THE

CHURCH CLUB
OF DELAWARE.

J 89 &

THE

Church Club Lectures.

DELIVERED IN 1894 AND 1895, UNDER THE AUSPICES

OF THE

CHURCH CLUB

OF

DELAWARE,

1895.
PRESS OF HOMER BARRY,
WILMINGTON, DEL.

CONTENTS.

PAGE.
LECTURE I.
THE CHURCH IDEA OF TEMPERANCF.  3
The Rev. Randolph H. McKim, D. £>.,
Rector of the Church of the Epiphany, Washington, D. C.
LECTURE II.
CULTURE AND RELIGION  25
The Rev. G. H. S. Walpole, D. D.,
"Mary Crooke Hoffman," Professor Dogmatic Theology,
General Theological Seminary .
LECTURE III.
THE MOSAICS AND MEMORIALS OF THE PRAYER BOOK. . . 5 1
The Rev. W. P. Lewis, D. £>.,
Rector Christ Church Chapel, Philadelphia.
LECTURE IV.
CHRISTIAN NURTURE  71
The Rev. George Williamson Smith, D. D., LL. D.,
President Trinity College, Hartford, Conn.
LECTURE V.
IMMORTALITY  92
The Rev. Charles James Wood,
Rector Church of St. John, York, Pa.
LECTURE VI.
THE CHURCH AND THE AGE  I38
The Rt. Rev. Leighton Coleman, S. T. D., LL. £>.,
Bishop of Delaware.

PREFACE.

THE lectures contained in this volume were de
livered in St. Andrew's Church, Wilming
ton, under the auspices of The Church Club
of Delaware. Although they were not given as a
continuous course upon any assigned subject; each
author having given expression to his own convic
tions and being alone responsible for them, yet there
will be found such an order in the topics as to give
them place in one volume.
They are published with the hope that they may
give their readers some of the great pleasure and edi
fication that they afforded those whose privilege it
was to hear them.
It is to be regretted that the first lecture of the
course by the Rt. Rev. Wm. F. Adams, D. C. L,.,
Bishop of Easton, upon " Charity and Loyalty," is
not contained in the volume. It was delivered with
out notes, and could not be reproduced by the author.

THE CHURCH CLUB.

Wilmington, Delaware,
February, 1895.

The Church Idea of Temperance,
BY
REV. RANDOLPH H. McKIM, D. D.,
Rector of the Church of the Epiphany,
Washington, D. C.

LECTURE I.
BY REV. RANDOLPH H. McKIM, D. D.
THE CHURCH IDEA OF TEMPERANCE.
In undertaking to discuss "The Church's Idea of
Temperance," it must be frankly acknowledged that
this Church of ours in the United States was very
slow in formulating, by any authoritative action or ut
terance, her "Idea" upon this great subject. Up to
the year 1881 her position had been a negative one.
She had held aloof from the various movements for
Temperance Reform that had arisen and run their
course during the first century of American Indepen
dence. Doubtless there were good reasons for this
policy. She could not give countenance to the ex
cesses and exaggerations that frequently characterized
them. She could not, even in so holy a cause, be par
taker with fanaticism. Least of all could she ally
herself with a movement, which, in some of its forms,
was distinctly irreligious, which not only did not rest
upon a religious basis, but even repudiated it, and
whose reliance for success in the warfare against this
fearful sin was not in the grace of God, but in the
strength of corrupt human nature.

4 The Church Idea of Temperance.
But the time came in the good providence of
God, when some at least in the Church were aroused
to the conviction that she had a higher mission than
merely point out the errors of the prevailing ideas
npon the subject of Temperance and Temperance
Reform. These men felt that the attitude of the
Church should be fundamentally changed. If the
principles that were adopted by the various Temper
ance Organizations were faulty, let the Church pro
claim what were the true ones. If the methods of
Reform that were employed were unsound, unscrip-
tural, even unchristian, let the Church point out the
right methods. "I would see this Church of ours,"
exclaimed a speaker at the Church Congress held in
Boston in November, 1876, "not lagging in the rear,
criticising, carping in a poor, small way, but leading in
the van, and giving shape and tone and form and
strength to the war against the vice of Intemperance."
(Rev. Wm. R. Huntington, D. D.)
The impulse to these views had come (or at least
had been quickened), from the action of leading men
in the Church of England. There, as in this country,
Religion and Temperance had been dissociated until
the year i860. In the following year, Mrs. Wight-
man awakened the conscience of the Church by the
publication of her appeal entitled "Haste to the Res.
cue." In 1862 "The Church of England Total Ab
stinence Society' ' was formed. — In 1863 it was changed
into "The Church of England Temperance Reforma
tion Society." In 1867 the Convocation of Canterbury

The Church Idea of Temperance . 5
appointed a committee to investigate the question of
Intemperance. Their report was published in 1869 ;
and in the month of February, 1873, at Lambeth
Palace, