Academy, Factoryville, Pa., 1883- 87; instructor in Hebrew, Crozer Theological Seminary, 1890-95; professor of biblical theology, 1895-1907; pro- fessor of Christian theology, 1907-9; dean of the faculty, 1906-9. For the purpose of this symposium I define the Church as a group of individuals more or less consciously re- lated by Christian sentiments and interests. The ad- jective Christian affirms that Christ is the historically conditioning cause of social groups called churches. That is, a Christian Church consists of persons religious enough to see in Christ God's method of mediating values in human experience. The experienced values are redemptive and remedial. In Christ a new divine force was introduced into history. He invited men to cooperate with him in overcoming evil. When a few had accepted the invitation, and had set to work to make their choices effective, the kingdom of evil had virtually come to an end. To wish to assist in its overthrow, in however slight a degree, with the conviction that Jesus Christ is alone potential in the process, is to put one on his side. It is some sort of apprehension of what Christ is and does (even though the apprehension be unreflecting credulity) , and trust in him for values desired, that dif- ferentiate Christian beliefs from beliefs of adherents [219] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE of other religions. That is, as the idea of God is regula- tive in philosophic theism, so the idea of Christ is reg- ulative in Christian philosophy; and in a Christian phi- losophy he is interpreted wholly as God's redemptive and remedial activity both in the individual and in the race. In this redemptive process creeds and ceremonies are conserving and educative forces. They are the stiff- ening factors in the "Christianizing of the social order," and thus secure continuity of development. In other words, the perpetuity and extension of the Church as a social institution are conditioned on the Bible, credal definitions and ritual worship. But to make sacred books and creeds and rites authoritative for thought and conduct is to substitute the means for the end, the husk for the kernel, the body for the soul. Whatever real authority Scripture and creeds may have, their author- ity is derived from the reality of that authority that evokes impulses to write sacred books, to formulate confessions of faith, and to perform ceremonies. To the Christian this primal originating authority is Christ. In history, the New Testament, the creeds, and the Christian institutions of every sort are modes by which Christ discloses the nature and the sphere of his authority. The modes are conditioned by the fact of relativity in time and place of disclosure. This fact of relativity makes it impossible that Christian doctrines should stand in isolation from the scientific, political, social, ethical, and philosophical beliefs that environ them. Hence, the constantly recurring necessity of re- stating Christian experiences in terms of their relation to a total world-view. Accordingly, each generation must interpret for itself the value of sacred books and [ 220 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE the validity of creeds and ceremonies. The only regula- tive idea in each recurring interpretation is Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God for spiritual and moral ends. [ 2^21 ] IRVING FISHER, Ph.D., NEW HAVEN^ CONN. Professor of political economy at Yale University since 1898; born at Saugerties, N. Y., Feb. 27, 1867; received his education at Yale University, Berlin, and Paris; tutor of mathematics at Yale, 1890-93; assistant professor of mathematics, 1893-95; assistant professor of political economy, 1895-98; editor of the Yale Review, 1896- 1910 ; author of Mathematical Investigations in the Theory of Value and Prices; Elements of Geometry (with Prof. A. W. Phillips) ; A Brief Introduction to the Infinitesimal Calculus; The Nature of Capital and Income; The Rate of Interest; National Vitality; The Purchasing Porver of Money; Elementary Principles of Economics. I AGREE most emphatically with the quotation from Abraham Lincoln and think that the Church will reach its greatest usefulness when the requirement for ad- mission is a declaration of intention to live a righteous life and to help others, including, of course, a reverent attitude toward the divine. I believe that whatever is merely traditional in religion must ultimately give way to the rational, and that it is possible for science to provide the foundation for a religious attitude of mind as well as to provide indications of the proper endeavors for men imbued with the religious spirit. I have a course at Yale in which I have tried to develop this idea, using as one of the bases the great book of Pro- fessor Shaler, Man and the Earthy in which, from a purely scientific point of view, he emphasizes the impor- tance of the consecration of the present generation to the interests of posterity. I think it is fair to say also that the great scientist. Sir Francis Galton, in founding eugenics, had the same religious feeling. Similarly, the [222] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE religious instincts of Gifford Pinchot and Sir Horsuce Plunkett are given their field of activity through the revelations of science as to the needs of conservation, improvements in rural life and happiness. I believe there is a wonderful opportunity for a re- union of science and religion, if scientific men will avoid the attitude of academic aloofness and cynical indiffer- ence to the claims of sentiment, and if religious men, on the other hand, will abandon the attitude of dogmatism and adherence to purely traditional beliefs. [223] GEORGE WALTER FISK, OBERLIN^ OHIO Professor of practical theology at Oberlin Theological Seminary, Oberlin, Ohio, since 1907; junior dean since 1910 ; bom June 3, 1872, at HoUiston, Mass.; educated at Amherst College and Hartford Theological Seminary; held pastorates at Himtington and South Hadley Falls, Mass., and Auburn, Me., 1898-1907; lecturer on business methods, Hartford Theological Seminary, 1902-7; acting dean, Oberlin Seminary, 1 90 8- 10. Author of The Chal- lenge of the Country, Boy-Life and Self-Government, and numerous monographs and articles on Church Administra- tion, The Country Church and Community, etc. I AM keenly interested in your questions regarding the proper standards for church membership in the modem church. There has been a significant change in em- phasis on this question during the past century, a change with which I find myself quite in agreement. I suppose there have been four distinct standards of church membership requirements, orthodox belief, at- tainment in character, specific experience, and Christian purpose. The easiest standard of all is the first. It has never been effective, for it keeps out only the most con- scientious, such as Abraham Lincoln, whom you have cited in your letter. I do not know a church to-day which makes character attainment the standard for ad- mission, though I presume most non-church members regard this as the actual standard in general practise. It would be pure Pharisaism to adopt such a standard of course. A half century ago the emphasis was quite uni- versally, among evangelicals, upon the matter of per- [ 224 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE sonal experience as a test of "saving faith." The stereotyped form was that of conversion, usually stim- ulated by the suggestive power of a revival meeting. Consequently a small percentage of the population were evangelical church members. This was to be expected, for susceptibility to any particular form of experience depends primarily upon one's temperament and native type of decision. Consequently thousands of the best and most Christlike people among the regular church attendants of those days found themselves unable to apply for church membership, for they had never ex- perienced the psychological phenomena of emotional conversion, and were too honest to feign it, though many of them earnestly prayed for it. To-day about 25 per cent of the population are church members, as compared with 7 per cent in 1800. The large gain in proportion has been due, in consider- able degree, to the shifting emphasis which now is upon Christian purpose more than experience, or belief. In many churches now the honest and earnest expression of the purpose to live the Christian life is what is ex- pected of new members. The test of this purpose is some sort of a "covenant of Christian living" which the new member accepts as his constructive platform for living the religious life with the help of God. To be sure, many churches retain a creed still as their test of membership; though many others never had a creed and even decry creeds. I have little sympathy with the popular clamor for "deeds not creeds"; for I of course recognize that every man has his creed, the philosophy of life by which he lives. But he often professes quite another creed, and a professional creed is of little value. I prefer the covenant basis for church membership be- [225] THE CHUKCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE cause it is the creed in practical terms, perhaps all of the creed which can be actually worked into life. We may as well face the fact that people will never absolutely agree in matters of belief. We do not all think alike, and it is not necessary that we should. There can never be Christian unity on the basis of a fixed creed. But with a simple "covenant of Christian liv- ing" there is large opportunity for real union, within which a generous scope for divergence in belief is al- lowed and expected. Many churches might be cited, within the fellowship of which there is wide divergence in details of faith. In fact the members have previously been members of scores of other churches; but they work together splendidly on the basis of a common pur- pose and mutual service. We find a similar experience in Oberlin Theological Seminary, a strictly non-sectarian training school for the Christian ministry. We have this year members of sixteen different denominations of churches, and we can hardly distinguish them from each other. The common devotion to the great kingdom of God and the universal Church unites them all and differences are forgotten. We apprehend that in this way a genuine Christian unity is being worked out by the providence of God, the essential motive of which will be a common consecration and a mutual cooperation for God and humanity. [226] GEORGE HOLLEY GILBERT, Ph.D., D.D., DORSETj VT. Born at Cavendish, Vt., Nov. 4, 1854; was educated at Dartmouth College, Union Theological Seminary, and the University at Leipsic, 1885; ordained to the Congrega- tional ministry, 1886; acting professor of New Testament literature, Chicago Theological Seminary, 1886-87; pro- fessor, 1887-1901; author of The Poetry of Job; The Student's Life of Jesus; The Student's Life of Paul; The Revelation of Jesus; The First Interpreters of Jesus; A Primer of the Christian Religion; A Short History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age; History of the Inter- pretation of the Bible; A Commentary on Acts; Jesus, CREEDS, DOCTRINES, AND THE CHURCH OF TO-DAY A CREED as the doorway into the Christian fold is a well- meant device of the Church itself, not a suggestion of the founder of Christianity. It was the first and one of the most momentous departures from the simple way of Jesus. For, however short and fundamental a creed may be, its use as the test of fitness for membership in the Church tends to reduce Christianity to an opinion; it makes salvation a matter of the mind. Jesus, how- ever, put the chief emphasis on a right will and a good heart. Jesus did not indeed scorn knowledge or undervalue it. His parables provoke thought in a high degree, as do also the short pregnant sayings of the Logia. Yet it was by his personal example, by the spirit of his life, that he sought to draw others to trust the heavenly Father, which, for him, was the beginning and the end [ 227 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE of religion, and to love the fellow-man, which he re- garded as the sum of ethical duty. But the weakness of the Church to-day in promot- ing the cause of Jesus is not to be charged too largely to the fact that it prescribes a creed as the condition of entrance. It is not merely the door of the Church that is forbidding to many, but also what one hears within. For though the pulpit has begun to adjust itself to the residts of historical study of the Bible and to the results of science, it is only a beginning that has been made, and often even in this beginning the heart has not gone with the head. Some preachers present the old conceptions of the Bible and the ancient views of the person of Christ with clippings from psychology and science, and suppose that they are keeping abreast of truth, while others timidly distinguish between what they believe in their own hearts and what they preach, and yet others sturdily refuse to stir from their anchor- age by the "good old doctrines." There is urgent need that preachers should simplify their doctrinal message into harmony with the principles of Jesus. If this process is carried to its legitimate end, it will greatly transform the pulpit, and therefore will in time transform the religious thought and the life of the Church. There is also urgent need that preachers, following the example of Jesus who found God in na- ture, should modernize and vivify their message by cor- relating it with those results of science which are most suggestive of ethical and religious truth. This corre- lation will do much to extend the influence of the Church among thoughtful people. [228] GEORGE MILBRY GOULD, M.D., ATLANTIC CITY, N. J. Physician; born at Auburn, Me., Nov. 8, 1848; graduated from the Ohio Wesleyan University, 1 873 ; Jefferson Med- ical College, Philadelphia, 1888; editor of the Medical News, 1892-95; Philadelphia Medical Journal, 1898- 1900; American Medicine, 1901-5; Fellow of the College of Physicians, Philadelphia, and member of the American Ophthalmic Society of the American Academy of Medi- cine; author of A New Medical Dictionary; Pocket Medical Dictionary; Illustrated Dictionary of Medicine and Biol- ogy; Borderland Studies; Diseases of the Eye; The Mean- ing and the Method of Life; An Autumn Singer; American Year Book of Medicine and Surgery; Anomalies and Curi- osities of Medicine; Encyclopedia of Practical Medicine and Surgery; Suggestions to Medical Writers; Biographic Clinics; The Practitioners' Medical Dictionary; Right- handedness; The Infinite Presence; associate editor of the Ldfe and Letters of Edmund Clarence Stedman, and of Genius and Other Essays by Edmund Clarence Stedman, I WOULD epitomize your questions thus : How can we make religion scientific? Or, what is really the same question: How can we make science religious? Sub- ordinate is the practical difficulty: How can the answers be fused into a working creed for a popular church organization? The desire for a scientific religion and a religious science is proof of the conviction that science and re- ligion are of equal value and importance to the best human character and life. Without the scientific in- tellect and religious ethics at the heart of personality, the drift is inevitable toward self-satisfactions and de- terminism. Without knowledge, i.e., science, of the world of matter and force, a person is the sport of the [ 229 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Zeitgeist, and of his passions and desires. It is the same if one neglect religion and conscience : life becomes subservient to the outside laws and world of "fate." Slavery follows either extreme, for fatalism is the inobviable result of either choice. Freedom is the reward of the choice of the double masters. Because, if, without prejudice, we look at a human being, oneself or another, we recognize that he is a composite of psyche and flesh. "The Logos became flesh." Concerning ultimate origins either of spirit or matter, we know absolutely nothing, and to say one fur- ther word about them is nonsense. Somehow the two are strangely and intimately united while we live here, but neither could have created the other. The miracle of their unlikeness is almost as great as that of their interblending by incarnation. Monism is the be- lief in either to the exclusion of the other, and violates the truth, plain to any disingenuous mind, of their independent existence. Whether materialistic or spir- itualistic, monism is a sin both of intellect and of morals, and, if thoroughgoing, speedily ends in atheism and determinism. The biologic world we know is the great adventure of God, or the universal Psyche, in materiality, that he may win it to the synthesis of purpose and life. The control of the physical world and its utilization for spir- itual ends is the method and the meaning of biology, or the incarnation-process. We know that any life-form is made up of two realities, spirit and matter. That the ontogeny repeats the phylogeny — the most encompassing of all truths — shows one soul, one organic memory, in all the history from the beginning to now, and to be carried on by [230] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE every living organism. That the mystery of life thus comes into the mystery of matter and creates the mys- tery of biology and humanity — this is the most thrilling and largest truth in the grasp of the human mind. The knowledge of the physical side of the cosmic marriage constitutes science ; the love and cooperation of the indi- vidual life with the universal life is religion. Of what- ever else God may be and do before or beyond this world's incarnation-process, we know nothing. Perhaps we shall know when we progress toward larger love of and participation in his life and work. But all our biological science is seeing with his vision, rethinking his thoughts, and aiding him in his aim and our work. He is the Father of religion and the first and greatest of all scientists; our merit and happiness is in loving and helping him according to Christ's all-comprising commands — Be ye therefore perfect, even as your heavenly Father is perfect; Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, soul, mind, strength, and thy neigh- bor as thyself. That is the life of all theology, and, alone, is creed enough, perhaps. The church which limits its theology to that, with some such subdominant and overtones as I have crudely suggested, would gain an ever-increasing membership of good men and women. [231] CASPAR RENE GREGORY, Ph.D., D.D., S.T.D., LL.D., LEIPSIC^ GERMANY Professor of theology. University of Leipsic, since 1891; born at Philadelphia, Pa., Nov. 6, 1846; was educated at the University of Pennsylvania, the Theological Seminary of the Reformed Presbyterian Church, Philadelphia, Princeton Theological Seminary, and the University of Leipsic; subeditor of the Theologische Liter aturzeitung, 1876-84; pastor of the American Chapel at Leipsic, 1878- 79; privat-docent of theology. University of Leipsic, 1884-89; associate professor of theology, 1889-91; author of the Prolegomena (3 parts) to the eighth edition, criti- ca major, of K. von Tischendorf's Novum Testamentum Greece; Texthritik des Neuen Testaments; Canon and Text of the New Testament; Das Freer Logion; Die griechischen Handschriften des Neuen Testaments; Ein- leitung in das Neue Testament; Wellhausen und Johannes; Die Schriften von Carl Wessely; Vorschldge fur eine kritische Ausgabe des griechischen Neuen Testaments; Die Koridethi Evangelion (with Gustav Boermann) ; has translated into English C. E. Luthardt's St. John the Author of the Fourth Gospel, and the same scholar's com- mentary on the Gospel of John (3 vols.) ; assisted Charles Hodge in the preparation of his Systematic Theology (3 vols.). The two main reasons for indifference toward the Church seem to me to be for the poor the feeling that the Church is backing up the rich people who make their life hard, and for the rich the feeling that the Church deals in a matter that is out of date. As for membership, our Lutheran Church does not pledge its members to the particular creeds. I regard the words in Matt. 22 : 37-39, to which Lincoln referred, as quite enough for a creed. As for theology, it is not of the least value if it does [232] "Walter F. Adeney < (C) Lafayette-Manchester "^'a) Milton O. Evans THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE not accord with every actually proved result of historical or other scientific research. Theologians should grant to every opposing theo- logian the right to think and speak for himself, should join to a strict following of the dictates of their own conscience the freedom for other people to follow theirs. [233] WILLIAM ELLIOT GRIFFIS, D.D., L.H.D., ITHACA, N. y. Lecturer and author; born in Philadelphia, Sept. 17, 1843; educated at Rutgers College (New Brunswick, N. J.) and Union Theological Seminary; went to Japan for the purpose of organizing schools, 1870; superintend- ent of education in the province of Echizen, 1871; pro- fessor of physics in the Imperial University of Tokyo, 1872-74; pastor of the First Reformed Church, Schenec- tady, N. Y., 1877-86, Shawmut Congregational Church, Boston, 1886-93, First Congregational Church, Ithaca, N. Y., 1893-1903; author of The Mikado's Empire; Jap- anese Fairy World; Asiatic History; China, Corea and Japan; Corea — The Hermit Nation; Corea, Without and Within; Matthew Calbraith Perry; The Lily Among Thorns; Honda^ the Samurai; Sir William Johnson and the Six Nations; Japan — In History, Folklore and Art; Brave Little Holland and What She Taught Us; The Re- ligions of Japan; Romance of Discovery; Romance of American Colonization; Romance of Conquest; The Pil- grims in Their Three Homes; America in the East; Ver- becJe in Japan; The Pathfinders of the Revolution; A Maker of the New Orient; Sunny Memories of Three Pastorates; Dux Christus, An Outline Study of Japan; The Japanese Nation in Evolution; The Story of New Netherland; China's Story in Myth, Legend, Art and An- nals, JESUS FOR OUR AGE AND THE AGES Let one put himself in the place of the inquiring Greeks (John 10: 20-25), and say, "Sir, we would see Jesus." What would be the answer received? From the ma- jority of the teachers or custodians of the religion of Jesus, as organized to-day, would come a reply far re- moved in spirit and form, I fear, from that given by the Master. [ 234 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Acceptance of a body of traditions, long and compli- cated statements of alleged Christian doctrine (largely founded on European scholasticism and texts from the Old Testament, or the Apocrypha, or on particular epochs of art, tradition, or controversy) and willingness to be initiated into the forms, ceremonies, and mysteries, more or less occult and unscientific, of the divisions, obe- diences, communions or sects, would be demanded. As through a thicket, one must press to touch the Master. Yet these inheritances and verbal symbols now laid on men's consciences are chiefly from the Middle Ages, or, still worse, are the relics of savagery, barbarism, or semicivilized paganism. In a word, a church-member of to-day, usually, and certainly a church officer must subscribe or assent to metaphysics, intellectual proposi- tions or manners or customs, formed and crusted cen- turies ago, which have no necessary connection with any- thing that Jesus said, taught, or lived. I believe that a reformation of Christianity is as much needed to-day as when, in the sixteenth century, the Christian religion in Northern Europe was simpli- fied, or when the language of the Holy Scriptures and of church worship was taken out of its dead forms and put into the living speech of the people. Greek philosophy, Latin discipline and superstition, with Prot- estant dogmatism have so overlaid "the simplicity that is in Christ," that, unless it were of God, the religion of Jesus would long ago have been smothered. All science and pure religion tend to unity and therefore simplicity. The Scriptures show this. As I read the record of man's spiritual experience in the Bible, I behold a series of releases, deliverances of the souls of men from worn-out dogmas, breakings of the [235] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE crust and burstings of the seed from its sheathing. The voice that calls is God's. The imagery and drapery of the narratives, being of men, differ, but the active growth and deliverance is ever one and the same. There is Adam's "fall," or the rise of the primitive man into moral consciousness, and the divine summons to him to the sorrowful yet glorious discipline of holiness. Abraham, enlightened of God, and delivered from the dead orthodoxy of his country, people and times, which demanded Isaac as a victim, forsakes human and offers animal sacrifices. Jacob, agonizing in soul to know who and what God is, would learn his name, nature, mean- ing, and purpose. Each of these events means reformation and ad- vance in theology. Who that is a spiritual leader of men to-day but has been at Jabbok's ford and wrestled with an "angel," thankful to be victor with God, even if limping in spirit and his earthly pride wounded. Have we not been there? Job first sat in honor and then lay upon the dung-heap, meeting the same sort of comforters and philosophers that we meet. Happy are we if we hear God's invitation to walk with him. Was Samuel's call any different in kind from that which comes to each one of us? Was the call of the prophets, Elijah, Elisha, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Joel, Daniel, or of Paul, fundamentally distinct from that which comes to us to-day? Alas, that so many monopolizers of relig- ion and professional purveyors of salvation stop their ears ! But the seeking soul, not afraid of priest, parson, synod, or rich pew-holder hearkens as of old. God not only was, but he is. He has not changed, and it is glorious to think that he is coming and is to come. We must ponder the answer of Jesus to the inquir- [236] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ing Greeks, for it is exactly apt to-day. The "grain of corn," as we have it, is traditional Christianity, a conglomerate of pre-ancient, ethnic, and medieval metaphysics, traditions, superstitions, and what not that one cannot discover in what Jesus said, taught, or lived. It is an outrage upon the Christ to assert and flaunt these assets of tradition in his name and make them obstacles to faith. It is a sinful wrong to force such a yoke upon souls that hunger for truth and spir- itual joy. The Church has no right to do this, yet she does, keeping out thousands of honest men like Abraham Lincoln, truth-seekers, lovers of science, and those whose living creed is "Jesus only." The "grain of corn" must die, in order to bear the fruit which the Master expects. The basis and erection of a true theology can and must be found only in what Jesus taught, lived, and commanded, for only that is Christianity. Other doc- trines, venerable and precious, are affairs of intellectual discipline, matters of individual taste, or questions of ethnic or personal temperament; but no more to be laid on the conscience now than are the scores of dogmas, customs, and points of ritual which were long ago outworn and cast away. Once, they were salt for seasoning, but now, the savor gone, they may serve only for the mending of the road for the eternal march of humanity. No theology can stand which does not accord with the assured results of science. All the spiritual values of human life and all that has uplifted man must find fulfilment in the Christianity of Jesus which the Church is yet to offer. They must be incorporated into the system of truth held by a Christian, whether they [237] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE come out of science or from the religions which Jesus said he came not to destroy but to fulfil. It seems to me most of the spirit, and the larger bulk of what Jesus actually taught and lived, has not yet been absorbed by or incorporated into our accepted theology. Most church members are afraid to face Jesus fully and to accept his doctrine of renunciation. We have set the disciple above the Lord himself. We have tithed too many herbs in the Pharisee's scholastic garden, while neglecting the weightier matters on which Jesus laid emphasis. As he himself gave us the substance of the law and the prophets, why not let these suffice, especially for what, before opening the church doors, we dare to lay on men's consciences? I confess that after a half century of life as a stu- dent, I have never found that history, science, research, or critical study, in the long run, has disturbed my sim- ple, personal piety or shaken my faith in my heavenly Father, and will not, so long as I make Jesus, and not dogma, my Master. I have found it wholesomer to fear God than to fear church dignitaries, trustees, pew- holders, or fellow pastors with high or low salaries, or to worry over position or emolument. Now my faith in Jesus is stronger than ever. My vision of the funda- mental truths contained in the old doctrines, which are still made to wear the clothes of medieval metaphysics, is clearer, yet I should gladly see them arrayed in new robes. The Son of man revealed the Father — ^that is the sum of our theology proper. What Jesus taught and lived suffices for all our problems, for he knew what was in man. That is the substance of a true anthropol- ogy. In him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and [238] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE knowledge. Increasingly I lose confidence in ecclesiasti- cal claims and theories of every sort that discredit Christian experience. More clearly do I recognize Jesus in his disciples, whether they wear the uniforms of the sects or not. To labor for men is to labor for him. In the line of my studies of history and comparative religion, I confess, I find God more fully and clearly through this discipline than in the accretions and ex- crescences of popular Christianity, or of orthodoxy so- called, especially that made long ago by majority votes in councils. With the old systems of theology and church procedure we can never solve the problems that press upon us to-day. By following Christ fully, en- tering into his mind, renouncing most of the medieval dogmas labeled Christian, dropping those which he did not himself teach ; and by facing ostracism, if need be, or even poverty; replacing race-, color-, creed-, and so- cial repulsions, as far as possible, with love, and adding to our other sacrifices that of self, as fully the living spirit of Christ helps us to do so, we shall win the world and save our own souls. At present, it is obedience to the ecclesiastical cor- poration, or acceptance of the dogma, that is the su- preme requirement. What is needed is, first, passionate loyalty to Jesus, and, second, "the service of humanity by re-born men." Perhaps some old civilization and type of man, not yet reckoned Christian, will furnish these in intensity and compelling example. God speed it! The Church will then no longer shelter orthodox scoundrels and reprobates who are obedient to their hierarchy. Let us reverence the old creeds as wayinarks of progress and use selected portions of them as material [239] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE for the new edifices of the intellect ; yes, even make devo- tional use of them, but never stumbling blocks in the paths of those who say and feel, "Sirs, we would see Jesus." Oh, for the continuing vision of the Christ who re- vealed the Father — ^not the Christ of the Greek meta- physics, or of Roman legend and obedience, or of medi- eval or Renaissance art, or of Protestant dogma or coun- cils, but the Christ with whom John walked, and whom he saw again in the island of Patmos — the Christ of the age and the ages. As among the choice flowers of faith and expression in the gardens of the past we each have our favorites, let me pluck and offer mine from the initial article of the Belgic Confession of Faith. It seems to me worth all the others in that blood-stained document gilded with the gold of truth in martyr fires. "We all believe with the heart and confess with the mouth that there is only one simple and spiritual Being, which we call God, and that He is eternal, incompre- hensible, invisible, immutable, infinite, almighty, per- fectly wise, just, good, and the overflowing fountain of all good," — ^whom Jesus revealed to us. In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Nisi Dominus Frustra, [240] ALMON GUNNISON, D.D., LL.D., CANTON^ N. Y. President of St. Lawrence University, Canton, N. Y., since 1898; born at Hallowell, Me., March 2, 1844; studied at Tufts College and St. Lawrence University; ordained to the Universalist ministry, 1868; pastor at Bath, Me., 1868-71; for twenty years was pastor of AH* Soul's Church, Brooklyn, and for ten years pastor of the First Church, Worcester, Mass.; author of Rambles Overland; Wayside and Fireside Rambles. No branch of the Christian Church has any right to make harder terms of entrance than were made by the founder of the Church, Jesus Christ. His requirements were the simplest ; admirably expressed in the words of Lincoln: love to God and love to man. The tendency of the Church has been to multiply requirements. The student of Church history wonders at the hair-splitting tests which the ingenuity of dog- matists has devised to keep people out of the Church. It is not wonderful that skeptics have sneered and the thoughtful have revolted and the reverent have been sorrowful at the pettiness of the requirements made by little sects for admission into their little fellowships. Denominations have held that the divine grace could come only through their little conduits and that they were the interpreters of the oracles of God. No more hopeful sign of the times exists than the recent renascence back to the simplicity of primitive Christianity, before the creed tinkers arrogantly be- gan to make their doctrines out by "the poor device of man." One by one the barnacles of dogma have been eliminated. First, wise men, with ingenious sophistry, [241] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE tried to square their creeds with their common sense; next, they ignored the absurdities and at last struck them out and denied that they ever believed them. No one now, unless he be a relic of a past era, pretends to believe them. They have not been argued out of exist- ence, they have simply been abandoned. Witchcraft, which was once one of the accepted and cherished articles of Christian belief, was never destroyed by argument, it was simply left behind, abandoned. There is something in the atmosphere of modern times that destroys the old barbarities of ancient dogmas, as the warm breath of spring melts the frost. Old theologians have become humane. Men begin to cherish "the larger hope," and what men hope they begin to believe, and what they believe they preach. The old creeds are hung up for monuments as we keep the discarded thumb screws of an age which has been left behind. Whether the Church can win back the influence which its petty creeds have lost and bring to its sane administration and its simple creeds those whom its artificial restrictions have alienated is a question yet to be solved. The Church to-day is the Church foundationed on common sense. It is kind, philanthropic, doing the Lord's will with sanity and in the spirit of love. The idol makers and the dove sellers of formality have been driven out of the temple, and the waters of life are offered freely to who- soever will. The world needs the Church never more than now, and never was it so well equipped for service as now when it has thrown off its yokes and manacles. [242] THEODORE HAERING, Th.D., TUBINGEN, GERMANY Professor of New Testament exegesis, dogmatics, and ethics at the University of Tiibingen since 1895; born at Stuttgart, April 22, 1848; educated at the universities of Tubingen and Berlin, 1866-71; lecturer in the Evangelical Theological Seminary, Tiibingen, 1873-76; pastor at Calw, 1876-81; Stuttgart, 1881-86; professor at Zurich, 1886-89; professor at Gottingen, 1890-95; associate editor of the Theologiscke Studien aus Wuerttemberg, 1880-89; author of Ueber das Bleibende im Glauben an Christusj Die Theologie und der Vorwurf der doppelten Wahrheit; Zu Ritschls Versohnungslehre ; Zur Versohnungslehre; Unsere personliche Stellung zum geistlichen Beruf; Gerechtigkeit Gotfes bei Paulus; Die Lebensfrage der systematischen Theologie; Das christliche Leben (translated into Eng- lish) ; Zeitgem'dsse Predigt; Der christliche Glaube (also translated into English) ; Personlich-praktisches aus der Glaubenslehre — Predigten. The experience of Abraham Lincoln seems to me to be both typical and non-typical for a thousand other men, in so far as they do not wish to identify themselves with the definite confession of a definite church. Non-typi- cal, in that very few among them will understand and confirm with their life and death Lincoln's motto, taken from Mark 12: 28-33, in the deep sense in which this splendid man understood it. As he understood and obeyed this word, it contains not only the supreme law of Christian morality, but it pre-supposes also the gos- pel of God's love as revealed to us by Christ. We can love God and our neighbor — as Christ understands this commandment — only "because God first loved us." Christ himself did not give this law merely as a legis- lator, but as the bringer and representative of the king- [ 243 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE dom of God. In fact, the confessions of the different Christian churches do not really claim to be anything but confessions of this gospel. They are doubtless im- perfect, frequently calling forth the contradiction of individuals. But to abolish them and to cling to Mark 12: 28-33 would be of no avail, because, as was said before, this word is by no means understood in its full depth by all those who appropriate it, at the same time expressing their opposition to the confessions. The confessions might certainly be simplified and developed, but if they contain nothing of that gospel they are worthless on account of their vagueness; they are thus not expressions of the Christian faith and life in their distinction from any other religion or system of ethics. And, until a Christian with a real call to be a reformer and capable of making himself heard and believed offers a new and better worded confession, it will be better for us to adhere to the old and imperfect confes- sion of that church which is comparatively the best home for us, where we may feel certain that, if that church is Protestant and not Roman, she will not only permit us, but enjoin upon us, the Christian freedom of having a conviction of our own. With this the second question is already answered implicitly and in principle. It is, in my opinion, indis- pensable for systematic theology and essential for the theology and essential for the existence of a Protestant church honestly to try to fmd the points of contact be- tween Christian truth and all other truth. If the Church must die "then let her die of truth," as we may say, quoting a word of Fichte's. But it is the belief of Christians that she will not die, because in the gospel she possesses the truth of God, which she must learn [244] THE CmJKCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE to understand more and more thoroughly, and concern- ing which she must, in every new epoch, again try to find points of contact with truth in general. The way in which she must do this will be different in different epochs. There are no everlasting apologetics or dog- matics ; there is only an everlasting gospel. [245] ADOLF HARNACK, Ph.D., Th.D., DJur., BERLIN^ GERMANY Professor of theology at the University of Berlin since 1889; born at Dorpat, Livonia, May 7, 1851; educated at Dorpat, 1869-71; associate professor at Leipsic, 1876; professor of church history at Giessen, 1879-86, and Mar- burg, 1886-89; general director of the Royal Library, Berlin, since 1905; one of the editors of the Theologische Liter aturzeitung, 1881-1911^ and since 1882 of the Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Litteratur; author of Dogmengeschichte (3 vols.) ; Ge- schichte der altchristlichen Litteratur bis Eusebius; Die 'Apostellehre und die judischen beiden Wege; Die Zeit des Ignatius; Medicinisches aus der dltesten Kirchenge- schichte; Geschichte der Koniglichen Preussischen Acad- emic der Wissenschaften (4 vols.) ; Das Wesen des Chris- tenthums (translated into English under the title What is Christianity}) ; Das Christ entum und die Geschichte (English translation, Christianity and History) ; Die Aufgabe der theologischen FaJcultaten und die allgemeine Religionsgeschichte ; Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums in den erst en drei Jahrhunderten (English translation. The Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries) ; Reden und Aufsdtze; Militia Christi, die christliche Religion und der Soldatenstand in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten; Beitrdge zur Einleitung in das Neue Testament; Zrvei Worte Jesu; Essays on the Social Gospel (with W. Herrmann) ; The Acts of the Apostles. *The gospel is no theoretical system of doctrine or phi- losophy of the universe; it is doctrine only in so far as it proclaims the reality of God the Father. It is a glad message assuring us of life eternal, and telling us what the things and the forces with which we have to do are worth. By treating of life eternal it teaches us how to lead our lives aright. It tells us of the value of the *From What is Christianity^ G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York, 1902, by kind permission of the publishers. [246] THE CHUKCR THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE human soul, of humility, of mercy, of purity, of the cross, and the worthlessness of worldly goods and anxi- ety for the things of which earthly life consists. And it gives the assurance that, in spite of every struggle, peace, certainty, and something within that can never be destroyed will be the crown of a life rightly led. What else can "the confession of a creed" mean under these conditions but to do the will of God, in the cer- tainty that he is the Father and the one who will recom- pense? Jesus never spoke of any other kind of "creed." Even when he says, "Whosoever shall confess me be- fore men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven," he is thinking of people doing as he did; he means the confession which shows itself in feeling and action. How great a departure from what he thought and enjoined is involved in putting a Chris- tological creed in the forefront of the gospel, and in teaching that before a man can approach it he must learn to think rightly about Christ. That is putting the cart before the horse. A man can think and teach rightly about Christ only if, and in so far as, he has already begun to live according to Christ's gospel. There is no forecourt to his message through which a man must pass ; no yoke which he must first of all take upon himself. The thoughts and assurances which the gospel provides are the first thing and the last thing, and every soul is directly arraigned before them. Still less, however, does the gospel presuppose any definite knowledge of nature, or stand in any connec- tion with such knowledge; not even in a negative sense can this contention be maintained. It is religion and the moral element that are concerned. The gospel puts the living God before us. Here, too, the confession of [ 247 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE him in belief in him and in the fulfilment of his will is the sole thing to be confessed ; this is what Jesus Christ meant. So far as the knowledge is concerned — and it is vast — which may be based upon this belief, it always varies with the measure of a man's inner development and subjective intelligence. But to possess the Lord of heaven and earth as a Father is an experience to which nothing else approaches; and it is an experience which the poorest soul can have, and to the reality of which he can bear testimony. An experience — it is only the religion which a man has himself experienced that is to be confessed; every other creed or confession is in Jesus's view hypocritical and fatal. If there is no broad "theory of religion" to be found in the gospel, still less is there any direction that a man is to begin by accepting and confessing any ready-made theory. Faith and creed are to proceed and grow up out of the all-important act of turning from the world and to God, and creed is to be nothing but faith reduced to practise. "All men have not faith," says the Apostle Paul, but all men ought to be veracious and be on their guard in religion against lip-service and light-hearted assent to creeds. "A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first and said. Son, go work to-day in my vineyard. He answered and said, I will not ; but afterward he repented and went. And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and said, I go, sir ; and went not." [248] EUGENE RUSSELL HENDRIX, D.D., LL.D., KANSAS CITY^ MO. Bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, since 1886; born at Fayette, Mo., May 17, 1847; was educated at Wesleyan University, Conn., and Union Theological Seminary; ordained to the ministry of the M. E. Church, South, 1870; pastor at Leavenworth, Kans., 1869-70; Ma- con, Mo., 1870-72; St. Joseph, Mo., 1872-76; Glasgow, Mo., 1877-78; president of Central College, Mo., 1878- 86; Cole lecturer at Vanderbilt University, 1903; Quillian lecturer at Emory College, 1903; president of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America, 1908-12; president of the Vanderbilt University Board of Trustees, in 1909; author of Around the World; Skilled Labor for the Master; The Religion of the Incarnation; The Person- ality of the Holy Spirit; Christ's Table Talk, Be it known that the great majority (some 17,000,000) of Protestant Christians of America have declared their simple creed in common, "in Jesus Christ as their divine Lord and Saviour." This was done at the Inter-church Federation Conference held in Carnegie Hall, New York City in December, 1905. This represented not only the simple and essential doctrinal statement of the four hundred delegates from more than 100,000 Protes- tant ministers in thirty-two of the great denominations, but became the unanimous action of their chief ecclesi- astical judicatories. Out of this three years later came "The Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America," a veritable church council which meets every four years. The beautiful simplicity of their creed has arrested the attention of thoughtful men everywhere. Dr. James Denney now happily suggests that the sufficient decla- [249] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ration of ministers and officers of the Church is found in this language: "I believe in God, through Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord and Saviour." — ^All of our gospel is here and none should object to it. [250] HERBERT HENSLEY HENSON, D.D., WESTMINSTER^ ENGLAND Canon of Westminster Abbey and rector of St. Margaret's since 1900; born in London, Nov. 8, 1863; educated pri- vately and at Oxford; head of the Oxford House, Bethnal Green, 1887-88; Vicar of Barking, Essex, 1888-95; In- cumbent of St. Mary's Hospital, Ilford, 1895-1900; author of Light and Leaven; Apostolic Christianity; Cut Bono: an Open Letter to Lord Halifax; Ad Rem, Thoughts on the Crisis in the Church; edited Church Problems, a View of Modern Anglicanism, by various authors; Dissent in England; Godly Union and Concord; Cross Bench Views of Current Church Questions; Preaching to the Times; Sincerity and Subscription; English Religion in the 17th Century; The Value of the Bible, and Other Sermons; Moral Discipline in the Christian Church; Religion in the Schools; Christian Marriage; The National Church; Christ and the Nation; The Liberty of Prophesying (Lyman Beecher Lectures) ; Westminster Sermons, * On the one hand, I approach the discussion of the creed from the point of view of one who himself accepts the traditional theology as the necessary basis of teach- ing; and, on the other hand, I acknowledge that this traditional theology has in many respects fallen out of accord with modern knowledge, and needs to be cau- tiously but frankly revised. This attitude of acceptance with reservations is not likely to be welcome, or even intelligible, to many people. The man who adopts it must needs expose himself to attack from opposite quar- ters. He will certainly not satisfy the "liberal" theo- logian, who has no other attitude toward traditional doctrine than that of contempt; and he will as certainly be an object of suspicion to the "orthodox" churchman, *From The Creed in the Pulpit^ by the Rev. H. Hensley Henson, D.D., by permission of the publishers, Hodder and Stoughton, London. [251] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE who finds in the difficulties which attach to credenda a reason for insisting on their acceptance with the more vehemence. Nevertheless, this via media of caution and charity will not lack justification in the eyes of all who appreciate the conditions under which an historical re- ligion must be apprehended, and the dubiety which properly attaches to revisions of credenda suggested by a criticism of very ancient documents themselves admittedly fashioned by older beliefs. Moreover, I doubt if many "liberal" theologians remember suffi- ciently that revision or "restatement" implies the pres- ervation of the truth which has to be revised and re- stated; that nothing which has disclosed the secrets of the spirit can ever be surrendered, however greatly the form in which it is expressed may vary — that, in short, the faith is unalterably the same, albeit the formal cre- denda change their form from age to age. This identity of faith is best seen in relation to the person and work of the divine Founder of Christianity. "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and to-day, yea and forever." The test which I would apply to every suggested "restate- ment" of Christian theology would be its treatment of the Founder. The alternative shortly expressed in the phrase "Jesus or Christ" seems to me to set forth a contrast no less violent than that between Christianity and the denial of Christianity, I do not believe that such a separation as is there suggested can be made. The history of Jesus is a vital part of the faith in Christ. The two may not be severed without cutting the roots of spiritual vitality. From the first the sense of be- lievers has expressed itself in the combination, twofold yet indivisible, of the historical and the spiritual, Jesus Christ. We cannot now divide the two, making Jesus a [ 252 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE myth and retaining Christ as a living power. That is all one with the fatuity which would maintain that a foun- dation is only necessary while the house is in building, but ceases to be important when once it has been finished. Rather is it the case that the size and splendor of the building test and reveal the strength of the foundation. Faith throws back upon the history, which created it, a glory which illumines as well as transfigures. Identity of belief in Jesus Christ has been consistent with frequent changes of opinion with respect to the circumstances of his earthly life. For the Church has from the first possessed no other knowledge with respect to that life than that which the testimony of the apostles, of which the essentials have been preserved in the New Testament, has provided. It follows therefore that the view of the life of Jesus which from time to time has prevailed in the Church has been determined by the methods of interpretation which have been adopted by Christian students. So long as an unsuspecting liter- alism governed their minds, it was inevitable that the life of the Incarnate should have been seen through a luminous haze of miracle. Discrepancies between the evangelists could not, of course, be concealed, but their significance was not perceived or suspected. Harmo- nists were able to simplify their task into the process of suggesting sufiiciently plausible schemes of happen- ings into which all the statements of Scripture could be fitted without palpable absurdity. Ingenuity and in- dustry in those ages of faith looked over the prerogative of faith itself, and "removed mountains." At the touch of criticism the palaces of harmony vanished. The old relation between the creed and the Scriptures became difficult to sustain, when proof texts were disallowed [253] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE and an uncomfortable element of uncertainty had been admitted. The root of our present difficulties is the fact that, while our methods of interpreting Scripture have changed, the theological system based on the abandoned methods has remained unchanged. We are still formally committed to the Christolcgy of the ancient Church, which may be said to have received its final shape at the Council of Chalcedon in A. D. 451, but we have long parted company with the exegetical processes which the authors of that Christology employed in fashioning it. Hence the embarrassments and confusions in which the modern teacher of the ancient doctrine finds himself immersed; and hence the reasonableness of permitting a large latitude of discussion to all competent and relig- ious students, who address themselves to the difficult but indispensable task of correlating what is true in the old theology with what is manifestly true in the Scrip- tures as they must needs understand them now. The concession of such a large latitude is not less the re- quirement of justice to individuals. [254] J. ARTHUR HILL, BRADFORD^ ENGLAND Has devoted himself to the study of philosophy, compara- tive religion and psychical research since 1897; born at Holmfield, near Halifax, Yorkshire, Dec. 4, 1872; educated at Thornton Grammar School, Bradford; began business career at fourteen, but continued studies in French, Ger- man and chemistry, qualifying himself as analytical chemist; attended classes in weaving and designing; be- came manager of a manufacturing firm; being invalided by a heart-wrench at the age of twenty-five devoted him- self to study; author of New Evidences in Psychical Re- search (introduction by Sir Oliver Lodge) ; Religion and Modern Psychology; Spiritualism and Psychical Research, The causes of the indifference of a large proportion of people to the claims of the Church are perhaps chiefly three. (1) The fulness and strenuousness of life, and the general sense of its shortness and the immense amount that there is to be done in it. This on the serious side; while on the other side there is equal, and more regrettable, fulness and strenuousness in the fever- ish pursuit of pleasure, which seems to seize inevitably on prosperous peoples. Nations wax fat and kick. (2) Church services (i.e., of the Church of England) are too long and tedious. Some of the prayers are beautiful if they were not spoiled by too frequent iteration. The "confession" is historically interesting, but is rather unreal and excessive; and moreover, is not the sort of thing one wants to sing. And the whole scheme of the service has become too mechanical; has stiffened and petrified into a thing which has no life or stimulating power in it. Of course, I know that the truly pious soul can draw nutriment from the bleakest and most [255] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE unpromising material; but these constitute a minority, and I am talking about the indifference of the majority. The American (Protestant Episcopal) Church has suc- ceeded in modifying this stiffness, and its authorized Prayer Book contains variations wisely devised in the interests of elasticity and livingness. (3) Too much dogma. But it is unnecessary to say much about this, for even the ecclesiastical powers themselves are per- ceiving that "belief" in metaphysical propositions is, as expressed by the majority of "believers," a rather empty thing — a thing of words only. The ordinary layman does not and cannot understand the subtle metaphysical propositions which embody or embodied orthodox doctrine. Naturally, therefore, he can get up no sort of interest in them ; and moreover they seem to him to be out of touch with life. The average layman is a pragmatist; that which "makes no difference" he will contemptuously ignore. And now that he no longer believes that his eternal bliss or torment after death depends on his acceptance or rejection of this or that dogma, he does not see that it matters much what he or anybody else thinks about such things as the con- substantiality of the persons in the Trinity. I am not saying that these metaphysical propositions are mean- ingless. They are not. Some of them have very deep and inspiring meanings. E.g., it is good to think that the begotten of the Father — i.e., the universe which the Supreme Power created — is of one substance with him, and is not a slag of dead matter, utterly debased and remote from God. But this sort of interpretation is not exactly welcome to ecclesiasticism, which suspects it of a pantheistic tendency. And even this interpreta- tion, as well as that of the medieval churchman, is too [ ^56 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE metaphysical to appeal to a practical generation. The modern mind does not want to "go to heaven" ; it wants to bring some heaven down to earth; and it sees that through the application of science, and general increase of knowledge, an indefinite amount of improvement in the conditions of human life is possible. In short, the modern tendency is toward a this- world religion. "One thing at least is certain, this life flies," and there is much work of a useful kind to be done. In medieval and pre-scientific days, the thinker was equally aware of the imsatisfactoriness of the state of the world, but, having no conception of the doctrine of development, or of what can be done by studying and controlling natural forces, he despaired of the future here, and fixed his gaze on the beyond. We modems have got over the despair. We preach a gospel of hope. This utilitarianism is not materialism. I believe in some sort of a future life, in the conservation of values, in a Supreme Being in whom we live and move, whose purposes I can no more comprehend than a phagocyte in my blood can comprehend my purposes, yet in whom I am somehow playing a not unimportant part, as the phagocyte does in my ovni body. Therefore I am no materialist. But the modern utilitarian tendency seems , to me, on the whole, healthy. It is a recovery from the medieval longsightedness which overlooked that which lay at hand, or, seeing it, despaired of improvement. The modern sees it and tackles the job of improving it. Consequently if by "the Church" is meant the old conception of religion as chiefly "other-worldly," I view indifference to it with perfect equanimity or even satis- faction. I think there is more religion now than ever before in the history of the world; more mutual under- [257] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE standing, sympathy, good- will; yes, even more rever- ence for "that which is above us" — in Goethe's phrase — for this very wonderful universe and for that Power which made it. This is what I call religion. If it is now largely outside the Church — well, I don't see that it matters, so long as it is in the world at all. If my friend is my friend, it doesn't matter whether he has his Sunday clothes on or not. If religion is here, in increas- ing measure, it doesn't matter whether it is in the respec- table clothing of the Church or not. In this optimistic statement about our progress, I do not forget what I have just said about the feverish pursuit of pleasure and the strenuous competition of industrial life. These are, partially, at least, evils. But the countervailing goods are greater. We are progress- ing. I have faith in continuous advance, continuous revelation, continuous working out of God's high pur- poses. [258] NEWELL DWIGHT HILLIS, D.D., L.H.D., BROOKLYN, N. Y. Pastor of Plymouth Congregational Church, Brooklyn, since 1899; born at Magnolia, la., Sept. 2, 1858; was educated at Lake Forest University, and McCormick The- ological Seminary, Chicago; ordained to the Presbyterian ministry, 1887; held pastorates at First Church, Peoria, 111., 1887-90; Evanston, 111., 1890-94; Central Church, Chicago, 1 894-99 ; author of The Investment of Influence; A Man's Value to Society; How the Inner Light Failed; Foretokens of Immortality ; Great Boohs as Life-Teachers; Influence of Christ in Modern Life; The Quest of Happi- ness; Building a Working Faith; Success Through Self- Help; The Quest of John Chapman; Fortune of the Re- public; Contagion of Character; Prophets of a New Era; The Misfortune of a World Without Pain; The Story of Phcedrus, There never was a time when the claims of the Church were so strong and all-convincing. And every patriot and citizen and lover of his kind should make haste to pledge his example and influence to those forces that make for justice and mercy, for truth and love, for obedience to Christ, the soul's Saviour, to God, the soul's Father. What is it to be a Christian? From the view-point of New Testament definition the Christian is one who is loyal to Christ. Having read Christ's words, the Chris- tian feels that these words command his reason. Look- ing out upon Christ's career, upon the beauty of his life and the spotlessness of his character, the Christian affirms that that character conmiands his reverent ad- miration. Having studied Christ's attitude toward lit- [259] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE tie children, toward the publican, and prodigal, he is a Christian who feels that Christ's bearing toward the poor and weak commands his sympathies. Having read Christ's Golden Rule, his Sermon on the Mount, his law of love, the Christian bows in loyal acceptance of Christ's ideals of possible excellence, feeling that these ideals at once condemn his past manner of life, and reveal latent powers and new possibilities of excellence. The emphasis is upon loyalty to Christ as a Master and Saviour. A man is not a Christian because he has wrought out fully his idea of the Bible. That is im- portant, but it is fidelity to a book. A man is not a Christian because he has wrought out his statement of a creed. That is important, but it is fidelity to a philosophy. History tells of a young paint grinder in the studio of Italy's greatest master, who developed striking evi- dences of artistic skill. When an enemy of the great teacher came to the boy and urged him to found a school of his own, saying that wealth and honors and invita- tions to kings' palaces might be his, the youth answered, in effect: "I am not ambitious to found a school or dwell in a palace, but I am ambitious to catch Angelo's spirit and reproduce in myself his ideals." Now that simple thought condenses in a word the essence of the Christian life. It is an ambition to rise to the level of Christ's thought, to feel his throb of sympathy toward the poor and weak, to abhor evil as he abhorred it, to hunger for righteousness as he hungered for it, and to walk with our Father as Christ walked with his. He is a Christian who is loyal to Christ in thoughts, sympa- thies, friendships, purposes and deeds. How shall I become a Christian? In as normal and [260] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE natural a way as one becomes a carpenter or a printer. When a youth stands upon the threshold of his career he passes in review the various handicrafts and profes- sions. He argues that he is unfitted to be a lawyer or a teacher, or editor, because he has no skill in writing or speaking. Contrariwise, he finds that the human body has such fascination for him that he is always try- ing to read a face so as to interpret the state of the person's health, and he decides to enter the medical school and become a physician. Once the decision has been reached, he waits for nothing magical or mysteri- ous. He simply buys a book on anatomy and sits down at his desk and goes to work. When a traveler finds himself going toward the North, where dwell storms and perpetual winter, once he feels sure that he is moving in the wrong direction, he turns sharply upon his heel and marches toward the South. But in this re- versal of his direction there is nothing magical, nothing mysterious, and when he has turned toward the South we must not suppose that the traveler has reached that land of tropic fruits and flowers. Perhaps he has taken but one step toward a sunmier land that is a thousand miles away. Nevertheless, he has started for that glori- ous clime. Thus the youth cleanses his mouth of pro- fanity, and starts toward purity. He cleanses his ap- petite of gluttony, and starts toward self-control. He cleanses his habits from idleness and vice, and starts toward industry and thrift. These are only first steps, doubtless, only rude beginnings. Yet every refusal to temptation, every rebuff to passion, every right thought, every noble aspiration, are steps in the right direction. Only they are first steps, and the man must march on. Building a character is like building a house. The [261] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE architect excavates the cellar, but that is not enough. He builds the walls, but the rain and snow may still come in. He springs the roof, but the rooms are bare. He furnishes and adorns the halls, parlors, and sleeping chambers, but the house is empty. At last he brings in his loved ones, and in the sounds of little children and the words of welcome to arriving friends, makes home bright and all the days beautiful. Not otherwise is it in the Christian life. The discipline does away with every animal passion and fleshly impulse. Upon the foundation of Jesus Christ he builds the moralities and erects a soul building, but the structure is not complete until the house, built on good habits, right thoughts and purposes, is illuminated with all heavenly qualities of love, joy, peace, trust. The friendship of Christ completes man's life and crowns it. Some, moved hy considerations of delicacy and honor, will say, am I good enough to join a Christian church? One who is governed by such considerations feels that it is an unworthy and ungenerous thing for him to announce himself as a disciple of Jesus Christ unless he represents those high and noble qualities that Christ represents. He thinks that the Platonist must have the qualities of intellect that characterized Plato. Now, what is a church? It is a school of morals. What is Christianity? It is the science of right living and character building. What is the Bible? It is God's handbook, full of directions for the building of a worthy life, based upon the foundation of Christ. And who is the Christian? He is a pupil in Christ's school. But nobody is received into a school because he is a ripe scholar. When a child goes to a school the principal says: "What do you know about grammar?" "I don't [262] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE know anything about it; I want to enter the school to learn." "What do you know about Latin and Greek?" "Nothing," the boy answers. "Are you up in history and science and literature?" "No, I am not sure that I know what those big words mean," the boy replies. To which the principal answers, "Well, you are suffi- ciently ignorant to be received. This school is founded for boys who do not know, but want to know." And men are to unite with the Church, not because they are good, but because they are bad. The Church is a school, and Christ is a teacher. And the disciple is a bad man who wants to become good, or a good man who wants to become better, or the best of men who feels that he wants to be like Christ. All are pupils in the school of character and human life, where Christ is the one Saviour and Lord. Is it my duty to avow myself openly a disciple of Jesus Christ if I conscientiously feel that I am not worthy to be so ranked and recognized? This question is influential, for the most part secretly, with many who earnestly desire to live the higher life, to realize their own best capacities, to serve their fellow-men most ef- fectively, and who are willing to accept the teaching and the help of Jesus Christ. Their hesitation is not selfish or ignoble. They are sincerely afraid that they might by their conduct as Christians injure the cause they really love. To those who offer this consideration merely as a pretext or excuse for not doing what they know they ought to do, no answer will be given here. But to the rest, it should be said that a Christian church ought not to be more severe than its Master in re- quiring attainment from beginners. What he required, and all that he required, was sincerity and thoroughness [263] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE of purpose. If he could forgive and restore Peter, after Peter had shown himself, under a sudden surprise of temptation, a liar and a coward, and had even re- lapsed into his old habits, cursing and swearing like a vulgar fisherman, is he not ready, and are his churches not bound in his name, to forgive and restore his stum- bling and wandering disciples? As to the disrepute into which the behavior of Christians may bring Christianity, let it be said, once for all, that this consideration was worn out long ago. It was the stereotyped charge against the Saviour him- self, that he included among his disciples so many sinners. It has been the characteristic of Christian churches ever since, that their members, being human, have not been worthy examples of the life they were professedly trying to live. But that was his express choice. He came to call "not the righteous, but sinners." And he counted nothing hopeless, save hypocrisy. Now, they who shirk from openly following him, lest they be not worthy, if they be sincere, must hope that some day they will have made themselves worthy, and will be free to avow their allegiance without mis- givings. To such, let it be said, that Jesus Christ prom- ised to the churches of his disciples the spirit of guidance, comfort and inspiration, and his own perpetual pres- ence. Do they really think they can make themselves "good enough" with greater ease or certainty by de- clining the help thus promised through the Christian brotherhood? Do they not realize that, if they sincerely purpose to follow and serve Christ, they will need all the help they can get, through the channels he has ap- pointed? And will the influence of an open stand on his side and among his people be good or bad? Is there [ 264 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE anything about church-membership that tends to make a man relapse into old, unworthy ways? // I am already living, to the best of my ability, a Christian life, actively assisting by my presence, con- tributions, and personal labor in the worship and work of the Church, and thereby showing my sympathy there- with, is it necessary that I should go further and for- mally join the Church? Cannot a man be saved, though he be not a church-member? That is a question between yourself and God, not between yourself and the church. We set no limits to his mercy. But if you will put your argument in the form of a prayer, saying, in substance, "Our Father, we have followed thy Son (to a certain extent) ; we have obeyed his commands (with certain ex- ceptions) ; we have kept company with his disciples (taking care not to be counted among them) ; we have done something to forward his kingdom on earth (de- clining to be naturalized as its citizen) ; in short, we have tried to do our duty to everybody except Jesus Christ; and we think we ought to be excused for our failure to honor him openly" — you may be able to imagine what answer you would make to such a plea. But the question we put lies between you and us, the avowed follower of Christ. Either you need us, or we need you — most probably, both. In the first case, you cannot aflFord to reject our offered companionship. In the second, you cannot afford to withhold your ut- most aid. What is the influence of a profession of one's faith in Jesus Christ upon conduct and character? In a re- public the president strengthens reverence for free in- stitutions by taking the oath of office; property also is rendered more secure because of that outer dramatic [265] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE act, the signing of a deed; truth and justice are pro- tected in the courts by the solemn oath in which the witness pledges himself to speak the truth. The foun- dations of the home are safeguarded through that sol- emn public form called the marriage ceremony. But more important still that dramatic event called confess- ing Christ before men, and publicly pledging fidelity to the laws of God and the higher ideals of Jesus Christ. During the late war certain citizens declined to take sides either against slavery or for it, and the children feel that the fathers let slip a great opportunity. And when the sunset gun doth boom for man, and the long, fierce battle with sin, superstition, and ignorance hath ended, sad indeed will be the lot of those who meet the apostles, the martyrs, heroes and fathers of yesterday, having had no part in the great world battle, having never received a scar or won a spur, having never sought to correct the weakness of the Church of to-day by lend- ing it their example or influence. l^ee-i DAVID STARR JORDAN, Ph.D., LL.D., STANFORD UNIVERSITY, CAL, President of the Leland Stanford Jr. University, Cal., since 1891; born at Gainesville, N. Y., Jan. 19, 1851; was educated at Cornell; instructor of botany there, 1871- 72; professor of natural history, Lombard University, 1872-73; principal Appleton (Wis.) Collegiate Institute, 1873-74; teacher at the Indianapolis High School, 1874- 75; professor of biology, Butler University, 1875-79; pro- fessor of zoology, Indiana University, 1879-85; president of the same, 1885-91; chief director of the World Peace Foundation since 1910; author of A Manual of Vertebrate Animals of Northern United States; Science Sketches; Fishes of North and Middle America, 4 vols, (with B. W. Evermann) ; Care and Culture of Men; The Innumerable Company; Footnotes to Evolution; Imperial Democracy; The Strength of Being Clean; Standeth God within the Shadow; Animal Life; The Philosophy of Hope; The Blood of the Nation; Animal Forms (with V. L. Kellogg and H. Heath) ; Voice of the Scholar; The Call of the Twentieth Century; The Human Harvest; Evolution and. Animal Life (with V. L. Kellogg) ; Life's Enthusiasms; College and the Man; The Higher Sacrifice; The Religion of a Sensible American; The Stability of Truth; Unseen Empire; The Story of a Good Woman. I MAY say that when the general spirit of the teachings of Jesus for simplicity, truth, and peace is so clear, it is not necessary or desirable for us to go back to the quar- rels of the Middle Ages over points of doubt. A theology which touches at any corner the discoveries of science is thereby assailable. The broader statement that religion is fundamen- tally the reason for clean and right living takes it away from all these petty questions on which science will have her own opinion, and this opinion cannot be finally formulated perhaps for hundreds of years. Religion should be taught "in terms of life." [267] HENRY CHURCHILL KING, D.D., LL.D., S.T.D., OBERLIN, OHIO President of Oberlin College since Nov. 19, 1902; born in Hillsdale, Mich., Sept. 18, 1858; received his education at Oberlin College, Oberlin Theological Seminary, and Har- vard University; tutor of Latin, Oberlin Academy, 1879- 81; in mathematics, 1881-82; associate professor of math- ematics at Oberlin College, 1884-90; associate professor of philosophy, 1890-91; professor, 1891-97; professor of the- ology since 1897; dean of Oberlin, 1901-2; author of Out- line of Erdman's History of Philosophy ; Outline of the Microcosmos of Herman Lotze; The Appeal of the Child; Reconstruction in Theology; Theology and the Social Consciousness; Personal and Ideal Elements in Education; Rational Living; Letters to Sunday-School Teachers; The Seeming Unreality of the Spiritual Life; The Laws of Friendship, Human and Divine; The Ethics of Jesus; Moral and Religious Challenge of Our Times; Religion and Life. In the first place, there seem to me to be, plainly, cer- tain great convictions which underlie the life of the Church, that the Church will naturally express in some way. In the second place, it is not only natural that the Church should make some expression of its underlying convictions, but it is really necessary for the sake of its own life, that it should express them as clearly as possible. In the third place, the formal statement which the Church should make of its convictions may well deal with the great, simple, fundamental truths of its faith, without going into great detail and certainly without getting into disputed and controversial questions. [ 268 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE In the fourth place, distinction may well be made be- tween the formal confession of faith of the Church, and that to which assent must be given for church member- ship. My own feeling is that the Church should include all those who genuinely desire to be disciples of Christ, though they may not be prepared to assent to all the creed of the Church. In the fifth place, the question of the fundamental theology of the Church may also well be regarded as another matter. Theology seems to me to be a thought- ful, unified, systematic account of what religion means to us. And such a statement needs, in the nature of the case, to be related to the rest of the thought of our time; because it is imperative for a man's own intellec- tual satisfaction that he should find it possible to bring some real unity into all his thinking. For that reason he will seek to state the great, fundamental Christian truths, in such form as will not contradict his convictions in other spheres. The theologian will wish also to state all these truths in such a way as to give them the strong- est appeal to the men of his own time, with all their peculiar and favorite modes of conception. These forms, therefore, of putting all Christian truths are pretty certain to change materially from generation to generation, and doctrinal statements, also, in this sense, should change. The Church should be prepared, there- fore, for rather frequent changes of the ways in which it puts before others the expression of its faith. [269] GEORGE TRUMBULL LADD, D.D., LL.D., NEW HAVEN^ CONN. Emeritus professor of Yale since 1905; born at Paines- ville, O., Jan. 19, 1842; graduated from Western Reserve College, 1864^ and from Andover Theological Seminary, 1869; acted as supply at Edinburg, O., 1869-71 ; pastor of Spring Street Congregational Church, Milwaukee, Wis., 1871-79; professor of mental and moral philosophy, Bow- doin College, 1879-81, and the same at Yale, 1881-1905; lectured on church polity and systematic theology, Ando- ver Theological Seminary, 1879-91; lectured in Japan, 1892, 1899, 1907, and in India (as Haskell lecturer of the University of Chicago), 1899-1900; author of Princi- ples of Church Polity; Doctrine of Sacred Scripture; Lotze's Outlines of Philosophy (translation), 6 vols.; Ele- ments of Physiological Psychology; What is the Bible? Introduction to Philosophy; Outlines of Physiological Psy- chology; Philosophy of Mind; Primer of Psychology; Psychology, Descriptive and Explanatory; Philosophy of Knowledge; Outlines of Descriptive Psychology ; Essays on the Higher Education; A Theory of Reality; Philoso- phy of Conduct; Philosophy of Religion; In Korea with Marquis Ito; Knowledge, Life and Reality; Elements of Physiological Psychology ; The Teachers' Practical Phi- losophy, THE CHURCH AND THE PEOPLE Why does not the Christian Church, with its claims to afford help, comfort, and redemption, secure from the multitudes more of respect, confidence, and allegiance? The question is complex, and does not admit of any single answer. Assuming the general fact to be cor- rectly stated in the question, the causes of the fact may admit of several, or even of many, answers. And the answers are not necessarily the same for all the different circumstances prevailing in the different parts of Chris- tendom, or even of our own country. There are, how- [270] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ever, four considerations that refer to causes of wide- spreading and profound influence. One of the causes is of a nature, although for the present discouraging in its more obvious effects, to af- ford solid grounds for hope of improvement "in the long run," Among both the intelligent and cultured classes, and also among the uncultured but often no less intelligent people, essential religion is coming to be less a matter of formal attachment to any of the conventions of organized Christianity, or of subscription to elaborate creeds, or of regular attendance on churchly services, or of formal connection with ecclesiastical organizations. Indeed, all things of this sort are not now regarded as so important for the truly religious man as they once were. It must be admitted that there is a wide differ- ence between Christianity as now representing these sides of the religious life and organization, and the Christianity which can be identified with the "religion of Jesus." For this difference in attitude toward its claims, the Christian Church is, doubtless, itself in large measure to blame. The revolt against its claims as "established" in these ways has a certain encouraging aspect of sin- cerity and of hopefulness. So far as the new attitude of the people toward the Church is directed against its excessive demands upon the minds and hearts and con- duct of men to conform precisely and too exclusively to its own "way of salvation," with the implied threat that there is no other way, or that the sincerity and value of a religious life not led in this exact way are not to be trusted — so far as the present attitude of the people is directed against such claims, it is not necessarily to be deprecated. [ 271 3 THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE But the revolt is excessive; and as judged by its psychological foundations, when these are consciously discerned and explicitly announced, it is even ab- surd. Too often the argument runs — albeit not con- sciously recognized — somewhat as follows: Religion is not subscription to creeds; therefore let us do with- out creeds, or at least, assure men that it makes little or no difference what they believe, in order to conform with the demands of the Christian religion. Genuine religion is a matter of feeling; or it is a matter of life (meaning by this, how one behaves oneself in relation simply to others) ; therefore, the use of intellect in inquiry and in the assortment and state- ment of opinions on religious questions is of little account. In rebuke of all this, it should be under- stood that no great human interest — politics, science, social reform, philosophy, or religion — can flourish im- less it commands and commends itself to the entire man. Intellect, feeling, will — in a word, the whole man, must enter into the religious life, if it is to be sound, sincere, and efficient. Doing good, or what is covered by that, to the young collegian, so captivating word — "serv- ice" — is essential to the life of religion. But that life must have its sources quickened and kept fresh and strong by experiences which belong to the individual in lonely intercourse with his God. For the religious man who will be truly successful in social service there must be interchange of thought, feeling and will, which has reference to the most thoroughly individualistic of all experiences — the communion of one lonely soul with one alone God. Therefore, if the Church will have its claim respected and regarded, it must claim the whole man and not a part of him only. [ 272 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE But the second cause why the claims of the Chris- tian Church are so little regarded by the multitude is, undoubtedly, in the "spirit of the age." All over the world, and to an exaggerated extent in this country, it is the material, or perhaps we should say the non- spiritual, side of human life and development in which both the unchurched multitude and the multitude who are nominally in the Church are interested, and with which they are chiefly occupied. The nations at large, and the individuals controlling them, and the multitude of them who are only more or less loosely controlled by their governments, are absorbed with interests that are not specifically those "of the spirit," in the religious meaning of this phrase. The effort has been persistent- ly made by teachers of ethics, in the university and the Church and outside of both, to identify the material and the spiritual in human interests and human life. The truly religious man cannot properly refrain from an active part in the promotion and regulation of these ma- terial interests; and he must show the genuineness of his religion by the way in which he plays that part. But after all, for neither the nation nor the citizen, for neither the individual nor the multitude, is material prosperity the same thing as, or in any good degree the equivalent of, the prosperity of the spiritual life. Why is it that violent or dishonest ways of gaining material good, or of escaping by divorce, and suicide, and desertion, and de- falcation, the pains of material evil, are increasing with all the increase of material prosperity in this country? It is chiefly because the word of our Lord is true : "Man does not live by bread alone." He must also feed him- self upon the words that proceed out of the mouth of God. And what those words are, let any one, believer [273] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE in the dogmas of Christianity or not, study as they are given in the "Sermon on the Mount." Both Church and multitude must find out, and acknowledge in practical ways, that not science and sanitation, not pure food and enough of it, not higher wages and lower prices for the purchaser, not good crops and cheap transportation — or all of these, and other similar things, taken together — can satisfy completely the needs of man. He must also have the spiritual goods, of trust in God, of the comforting faith in divine Providence, of the conscious- ness of being a friend of God, of the hope of becoming like Jesus, a perfect son of God, and also the cheer and uplift of confidence in the issues of life immortal, in order to be satisfied completely. In these things he must yearn and strive for the increasing attainment of such satisfaction. On the side of the people, then, the trouble is that they do not appreciate these spiritual goods at their true value, so absorbed are they in the not unreasonable clamor and striving after a larger share of the material goods. And, alas! the trouble with the Church is that so many, so large a proportion, of its own members show the same relative estimate of the two kinds of values ; and that the ministry does not hold up before the people, in attractive and convincing ways, the higher worth of the words that proceed out of the mouth of God. With this second cause, a third is most intimately connected. This is the failure of the Church to effect the abolition of the most flagrant social wrongs, and the triumph of the most reasonable and manageable of social reforms. The redemption of humanity is, indeed, no easy task, no work to be accomplished in a day or in a single generation. We may say without irreverence, [ 27i ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE that God himself has been taking all his energies through countless centuries to accomplish this end. But there are prevalent in Christian countries certain social wrongs which are most obvious and flagrant, and which conventional Christianity has not done its duty toward remedying or completely abolishing. The test which the people all over the world are applying to the Church is its power and efficiency to help in the social redemption of mankind. Just the other day, a friend of mine who was com- plaining of how his own minister left him unfed, re- marked upon the encouraging fact that the "laboring classes" are changing in their attitude, not toward the Church, but toward its founder, Jesus. It is "really touching," said this friend, how universally the labor unions and their leaders are coming to regard Jesus as the "poor man's friend." These same classes do not regard the Christian Church as the "poor man's friend." It is not condescension or patronage or coddling which these men and women desire, or look for, from or- ganized Christianity. It is first of all justice; and after that friendship which is sincere and fearless and faithful. But they know that not a few of the men who are chiefly responsible for the economic and social condi- tions which they feel to be so unjust and onerous are prominent members or "supporters" of Christian churches. They know also, that in not a few cases, the ministers and other officers in these churches stand habit- ually in a position of unmanly and un-Christian dread of losing the "support" of these persons. In all the past of human history the religions of the world have met their ultimate test when they have been found able or unable to contribute handsomely toward [275] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE the actual redemption of society. In modern Western Christendom, just now, this supreme test is being applied to conventional and organized Christianity more rigorously than ever before. The test is essentially more severe than ever before, because the democracy are awakened and the social conditions are vastly compli- cated. Religion, indeed, deals first with the individual; it aims to place him in right relations to God, and so to his brethren in the kingdom of God. But just in this way — for it is always the individual who counts — re- ligion aims to redeem society. The claims of the Church are being critically and even scornfully regarded, by multitudes of the people, while they wait to see the Church assert its power to contribute more largely to the cause of a redeemed society. There is a fourth and more specific cause why the multitude of the people is so indifferent or even hostile to the claims of the Christian Church. And this failure, or fault, must be laid chiefly at the doors of the ministry. Thoughtful people, men and women, the cultured classes and the laboring classes, no longer look to the ministry as teachers of religion. Our theological schools are virtually encouraging their students in contentment with smatterings of this and that, and with what they call "the practical," to the neglect of training them to be strong, clear, well informed, and logical and convinc- ing exponents of the great truths of the Christian re- ligion. But this is what they are hungry for — namely, some well-grounded opinions and convictions regard- ing great religious truths, to which they may let their feelings rise and on which they may act as principles of conduct. The cultured and the democracy are look- ing in every direction for a knowledge of religious truth, [276] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE They take in general "little stock" in the ministry as qualified teachers of the Christian religion, or of re- ligion essentially and historically considered. And their low estimate of this side of the "training of the min- istry" is quite too obviously in accordance with the facts. Remedies for these evil conditions, like all other remedial agencies, in order to be largely and really ef- fective, must be directed toward the gradual removal of the causes, or sources, of such conditions. And on ac- count of the complex nature of the problem — as I began by saying — each workman will have to be inventive, according to his own equipment and the peculiar cir- cumstances which environ him. [277] JAMES LINDSAY, D.D., F.R.S.L., F.R.S.E., IRVINE, SCOTLAND Philosopher, theologian and man of letters ; associate editor of Bibliotheca Sacra since 1903; educated under his father and at Glasgow University; university extension lecturer, 1886-87; corresponding member of Royal Academy of Sciences, Letters and Arts, Padua, 1894; Hugh Waddell lecturer. Queen's University, Canada, 1899-1900; member of the International Congress of Psychology, Paris, 1900; author of Progressiveness of Modern Christian Thought; Essays, Literary and Philosophical; Significance of the Old Testament for Modern Theology; Recent Advances in Theistic Philosophy of Religion; Momenta of Life; Studies in European Philosophy; The Fundamental Problems of Metaphysics; The Psychology of Belief. SYMPOSIUM ON CREED AND THEOLOGY I. As to creed. I do not think the tendency exists, as in Lincoln's time, to exact "assent" to "long com- plicated statements of Christian doctrine," as a condi- tion of church membership. But, no doubt, many still think more is expected of them in this respect than they feel they can conscientiously profess. I certainly think it unwise to ask that entrants to church membership "subscribe to statements that deal with debated and controversial questions." I should not greatly care to adopt as "sole qualification" Lincoln's "love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbour as thyself," both because there are those who should feel such a command so exceeding broad as to appear to them a counsel of perfection, and because there are others who should eschew it as savoring of legalistic associations. I should [ 278 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE prefer something more human, more simple, more concrete, and more distinctive of Christianity itself. Nothing is more distinctive of Christianity, as it ap- pears in the New Testament, than Christ, "Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven," as the Nicene Creed put the matter. Neander was among the first of those who, in modern times, expressly made this redemptive relation of Christ "the central point of Christianity." To ask a personal belief in the Saviour- hood of Christ — or in the historic Christ — is to make a more concrete and definite form of appeal to the mass of men, than the more vague and unsatisfactory "com- mon purpose of love and service to God and man." Be- lief should, in my judgment, be kept as objective in character as possible. Besides, though Jesus Christ affirmed that no man cometh unto the Father but by him, it is yet imto the Father we are brought by him, and thus, in the implicates of such a belief, the purpose of "love and service to God and man" is assured of a better fulfilment. The matter is thus rendered less one of doctrinal import and intellectual assent, and rests on a more or less experiential basis. Such a pro- fession of belief in the Saviourhood of Christ — such an acknowledgment that Jesus is Lord — seems a feasible and reasonable minimum; and it is concerned with the fact of his Saviourhood rather than with theory or doctrine about it. In this fact all Christendom believes. It is the fact which has made Christendom. It must be clearly understood, however, that, in expressing the personal preference now put forward, I do not, in any way whatsoever, judge any churchly bodies or com- munities that may choose other simple forms of belief. I am well content to accept, in respect of these, the [279] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Scriptural assurance that, in every nation he that fear- eth God, and worketh righteousness, is accepted of him. II. As to theology. A "fundamental" theology must be theistic in "basis": much of the theism of our time is so anemic in character as to evince but little vitality. Theology must be superior to any idle modern preju- dice as to its being dogmatic; the dogmatizing instinct will not, without nemesis, be denied; atheism, firmly held, is as dogmatic as theism. Of course, we still await an ideal dogmatic. The "basis" of theology must be ontological: it must take God as the Ground and the Cause of the world, and, as such, both immanent and transcendent. It will not despise the aid of metaphysics, whose precise function has been to show the necessity to thought of postulating such a transcendental object as ground and base of all the phenomena known to ex- perience. Doctrine de Deo is "fundamental" to the- ology, as ultimately determinative of our views of crea- tion, of providence, and of all that is vital to faith and life. Theology, as theistic, must set forth God, as the absolute Personality, distinct, as such, from the uni- verse; it must show how futile are the objections to such a mode of conceiving him; and it must recognize him, in a way too seldom done, as the absolute Reason no less than the absolute Will. It must find in him not only the Supreme Being, but the one absolutely perfect ethical Being. Advancing from le Dieu faineant, the- ology will seek the God who, in the realm of ends and manifestation, is found in nature and in art, in science and in philosophy, in literature and in life, in history and in experience. With God as the absolute Reality, theism sets the universe on a spiritual, or, if any will, a supernatural "basis," the visible order of things rest- [280] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ing on an order unseen or supernatural. Now, of the knowledge of God, in the senses just put forward, we may say, as a German theologian (Kaftan) once did, that "it is more objective than all other knowledge, since it has reference to God, to the Reality which sus- tains and conditions all other reality." The objective bases of belief, of which I have been speaking, are of unspeakable importance, in view of the infinite subjec- tivity of our time. But there is, on the subjective side, a psychology of theism whose significance is not to be imder-estimated. The objective realities owe their im- portance, not alone to what they in themselves are, but also to what we are, as conditioning the result. Our spiritual nature is such that the psychological principles which constitute the subjective factor of a theistic faith lead us to seek a spiritual significance in all the phe- nomena of nature and all the facts of experience. But there are pitfalls in the use of psychology in religious or theological matters that call for careful avoidance, now that the method has been, in certain respects, fre- quently over-rated. I am content here to remark that the grounds of theistic belief in God lie far more deeply rooted in man's mental and spiritual constitution than can be found in any syllogistic reasoning or argument, that is to say, when due account is made of the testi- mony of our speculative powers, and of that of our moral reason or conscience. We have the more serious business of accounting for ourselves than of merely finding due cause for the world. I venture to affirm that, after not a little depreciation, both wise and foolish, on the part of philosophers and theologians, the so- called theistic "proofs" remain, not as in any strict sense, "proofs," but, as a distinguished American theologian [281] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE has said, "as forms in which the invincible convictions of our rational and religious nature find expression." The- ology, however, must be not only theistic but definitely Christian, and Christian theology is only the scientific expression of the truths of the Christian religion. As I have said elsewhere, — "It simply takes those truths as they are implicitly presented in the spiritual con- sciousness, and seeks, by an endeavor to rationalize and interpret what is so presented, to give unity and coherency to the whole." Again, as to the "direction" of theology, I may say of it, in accordance with the views just presented, that it must take the form of a growing union between sub- ject and object, between our spiritual consciousness and the being of God, between faith itself and objective Christianity. In well-directed handling of new social problems, theology will prove the sanctifying light, as well as the stimulating guide of all sound treatment of new intellectual issues. She will, of course, welcome the modifying impact of the sciences, but ought in her turn to do something in the way of leading the van of intellectual progress. Whether she has done what she might in this latter respect is a different matter, but, in any case, she has plenteous room for progress. III. We are thus brought to consider the mode of relating theology "to the literary, scientific, and philo- sophical certainties of our time." This suggests to one's mind, first of all, the enormous discount to be made, in the number of "certainties" in all these, in any con- sensus of the competent, as compared with the ordinary current conceptions on the subject. The "certainty" zone, in human knowledge, is a comparatively small one. However, without dwelling upon that, I shall say [ 282 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE a little on the "certainties" of each of these spheres sep- arately. 1. The literary. Among the most accepted of the "certainties" in this sphere is the saying that lit- erature has to do with life. But theology also has to do with life, being itself no more than the reflex of Christian thought, life, and experience. But the the- ologic conception of life, as we now understand it, is so exceeding broad, generous, expansive, that it can — as it must — leave literature wholly free. It asks only that nothing in the spirit or essence of literary treat- ment shall be discordant with the ethical aim or the re- ligious essence of life, as understood under the theologic conception. Literature has given theology even more than she asked, as, for example, the theological novel. For we do not want in literature pseudo-theology or half-baked scientific theory or charlatanry of any sort, but literature as literature, pure, undefiled, inspiring, exquisite. Our greatest poets have, for more than half a century, done much more for theology than she had any title to ask, or any right to expect ; so doing, it was still theology that proved their light and inspiration; theology has, nevertheless, by no means failed in the keenness of her appreciation. These, too, are "cer- tainties," and not to be gainsaid; to appreciate what this advance means, one has only to recall the spirit and results of eighteenth century literature. If the inner eye of poetry be, as I have elsewhere advanced, "fixed on the ideal, which she seeks to imprison, that therewith she may interpenetrate, inspire, and spiritualize the ac- tual," then the relation of theology to such literature can only be one of community of aim, and harmony or agreement of spirit, while each works out its own inde- [ 283 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE pendent, free, and distinctive mission. Each has need of the other, and between them need be no strife; we have need of both, as each of them, in its own way, finds the divine element in life, and helps us bear the weary and the heavy weight of this unintelligible world. 2. The scientific. The so-called "certainties" of science have been flaunted before theology, and the world in general, to a very imposing extent, by people who did not realize that these are, in reality, only proba- bilities, admitting, as such, of some possible doubt. Science, it must be plainly said, does not deal in abso- lute "certainties." As Jevons said, in his treatment of the principles of science: "Perfect knowledge alone can give certainty, and in nature perfect knowledge would be infinite knowledge, which is clearly beyond our capacities." Uncertainty in the facts of nature there is none, but there is always defect in our knowledge — or science — of them. How great is the strife of theories that still enshroud in mystery such primal scientific ele- ments as ether, matter, and energy ! ■ It is only too often forgotten that science, though rigid, reasoned, and me- chanical, is yet assumptive, uncritical, and dogmatic. This, of course, is perfectly understood by all who are really versed in the philosophy of science. Those who make most of the "certainties" of science are unthink- ing persons whose talk is of nothing deeper than the testimony of common sense to the external world. They have not seen that science is not the fundamental thing; that, as a noted scientist has said, "It is essentially super- ficial, and not fundamental ;" and that the reality of its outward world must first be guaranteed. This, before we can blindly take the universe as self-contained and self-sufiicient, in the ordinary scientific way. The truth [284] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE is, that not the "certainties," but the far from settled character of scientific conclusions as to the constitution of the world, is what most deeply strikes one to-day, if his vision happens not to be obscured by the scientific habit of mind. This, in spite of Sir Oliver Lodge's large, uncritical en bloc creed of "modern science," to which I should not like to have to subscribe. Only a very large faith-talent could accept most of these scien- tific articles of faith as "certainties," rather than as provisional forms of knowledge based on scientific convention. Nothing is, in truth, more superficial and absurd than the widely prevalent notion that the "cer- tainties" of science are more solid and sure than those of theology. I do not say that inductive theology is all of theology, but I do affirm that inductive theology rests on probability, just as all inductions in the physi- cal sciences also are only probable. The relations of theology to science are clearly such that science must be allowed to hold on its own way without any intrusion of theological dogma, while theology must be equally immune from scientific dogmatism, since, on the prob- lems of theology proper, science can have nothing to say. This does not dispense theology, however, from obligation to welcome and incorporate what science may find or ascertain as to the methods and facts of God's working in nature or the world. So doing, theology is, like Kepler, thinking God's thoughts "after" him, only that the thinking is not, in the finite case, of absolutely full and certain truths. But, whenever we pass from methods of operation to the divine Worker behind these, and to questions of the origination and the end of all things, science is no longer in court, these lying beyond her sphere and ken. [285] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE 3. The philosophical. Philosophy has, no doubt, what many would call its accepted "certainties" — ^its necessities of thought, its immediacies of experience, its world of spirit, and the rest — but philosophy always remains a human product ; it has never an issue that is raised beyond all possible dispute; and it never as- sumes a final form. It does not offer any definite body of truth, such as Sir Oliver Lodge professes to find in what he is pleased to term "orthodox science." It is not an inquiry, however, of a detached and self-con- tained order, for it is the actual, every-day world of experience which it seeks to explain. Philosophy has no great difficulty in accepting the statement of Leibnitz, in his metaphysical treatment, that "every true predica- tion has some basis in the nature of things." Its great postulation of the Absolute may, for all practical pur- poses, be taken as a positive "certainty." But this "certainty" gives place to probability, on an inductive basis, as soon as we begin to inquire into the nature of this Absolute — its what and not merely its that. The- ology is itself, as the illustrious Vinet said, "une philoso- phies dont la base est donnee" so that, starting from what is given, it works over the historic products which are its material, in a really critical and philosophical manner. Theology will relate itself sympathetically to philosophy, to which it owes an incalculable debt, while maintaining its own freedom and independence, and declining to be allied or attached to any of the par- ticular philosophical systems. Modern theology has quite overpassed such a survival of unsympathetic atti- tude toward philosophy as has been lately exemplified in Prof. W. P. Paterson's unprogressive and unfruitful work on the Rule of Faith — an attitude put to shame [ 286 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE by Calvin's fine Philosophia prceclarum est Dei donum. The Absolute of theology will be no static Absolute, but the Absolute Personality, infinite Possessor of all mind possibilities and powers — one who is manifested in all the visible universe. Yes, manifested in his works, and made known and manifest in human experience. Him, therefore, the invisible Cause of all visible effects, we come to know as the objective complement of our being — our first and our true Other — ^in all its spiritual, social, and physical dependencies and needs. IV. "Can a theology," it is asked, "be imassailable and final that does not accord with the assured results of science?" An enlightened theology will naturally put itself into line with "the assured results of science." Apologists even of the Roman Catholic jChurch claim for her, in the words of Wilfrid Ward, "a power of as- similation and of ultimate consolidation of her teach- ing, in its relation to assured scientific advance, or well-examined and tenable hypothesis." Not less, but more, may be expected of all Protestant theologies. Theology, one may presume, has not forgotten the use- ful distinction drawn by Martineau, that "Science dis- closes the method of the world, but not its Cause; re- ligion its Cause, but not its method." If we take it to be a fundamental axiom of theology that God cannot lie, then theology will feel assured that the expressions of his mind in the world of science cannot conflict with those in the world of revelation. Theology has wel- comed all the light of science upon the process and method of creation, and, so long as theology and science keep each to its own sphere and ken, there can be no clash or collision between them. Theology will espe- cially relate itself to the scientific doctrine of evolution, [287] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE conceived with theistic premise, and will thus establish its connection with current thought. It has, indeed, pretty well done so in this direction, since the days when Dr. George Matheson wrote. Can the Old Faith live with the New? Well it might, for as Dr. Munger once remarked, "in evolution we see a revelation of God, while in previous theories of creation, we had only an assertion of God." The evolutionistic habit of mind, however, sets before us only an ideal of progressively realized certainty, and yields not any such final and irreducible form of knowledge as would accord with more purely rationalistic ideals of thought. There is a sense in which the saying of a French writer is true, that "the true synonym of evolution is not change, but permanence." For all that, the permanence of phe- Momena is a permanence of change, their nature and essence being mutation. The truly real and immutable are found when we have transcended the world of sense. For the actuality of phenomena just means transmu- tation. Of course, it is alone of "the assured results of science" we have been speaking, science being many parts theory, and few parts fact; for the history of science is strewn with the wreckage of discarded theories, phlogiston, the corpuscular theory of light, and the rest. So little are scientific theories "final and unas- sailable," that we do better to remember, with Emer- son, that science may have her flank turned to-morrow. Science and theology may yet make "one music" in our hearts and lives, if only each will let the other pursue its own free, independent, reverential way. For truth is one, and not a house divided against itself. Of school- masters to bring men to Christ there have been many; [288] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE and science is one of them, albeit scientists not a few have failed to find the way. V. Our final inquiry is, as to the need, for purposes of effectiveness, that a message enforce the things "that constitute the sum total of the values of human life, whatever their source may be." My position is, that the message must assuredly do so, not only to be ef- fective, but in justice to the truth. But I think that, while including all partial or relative values that are contributory to "the sum total of the values of human life," it must find the ultimate core of value in, and lay the central insistence on, the conscious spiritual self, with its boundless possibilities of growth and expansion. This I regard as the ultimate standard or judgment of value, which would abide if earth itself became a muddy vesture of decay. Other values are important, however, as ministering to this value, supreme in the world of spiritual values. These other values — ^be they what they may, friendship, work, beauty, pleasure, ambition, effort, and the rest — finally fail to be satisfying or self- supporting, and the self or soul of ultimate value rests on communion with God, or the companionship of the eternal, as its final satisfaction. In so recognizing the worth of these other values, and in speaking of a "sum total" of human values, we must, it seems to me, not be understood as suggesting anything of the nature of quantitative ideals, or doing anything to obscure the grand, inspiring fact that life is a qualitative thing, whose intensive values are of primary importance. For the religious mind, God is the first and the supreme certainty; the world, too, is for it a certainty, as being God's world; the spiritual self or soul is for it also a certainty, having God as its fundamental presupposi- [ 289 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE tion. To it, all things belong, and have interest and value. For all that, the world is as nothing to the life or the soul : what should a man give in exchange for the soul? The soul or spiritual self veritably subsumes all conceptions of value. Thus the self, as religious, puts an absolute value upon itself, in virtue of its relation to the Absolute Being. All other values, included in the "sum total" of values, have their partial and relative values, but one may recall the words of that distin- guished thinker, T. H. Green, that "our ultimate stand- ard of worth is an ideal of personal worth." An ef- fective message will know how to bring all the worths and values so to bear upon human needs, hopes, and aspirations, as to evoke the responsive cry — "More life and fuller, that we want," [290] FRIEDRICH ARMIN LOOFS, Ph.D., Th.D., HALLE^ GERMANY Professor of church history at the University of Halle since 1888; born at Hildesheim, Germany, June 19, 1858; educated at the universities of Tubingen, Gottingen, and Leipsic ; privat-docent for church history at the University of Leipsic, 1882-86; associate professor at the same uni- versity, 1886-87; in the same capacity at the University of Halle, 1887-88; author of Zur Chronologic der auf die frdnhischen Synoden des heiligen Bonif alius besUglichen Brief e der bonifasischen Brief sammlung ; De antiqua Bri- tonum Scotorumque ecclesia; Leontius von Byzanz und die gleichnamigen Schriftsteller der griechischen Kirche; Die Handschriften der lateinischen Uebersetzung des Irendus und ihre Kapitelteilung ; Leitfaden zum Studium der Dog- mengeschichte; Studien iiber die dem Johannes von Da- maskus zugeschriebenen Parallelen; Predigten, Die Auf er- st ehungsberichte und ihr Wert; Eustathius von Sebaste und die Chronologic der Basiliusbriefe; Schopfungsgeschichte, Siindenfall und Thurmbau zu Babel; Anti-Haechel, eine Replik nebst Beilagen (translated into English) ; Grund- linien der Kirchengeschichte in der Form von Disposi- tionen; Symbolik oder christliche Konfessionskunde; Nes- toriana, die Fragmente des Nestorius; What is the Truth about Jesus Christ? Every eflFort to establish a new confession of faith for our times seems to result only in conflict and in tempo- rary divisions. And in the old confessions, provided they be understood in connection with the tendencies of the times in which they came into being, there inheres so much of value that it is not expedient simply to throw them overboard. Moreover in every church there are those who are glorifiers of the past, who find only in the formulas of that past the correct expression of their belief. So that it would not be well for any church to sever itself from its history. Our need is rather a [291] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE different attitude to the past, to the confessions, to all dogmatic thinking. It is the "first Jie," the fundamental error, of all orthodoxy to look upon accord with doctrine as the first and most pressing demand. Lincoln was entirely right when he expressed the wish that the sole precondition of membership which churches imposed were readiness to obey the word of Jesus (Luke 10 : 27) . But it is an error, in which Lincoln appears to have shared, to suppose that by such means doctrine is side- tracked. By "doctrine" (when rightly understood) is meant the thoughts and cognitions which God's revela- tion opens up to faith in his grace as made known by experience. In "doctrine," then, individuals grow in proportion to their spiritual and religious maturity. Each individual makes a progress in his real life that varies with the measure of his experience and his spirit- ual capacity. And the ability to manifest the love which Jesus commanded grows in proportion to our compre- hension of the love that God has shown us. Modern un- belief undervalues the power of the Christian faith. But the knowledge that comes by Christian faith must be recognized as the result of Christian growth instead of being made its pre-condition. As regards the laity no churches seem to me able to make a dogmatic pre-demand. In many of the churches, it is true, there are excess of liturgical formulas, obliga- tory use of confessions in the usual services, and some- times unpedagogical sermons, to which there is fre- quently added the pressure of an "ecclesiastical" party- press, all of which seems to justify the opposite impres- sion. Now, I do not mean to assert that the liturgy and the formulas imposed by authority should abnegate the connection with the past, or that they should be sur- [ 292 ] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE rendered to the unlimited arbitrariness of subjectivity. But what, it seems to me, must fall away is the insistence with which the old formulas obtrude themselves and the strictness of liturgical compulsion. As regards the clergy, I concede, the question brings greater difficulty. Fortunately only a few churches are so conservative as to make the theology of the past bind- ing upon its ministry. Nevertheless the fact that in this respect a certain amoimt of freedom is granted does not do away with the difficulty. The confused condition of the present carries with it the consequence that not a few of the clergy, particularly in their early ministry, in their faith-cognitions find themselves at variance with the tradition of the Church. In spite of this, I firmly believe that the largest possible freedom is the best guar- antee of a sound development both for individuals and for the Church as a whole. Polemics against the basal faith-convictions of the Church, unloving hostility to conservative believers, or opposition to the fundamental platforms of ecclesiastical government are, it is true, in- consistent with teaching activity. Such a freedom is impossible. But within the limits here indicated, my ideal is to concede the largest liberty to every co- worker whose sincere wish it is to preach the gospel in exactly this historical fellowship, who is also fired with the sin- cere purpose to use what he has to build up and not to tear down. Churches have ever been conservative in character, and such they will continue to be. The unhistorical radicalism that recklessly presses toward modernization has no understanding of this native conservatism, and will therefore soon discover that it has no part in a really capable reconstruction of any church. [293] JOHN STUART MACKENZIE, Litt.D., LL.D., CARDIFF^ WALES Professor of logic and philosophy at the University College of Southern Wales and Monmouthshire since 1895; bom near Glasgow, Feb. 29, I860; received his education at Glasgow and Cambridge universities, and at the Univer- sity of Berlin ; assistant lecturer on philosophy and Cobden lecturer on political economy in Owens College, Manches- ter, 1890-93; member of the Editorial Committee of the International Journal of Ethics; president of Moral Edu- cation League, since 1908; author of An Introduction to Social Philosophy; A Manual of Ethics; Outlines of Metor physics; Lectures on Humanism, The question that you raise as a subject for a sym- posium is certainly one of real importance. Some organization for the support of ethical and religious ideals seems to be essential for human progress; and it is no doubt true that the existing organizations for this purpose are greatly hampered by their antagonism to one another and by the increasing difficulty in secur- ing adhesion to their elaborate creeds. I certainly think that the statement you quote from Abraham Lincoln expresses what very many feel. I doubt, however, whether the difficulty would be satisfactorily met by adopting the qualification for membership which he sug- gested. My chief grounds for this doubt are as fol- lows: 1. The proposed qualification is in the form of a commandment, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor as thyself," rather than of a belief; and it is consequently not altogether easy to know what it is to be taken as implying. [294] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE 2. If we are to understand that no one is to be ad- mitted to membership who does not, in the fullest sense, obey this commandment, I am afraid that the mem- bers would be either very few or very insincere — ^per- haps both. The love of one's neighbor cannot be di- rectly willed, but only gradually cultivated; and the love of God, I should suppose, must be of even slower growth. 3. If, on the other hand, what is meant is only that those who are to be admitted to membership are to pledge themselves to act, as far as possible, in the spirit of the commandment, the difficulty still remains that the interpretation of it would raise — ^what, I think, you rightly deprecate — "debated and controversial ques- tions." The conception of God is one that raises many questions. Are we to accept it in the sense in which it was understood by Plato or by Spinoza or by Mar- tineau, or in what other sense? We know, also, from Bishop Butler's twelfth sermon, that several different interpretations may be put upon the injunction, "Love thy neighbor as thyself." I fear, therefore, that the pro- posed formula is a little too vague to serve as a satis- factory basis for a church. Hence I should be inclined to suggest as a simpler and more intelligible basis, that the member should only be asked to pledge himself to do his best to know what is true, to appreciate what is beautiful, and to promote what is good. Is this too slight a foundation for a religious organization? It does not appear to me that it would be so. No doubt every one ought to be able to join an organization on such a basis. There would hardly be any room for dissenters. But is it not just such a church that we desire to see? On the other [295] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE hand, it must be remembered that any one who did join such a church would be committing himself to a large undertaking. He would be definitely recognizing the obligation to keep his intellectual, his esthetic and his moral activities in the fullest possible exercise; or, in Goethe's phrase, "Sich vom Halben zu entwohnen Und im Ganzen, Guten, Schonen Resolut zu leben." Of course, if a church were established on such a simple basis as this, it might still be possible for its members to form themselves into smaller groups who might differ in their views with regard to what is true, beautiful, or good; and who might think it desirable to formulate their opinions in some more definite and detailed way. But the Church as a whole would only exclude those who deliberately closed their eyes to any one of these three ideal standards. And I believe that the differences that would arise within such a church would be very much smaller than most people are apt to imagine. The differences that exist among men at present are very largely due to the profession of creeds which are probably as little understood in general by those who accept them as by those who reject them. If people were not bound by such creeds, I am inclined to think that they would soon fmd themselves in sub- stantial agreement on the most fundamental problems. But it would be a mistake to try to make any detailed formulation of the points on which they agreed. Such a formulation might serve for a time ; but in a few years it would probably be as much outworn as any of the creeds with which we are at present afflicted. [296] John S. Mackenzie JAMES GORE KING McCLURE, D.D., LL.D., CHICAGO^ ILL. President of McCormick Theological Seminary, Chicago, since 1905; born at Albany, N. Y., Nov. 24, 1848; edu- cated at Yale University and Princeton Theological Semi- nary; ordained to the Presbyterian ministry, 1874; pastor at New Scotland, N. Y., 1874-79; traveled in Europe, 1879-81; pastor at Lake Forest, 111., 1881-1905; president of Lake Forest University, 1897-1901; author of Possi- bilities; The Man Who Wanted to Help; The Great Ap- peal; Environment; For Hearts that Hope; A Mighty Means of Usefulness; Living for the Best; The Growing Pastor; Loyalty, the Soul of Religion; Supreme Things, 1. The conditions of reception into membership in the Presbyterian Church in the United States are sim- ply such evidence of knowledge and piety as indicates repentance of sin, purpose to live according to the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ, and acceptance of the government of the church. 2. Theology, which is the science of God, can be true, final, and effective only as it is in agreement with all God's revelations of himself in conscience, nature, history. Scripture and Jesus Christ. Ordinarily the more brief a formulated credal state- ment is the more sure it is to have lasting significance and to prove permanently advantageous to the welfare of individual souls and to the advancement of the king- dom of God in the world. [297] THE REV. SAMUEL McCOMB, D.D., BOSTON^ MASS. Associate director of the Movement for Moral Treatment of Nervous Disorders at Emanuel (P. E.) Church, Bos- ton, since I9O6; born at Londonderry, Ireland, Jan. 28, 1864; educated at Magee College, Londonderry, Assem- bly's College, Belfast, and at the universities of Oxford and Berlin; during 1896-99 held pastorates at Reading, England, Armagh and Belfast, Ireland, and Riverside Church, New York; professor of ecclesiastical history. Queen's University, Canada, 1899-1904; author of Re- ligion and Medicine; The Making of the English Bible; Christianity and the Modern Mind, THE CREED AND MODERN THOUGHT No one who has eyes to see can doubt the existence of a grave crisis for religion and the institutes of religion. Criticism has shaken the foundations of traditional teaching about the Bible. Scientific conceptions of the world have revolutionized beliefs supposed to be essen- tial to Christianity. The cosmogony of the creeds has vanished before the newer astronomy. Redemption from sin seems hard to reconcile with the doctrine of evo- lution and the inviolability of self-acting ethical laws. Even the ideas of God and immortality which "natural religion" was supposed to certify are passing through a drastic trial, and the minds of men are profoundly dis- turbed. In such a critical situation, what is the duty of the Church? What must be our attitude toward a creed, or a confession of faith? We can find no relief either in the short and easy method of the ultra-rationalist who would throw overboard all the classic expressions of [ 298 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Christian belief and would commit us to the anarchy of individualism, or in that of a blind literalism which cannot pierce beneath the letter and the symbol to the inner spiritual reality. The truth is that the problems involved are the most difficult and the most delicate that the Christian intellect can be called upon to solve. For the Church is a historical body, not an accidental conglomeration of individuals. Nay, more, the Church is the symbol of something grander than itself, the unity of humanity in God, and is a witness to truths essential to the higher life of the world. On the other hand, the creeds reflect the intellectual and spiritual problems which agitated the age which gave them birth. They are not supernatural entities to be accepted in the spirit of a narrow dogmatism, nor are they an adequate em- bodiment of the truths they would proclaim. They only symbolize truth, the truth that saves and unites humanity into a holy brotherhood. It follows that long and intricate confessions of faith defeat the very purpose for which they are com- piled. For what is wanted in the creed is not a de- tailed statement of exact and definite thought — ^that is the work of the speculative thinker — ^but a hint at in- definable mysteries, a cry out of the common heart of believing souls, going up in worship and service. Surely, the formula known as the Apostles' Creed meets these requirements. It comes to us from a period not far removed from the apostolic age. It is laden with the devotion, the aspiration, the victorious faith of almost eighteen centuries. All the scattered members of historical Christendom can unite in uttering it. But it may be argued, simple though the apostolic formula is, it nevertheless contains statements which [ 299 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE taken literally, are not in harmony with the fundamental convictions of the modem world. Must we not, there- fore, seek for something simpler still? I answer, the most simple formula that can be devised to serve as a symbol of the Christian religion if analyzed in a dog- matic spirit, must give rise to division and controversy. It is only in prayer and worship that unity is achieved, and the creed is to be felt as we feel the glory of music, or poetry. It is not to be dissected as we would a prop- osition in logic. Hence each mind will attach to the creed an interpretation born of its own special spiritual experience and religious training. When, for example, we recite the words "He de- scended into hell," what do we mean? To the mind still imprisoned in medievalism these words mean that the crucified One made a literal journey to a region in space. For the educated mind of to-day such a thought is unintelligible; yet interpreted in terms of spirit, the phrase suggests a truth of profound significance. Has not Christ faced the utmost darkness that can overtake the human spirit? Has he not irradiated the spiritual universe with the glory of his presence? Has he not brought redemption and reconciliation to humanity sunken in the hell of sin and despair? When we pass from the creed to the theology of the Church, we pass from the realm of worship to that of thought. It is obvious that the theology that does not conform to the proved conclusions of science and phi- losophy is a mere playing with words. A permanent dualism between our theological and our scientific con- sciousness is unthinkable. We must either fall back into obscurantism, or fearlessly follow truth whither- soever it may lead. The fundamental dogma, the root [300] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE principle of our thinking to-day is that truth is a unity. It is this faith that ever allures onward the human mind. But this means that every truth of science is also a truth of religion, that every generalization in re- gard to the physical world, such as the principle of evolution, is the revelation of divine activity, that every great uplifting force in the normal or social order is a sign that the kingdom of God is a present reality. Theology is the interpretation of human experience in and through the idea of God. It is the new ex- periences of men, their new desires, new insights, new aspirations, — in a word, it is the new life of the present enriched by the heritage of the past, and looking toward new horizons that await adequate theological interpre- tation. The formulas and traditions of the past, pre- sent quite a helpless look, when set face to face with these new demands. The relief which dogmatism offers is discredited among all who carry weight. The task of the theologian of the future must be to challenge every tradition, discover the truth which it contains, and coordinate the truth thus discovered with the cer- tainties of the ethical and philosophical thinker and of the dramatist and the novelist who study life and report what they find there. To contribute, even in the small- est degree to the unification of our religious and scien- tific thinking, is an honor for even the strongest man. For such a unification would give a great upUft to the ethical life; would put the iron of assurance into the preacher's message; would inspire with a lofty enthu- siasm our essential endeavors, and would go far to re- deem our inner and outer life from confusion, weakness and vacillation. [SOI] ALLAN MENZIES, D.D., ST. ANDREWS, SCOTLAND Professor of divinity and biblical criticism at St. Mary's College, St. Andrews, Scotland, since 1889; bom at Edin- burgh, Jan. 23, 1845; educated at the universities of St. Andrews and Edinburgh and Erlangen; minister of the parish of Abernyte, Perthshire, 1873-90; president of the National Church Union, 1 897 ; translated F. C. von Baur's Paulus, der Apostel Jesu Christi (Paul, the Apostle of Jesus Christ), and Das Christentum und die christliche Kirche der drei ersten Jahrhunderte {The Church History of the First Three Centuries) ; J. Wellhausen*s Prolego- mena zur Geschichte Israels {Prolegomena to the History of Israel) in collaboration with J. S. Black; also O. Pflei- derer*s Religionsphilosophie auf geschichtlicher Grundlage {Philosophy of Religion) in collaboration with A. Stewart; edited the supplementary volume of the Ante-Nicene Fathers, and the Review of Theology and Philosophy since 1905; author of National Religion; The History of Religion; The Earliest Gospel; Commentary on Second Corinthians. I CANNOT say whether there are many of my country- men whose attitude toward the Church is similar to that of Abraham Lincoln, the great liberator. In Scotland the laity are not required to subscribe to any creed, some ministers recite the Apostles' Creed as part of the Communion Service, and a father bringing an infant to be baptized may be asked as to his belief; but it is doubtful whether a minister is entitled to insist on be- lief in the creed in either case. In the Church of Scot- land and the United Free Church ministers sign the Westminster Confession of Faith at ordination or in- duction, but these churches have in recent times passed Declaratory Acts to relieve the consciences of those signing. The question of subscription is not a press- [302] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ing one in Scotland for either ministers or laity, the churches recognize that theological progress is not only their privilege but their duty. There is in consequence little movement away from the churches on the score of belief; and no sharp distinction between ministers and laity. Both are advancing, and the people gen- erally belong to the church, both in country districts and in towns. It cannot be denied, however, that the question which this symposium is to discuss is a real one in Scotland as elsewhere. There are many who do not go to church; men of letters and artists, and men of business, who have high authority in their own de- partments and are justly esteemed by the community. Among the working class many are influenced by the active propaganda of secularism and socialism, and re- main outside of the churches. They consider the Church to teach things about the Bible which are not true, to be behind the age in her attitude toward science, and to be wanting in real guidance in social questions. These criticisms of the Church are felt not only by those who are led by them to stay at home on Sunday, but by many who go to church and by the ministers themselves. Re- ligion, it is felt by all, is not affording to the people the guidance and stimulus that are justly to be ex- pected from her; the old beliefs have lost their author- ity, and the teaching that shall have authority and shall call the whole people to the pursuit of spiritual and ideal ends is slow to appear. Hence the variety in the subjects of sermons in our day. The churches are waiting for the word which God will put in their mouths. They have prepared themselves to receive it. They have accepted the teaching of biblical criticism, and are [303] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE full of the interest with which the Bible is so much alive when seen and understood as a historical record and arranged as criticism dictates. They are taking to the study of sociology both in theory and practise, and are bent on finding out what is just and right in the relations to each other of the dijfferent classes of society. They are discovering afresh the figure of Jesus Christ and convincing themselves in the new ways pointed out by scholarship of his supremacy. Can the Church then dispense altogether with a creed and declare all those to be within her pale who accept the requirements of our Lord, that we should love God first and wholly and our neighbors as ourselves? I would add the Lord's Prayer, which many regard as the first and most adequate statement of Christian doc- trine. It is too much to ask of the Church that she should ignore the whole development of her doctrine in the past and content herself for her creed with state- ments of moral duty; but if she takes for her standard the Lord's Prayer and the requirements of love to God and man, leaving the rest of her doctrine to be nurtured by scholarship and by the judgments of time, she will take up a position from which science cannot drive her, and which will secure for her the sympathy of the world more and more. The beliefs which these words of our Lord imply are the root doctrines of the Bible in both Testaments. They imply the belief in the sovereignty of God and the spiritual nature of the universe. In the hundredth Psalm the appeal is made to all men, of every race, to worship God, to join in his praise, and the only reason given for the appeal is that God is our Maker and that we are his. The Church is specially called at the pres- [ 304. ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ent time to insist on this doctrine and make it the chief burden of her message. She should take a stronger stand than she has done in declaring that men are the children of a spiritual Being, amidst the works of whom they live, whose wisdom and care are manifest on every side, and who has made them partakers of his own na- ture. That they exist not for themselves but for him, that he has an indefeasible claim on them, older than that of church or country or any human institution, and that he has put his law in their hearts. They are called to worship him and they are not entitled to refuse the wor- ship he asks of them. And along with the teaching of the sovereignty of God, that he made us and asks our worship and our love there should go the preaching of Christ, as the being in whom the knowledge of God which we all have, more or less, dwelt most fully and took command most en- tirely of all life and action, so that in him the message of God's mercy and love to his creatures took bodily shape. [305] EDUARD MONTET, D.D., SWITZERLAND Dean of the faculty of theology of the University of Geneva since 1897; vice-rector since 1908; rector since 1910 ; professor of Old Testament exegesis, and lecturer on the Semitic languages; born at Lyons, June 12, 1856; secondary studies at the Lycee de Lyon, collegiate studies in the Universities of Geneva, Berlin, Heidelberg, and Paris ; appointed professor to the faculty of theology of the University of Geneva, 1885; author of The History of Christianity, and other works on Semitic languages, on Islam, and on the Old Testament. The number of religious men who refuse to join an ecclesiastical organization, no matter what it be, will continue to increase, the farther we advance along the course of the twentieth century. This is due to two im- portant causes: 1. Protestant individualism: Protes- tantism is by its principles individualistic. It is based on liberty of thought; thus liberty of thought attracts the adherence of the individual. Formerly, it was said that every Protestant was a pope, with Bible in hand. It has been said, still more truly, that Protestantism was neither doctrine nor church, but that it was a method — the method of liberty of thought. 2. The Protestant churches have all, without exception, failed to carry out the fundamental principle of Protestant- ism — free thought and absolute liberty ; where the spirit of the Saviour is there is liberty! The most liberal among them have maintained a dogmatic basis, so weak are they. The Reformed Churches of France, churches with liberal tendencies and a liberal spirit, aflSrm in their [ 306 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Declaration of Principles of Paris (Oratory), of June, 1907, "their faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God, who by his holy life, his precepts, his death on the cross, his resurrection, saves all who through him unite themselves to God." The National Protestant Church of Geneva, the largest church in our knowledge, declares in the pre- amble to its constitution of 1908, that it "recognizes for its only leader Jesus Christ, Saviour of man." This latter declaration is very broad, but it is a dogmatic declaration. Single isolated communities have been established with no dogmatic foundation whatever; such, for in- stance, is the Liberal Protestant Church of Brussels, which is an organization, an assembly, organized of com- munities. A declaration like that of Lincoln is insufBcient as a basis for ecclesiastical organization. On the other hand, liberal religious associations that have affirmed broad principles (for example, monotheism) never at- tain to the establishing of a church (International Unitarian Congress ; Congress of Religions of Chicago, etc.). There is, therefore, reason for believing that there will always be two parties in Christianity in the true religious sense of the word: a majority that has need of a church because it needs direction; a minority among whom there will be choice thinkers and remark- able Christians outside of all churches, no matter pf what sect. Theology, within and without the Church, must be molded without being in opposition to the scientific ideas of the period ; but there should be no question of being in harmony with these ideas. Complete harmony [307] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE between theology and the sciences, along general lines, is impossible, because the domains of these two disci- plines (theology and science) are absolutely different and strangers the one to the other. Complete harmoni- zation of one with the other of these disciplines sup- poses reciprocal encroachments and therefore con- tradiction. [808] WILLIAM MATTHEW FLINDERS PETRIE, D.C.L., Litt.D., LL.D., F.R.S., F.B.A., LONDON^ ENGLAND Edwards professor of Egyptology, University College, London, since 1892; born at Charlton, England, June 3, 1853; educated privately; excavator in Egypt, 1880-1911 (the principal discoveries of which were the Greek set- tlements at Naukratis and Daphnae; prehistoric Egyptian at Koptos and at Naqada; inscription of Israelite war at Thebes; kings of the earliest dynasties at Abydos; Hyk- sos camp ; city on Onias and palaces of Memphis) ; founded Egyptian Research Account, 1894, enlarged as the British School of Archaeology in Egypt, 1905; author of Inductive Metrology; Stonehenge; Pyramids and Tem- ples of Gizeh; Tanis I and II; Naukratis I; Season in Egypt; Racial Portraits; Historical Scarabs; Harvara; Kahun; Illahun; Medum; Ten Years Digging; History of Egypt; Tell el Amarna; Koptos; Naqada; Egyptian Tales; Decorative Arts; Six Temples at Thebes; Desha- sheh; Religion and Conscience in Ancient Egypt; Syria and Egypt; Dendereh; Diospolis; Royal Tombs of the First Dynasty; Royal Tombs of the Earliest Dynasties; Abydos I and II; Ehnasya; Methods and Aims in ArchoBology ; The Egyptians in Sinai; Researches in Sinai; Hyksos and Israelite Cities; Religion of Ancient Egypt; Gizeh and Rifeh; Athribis; Personal Religion in Egypt; Memphis; Qumeh; The Palace of Apries; Arts and Crafts in Egypt; The Growth of the Gospels; Meydum and Memphis; Historical Studies; Egypt and Israel; RevO' lutions of Civilization, The question put is one which no one can really answer any more than he can describe growth or decay in his body. To reach any permanent values in our conception of things we must carefully discount the tendencies of our own time. When we look at any of the separate worlds of thought around us, we can see how entirely they can [309] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE absorb a mind and close it to all other interests. The world of chemistry, or mathematics, or physics, or bi- ology, or astronomy, or ethics, or history, or philan- thropy, or music, or art, might easily dominate all one's thoughts and horizon of being. And one may see other worlds equally dominating those around us, such as novel reading, or politics, or society, art, music, sport, theatricals, vice, or crime. This dominance of a single circle of interest, which we can thus watch at first-hand around us, enables us to realize the dominance in different ages of single ideas round which all else was grouped. In each century we see how to most men one great issue ruled their thoughts. Reform, which was to be a cure-all, revolu- tionary fraternity, free will and predestination, liberty of prophesying, the mass, the power of the keys, cru- sading, the moral rule of the Church, the conversion of Europe, the procession of the Holy Spirit, the mother of God, the Trinity, Lapsarianism, Marcionism — each of these dominant ideas ruled the whole conception of its own age. The present obsession is the dominance of natural law, and the immense extension of man's physical powers and knowledge. This colors our ideas of every- thing just as much as other ideas have colored other ages. Though our circumstances of thought might have been fairly clear to us in a dim manner if nothing else had interfered, yet they have all been blotted out by a blinding search-light from one direction only, which had obscured our perception of everything else. One aid to us is to look through other eyes. Books like Doughty's Arabia Deserta, Laotze, Epictetus, or even Plutarch enable us to live for a time amid truer [310] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE values of humanity, to shake off the insistence of mat- ter, to regain a little of that truth of orientalism that mind is the essential and matter the accidental. It is one of the greatest difficulties of the present, how to use the facilities of life crowding upon us without being subdued by them. It is easy to fall into a mechanical rush without keeping the proportions or the ends in view. Further, as every message to the past was con- ditioned by the capacities of those who wrote and who received it, so we cannot expect that such past messages can fit the needs of the present expression in all their form, but rather in their principles. The distinction of the principles from the form was the expressed mission of the teaching of Jesus. He came to show how the law was to be fulfilled by observing its principles, while its forms had become obsolete, or overlaid by tradition. Such was his own personal claim. For any fundamental theology which is asked for, we must go back to the essential principles, regardless of transient forms or beliefs. No lesson is plainer in history than the permanence of the nature of man, re- gardless of his acquirements of knowledge. The noble passage of Abraham Lincoln, which has been quoted in your letter, shows his sense of the requirements of essentials, irrespective of all transient forms. When we look at what seems to many to be the ter- rible cleft stick of circumstances — that any religious body must have some fixed formula, and yet that all perception of truth must be in a state of flux accord- ing with the power of man's perceptions — each can only say "to his own Master he standeth or falleth," let no man judge another. [311] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE The greatest work for teachers of the present time, and in all times, is to disentangle the essential principles from their past expression, and reset them afresh in their present terms, which will yet again become anti- quated in the future. The more the expression of es- sentials can keep clear of the accidentals of the time, the truer it will be; that is the secret of the lasting power of great thought from Job and Asoka to Herbert and Shakespeare. All topical style, bringing the feel- ings and interests of the day into religious expression, is like a fashionable figure in a picture — it forms its most rapid condemnation as being out of date. There is sometimes a pious sneer at the Decalogue, as if we had outgrown it; but I should much like to know the man who never broke even the tenth conmiandment. [312] JAMES BISSETT PRATT, Ph.D., WILLIAMSTOWN, MASS. Professor of philosophy at Williams College, Williams- town, Mass., since 1906; born at Elmira, N. Y., June 22, 1875; studied at Williams College, Harvard University, Columbia Law School, and the University of Berlin; taught Latin in Berkeley School, New York, 1900; head of Latin department, Elmira Free Academy, 1900-2; in- structor of philosophy at Williams College, 1905-06; au- thor of Psychology of Religious Belief; What is Prag- matism? The question of a creed for our time is an exceedingly important one. The official creeds which most of our Christian churches formally profess are not creeds for our time. This in itself would indeed be no evil, for the ancient is often reverend and helpful. But the evil in retaining these creeds of other centuries as the exact and deliberate statement of our present beliefs, and as the thing by which we wish our Christianity to be de- fined is obvious enough. Such a policy lends a weapon to every foe of Christianity. It deliberately chooses the most indefensible positions for its battle-field. It announces to the world that it will stand or fall by that which in the eyes of the world's science and criticism is already fallen. On the other hand, to break altogether with our past would be an equally great mistake. Our present and future must grow out of our past and be in vital connection with it. Hence as many of our old forms should be retained as are still foimd at all helpful — ^nor in our attempt to be liberal and modern should we break down everything that distinguishes the Christian from [313] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE the moral man who finds no help and no attraction in Christianity. There should be some difference — a good deal of difference — between a church and a society for ethical culture. Otherwise we surrender at once an enormous amount of potential energy which loyalty to Christianity has always evolved, and which has been by no means lost to-day. Hence I should not welcome the words of Lincoln, which you quote, as suggesting a sufficient demand for church membership. And this I say as a purely practical, or psychological, matter. I believe that if our churches should give up every refer- ence to Jesus in their membership formula, with all the break-down of distinctions which that would imply be- tween Christianity and non-Christian morality, they would lose enormously in efficiency and motive power. I am inclined to believe that there is danger in identify- ing religion too completely with social service. Cer- tainly it should include social service, but it means more than that. Therefore I shoidd be in favor of some such ques- tions as the following, as the form of entrance into the Church : Do you love the Lord your God, and do you desire to love him more and serve him better? Do you promise to be a loyal follower of Jesus Christ in the service of your fellow-men? isuj WALTER RAUSCHENBUSCH, D.D., ROCHESTER^ N. Y. Professor of church history at Rochester Theological Semi- nary since 1902; born at Rochester, N. Y., Oct. 4, 1861; was educated at the classical gymnasium, Giitersloh, Germany, the University of Rochester, and the Roches- ter Theological Seminary; ordained to the Baptist min- istry, 1886; author of Christianity and the Social Crisis; For God and the People; Christianizing the Social Order. I DOUBT if the modern indifference to the churches is mainly due to conscientious doubt about the creeds of the churches, and if church membership would be in- creased by an abolition of creeds or a simplification. Personally I should be well content with making the Saviour's statement the basis of membership. The Church has taken religion away from the babes and given it to the rabbis by intellectualizing the gospel. This would reverse the process. It would shift the obli- gation from the domain of intellect to that of the will and the power of loving. As to an "unassailable and final" theology, — I think we shall never have it. But you are wholly right that our theology must not be in plain and shocking con- tradiction to the facts about the universe and about human life which are the common property of our age. Theology should give an adequate intellectual support to the living religious convictions of modern men. It is defective if it teaches things which the best minds find it hardest to believe. It is also defective if it fails to teach things which arouse the deepest religious feel- ing and stir the best minds to religious action, [315] ARCHIBALD THOMAS ROBERTSON, D.D., LL.D., LOUISVILLE^ KY. Professor of interpretation of the New Testament in the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary since 1895; born near Chatham, Va., Nov. 6, 1863; graduated from Wake Forest College, N. C, 1885, and Southern Baptist Theo- logical Seminary, Louisville, 1888; assistant instructor of New Testament interpretation, 1888; professor biblical in- troduction, 1892-95; author of Life and Letters of John A. Broadusj Syllabus for New Testament Greek Syntax; Syllabus for New Testament Study; Teaching of Jesus Concerning God the Father; The Students' Chronological New Testament; Keywords to the Teaching of Jesus; Epochs in the Life of Paul; Commentary on Matthew in Bible for Home and School; John the Loyal, or Studies in the Ministry of the Baptist; The Glory of the Ministry; A Short Grammar of the Greek New Testament; Epochs in the Life of Jesus; A Grammar of the Greek New Testor ment in the Light of historical Research. THE DEMAND FOR A COMMON CREED I AM asked to answer these questions: 1. Why so many people do not go to church? 2. Do the complicated creeds debar men from Christianity? 3. Where shall we look for a fundamental theology? These questions are more or less interwoven, and a simple answer is not possible to any of them. I may say at once that I do not believe that a final theology is any more possible than fijial science or final medicine or final law. It is in the very nature of the human mind to push on to further fields of inquiry. To stand still is to shrivel and decay. It is a fad of every age to imagine that it has at last reached the limit of human knowledge. Every system of philosophy overturns the [316] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE other, and yet progress is made. It is no more possible to-day to have a final theology than it was when Jesus told the disciples that he could not then tell them more. The Holy Spirit would come and lead them into all truth. He is still leading us into truth, and the truth is setting us free to combat new error and shake off old shackles. So I may answer the questions in inverse order by saying that I do not know in what direction we may look for the final solution of all our problems save in the direction of God. God is ever at work in his universe. He has expressed his will in the worlds about us, in man in particular, in his Son as the expression of himself, and in his Word as the record of that expression. God is at work in human life and human history. The life of God in the heart and character is the main thing, far more important than theology. That is mediated to us by God's Son through his Spirit. That life of trust is far above theology, as the flowers bloom without con- sulting the books on botany. It is in experience there- fore that we must start. The soul of man has direct dealings with God. That is real religion. But, granted this God-given life, it must be nour- ished. It is not all of the will nor of the emotions. The intellect must prompt the will and stir the emotions. The intellect must be fed. It is impossible not to build a theology if one has experience of God and a mind that thinks. These minds will not interpret God and the experience in the same manner. In the New Testa- ment itself we see the Pauline, Johannine, Petrine, Jacobean types. This variety is inevitable and is harm- less. Jesus did not condemn this in his prayer for unity^ The occasion for that prayer was the rivalry among the [317] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE disciples for ecclesiastical preferment, not types of mind and character. I doubt if denominationalism is the rea- son for the indifference of people toward Christ. Cer- tainly uniformity, enforced uniformity, has had a far more danming effect on men than all the curious and even sad divisions in Christian doctrine. It is vain to force men into organic union who do not really agree. They will fly apart by centrifugal force. It would be well from many points of view if all the forces of Prot- estantism could present a solid front to the world and to Romanism. Certainly progress has been made, and there is less tendency now to have so many churches in small conmiunities. But the basic principle of Protes- tantism is freedom of the individual as opposed to Romish oppression. The individual must be allowed to speak as he sees and learns. This leads to diversity and to a certain amount of weakness and occasion for criticism, but it remains to be said that it is just where the Protestant principle has flourished best that we find the flower of human progress in religion and all that makes for the welfare of man. The tide ebbs and flows with the years. The eighteenth century was the age of deism and religion seemed dead, but John Wesley and George Whitefield blazed a path for evangelism. The nineteenth century was the age of materialism, but the missionary enterprise swept over the earth. The twentieth century comes in as the age of criticism, but already the heart of man is feeling after God if haply it may find him, and it is finding that he is near and loving. Religious experience is finding a standing even in philosophy. Why do not more men go to church? That has always been a problem. At bottom it is because of sin. [318] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Men who love sin do not enjoy being made uncom- fortable by a powerful preacher. They do not like being bored by a poor one. For both reasons they stay away. Sin gets a tight hold on them. They offer many excuses, but that is the real reason with most men who are indifferent to Christianity. Ask your doctor what proportion of men are free from sexual immorality, to go no farther, and you will have a deal of light thrown on the vacant pews in the churches. Some men are bothered about critical views of the Bible, especially college students. There is in some institutions a fine scorn of Christianity as a played-out religion. But this temper has always been found in universities. It be- longs in part to the period of youth, as it grapples with the great problems of life. Each age has to solve its own problems in its own way. There is no other way. This is the way of life and it is the best way. There is nothing in the present situation to cause essential disheartening. Nietzsche has had his vogue in Europe, but it is passing. It is a great thing to be able to stand still and see the salva- tion of the Lord, to stand and not give way to rout, to stand and to rally for victory. There is nothing so essential as to go right on with the fight, go on with new weapons adapted to new foes, but to go on in the same warfare with the sword of the Spirit. Christ has the same universal appeal if he is put before men to-day with intelligence and force. iswi ROBERT McWATTY RUSSELL, D.D., LL.D., NEW WILMINGTON^ PA. President of Westminster College, New Wilmington, Pa., since 1906; born at Balm, Mercer Co., Pa., April 6, 1858; studied at Westminster College and at Allegheny- Theological Seminary; teacher at McKeesport and Day- ton academies, 1881-83; pastor at Caledonia, N. Y., and Sixth Church, Pittsburgh, Pa., 1890-1906; author of Truths for the Inner Life (in The Midland). CONDITIONS OF CHURCH MEMBERSHIP The sentiment of Abraham Lincoln concerning what should constitute the conditions of church membership has been held by thousands of thoughtful men, some- times with so full a consciousness as to result in protest against church requirement for credal confession, and sometimes only as latent conviction resulting in timidity concerning the whole question of confessing Christ through membership in his church. It is absolutely certain that if the celebration of the Lord's Supper in every congregation were made a real invitation to all who believe on Jesus Christ to express faith in him and loyalty to his cause, many who are now absent from the communion table would feel impelled to be present. If when the Lord's Supper is observed, its full meaning were set forth as a confessional ordi- nance, making its observance the public expression of the great fact that Jesus Christ has been here and that he will come again, and that service for him on earth demands the imion of believers in expression of their faith and efforts for service, thousands who now feel [320] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE they are debarred from church membership because lack- ing in sympathy with the credal statements of the va- rious denominations, would gladly participate in the ordinance of the last supper, and in humility and loyalty to Jesus take the bread and the wine in his name. Unfortunately church membership has come to mean more than simple allegiance to Christ. It is viewed by many as the acceptance of a creed rather than "the con- fession of Christ." Scores of serious-minded men have been hindered from becoming members of the Church, with which they are naturally environed by birth and family circumstance, because they entertain mental pro- test against certain statements of the ancestral creed and feel that public confession of Christ is inconsistent with the entertainment of such mental attitude. Let it be made plain that the partaking of the Lord's Supper means the confession of Christ as Saviour and Lord, and many a man who has been kept away from the Lord's table at thought of his own unworthiness will rejoice to come because through coming he can confess his faith in the worthiness of Christ. Let it be made plain that the communion table is "the table of the Lord" and not the table of any organization, and those who have yielded to the invitation of Christ when he says, "Come unto me" will also feel constrained to obey his command concerning the celebration of the last sup- per, "This do in remembrance of me." The pernicious results of placing an over-emphasis upon credal statements as a term of church membership are numerous: 1. The Church rather than Christ becomes the cen- tral object of thought. Thousands join the Church, who have never joined Christ and live in moral content- [S21] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE 1 ment because accepting the creed of their Fathers, while life in its finer moral and spiritual aspects is remote from the standard of Christ. There is, therefore, the tendency to put the Church where Christ ought to be in human thought. This will account for all the cruelties and persecutions that have taken place in the name of the Church. Mere loyalty to creed may leave men hard, cruel, and uncompromising toward all who cherish opinions differing from their own. Loyalty to Christ secures for men the strong yet tender spirit of the Master. 2. The placing of emphasis upon creed as a term of church membership tends to perpetuate sectarianism. When the Church is viewed as the kingdom of God, people of narrow vision naturally say, "Our church," and believe that the kingdom of God can come only as their own particular denomination attains ascendency and power. 3. Young people are subjected to an unreasonable test at the time of assuming church membership by ask- ing them to avow belief in credal statements, the scope of which they are not able to measure, and the meaning of which is necessarily obscure and open to controversy between loyal followers of the Master. There was cer- tainly a grim humor in the action of many sessions of former days who held back devout children from con- fession of Christ in the Lord's Supper because certain questions of "The Larger Catechism" were not yet mastered. The creed of the thinking man is ever chang- ing. Centered in Christ there will always be enlarging views concerning him. The great historic creeds have generally been produced by the majority votes of those in council. Creed-making is a sort of theological land- [322] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE scape-gardening in which a large liberty is allowed, so long as everything is on God's ground of revealed truth. The terms of church membership should be simple, and with young people might be summed up in the fol- lowing questions : 1. Have you lived long enough and thought care- fully enough to realize that you are in a world where there is sin in you and around you and death before you? 2. Do you realize that living in a world where there is sin in you and around you and death before you, you need a Saviour of some kind? 3. Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the kind of a Saviour set forth in the Bible as Son of God and Son of man, and able to deal with your record of sin through forgiving love, and to give eternal life through his sav- ing power? 4. Do you realize that he offers himself and all the benefits of his life and death and resurrection glory to you as the free gift of divine love, and do you accept him on his own terms as your Saviour and Lord? 5. Do you desire to confess him as your Saviour in his own appointed way through the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, and to unite with his confessed follow- ers in a life of testimony and holy service for him, that his kingdom may come and his will be done on earth as it is in heaven? The person who can give intelligent assent to the foregoing questions is prepared for membership in the Church. The supreme need of the hour is a return to "the simplicity that is in Christ." Apostolic terms of con- fessing Christ are sufficient for the modern Church, [323] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Anything more will perpetuate sectarianism and inter- fere with the spread of the gospel. The Lord's Supper is a confessional ordinance. In it men "proclaim the Lord's death until he comes." The observance of the Lord's Supper by believers con- stitutes a dotted line of history through the ages back past the open tomb of Christ to the upper room where he instituted the feast memorial and prophetic. The prophetic character of the memorial requires a present emphasis. Of its meaning we read "Ye proclaim the Lord's death until he come." So long as men intelli- gently commemorate the last supper, the world has a vital witness to the great truths that Jesus Christ was here and that he is coming again. In proportion as the sacrament of the supper becomes a ceremonial rather than a witnessing or confessional ordinance, the world will lose sight of the fact that we have a coming Lord, and believers while striving to live "soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world" will miss the inspira- tion which comes from "looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ." The placing of emphasis upon union with Christ rather than espousal of a creed as the term of church membership is the supreme need of the hour. It will introduce a new spirit of vitality into the work of the Church. It will give new inspiration for home evangel- ism and a new spirit of activity in foreign mission work. Too often foreign mission work has been regarded as taking our Christianity to heathen lands rather than oflPering to introduce the nations to our Christ. Too often mission work has seemed the effort to substitute Christianity for Buddhism or Confucianism instead of [ S24> ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE asking heathen nations to turn from a dead Buddha, Confucius, or Mohammed to a living and coming Christ. The proclamation of the full gospel requires a fuller emphasis upon the prophetic truth emphasized in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper. The Church is proclaiming the gospel of "justification by faith" and "a heavenly inheritance for the redeemed," but the king- dom view of the gospel has been too little emphasized. The nations are to be confronted with warnings con- cerning the judgment features of "the day of God," and are to be gladdened with announcement of the king- dom-glory that shall be ours when the Christ we serve "shall come again." History reveals the persistent ten- dency of the Church to hold limited views of the gospel. Through centuries the doctrine of "justification by faith" was hidden under traditions and ceremonialism. Its reenforcement by Luther brought in the Reforma- tion. For generations the great missionary command of Christ was forgotten and neglected. The Church has now awakened to its meaning. "The blessed hope," or the realization that world evangelization will permit the return of Christ and the introduction of the glad kingdom-days or golden age of prophecy is the truth now knocking at the door of the Church. Its admission and realization will usher in a new era of service. [325] PAUL WILHELM SCHMIEDEL, Th.D., ZURICH^ SWITZERLAND Professor of New Testament exegesis at the University of Zurich since 1893; born at Zaukeroda, Germany, Dec. 22, 1851; educated at the Universities of Leipsic and Jena; privat-docent of theology at Jena, 1878; associate professor of theology at Jena, 1890-93; author of Qucb intercedat ratio inter doctrinam epistolce at Hehroeos mis- soB et Pauli apostoli doctrinam; "Handcommentar" zu den Brief en 'an die Thessalonicher und Corinther; Johannes- schriften des Neuen Testaments (English translation. The Johannine Writings) ; Die Person Jesu im Streite der Meinungen der Gegenwart (English translation, Jesus in Modern Criticism) ; has edited R. SeydeFs Religions philos- ophie; and has prepared a new edition of G. B. Winer*s Grammatih des neutestamentlichen Sprachidioms, THE CREEDS OF THE CHURCH AND MODERN REQUIREMENTS It is to be deplored that Christian churches in their creeds demand faith in dogmas in which many of our day can no longer believe. With the spread of culture and education this discrepancy will be felt more and more. Thus ever-growing numbers of men and women will be deprived of the benefit they might derive from the Church, and the latter of an ever larger number of desirable members. Such a state of things earnestly calls for some attempt at solution. But this is not as easy a matter as Abraham Lincoln imagined when he said he would join only a church which inscribes over its altar, as its sole qualification for membership, the Saviour's statement: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all [326] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE thy soul, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor as thyself!" How do formulas of faith arise, the acknowledg- ment of which is demanded of church members? How did those arise which are in use at present? They are not called "creeds" without a reason. People feeling at one in religious matters wish to state briefly in what that unity consists, and that is the content of their com- mon faith. Lincoln's formula does not express a faith but an injunction. A religion, however, does not start by setting up injunctions, but by trying to give expres- sion to the glad consciousness of some priceless posses- sion, due to a higher Power. However briefly stated, this glad consciousness seeks as comprehensive an expression as possible, so that nothing of vital impor- tance be left out. The more intensely the truth of such a religious possession is felt, the less restraint is observed in expressing it in the form of doctrinal statements. Creeds which are the natural outcome of the religious life, and not an artificial fabrication, always rest on an absolute conviction of the indubitable truth of the as- sertions made. Let us recall the age of primitive Christianity. The oldest creed was: Jesus is the Messiah, or: Jesus is the Son of God, or: Jesus is the Lord (Mark 8: 29; Matt. 16: 16; Acts 8: 37; Rom. 10: 9; Phil. 2: 11). Of this everybody was convinced, those who were already Christians as well as those intending to embrace Chris- tianity. This creed distinguished the adherents of the new religion from those of all other religions; to remain true to it, the martyrs faced death; and it conquered the world. If Christianity, instead, had started with Lincoln's formula, it would probably not exist to-day. [327] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE And yet in these doctrines about Jesus there lurked already all those difficulties which beset us to-day. To begin with, such expressions as the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord, could be differently interpreted; they did not convey the same idea to all who used them. Even for one and the same person they acquired a differ- ent meaning after the death of Jesus from what they had had before. These differences of opinion could not remain concealed, and there ensued a struggle, in which every one tried to prove his interpretation to be the right one or even to enforce, in some way or other, its general acceptance. The principal trouble, however, with regard to the future lay in the fact that these terms represented dog- mas. The characteristic feature of a dogma is not fully described by saying that it is a tenet of religion which a majority of people have publicly declared to represent their views. Before a majority of people can so ac- knowledge it, it must have taken shape in the thoughts of a single person; and the question is just this — ^how this thinking process leads to the sort of doctrinal utter- ances which we call a dogma and which is accepted by others as a statement of their faith. This question must be answered as follows : A dogma is the formulation of a religious belief by means of thoughts and convictions extraneous to re- ligion. What a Messiah is, whether God could have begot- ten a Son, and in what manner, whether and how a divine being could have become man, whether the resur- rection and ascension of such a being was possible and how it was accomplished; these, and numberless other questions arising from the subject, are settled accord- [ 328 ] THE CHUKCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ing to ideas of which religion unhesitatingly makes use, although they have their root, not in religion itself, but in a general tendency to form a conception of the uni- verse, that is, in the philosophy and especially the meta- physics of a given age. Now it is a characteristic feature of all such philo- sophical tenets that they are subject to great changes in the course of time. What one age holds to be self- evident, a later age considers a fundamental error. Then dogmas resting on such tenets can no longer be held to be true. But it is not their religious content to which this change is due. The purely religious thought which forms the nucleus of the dogma of Jesus, the Son of God, is this: Jesus has opened up to us a view of God's attitude toward man which fills our hearts with intense joy. This conviction could be shaken by a new philosophy proclaiming that there is no God or none who considers man or holds such an attitude toward him as Christianity asserts; but it could not be overthrown by a new conception of what a Son of God really is. On the other hand, all dogmatic utterances about Jesus, as the Son of God, become obsolete if a new philosophy asserts that it is impossible for God to beget a Son in any way whatsoever, or if it declares that for a divine omnipotent, omniscient Being to appear on earth, his omnipotence, omniscience, etc., veiled or revealed, would be as impossible as to divest itself of such powers, if they really had formed part of Christ's psychological personality. Even Luther's Reformation bears the im- press of the philosophy of its time in so far as the teach- ing of the Bible that the risen Lord should sit at the right hand of God was — ^not given up, but — so inter- preted as to mean that God's right hand is everywhere, [329] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE a rendering of the biblical meaning which is a clumsy forcing of texts. It is hardly necessary to point out that this fate be- fell not only the dogma concerning the Son of God, with all it implies, as mentioned above, but also that of the unity of the divine and human natures in Christ, that of the Trinity, that of creation, that of the inspiration of the Bible — indeed, practically, all the so-called ob- jective dogmas, that is, all those, dealing with something said to exist or happen outside the believer's mental consciousness. Such being the case, would it not be far better if creeds contained no dogmatic assertions at all, but only such purely religious utterances as the aforesaid, for instance, that Jesus has opened up to us a view of God's attitude toward man which fills our hearts with joy? It would certainly seem to be so. But before we follow this train of thought, let us again refer to history and ask ourselves whether, when our creeds took shape, such a renunciation would have been possible. This question, however, must be answered with an emphatic negative. Even if the early Christians could have foreseen that their doctrines would be called into question by a later age they could not have avoided setting up their dogmatic formulas. They had to con- sider the needs of their own time and to find a formula by which to attract new adherents while binding together those already won. No doubt, the sole reality underly- ing their dogmatic assertions that Jesus was the Mes- siah, or the Son of God, or the Lord, was the fact that he had brought them salvation in the religious sphere; but if, in their creed, they had limited themselves to calling Jesus their Saviour and nothing more, they [330] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE would have said less than they felt and their confession of faith would have lacked in vigor. Because the other terms employed appeared perfectly legitimate, they had to be used, for it is ever the tendency of religious conviction to seek for the fullest possible expression of what it holds to be true. This would apply equally, for instance, to the dogma of the resurrection. Now it is natural that a creed, once formulated and adopted by the Church, should have been strictly ad- hered to during the centuries that followed. Otherwise, the Church would' have feared to break the continuity with her past, even to separate herself from her Foun- der. And, naturally, in every religion which has a historic founder, strict adherence to his person and teaching is considered indispensable. The Reforma- tion of the sixteenth century, for instance, would have had neither the same outward success nor the same inner strength without the consciousness of setting aside the authority of the Church in favor of an older one, namely the authority of the Bible. We are only beginning to realize the possibility of keeping in close touch with the spirit of the Founder of our religion in spite of giving up formulas supported by the hitherto prevalent con- ception of his work or by that conveyed by the Bible or even by his own words. But why should we recall the past ? Because of what we learn from it in regard to our own time. We learn how our creeds were formed and why they were ad- hered to, and when we realize how natural this process was and how completely in keeping with the spirit of religion, we shall no longer view the fact in an unfavor- able light, however much we may be inclined to deplore it. On the contrary, we shall gladly acknowledge that [331] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Christianity has done its very best to pass on to us its most precious possession. Thus, if any one feels a call to improve matters within the Church, let him fully appreciate this and realize, before he sets to work, that there is no room in it for grumbling and fault-finding with the past, but only for an endeavor at readjustment according to altered circumstances. But even if an attempt be made at a restatement of our religious convictions, the philosophy of our time would still form its basis. Religion will never rest con- tent with purely religious utterances of the kind men- tioned before; to create dogmas is a tendency inherent in her very structure, for only by so doing can she bring her religious possession into touch with thoughts and conceptions indispensable to our conmion mental con- sciousness. Even Lincoln, mentioning God in his formula, could not have prevented the raising of the question whether any one believing in a pantheistic God was a Christian ; and even if he himself had affirmed that he was, others would have denied it. And thus dog- matic controversy would not have been barred out even by a statement so carefully calculated to that end. Moreover, creeds are always formulated by those whose interest in religion is most intense, and it is this very intensity of religious feeling which urges them to go as much as possible into detail in giving doctrinal expressioil to their faith. And when there exist a large number of religious communities vying with each other for precedence, each of them would, naturally, feel the necessity of expressing its special views as fully as pos- sible, thus leading to ever finer shades of dogmatic dis- tinctions, on the relative values of which the layman is hardly in a position to form a judgment. [ 832 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE It must be noted, however, that this is far less the case on the European continent than in English-speak- ing countries. The number of denominations here is small and their membership, numerically, hardly counts as compared with that of the Protestant State churches each comprising the whole geographical area of a po- litical state. From this arises another difference — to most people the question of joining a church never pre- sents itself. They are born within the Church, formally admitted to it at baptism, they receive their religious education in it, at their confirmation between the ages of fourteen and seventeen they are asked to remain faithful to it, and this they promise. If, later on, they do not feel satisfied in it, they usually remain passive; only a few persons of unusual energy leave the church altogether or join another, as such a change entails irksome formalities, and, so far as the education of the children is concerned, considerable disadvantages. Others again, lacking neither insight nor religious fervor, are still loth to leave their church, being attached to it by bonds of affection from childhood upward. The larger a religious body is, the less frequently can it happen that the individual member, as may hap- pen in the independent denominations, is called upon to take a definite attitude with regard to this or that dogma of the Church. Apart from the children's vow at con- firmation by which they pledge themselves, in almost all the churches, to acceptance of the Apostles' Creed, it is only at a baptism that the godparents are asked whether they are willing that their godchild should be brought up in this creed, and in the services of the church it is read as the creed of the whole congregation. On the other hand, tests for the clergy, when called 1333 2 THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE to holy orders, binding them to the teaching of the Bible and the creeds of their State Churches, are exacting, and in some comitries the clergy are under strict super- vision, so as to prevent any deviation from orthodoxy. Mulert gives in Die Lehrverpflichtung in der evange- lischen Kirche Deutschlands a good collection of these formulas, from which the following, used in the eight older provinces of Prussia since 1895, is taken: "It is forbidden a Protestant clergyman to preach and to spread another doctrine than that founded on God's pure and clear word, expressed in the Holy Scrip- tures of the Old and New Testaments, our only norm of belief, testified to in the Apostles', the Nicene, and the Athanasian creeds, and in the creeds of our Church, established in the time of the Reformation {Confessio Augustana, etc.)." This state of things is typical of the distressing po- sition of all liberal-minded members of such a church. If these directions were strictly carried out, such persons would never receive religious guidance of a kind con- genial to them, nor their children a religious education which they could approve. People often say that mem- bers dissatisfied with their church should leave it. There might be something in this argument if there existed side by side with their church another which they could join, but on the Continent there is none. In proportion as a State Church claims, as against the diversity of the free denominations, to minister to the religious needs of all belonging to her by birth, she should be so organized as really to fulfil this mission, and, moreover, the right of minorities (which might easily turn out to be ma- jorities) should be respected. As matters are at pres- ent, it is entirely forgotten that a church should stand [334] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE toward her members in such a relation as Paul consid- ered to be the right one in regard to his churches, ac- cording to his words: "Not that we have lordship over your faith, but are helpers of your joy" (2 Cor. 1 : 24) . But in order to prove that in some instances the case is different, let us quote the formula in use in Nassau up to the year 1843: A clergyman pledges himself to teach the Christian doctrine according to the principles of the Protestant Church as, on due deliberation and to the best of his knowledge, he finds it in the Bible; and the formula in use in the canton of Zurich since 1905: "Will you promise, as faithful servants of the Re- formed Church, to preach, from conviction and with devotion, the gospel of our Saviour Jesus Christ, on the basis of the Holy Scriptures?" In the same connection may be mentioned the fol- lowing sentences from the statutes of the Mennonites at Cref eld in the Prussian province of the Rhine, dated 1912: "Our community of Mennonites forms part of the communities of Mennonites existing in many countries. . . . It stands for those aims in life which Jesus Christ has placed before us, regarding, as the signs of a Christian community, purity of mind and active love. . . . Their pastor, untrammeled by the yoke of a dogmatic formula, is in duty bound, by his life and through his teaching, to seek the welfare of his com- munity, to fulfil faithfully, to the best of his abilities and in accord with his conscience, the duties of his office as preacher and teacher, and to minister, to the best of his capacity, to those who desire his services." [335] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Mention should further be made that in the cantons of Neuenburg and Geneva tests for the clergy are pro- hibited. So we possess already what Lincoln desired, but only in such isolated cases as to be practically of no avail to the majority of those who wish for it. That such a satisfactory state of things as just de- scribed will become more general appears, in view of the signs of the times, to be quite out of the question for a long while to come. Strict adherence to the tests (or formulas) has, it is true, been occasionally somewhat relaxed, as in Prussia and Saxony, but on the whole the historic tradition is closely adhered to. Now, if we ask what should be done, under such circumstances, it is just from the most imcompromising and exclusive of Lutheran creeds that a hint can be taken. The Formula of Concord (dated 1577) express- ly states, toward the end of its preface, that creeds are not endowed, as the Bible is, with the authority of a judge, but are to be considered only as witnesses to the faith, showing how controversial points in the Bible have been understood and interpreted within the Church by the teachers of each age. This statement is the outcome of an unlimited rev- erence for the Bible, but it contains so much truth as to allow of its being applied even against the Bible. Dur- ing the last hundred years or so the view has gained more and more adherents that the Bible, too, is only a collec- tion of writings which bear witness to the conceptions of Christianity prevalent in their time. If the churches are so reluctant to act upon these suggestions, then let the laity take the lead ! Religious- minded laymen, holding modern views, should not allow [336] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE themselves to be ousted from the churches because these uphold doctrines no longer tenable. They know the invaluable help derived from fellowship in the religious life and feel the need of it. They know, too, what the churches do not yet realize, that the earnest search for truth is sufficient to engender such a spiritual fellowship and to generate its vivifying influence of mutual help- fulness. And if a common possession is insisted upon, they further know, what again the churches fail to rec- ognize, that the faith in the power of truth, of goodness, and of love forms such a common possession. And if an existing formula should be considered necessary to mark the bond of union between all Christian believers, they know, what again the churches ignore, that our Lord's prayer amply suffices. Where a number of denominations exists, the one approximating most nearly to one's ideal may be chosen. Where there is no choice but the State Church, we rec- ommend that a relative, not an absolute, separation of Church and State be aimed at. So long as such a state of things does not prevail, however, religious-minded laymen and women, holding such views, should publicly declare that they do not feel themselves bound by those doctrines, the acknowledg- ment of which is demanded by the Church, and they should not give up their membership in the Church because of those dogmas. Other members of the Church, who feel called upon to give doctrinal expres- sion to the theoretical views of the majority of church members may, for this purpose, readapt old doctrines or formulate new ones. Such an endeavor, so entirely in accord with the very nature of a church, is, for this very reason, necessary ; on the other hand it ought to be [337] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE permitted to remain in a church or to join another, not because of her doctrines, nay, even in spite of them, but solely on account of the religious spirit permeating her which, in any case, is more important than dogma. And this observation leads us back to the words of Lincoln with which we started. There exists no Chris- tian church that would not uphold his two injunctions; so if only he could have overcome, in the way in which we find it right to do so, his aversion to dogma, he might have joined any one of them. Yet, it must be said that there still exists considerable difference as to the degree in which these commandments react on life in the va- rious churches. This being the case, a man or woman of the present day, feeling as Lincoln did, should be entitled, if there is a possibility of choice, to choose that church where is found not, perhaps, so much the best doctrine as the best practice of the love of God and the love of one's neighbor. And lay members of this mind should take an active part in church government and in social and charitable activities of their churches, thereby proving to conserva- tive members that they are as keenly alive to religious interests as they themselves. Thus many a misunder- standing might be avoided, many a seemingly hopeless chasm bridged over, and they would be enabled to en- joy what the Church really has to offer them. There is, fortunately, a wealth of religious stimulus, consolation, and help, far greater than reveals itself at first sight, embedded in those antiquated forms; and we come at once under its beneficent influence when we no longer feel on the defensive against the forms in which it is offered us. If laymen with strong religious feelings and ad- [338] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE vanced views would act in this way, their example might have a beneficial effect, also, on those who keep away from church, not so much because of their aversion to dogma, but in consequence of their religious indiffer- ence. Most of them are not entirely without a religious interest which might be aroused if they were shown a way to satisfy it which would be acceptable to them. And liberal-minded theologians of advanced views should not hesitate to become ministers of the Church and to work, together with the laity, for its reorganiza- tion from within. More than once a large number of Prussian pastors have informed their official authorities that they did not hold themselves committed to a literal acceptance of the creeds, and that, in the exercise of their office, they would be guided only by the dictates of conscience, and the authorities remained silent. Such modern theologians, however, should avoid artificial use of an antiquated, dogmatic terminology. A hundred years or so ago, the whole Church in England and Germany was dominated by a trend in religion, very similar to that of our own day, in the demand for liberty from antiquated church dogmas and for the placing of stress on the predominance of reason in theological thinking. Nothing could withstand the overwhelming force of those ideas. Why should such a period not reappear? If it does, let it find us better prepared than those before us to gain for a theology which is desirous not to find itself in contradiction with any really acknowledged truth, and yet is an unfolding of the deepest, most heartfelt piety, the rights of citizen- ship — ^not sole government — within the Church. IS391 THE REV. CHARLES MONROE SHELDON, D.D., TOPEKA^ KAN. Minister-at-large of the Central Church, Topeka, Kan., since 1912; born at Wellsville, N. Y., Feb. 26, 1857; grad- uated from Brown University, 1883, and from Andover Theological Seminary, 1886; ordained to the Congrega- tional ministry, 1886; pastor at Waterbury, Vt., 1886- 88; Central Church, Topeka, 1889-1912; author of Rich- ard Bruce; Robert Hardy's Seven Days; The Twentieth Door; The Crucifixion of Philip Strong; John King's Question Class; His Brother's Keeper; In His Steps; Malcolm Kirk; Lend a Hand; The Redemption of Free- town; The Miracle at Markham; One of the Two; For Christ and the Church; Edward Blake; Born to Serve; Who Killed Joe's Baby?; The Wheels of the Machine; The Reformer; The Narrow Gate; The Heart of the World; Paul Douglas; The Good Fight; A Sheldon Year Book; The High Calling; A Builder of Ships; "Jesus is here." I HAVE always believed in a simple declaration of Chris- tian principles and have always been willing to receive into my own church in Topeka, any man or woman who simply said he believed in Jesus Christ as his Saviour and Friend without asking for a detailed definition of the person's theology. If I were to ask the members of my church to write down an honest confession of all the things they believe in religion and their reasons for it I would have almost as many different definitions as I have members; but I cannot say that that fact makes very much difference with the most important thing of all and that is the daily Christian life. Character is one thing; creeds and confessions of faith seem to be very [ 340 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE many. What the Church needs is a vital and funda- mental unity of purpose. If it can determine what the main thing in religion is, that is enough without anything more. In my experience, however, I do not find a great many people are kept out of Church for the reason that Abraham Lincoln gave, but a great many stay out, of their own selfishness, most of them, I think, because they are not willing to follow the Master's teaching and be real Christians. They claim to stumble over this or that imperfection of the Church in its organized life or in its professed creed when in reality the real trouble is with themselves and their unwillingness to do the Christian thing which they know perfectly well and which no man-made creed has ever hindered any Christian from doing. I am perfectly willing, myself, as a minister and one who has always been called orthodox, at least in some particulars, to receive any man or woman into full church membership who simply says he is trying to live the Christian life, without asking him to define what it all means except as it finds expression in his own daily attempt to do what Jesus commanded ; but even a church with as simple a creed as that will not draw all men into it. I do not find myself ready to criticize or condenm the Church for the failure of men to come into it. I think the same conditions prevail now which prevailed in the time of the Master when he himself said, "They (the people) will not come unto me that they might have eternal life." If the people would not come to Christ, they will not always come to me or to my church, and nothing I can do in the way of changing my creed or throwing the door open any wider or trying to make it any more simple will induce certain types of men to [341] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE come into church membership. I am wholly out of sym- pathy with any spirit which is denouncing the Church to-day for the failure to reform all of the world. I think it is the coward's position where men in great and small towns blame the Church for all the evil conditions that exist. The Church is not responsible alone for all the redemption of society. The salvation of the world is so great a task that it requires all the forces of civiliza- tion to combine — the home, the press, the school, the State, and the Church together are not any too great, all of them combined, to help in the formation of a Christian character, and none of them has the right to throw all the burden of responsibility upon the others or upon any one of the others. In many towns the home, through its failure, is more to blame for existing conditions than the Church, and in other towns the daily press is the great force for evil which is hindering the reformation of the place. To sum up my position I may say frankly that I am in favor of the simplest creed in the matter of conditions for church member- ship. If that will remove any barrier which now exists to hinder men of any type from connecting them- selves with the Church, I am in favor of removing that barrier without compromising in the least with any form of what may be called worldliness. Practically, I do not think a Christianity which denies the divinity of Christ is going to accomplish much for the real redemp- tion of mankind ; and a Christianity which does not have that kind of Christ in the center of it, in the Church or out of it, will never prevail to any appreciable extent. I cannot help feeling that Abraham Lincoln even might have been mistaken, and if he had come into some church and identified himself with it enthusiastically, he could [342] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE have lived a Christian life just as well without being hindered by any creed that the church might have de- manded, and at the same time his influence with the world would have been greatly enhanced — his influence, I mean, over young men who hesitate and claim, with- out as much honesty as he had, the same excuses. I have never had much sympathy with men who kept out of the arena and sat on the benches to criticize in any fashion those who were fighting, no matter how feebly, down in the middle. I believe it is better for men to join imperfect organizations and sacrifice some personal feeling rather than try to live their Christian lives out- side of the organized forces. Individual Christianity cannot in the nature of the case do the work for the world that organized Christianity can do. I believe the feeblest church organized to-day to do some form of Christian work and be an inspiration for Christian life is infinitely better than a scattered number of individ- uals, although every one of them may claim to be living a better life than church members. It is not fair to the Master or to his kingdom for any man, no matter how good, to walk along his way alone and in so doing threw discredit upon the organization which the Master loves and for which he gave himself. There are plenty of churches at the present time that do not offer any ob- stacles to any man who wants to live a Christian life so far as the creed of the organization is concerned ; and I feel very emphatic in my own mind concerning the present attitude of many both within and out of the (Church who criticize the church organization and make it a stumbling-block rather than an open door to the kingdom of God. Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for it, not because it was a perfect organiza- [343] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE tion but because it stood for his life and teaching. It is not conceivable that if he were here to-day he would refuse to belong to a church for the reason Abraham Lincoln gave. [S44] HERMANN SIEBECK, Ph.D., Th.D., GIESSEN^ GERMANY Professor of philosophy at the University of Giessen since 1883; born at Eisleben, Sept, 28, 1842; educated at the Universities erf Leipsic, Berlin, and Halle; has taught at Gera, Stargard, and Halle; privat-docent at Halle, 1872- 75; professor at the University of Basel, 1875-83; author of U Titer suchung en zur Philosophie der Griechen; Das Wesen der aesthetischen Anschauungen; Ueber Bewusstsein als Schranke der Naturerkenntnis ; Geschichte der Psychol- ogie; Wesen und Zrveck des wissenschaftlichen Studiums; Ueber die Lehre vom genetischen Fortschritt der Mensch- heit; Lehrbuch der Religions-Philosophie ; Aristoteles; Goethe als Denker; Ueber musikalische Einfiihlung; Zur Religions-Philosophie; Grundfragen zur Psychologie und Msthetik der Tonkunst; Ueber Freiheit, Entwicklung und Vorsehung, The significance of the Church and its warrant lie in the fact that it matures and reconstructs the forms of its cultus in the sense of religious fellowship. It desires to engender and preserve a common living religious consciousness, and by means of this to strengthen the religious consciousness of the individual. Along with this goes an activity directed toward the ethical. The more the individual consciousness that is strengthened in the presence of deity feels and knows itself before God as partaking in religious fellowship, the stronger becomes the basis for its manifestation in the interest of the maintenance and of the well-being of the individuals that compose the fellowship. The ecclesiastical institution also brings to expres- sion for religion the anthropological truth that man is a social being, and that all which he contributes in his [ 345 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE normal activity and productivity out of the common good and common deeds belongs to him only as he belongs to society. What answers to a need of the individual is that he assures himself of his relationship to the supramundane and the divine upon the ground and in the framework of religious fellowship. There is, moreover, a means of allowing the content of the religious disposition to emerge objectively, and espe- cially of bringing that which is inexpressible and un- attainable to "discursive" thinking into at least relative intimacy to the individual. Through this the religious consciousness first gains the ability to make suitable to others its own peculiar capabilities for self-sacrifice, and to conserve it continually for those who already live therein. Again, it is especially significant that essential interest in the saving of souls becomes current together with the (development of the) ecclesiastical. Through the religious coramunity and its representatives the be- ing and existence of the supramundane are to be brought home to the consciousness that was originally bounded by the mundane, and are continually to be re- ferred to him who is constantly leading in that direction. The Church with its agencies is to care for souls as that ofiice can be exercised upon the basis of and in the way of fellowship. The minister, not as "priest" but as he who cares for souls, is the preacher of the concept of salvation that is authoritative for the fellowship of mem- bers. In and through the Church which rules in the spiritual self the religious life is to attain to a conclusive external expression. In those matters which belong specifically to the cultus the Church perceives not the means of introducing, out of temporal interest, the Deity into the world, but the operation and expression of a [ 346 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE common disposition that rejects and conquers the world. At any rate it may be recognized that among religiously disposed individual personalities the need of affiliation to the ecclesiastical community both may and must be felt in varying degrees of intensity. [S47] .WILLIAM MACDONALD SINCLAIR, D.D., F.R.S.L., F.R.G.S., HENFIELD, ENGLAND Archdeacon of London and canon of St. Paul's since 1889; born at Leeds, June 3, 1850; educated at Balliol College, Oxford; ordained to the priesthood in 1874; curate of Tortworth, Gloucester, 1874-75; assistant minister of Que- bec Chapel, London, and evening lecturer in logic at King's College, London, 1875-76; vicar of St. Stephen's, Westminster, 1880-89; rector of Shermanbury, Henfield, Sussex, since 1911; honorary chaplain to the Queen, 1889- 95; chaplain in ordinary, 1895-1901; honorary chaplain to King Edward after 1901 ; grand chaplain of England after 1894; author of The Psalms, the Authorized Ver- sion in the Original Rhythm; Commentary on the Epistles of St. John; Lessons on the Gospel of St. John; The Chris- tian's Influence; Christ and our Times; Words to the Laity on Subjects of Ecclesiastical Controversy ; Leaders of Thought in the English Church; Points at Issue between the Church of England and the Church of Rome; The Churches of the East; Memorials of St. Paul's Cathedral; The Servant of Christ; Simplicity in Christ; The New Law; Chapters in the Christian Life; Unto You, Young Men; Likewise the Younger Women; Difficulties of Our Day. SIMPLIFICATION OF CONFESSION The elaborateness of the various church creeds and sym- bols has arisen from the desire to establish certain posi- tions which are believed to have been gained in the long course of controversy, and to provide against error. This desire has grown from the belief in the verbal in- spiration of Holy Scripture; and though that belief has long been found to be untenable, its effects upon the history of doctrine are still strong and formidable. The spirit which finds in "Hoc est corpus meum," in [348] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE spite of the notable variations in the four accounts of the institution of the Lord's Supper, a definitive and exclu- sive dogma, is still powerful in every church. At the present day, the Church of Rome is bound by the decrees of the Council of Trent, the Creed of Pope Pius IV, and by the Vatican decrees ; the Church of Eng- land by the Thirty-nine Articles, including the Apostles' Creed, the Nicene, and the Athanasian; the Lutheran churches by the Confession of Augsburg; the Presby- terian churches by the Longer and the Shorter Cate- chisms; the Methodists by the numerous volumes of Wesley's sermons. As long as there is a general deter- mination to abide by all these, and a sense of sacrilegious horror and dismay at the idea of putting any of their formulas aside, there is no possibility of any return to New Testament simplicity. Probably there is a very large body of Romanists who find their doctrinal ap- paratus overwhelming; very few members of the Church of England are content with the Thirty-nine Articles as they exist ; many Presbyterians, though profound ad- mirers of the Longer and Shorter Catechisms, would like to rest on a less ambitious basis; many Wesleyans would admit that the vast theological and homiletic out- pourings of John Wesley are a cumbrous bond of intel- lectual and religious union. But there is everywhere a dread lest when once the familiar ground is left, the members of the different denominations of Christ's divided body may be led into regions still less to be preferred. In the Church of England it has been the aim of the Broad-church party to work quietly and unostenta- tiously for a more primitive simplicity. Broad-church- men, of course, are not, and never can be a party: they [ 319 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE are merely an aggregation of those who cannot be right- ly classed as either High-churchmen or Evangelicals. They include representatives of the old Latitudinarian tendencies of the eighteenth century. In the last cen- tury their principal manifesto was Essays and Reviews: Ecce Homo might be added. In the present century, they have issued volumes of essays both at Oxford and Cambridge. Harnack's writings have made a great im- pression on English thought : Bishop Boyd Carpenter's Bampton Lectures, "Some Permanent Elements in Christianity/^ on a constructive basis, were in favor of simplicity : among laymen Sir Oliver Lodge has written in the same direction. The strength of the Anglo-Catholic or High-church party and of the corresponding Evangelical party is so great and preponderating, that no reformer could hope, in the lifetime of the present generation, to see any change of symbols. Even the proposal to relax the ob- ligation to repeat the Athanasian Creed, with its damna- tory clauses, in the public services of the church created so great a disturbance that there was no chance of its being adopted. Nor would the Evangelicals be willing to modify the basis which they find in Holy Scripture and the Reformation. A discussion, therefore, of this subject becomes to a large extent academic and ideal. But that does not condemn it to barren inutility: the present situation is plainly unreasonable, and light must come from wholesome controversy. The difficulty in the way of simplification is, that in orderly, regularly constituted bodies, such as national churches, or large religious conmiunities, there must be some basis of doctrinal concord, otherwise congregations would be perpetually startled and upheaved by violent [350] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE contrasts of teaching. This would especially be the case in Episcopal churches, where the bishop has immense influence in his diocese. The want of continuity would be very disastrous. On the other hand, to discuss, as Harnack does, what is the true meaning of Christianity, must be salutary. The ideal would be to reproduce the preaching and teaching of Christ without subsequent himian adjuncts. And then there might be two symbols: one for the clergy, with regard to their message; the other, a very simple one, for the laity with regard to membership of the Church. It is of the second that it is more advisable and ap- propriate to speak. "If," says Harnack, "we take a general view of Jesus' teaching, we shall find that it may be grouped under three heads. They are of such a nature as to con- tain the whole, and hence it can be exhibited in its en- tirety in any one of them. Firstly, the kingdom of God and its coming. Secondly, God the Father and the in- finite value of the human soul. Thirdly, the higher righteousness, and the commandment of love. . . . The gospel is no theoretical system of doctrine, or philosophy of the universe; it is doctrine only in so far as it proclaims the reality of God the Father. It is a glad message assuring us of life eternal, and telling us what the things and the forces with which we have to do are worth. By treating of life eternal it teaches us how to lead our lives aright. It tells us of the value of the human soul, of humility, of mercy, of purity, of the cross, and the worthlessness of worldly goods and anxiety for the things of which earthly life consists. And it gives the assurance that, in spite of every strug- gle, peace, certainty, and something within that can never be destroyed, will be the crown of a life rightly [S51] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE led. What else can the confession of a creed mean under these conditions but to do the will of God, in the certainty that he is the Father and the one who will recompense? Jesus never spoke of any other kind of creed? Even when he says: Whosoever shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my father which is in heaven, he is thinking of people doing as he did; he means the confession which shews itself in feeling and action. How great a departure from what he thought and inspired is involved in putting a 'ChristologicaF creed in the forefront of the gospel, and in teaching that before a man can approach it he must learn to think rightly about Christ. That is put- ting the cart before the horse. A man can think and teach rightly about Christ only if, and in so far as, he has begun to live according to Christ's gospel. (*If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.') There is no forecourt to his message through which a man must pass ; no yoke which he must first of all take upon himself. The thoughts and assurances which the gospel provides are the first and the last thing, and every soul is directly arraigned before them. . . . His death had the value of an expiatory sacrifice, for otherwise it would not have had strength to pene- trate into that inner world in which the blood-sacrifices originated: but it was not a sacrifice in the same sense as the others, or else it could not have put an end to them: it suppressed them by settling accounts with them. Nay, we may go further : the validity of all ma- terial sacrifices was destroyed by Christ's death. Wher- ever individual Christians or whole churches have re- turned to them, it has been a relapse. The earliest Chris- tians knew that the whole sacrificial system was thence- forth abolished, and if they asked for a reason, they pointed to Christ and his death. . . . Any one who will look into history will find that the sufferings of the pure and the just are its saving element; that is to say, that [352] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE it is not words, but deeds, and not deeds only, but self- sacrificing deeds, and not only self-sacrificing deeds, but the surrender of life itself, that forms the turning- point in every great advance. . . . No reflection of the 'reason,* no deliberation of the 'intelligence,' will ever be able to expunge from the moral ideas of mankind the conviction that injustice and sin deserve to be pun- ished, and that everywhere that the just man suffers, an atonement is made which puts us to shame and puri- fies us. It is a conviction which is impenetrable, for it comes out of those depths in which we feel ourselves to be a unity, and out of the world which lies behind the world of phenomena. . . . The Easter faith is the conviction that the crucified one gained a victory over death; that God is just and powerful; that he who is the first-born among many brethren still lives. . . . Whatever may have happened at the grave and in the matter of the appearances, one thing is certain : This grave was the birthplace of the in- destructible belief that death is vanquished, that there is a life eternal. . . . The certainty of the resurrection and of a life eternal which is bound up with the grave in Joseph's garden has not perished, and on the convic- tion that Jesus lives we still have those hopes of citizen- ship in an eternal city which make our earthly life worth living and tolerable. *He delivered them who through fear of death were all their life subject to bondage.' Wherever, despite all the weight of nature, there is a strong faith in the infinite value of the soul; wherever death has lost its terrors ; wherever the sufferings of the present are measured against a future of glory, this feeling of life is bound up with the conviction that Jesus Christ has passed through death, that God has awakened him to life and glory. What else can we believe but that the earliest disciples also found the ultimate foun- dations of their faith in the living Lord to be the strength which had gone out from him? It was a life never to be destroyed which they felt to be going out from him ; [353] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE only for a brief span of time would his death stagger them; the strength of the Lord prevailed over every- thing; God did not give him over unto death; he lives as the firstfruits of them that have fallen asleep." From such thoughts as these of Harnaek about some of the main doctrines of Christianity, a simple for- mula to unite lay people might be devised, leaving them to put into its phrases their own meaning, or the mean- ing that they had received from their several teachers. A new official formula for the clergy is, as I have said, far beyond the possibilities of the present generation: the more candidly individual members of the churches agree in regard to what are the less essential phrases and articles of their various confessions, so much the more hope will there be for ultimate peace and truth. [S54] GERALD BIRNEY SMITH, D.D., CHICAGO^ ILL. Professor of systematic theology at the University of Chi- cago; born at Middlefield, Mass., May 3, 1868; studied at Brown and Columbia Universities, Union Theological Seminary, and at the Universities of Berlin, Marburg, and Paris; ordained to the Baptist ministry, 1902; tutor in Latin, Oberlin Academy, 1891-92; instructor in mathemat- ics and modern languages, Worcester Academy, 1892-95; instructor in systematic theology, 1900-4, and assistant professor 1904-6, and associate professor, 1906-13, at the University of Chicago; author of Practical Theology; Bib' lical Conception of Atonement (with E. D. Burton and J. M. Powis Smith) ; Social Idealism and the Changing Theology. THE PRESENT RELIGIOUS SITUATION In asking why so many men to-day are indifferent to the claims of the Church, we should first of all remem- ber that those claims have been strikingly modified in modern times. Throughout the Middle Ages there was developed the ideal of a church-controlled civilization. Consequently the claims of the Church formerly cov- ered practically all realms of human enterprise. To be excommunicated from the Church meant ostracism from society. To engage in any activity for the benefit of mankind meant to cooperate with the Church. Dur- ing the past two or three centuries, however, we have developed secular means of promoting human welfare. Many of the benevolent and charitable enterprises which were formerly administered by the Church are now given over to secular organizations. One's service to his fellow-men may therefore be rendered through chan- IS55 2 THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE nels which do not lead to the Church. It is quite pos- sible for a man to find such abundant opportunity for moral and spiritual achievement in these secular enter- prises that he is not conscious of needing any additional realm for activity such as the Church might supply. There are unquestionably many men of whom this is true. Now to a man who is thus interested in the actual moral tasks of humanity, the creeds of the Church seem to be lacking in the emphasis which he approves. It is recognized to-day by historians that Christianity arose in a decadent age, when no confidence was felt in secular forces. The idealists were looking for a new age which was to supersede the present order. Religion naturally attached itself to the ideal values of that "other" world rather than to the social and ethical forces of this world. Christian doctrine thus consisted in statements concern- ing the way of redemption out of this evil world; and the creeds of early Christianity were concerned with the mysteries connected with this redemption. Let one read the Apostles' Creed or the Nicene Creed, and note the almost total absence of emphasis on the ethical and social aspects of religion. One who really lives in the modern world and draws his inspiration from the splen- did opportunities for scientific warfare against the foes of human welfare finds in these ancient creeds almost no direct reinforcement of his ideals. If, in addition, he contemplates the later denominational creeds, born of theological controversy over issues long since dead, he is likely to feel that in as far as the Church insists on creed-subscription, it has its face turned toward the past. There can be no doubt that a strong sentiment is growing toward the abandonment of those items in [356] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE creed and polity which absorb so much time and energy in outgrown controversies. On the other hand, the Medieval Church undoubt- edly attracted thousands of adherents who were in mor- tal terror of hell, and who were willing to pay what- ever price the Church demanded in return for the guarantee of salvation. Now in so far as the more ethical ideal of Christianity comes to prevail, the Church ceases to guarantee a man's salvation. It is coming to be widely believed by members of Protestant churches that no one is saved primarily by being baptized or by receiving the sacraments of the Church. Salvation must be a matter of ethical and spiritual development rather than the acceptance of supernatural means of grace in the form of ritual practises. It is thus possible for a man to be saved outside the Church. Why, then, does a modern man go to church? In order to strengthen the inner self in the struggle for a spiritual life. Now if a man has no genuine interest in inner spiritual achievement, if his only thought is to get his soul saved by the ministrations of the Church, such a man will naturally decline to spend his time and his money in connection with a church which does not guarantee his salvation, but which, on the contrary, lays upon him heavy moral duties. The church which aban- dons the sacramental ideal, giving itself consistently to the ideal of creating personal character and of inspiring social service will, of course, find itself forsaken by the not inconsiderable number of those who in former times regarded the Church as an ark of salvation. But in so far as this is true, a decline in membership might mean an actual gain in spiritual strength. As to the theology of a modern church, this question [ 357 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE will doubtless take care of itself, as it always has in the past. Nothing could be more futile than to attempt to construct a logically perfect "system" of theology, with the idea that it would endure forever. Religious life has a way of ignoring official statements which do not actually minister to life. There are to-day in our rituals and our creeds statements officially valid, but actually dead so far as practical usage is concerned. After they are repeated in the formal service they pass entirely out of consciousness until the next time when they are offi- cially promulgated. Nobody uses the content of the Athanasian Creed in his practical religious life. No mother or teacher actually proceeds on the assumptions of the Augustinian and Calvinistic doctrine of human nature. Intelligent people do not really believe that there is as much difference between a baptized and an unbaptized person as the prayer-book seems to imply. What is more, the spirit of freedom is coming to be so widespread that if a member of a church disbelieves in some outgrown tenet, he does not hesitate to say so. We are coming to tolerate a variety of opinion in every communion which would have seemed incredible to our fathers. The next step is not a difficult one to take. It is to carry to its logical conclusion the process which is now going on. The aspirations and convictions of our actual religious life will be put in such a form as will best pro- mote that life. We shall not attempt to impose our creed or our ritual on the next generation, but shall expect a living religion to create its own appropriate ways of stating and making effective its fundamental principles. There cannot be such a thing as a "final" theology; for human life never reaches its "final" de- [358] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE velopment. But there can be a theology which, just because it makes no claim to finality, is ever in quest of better ways of stating the inexhaustible mystery of the life of man in relation to God. We are just now in the transition period between the old and the new. We are trying to retain the older notion of infallibility, while continually revising the fal- lible portions of what ought by hypothesis to need no revision. When once we come to feel that revision is not something which needs apology, but is rather a mark of religious advance, the time will have come when any man who is really interested in the religious life of man- kind will have perfect freedom to try to persuade others to his way of thinking, and if he succeeds, will find him- self contributing to the actual development of Chris- tianity. The Abraham Lincoln of to-morrow will find plenty of churches where he can find a home and a wel- come. Probably a more intimate acquaintance with such a church from the inside would give to him a more positive appreciation of some features of Christianity which his creed failed to include. [359] JAMES HENRY SNOWDEN, D.D., LL.D., PITTSBURGH, PA. Editor-in-chief of The Presbyterian Banner (Pittsburgh) since 1898; born at Hookstown, Pa., Oct. 18, 1852; edu- cated at Washington and Jefferson College, and Western Theological Seminary, Alleghany, Pa.; ordained to the Presbyterian ministry, 1879; has held pastorates at Hu- ron, O., 1879-83; Sharon, Pa., 1883-86; Second Presby- terian Church, Washington, Pa., 1886-1911; adjunct professor of political economy and ethics, Washington and Jefferson College, 1893-98; professor of systematic the- ology. Western Theological Seminary, since 1911; author of Scenes and Sayings in the Life of Christ; A Summer Across the Sea; The World a Spiritual System — An Out- line of Metaphysics ; The Basal Beliefs of Christianity, ALL TRUTH HARMONIOUS 1. I DO not think it wise "to ask the great majority of people to subscribe to statements that deal with de- bated and controversial questions." Few churches do this, and the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, with which I am connected, only asks of persons applying for admission to its membership a credible profession of faith in Jesus Christ. 2. All truth is harmonious and coheres into a sys- tem, and therefore "a fundamental theology of the Church" must "be related to the literary, scientific, and philosophical certainties of our time" and cannot "be unassailable and final" if it "does not accord with the assured results of science." It is also "true that a mes- sage to be effective must stand for and teach those things that constitute the sum total of the values of human life, whatever their source may be." However, these state- [360] Scott Wearing THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ments are little more than truisms, and the question must always be determined what are "the assured results of science" and what are "those things that constitute the sum total of the values of human life." "The assured results of science" cannot conflict with the assured re- sults of theology, because science deals only with phe- nomena, and theology along with philosophy goes back of phenomena into their ultimate cause and nature. Yet conflict has arisen between these two departments of knowledge because scientists sometimes go outside of their province and begin to speak with an air of author- ity on questions of philosophy and theology, and theo- logians sometimes unwisely take alarm at the proper conclusions of science, and combat them only to be de- feated. Theology should be based only on truth and on truth from any and all sources, and it should there- fore be hospitable toward the "assured results" of study in all fields of knowledge and to all the "things that con- stitute the sum total of the values of human life." It must be admitted that theologians have often mis- takenly opposed the results of science, which afterward they were forced to accept, and have thus alienated men of science and culture, but there has been a marked im- provement in this respect. Theology is now, more than formerly, using all the results of knowledge and all the values of life to illustrate its own teaching and to reflect the Light of the world. rs6i] THEODORE GERALD SOARES, Ph.D., D.D., CHICAGO^ ILL. Professor of homiletics and religious education at the Uni- versity of Chicago since 1908; born at Abridge, Essex, England, Oct. 1, 1869; studied at the Universities of Min- nesota and Chicago; ordained to the Baptist ministry, 1894f; pastor at Rockford, 111., 1894-99, Galesburg, 1899- 1902, Oak Park, 1902-5; university extension lecturer on biblical literature at the University of Chicago, 1899-1905; professor of homiletics, 1 906-8; author of The Supreme Miracle, and Other Sermons; His Life Series; Heroes of Israel; Lessons from the Great Teachers (with Lillian M. Soares) ; A Baptist Manual. Christian theology is an interpretation of human life and of the universe in terms of those values which have been mediated to us through the influence of the per- sonality of Jesus. It assumes the validity of religious experience, of the feeling of values, as datum in its in- terpretation. At the same time it proceeds on the basis of the acceptance of all scientific knowledge. It can never have even an attitude of suspicion or of reluctant acceptance of the assured results of any science. As it is seeking an interpretation of the cosmos, it must gladly welcome truth from every source. This applies to phys- ical science with its investigation of the material uni- verse, to psychology with its study of even the religious experiences themselves, to biblical science with its criti- cal examination of the literature and history of the Bible, to the science of the history of religion with its determi- nation of the course of the historical evolution of relig- ious ideas and institutions. [ 362 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE It follows that theology must move forward with these and other sciences, and must be open to constant reconstruction as human knowledge advances. The Church, therefore, must make her tests of membership in terms of religious feeling and of life, and not in terms of doctrinal statement, about which there may easily be difference of opinion, and which in its very nature is open to constant change. [363] JAMES STALKER, D.D„ ABERDEEN^ SCOTLAND Professor of church history in the United Free Churcli College, Aberdeen, Scotland, since 1902; born at Crieff, Feb. 21, 1848; educated at the Universities of Edinburgh, Halle, and Berlin, and at New College, Edinburgh; min- ister of St. Brycedale Church, Kirkcaldy, 1874; St. Matthew's, Glasgow, 1887; was Lyman Beecher lecturer at Yale University, 1891, Cunningham lecturer at Edin- burgh, 1899, and Gay lecturer at Louisville, Ky., 1904; author of The Life of Jesus Christ; The Life of St. Paul; Imago Christi; The Preacher and His Models; The Two St. Johns; The Four Men; The Christology of Jesus; The Seven Deadly Sins; The Seven Cardinal Virtues; John Knox, His Ideas and Ideals; Three Lectures on the Atone- ment; The Ethic of Jesus. It would lend variety to the symposium if those invited to take part in it were to speak from the standpoint of the countries in which they live or the churches to which they belong. At all events I deliberately adopt this limitation, and speak as belonging to the United Free Church of Scotland. Being Presbyterian, this church does not impose on its ordinary members subscription to any creed what- ever, and, therefore, does not come within the sweep of Abraham Lincoln's challenge; although I may perhaps be allowed to express, in passing, a doubt whether per- sons keeping away from the membership of the Church for the reason stated by Lincoln really know their own mind. If this reason for not joining the Church were taken away, I suspect that most of them would have no difficulty in finding another. A prominent feature of the early history of the [364] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE branch of the Church to which I belong has an impor- tant practical bearing on the question of creeds. This is the Sustentation Fund, devised by Dr. Chalmers just when the Church broke away from the State in 1843. So successful did it prove, in evoking liberality and teaching the strong to assist the weak, that it has at- tracted not only observation but imitation in all quar- ters of the Christian world. At one time, when there was serious talk of adapting it to the use of the Con- gregational Church in England, an eminent and saga- cious minister of that body, the Rev. Dr. Henry Allon, of London, confided to me that there was one difficulty which could not be overcome. People would never, he said, give on such a scale without a guarantee, such as is secured by subscription to a creed, that the doctrines for the diffusion of which they were paying were the truths which they themselves believed. It is not, however, by intellectual reasons, even though they be as practical as this one, that creeds hold sway over those who make use of them, but by the force of tradition. Confessions of faith, for the most part, came into existence at the period of the Reformation; and they did so not arbitrarily but providentially. A Church did not say. Come, let us make a creed; but circumstances demanded a creed, both to testify what the Church believed and to oppose what it denied. This element of witness-bearing for the truth exerts a strong influence over minds that have any conception of his- tory; and a church does not easily recede from attain- ments it has once made. The virtue, however, of this use of creeds is most manifest in catechisms, which are the creeds of the young. It is difficult to overestimate the value of a good catechism for a growing mind. [ 365 ] THE CHUKCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE The most questionable use of creeds is when they are made tests of orthodoxy and imposed on the office- bearers of a church. In my opinion, this can be justified only if the right and duty of a church to change its creed be both acknowledged and^ at proper intervals, acted upon. The Presbyterian Church of Scotland changed its creed entirely in the middle of the seventeenth cen- tury, when it exchanged the creed written for it by John Knox in 1560 for the Confession of Faith of the West- minster Divines. By the device of Declaratory Acts, embodying far-reaching modifications of the West- minster Confession, both the denominations now form- ing the United Free Church of Scotland had virtually altered their creed before their union in 1900; and it is no secret that, in the negotiations for union now going on between this body and the Church of Scotland, it is recognized on both sides — though not unanimously on the part of the Church of Scotland — that the Church of the future must have power to alter its creed when- ever it may think proper. The disposition to do so is not infrequently strong- est in minds least fitted for the delicate task; and it is obvious that, in a period of spiritual decline, vast changes might be lightly undertaken to the disadvan- tage of religion; but I regret that the generation of •Chalmers, when there was so profound a revival of faith and spirituality, did not add this to its other labors; and a church can never abdicate the obligation to make the attempt, should a providential call arise, without for- feiting its loyalty to the Spirit of truth. Into the question of the truths to be admitted into a creed I will not further go, in spite of your invitation to discuss this also; but, as I hold that the creed ought to [366] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE be the Church's joyful confession of its present faith, it is obvious that, in my view, there ought to enter into it the Church's convictions on the living issues of the age, as far as these are mature and unanimous. 1367] JOSIAH STRONG, D.D., LL.D., NEW YORK^ N. Y. President of the American Institute of Social Service since 1898; born at Napierville, 111., Jan. 19, 1847; educated at Western Reserve College, and at Lane Theological Semi- nary, Cincinnati, Ohio; ordained to the Congregational ministry, 1871 ; home missionary at Cheyenne, Wyo., 1871- 73 ; instructor in natural theology and chaplain in Western Reserve College, 1873-76; pastor at Sandusky, Ohio, 1876- 81; secretary of the Ohio Home Missionary Society, 1881-84; pastor in Cincinnati, 1884-86; secretary of the Evangelical Alliance, 1886-98; author of Our Country; The New Era; The Twentieth Century City; Religious Movements for Social Betterment; Expansion; The Times and Young Men; The Next Great Awakening ; The Chal- lenge of the City; My Religion in Every-Day Life; Our World, the New World-Life; editor of Social Progress for 1904-6; Gospel of the Kingdom since 1908. You ask: "Why is it that there are so many persons who are indifferent to the claims of the Church?" For nineteen hmidred years there have been many who were indifferent to the claims of the Church be- cause they were indifferent to the claims of God. But when for half a century and more there is a steady decrease in the Church's rate of gain on the popula- tion, and a decreasing hold on the common people, it is evident that there is at work some cause other than any to be found among the common and historic char- acteristics of human nature, and your question becomes altogether pertinent. Occidental civilization as compared with oriental is based on an individualistic theory of life. As we all know, the tyranny of Church and State in the eighteenth century created a reaction against all authority and pre- [ 368 ] THE CHURCH, THE. PEOPLE, AND THE AGE pared the way for the French Revolution. The in- tensely individualistic teachings of Voltaire, Rousseau, and other Encyclopedists deeply influenced European, and especially American, thinking. Accordingly our law, our religion, our ethics, our economics, our politics have all been based on an individualistic philosophy of life ; and this is especially true of our religion which re- ceived a deep individualistic stamp at the time of the German Reformation. The industrial revolution, however, is creating a new and radically different civilization, which multiplies a thousandfold men's relations to one another; that is to say, the new civilization is preeminently social, and the new problems are social problems. It is found as a matter of experience that the laws, ethics, economics, and politics of our fathers are to-day unequal to solving the new problems of the new civilization, and this mal- adjustment is rapidly driving us toward a great crisis. The prevailing interpretation of religion, which is dis- tinctly individualistic, is equally out of harmony with the new social spirit. Of course it is always the privileged classes who cling to existing conditions and resist innovations, and it is the unprivileged who furnish most of the discontented and revolutionary element. It is this latter class — the so-called conmion people — among whom the new social spirit is growing most rapidly, and this is precisely the class over which the Church has increasingly lost her influence. Institutional Christianity is now on trial, and only as it grasps the world-significance of the teachings of Jesus and applies his principles to the solution of the great world-problems can it hope to survive. The social [369] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE interpretation of Christianity will have the double ad- vantage of being true, and of being precisely adapted to the needs of the new social civilization. When the Church has been thoroughly socialized it will rapidly recover lost ground and make new conquests. Again, you ask: "What should be the basis and di- rection for a fundamental theology of the Church?" It must be broad enough to consist with all truth which has been or which may be established, whether scientific, or philosophical, or historical. It must not conflict with any known facts. Sir William Hamilton said: "Every man philos- ophizes well or ill, but philosophize he must." Every man has his own philosophy of life which is more or less completely adjusted to the facts of his life. It was inevitable that the individualistic civilization of the West should result in a popular philosophy of life and in an interpretation of Christianity which were strongly indi- vidualistic. The new civilization is distinctly and in- creasingly social. It has radically changed the condi- tions of life, and is, therefore, radically changing the philosophy of life. Before the incoming current of the new social spirit the old individualistic philosophy is being swept away, and has become impossible to every one who discerns the signs of the times. At the same time, the fact of great and pressing social problems which shame the wisdom of the wise is opening the eyes of many to the social teachings of Jesus which the in- dividualistic spirit and philosophy could not discern, or else explained away. It is now seen that the Christianity of Christ is not individualistic but social, and if the theology which is now beginning to recrystallize is truly Christian, it will [370] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE be perfectly adapted to the needs of the new social civili- zation, it will agree perfectly with the social philosophy of life which is contained in the Christianity of Christ, and will harmonize with the facts of science and the established truths of philosophy. Jesus's doctrine of the kingdom of God is not what has been called "Christian Socialism," but Social Chris- tianity, which is a very different thing, and which is destructive of all theologies, all philosophies of life, and all systems of society which are individualistic in form or spirit. Social Christianity affords a germinal prin- ciple, capable of assimilating all the elements of truth in disintegrating systems of the past, and of producing a vital and progressive theology. We expect all other sciences to grow, but there seems to be a general con- viction that a system of theology is final, if true (and of course every man thinks his own is true), because it is based on a closed revelation; hence the reluctance of theologians to modify their views. But when we recog- nize an immanent God, organizing the world into his kingdom, then all things animate and inanimate are seen, like the Scriptures, to contain a revelation of him, and all natural laws are seen to be God's laws. Thus science becomes a revelation of the divine method as the kingdom is a revelation of the divine aim ; and theology, being based on a progressive revelation, would itself become progressive. As to conditions of church membership, let us go back to "the simplicity which is in Christ." Absolute loyalty to him is the one condition of true discipleship now as it was when the apostles left all and followed him. [371] MILTON SPENCER TERRY, D.D., LL.D., EVANSTON^ ILL. Professor of Christian doctrine, Garrett Biblical Institute, Northwestern University, Evanston, 111., since 1884; born near Albany, N. Y., Feb. 22, 1840; studied at Charlotte- ville Seminary, Troy University, Yale Divinity School, and the University of Berlin, Germany; pastor of Methodist Episcopal Churches in New York, 1863-84; author of The Commentary on the Old Testament, Volumes I, III and IV; Biblical Hermeneutics; The Sibylline Oracles; Prophecies of Daniel Expounded; The Song of Songs Analyzed, Translated, and Explained; Rambles in the Old World; The New Apologetic; Biblical Apocalyptics; Moses and the Prophets; The New and Living Way; The Mediation of Jesus Christ; Primer of Christian Doctrine; Biblical Dogmatics; The Shinto Cult, There are many great churches that are very efficient, and they command the admiration of good men every- where. Abraham Lincoln expressed his devout thanks to Almighty God, who in the hour of our nation's peril gave him the support and the prayers of the churches. And yet he could not conscientiously subscribe to the tests of membership required as a rule in the great ecclesiastical communions. But creed, cult, and conduct seem essential to any efficiently organized form of re- ligious activity. For how can a goodly company walk together unless they are agreed? The existence of many Christian churches of as many different names and claims is a standing witness of the existence of so many different beliefs, customs, tastes, and ideals of Christian life and work. Some churches make their conditions of membership quite broad and easy, while others maintain that the reasons for their separate existence require the [372] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE exclusion of all who will not accept their distinctive doctrines. The nine doctrinal statements adopted as a basis of fellowship and cooperation in the Evangelical Alliance were prepared with obvious intention to ex- clude the Society of Friends and some other Christian denominations not deemed sufficiently orthodox for the purposes of that great federation of churches. Judg- ing from such facts of the past and the present, one finds little ground for hope of any considerable change in the near future. The dogmatist insists on his credenda, and the ritualist on his established ministries and functions of divine authority. And some of the smallest of the religious bodies exhibit the most rigid exclusiveness. In Great Britain and Europe the prom- inent church organizations are more hopelessly sep- arated than in America. What change can be reason- ably expected for generations to come in the relations of the Roman, Greek, Anglican and various Protestant communions? The authority and claims of any or all of these churches have no appreciable influence on modern sci- entific research. Such research is sure to go on tri- umphantly, whatever the Church or the churchman may say or do. But the general tendency of the Church is to encourage science and learning. The compelling of a modern Galileo to abjure his wonderful discoveries on bended knees before an ecclesiastical inquisition is unthinkable. The whole material world has been found to be alive with electric energy, and human intelligence and invention are making the latent forces subservient to our advancing civilization. We are getting better acquainted every day with the peoples of the wide world. A deeper and broader knowledge of religious cults, [373] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ancient and modern, has enhanced the significance of what an apostle long ago declared, that God has not left himself without witness among any of the nations. The World-Parliament of Religions, held in Chicago in 1893, probably made a profounder impression upon thousands of thoughtful people inside and outside the Christian churches than any ecclesiastical council ever held in Christendom. It assumed no authority, put forth no churchly claims, but it emphasized the religious element in all mankind, and commanded world-wide ad- miration. But it was criticized by prominent men of various churches, who refused to have anything to do with it. Meanwhile chairs of comparative religion have been established in our theological schools and universities. Oriental mystics and prophets of Mazdaism and of Islam have appeared among us and have met with generous welcome, and sundry theosophical societies have been organized in various parts of our country. The remarkable growth of the Christian Science cult has also attracted wide attention. Many run to and fro among these new religionists, and would seem to be very much like the men of Athens and the strangers so- journing there in Paul's day, who had leisure for little else than for hearing and talking about some last new thing. All this may be the sign of great religious un- rest, but it reveals a noteworthy situation, and cannot be ignored when we inquire into the alleged failure of the Christian churches to secure the fellowship of thousands of our excellent citizens. It should be observed also that most of the great labor organizations of our time, for reasons of their own, seem to feel and act as if the churches had no sympathy [ 374 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE with their struggle against the grasping corporations of plutocracy. Nor should we omit reference to that vast multitude, who, in their gratification of personal pleas- ures, disregard all church obligations, and give them- selves over to club life, the golf ground, the automobile craze, and the gay Sunday excursion. With many, if not most of these, creed and cult and conduct are no serious concern. In view of all these facts it certainly behooves the leaders of the churches to see to it that they do not build on the foundation of Jesus Christ structures of wood and hay and stubble, but rather of gold and silver and precious stones. It is to be assumed that all Christian churches hold Christianity to be the final and supreme religion of man- kind. It is as truly the fulfilling of all the ethnic cults of the past as it is of the law and the prophets of Israel. Have we been so long time familiar with the teaching of Jesus and are yet slow to perceive that the essence of his religion requires but few words for its most fun- damental and comprehensive expression? His conden- sation of the whole law and the prophets into two com- mandments of love, and the manner in which he taught his disciples to pray suggest a corresponding confession of faith, which can have no conflict with assured results of science, and would be in itself so simple and authori- tative as to meet Abraham Lincoln's desire for a church of the living God without offensive shibboleths. Such a creed, I think, may be found by combining the sub- stance of the Lord's prayer with his two great com- mandments. Here we have, in hallowed and familiar words, a confession of faith which is at once a funda- mental theology and an ecumenical creed. It may be called "the Lord's Creed" with as much propriety as [375] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE his great Pater Noster is called "the Lord's Prayer." What more should any church require for a basis of holy fellowship and of all good works? I believe in our heavenly Father, who loves us and gives us our daily bread and all good things, and who forgives us our debts as we forgive our debtors. I believe in Jesus Christ who gave his life for others, preached a coming kingdom of truth and righteousness and peace, and bade us love the Lord our God with all the heart, and love our neighbor as ourself . I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, who helps us in our trials, delivers us from evil, leads into all truth, and works in us to do the will of God on earth as it is in heaven. [376] JHR. BERNARD HENDRIK CORNELIS KAREL VAN DER WYCK, LL.D., L.H.D., UTRECHT^ HOLLAND Professor emeritus of philosophy in the University of Utrecht since 1906; born in Gorinchem, March 30, 1836; studied at the University of Utrecht, from which he re- ceived the degree of L.H.D. in 1869; professor of phil- osophy at the University of Groningen, 1863-1890; Uni- versity of Utrecht, 1890-1906; member of the Royal Academy of Sciences, Amsterdam, 1869; author of Origin and Limits of Knowledge; Psychology ; The Enigma of Experience; and works on J. J, Rousseau; Voltaire; Pro- fessor Frazer's Edition of Berkeley; Fichte; Spinoza; Opzoomer; Giordano Bruno; Nietzsche, and Schopenhauer, "His ignorance is most remarkable. Except some facts of Jesus' exterior life, the escape to Egypt on a donkey's back, the multiplication of the loaves at the wedding of Cana (sic), the expelling of the money changers out of the temple, some exorcisms, he knows absolutely nothing about the four gospels, but he ad- mires them nevertheless most sincerely. About the teaching of Jesus he is not better informed than about the logic of Hegel. For his acquaintance with the Old Testament he is, I presume, all indebted to some oleo- graphs representing Noah's Ark, Samson carrying away the gates of (Jaza, Judith dancing to Holo- femes." In this malicious way the Portuguese E9a de Queiros gives us an idea of the learning of one of his friends, who is a priest in Lisbon, and unconsciously he discloses at the same time a gap in his own biblical erudition. The English and also the Dutch people are deeply versed in the Scriptures, and doubtless owe to their intimacy [377] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE with the Bible a great deal of their energy. Nothing is more common in one of those countries than to hear from the lips of a plain man or woman a saying of Isaiah or a verse from the Psalms that makes the soul soar aloft and enables one to face the adversities of life. There the Bible is the most popular book and in a high degree the educator of nearly all classes of society. Nevertheless the right interpretation of the Scrip- tures requires very often a great deal of professional learning. It wo.uld be unreasonable to expect that as a rule a clergyman acquires in the long run all the infor- mation needed for biblical interpretation. The minister of a parish has not only to preach, but also to visit the sick, to instruct the young, to bury the dead, to relieve the poor, to counsel, to mediate, to admonish ; the duties of his calling are so multifarious that it is often a sheer impossibility for him to spend each day a couple of hours among his books. He would have a better oppor- tunity to avail himself of all the resources that modern science puts at his disposition if his Sunday task were to explain a chapter of the Bible; but unhappily it is the custom in Holland to choose a single verse or part of it, that can be prefixed as a motto to a bulky sermon; to interpret that bit of a verse in an arbitrary way, permitting one to draw from a small group of words a complete system of doctrine and to expound in a single hour all that the conmiunity is sup- posed to want for its edification. There is perhaps no place in a civilized country, where you can hear more nonsense than in some Chris- tian churches. I suppose it might be a great improve- ment if young clergymen, who are without a large ex- perience of the recesses of the human heart and are not [378] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE able theologians, were not obliged to compose for every service a long sermon. There are many good printed sermons, — why not make a choice out of them and con- sider it a privilege for a few very able parsons to deliver self-made discourses? In this manner the religious of- fice would be more palatable to persons of good taste, who want nourishment for their inner life. The incongruity between the teaching of Jesus Christ himself and that of his apostles of later times is often shocking to clear-headed and really pious people. Everybody knows that Lucretius, in his great poem, admitted a chasm between what he called religion and what we would rather call superstition — ^gloomy, life- embittering, crime-fostering superstition — on one side, and sweet, elevating piety on the other. Now it is evi- dent that the piety of the average Christians cannot be pure and fosters a supplement of superstition. They are convinced that nothing but the blood of the holy Son of God can atone for the sins of Adam's progeniture. If it had been Jesus's belief that the Father in heaven in his wrath wanted to wreak his vengeance on an inno- cent head before he could forgive the follies and crimes of poor humanity, Jesus never would have uttered the parable of the Prodigal Son, and his attitude toward the adulteress would have been quite different. Nowadays there are many people who can accept only a message standing for all the spiritual values of life. Therefore it would be advisable to choose the largest possible basis for the theology of the Church and to admit as members all those who can approve the Saviour's statement of the substance of both law and gospel: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul and with all thy mind, and thy neighbour as thyself." [ 379 ] PHILIP VOLLMER, Ph.D., D.D., DAYTON^ OHIO Professor of the New Testament, Ursinus School of The- ology, Philadelphia; and at Central Theological Seminary of the Reformed Church in the United States, Dayton, Ohio, since 1898; born at Frankenthal, in the Palatinate, Ger- many, Nov. 28, I860; received his early education in Ger- many; graduated from Bloomfield College, 1881; Bloom- field Presbyterian Seminary, 1884; took graduate courses in Union Theological Seminary, New York, 1885, and in the universities of Pennsylvania, 1891-93, Heidelberg, Ger- many, 1895, and Strassburg, Germany, 1906; pastor of the Presbyterian Church of Peace, Brooklyn, N. Y., 1884- 1889; St. Paul's Reformed Church, Philadelphia, Pa., 1889- 1905; author of The Heidelberg Catechism Analysed; The Old Testament and Social Reform; The Dialectical Method of Socrates; Sound Exegesis the Basis of Effective Preach- ing; The Inspirational Value of the Study of Church His- tory; Life of John Calvin; The Modern Student's Life of Christ, I. I DO not think it wise to ask candidates for admission to church membership to subscribe to long complicated statements of Christian doctrine that deal with debated and controversial questions, for the reason that such a practise is (1) contrary to the example of Christ and the apostolic Church; (2) it tends to keep honest doubt- ers from joining the Church — people who may be ready and willing to accept the fundamentals of Christianity, but who may not be prepared to assent to inferences drawn from admitted facts, or to a line of philosophical reasoning underlying a certain creed; (3) it is liable to repulse conscientious, self-respecting, and cultured people, who may have had neither the time, nor the opportunity, nor the inclination to delve into all the hair- [380] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE splitting theological disquisitions which many of our old creeds contain; (4) it breeds insincerity and flip- pancy because it encourages the acceptance of sacred pledges on the part of people who are ignorant of the grave import of them, though they may be very willing to give their assent; (5) the Church, moreover, has no moral right to lay the yoke of a complicated creed upon the neck of the brethren who are ethically qualified to join the Church, because only a small proportion of the 170,000 American pastors continues the time honored, biblical and rational custom of conducting catechetical classes in which the creed might be interpreted, doubts dispelled, pledges explained, difficulties removed, and confidence inspired by long-continued intercourse be- tween the pastor and the candidate. The first of the reasons stated above should be de- cisive with all who accept the Bible as the rule of faith and practise. The gate of entrance into the Church of the living God should not be made narrower than Christ and his apostles made it. When Peter professed his faith in Jesus as "the Christ" (Mark), or as "the Christ of God" (Luke), or as "the Christ, the Son of God" (Matthew) — all three phrases being equivalent to "Sav- iour" and stressing the Lord's office rather than his nature — Jesus, with evident joy in his heart, answered, "On this rock I will build my Church," that is, "loyal hearts and true" I will recognize as stones which are to be added one upon another in the erection of my spirit- ual temple. Peter was in no sense constituted the cor- ner-stone of the Church — Christ himself occupies this distinctive place; he was merely declared to be the first real Christian, because of his simple profession of per- sonal loyalty to Jesus as the Christ. When, on the day [381] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE of Pentecost, thousands asked of Peter, "What shall we do?" the man of rock, remembering the Master's dec- laration in his own case, answered, "Repent ye, and be baptized" (Acts 2: 38), i.e., undergo a religious and ethical change in heart and mind by accepting Jesus as the Christ, as explained in my sermon, and then profess your loyalty before men by submitting to the symbol of spiritual and moral cleansing. When the jailer at Philippi asked, "What must I do to be saved?" Paul answered, "Believe in the Lord Jesus" (Acts 16: 30). Repent and believe are synonymous terms, sometimes used together, and at other times separately, their ground meaning being the expression of loyal adher- ence to Jesus and of an ethical change in correspondence with the spirit of Christ. An unprejudiced study of the conditions for following Christ, as demanded in the New Testament, will conclusively show that all he asked was "to learn of him" to be a disciple, i.e., a pupil. Un- der the Lord's tutoring they would, of course, make progress, and their growth in grace and in the knowl- edge of the true nature of Jesus can easily be traced in the New Testament. The same was demanded by the apostles and the first missionaries. They were stren- uously active in season and out of season, by preaching, conversation, and letters, that the new converts "might know the certainty concerning the things wherein they were instructed" (Luke 1:4). But the entrance con- ditions were brief in bulk, practical in nature, and un- iphilosophical in their reasoning. As the New Testament is the admitted standard of the Church, she also should principally test the sin- cerity and docility of the person asking for admission. The schoolmaster should be the Church's example. All [382] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE he asks is that the pupil come to school, submit to his guidance and be willing to work. This is enough as a beginning. The rest follows naturally in the course of time. Line upon line, precept upon precept, promotion from the lower to the higher grade, from the grammar school to the high school, then to college, and finally to the university. Now he can read his diploma in Latin, he knows the history of the world, and is prepared to discuss the problems of science and philosophy. What would have become of the little fellow, if the primary teacher had required the attainments of the mature student as a condition for entrance into the A B C class? In the preceding discussion we have assimied that the Church of to-day does require "the giving of assent to long complicated statements of Christian doctrine" as a condition for church membership. But are we not begging the question? Some churches, indeed, have gone far beyond Christ and his apostles in their requirements for church fellowship. They require the acceptance of the Apostles' Creed in detail and a few still retain in their formulae of admission those semi-pagan remnants from the medieval liturgies about renouncing the devil, and other unbiblical and worn-out phrases. Others de- mand subscription to entire catechisms and even to as- cetic rules with reference to things ethically indifferent, concerning which "Christ alone is Lord of the con- science," a procedure which Jesus and Paul denounced with great vehemence (Mark 7: 1-23; Col. 3: 16-23). A few denominations forbid voting and office-holding, others denounce officially secret societies, and some com- munions regulate the outward apparel, the style of hair- cutting, and the wearing of beards. But the overwhelm- [ 383 1 . THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ing majority of American congregations — ^the Congre- gational, Presbyterian, Reformed, and others — adhere at present, and have for a long time adhered very close- ly, to the requirements laid down in the New Testament. In the exercise of the liberty enjoyed by pastors and official boards in most of the American denominations, many congregations use even a more simplified and puri- fied form of admission than may be contained in their of- ficial liturgies. For instance, "The Book of Common Worship, prepared by the Conmiittee of the General As- sembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A.," for voluntary use, asks the candidate for admission to the Church : ( 1 ) "Do you receive and profess the Christian faith? (2) Do you confess your sins, and turn from them with godly sorrow, and put all your trust in the mercy of God, which is in Christ Jesus; and do you promise in his strength to lead a sober, righteous, and godly life? (3) Do you promise to make diligent use of the means of grace, submitting yourself to the lawful authority and guidance of the Church, and continuing in the peace and fellowship of the people of God?" No one who is at all prepared to join a Christian Church, and not merely a society for ethical culture, should ob- ject to these requirements. The ethical note might be a little more emphasized in all our creeds, though it is contained in the very demands "to repent" and "to be- lieve," if only the pastors would conduct catechetical classes in which these pregnant terms might be ana- lyzed. Yet we concede that a little more stress, in this age of revival of the "ethical and social consciousness," on the plain question as to the candidate's acceptance of the royal law (Matt. 22 : 37) , and the golden rule (Matt. 7: 12) would appeal to many. [384] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE I would, however, advocate the liberalizing of the entrance conditions to church membership solely in order to bring them into harmony with the New Testament and not because I think that by doing so a large number of people standing aloof would then flock into the Church. There are more potent reasons which keep people outside. There is the evil heart of man; igno- rance of the Bible, for which the pastors are greatly to blame because they have given up the personal cate- chization of the young, handing it over entirely to less qualified Sunday-school teachers; the bad example of evil rich men in the Church; atheistic socialism; open lawlessness at the two extremes of society, by the very rich and by the residents in the slums ; bad city govern- ment failing to enforce the laws protecting the weekly day of rest. In spite of these up-hill conditions the Church is not only holding her own but is making steady progress, both extensively and as to real influence. In Germany the liberal ministers demand freedom to preach "modernism" in order to draw the educated classes ; but their churches are empty, while the services of those who hold to the more evangelical and New Testament views are well attended. With special reference to President Lincoln's case I may be permitted to remark: (1) that he seems to be too exacting in his strictures on the Church. He ap- plied a double standard in his relations to society. He strongly dissented, e.g., from the Dred Scott decision, from a number of compromise laws on slavery, and from minor details of the United States Constitution itself, and yet he did not hesitate on several occasions to accept these documents and to take oaths of allegiance, simply be- cause he knew himself to be a loyal American and found [385] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE himself in sincere sympathy with the constitution and laws in general. If he was a member of a secret society he no doubt found many details of their rules not to his liking, yet he joined the lodge, because he sympathized with the general trend and spirit of the order. Almost everybody believes that President Lincoln was a true Christian at heart, for he highly appreciated the tre- mendous influence of the Church for good ; he loved her ministers, attended her services, prayed to her God, and read the Bible. Might he not have applied his entirely correct practise toward the United States government to the Christian Church, even if she in his time required assent "to long comphcated statements of Christian doctrine," a supposition which I doubt very much. President Lincoln's example has done great injury to the Church and to America, during his lifetime and up to this very day; for his conspicuous example has been quoted by thousands as a reason, or as an excuse, for not affiliating with the Church. Distinguished men who love America should carefully consider their influence for evil if they, for reasons which would not weigh with them in other relations of life, fail to throw their in- fluence on the side of that institution which by the com- mon consent of all the good is the strongest power for personal and civil morality, and if they neglect openly to acknowledge the Bible which the United States Su- preme Court in the famous Girard will case declared to contain a system of the highest morality known to men. (2) I doubt whether President Lincoln realized how comprehensive a pledge it is which he declared himself willing to accept "with all my heart and all my soul." In it he declares himself willing to be guided by the great commandment, and as this is contained in the Old [386] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE and the New Testament, he thereby accepts the author- ity of the Bible in his religion. He calls Jesus "the Saviour," by which he pregnantly professes man's sin- fulness, his inability to save himself, and the paramount mission of Jesus. He is willing to follow his teaching, and this implies recognition of Christ's lordship. He considers love the supreme thing in the world, and there- by accepts the quintessence of the New Testament ethics. I verily believe that few evangelical churches in his own time, and still fewer in our time, would have refused President Lincoln admission on such a pledge with its evident implications. If, however, Lincoln wanted his words understood in their bare ethical import, he betrays a superficiality of reasoning not at all usual with him. For he should have known that ethics must rest on religion, and that if Christ and his apostles had had nothing more to offer to the world than what Mr. Lincoln deemed sufBcient, there would be no Church to- day, and possibly there would never have been an American republic, nor a character of Mr. Lincoln's excellence. 11. The basis of a sound and workable theology is the truth. Truth may be defined as the perfect agree- ment between reality and opinion. All truth is one. Consequently, whatever in literature, science and phi- losophy has really been ascertained as true, must there- fore be cheerfully, not grudgingly, accepted by theology and the Church, and their former statements and con- clusions must be revised and adjusted according to the new light. From these observations, which are really of the nature of axioms, a twofold criticism results : one direct- [ 887 ] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ed toward science and the other toward the Church and theology. (1) Science, in its various subdivisions, has always shown the very natural weakness of asserting "assured results," when there was as yet only a hypoth- esis, a "research guess," to offer. It is a perfectly legit- imate method in any scientific induction to start with a hypothesis, and, after having verified it, to present it as a theory. Very often, however, our scientists become impatient at other scientists and especially at the Church for not accepting their hypotheses as proven theories. (2) Theology is the science of religion and the bearing of religion on personal, social, commercial and political life is fraught with the most important consequences, here and hereafter. Hence, while theology must enjoy full liberty of investigation and discussion, the Church cannot permit her to apply her experiments too freely to the issues of practical life on which so much depends, before they have reached a tolerably advanced stage of scientific verification. The place for hypotheses is the laboratory. Even advanced theologians, like Dr. Har- nack of Berlin, insist on this distinction. Medical science, e.g., does not permit its research professors to experi- ment with their supposed finds on men before their hy- pothesis has been reasonably elevated to a theory. (3) The scientist must remember that truth is possessed of an undying vitality. "Truth crushed to earth will rise again, the eternal years of God are hers." If an opin- ion is true, i.e., if it corresponds to reality, it will even- tually be accepted. The Church in her organized capacity, on the other hand, is perhaps the most conservative institution in the world. ( 1 ) While almost all true progress in the world may, directly or indirectly, be traced back to individuals [388] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE in the Church, the Church in her organized capacity has never been entirely successful in overcoming her beset- ting weakness of passively holding aloof or actually opposing new departures in science, literature, and phi- losophy until these movements became so strong that one group after another of her leading men became convinced of the truth; finally the organization as a whole capitulated, but not until she had sustained great losses in prestige and members. Andrew D. White j in his History of the Warfare of Science with Theology, has, in a spirit entirely friendly to the Church and re- ligion, conclusively shown this. (2) The Church must remember that the Lord promised to her the gift of a fuller understanding of the old, and the acquisition of new truths (John 16: 12-14) . (3) The Church should, therefore, remember that every ascertained result in any science whatsoever is in the nature of a divine revelation, and should be claimed by theology as material for her system; for God is the giver of all good gifts. Only the truth shall make men free. (4) Theology and the Church must insist with much greater emphasis than hitherto that the Bible is a record of revelation and of precious religious experiences which have the value of a standard, rather than a text-book of geology, astronomy, physiology and history. This will lift a burden from her shoulders which she was never able to carry with ease and grace. Theologians and the better elements in the Church have learned by this time that changing old view-points and accepting new interpretations is by no means equivalent to giving up the Bible, but only in- volves a prof ounder understanding of the word of truth. (5) The Church thrives best when allowing to theology a large measure of liberty in research, investigation and [389] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE reconstruction, while at the same time insisting on spir- ituality and practical piety in life; for where the heart is right the head will not go very far astray. Cor est quod facit theologium ("It is the heart that makes the theologian"). Summing up then, permit me to register my general agreement with the observation in your letter, viz. : that "It is true that a message to be effective must stand for and teach those things that constitute the sum total of the values of human life, whatever their sources may be." [390] THE LATE JOHN WATSON ("IAN MACLAREN"), D.D., LIVERPOOL^ ENGLAND Bom at Manningtree, Essex, England, Nov. 3, 1850; died at Mt. Pleasant, Iowa, May 6, 1907; he studied at the Universities of Edinburgh and Tiibingen, and at New Col- lege, Edinburgh; was assistant at Barclay Church, Edin- burgh, 1874-85; minister of Logiealmond Free Church, 1875-77; of St. Matthew's Church, Glasgow, 1877-80; and Sexton Park Presbyterian Church, Liverpool, 1880- 1905; Lyman Beecher lecturer at Yale in 1896, and in 1906 again visited the United States, where he was taken ill and died; author of The Upper Room; The Mind of the Master; The Cure of Souls; The Potter*s Wheel; Companions of the Sorrowful Way; Doctrines of Grace; The Life of the Master; The Homely Virtues; The In- spiration of Our Faith; Beside the Bonnie Briar Bush, *The footsteps of the holy apostles had not died away — concerning whose relation to Jesus something will be said — before the fathers arose, and became, with the lapse of time, lords of the Christian conscience. Great theologians of the Middle Ages gradually took rank with the fathers, while council after council, from Nice to Trent, saddled their accumulated dogmas on the Church. Chief reformers almost literally dictated creeds to na- tions, and the pragmatical seventeenth century forged a yoke of doctrines so minute, tedious, and unreasonable that it became too irksome even for our more patient fathers. . . . Unity was as much wanting as char- ity, for Christians in the matter of creed agreed in ♦From The Mind of the Master, by John Watson, D.D. ("Ian Mac- laren") by permission of Dodd, Mead & Company. Copyright 1895, 1896, by Dodd, Mead & Company. [ 391 ] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE I nothing except in ignoring the gospels and persecuting one another. Romans rest on the councils down to the one that affirmed the infallibility of the pope; an Angli- can goes back to the early councils and the fathers; a Lutheran measures his faith by the Confession of Augs- burg; and the Scottish Church seems to suppose that Christianity was only once thoroughly understood, when an assembly of English divines met at Westminster. Bodies of Christian folk have also ignored Jesus's warn- ing against rabbinism, and have surrendered their birth- right by allowing themselves to be called by the names of men, and so we have Socinians, Wesleyans, Camer- onians, Morisonians and what not. ... It comes as a shock on one to attend some heresy trial, and hear the prosecution quoting a foreign divine of almosij miraculous woodenness and the defendant taking refuge in a second-rate commentator. If you were to ask, as is very natural, why neither will refer at once and finally to the words of Jesus, who can hardly have been silent on any point of importance, it would be at once ex- plained that such a reference is an irrelevancy and sub- terfuge ; and one must admit that it would be an attempt to get behind the rabbis to Jesus. But does it matter much what any rabbi says? and is not the only vital question. What saith the Master? There are certain rights which are legal; there are certain rights which are natural. No law can take away the latter, nor can a man divest himself of them by any form of engagement; and among the inherent rights of a Christian man is his appeal to Jesus as the one Judge of truth. It has often lain dormant in the Church; it has at times been powerfully exercised. Some one dis- covers that the water of life is clearer and sweeter from [ 392 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE the spring than in a cistern, and shows the grass-grown path to the spring. Perhaps there has been no long period without some voice summoning Christians to break away from the tyranny of tradition and return to the liberty of Jesus. This has been the work of all reformers from Tauler to Luther, from Luther to Wesley — ^to unearth the evangel of Jesus from the mass of dogmas and rites which have overlaid it. Two parties have been in recurring conflict — ^the traditionalists, who insist, "This is what our fathers have said, and what you must believe" ; and the evangelists, who declare, "This is what Jesus has said, and this only will we believe." When traditionalism has the upper hand, it bums its opponents, as the Roman Church did John Huss, or annoys them, as the Church of England did Robertson of Brighton ; when evangelism is strong, it clears an open space where men can breathe and see Jesus. By-and-by each evangelical movement loses its free spirit, and settles down into a new form of traditionalism. Brave hands clear away the covering from the ancient temple of truth, and then the generation following allows the sand-drift to cover its columns once more. It is a long battle between a handful of faithful men and the desert, and too often the desert has won. The spirit of our day is so resentful of traditionalism as to be even impatient of theology, which is foolish; and to threaten faith, which would be ruin. No one, how- ever, need be alarmed, for there is good reason to believe that the end will be the toleration of a noble science and the reestablishment of faith. When workmen come with pickax and shovel, it is either to destroy or to discover, and the aim of present thought is discovery. Were earnest men rebelling against ancient dogmas [893] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE because they were an integral part of Jesus's teaching, this would be a very serious matter. This would be nothing short of a deliberate attack on Jesus. If they be only endeavoring to correct the results of theological science by the actual teaching of Jesus, then surely nothing could be more hopeful. This must issue in the revival of Christianity. There is no question that for some time dogmatic theology has been at a discount. They say that both the fathers and the Puritans are unsalable, and this is to be regretted. But there can be little question that biblical theology is at a premium, and this is of far more importance. Never have there been so many Lives of Jesus ; never have his words been so anxiously studied. This is as it ought to be, and every Protestant may well lift up his head. For what did the reformers of the sixteenth century contend, but for the right of Christian men to build their faith at first hand on the words of Holy Scripture? We are living in a second reformation, and it were an immense blunder for us to go back on the principle of all reforma- tions, and insist directly or indirectly that Protestant councils should come in between Christians and Christ. "When I say the religion of Protestants," wrote Chil- lingworth, "I do not understand the doctrines of Luther, or Calvin, or Melanchthon, nor the Confession of Augs- burg or Geneva, nor the Catechism of Heidelberg, nor the Articles of the Church of England; no, nor the har- mony of all Protestant confessions, but that wherein they all agree and which they subscribe with a greater harmony as the perfect rule of their faith and actions, that is, the Bible." Perhaps the ground principle of one Reformation was never more admirably stated : the principle of our Reformation is an advance along the [394] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE same line. The religion of Protestants, or let us say Christians, is not the Bible in all its parts, but first of all that portion which is its soul, by which the teaching of prophets and apostles must itself be judged — the very words of Jesus. As soon as any body of men band themselves to- gether for a common object — ^whether it be making a railway or reg^ierating a world — they must come to an understanding, and promise loyalty. This is their cove- nant, which no man need accept unless he please, but which, after acceptance, he must keep. When Jesus founded that unique society which he called the kingdom of God, and we prefer to call the Church, it was neces- sary he should lay down its basis, and this is what he did in the Sermon on the Mount. For we ought not to think of that sermon as a mere detailed report of one of his numerous addresses, which often sprang from un- expected circumstances. It was not a defense against the Pharisee, like the fifteenth chapter of St. Luke, or an explanation to the disciples, like the thirteenth of St. Matthew. It was an elaborate and deliberate utterance, made by arrangement, and to a select audience. It was Christ's manifesto, and the constitution of Christianity. When Jesus opened his mouth, his new society was in the air. When he ceased, every one knew its nature, and also on what terms a man might belong to it. It would be very difficult to say which is the latest creed of Christianity — ^there is always some new one in forma- tion, but there can be no question which is the oldest. Among all the Creeds of Christendom the only one which has the authority of Christ himself is the Sermon on the Mount. When one reads the creed which was given by Jesus, and the creeds which have been made by IS95 2 THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Christians, he cannot fail to detect an immense differ- ence, and it does not matter whether he selects the Nicene Creed or the Westminster Confession. They all have a family likeness to each other, and a family un- likeness to the Sermon on the Mount. They deal with different subjects, they move in a different atmosphere. Were the Athanasian Creed and the beatitudes printed in parallel columns, one would find it hard to believe that both documents were virtually intended to serve the same end, to be a basis of discipleship. It is not that they vary in details, insisting on different points of one consistent covenant, but that they are constructed on different principles. When one asks, "What is a Christian?" the creeds and the Sermon not only do not give the same answer, but models so contradictory that from the successive specifications he could create two types without any apparent resemblance. We all must know many persons who would pass as good Christians by the Sermon, and be cast out by the creeds, and many to whom the creeds are a broad way and the Sermon is a very strait gate. Since there is nothing we ought to be more anxious about than being true Christians, there is nothing we ought to think out more carefully than this startling variety. What must strike every person about Jesus's ser- mon is that it is not metaphysical but ethical. What he lays stress upon are such points as these : the father- hood of God over the human family ; his perpetual and beneficent providence for all his children; the excel- lence of simple trust in God over the earthly care of this world; the obligation of God's children to be like their Father in heaven; the paramount importance of true and holy motives; the worthlessness of a merely [396] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE formal righteousness; the inestimable value of heart righteousness; forgiveness of sins dependent on our forgiving our neighbor; the fulfilling of the law, and the play of the tender and passive virtues. Upon the man who desired to be his disciple and a member of God's kingdom were laid the conditions of a pure heart, of a forgiving spirit, of a helpful hand, of a heavenly pur- pose, of an unworldly mind. Christ did not ground his Christianity in thinking, or in doing, but first of all in being. It consisted in a certain type of soul — a spir- itual shape of the inner self. Was a man satisfied with this type, and would he aim at it in his own life? Would he put his name to the Sermon on the Mount, and place himself under Jesus's charge for its accomplishment? Then he was a Christian according to the conditions laid down by Jesus in the fresh daybreak of his religion. When one turns to the creeds, the situation has changed, and he finds himself in another world. They have nothing to do with character; they do not afford an idea of character; they do not ask pledges of char- acter ; they have no place in their construction for char- acter. From their first word to the last they are physical or metaphysical, not ethical. They dwell on the relation of the three Persons in the Holy Trinity; the divine and human natures in the person of Jesus; his miraculous birth through the power of the Holy Ghost; the con- nection between his sacrifice and the divine law; the nature of the penalty he paid, and its reference to his atonement; the purposes of God regarding the salva- tion of individuals, and the collision between human will and divine; the means by which grace is conveyed to the soul; the mystery of the sacraments, and the interme- diate state. From time to time those problems have [ 397 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE been discussed, and the conclusions of the majority formed into dogmas which have been made the test of Christianity. If any person should decline assent to one or all of those propositions, as the case may be — on the ground that he does not understand them, for instance — and offers instead adherence to Jesus's creed in the Sermon on the Mount, it would be thought to be beside the question; just as if any one had declined obedience to Jesus's commandments, and offered instead acceptance of some theory of his person, the Master would have refused his discipleship with grave emphasis. It may, of course, be urged that Jesus said many things afterward which must be added to the Sermon on the Mount, to form the complete basis of Christian discipleship, and that great discourse is sometimes be- littled as an elementary utterance, to which compara- tively slight importance should now be attached. Cer- tainly Jesus did expound and amplify the principles of his first deliverance, but there is no evidence that he altered the constitution of his kingdom either by im- posing fresh conditions or omitting the old. Did he not teach on to the cross that we stood to God as children to a father, and must do his will: that for no sin was there or could there be forgiveness till it was abandoned ; that the state of the soul and not the mere outside life was everything; that the sacrifice of self, and not self- aggrandizement was his method of salvation; that love was life. And when he said: "Believe in me; carry my cross," was he not calling men to fulfil his gospel? If one had come to Christ at Capernaum or Jerusalem, and said, "Master, there is nothing I so desire as to keep thy sayings. Wilt thou have me, weak and ignorant although I be, as thy disciple?" Can you imagine Christ [398] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE then, or now, or at any time interposing with a series of doctrinal tests regarding either the being of God or the history of man? It is impossible because it would be incongruous. Indeed if Christ did revise and im- prove the conditions of discipleship, we should learn that from the last address in the upper room. But what was the obligation he then laid on the disciples' conscience, as with his dying breath? "This is my commandment, tiiat ye love one another as I have loved you." It is the Sermon on the Moimt in brief. No church since the early centuries has had the courage to formulate an ethical creed, for even those bodies of Christians which have no written theological creeds, yet have implicit affirmations or denials of doc- trine as their basis. Imagine a body of Christians who should take their stand on the sermon of Jesus, and conceive their creed on his lines. Imagine how it would read: "I believe in the Fatherhood of God; I believe in the words of Jesus; I believe in the clean heart; I be- lieve in the service of love; I believe in the unworldly life ; I believe in the beatitudes ; I promise to trust God and follow Christ, to forgive my enemies and to seek after the righteousness of God." Could any form of words be more elevated, more persuasive, more alluring? Do they not thrill the heart and strengthen the con- science? Liberty of thought is allowed; liberty of sinning is alone denied. Who would refuse to sign this creed? They would come from the east, and the west, and the north, and the south to its call, and even they who would hesitate to bind themselves to a crusade so arduous would admire it, and long to be worthy. Does one say this is too ideal, too unpractical, too quixotic? That no church could stand and work on such a basis? [399] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE For three too short years the Church of Christ had none else, and it was by holy living, and not by any metaphysical subtleties, the primitive Church lived, and suffered, and conquered. [400] THE REV. LAUCHLAN MACLEAN WATT, M.A., B.D., F.R.S.E., EDINBURGH^ SCOTLAND Minister of St. Stephen's, Edinburgh, Scotland; educated at Edinburgh University; entered the Church of Scotland in 1896, after mission work and social study in Edinburgh and the Highlands; author of God's Altar Stairs; Lectures on the Lord's Prayer; In Love's Garden; Alloa and Tulli- body, a Historic Sketch; The Grey Mother and Songs of Empire; The Communion Table; By Still Waters; Metrical Psalms and Paraphrases, selected and edited; The Tryst (poems) ; Edragil; edited Smith's Summer in Skye, and Mrs. Stowe's Dred; Attic and Elizabethan Tragedy; Moran of Kildally; In Poet's Corner; Oscar. It is an undoubted fact that multitudes every year turn from the Church, and become blind and deaf to her claims. But my experience is not that this is due to difficulties of creed subscription or creed acknowledg- ment, but very largely to that carelessness which springs out of the weariness arising from the multiplicit dis- tractions of to-day, with the resultant spirit of unrest which makes men impatient of restraint of every kind, suspicious of conviction, and rebellious against any attempt at guidance, as though it were an attempt to shackle their freedom. One sees the very same thing in the modern homelessness of the well-to-do. On the very first and flimsiest excuse they fly about the coun- try, and their existence becomes a search for change of scene and amusement — for anything, indeed, but quiet settlement of heart and thought. The week-end railway system and the motor car habit find their reflection in the lives of the poor and the rich alike. [401 ] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Perhaps a great many love to think that they do not attend church because they cannot accept the confes- sions of faith which are the standards of the churches, especially if they have read or heard of such a difficulty. But I usually find that the majority of such people either have not read the confessions which they condemn, or have not really thought deeply on the mat- ter at all. It may be that they have only read certain forms of cheap controversial literature, and have mas- tered the details of diatribes against phases of dogma which have really been dead and buried one himdred years ago. At any rate, I have very frequently been led to think so, from the color and tone of the discussions thrust upon a clerg5maan by the would-be clever man whom one sometimes meets in railway travel. I do not believe, however, that the religious pessi- mist is at all correct when he bewails the indijBference of the people of to-day in regard to religion. I think the fact is that a far larger proportion are thinking far more deeply about the things of the soul — ^life's purpose, eternal destiny, the duties of the heart — ^than did when our churches were more crowded than they are. A man with a message, obviously grappled out of earnest thinking, by his own struggle toward light — a message of hope, telling men where not only are the ways of the true discovery of the highest self, but also the ways of escape from harassing dubieties which are the foster- parents of distressing unbelief — ^will find an audience keen to listen and to learn, almost anywhere. It is the duty of the Church to show that religion is the handmaid of a progressive revelation, that in each generation we see "but a part of God," that religious life, like all life, is a continuous upbuilding process, and [402] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE that the builders must reject, frequently, stones which have been elements of obstruction, so long as the corner- stone is not overthrown. Christ's arm must grow, often, too long and too strong for the sleeve which to-day pro- vides for it. His ship of grace is not to lie moored to rotting wharves, while men and women are crying for its aid beyond the harbor bar. His language must, like that of every manifestation of life, grow and assimilate, else it becomes but the hardened envelope of obsolete truths. Not that truth changes, but what is a truth sufficient for one day's needs is not sufficient for those of the next. The world's life outside the Church goes marching along, securing thus new and manifold points of view; and if the Church does not move also, it is doomed to be left behind. The venture of faith is as necessary to-day as ever it was, and the Church must sometimes take the risk of believing enterprise with God, if literature, science, commerce, and art are to be leavened with the grace and power of Christ. I think that, in many ways, science has been a con- stable aiding faith. The great modern advance in sur- gery has brought so many into touch with the ordeal of the knife that the shadow which keeps the keys of all the creeds broods closer over the world to-day, while the unveiling of the giant secrets of nature has been as the revelation of a God of almightiness and providence vaster than ever any generation has known. It makes, however, for a greater clearage between the automatic Christian, who was a mere churchgoer, and the believer who thinks, who grapples with his faith until he con- quers doubt, rather than, as formerly, who grappled with his doubt until he conquered faith. Certainly, at the present moment, the tendency is [40S] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE to cut the Gordian knot ; but the effect, were this entire- ly yielded to, would be that of casting loose the painter in an uncharted sea. We should rather, like the mari- ners of old, loosen knot after knot, if necessary, slowly and prayerfully, liberating breath after breath of quick- ening breeze. We are in an experimental belt of the ocean of belief. There should be no universal hard- and-fast test for admission of the laity to the Church. Of course, there are some who try to enter because the Church may help their trade or whitewash their char- acter. But these must be shown that the Christian Church is neither a cooperative store nor a branch of a spiritual laundry where a soul is bleached white cheaply for its own monetary advantage. Naturally, no mere man is perfect, but I take it that, when a person comes forward voluntarily to join the body of believers, he is prompted by the desire to seek after the highest ideals of the human soul, and to deepen what knowledge he may have of the secrets of the life of faith intensely centered on the love of Christ, and that, though perhaps he could not utter his creed in words, he is ready to manifest it in acts of obedience to the Master's will, and of loving service among his fellows. Nevertheless, none should be permitted to go forward into that communion without knowledge; and some require careful training in the simple essentials of Christian belief. For myself, following the custom of the Church of Scotland, I ask no communicants to sign any statement of their belief. Of course, any who have not been bap- tized have to declare their faith explicitly then; as they must be baptized Christians ere they become sharers in the disciples' feast at the table of the Lord. I teach those who desire to join the Church the elements of [404] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Christianity, the meaning of a sacrament, and the out- lines of Christian duty, in that broad sense and power which must follow from the idea of living and doing "for Christ's sake." The course of teaching extends over six weeks. The questions and answers are taken from the Shorter Catechism of the Westminster Gen- eral Assembly of Divines ; and they admirably embody the necessary principles of the Protestant faith. To my mind, the fundamental working theology of any church which is to be effective in uplifting men must contain the following: That God is One: That he is a spiritual God: That nothing which man has made, or which man can fetch, buy, or carry can be God: That he is a holy God : That the descending arc of his being comes in con- tact with the ascending arc of man's richest as- pirations, entering life through his working days, touching and hallowing the resolutions of the fireside, and the field of the soul and the body's purity, of the property, character, and good name of every man, everywhere, whether or not the human individual know it, as yet: That nothing of human pride, arrogance of ecclesi- astic, or tyranny of the powerful, can come be- tween the soul and God: That God is the great Optimist — ^the eternal Never- Despairer: That he is not sectarian: That heaven cannot be interpreted in terms of ecclesiastical denominations : [ 405 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE That his love is all-enfolding: That the incarnation, and the activity of the Holy Spirit, are the utterance and declaration of his eternal hope and eternal pity for mankind: That we do not see here, meantime, the final horizon of human effort and human destiny : And that whatever is sufficiently proved in regard to nature and the human soul must be held as a truth of the spirit and of the spiritual world likewise. In our Highlands in Scotland, among the Gaelic folks and their descendants, the communion table is looked upon with something like absolute dread, in con- sequence of the concentration of teaching upon the Paul- ine warning, of "eating and drinking judgment to themselves." The regretful reply given by the people, when they are remonstrated with for rejection of com- munion opportunities is, "I am not good enough to join the Church" — the idea being that only the perfect can sit down with Christ. Of course, if only the perfect are to go heavenward, it will not be an inconveniently crowded road. It is, meanwhile, in those districts, an insurmountable obstacle, but arising not from the ques- tion of acceptance or refusal of confession, but from the fear of judgment upon rash imperfection of human nature daring to intrude upon the board of Christ. At the same time this very attitude begets in many the most curse-laden hypocrisy and oppression of spiritual pride, which are much intensified by the crude misinter- pretation of the doctrine of election, which makes cer- tain men hold as a maxim of practical religion that it does not matter what you do, so long as you think that [406] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE you believe certain dogmas printed in a creed. All which is for misery, despair, and failure. I must admit that I find a shrinking fear in many, as from an ordeal unknown, at the early interviews with them in the preparatory class; but they seem, without exception, to enter into a glad union with such teaching, and see anew the meaning of faith, hope, and charity, and a life beyond, entering with fresh courage into the Christian enterprise. [407] THE REV. JAMES MORRIS WHITON, Ph.D., NEW YORK^ N. Y. Chairman of Executive Committee of the New York State Conference of Religion since 1899; born at Boston, April 11, 1833; graduated at Yale; ordained to the Congrega- tional ministry, 1 865 ; rector of Hopkins Grammar School, New Haven, Conn., 1854-64; pastor at Lynn, Mass., 1865- 75; principal of Williston Seminary, Easthampton, Mass., 1876-78; pastor at Newark, N. J., 1879-85; New York, 1886-91; professor of ethics at Meadville (Pa.) Theologi- cal School, 1893-94; on staff of The Outlook since 1896; pastor at Haworth, N. J., 1898-1901; author of Select Orations of Lysias; Is Eternal Punishment Endless?; Six Weeks' Preparation for Reading Caesar; Auxilia Vergil- iana; Beyond the Shadow, or the Gospel of the Resurrec- tion; The Evolution of Revelation; Early Pupils of the Spirit; Three Months' Preparation for Reading Xeno- phon; The Divine Satisfaction; Turning -Points of Thought and Conduct; The Law of Liberty; New Points to Old Texts; What of Samuel?; Gloria Patri, or Talks on the Trinity; Reconsiderations and Re enforcements; Miracles and Supernatural Religion; Interludes in a Time of Change; Getting Together, Essays by Friends in Council. WHAT AILS THE CHURCH? Far the larger part of the present large indifference to the Church must be accounted for on moral rather than theological grounds. The ethics of the religion of Christ has long failed of due emphasis, while stress has been laid on the creeds of post-apostolic orthodoxy. In consequence of this lowering of the moral tone of the Church to a level not generally above the cus- tomary morals of good people outside, the wave of scientific materialism that inundated the last third of the [408] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE nineteenth century, though now receding, has left a wide deposit of indifference to religion. Its effects are seen in a moral deterioration, the outstanding symptoms of which are an exaggerated and lawless individualism, and an appalling frequency of homicide and suicide. Wherever there is ethical breadth and passion in the pulpit, it matters little whether the theology back of it is medieval or modern. Orthodox and liberal seem to "draw," neck-and-neck. But the long indifference of the Church to misgov- ernment, mammonism, and social injustice, together with its greater zeal in combating theological innovations by heresy trials than moral delinquency by strict disci- pline, has entailed the disesteem everywhere incurred by the inefficient. Though the cause is abating, the effect is likely to continue, at least for the present generation. Were the church and pulpit of Henry Ward Beecher this year to become the prevailing type, multitudes would still say, "What is there in it for us?" and would prefer the labor meeting and the Sunday theatre, or golfing and automobiling, to the assembly for public worship. The full pews of Roman Catholics are still an object of wonder and envy to Protestants. Yet many churches are now unbuilt because of the millions that have lost fear of Rome's claim to hold the keys of heaven, and have broken from her pale to join the host of the im- churched. Professor and Senator Davenport, in his volume on Primitive Traits in Religious Revivals, reminds us that "we are civilized and barbarous at the same time. We have millions of primitive black men, and more millions of primitive white men, both native and foreign-born." [ 409 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Thus much for diagnosis of the present situation. Now, well-squared with all modern knowledge as the- ology may become, and however the ministration of the Church to all human needs may approximate to the ideals of Christ, the lapsed multitudes cannot be ex- pected to return to her in any large measure till they become conscious of a religious need which nothing but Christ's gospel of the grace of God can satisfy. "When thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world learn righteousness." The fruitful work of the Christian Commission in the Union army and the re- ligious revivals in the Confederate army during the Civil War are a significant commentary on that proph- ecy of Isaiah for a time of social agony, whose recur- rence now begins to be foreboded by fearsome seers. Timely, indeed, and hopeful it is that the socializing of religion according to the moral ideals of Christ has al- ready begun to redeem the time of evil days, and with it is going the modernizing of a hopelessly antiquated theology. On these parallel lines the spirit of Christ is now impelling the Church's return toward her primitive evangelical ideal — a working faith in faithful working: the one in the simplicity of Christ's address to heart and conscience, the other in the self-devotedness of Christ's ministries to sinning and suffering humanity; the faith justifying itself by its works, and the works perfecting the faith. Written out, the credenda of such a faith will be few, but all vital ; its agenda many, but all essential — thus restoring the long upset balance between the the- ological and the ethical. In the combination of these two is the real "summa theologice/' as distinct from that of scholastic doctors — the sum of the knowledge of God as [410] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE spiritually experienced and applied, rather than as in- tellectually apprehended. Only thus can the modern Church begin to realize the vision of ancient prophecy: "Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lobd is risen upon thee." [411] ANDREW C. ZENOS, D.D., LL.D., CHICAGO, ILL. Professor of biblical theology, McCormick Theological Seminary, Chicago, since 1894; born at Constantinople, August 13, 1855; graduated from Robert College, Con- stantinople, 1872; Princeton, 1880 (A.M., D.D.) ; pastor of Presbyterian Church, Brandt, Pa., 1881-83; professor of Greek, Lake Forest University, 1883-88; professor of New Testament exegesis, Hartford Theological Seminary, 1888-91; professor of Church history, McCormick Theo- logical Seminary, 1891-94; author of Elements of Higher Criticism; Compendium of Church History; The Teach- ing of Jesus Concerning Christian Conduct, So far as the facts are concerned, it is undoubtedly true that there are thousands of men who show indifference to the claims of the Church. The explanation, however, is, in my judgment, not as simple as it might appear at first sight. There are several causes which conspire to produce this indifference. First of all, the changed idea within Protestantism of the relation of the Church to personal salvation has weakened the sense of obligation to enter into its organized life. As long as it was sup- posed that outside the Church there was no salvation, men identified themselves with the Church as a matter of course. But since it is generally understood that a man may be a good Christian and not a member of any organized body of Christians, the necessity of joining an organization does not present itself as vividly. In fact a certain sense of independence and freedom in the expression of one's Christian life compensates the man who declines or neglects to affiliate himself with any of the branches of the Church. [412] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE In another way the relation of the individual mem- ber to the Church is misunderstood by many. The case you cite, of Abraham Lincoln, illustrates this misunder- standing quite clearly. He professed himself willing to join any church which made its sole qualification for membership the short restatement by Jesus of the sub- stance of both law and gospel. It is quite possible that in his day the denominations defined conditions of church membership more rigidly than they do now. At the present day, I daresay, there are Christian churches of the evangelical type which would accept his willingness to affiliate himself and work with "any body of Chris- tians" on the basis he proposed as a credible evidence of faith in Jesus Christ and would admit him to their mem- bership. Those who withhold their allegiance from the Christian Church of to-day on the same ground are certainly laboring under a misapprehension. The remedy for the unfortunate loss of such persons to the Church must be mainly the enlightenment of the minds of those who are making the above mistake. Pro- gressiveness in theological definition, the relating of doc- trinal statements to the current literary, historical, sci- entific and philosophical views will greatly help. So would also a simplification of all official creeds by the churches somewhat in line with Dr. Denney's sugges- tion in the concluding chapter of his Jesus and the Gos- pel/' * But after all the main effort must be toward getting men to understand what the Church is, what it requires of its members, and what it aims to accomplish. *See p. 209. [413] GROUP THREE [415] ALEXANDER FRANCIS CHAMBERLAIN, Ph.D., WORCESTEE^ MASS. Professor of anthropology at Clark University; born at Kenninghall, England, Jan. 12, 1865; graduated from Toronto (Can.) University, 1886; corresponding member of the Instituto de Coimbra, Portugal, Sociedad de Folk- Lore Chileno (Santiago), and Societe des Americanistes (Paris) ; editor of the Journal of American Folk-Lore, 1900-8; co-editor of Current Anthropological Literature, also, since 1912, of the Journal of Religious Psychology; chairman of the Democratic City Committee, 1904-5; author of Child and Childhood in Folk Thought; The Child — A Study in the Evolution of Man; Poems, There can be no possible doubt of the existence to-day of a widespread dissatisfaction with the Church, its teachings, its attitudes, its methods, its ideas, and its ideals. This dissatisfaction ranges over all classes of society, from the most ignorant to the most intelligent, and finds expression among men and women of all temperaments and all dispositions; and the criticisms heard involve all denominations, being, moreover, not confined to any one particular aspect of so-called Chris- tian belief or practise. The idea that "something is wrong with the Church" is in the air, and nothing that the Church itself has done of recent years seems to have met the situation in anything like a satisfying or a con- clusive manner. The question cannot, it seems to me, be settled in the very simple fashion suggested by the well-known declaration of Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln said: [417] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE "Whenever any church will inscribe over its altar, as its sole qualification for membership, the Saviour's con- densed statement of the substance of both law and gos- pel, *Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor as thyself,' that Church I will join with all my heart and all my soul." I was present, as a dele- gate, at Saratoga, in 1895, when, in a moment of the greatest religious enthusiasm and devotion of the rarest sort, the National Conference of Unitarian and Other Christian Churches adopted the following statement of its basis for religious fellowship: "These churches ac- cept the religion of Jesus, holding, in accordance with his teaching, that practical religion is summed up in love to God and love to man." This would have satis- fied Mr. Lincoln. But, since that simple declaration was made, no Lincolns have come into the Unitarian fold by virtue of it alone, nor are the churches of that particular denom- ination in any greater danger of being always crowded to the doors. And, more than this, we have lately seen a Unitarian president of the United States, whose ad- ministration was so inconsequent and so unsatisfactory that he was practically driven from ofiice by a popular revolt at the ballot-box, succeeded by an orthodox Presbyterian giving voice to a gospel of justice. Some of the worst politicians New England has had, since 1895, have been Unitarians; and on the roll of those Senators of the United States who voted to retain Mr. Lorimer of Illinois as a member of their honorable body Unitarianism was duly represented. A study of the correlation of theological beliefs and political practises, in the United States alone, reveals one difiiculty, at [418] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE least, facing the Church, viz., the lack of consistent moral honesty. Men and women of sincere ethical beliefs and upright personal conduct must, and do, hesitate to ac- cept membership in, and assume responsibility for, an institution such as is the Church to-day — often below their own standards of life, real and ideal. They firmly believe that, if its case is to be won, the Church must come into court with clean hands. They feel, too, and their experience convinces them of the truth associated with such feeling, that, by joining the Church, they are actually, in many cases, limiting, or even minimizing to a very large extent, their power for good. It is not, therefore, by any simple declaration of faith, covering "essentials" merely, or avoiding all matters of a doubt- ful or a controversial nature, that the Church can make sure of the future. Nor can it justify itself by works. Some churches have taken that other simple declaration of the essence of religion, and made of it almost a twentieth-century fetish: "And what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?" The Church has become a charitable institution, a social center, a community laboratory, a psychic hospital, a people's forum, etc. To the audi- torium have been added kitchens and restaurants, dance- halls and theaters, smoking-clubs and gymnasiums, bowling-alleys and boxing-parlors, golf-links and roof- gardens, hospitals and clinics, and many other stranger things. The minister has "branched out," too. In ad- dition to being an interpreter of the religious instincts of the race, he has been required to be a first-class after- dinner speaker and raconteur, a "jolly smoker," a base- ball "fan," a dog-fancier, a connoisseur of horses (or of [419] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE automobiles, as the case may be), an exponent of the "strenuous life" in some form or other, a devotee of athletics, an amateur farmer, a scout-master, a Cook's tourists' guide, etc. Or, he may exhibit himself before the public as janitor, furnace-tender, painter, shingler, or what not, of his own church building. But neither the "institutional church," nor the "socialized minister" can really stand for the Church of the future. The out-of- the-Church public are already beginning to call a halt in this matter, and the preacher who is so conspicuously and so notoriously "something else besides a minister" seldom sees in the pews before him some of the very men and women whom he is most desirous of having join his church, and to whom he extends the most cordial invitation possible. The minister who is "too much of something else," however, has an equally guilty brother in the one who is "too much of a minister." He is still found in all de- nominations; even intellectual Unitarianism knows him well. He overestimates the role of the minister in mod- ern society and overemphasizes the sanctity of the pul- pit, often putting up a "No trespass" sign for the ben- efit of the laymen of his congregation. He is sometimes so "ministerial" that even the children, from whom the ranks of church-members must necessarily be largely recruited, often fall foul of him, with more or less justi- fication. He often gives cause for the complaint that the Church is suffering from "too much minister." In- stead of inviting the scientific expert, on perfectly equal terms with himself, to speak from the pulpit, and with the authority that goes with it, to the full congregation, he is content to ask him to "address" the Men's Club, the Ladies' Aid Society, or some other minor and usual- [420] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ly poorly attended gathering, meeting often at the noon- hour, right after church, or at some other rather incon- venient time. He, himself, does not hesitate to interpret from the pulpit James's psychology, the Darwinian theory, prehistoric man, the domestication of animals, Peruvian art, and a hundred other topics, from all over the realm of science, often erring most egre- giously, both in arguments and in conclusions reached. The minister is now no longer the only learned man in the community, and there is really no reason why, in- stead of being a good minister, he should succeed in be- ing rather a poor anthropologist, psychologist, sociolo- gist, biologist, or other representative of the sciences. He should call to his aid, in these instances, if such things must be taught from the pulpit, experts, who are authorities upon the topics in question, and who are able to discuss them rightly and intelligently. Before the Church of the future can be firmly established, a natural and sympathetic cooperation between the minister and the competent layman must be inaugurated. This is one of the crying needs of the present unsatisfactory sit- uation in which the Church unfortunately finds itself. Both by his own personal experience and by reason of a rather wide acquaintance, as a man of science, with the facts of the religious history of mankind, the writer is convinced that the function of the Church of the future will not lie in the outre direction of the exploita- tion of social activities, the assumption of the services and the responsibilities of charitable institutions, hos- pitals and clinics (physical or mental), curative and pleasure-giving establishments of all sorts, "social lab- oratories," or anything of the special nature of the pres- ent so-called "institutional church" and its numerous [421] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, ^lND THE lA.GE i imitations. The true function of the Church is the study, the interpretation, and the preservation of the religious instincts of the human race as such, and the giv- ing of them effective expression in the larger and deeper life of the individual, the community and the nation. It is now generally conceded that man has possessed the religious instinct from the very beginnings of the race, that it is, indeed, one of the characteristics which have always distinguished him as man per se, one of his traits having an independence and autonomy of its own, the one whose alliance with his own conscience and grow- ing personality has made him in all ages of human history the overcomer and the refiner of heredity, the subjugator and the controller of environment, that which, as long as the world stands, will demonstrate the fallacy of the "economic theory" of the life of man and prove, beyond all doubt, that religion is and always has been a factor of supreme importance in dictating the survival of the race. The pathway of the Church in the future lies in larger and sincerer recognition of religion per se, in this higher and truly evolutional sense, in full allegiance to the spiritual and creative ideals which it represents, and not in weak or craven surrender to passing social fads, or transient materialism, even though these mask themselves under the armor of God. And the minister of the Church of the future must be ever nearer the seer and the prophet than the successful pew- filler or the favorite of very substantial society folk. With such ministers, and a Church like this, the future of religion will be assured, as it can never be by any declaration of faith that will please everybody or any program of works that will satisfy all. The Church [422] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE can never have, if it be true to itself, any other rightful function than that of interpreting the religious instincts of mankind. In this are summed up its raison d'etre, its goal^ and its achievements. [423] FRANK WIGGLESWORTH CLARKE, D.Sc, LL.D., WASHINGTON^ D. C. Chief chemist of the United States Geological Survey and honorary curator of minerals of the United States National Museum since 1883; born in Boston, March 19, 1847; re- ceived his education at Lawrence Scientific School (Har- vard), and honorary degrees from Columbian, Manchester, and Aberdeen Universities; instructor at Cornell, 1869; professor of chemistry, Howard University, Washington, 1873-74; professor of chemistry and physics. University of Cincinnati, 1874-83; author of Weights, Measures, and Money of All Nations; Elements of Chemistry; Constants of Nature; Report on the Teaching of Chemistry and Physics in the United States; Elementary Chemistry; Manual of Elementary Chemistry; also Data of Geochem- istry and other bulletins of the United States Geological Survey. NOTES ON CHURCHGOING Why do people stay away from Church? This ques- tion is not easy to answer, for no general answer is pos- sible. The motives which influence one man are not those which affect another. The fear of everlasting perdition, the selfish anxiety for personal salvation, no longer carry the weight that they did formerly, and so the power of one class of churches is greatly diminished. If hell is frozen over, why worry about it? Let us en- joy Sunday as a day of rest and recreation, and the fu- ture can take care of itself. So reason, perhaps to some extent unconsciously, one class of minds, but others argue differently. Why go to church to hear outgrown ideas continually rehashed, with little said that bears directly upon every-day duties and every-day life? Tell [424] Paiil W. Schmiedel THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE us how to be better, how to make the community in which we live better, and so give to preaching a prac- tical efBciency which it too often lacks. Do that, and there will be no scarcity of hearers. Music, vestments, candles, and incense may attract the sensuous and un- thinking, but they count for little with earnest and thoughtful men. As concrete symbols for those who cannot grasp the purely spiritual conceptions of re- ligion they may be helpful; but only so long as they are not taken too seriously. If they obscure or replace the essentials of religion they are mischievous, and may even provoke the indifference of which some churches com- plain. Religious services may be beautiful, but unless there is something deeper than beauty in them, some- thing that is not merely skin-deep, their influence on the community will be slight. The still, small voice must be heard, and it must speak with all sincerity. The con- ventional repetition of a creed in which preacher and congregation only partially believe, is hardly conducive to intellectual honesty. Absence from church is far less harmful than an insincere attendance, or attendance for frivolous reasons. Churchgoing for the sake of social advancement is by no means meritorious. Because a church is fashionable is no good reason for attending it. Absolute sincerity is the only safe foundation upon which worship can be based. A religion with mental reservations is dishonest. Between science and religion there is no real quarrel; but science and ecclesiastical authority have often been at odds. To the man of science there is no authority save that of the truth, and his search for the truth can- not be obstructed by any theological walls. If he is asked to believe a doctrine he must be free to examine [ 425 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE it to its very foundations, and so to satisfy himself that it is entitled to belief. No Hebrew or Babylonian tra- ditions can be permitted to stand in his way. Astron- omy, geology, biology, and archeology are not subject to the authority of any church. To attract the scientific thinker the churches must get rid of all the dead wood that now hampers their growth. The teachings of Jesus could be accepted by a man like Lincoln, to whom only the essentials ap- pealed, but the overload of theology repelled him. That overload, to speak fairly of the churches, was assumed naturally enough, and doubtless unconsciously. At first the followers of Jesus were simple monotheists, who expected the return of the Master while they were yet alive, to establish the kingdom of God on earth. As they spread beyond the confines of Palestine, carrying their message of peace and good-will to the Gentiles, they came into contact with paganism of various types, Egyptian, Greek, or Roman, gaining converts who could not quite rid themselves of all their old beliefs and habits of thought. To these converts the conception of one Supreme Being was intelligible, but the minor deities were missing. In their place, then, a multitude of saints was provided, mediators between God and man, to whom prayers could be, and still are, oflfered. A Queen of heaven was also wanted, and to fill that place the ex-pagan converts took the pathetic figure of Mary; a transmutation which the humble carpenter's wife could never have imagined. These absorptions from paganism were not intentional, not carefully thought out, neither were they at first universal. The early Christians divided into sects, but that one which offered the largest compromise with the lower faiths, [426] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE the line of least resistance to conversion, became domi- nant and overwhelmed the others. This interpretation of history is not fanciful, for the same process is going on to-day. Tribes of American Indians are outwardly and professedly Christians, but practise on proper occasions their old rites secretly. The inherited beliefs of cen- turies cannot be cast aside like an old suit of clothes. Their fossil remains are still to be found imbedded in the new religion. To such a jumble of beliefs the true scientific thinker cannot easily subscribe. It is, moreover, complicated with appeals to the miraculous, which makes acceptance still more diflScult. A faith in the orderliness of nature is fundamental to science, and not to be disturbed except by such overwhelming evidence as has never yet been provided. Before the vast miracle of the universe, and the unfathomable mystery of existence, all special miracles, if such were possible, would seem trivial and meaningless. What, then, remains for the churches to do? That question is easier asked than answered, but one thing seems clear. They must adapt themselves to the needs and aspirations of to-day, they must willingly accept all new knowledge, and use as a basis for preaching the simple ethics of Jesus, with the great conceptions of the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man. Jesus, perhaps, held up unattainable, or at least rarely at- tained ideals, but what of that? How many Christians take no thought for the morrow? How many, when smitten on one cheek, turn the other? How many of the well-to-do sell all they have and give to the poor? Few, very few! But the ideals still hold as something toward which humanity can move, even though they [427] THE CHUPCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE should never be completely realized. Love, charity, and righteousness are themes on which all churches can agree, and which need no meretricious aid from the miraculous. If men can be led to do their best in this world they need have no anxiety about the next. [428] CHARLES BENEDICT DAVENPORT, Ph.D., COLD SPRING HARBOR, LONG ISLAND^ N. Y. Director of the Station for Experimental Evolution (of the Carnegie Institution) since 1904; director of the Bi- ological Laboratory of the Brooklyn Institute of Arts and Sciences since 1898; born at Stamford, Conn., June 1, 1866; studied at the Polytechnic Institute, Brooklyn, and at Harvard University; surveying engineer of the Duluth, South Shore and Atlantic Railway, 1886-87; assistant in zoology at Harvard, 1888-90; and instructor, 1891-99; assistant professor of zoology and embryology. University of Chicago, 1899-1901; and associate professor and cura- tor of the Zoological Museum, 1901-4; organizer and trus- tee of the Eugenics Record Office; associate editor of the Journal of Experimental Zoology since 1898; and of the American Breeders* Magazine since 1910; author of Grad- uate Courses — A Handbook for Graduate Courses; Ex- perimental Morphology ; Statistical Methods in Biological Variation; Introduction to Zoology; Inheritance in Poul- try; Inheritance of Characteristics of Fowl; Eugenics; Heredity in Relation to Eugenics, I DO not see how anybody can keep his self-respect and assert his belief in things about which he has no knowl- edge or which do not appear to him to be reasonable. Until further instructed I doubt if there is any uni- versal creed possible, because the different races of men differ so fundamentally. Just as a dog and a tiger have a "love of man," in quite different senses, so the social, gregarious races must, from their nature, hold a differ- ent relation to other men from the nomadic, individ- ualistic peoples. In a highly socialized state each person should see the necessity of providing his children and his "neigh- bors" with the best of conditions for the development of [429] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE inhibitors and, in general, of elevating social ideals, and helping to achieve the highest of them. As social beings we have, above all, to work for the common weal, and the emotions keep us responsive to social needs. The cultivation of the emotions, while keeping them under the control of reason (where reason can be de- veloped) ; the education of the emotions to replace rea- son (where the latter is incapable of development) ; the elevation of the ideals of youth by example and precept ; the dissemination and interpretation of the best thoughts of the centuries — these are the functions of religion. I would agree that a love of and a desire for socially "good" conduct, a lively altruism and a well-developed system of inhibitors should be our common aim — ^but then I have come from stock on both sides that was capable of highly developed inhibitions; I had my po- tentialities in this direction fairly well cultivated; and, naturally, these seem an attainable good to me. For others these may not be the highest aim, or even if ac- cepted as the highest aim, it is a hopelessly unattainable one. This may be their misfortune, but it is not their fault. [430] GEORGE ELLSWORTH DAWSON, Ph.D., SPRINGFIELD, MASS. Professor of psychology at the Hartford School of Re- ligious Pedagogy since 1902; born at Berkeley Springs, W. Va., Dec. 23, 1861; received his preparatory education at Mt. Morris (III.) Academy and at Carthage (111.) College; graduated (A.B.) from the University of Michi- gan, 1887; student at the University of Leipsic, Germany, 1888-89; fellow at Clark University, 1895-97, Ph.D., 1897; principal of Oil City (Pa.) High School, 1889-91; pro- fessor of English at the South Dakota Agricultural Col- lege, 1891-93; instructor in English at the University of Michigan, 1 893-95 ; professor of psychology, Bible Normal College, Springfield, Mass., 1897-1901 ; head of the history department at Pratt Institute, Brooklyn, 1901-2; professor of education at Mt. Holyoke (Mass.) College, 1903-8; author of The Child and His Religion; The Right of the Child to he Well Born, I SEE no reason why the Church of to-day should have any formal creed at all. In the first place, no church now has a creed in which a majority of its members ac- tually believe. So far as I can see, the formal creeds that men and women are asked to assent to in becoming members of churches are symbolic of religious states of mind held by former generations, but assented to by the present generation only in a passive and perfunctory manner, and not with any active participation in their meaning. This being the case, the question presents itself as to whether creeds no longer believed in have any econ- omy in the life of the Church or of its individual mem- bers. I believe they have no economy, but, rather, a great disadvantage. They interpose a barrier between the Church and all those minds that have been trained [431] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE in ways of thinking characteristic of our generation. Young men and women coming up through our public schools and colleges have a content of consciousness and mental habits that make it impossible for them to believe what the creeds say about God, the world, and the human soul. If they are honest with themselves, and independent in their judgment, they will not assent to the creeds ; and so they are repelled from the Church. This accounts, in no small degree, for the fact that the Church of the present time has increasing difficulty in winning young men and women of high intellectual quality to its membership. Should we, then, rewrite our creeds, so as to bring them within the comprehension and interests of the present generation? In other words, recognizing that existing creeds have no economy in the life of the Church, should we replace them with other creeds? I believe not. The present order of human consciousness does not need a formally written creed to define its allegiance to the Church. It needs, to be sure, a no less definite body of beliefs than did the consciousness of past generations, but it prefers to hold this body of beliefs as a private and individual possession, and not as a public and ecclesiastical profession of faith. I believe the average man in current civilization, if he were asked to give an opinion, would see no more reason for assent- ing to a stereotyped creed year after year in his religious life, than in his political, educational, or social life. Men join political parties, educational movements, clubs, and other social organizations, without a formal profession of faith that essays to define for them the conditions of their political, educational, or social status, and to fix henceforth the limits of their intelligence and [432] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE personal growth. Platforms, indeed, they may have, statements of principles and aims, but nothing ap- proaching the character of the religious creed they are asked to give their assent to in becoming a member of the Church. I would therefore have men associate together re- ligiously in the same way they otherwise associate, bound together by common ideals, purposes, and modes of conduct. I should like to say to my own children and to other young people: "Come with me and identify yourself consciously with those who are trying to create a divine order of human life in themselves and other men." With Lincoln, I would inscribe over the altars of our churches the words of Jesus: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor as thy- self"; and I would welcome every man and woman to our fellowship that wanted to join with us in the effort to achieve personal worth and to serve the world of men, under the stimulus and direction of that command. No formal and public statement of what such a man or woman believed, would be required. The fact that they identified themselves with the forces of righteousness, and sought to make righteousness the law of their own lives and the lives of others, would be evidence of be- liefs sufficiently distinctive to make them followers of him who did not write creeds but lived them. As to the fundamental basis and direction of mod- ern theology, it seems to me clear that these must be de- termined by the content of the modern consciousness. The older theologies were fashioned from certain con- ceptions of the world-order and of man's life. The new theology will inevitably be fashioned from the concep- [433] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE tions of the world-order and of man's life that are now held. These conceptions are the outgrowth of the current reconstruction of the body of knowledge out of which these larger conceptions always spring. Therefore, those who are shaping modern theological thought should take a sympathetic attitude toward sci- ence, familiarize themselves with its point of view and its data, train themselves in its technique, and be able to interpret its facts and principles in the direction of a philosophy of the religious life that is in harmony with its conclusions. No theology can long survive that con- flicts substantially with any well-established body of facts. The temper of men that sneers at modern science, and seeks to defend views of the world-order and of man's life that do not harmonize with known facts is fatal to the Church's leadership in the modern world. Those who cultivate such a temper should not be allowed longer to usurp the rights of religious leadership. They are not leaders of present-day religion at all, but of the religion of past generations; and their place is that of every other living creature that cannot adapt itself to a changing environment. The new theology, therefore, will be grounded in the conceptions of the universe and of human life that modern science is now rapidly shaping in man's con- sciousness. The Church should honestly and fearlessly face in the direction of this reconstructive process. Christianity, like all other religions, is an expression of what men think of themselves and of the world. Sci- ence is rapidly modifying both the content of knowledge and the scale of conscious values ; and with this modifi- cation it is certain that Christianity • will be as much richer and more effective for human progress and happi- [ 434 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ness, as is the content of knowledge larger, and the scale of conscious values more accurate. Fortunate are the individual men and women, and fortunate are the re- ligious organizations, that in these hours of reconstruc- tive change, in both religious and secular affairs, are reorienting their lives to the light of a new day I [435] CHARLES WILLIAM ELIOT, Ph.D., LL.D., CAMBRIDGE^ MASS. President emeritus of Harvard University since 1909; born at Boston, Mass., March 20, 1834; studied at the Boston Latin School and at Harvard University; tutor in mathematics. Harvard, 1854-58; assistant professor of mathematics and chemistry, Lawrence Scientific School (Harvard), 1858-63; studied chemistry and investigated educational methods in Europe, 1863-65; professor of analytical chemistry at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1865-69; in France, 1867-68; president of Harvard, 1869-1909; author of Manual of Qualitative Chemical Analysis (with F. H. Storer) ; Manual of Inor- ganic Chemistry (with same) ; Five American Contribu- tions to Civilization, and Other Essays; Educational Re- form; Charles Eliot — Landscape Architect; More Money for the Public Schools; John Gilley; The Happy Life; Four American Leaders; the Durable Satisfactions of Life; The Conflict between Individualism and Collectivism in a Democracy; The Future of Capitalism and Trades- Unionism in a Democracy; editor of The Harvard Classics. You say that thousands of persons are indifferent to the claims of the Church, and refuse to become identified with the Church in any of its numerous denominations. You then ask, "do you think the Church should limit itself to a declaration" . . . of "a common purpose of love and service to God and man," and you invite me to answer that question. I answer, first, that all the existing creeds are full of improved and unprovable statements, and that their whole tone is inconsistent with the great movements of modem society, democracy, individualism, social ideal- ism, universal education, the spirit of research, the ethi- cal conduct of business and industries, and the new sense of governmental justice. Many "modern" men are [436] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE unable to subscribe to any of these creeds. The historic evangelical churches are therefore recruited from women, and from children who are enlisted before they have arrived at years of discretion. If the unchurched are to be brought into association with a Christian church, it must be a church which makes no use of the ancient creeds. There are millions of men in Christian countries who would subscribe to Abraham Lincoln's declaration, "Whenever any church will in- scribe over its altar, as its sole qualification for member- ship, the Saviour's condensed statement of the substance of both law and gospel, *Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor as thyself,' that church will I join with all my heart and all my soul." There exists in the United States, England, Hungary, and a few other places a Christian church called the Unitarian which makes no use of any of the ancient creeds, or of any authoritative test for church membership. Its declaration of faith is as follows : "The fatherhood of God, the brotherhood of man, the leader- ship of Jesus, salvation by character, the progress of mankind onward and upward forever" ; but no member is required to subscribe to this, or any other, declaration of faith. In some Unitarian churches the following covenant is signed by persons who wish to declare them- selves members of the church: "In the love of truth and the spirit of Jesus Christ we unite for the worship of God and the service of man"; but the use of this cov- enant is wholly voluntary. This Unitarian denomination is small, and is be- lieved by most persons to be too free and too individual- istic, and therefore to lack cohesion and impelling force. [437] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE During the past hundred years, however, it has had an influence on other religious denominations and on the current of modern thought quite out of proportion to its numbers, since its main tenets have been set forth and enforced by innumerable poets, historians, men of sci- ence, and political and social philosophers in writings which, for the most part, take no cognizance whatever of the existence of such a denomination. Its theology and its creed, if it can be said to have one, are consistent with present-day thought and aspiration. I think all the Christian churches which desire to carry on an effective propaganda at home or abroad might wisely limit their declarations of faith to state- ments as simple and comprehensive as those quoted above from Unitarian afiirmations. [438] HAVELOCK ELLIS, LONDON^ ENGLAND Fellow of the Medico-Legal Society of New York; Hon- orary Fellow of the Chicago Academy of Medicine; For-' eign Associate of the Societe Medico-Historique of Paris; general editor of the Contemporary Science Series; born at Croydon, Surrey, England, Feb. 2, 1859; educated at private schools and at St. Thomas's Hospital; taught in various parts of New South Wales, 1875-79; returned to England and qualified as physician, but after practicing for a short time took up literary and scientific work; au- thor of The New Spirit; The Criminal; Man and Woman: A Study of Human Secondary Sexual Charac- ters; Sexual Inversion; Affirmations; The Evolution of Modesty; The Nineteenth Century; A Dialogue in Utopia; A Study of British Genius; Analysis of the SeX' ual Impulse; Sexual Selection in Man; Erotic Symbol- ism; Sex in Relation to Society; The Soul of Spain; The World of Dreams, I REGARD religion as a private matter between the indi- vidual and the Infinite, with which no third party has any concern. So far as regards religion, it seems to me, therefore, of little consequence what the churches do or leave undone. At the same time it may well be that the churches have a real function to perform, and I could imagine them exerting a noble and inspiring influence. It would, however, be presumptuous for an outsider to suggest how this might best be done, and no vitally active church requires such suggestions. "I am dying to preach a gospel but can't for the life of me imagine what gospel the age demands" — that was scarcely the attitude of Jesus. I would only say that personally I think the churches would be well advised to insist as little as pos- [439] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE sible on their theological divergencies. The world is not so willing as it once was to gaze with respect on the spectacle of homoousians and homoiousians cutting each others' throats, not even when they only do it figur- atively. Fewer people seek the churches now than formerly.* I suppose it is inevitable. No religion can preserve its youthful vitality for two thousand yfears, especially when that hostile environment which stimulates growth has vanished for ever. But I fear that neglect of the churches is not always a sign that the churches have been spiritually outgrown. * This statement was submitted to Edwin M. Blis3, Bureau of the Cen- sus, Washington, D. C. He writes us that "In 1890 for the first time an effort was made to obtain the number of persons enrolled in the membership of the various religious organiza- tions, Protestant, Roman Catholic, Jewish, Mormon, etc. According to that report the nimiber of such persons was 20,597,954. The next census re- port was for 1906, and showed a total of 32, 936,445 members. "The population of continental United States in 1890 was 62,9^,714, so that the church membership formed 32.7% of the total popiilation. In 1906, the population (estimated) was 84,246,252, the church membership being 39.1 %» an increase of 6.4%. . . . "While no positive statements can be made, the general impression left by a study of the figures as they are reported leaves the impression: (1.) That the actual number of persons enrolled as members of some religious organization is on the increase rather than the decrease; (2.) That the actual strength of the religious bodies, as indicated by the number and size of their buildings, the extent of their benefactions, the activity of their organizations, is notably on the increase." [440] G (RANVILLE) STANLEY HALL, Ph.D., LL.D., WORCESTER^ MASS. President and professor of psychology, Clark Univer- sity, Worcester, Mass., since 1888; born at Ashfield, Mass,, Feb. 1, 1846; received his education at Williams College, Union Theological Seminary, the Universities of Berlin, Bonn, and Heidelberg; professor of psychol- ogy at Antioch College, 1872-76; instructor of Eng- lish at Harvard, 1876-77; lecturer on psychology at Har- vard and Williams College, 1880-81; professor of psychology, Johns Hopkins, 1881-88; founder and editor since 1887 of the American Journal of Psychology; editor of the Pedagogical Seminary since 1892; American Jour- nal of Religious Psychology and Education since 1904; author of Aspects of German Culture; Hints Toward a Select and Descriptive Bibliography of Education (with John M. Mansfield) ; Adolescence; Youth — Its Education, Regimen and Hygiene; Educational Problems, Most of my life, until recent years, I have had some church connections. I am profoundly interested in the psychology of Christianity and, indeed, have lectured upon it for many years. To my mind it is not so much a creed as a life-purpose, which may be summed up in six words, Love and serve God and man. In this formula I would allow the greatest latitude toward the interpretation of the word God. It might even be a power making for righteousness in the world. It cer- tainly implies a moral order. It seems to me to rest back on the deep foundations of biology and to pervade all life. I hope and trust I am religious and Christian, and I try to live according to the above maxim, but object to having my ultimate beliefs prescribed by any creed, I have pretty definite ideals as to what the edu- [441 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE cation of ministers should be and that it should be some- thing very different from what it is at present, and have my ideals of what constitutes a church, and what the service should be. I would not attempt to formulate a creed or theology for any one, but I think the basis of union should be work. [44,2] PAUL HENRY HANUS, LL.D., CAMBRIDGE^ MASS. Professor and head of department of history and art of teaching. Harvard University, since 1901 ; born at Herms- dorf-unterm-Kynast, Silesia, Prussia, March 14, 1855; came to the United States in 1859; graduated from the University of Michigan, 1878; has been teacher since 1 878 ; assistant professor of the history and art of teaching. Harvard University, 1891-1901; author of Elements of Determinants; Geometry in the Grammar School; Educa- tional Aims and Educational Values; A Modern School; Beginnings in Industrial Education and Other Educational Discussions, I BEG to say, first, that I have no interest whatever in creeds : they seem to me pernicious, because they tend to formulate, once for all, a point of view which ought to change with maturity, knowledge, and experience; sec- ond, that while theology is of great interest to many minds, it seems to me a speculative subject, like philos- ophy, and therefore likely to yield no permanent solu- tion of the problem with which it deals. I have all possi- ble sympathy with personal religion, but very little with institutional religion. My conception of a useful church is an institution that is primarily a social clearing house ; that is to say, a clearing house for various kinds of help- ful social activities; and incidentally a source of guid- ance and inspiration for every person who desires to define for himself high ideals of every kind and to ap- proximate their realization in his own and his neigh- bor's experience. [443] # JESSE HERMAN HOLMES, Ph.D., SWARTHMORE^ PA. Professor of history of religion and philosophy, Swarth- more College, since 1900; born at West Liberty, la., Jan. 5, 1864; graduated from the University of Nebraska, 1884; graduate student and librarian, 1884-85; studied at Johns Hopkins, 1885-86, and 1880-90, at Harvard, 1894, and at Oxford, 1899-1900; taught at the Friends' Select School, Washington, 1886-88, 1890-93; collector of botani- cal specimens for the United States Herbarium, Depart- ment of Agriculture, 1888-90; teacher at George School, Bucks County, Pa., 1893-99; has taken active part in the work of the Society of Friends, especially in Sunday- school work; author of several courses of lessons for Friends* Sunday-schools. I THINK religion can never find a permanent basis in historical fact. History is, by its nature, incapable of proof, since it cannot be repeated. Depending as it does on human evidence always liable to distortion or error, it can never reach farther than a greater or less degree of probability. This has been the great and fimdamental mistake of Christianity, since it rests its case on the accuracy of historical statements in the New Testament, or in the Old and New Testaments, or in the historical creeds. It has attempted to overcome this difficulty by claiming infallible authorities. The Ro- man Church has a consistent theory in an apostolic succession and an infallible pope. But experience shows in practise that this authority is anything but infallible. Protestantism tried an infallible Bible and in many in- stances still tries to maintain this. But thoughtful people realize that nothing short of infallibility on the [ 444 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE part of each reader will give him certainty; since his interpretation is what guides him. Since history fails us as a basis I believe we must turn to experience, as interpreted by such history as is in accord with experience. We find in our nature a desire for the right and true, we recognize it in humanity about us and we see its workings in the story of the race. We have a permanent and abiding sense that loyalty to our highest ideals is not only safe, but the only safety. We Quakers recognize in this guidance :of the highest self the voice of God, the "inner light," the "divine seed," the "Christ of God." This guidance is to be had by prayer and by striving. Its full acceptance brings peaceful security. These things are as much experimental facts as the laws of gravitation or of mag- netism. They are verifiable — they need not be taken as authority, and by this they show themselves as a solid foundation for the higher life. Moreover they explain and make vital the lives and messages of the prophets of the Old Testament, the career and teaching of Jesus, and the parts played by the heroes of faith the world over. They enable us to recognize and welcome light and leading from every land and from every religion. We are enabled without inconsistency and without revolution to readjust our thought and our vocabulary to every new age and condi- tion. We not only need not fear science, but may recog- nize in her the handmaid of religion, in that she opens up new areas and new vistas for revelation. In a word religion should be based on the fact of the constant and progressive revelation through ex- perience to man of the ways of righteousness, and of the order of our mysterious lives. It should include kinship [445] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE and reverence for the great revealers of every age and people. It should welcome every new advance without fear — ^with joy indeed at the wider vision. It should be quick to recognize truth in whatever guise of vocabu- lary, caring supremely for the thing rather than the form of expression. It should see no heresy except in hypocrisy. "Infidelity does not consist in believing or in disbelieving; but in professing to believe what one does not believe." r446] SIR HENRY HAMILTON JOHNSTON, G.C.M.G., K.C.B., D.Sc, ARUNDEL, ENGLAND Explorer and scientist; born at Kennington^ London^ June 12, 1858; studied at King's College, London, and at the Royal Academy of Arts; served for many years in the British consular service and as administrator of several African Protectorates (Southern Nigeria, British Central Africa, and Uganda) ; explorer and gold medallist of the Royal Geographical and Royal Scottish Geographical so- cieties and of the Zoological Society of London; honorary life fellow of the Royal Italian and the Philadelphia Geographical societies and of the Royal Irish and the New York Zoological societies; member of the Royal Water Colour Society; governor of the London School of Eco- nomics, and a trustee of the Hunterian Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons; has made many discoveries in the African fauna (including the okapi) and flora; has written numerous books on travel, history, zoology, and linguistics; and his paintings have been frequently ex- hibited in the Royal Academy (of which he was once a student), and in other English art galleries. I THINK on the whole (with some slight reservations) that many men and women of the day would be content to close issue with Abraham Lincoln on what should con- stitute the sole qualification of "church membership." I would prefer, like him, to lay stress rather on love for the works of God than a personal "love" for the source of creative energy, as to which we know so little, about whom we can only speculate with ever-increasing vague- ness and awe, as the scope of our knowledge of this world and the solar system, and the universe beyond widens from year to year. We are in fact lost in a sea [447] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE of doubt — "Are God and nature then at strife, that nature lends such evil dreams?" Sometimes it seems to me allowable to imagine God as creating a wonderful living universe out of chaos, while the devil is the per- sonification of the brute resistance of matter, the recal- citrancy of forces which overshoot the mark or fail to come up to the standard of efficiency. Yet great as are the difficulties which beset God's purpose (as we dimly imagine it) , we can now by the knowledge we have acquired — a knowledge infinitely greater than that of the prophets of old — see a steady progress toward higher, better, more complex things in the history of life-development on this little planet ; and from this un- folding of living, sentient matter deduce that some great purpose lies ahead in the evolution of man. But all this must be guess-work and theory. If we are to express a concrete opinion on religion, I should say that mankind has as yet had no better inspiration than the gospel uttered by Jesus the Christ, by Yeshu the Nazarene, as he was really styled at the time of his teach- ing; and this gospel is reinforced and emphasized by the utterances of his inmiediate followers, so far as they are authentic; especially in the epistles of Sha'ul who was called Paulus and of lakob bar losef — if it was he who wrote the beautiful verses we ascribe to "St. James." Briefly, I think pure religion and undefiled is being injured at the present day by the indiscriminate fetish worship of all the books of the Bible, that is to say of that collection of the Jewish scriptures written between about 500 B. C. and 200 B. C, and the Neo-Greek gospels and epistles composed in Asia Minor, Greece, and perhaps Rome between 50 A. D. and 200 A. D. This collection represents what was arbitrarily pro- [ 448 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE nounced to be canonical many hundred years ago. All that is essential to the Christian religion — a religion which in its main purpose has stood the test of time — is contained in three or four books of the New Testament. The remainder of the Bible, especially the Old Testa- ment, is a negligible quantity to all but students of oriental history, of ethnology, and of poetry. As liter- ature I will admit there are passages in the Psalms, in Isaiah, and in the Book of Job which are sublime, espe- cially when done into Jacobean English; but they are no great reenforcement to civic morality nor of much practical use to the commonalty. Milton was quite equally inspired; while as to Tennyson, as to portions of Shakespeare, they are unapproached in beauty of phrase or self-evident truth by the most inspired among the Jews, who in returnmg from their captivity or dur- ing the later times of bondage set themselves to trans- scribe the legends and express the longings of their race. It is because of the overmuch attention which min- isters of the Church of Christ bestow on the books of the Old Testament, or the incessant reiteration of prayers and canticles two-thirds of which are inapplic- able to our modern lives, our modern hopes, sorrows, longings, and sins, that the churches and chapels are losing their congregations, and that the rift between the professional ministers of religion and the laity is widening. And yet there is a greater need than ever for Christianity, and the gospel of Christ stands out more than ever as a beacon of truth — a revelation, if you will. The last thing I desire is the disestablishment of the Church or the abolition of real religion, but it must be religion as defined in the earlier books of the New [449] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Testament, devoid of needless and unbelievable dogma, a religion of w^orks, with faith more in the background, hope kept alive, and charity predominating. I ask for no blind following of the pronouncements of science. The theories of Darwin, Spencer, Hooker, Haeckel, Weissmann, Metchnikoff; of astronomers and bacteri- ologists, geologists and anatomists, can be given cre- dence as long as they seem to fit together some pieces of the puzzle of this and other worlds; but we need not any more go to the stake for this or that theory of the universe. Let us martyrize ourselves only for objects of material good ; let us inflict martyrdom only on those who break the laws. Yet not make fetishes of laws or law-givers ; marching with the times and constantly mod- ifying our codes and our customs to conform with the changing circumstances of life; and the needs of each new generation. Our churches ought to be temples of knowledge, of knowledge concerning good and evil, of social needs and deficiencies, the discoveries and temporary conclusions reached by students of God's works, in a constant striv- ing after an understanding of God's purpose. By no means let us neglect the appeal to men through their senses; the quickening of the emotional side through music — ^music which that seer, Du Maurier, thought might prove to be a channel of communication with the divine Spirit — the visual comprehension of facts and phases through pictures, the brain-soothing or intellect- stimulating effects of delicious odors — incense should never have been pretermitted from public worship. In- stead of religious exercises being an odious imitation of the Tibetan prayer wheel, they should be so multiform, so varied, so catholic in their appeal to the better in- [450] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE stincts of our nature, so convincing to our intelligence and soothing to our sorrow, so apt in their diagnosis of our errors and swift to indicate the remedy or the atone- ment, that all the world would wish to go to church* [451] IRVING KING, Ph.D., IOWA CITY^ lA. Professor of education. State University of Iowa, since 1909; born at Richmond, Ind., July 17, 1874; graduated from Earlham College, Ind., 1896; principal of Ton- ganoxie Academy, 1896-98; Bloomingdale (Ind.) Acad- emy, 1898-1900; fellow at the University of Chicago, 1901-03; professor of psychology, Oshkosh (Wis.) State Normal School, 1903; of psychology and history of educa- tion, Pratt Institute, Brooklyn, 1903-06; assistant profes- sor of education and inspector of secondary schools. Uni- versity of Michigan, 1906-09; author of Psychology of Child Development; The Development of Religion; Social Aspects of Education; Education for Social Efficiency. I AM just now one of those who are finding it increas- ingly easier to stay away from church. I was raised to go to church regularly. I have been a church worker and have even at times occupied the pulpit myself; one winter in Brooklyn, N. Y., I spoke every Sunday morn- ing at the Lafayette Avenue Friends' Church. I sup- pose my case therefore is different from that of many men who do not attend; or men who have seldom at- tended. I have gone and have participated, but I find my interest waning. Surely if the Church is to get the men it must be able to hold those it has already. I have thought a good deal about my own diminish- ing interest. It is not due to any lack of belief in the reality or need of religion. I had and have a sincere and effective Christian life, I hope and believe. I am trying to train my children in religious matters. But, frankly, the church service, the average one, does not touch or satisfy in any particular my inner religious cravings. [ 452 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE The minister does not seem to have lived and suffered any, nor does he seem to be speaking to me out of any- great depth or reach of experience. When I say "the minister," I use the term generically. And yet, now and then, I do hear one who has a real "message," whose words strike home and move me to a higher plane of en- deavor. I do not want to be "entertained" by a sermon, either through the wit or the learning of the minister. I want to be inspired to grapple more energetically with the serious problems of the present-day social order. I care very little for questions of biblical interpretation or for the discussion of Greek or Hebrew etymologies. I am intolerably bored by a doctrinal discussion of the atonement or by a forty-minute discourse on the "fine example" set by Abraham in leaving his kindred in idolatrous Ur to go to a new land that his children might not be contaminated by idolatry (I had always before supposed his children came long afterward!). In a word, the average sermon is hopelessly out of touch with the needs and interests and problems of pres- ent-day life. I get little help from the church service, I hear only platitudes which are iterated and reiterated beyond endurance. I sometimes think if the sermon and prayer could be reduced to fifteen minutes and the musical portion increased, the service would be more beneficial. But, after all, what is needed is a reed man with a vital message. Men generally do not go to church because it does not have anything for them. It is unfortunate that religion and churchgoing are so closely identified in our minds. It seems to me that the average church service is an anachronism, a left-over from an earlier social era, when the needs of people were different. People then went to church because they [ ^^^ ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE wanted to. It fitted into their lives, and did something for them. Nowadays one often goes out of a sense of duty, or to set a good example to his neighbor or friend. When this attitude is held I think it shows something radically wrong somewhere. No church can long main- tain itself on such a basis of interest. I hold there must be a genuine spontaneous interest in church for what one gets out of it himself. No one should be expected to go simply because he should set a good example or because he vaguely believes the Church is a good in- stitution for his community. Unless the Church can offer some more vital reason than this for attending its services it cannot expect to appeal largely to men. [454] JAMES HENRY LEUBA, Ph.D., BRYN MAWE^ PA. Professor of psychology and education, and director of the psychological laboratory, Bryn Mawr College, since 1908; bom at Neuchatel, Switzerland, April 9, 1868; came to the United States, 1887; studied at Clark University, 1892-97, at Leipsic, Halle, Heidelberg, and Paris, 1897-98; author of The Psychological Origin and the Nature of Re- ligion; A Psychological Study of Religion: Its Origin, Function, and Future. The present religious crisis arises in my opinion from the progressive disappearance of the belief in a personal God in direct communication with man. All the other debated questions, the divinity of Christ, the atonement, baptism, etc., are subsidiary to that one. Our contem- poraries differ from the Christian people of the Middle Ages by the decrease of the firm, practical belief in a God who watches over them and answers their prayers. This growing disbelief is not accidental, neither is it the outcome of a disinclination to believe. On the contrary, it appears to me that most of those who have lost that belief have given it up sorrowfully. The change I am indicating is a logical, unavoidable result of scien- tific progress and philosophical speculation. In dem- onstrating the presence of law in the physical and in the psychological universe, science has destroyed, in those best informed, the belief in divine intervention, whether in nature or in man ; and contemporary philosophy has abandoned the belief in the God with reference to whom the prayer-books have been written. The Absolute of the German idealists and of their English followers, some [455] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE of whom have, for practical reasons, lent their influence to the Church, is not a Being to whom the prayer-book of the Anglican Church could be addressed; imless one chose, as Hegel did, to speak symbolically of the "love of God" and of the "Son of God." For Hegel, the first of these expressions meant that, in the Absolute, contradictions are transcended, what is opposed to God is yet in union with him; and the second expression signified that "when we concentrate attention on the manifestation of God, as distinguished from his inner essence, we are dealing with God as the *other' of him- self." But a Christian prayer-book so interpreted be- comes simply a parody. There is no reason known to the scientist or to the philosopher for thinking that the increasing disbelief in a personal God in affective communication with man will not continue to spread together with knowledge. The Christian religion has grown up about a belief in a god-idea now being replaced by another. The read- justment demanded by the situation should therefore reach the very foundations of Christian dogmatics. Un- willingness on the part of the progressive clergy and leading professors of theology to acknowledge the situa- tion openly, and their efforts to continue the use of habitual terms by attaching symbolic meanings are to be expected. It appears to me, however, to be a practise deeply to be deplored, for it places these men in a situa- tion which to the outsider cannot fail to appear as lack- ing in directness and ingenuousness ; and in the present crisis no good can come to religion from an attempt to hide radical differences. Unless the Church is to resolve itself merely into an ethical society, it will have, it seems, to transform its theology radically. Theology may [456] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE transcend, but it may not contradict science and regain the place of honor which it held when its God-conception was in agreement with the best thought of the time. We hear on every hand that the number of young men entering the ministry is relatively decreasing, and that their quality is not equal to that of the men entering other professions. I do not believe that the blame for this is to be laid upon the "materialistic spirit" of the age. There is probably as much noble devotion now in our young men as at any other time. But they cannot show it in the interest of a religion whose system of theology is fundamentally at variance with the knowl- edge of the age. [457] THE REV. CHARLES STEDMAN MACFAR- LAND, Ph.D., NEW YORK^ N. Y. Executive secretary of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America since 1911 ; bom at Boston, Dec. 12, 1866; educated at Chapman School, East Boston High School, and Yale; general manager of T. O. Gardner & Co., Boston and New York, 1885-92; general secretary of the Y. M. C. A., Melrose, 1892-93; assistant pastor at Ma- verick Congregational Church, East Boston, 1893-94; or- dained to the Congregational ministry, 1897; teaching, 1899-1900; minister at Maplewood Church, Maiden, Mass., 1900-6; South Norwalk, Conn., 1906-11; author of The Old Puritanism and the New Age; The Spirit Christlike; Jesus and the Prophets; The Infinite Affection; The Chris- tian Ministry and the Social Order; Spiritual Culture and Social Service; Christian Unity at Work. The various evangelical denominations, coming to- gether for mutual service as constituent bodies of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America, have raised before themselves many questions, some of which they are not yet ready to answer. These ques- tions, however, in many cases, are answering themselves in concrete and practical terms before any answer is attempted by way of intelligible formulation and ex- pression in definite principles. One of the questions which has been raised, not officially in the Federal Council and in no very clear way by any of the denominations, but which is clearly to be seen in the background of the whole situation, is that which has been raised in connection with this sym- posium. Put in one form it is this: What conditions or tests [458] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE can the disciples of to-day, organized in Christian churches, lay down upon which to admit or to reject men in relation to this fellowship? What is the Chris- tian Church? How does it differ from other human organizations? The basis of selection in all other so- cieties is upon some ground of classification. Men come together in other fraternal circles because of intellectual sympathies or social congenialities; sometimes because of sympathy in moral purpose and effort. But can the Church do this? Another question we are asking: Does the Christian Church exist for the sake of herself or for the sake of humanity? It must be admitted that we have assumed that there were certain clearly defined conditions and grounds for this Christian fellowship. We have conditioned it upon considerations of doctrinal belief and upon participation in conventional rites and ceremonies. A prevailing dis- position has been to make the test that of a particular type of religious experience. We have also assumed that men and women were to be admitted to the fellow- ship in large measure upon the ground of their moral attainment. The test of doctrine does not answer. If it means that we are to demand intellectual belief in these con- ceptions of the human mind, we turn the Church into an intellectual aristocracy. The great mass of men and women cannot understand these abstractions. Such a condition of fellowship excludes those common people who once heard the Master gladly. If, instead of com- prehension of these doctrines, it means mere assent to them, then we invite insincerity with its vain repetitions. By any such test we exclude great hosts of men and 14.59 2 THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE women of noble Christlike living. It is not a moral test, for it is altogether possible for the orthodox, who are straight in their thinking, to be crooked in their living. This was the test of the scribe. All who did not know and imderstand the law were accursed. If we base our fellowship upon participation in rites and ceremonies we furnish men with a mechanical type of religion that emulates the Pharisee, in his washing of hands and plates. Another condition which we have assumed has been the profession of a particular, clearly defined type of religious experience in space and time. There are times and occasions when great revivals accomplish wonderful results. There are men and women who never would be brought to the sense of religion by any other means or methods. Some of the most splendid things we do in life, some of our finest resolves, are carried out under the impulse of our emotions. But, as the wind bloweth where it listeth, so it is with the Spirit of God ; we can- not tell whence it cometh or whither it goeth. There are almost as many types of religious experience as there are of human personalities. There are many mansions in the Father's house and many doors by which men may enter. It has been a sad mistake to tell men in advance that they must have a particular kind of re- ligious experience in order that they may enter the Christian Church. It has closed the door to many, it has led many others to wait and anxiously to seek a particular experience, which, on account of tempera- ment, they can never have. It has kept many earnest Christian men and women outside of the Church. Shall we then grant fellowship upon moral attainments? Shall we say to men and women: You may come in [460] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE here when you have sufficiently gotten rid of your sins, when you have become good enough, when you feel sure that you are strong enough to live a religious life? This also was the answer of the Pharisee, and it is a question- able answer. The doctrinal test excludes the ignorant and the sin- cere. The ceremonial test keeps out those men and women who, because of their peculiar nature, are not affected by symbolism, beautiful as it may be. The experimental method denies the work of the spirit, which limits that work to one single type of manifestation. The last method, that of the test of moral attainment, shuts the door of the Church in the face of those who need it most. Look now for a moment at the method of Jesus in calling his disciples and all those who would share his fellowship. He never formulated or imposed a doctrine. He did not institute a single form or rite. While he himself submitted to the baptism of John and permitted his disciples to baptize, it is expressly stated that he him- self did not baptize. He never prescribed any particu- lar psychological experience through which his disciples must pass. In his contact with men he treated each man differently according to the personal equation. When do we find that he ever received his disciples upon any moral probation whatever? We cannot find that he ever laid down any condition or test. Suppose we should turn to the Scripture some day and in reading the gos- pel we should find something like this: "One day a disciple came to Jesus, when he was within the house and said, Outside the door is one who seeks to join our fellowship. Jesus answered him and said: Do you think he is good enough? does he understand or give [ 461 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE assent to our doctrines? has he been carefully examined by the deacons? are you sure and is he sure that he will not injure us by falling again into sin? have you satis- fied yourself of his moral attainments?" It is not perfectly clear that we cannot imagine Jesus doing anything but saying to the disciple. Open the door — ^let him in? What is the Church for ? We answer : To help men. How then can we do it best? By having them on the inside or keeping them on the outside? By exclusion and probation or by fellowship with them? If the Church is a society for the good, who are the good? Who is to determine in the light of the ele- ments of heredity, opportunity, resistance, and environ- ment? Who shall answer the question? Who is empowered to make the selection? Who is able to read the intentions and motives of men's hearts? Have we the right to exercise the prerogatives of the judgment day? Or shall we think of the Church as a hospital for men's souls? One of the finest books of instruction for a minister has the beautiful title, "The Cure of Souls." Suppose the hospital should put up a sign outside its doors: Only those who are well enough are admitted here. We liken the Church to the school. Suppose the school should say: You must learn before you can get in here. It will take only a little thought to show us that the Church must have an absolutely open door, without any conditions whatever, other than humble intent and purpose and a right spirit. We have not done this. We have not dared to soil [462] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE our philacteries. We have created a wrong impression among those whom we should seek. I invite a noble- spirited man to unite with the Church. He answers that he cannot, and then goes on to name two or three (often unessential) doctrines to which he cannot give honest, intellectual assent. I called upon a young woman once who confessed that she had not been leading a right life and who on that ground suggested that we had better cast her off. I told her that she had given me the very best reason in the world why we should absolutely re- fuse to deny her our fellowship. I said, "I must be your pastor now." And I reverently say that I never felt the spirit of Christ more in my life than as I said it. A young man, sincere and honest in his thought, came to ask me to help him with his intellectual problems. His mind had become clouded with doubt, not moral doubt, but intellectual doubt. Upon this ground he had gone to his pastor who had agreed with him that under those conditions he had better withdraw from the church. That pastor needs to take another course in his preparation for the ministry. I knew a case of a church which ruthlessly exconmiu- nicated a young woman who had been deceived and been robbed of the dearest of her possessions in life. Was that the attitude of the Master or of the Pharisee? I once heard a minister preach a sermon on the Church, in which he declared with great emphasis and a sense of righteous indignation that we must have "quality and not quantity." In answer I told him I did not want a regenerate Church so much as I did a regenerating Church. Upon one occasion a man came to me and con- fessed his weakness. He was under the control of an awful appetite. He wanted me to help him. I said: [463] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Let me be your pastor, come into the warm and health- ful fellowship of our church; we will try to help you. He said: I may fall, I cannot trust myself. Very well, if you fall we will try to lift you up, even though it be seventy and seven times. A few days after, a well-intending Pharisee from a neighboring church came to warn me from receiving this frail member. I re- ferred him to Matt. 9: 11-13. These instances, which might be indefinitely multi- plied, all reveal false conceptions. If we are to follow Christ, there is only one attitude for us to take. The Church cannot adopt a policy of protection, she must have a free and open market. She must have no restric- tion of immigration to her shores. She can require no certificate of standing, no guaranty of moral health ; she can have nothing but an open door, to those whose spirit sincerely seeks her. To the unbeliever we must say, Come in and learn that you may believe. To the man who says he has had no religious "experience," we must say. Come in and share the warmth of this fellowship and let your affec- tions be touched by Christ. To the man of moral weak- ness we must say, Come in and share our strength. If he says: I am too weak and unwell, we must respond. This is the abiding-place of the greatest of physicians. If he persists and tells us he is afraid that he may fall again, we must say: If you do we will lift you up even four hundred and ninety times. The Church cannot be a Castle Garden with its ofiicers on guard. It cannot have any quarantine station. If there is any ground of exclusion whatever it must be only that which excludes the Pharisee, who thinks that he is good enough. [464] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE The supreme question for us to-day is, Does the Church dare to follow Jesus Christ, to eat with publi- cans and sinners, to invite them to her own table, to let the sinful women in with their alabaster boxes, to wel- come sinners, not simply to seek the righteous, to heal the sick and not the whole who need no physician? She must open her doors, not the doors of wood, but the doors of her fellowship, to every human child of the Father who knocks; and if he is too weak to knock we must knock for him. It is answered that such a Church would invite criticism. So it would. The Pharisee would say. This church eateth with publicans and sinners. We must take our choice between Christ and his critics. It often happens that the frailty of our church-members, which has been made the unjust cause of criticism, is really the best evidence of the Christlikeness of the Church. Shall she gather from the world for the sake of her- self, or shall she give herself for the sake of the world? Shall she invite to her table not only the worthy, but the needy? Let us be brave enough to get rid of all our false conditions. Let us no longer shut up the king- dom of heaven with the keys of doctrine. Let us get absolutely rid of our lingering idea of the Christian Church as a collection of Pharisees, who may thank God that they are not as other men are. Let us look back at the Church as Jesus initiated it. His church was a strange gathering in the eyes of the churchmen of his time. He ate with publicans and sinners. The Pharisees were always pointing at him and saying, "Look at his methods, look at his liberalism, look at his associates." It was a strange collection when we come to think of it, that gathering of his intimate dis- [ 465 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE ciples. There were rough, uncouth fishermen. There was Matthew of the despised class of publicans. There were the sinful women at his feet, and Peter who was profane imder excitement. While the Master came to know Judas before his base betrayal, he never excom- municated him from that chosen circle. Again and again these disciples of his failed him and misunderstood him, but he never allowed that for one moment to make a break in their sacred fellowship. I know perfectly well that this raises difficult prob- lems so far as the formal constitution of the Church is concerned. I do not know, I frankly confess, just what we can do in an attempt to make a truer adjustment so far as the membership roll of the Church is concerned. So far, however, as the fellowship of the Church is con- cerned, I feel very sure that Jesus was right, and that he did not set us a bad example. I feel very sure that we should be safe in a serious attempt to follow his example even if it did raise difficulties with our consti- tution and by-laws. I also feel perfectly sure that what I have suggested is readily susceptible to misinterpretation and misunder- standing, although in the main our churches have largely followed the very procedure I have outlined, under the sense of moral necessity. Does this mean a Church that ignores truth, neglects religion, and countenances sin? By no means. The open-door church must be a strong church, with earnest seekers and upholders of truth, with symbolism that shall appeal to the imagination, full of religious contagion, and above all with men and women of great moral strength. The ideal church will have in its fellowship both the [466] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE strong and the weak in faith, in sense, in religious feel- ing and in moral character, in order that the strong may be there to help the weak, and the weak, that they may receive the strength of the strong. We must distinguish between her conditions of fel- lowship and her ideals. The conditions cannot be too broad nor the ideal requirements too exacting. But we must remember inequalities of privilege and oppor- tunity in the exaction of actual requirements. What hurts the Church — the falling of some poor frail crea- ture of her fellowship? No, it is when her strong men fail and fall. We must take the publicans and sinners with us to hear the searching sermon on the mount. But we must have them "with us." Every church must have her seventy disciples, her eleven faithful apostles, and her Johns. Why do we not reach the great masses of needy men and women? Why, just because we do not reach them. We have tried to do it at arm's length. They are both afraid of us and in doubt about us. We have put up impassable barriers and beckoned to men from inac- cessible summits. If we are going to cure the sick we must let them into the hospital first. We shall make the Church strong when we thus make it for the weak. We can risk it. The gospel of Jesus is the solvent that will bring coherency out of incoherency. Its leaven will do its work. The strong men of the Church will become stronger by having the weak beside them and by the giving of their strength. The weak will become stronger from the touch of the strong. But the touch must be, not of the finger-tips, but of the whole hand. It must be the contact, not of [ 467 ] THE CHUECH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE mere example; it must be that of fellowship and com- munion. We must change the Church from a gallery of fine arts to an asylum; for the weak-minded in faith, for those who have fallen in moral weakness, for frail sinning men and women, for the sick, the lame, the halt, the blind. The deeper the need, the warmer and closer must be the fellowship. We need to-day a magnificently reckless Church, who will not be afraid of her reputation, even though it may bring her to the cross. He bare the sins of men in his own body on the tree; so it has been said of Christ. The Church must bear the sins of men in her own body, by the side of the cross. Let her dare to give and lose her life, for thus only, according to her Lord and Mas- ter, can she save her life by losing it. I went into a hospital the other day. I witnessed a parable. A pale, weak, bloodless man was carried in. He was not strong enough to walk. He did not even come of his own volition. Following him came a great, strong, stalwart man, glowing with health. They bared an arm of each man. They brought them into fellow- ship by a conductor which carried the rich blood of the strong into the frail body of the weak. That should be the Church. The ideals of the Church cannot be too high. But her doors cannot open too wide. Does the Church of to-day dare to follow Jesus Christ? Will she save her life by losing it; or go on losing it because she saves it? I do not feel at all sure that the first question asked in the letter inviting this contribution necessarily leads to the further question. [ 468 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE What I have attempted to indicate has relatively little bearing upon the theology of the Church. I sup- pose it goes without saying that our religious experience must express itself in intellectual terms. Indeed a great theology and a spacious Christology are the main things needed as we face the social order to-day. Our theology must be rooted in the past, must comprehend and in- terpret the present, and shed light upon the future. I am, however, more and more inclined to the feel- ing that we must not substitute our poor, feeble at- tempts at the intellectual expression of our religious faith for our religious faith itself. Our experience must shape our theology. It has been man's too exclusive use of the intellectual in religion that has led to the anoma- lies and inconsistencies which I have endeavored to sug- gest. It was Jesus, be it remembered, who laid the obligation on his followers to use the intellect in relig- ion. But he put it in a very striking way. He spoke of the "affection" of the intellect. Man must love God with the mind. He believed that God and the eternal order were worthy of the thought of man. In the life of religion the knowledge of the truth and the affection of consecrated devotion are thus by God joined together and may not by man be put asunder. Religion is both thought and feeling. Only an artificial distinction separates the two. Theology is an eternally enduring science. Religion, without it, is like "An infant crying in the night; An infant crying for the light; And with no language but a cry." God is the infinite subject of which the congregation of objects in nature is one expression. Nature is an THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE organism of intelligible things. God is himself the eternal intellect. While there cannot be antagonism between the two, antithesis there must be. No one can bow in reverence to a nature below him or to an idea within him. Religion, therefore, in its soul is reverence and homage to a supreme Mind and Will. To such a Being there cannot fail to be a pathway from the sensi- tive, the intellectual and the moral highways of human life. Conscience may act as human before it is dis- covered to be divine. It does not reach its height until the discovery is made. In both worshiper and worshiped, there must be the same conscious moral order; one the infinite arche- type, the other, the finite image, susceptible to ap- peal and capable of response. The moral consciousness of man brings us face to face with the profound and momentous questions as to whether its sovereign in- timations are verifiable and its relations eternal. Ethics inevitably perfect themselves in religion or degrade themselves into some lurking form of hedonism. The life of duty must become the life of an enlightened affection. This moral relation between man and God needs to be adjusted to the order of the universe. Im- personal impulse must become personal affection and intelligent conviction. The deeper man's religious experience becomes in the realm of the temporal, the profounder is his earnest interest in the eternal, as "deep calleth unto deep." Thus "Belief or unbelief Bears upon life, determines its whole course." But our theology must be one that lets the human affection have its play in the attempts of the human [470] . THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE intelligence to give expression to religion, and the experience of life must guide our thought, even as that experience is shaped by thought. "Let knowledge grow from more to more; But more of reverence in us dwell. Till mind and heart according well. Shall make one music as before. But vaster.** [471] EDWIN MARKHAM, WEST NEW BRIGHTON, N. Y. Poet, writer, and lecturer; born at Oregon City, Ore., April 23, 1852; went to California in 1857, where he worked at farming, blacksmithing, herding cattle and sheep during boyhood; educated at the San Jose Normal School and two Western colleges; took up special studies in ancient and modern literature, also Christian sociology; principal and superintendent of schools in California until 1889; has written poems since early boyhood; author of The Man with the Hoe, and Other Poems; The Man with the Hoe, with Notes by the Author; Lincoln, and Other Poems. (In preparation) The Poetry of Jesus (essays) ; Virgilia and Other Poems; New Light on the Old Riddle; edited The Remarkable Writings of Thomas Lake Harris; wrote The Social Conscience and The Hoe-Man in the Making, a series of magazine articles covering the problem of child-labor. THE CHRIST CULTURE A CULTURE IN BROTHERHOOD I THINK that Lincoln's statement is correct as far as it goes. The Church certainly needs to adopt a simpler creed — ^to throw out the metaphysics and to take her stand upon the brotherhood of man and the fatherhood of God. Let the Church be the rallying ground of all those who would fire their mind with "the mind of Christ," all those who would make practical loving the guide of their existence. And in addition to this the Church should direct her energies along the lines of the social questions of the hour. She should become the leader of the nation in all the moral adventures of the age. There should be a continual cry from her walls and towers against [472] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE all the wrongs of the time — against child-labor, white slavery, the oppression of the poor, the irreligion of the competitive struggle, and the irreligion of the cruel riches side by side with the cruel poverties. Christ was radical, so the Church that takes his name ought also to be radical. Let the Church simplify her creed, put on her militant garments, and cry forth the social gospel of the heroic Christ. Then men will turn to her gladly — all men that have earnest hearts. The Church must take on her social form. She must seek a new departure: she must begin to organ- ize the industries in the spirit of the sermon on the mount. The world cannot be lifted until Christ the Artizan is enthroned in the temple of labor, until the golden rule is made the working principle of life. For the Christ culture is a culture in brotherhood. But brotherhood is nothing so long as it is left hanging in thin air: hence the Church must discover the economics of brotherhood, must find a material basis for brother- hood. And only in this way can men answer the great prayer, "Thy kingdom come on earth." For be it known that men must help God to answer their prayer. It is as much man's business to answer prayer as it is God's. But men have failed to answer the great prayer for a new social order on earth, an order that would serve as an outward and visible providence for the race. Men ask to go to heaven; but how can they hope to be taken into a kingdom of heaven hereafter if they make no serious effort to or- ganize a kingdom of heaven in the world? The Christ is in the social passion that is beginning [473] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE to sweep as a new fire over the cold world. As far as I can see, the Church must take on her social form or perish. She must become less ecclesiastical and more humanitary. However it was in the past, there is now no salvation for the people but social salvation. The star to light her path is the star of brotherhood. Fraternity — ^it is the most sacred of all words: it is the essence of all gospels and the fulfilment of all rev- elations. Let the Church, then, rise to her great mis- sion, let her resolve to make the State the organ of fraternity. For her I sing a Song of Brotherhood: The crest and crowning of all good. Life's final star, is Brotherhood; For it will bring again to Earth Her long-lost Poesy and Mirth; Will send new light on every face, A kingly power upon the race. And till it comes, we men are slaves. And travel downward to the dust of graves. Come, clear the way, then, clear the way: Blind creeds and kings have had their day. Break the dead branches from the path; Our hope is in the aftermath — Our hope is in heroic men. Star-led to build the world again. To this event the ages ran: Make way for Brotherhood — ^make way for Man! All this points the way for a new working creed for the Church; and this creed will keep men so busy with the questions of the here and now that they will have no time to fight about the abstruse metaphysics of the- ology. God and the people, Christ and the brother! — let these be the battle-cries of the coming centuries. [474] SCOTT NEARING, Ph.D., GERMANTOWN, PA. Instructor of economics at Swarthmore (Pa.) College since I9O8; born at Morris Run, Pa., August 6, 1883; received his education at the University of Pennsylvania and Tem- ple University, Philadelphia; secretary of the Pennsyl- vania Child Labor Commission, 1905-07; instructor of economics. University of Pennsylvania, since 1906; author of Economics; Social Adjustment; Solution of the Child Labor Problem; Wages in the United States; Super-Race; Woman and Social Progress; Social Sanity. THE CONTENT OF A SOCIAL RELIGION Perhaps the time has not yet arrived when it is pos- sible to formulate the content of a social religion in incontrovertible terms; nevertheless it is possible to indicate, roughly, the line along which the formulation of an effective social religion must proceed. For convenience of statement, a social religion may be analyzed into three parts: 1, the theory; 2, the ma- chinery; 3, the application. Each part logically follows the part preceding it — without a theory, without a goal, no machinery can be erected; without an ideal and a system, religion can never be applied. The theory of religion, or as it is sometimes called theology, represents the background of faith and belief on which religion is founded. The scribes and Pharisees understood their theology thoroughly. They had spent decades in formulating beliefs or theories about God and his kingdom. If you will read the twenty-third chapter of Matthew you will learn what [475] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Jesus thought of these theories. His ideas are force- ful if not exactly nice. Such a savage condemnation of the ideas advanced by the scribes and Pharisees does not, however, mean a condemnation of all theology. Jesus laid down his theory in unmistakable terms. "Love thy God," said he, "and thy neighbor as thyself." That is the extent of the theology of Jesus. Formulated, his doctrine might appear thus: I. The Theory of Social Relig- ion — 1, belief in God; 2, belief in men. How divinely simple; how wonderfully grand! We are to found our lives on God — good — a spirit that must be worshiped in spirit and in truth. The theory of our faith must be judged by the practise of our works. It is not enough that we be- lieve; we must do. Let me suggest that the things needed for putting social religion into practise are — 1, sjnnpathy; 2, inspiration; 3, efficiency. Those men who aim to make their religion prac- ticable must possess these attributes : sympathy, inspira- tion, efficiency. It is idle to talk of the function of the Church as if the Church was an individual that, like Lazarus, would arise and walk. The Church is an in- stitution, the work of which must necessarily be done by men, hence it is the attributes of the men that really count in the determination of church activity. You cannot touch the hem of your neighbor's soul without sympathy. To live as a social being in a social group; to practise a social religion; to keep your soul open for belief in men, there must be that inspiration — that divine fire which animates every individual man and woman who is born into the world. To do is well; to do right is better; but to do right in the best possible [476] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE manner is best of all. No machinery can be eifect- tive unless to its inspiration and sympathy is joined eflSciency. When the theory has been accepted and the ma- chinery evolved, there yet remains the application of a social religion — an application which involves, 1, clean living; 2, social service; 3, social justice. There are, therefore, two elements — an individual and a social — ^in the practice of social religion. The individual has a machine with which he must do his work. That machine — ^his body and soul — must be kept in repair, cleaned, exercised, developed. "He that ruleth his spirit is always greater than he that taketh a city." The practise of social religion, like charity, begins at home, in the individual life. When the individual life is clean, or, indeed, while it is being cleansed, it may, through social service, assist in erecting social justice. In the home, the street, the school, the factory, men may serve their neighbors — binding up their wounds, pouring in oil and wine, caring for them, and calling solicitously again to see that they have fully recovered and are able to discharge their debts. Such was the service of the Good Samari- tan. Such is the service of any one who cheerfully as- sists in making lighter the burden of his fellow. Without opportunity men and women are born and live and die in squalor. Universalize and revolutionize education until it prepares children for life; then uni- versalize opportunity until every adult has a chance to show what powers lie in him. So you shall establish justice to complete the practise of your social religion. [477] FRANCIS GREENWOOD PEABODY, D.D., LL.D., CAMBRIDGE, MASS. Plummer professor of Christian Morals, Harvard Univer- sity, since 1886; born in Boston, Dec. 4, 1847; graduated from Harvard University, 1869, and Harvard Divinity School, 1872; pastor of First Parish Church, Cambridge, 1874-80; Parkman professor of theology. Harvard Univer- sity, 1881-86; author of Mornings in the College Chapel; Short Addresses to Young Men on Personal Religion; Founders* Day at Hampton; Afternoons in the College Chapel; Jesus Christ and the Social Question; Religion of an Educated Man; Jesus Christ and the Christian Char- acter; The Approach to the Social Question; Sunday Evenings in the College Chapel, I ENTIRELY concur with the view of Lincoln cited in your letter. For my own part I have always been unable to associate myself with any evangelical church, not only because of "complicated statements of Chris- tian doctrine," but also because such a basis of worship and work seems to me intrinsically contrary to the teaching of Jesus Christ. One may assent with com- plete conviction to all the traditional creeds of the Church and yet not be a Christian at all. The creeds say nothing of conduct, character, discipleship, loyalty, obedience, or love; and these are obviously of the es- sence of the gospel. The human life and teaching of Jesus, between his birth and resurrection, is not even a subject of the creeds. A believer in the virgin birth and in the descent into hell may at the same time be dishonest or unchaste. The Church cannot, I think, hope to recover the loyalty of modern men imtil it ac- [ 478 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE cepts the sufficiency of the two great commandments which Jesus himself recommended, and reasserts the simplicity which is toward Christ. "And I remember still The words and from whence they came^ Not he that repeateth the name^ But he that doeth the will." [479] ANALYSIS AND SUMMARY [481] CLARENCE AUGUSTINE BECKWITH, S.T.D., CHICAGO, ILL. Professor of systematic theology, Chicago Theological Seminary, since 1905; born at Charlemont, Mass., July 21, 1849; studied at Olivet (Mich.) College, Yale Divinity School, Bangor Theological Seminary, University of Ber- lin; ordained to the Congregational ministry 1877; pastor of the First Congregational Church, Brewer, Me., 1877-82; of the South Evangelical Congregational Church, West Roxbury, Mass., 1882-92; professor of Christian theology, Bangor Theological Seminary, 1892-1905; editor of the departments of theology, philosophy, and ethics in the Nero Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge; au- thor of Realities of Christian Theology. ANALYSIS AND SUMMARY This analysis and summary of the foregoing papers will present in a single view the chief points in the an- swers to the three questions proposed. (1) Why are so many people indifferent to the claims of the church? (2) Should persons be asked to subscribe to statements dealing with debated and controversial matters, or to a declaration like Lincoln's? (3) What should be the basis and direction of a fundamental theology of the Church as related to the literary, scientific, and phil- osophical certainties of our time, i.e., to the values of human life whatever their source? The single fact upon which the writers are agreed is that of the present indifference toward the Church; there is, however, only partial agreement concerning [483] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE the extent and cause of this indifference. Some hold that it is not as great as formerly — it is not, there- fore, a new phenomenon ; others assume that it is a pres- ent day problem and is on the increase, to be referred to certain general conditions. (1) Creeds which are prescribed as requisite to church membership. These are either weak, vague, and unreasonable, or else in- clusive of too much. On the one hand, there is little appreciation of the historic creeds and the basis of be- lief is too indefinite; there is no appeal to great loyal- ties. On the other hand, the creeds either contain ma- terial, as metaphysics, which does not belong there, or are full of unsupported and unprovable assertions, while their tone is inconsistent with the spiritual life or the social movements of to-day, such as individualism, de- mocracy, universal education, and the spirit of research. (2) The Church, as a teaching or working organization, invites indifference. Its teaching is remote from life, lacks the note of reality, is behind the age in science and social questions, and fails in leadership in great social activities. (3) Indifference is increased both by the theology for which the Church stands and by the fact that men confuse the Church with dogmatic theology which is repugnant to them. (4) Ministers come in for their share of responsibility for this condition. They are deficient either in their personal qualities as minis- ters or in their leadership of the Church's activities or their message is not in harmony with present Christian ideals. (5) Competing attractions, as Sunday news- papers or week-end visits, providing respite from the increasing pressure of business, draw men away from the Church. (6) Other activities outside of the Church as such, all legitimate and needful for social welfare [484] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE — ^the Y. M. C. A. and scores of agencies for human betterment, enlist an increasing body of workers who would once have found their opportunity in the Church. (7) Indifference to the Church is only another symp- tom of general indifference which appears elsewhere in politics and other spheres of responsibility. (8) There are those for whom the Church will always be too nar- row — a fact which argues perhaps no reproach against their moral character, their religious idealism, or even against the Church. (9) A growing disbelief in a per- sonal God among those who are trained in purely sci- entific or philosophical directions has made the faith on which the Church is founded impossible and turned them from it so far as it represents a theology. (10) More special causes of indifference are alleged, some of which are the natural repugnance of the natural man tQ religion as embodied in the Church, unawakened con- science or religious sense, intense individualism caring only for personal religion, desire for independence, frivolous expectations as to the outcome of life, un- admirable character of many church members, the Church's class consciousness, maladjustment to social needs or ignorance or, worse, timidity in dealing with social injustice. On the other hand, people are weary of hearing only of this present world — things political, social, economic — and because the Church does not min- ister to their craving to hear about another life — ^re- ligion — they seek elsewhere for the satisfaction of their desire. II With reference to the second question concerning creed subscription, the replies betray a wide diversity [485] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE of judgment. There is indeed a general agreement that Lincoln, were he living, could to-day join almost any Christian church ; and yet this touches but the fringe of the subject. The discussion has opened up the whole question of terms of admission to the Church. (1) Many regard Lincoln's program without modification as itself adequate ; for this several reasons are assigned. It is better to choose the largest possible basis, since many can accept only a moral message. To be disciples of Christ is more important than to assent to all the terms of a church creed. Obligation is shifted from the intellect to the will. The modern man will yield his loyalty when the Church reasserts the simplicity that is in Christ. Some of the replies hold, however, that Lin- coln's platform involves more than appears at first sight. It does not define God whether as pantheistic or otherwise; neither does it deliver from theological or other divisive problems. Other criticisms of this posi- tion are that these words of Christ are law, not gospel, an injunction, not a creed, pre-Christian, not Christian, and the church which adopted this would be reactionary and not Christian at all. Moreover, this is not definite enough for church membership. Furthermore, it is powerless to create the spirit of love or obedience — Christ alone can impart this. Finally, Lincoln's pro- posal is not crystallized about Christ. (2) Others would require a different basis for church membership, e.g., Lincoln's suggestion modified in connection with the Lord's prayer, or the Apostles' Creed interpreted either broadly, or literally, without paltering or equivocation, or the Apostles' Creed in combination with the Scriptures, or in addition to this creed the Lord's prayer or the Nicene Creed. It was, [ 486 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE however, objected to the Nicene Creed that it was de- fective, since it contains no allusion to the ethical or social aspects of religion. Several replies advocate much fuller requirements, as confession of God, deity of Christ, i.e., Christ was perfect God and perfect man, preexistent, born of a virgin, performed miracles, died as atonement for sin and guilt, deity of the Holy Spirit, Trinity, repentance, faith, and holiness, the or- dained ministry, and the sacraments. That these tenets involve debated and controversial questions is claimed to be no valid objection to the inclusion of them. Some minds are so formed as to wish for controversy, by which the value of truth is enhanced. Besides, every- thing important is debated, the only question concerns the soundness and wholesomeness of the Christian posi- tions. These are the more liable to debate since they- embody the historical events in which God's grace is re- vealed; and they are not rational axioms but subjects of saving faith. The Church ought to stand for some- thing, to know what it stands for, and not be persuaded to sacrifice its leadership. (3) A very considerable number of the replies would make Christ central. Thus the minimum confes- sion would include the divinity of Christ or Jesus as Lord as the bedrock on which the Church is founded. Enormous potential energy is conserved by retention of reference to Jesus in the membership formula, for it is in this way that loyalty to Christianity has been evolved. A formula to which several gave emphatic assent is thus expressed: "I believe in God through Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord and Saviour." (4) Several would dispense with any formal creed as condition of church membership, partly because a [487] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE creed reduces Christianity to opinion, and opinion is al- ways divisive, partly that there is no relation between intellectual judgment and spiritual growth, and partly that the intellectual contents of a creed presuppose ex- perience, whereas, for those who unite with the Church, experience is only in its initial stage. (5) Two other courses were suggested. Since a covenant offers the creed in practical terms, this is pro- posed in place of the creed as a condition of member- ship. The declaration of "purpose" was also offered as a substitute for creed subscription. This purpose as- sumes allegiance to Christ as his disciples, or avowed loyalty to God. There was also emphasis on the eth- ical and social, concerning which the ancient creeds are mainly silent. In case purpose becomes the uniting principle, then religion takes its place as the chief inter- est in life. Ill The third question, concerning the relation of fun- damental theology to literary, scientific, and philosoph- ical certainties, brought out replies touching the basis of theology, its relation to metaphysics, its develop- ment, and finally its bearing on the certainties indi- cated. (1) As to its basis, the chief points developed were that it must be thoroughly theistic, having its roots in religion, in the New Testament presentation and in- terpretation of Jesus Christ, in Christian experience, and in the social consciousness. Theology, if it is to be Christian, finds in the teaching and especially in the person of Christ its source, its content, and its ideal. As interpretation of Christian experience, it cannot go [488] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE beyond what is implied in the experience. And because this experience is not merely individual but essentially social, its chief task is the interpretation of the meaning of life in terms of the social ideal. (2) As to the critical question concerning the rela- tion of theology to metaphysics, opinions differ. Some would retain metaphysics, even if this gave rise to dis- cussion and controversy, others would eliminate meta- physics, and that too for several reasons. First, there is the opposition of the traditional and the rational; then, modern intelligence does not correspond with an- cient notions ; again, the essential content of theology is not philosophical but religious, not so much concerned with ideas as with life ; finally, as having to do with the saving grace of God, it does not depend upon any hu- man theories for either its content or its meaning. On the other hand, it is claimed by some that if the creed is a basis for church membership and is to be a full one, it must give rise to a theology which shall support it, which may then embrace such doctrines as the Trinity, the deity of Christ, his preexistence, miracles, and res- urrection, all of which must seek in metaphysics their rational justification. (3) Concerning the development of theology, two diametrically opposite tendencies appear. One would go back to the essential principles, irrespective of tran- sient forms, the other would seek a restatement of the- ology, which is demanded by various considerations. It ought to keep pace with the present-day religious and intellectual revival and the growth of intelligence. As contrasted with the almost exclusive reference to other world interests and purely theological questions, atten- tion to the present world and its ethical and social [ 489 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE values is drawn into the foreground. Nor can theology shut itself away from sharing the general development of the time. Furthermore, there must be freedom for theologizing. Since, too, the meaning of religion changes and it must appeal to men of every new time, theology must likewise be subject to change. Finally, because theology is not based on a closed revelation, and especially because it is vital, it must progress. (4) With reference to the relation of theology to literary, scientific, and philosophical certainties, three general positions are suggested. First, these "certain- ties" are by no means fixed and permanent but change with changing intelligence ; one should therefore not be anxious to square his theology with shifting notions of science; the same is true of literature and philosophy; there are fashions in these which to-day rule and to- morrow are discarded. Secondly, it is maintained that, as was indicated above, theology must be in accord with knowledge or "certainties" in other spheres. It matters not that these certainties change; theology must change with them. The purpose of intelligence is to unify knowledge, and since theology belongs to the same field of intelligence which is occupied by science and philosophy, it must submit to the same canons of inquiry, the same rules of evidence, and the same logic by which conclusions are drawn which science itself has to observe. Theology may arrogate no special pre- rogative for itself; it is worthless unless it accords with every actually proved result of historical or other sci- entific research. Thirdly, because theology is self-suffi- cient, being self-defined, it is therefore independent of other branches of knowledge. It may indeed incorpo- rate into its scheme what science has to say of God and [490] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE his world, but it derives nothing essential from these directions, and must not allow itself to be enslaved by them. Theology has its own sphere; let it be content therein. Accordingly, it is roundly affirmed that the- ology is unassailable when it keeps within its own do- main; yet it will be found in harmony with all the certainties in other fields of knowledge. Or, since theology has a domain which is wholly peculiar to itself, any question of harmony with other domains is idle — the two are absolutely different. On the other hand, however, it is as stoutly asserted that theology which at any point touches the discoveries of science is assail- able ; let it, therefore, be content with the general spirit of Jesus' teaching without recourse to the Middle Ages on disputed matters. (5) Two widely different views are expressed con- cerning the infallibility of theology, some holding that it is an exact interpretation of a closed revelation and is therefore a perfect reflection of this; it is, accord- ingly, authoritative and final. Others believe that, since theology is a human product and shares the general movement of intelligence, it is never at any stage final but subject to improvement, which it must indeed expe- rience if it is to retain the approval of men versed in literature, science, and philosophy. IV The causes of indifference to the Church and obsta- cles to increased church membership are, however, more extensive and aggravated than the foregoing considera- tions indicate. The replies make it clear that involved in this condition are the basis and function of the [491] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE Church, the character and purpose of creeds and the theology by which they are supported, the nature and aim of Christianity, the minister's relation to the Church, and the existence and efficiency of other agen- cies for social betterment aside from the Church. 1. The Chuech The papers reveal an irreconcilable disagreement as to what the Church stands for. (1) Concerning its basis, one affirms that it is work, another that it is neither faith nor works. Others hold that the Church is bound to Christ and not to any theory of his person but must maintain the simplicity that is in Christ. Still others regard the Church as founded on the Father- hood of God and the brotherhood of man. It is further suggested that the Church is not composed of the re- generate but is itself regenerating, with open door to all of humble intent and right spirit. Finally, it is thought of as a clearing-house for social activities, and only incidentally as an inspiring center of personal ideals. (2) Its aim is also variously conceived. Its real function is the study, interpretation, and presenta- tion of the religious instincts of the himian race as such, making these effective in the individual, community, and nation; more specifically to make religion morally, spiritually, and intellectually persuasive. Or its busi- ness is to express fellowship, ethical activity, social relationships, raising men to a consciousness of the su- pramundane. Or again it should return from its theo- logical and other wanderings to the values of the Ser- mon on the Mount. Once more, as a Christian Church it should stand for the historic creeds and should be leader in Christian teaching and activity. (3) The [ 492 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE causes of its failure are many. In general, it has not held fast to its essential ideal function. It has, e.g., too often done everything else but be a church. The Church of England with its prescribed service has had its peculiar handicap. The apparent failure has, how- ever, to be qualified by two considerations: first, the Church, whatever its form of belief, or organization, will never embrace and satisfy all; secondly, the Church is not the sole agent nor is it responsible for all the redemption of society. Yet specifically, the churches have sacrificed too much the principle of authority and leadership ; they are holding men to something else than religion ; they give the impression of unreality ; they are out of touch with real life, neither addressing them- selves to nor satisfying inner cravings ; they are marred by jealousies, contentions, uncharitable competition, whereas they ought to come into court with clean hands ; they fail to minister to social needs ; they do not tolerate conclusions reached by devout and thorough scholarship; they are identified with dogmatic theology for which men have no longer any use. 2. Cbeeds and Theology by Which These Are Supported (1) Three positions are represented concerning the significance of creeds. First, as embodying the content of revelation, they are authoritative for faith. Sec- ondly, as interpretation of experience, they are suscep- tible of change to meet the advancing requirements of the Christian life. Thirdly, as a body of belief by which the Church is related to its historic background, it has more or less reference to particular positions maintained by its predecessors, yet it is not necessary [ 493 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE as a universal condition or basis for church member- ship, — this is rather a covenant. Such a creed may, however, be desirable as stating the doctrinal belief of office-holders in the Church, but even this, where churches use it as a requisite for standing, whether of members or of officers, must undergo change with the change of theology in the Church. (2) Concerning the constitution and validity of creeds as conditioned on their origination and content. While some replies allege that creeds are final, al- though science and philosophy are continually subject to modification, others affirm that creeds are not ab- solved from the same necessity of change which rules in all other fields of human interest. The latter posi- tion is strengthened by reference to the circumstances in which the historic creeds arose, (a) Much of the exegesis by which the meaning of the Scriptures was arrived at no longer commands the allegiance of bibli- cal scholars. This has reference not only to such in- terpreters as Origen, Athanasius, Augustine, the Protestant reformers and the Westminster divines, but even to the New Testament use of the Old Testament prophecies and the Psalms. The science of hermeneu- tics is a strictly modern achievement, and although the art of interpretation suffers now more or less from sub- jective bias, it is on the whole far more reliable than it has ever been in the history of the Church, (b) The psychology in accordance with which the personal prop- erties and actions of God and Christ were explained has had to be corrected in the light of modern psycho- logical discoveries, (c) The view of the world which provided a setting for the working out of the divine purpose and for human action, hopes, and ideals, has [494] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE given place to a scientific conception of nature, where continuity and uniformity leave no room for contin- gency, or for arbitrary disappearance of the present scheme of things. Here, e.g., one has to compare what was the world view and what the exact meaning of those who confessed of Christ that "he ascended into heaven" and "shall come again" with the very diflfer- ent meaning which the modern man assigns to such words, if indeed he is able to express his faith by the use of such words. One may also say the same with reference to "the resurrection of the body." Unless it could be shown that these tenets in their precise histor- ical sense are essential to Christianity and the Church, it would be a grievous mistake to require subscription to them. For first, very many would withhold assent and remain away, and many others, even if they appear, to assent, would do so with silent protest and reserva- tion, and still others, although they would yield an implicit assent in early life, would with maturing intel- ligence feel that they had been misguided and so repudiate the untenable position. (d) So far as the historic creeds presuppose meta- physics derived from Aristotle or Plato or neo-Platon- ism, or from modifications of these as in medieval thought, or are repugnant to the idealism or realism or pragmatism of to-day, the creeds as to their Christian content are by so much invalidated and cannot be pro- posed for subscription. Examples of the contribution of metaphysics to Christian belief where its presence is not always suspected or its rejection is stamped as un- warranted skepticism, are doctrines based on ovaUi ("substance") and its compounds, on ^uo-t? ('^nature"), and imoaratn^ (* 'hypostasis") in Greek and in Latin [495] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE on essence, substance and its compounds, and on per- son. (e) The history of the origin of creeds makes it evi- dent that they lack the ecumenical character which they would require to command universal and un- equivocal assent, even of the men of their own period. The fact is that every creed has been the expression of only a part of the Church, and in every case it is more or less a fruit of compromise. Even if it were con- ceivable that a creed of the fourth century was binding on all the Christians of that period, this would not be equivalent to saying that it is similarly binding on all believers throughout all time. (f ) The essential nature of creeds and the theology which underlies them reveals them not as final but as transitional, at any given time partially expressing the content of faith, temporarily fixing its expression in the thought-categories of that time whether literary, scientific, or philosophical, yet constantly subject to the same law of evolution by which the development of in- telligence in other spheres is determined. Moreover, so far as they depend for their content on science and metaphysics, they necessarily change as these change. (g) Since creeds arise out of and are interpreta- tions of experience and not merely of objective revela- tion, experience is the fundamental thing, and it is this which the Church must require and must require this first. This brings us to a covenant instead of to a creed, i.e., a purpose as the condition and basis of church membership; the tie which binds is a common aim. (3) Two further difficulties emerge where creeds are employed as doorways through which believers have THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE to pass into membership in the Church, (a) So far as these contain doctrines, e.g., certain clauses of the Apostles' Creed which are incompatible with conclu- sions reached by science in the same field, the Church cannot shut its dogmatic ears and go on in sublime in- difference to the voice of science. This might be pos- sible in an age of enthusiasm or of persecution, but not when intelligence in one sphere is dependent on knowl- edge in other departments. Some of the replies claimed that theology was self-sufficient because based on revelation alone, but other replies made it evident that such a claim is one of the chief dangers of the- ology, and that theology is safe only when it is in sym- pathetic relation with all other knowledge. Science cannot be excluded from any domain. If evolution is accepted, this will affect the history of revelation, the idea of God, the theory of creation, the notion of the Scriptures, the nature and progress of the kingdom of God. Biology, psychology, social science in its many aspects will enrich theology all along the line. At- tempts to keep theology from science or science from theology have been and will continue to be made, and they may be partially successful, but they are doomed to ultimate defeat. To assume that because theology is derived from revelation it is therefore self -complete, infallible, and authoritative, and that since science has to work with existing and changing facts, with hypotheses and theories it is therefore inconclusive, tentative, and unworthy of confidence, is to mistake the meaning and function of both science and theology. The history of creeds shows quite as clearly as the his- tory of science that these are subject to reconsideration and restatement which, if sometimes tardy and perhaps [497] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE grudgingly performed, do nevertheless take place, and that they quite as truly as scientific theories reflect ad- vancing experience. If to-day the Church refuses or begrudges the revision of its creeds so that they may express the new thought and experience which science and philosophy as well as religion have made possible, she must blame none but herself if cultivated and thoughtful men do not seek membership in her. (b) The Church may admit to membership without a formal creed, but if the Church stands for obnoxious doctrines, and if the preaching and teaching of the Church is a promulgation and defense of these obnox- ious tenets, one difficulty is simply exchanged for an- other, and the perplexity, instead of being relieved, is only aggravated. If one cannot assent to certain theo- ries of the origin of the Scriptures, to divine sover- eignty and election, to the satisfaction theory of the atonement, and other objectionable positions, and is ad- mitted to the Church without subscription to these, yet once admitted is compelled to listen to them from the pulpit and to have them taught to his children in the Sunday-school, he has indeed escaped one evil for a mo- ment only to fall into the hand of an even greater evil which will harass him during his entire connection with the Church. This condition undoubtedly acts as a de- terrent to many who would otherwise seek membership in particular churches. 3. Concerning Christianity (1) We have encountered a tendency to identify Christianity with either truth or purpose. As truth, it is a doctrinal content, to be stated and defended, incor- porating Greek philosophy, Latin discipline, and Prot- [498] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE estant dogma, with emphasis placed on opinion which separates, and which itself constantly changes. Accord- ing to this view, to learn to think rightly is man's first task. As purpose, Christianity is love and service to God and man, according to the type disclosed in Jesus Christ. Its appeal is, therefore, to the will and it sum- mons men to loyalty and social service. Theology and creeds, instead of creating experience, grow out of it. There will always be those who give first place to Chris- tianity as doctrine and are accordingly repelled by churches which devote themselves to social service, and there is perhaps an equally large number who define Christianity by social service and hence have no use for churches which exalt dogma to a commanding position. In the case of others Christianity is supposed to be in- carnated in the Church, and since there is this diversity of conviction as to the essential note of Christianity, naturally this confusion is carried over to the Church itself, and men, whether before or after uniting with the Church, do not know what is expected of them or what they ought to do. (2) Christianity and hence the Church is just now suffering acutely from three conditions which appear destined to greater increase. As one of the contributors to this questionnaire has elsewhere indicated,* there is (a) a wish to preserve unchanged both the traditional dogmas and the traditional methods of defending these; (b) among scholars a tendency toward intellectualism which is more or less careless concerning the ethical and spiritual bearings of the truth with which it has to do; (c) an intense secular spirit which is spreading ♦Cf. Gerald B. Smith, Social Theology and the Changing Order, New York, 1913. [ 499 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE through every field of modern activity, which contents itself with an immanent idealism detached from Chris- tianity. These tendencies arising from opposite quar- ters and with totally opposite motives and ideals must somehow be transformed — the first to harmonize with the modern spirit, the others to find in Christianity their permanent and most powerful inspiration and ally — if their present influence upon indifference of men to the Church is to cease and that which is essential in them is to become a help rather than a hindrance. In other words, Christianity must recover the place in the interest and ideals of men which it once possessed, if the Church is to regain the influence which it appears to be losing. 4. Concerning the Minister Many of the replies intimated that the minister plays an important role in relation to the Church, as interesting men in that for which the Church stands. (1) As to his personal bearing two significant sug- gestions were ojOfered. First, he must not be "too much of a minister," stuck on his office, exaggerating both the sanctity of the pulpit and its place in modern so- cial activities, isolating himself from his lay brethren, especially from scientific experts who are his peers or his superiors, professing to speak with authority on all sorts of literary, scientific, and philosophical subjects as if his judgment was exact and final — a course which can only disgust and alienate many who would other- wise be drawn to the Church. Secondly, he must not be "something else than a minister" — "a first-class after- dinner speaker, ... a jolly smoker, a baseball fan, a dog fancier, a connoisseur of horses or of automobiles [500] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE . . . devotee of athletics, an amateur farmer, a scout master, a Cook's tourist guide," etc., — conduct which fails to attract to the Church the very men whom he most desires to see, that he may give to them his divine message. (2) Concerning his message. His first business is to teach religion from the point of view of its princi- ples and ideals as seen in Christianity, and not to con- tent himself with the merely "practical." This must be done in the modern spirit; for example, no patchwork of ancient views of the Scriptures and the purely tra- ditional doctrine of the person of Christ, with scraps of recent psychology and science half understood and so misapplied, under the impression that his teaching is thus up to date and is fitted to the modern man. The minister must make the personal and social teachings of Jesus the principles of his own teaching and thus really address the modern consciousness. If, however, there are clergymen who are traditionalists in theology to whom such a course is repugnant, and churchep to which they minister which will not tolerate this, then with conviction must they present the truth as they see it, assured that the strength and enthusiasm of their conviction and the utter sincerity of their purpose will go far to overcome the indifference of many to the Church and its claims. Besides, there will always be those who sympathize with such teachings. (3) As to leadership. Only a single note was struck on this subject. The minister must sacrifice all else for the sake of spiritual leadership. He is called to be the head of a great business and he must "make his calling and election sure." [ 501 ] .THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE 5. Concerning the New Social Service The large number of social agencies of recent origin working for human betterment are destined to very considerable expansion. (1) Many special agencies, wholly Christian in spirit and aim, are upon founda- tions either independent of the Church or else are only affiliated with it. A generation or so ago many of their supporters and workers would have found their sphere of service in the Church, even though the extent of such service would have been rather restricted. The Church must now unquestionably reconcile itself to this condi- tion. (2) The State is rapidly enlarging the scope of its responsibility along ideal social lines, laying upon itself many burdens which quite as truly belong to the Church. One has to acknowledge that it is more efficient in these than was ever possible to the Church. Mean- time, the tabulated forces of the Church suffer. (3) The Church, without being fully conscious of the fact, has a share in the universal readjustment by which life is fitted to modern conditions. This has given rise to two extreme types of ideal as to the functions of the Church, one, that of a purely religious and spiritual in- terest and activity, the other, that of the Church as a social center where, however, personal religion is left entirely to the individual. (4) Christianity is itself in process of reinterpretation, less than heretofore iden- tified with the Church as a definite institution, but con- ceived of rather as a pervasive spirit which seeks to organize every form of social life with reference to im- mediate human need. [502] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE The foregoing survey invites to three further sug- gestions concerning the present condition of the Church. 1. Indifference to the Church is not caused solely by requiring subscription to a creed. It is unquestion- ably true that long, complicated, and controversial creeds repel many from the Church, and it is also true that many of the largest and most influential churches have creeds which contain much debatable material ; on the other hand, the absence of creeds does not of itself draw great numbers to those churches which dispense with them as conditions of membership or dispense with them entirely. In the replies, a church described by one of its adherents as "small" requires no such sub- scription, but this fact appears to have no power to at- tract either adherents or even attention to it. If sub- scription to creeds were the sole or even the principal ground of indifference, it may be questioned whether the time is ripe for a complete surrender of this prac- tice in favor of Lincoln's proposition. For, first, too many are still committed to the older way, and sec- ondly, one may believe that the Christian Church would suffer irreparable loss in thus detaching itself from the acknowledgment of the personal leadership of Jesus Christ. If the Christian Church represents the type of life which found its supreme instance in Jesus Christ and if Christ is still central in its faith and hope and love, then omission of all reference to him in that for which the Church stands or failure to set him forth as embodiment of the Church's ideal and inspirer of the Church's devotion to individual worthiness and social [503] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE service, would of itself rob the Church of its chief glory and leave it poor indeed. Only, it must be Christ and not simply theories about him which the Church finds room for in its confession; and it must be the Jesus of the gospels and not the Christ of the creeds or of the theologians who is to occupy this central place. Having this and other interests in mind, the late Professor Bowne drew up a platform and a program which he believed contained all the vital facts and values which are essential to the Church. Although he had no contribution in this series of papers, it may be well to present his suggestion. The platform reads : "I believe in God the Father Almighty, and in Jesus Christ, his Son, our Lord. I believe in the Holy Spirit, in the forgiveness of sins, in the kingdom of God on earth, and in the life everlasting." The pro- gram runs: "Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven." He held that this platform expressed the continuity of Christian thought, that it was the true faith, the true orthodoxy, the gospel or good news of God, on which the victories of Christian- ity have been won. The program would be equally ac- ceptable to men in the Church or out of it, the only question being whether they were lovers of their kind. "A church with no other theology or program, if it were vitally interested in this, would not fail to give a good account of itself as a church of Christ." * This summary of Professor Bowne is significant not because it is beyond criticism nor because it has been adopted by many churches, but because it reveals the fine temper of catholic scholarship and points the way we are going. 2. For the first time in its history the Church is * The Christian Advocate, June 26, 1913, p. 881. [504] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE confronted by the fact that other agencies which are independent of it or but loosely connected with it, are entering upon moral and social tasks in which the Church might very well engage, but which, by reason of the non-sectarian and cooperative character of these tasks, no single church is in position to do as well, or even to undertake at all. For the first time also the Church is aware of a strange reversal in its position, — from being by common consent the exclusive agency for human betterment, it finds itself only one among many agencies, some of which are already outstripping it in usefulness ; in very many communities it has to as- sume an apologetic attitude respecting not only its sup- port but even its very existence. It would be worse than foolish to ignore this new condition of the Church as creating a problem of grave difficulty. Whether the Church knows it or not, the Church is on trial in the modern world as really as it ever was in the ancient regime. Not until it rediscovers in the new social en- vironment and consciously defines and dedicates itself to its task will it compel the allegiance both of its own members and of the community in which it is placed. Its task may be different or simpler in one community than in another — here religious, there educational, else- where social, or all of these in various combinations and degrees. Its only justification for its existence even lies in the word of Jesus, "I am among you as he that serveth." All over our land are deserted church build- ings which tell their own tragic tale; because they ceased to serve, they ceased to live. And not long will a community care for a church which cares little or nothing for it. Here, without doubt, lies a secret and powerful cause of indifference to the Church; that this is [505 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE recognized as such, is a tribute to the honest judgment of men. "We love him because he first loved us" is no less true with reference to the Church than to God. With a creed or without it — ^be it the Thirty-nine Arti- cles of the Church of England, the Westminster Con- fession, or Lincoln's platform — the church which serves the community and the world will never lack for sup- porters. Never will the Church resume its place of leadership and supremacy in social redemptive action until more than any other agency it serves the highest and most permanent needs of men. 3. The only position concerning the relation of the Church's theology to literary, scientific, and philosoph- ical certainties of our time which the nature of the sub- ject demands and experience warrants is that theology is safe only when it is in harmony with all the values of human life, whatever their source. Reasons for the isolation of theology by the Church are various. In or- der to guard it from the intrusion of science, the Scholastics had their "Two Ways." Protestants have defended a similar position: since theology is based on revelation alone, it has no dependence on human knowl- edge. Not to dwell on the mistaken view of revela- tion which is here presupposed, the human mind re- fuses to be partitioned off in this way, with impassable barriers across which thought must not venture. More than from any other cause theology has suffered from the arrogance of its advocates who, having staked off their inviolable boundaries, have warned all profane scientists and philosophers to keep their distance. Some of the chief battles of theology have been in defense of its sacrosanct claims, but in the end the theologians have been worsted, driven in, forced to reduce their [506] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE pretensions, or to surrender without capitulation. One would suppose that theology, taught by sad experience, might at length learn at least to make her peace with all other knowledge, if not to go out in search of such knowledge, and, wherever found, welcome it. A new day has, however, dawned, with religion conceived of as a universal human experience, with revelation regarded as coextensive with the consciousness of values, with theology emphasizing a special aspect of reality which at the same time involves all our knowledge of reality. We cannot say that theology is "unvulnerable" ; it is no more and no less invulnerable than any other product of intelligence. Neither theology nor any other branch of research and knowledge is "unassailable when it keeps to its own dominion;" the history of theology on the one hand, and of science and philosophy on the other, shows that these have all suffered attack and have not infrequently surrendered to the stronger force. Nor is theology infallible in its own sphere any more than science and philosophy are in theirs. The state- ment that "science is learning; theology has learned" i3 true only of a dead theology, and is refuted by the whole history of dogma. It also cannot be maintained that science has not "anything to say of authority rela- tive to the matters with which theology deals." One writer remarked that he could not conceive of a the- ology which would not accord with the assured results of science; but the long and so far unfinished warfare of science and theology demonstrates that this antagon- ism has actually existed and still exists unreconciled to-day. Theology may be defined as the science of God or the science of faith, but in either case alike it dis- cusses the same subjects and is enriched by the entire C 507 ] THE CHURCH, THE PEOPLE, AND THE AGE wealth of human intellectual achievement. A funda- mental theology of our time must have a well-beaten path between it and literary and scientific and phil- osophical certainties ; it must draw its material from all sources — ^the Scriptures, history, experience, psychol- ogy, ethics, metaphysics, scientific conclusions, indeed wherever any values appear; and it must be influenced by these and change as these change. At least one cause of the present indifference to the Church will be removed when the Church acknowledges that its the- ology is simply the human interpretation of God and his purpose for the world, an interpretation always fal- lible, incomplete, progressing, which aims to be at one with all intelligence in other spheres of certainty. "We have this treasure in earthen vessels." [508] THE HISTORIC CREEDS [509] THE "ECUMENICAL" CREEDS THE APOSTLES' CREED* The Apostles' Creed is first found in exactly its present form in the writings of a missionary in Southern Germany, named Pirmin or Pirminius, who died in 753 A. D., though it ocicurs in nearly its present form in the writings of Caesarius of Aries, who died in 542. It owes its name to the legend that it was composed by the apostles at Pentecost, each of the twelve contributing a part. While it did not attain its final shape till so late, forms of statement nearly identical are found in use in various Christian centers as far back as the second century, the exact wording and also the contents differing slightly in different places. Of this sort is the symbol used at Rome in the fourth century, given on p. 512. I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth: And in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord: Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, Bom of the Virgin Mary : Suf- fered under Pontius PHate, Was crucified, dead, and buried: He descended into hell ; The third day he rose again from the dead: He ascended into heaven. And sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty: From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. I believe in the Holy Ghost: The holy Catholic Church; Th5 Communion of Saints : The Forgiveness of sins : The Resur- rection of the body: And the Life everlasting. Amen. * Text taken from The Book of Common Prayer . . . J INDEX Membership and Cfeeds, complicated statements hindrance to, 31 -^--, conditions of church, 6, 18, 23, 24, 36, 55, 107, 109, 148, 150, 160, 162, 165, 166, 167, 172, 179, 195, 222, 224, 227, 234, 241, 315, 320, 323, 341, 363, 371, 372, 376, 379, 380, 381, 383, 384, 404, 459, 460, 467, 496, 503, 533-553 for young people, terms of, 323 , Friends conditions of, 535, 536 , gain in church, 225 in Christ, 46 in Congregational Church, 137, 384,534 in Christian Reformed Church, 533, 534 — pledge, 295 , Plymouth Church, 128 , religious feeling and life as tests of, 363 - — ^, spiritual life necessary for, 25 Mennonite conditions of membership, 537 confession, 335, 52* Menzies, Allan, 302 Message, minister's, 501 of Jesus Christ, 99 Metaphysical creeds, 397 propositions, 204, 256 Metaphysics and creeds, 204, 495 1 function of, 280 1 theology and, 489 Method of Jesus, 461 Methodist Articles, 525 Church, 197, 349 Episcopal conditions of member- ship, 537-539 Middle Ages, civilization of thc^ 355 Milton inspired, 449 Minister and spiritual leadership, 501 ^,lack of personal appeal of the, 55 ^.personal bearing of the, 500 Minister's message, 501 Ministers as teachers of religion, 276 f hyperclerical, 420 of the gospel, 35 ^, unclerical, 419, 420 Ministry and creeds, 36, 39, 40, 150, 191, 293, 302, 333, 334, 351 Miraculous, appeal to the, 427 Mission of Christ, 171 of religion, 16 of the Church, 39, 211, 218 of theology, 180 Mission work, 324 Missionary enterprise, 185 Modem spirit in preaching, absence of the, 191 theology, basis of, 433, 434 thought and the creed, 298 Monism, 230 Monotheism, 307 Monotheist, 7 Montet, Eduard, 306 Moore, Edward Caldwell, 58 Moral relations, indiflFerence to, 65 Morality, Christianity and, 314 f supreme law of Christian, 243 Morals, Church a school of, 262 Moses, 8 Mulert, 334 Mullins, E. Y., 64 Munger, Dr., 288 Mysteries, 12, 79 of the Holy Trinity, 11 , sacred, 150 Mystery, 83 of Ufe, 231 Narrowness a hindrance, 13f Nassau formula, 335 National Protestant Church of G«n- eva, 307 Natural law, 310 religion, 3, 216, 299 theology, 97 Nature, 99 and the gospel, 247 ^,book of, 3 ^, greatness of, 68 , knowledge of, 97 ^, orderliness of, 427 f scientific conception of, 49$ , scientific study of, 184 Naville, E., 156 Neander, 279 Nearing, S., 475 Need to-day, 70 Neuenburg, prohibition of clerical tests in, 336 New Jerusalem, General Church of the, conditions of membership in, 536, 537 New Testament basis of faith, 253 Christ, 88 , church of the, 206 in history, 220 simplicity, return to, 349 the admitted standard of the Church, 382 theology, 162 "New Theology," 76, 78 New theology necessary, 456 1565 1 INDEX Newman, Cardinal, 84 Newman, F. W., 102 Newspaper, Sunday, 54- Nicene Age, 181 Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, 10, 81, 118, 202, 203, 205, 207, 208, 279, 356, 486, 512, 513 Nietzsche, Friedrich, 94, 112, 319 Notes on churchgoing, 424-428 Oberlin Theological Seminary, 226 Old Testament, reading of, 134 f authority of the, 9 , inspiration of the, 9 Optimism, pessimism and, 89 Orderliness of nature, 427 Origen, 102 Origin of creeds, 181, 327, 331, 365 Orr, James, 73 Orthodoxy, fundamental error of, 292 Pantheism, 142 Paris, Declaration of Principles of, 307 ^, Reformed Church of the Ora- tory, membership in, 156, 541, 642 Partial church, 212, 214 Pascal, 98 Passy, F., 156 Paul, 382 , Christology of, 207, 208 Peabody, F. G., 478 Peace, 136 Pentecost, 382 People, the Church and the, 270 Personal appeal of minister, lack of, 55 bearing of the minister, 500 communion with God, 16, 272 experience, 225, 300 piety, 218, 238 religion, necessity of, 52 responsibility, 213 salvation, the Church and, 412 Personality of Jesus Christ, 157 of God, 7, 26, 32 y worth of, 186 Pessimism and optimism, 89 Peter, 382 confession of, 381 Petrie, W. M. F., 309 Pharisees, 475 and Jesus, 465 Philosophical certainty, 51 speculation, theology and, 178 ——tenets variable, 329 Philosophy, 69, 70, 163 and Christ, 220 and Christianity, 176 and religion, 148 and religious experience, 318 and theology, 161, 163, 178, 286, 300, 361, 387, 489 , certainties of, 286 individualistic, 369, 370 ^, Jesus Christ and, 220 of religion, 70 of religious life, 434 , unchristian, 53 Physical reality, 69 Piety, personal, 218, 238 Pinchot, G., 223 Pleasure, pursuit of, 30, 47, 138, 156, 255, 375, 401, 409 Pledge, membership, 295 Plunkett, Sir H., 222 Plutarch, 310 Plymouth Church, form for reception of members, 534 membership, 128 creed, 128 Poetry, ideal of, 283 Pope, infallible, 444 Post-Reformation creeds, 519-530 Poverty, 156 Practise and precept, 92 theory and, 93 Pragmatist, layman as a, 256 Pratt, J. B., 313 Prayer Book, inadequacy of, 133 Prayer, the I^ord's, 304, 337, 375, 486 Preaching, absence of the modern spirit in, 191 and science, 228 — and teaching obnoxious tenets, 498 in Holland, 378 , present-day, 198, 228, 274 Precept, practise and, 92 Predestination, 522, 523 Presbyterian Church, 35, 36, 37, 39, 197, 297, 349, 360, 384 of Scotland, 366 i U. S. A., conditions of member- ship in, 34, 36, 360, 364, 384, 539, 540 Present-day demands, 85 Principles, fundamental, 68 of the law, 311 Prodigal Son, parable of the, 48, 379 Progress, 118 of knowledge, 317, 448 of the universe, 143 Progressive revelation, 4, 32, 402, 445 l5QQ-\ INDEX Protestant Episcopal Articles, 524, 525 — ■■ — conditions of membership, 541 Protestant free thought, 306 theology, 117 Protestantism, 214, 217 , basic principle of, 348 .development of, 117 .individualism in, 212, 306, 318 Protestants, religion of, 395 Psalter, the, 134 Psychology of theism, 281 Public reading of the Bible, 134 Purpose, Christianity as, 499 ^, sincerity of, 263 Quaker, admission of a, 127 Quakers, 197 and "inner light," 445 Quakers* conditions of membership, 535, 536 Radicalism, unhistorical, 293 Rationalism, German, 4 Rauschenbusch, W., 315 Reality, 68, 69 Reason and religion, 179 and revelation, 87 Reception of members, forms for, 533-553 Redemption of society, 276, 342, 356 Redemptive acts of God, 115 relation of Jesus Christ, 279 Reform Church of the Oratory, Paris. membersUp in, 156, 541, 542 Reformation, churches of the, 4 ^.German, 369 of Christianity needed, 235 , second, 394 ,the, 181, 325, 329, 331, 365 Reformed Church, 384 Churches of France, 306 confessions, 521-524 (Dutch) Church in America, conditions of membership in, 542, 543 (German) Church, U. S., condi- tions of membership in, 543-545 Regenerating Church, 463 Regeneration, 11, 25, 26 Religion, 70, 98, 231 a science, 120, 497 a universal human experience, 507 , abstract, 87 , aim of, 185 and clean and right living, 267 [567] Religion and dogma, 332 and ethics, 387 and Jesus Christ, 179 and life, 61 and philosophy, 148 and reason, 179 and science, 71, 120, 148, 168, 169, 222, 223, 229, 235, 426if, 445, 455 and social co-operation, 154 and social service, 314 and the Church, 180, 257, 258 and the supernatural, 83 and theology, 98, 469 , Christianity the final, 375 ^.comparative, 374 ^, crisis in, 298 defined, 178 ^, failure of, 62, 303 , functions of, 430 ^, ideal of, 216, 217 in terms of life, 61, 267 is wanted, 135 f minimum, 174 .ministers as teachers of, 276 ^.mission of, 16 ^.natural, 3, 216 of Protestants, 395 of the future, 153 , personal, necessity of, 52 , philosophy of, 70 , restrained application of, 132 , science is, 120 i service of, 60 , socializing of, 410 .test of, 275, 276 . theology and, 98, 469 , theory of, 475 vs. dogmatic theology, 178, 179 ^, vital, 72 , what it is, 272 without Christ inadequate, 67 Religious consciousness, 346 experience, 23 experience, types of, 460 feeling and life as tests of mem- bership, 363 indifference, 455. 483. 484, 485 life, philosophy of, 434 revival, 183 sense, weakening of, 53 situation, present, 355 terms indefinite, 129 tests, standard. 182 Remensnyder. J. B.. 80 Renunciation, doctrine of, 238 Reorganized Church of Latter Day Saints. Epitome of, 526-528 Repentance, 57 .._.---««dl|t INDEX Research, liberty in, 389 y scientific, 373 ^ Responsibility, personal, 213 Restrictions, unwillingness to submit to ecclesiastical, 54 Resurrection, 10, 32, 77, 119 , certainty of the, 353 of the body, 495 Revelation and experience, 445 ——and reason, 87 and science, 87 and theology, 497 f Bible as progressive, 4 y Bible as a divine, 4 — , biblical, and literary criticism, 87 1 biblical, and science, 87 ^, closed, 371 in the Bible, 91 — of divine method, science a, 371 ^, progressive, 4, 32, 402, 445 ^, purpose of Christian, 185 , reason and, 87 Revision and theology, 95 ^, creed, 498 ^,duty of creed, 366 , implications of, 252, 359 Revival of Christianity, 394 , religious, 183 Revivals, 460 Revolution, French, 369 ^, industrial, 369 Righteousness, 211, 212 f higher, 351 ^.kingdom of, 89, 90 , membership and, 210 Ritual, defects of, 449 Ritualism, 425 Robertson, A. T., 316 Roman Catholic Church, 20, 214, 349, 409 minimum creed, 117 Roman text of Apostles* Creed, 512 Rothe, R., 210 Rousseau, 369 RusseU, R. McW., 320 Sabbatarianism, decay of, 138 Sacramental ideal, 357 Sacraments, 144, 213 Sacred and the secular, 89 mysteries, 150 Sacrifices, 352 Salvation, 21, 39, 357 , Christianity and. 111 y gospel of, 21 of the world, 342 , the Church and personal, 412 Saviour, Jesus Christ as, 8, 17, 29, 35, 36, 37, 40, 41, 42, 73, 81, 108, 323 Savoy Declaration, 525 SchiUer, Professor, 69 Schmiedel, P. W., 326 Science, 50, 69, 70, 97, 163, 231 a revelation of divine method, 371 agnostic, 142 y aim of, 185 and biblical revelation, 87 and Christianity, 176, 434 and ecclesiastical authority, 425, 426 and faith, 100, 403 and knowledge, 257 and preaching, 228 and religion, 71, 120, 148, 168, 169, 222, 223, 229, 235, 426ff, 445, 455 and revelation, 87 and the Apostles* Creed, 497 and the Church, 215, 373 and theology, 99, 115, 138, 140, 161, 237, 244, 267, 282, 285, 287, 288, 300, 307, 308, 315, 361, 362, 370, 387, 388, 457, 497, 506, 507 ^, certainties of, 284 y claims of, 497 constantly changing, 114 is religion, 120 , misunderstanding of modem, 97 of right living, 262 ^, religion a, 120 y restatement of, 497 ^, speculations of, 13 , uncertainty of, 50, 74 y unchristian, 53 ^, value of, 257 Scientific attitude, 99 conception of nature 495 research, 373 spirit, 153 study of nature, 184 theories, mutability of, 288 Scotland, indifference to the Church in, 303 y Church of, 302, 404 y Presbyterian Church of, 366 , United Free Church of, 364 Scripture and the creed, 253 and theology, 254 y verbal inspiration of, 348 Scriptures, interpretation of, 378 ^, exegesis of, 494 Sectarianism and the creed, 322 Secular knowledge, growth of, 184 [568] INDEX Secular knowledge, organizations for human welfare, 355 sacred and the, 89 Secularism and Christianity, 499 Sermon on the Mount, 395, 396, 399 Sermons, defective, 453 ^, Church and, 180 of humanity, 239 of religion, 60 ^,the Church's ideal, 505, 506 Services, long and tedious Church, 355 Seventh-Day Adventist conditions of membership, 545 Shaler, Professor, 222 Shakespeare inspired, 449 Sheldon, C. M., 340 Sheldon, H. C, 85 Siebeck, H., 345 Simplicity, New Testament, return to, 349 Simplification of creeds, 74, 77, 105, 202, 348, 413 Simplified creeds and adjusted the- ologies, 22 Sin, 168 and holiness, 99 as cause of indifference, 318, 319 ^ forgiveness of, 3, 40, 398 ^,weak sense of, 110, 111 Sincerity of purpose, 263 Sinclair, W. M., 348 Sinners, Christianity only for, 110 Smith, G. B., 355 Snowden, J. H., 360 Soares, T. G., 362 Social being, man a, 345 Social Christianity, 371 of Jesus Christ, 370 clearing house, church a, 443 Social co-operation, religion and, 154 ideal, 89 — injustice, indifference to, 409 ^— interpretaticm of Christianity, 369, 370 life, church and the, 472, 473 ^,new civilization, 369, 370 relations, indifference to, 65 religion, 473, 476, 477 Social service, 272, 502 and Christianity, 499 and religion, 314 and the Church, 503 and the State, 502 Social spirit, new, 369, 370 wrongs, the Church and, 274 Socialism, Christian, 371 Socializing of religion, 410 Society of Friends. See Quakers. , redemption of, 276, 342, 356 , the Church as a friendly, 48 Son of God, 4, 8, 20, 25, 29, 32, 35, 36, 37, 41, 42, 112, 119 Soul, immortality of the, 57 Southern Presbyterian — United Pres- byterian formula of union, 528-530 Speculation and Jesus Christ, 179 , theology and philosophical, 178 Speculations of science, 13 Speculative theology, 443 Spirit and matter, 230, 273 ^, Christian, 106 ^.Holy, 8, 11, 25, 30, 39, 53, 74, 132, 143, 144, 317 of the age, 273 Spiritual crises, n'eat, 182 diagnosis, ifl freedom and ecclesiasticism, 211 gravitation to Christ, 71, 72 growth, intellectual conviction and, 167 interpretation of the world, 68 leadership, the minister and, 501 life, 132 life necessary for membership, 25 mechanics, 65 — nature of the uni^rse, 304 reality, 68, 69 ——universe, 68, 71 Spirituality, necessity of, 274 Stalker, J., 364 Standard religious tests, 182 Standards, inadequacy of accepted, 182 State and Church, 212 — churches in Germany, 215 , social service and the, 502 Statutory methods, 213 Strauss, D. F., 113 Strong, A. H., 91 Strong, J., 368 Suggested forms for reception of members, 549-553 Sunday newspaper, 54 Sunderland, Mr., 75 Supernatural character of the gospel, 42 of religion, 83 Superstition, 4, 5 and Christianity, 379 , creed and, 174 Sustentation Fund, 365 Symbol of Chalcedon, 513, 514 Symposium, object of the, 131 [569] INDEX Talleyrand, 87 Teachers of religion, ministers as, 27(5 Teaching and preaching obnoxious tenets, 498 Teachings of Christ, 10, 267, 351, 369, 379 Tennyson inspired, 449 Terminology, antiquated, 339 Terre Haute, First Congregational Church of, 124 Terry, M. S., 372 Tests for church membership, 6, 18, 23, 24, 36, 55, 107, 109, 148, 150, 160, 162, 165, 166, 167, 172, 179, 195, 222, 224, 227, 234, 241, 315, 320, 323, 341, 363, 371, 372, 376, 379, 380, 381, 383, 384, 404, 459, 460, 467, 496, 503, 533-553 — of faith, authority of traditional, 183 Text of Apostles' Creed, 511, 512 Theism, 280, 281 i immanent, 114 —, psychology of, 281 Theistic theology, 88, 142, 280, 282, 488 Theologian, place of, 95 Theologies, simplified creeds and ad- justed, 22 Theology, 19, 84, 94, 149, 282 , a minimum, 85 a science, 115, 118, 388 ^, absolute of, not static, 287 ^.advance in, 236 and Christianity, 93, 94 — and creeds, 493 and dogma, 280, 301 ^-^and ethics, 410 — and evolution, 287 and experience, 469, 488, 499 and faith, 76 and human values, 506 and literature, 283, 387 and metaphysics, 489 and philosophical speculation, 178 • and philosophy, 161, 163, 178, 286, 300, 361, 387, 489 and religion, 98, 469 ■and revelation, 497 ■and revision, 95 — - and science, 99, 115, 138, 140, 161, 237, 244, 267, 282, 285, 287, 288, 300, 307, 308, 315, 361, 362, 370, 387, 388, 457, 497, 506, 507 and Scripture, 254 and the Church, 484 and theism, 280 Theology, basis of, 137, 157, 237, 361, 379, 387 ^.Christian, 362 i Christocentric, 487 y contents of, 489 ^,deistic, 142 y dogmatic, vs. religion, 178, 179 , eflFective, 405 ^, errancy of, possible, 95 , final, 316 for our time, 141 ^, fundamental, 32, 269 , fundamental, based upon Chris- tian experience, 160 ^, inherited, 196, 198 ^, inf alUbility of, 491, 507 , meaning of, 115, 301 ^, mission of, 180 , mistake of, 97 ^, mistrust of, 200, 210 i modern, basis of, 433, 434 must be ontological, 280 , natural, 97 , New Testament, 162 ^,no final, 19, 27, 358 , practical, 148 f present-day, 75, 76 ^.progress of, 96, 139 y Protestant, 117 ^, religion vs. dogmatic, 178, 179 self-suflScient, 491, 497 speculative, 443 ^, static or progressive, 363, 490 , sum of, 238 1 symposium on creed and, 278 taught by Jesus, 85, 86 , theistic, 88, 142, 280, 282, 488 , traditional, and modem knowl- edge, 251 y true, 163 ^,use of, 149 ^, value of, 282 Theoretical, value of the, 86 Theories, mutability of scientific, 288 Theory and practise, 93 of religion, 475 Thirty-nine Articles, 200, 524, 525 Thought, confusion of, 68, 69 1 creed and modern, 298 , dominance of separate worlds of, 309, 310 , liberty of, 306 ^, Protestant free, 306 Tisdall, W. St. C, 92 Toleration in the Church, 11 Tradition, force of, 365 , tyranny of, 393 Traditional Christianity, 237 [570] INDEX Traditional Christology, 196 texts of faith, authority of, 183 theology and modern knowledge, 251 Traditionalism and Christianity, 499 and evangelism, 393 Traditions, creeds as theological, 201 Transgression, Adam's, 40 Transition period, 359 Transitional, creeds, 496 Trinity, Holy, 8, 9, 10, 29, 57, 78, 256, 397 , mysteries of the Holy, 11 Triune God, 144 Troeltsch, E., 114 Truth, 38, 69 1 Christianity as, 498 — harmonious, all, 360 as a unity, 301, 387 f saving, 116 Twenty-five Articles, 625 Tyrrell, G., 153 Unbelievers, 52 Unclerical ministers, 419, 420 Uniformity, enforced, effect of, 318 not possible, 105, 134, 188 Union of churches remote, 373 with Jesus Christ, emphasis upon, 324 — , work basis of church, 442 Unitarian Association, British and Foreign, 74 -^—Congress, International, 307 creed inefPective, 418 ——declaration of faith, 437 , influence of, 438 Unitarians, 75 ^,lack of ministers and mission- aries among, 75 United Free Church of Scotland, 302, 364 United Presbyterian, conditions of membership in, 545, 546 ^ Southern Presbylerian, formula of union, 528-530 United States, growth of church mem- bership in, 58 Supreme Court on the Bible, 386 Unity of God, 7 ^, church, 13, 14, 158, 202, 216,226, 373 ^, illusion of, 105 of purpose necessary, 341 , symbol of the Church's, 209 ^,true bond of church, 129 Unity of God, variety in, 15 Universal church, basis of a, 216 creed impossible, 429 Universalist conditions of member* ship, 546 Universe, progress of the, 143 , spiritual, 68, 71 , spiritual nature of the, 304 Unknowable, the, 94 Unreality in life of the Church, 193 Utilitarianism not materialism, 257 Value, ultimate standard of, 289 Values of human life, sum total of the, 289 Van der Vlugt, W., 97 Van der Wyck, B. H. C. K., 377 Van Home, D., 107 Vatican Coimcil, 12 Vinet, 286 Virgin-birth of Christ, 10, 60, 77 Vollmer, P., 380 Voltaire, 369 Ward, W., 287 Warfield, B. B., 110 Waterland, confession of, 625 Watson, J., 391 Watt, L. M., 401 Wealth, pursuit of, 64, 156 Wesley, J., 196, 197, 318 Westminster Confession, 39, 200, 202, 203, 208, 302, 366, 523, 524 White, A. D., 389 Whitefidd, G., 318 Whiton, J. M., 408 Work basis of church union, 443 Working creed, a, 20 World evangelization, 325 Parliament of Religions, 374 ^, spiritual interpretation of the, 68 Worship, Book of C<»nmon, 384 of God, 305 Worsley, F. W^ 117 Young people and creeds, 322, 433 , terms of membership for, 323 Zeitgeist, 393 Zenos, A. C, 413 Zinzendorf, 196 Zurich formula, 335 [571] UNIVERSITY 0F^^3jELEY „ti^^ THE LAST DATS THIS BOOK IS^ BELOW ^^ , demand jay ^,\^p2i2i,^^,,=====^^ 1 I re 30018 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY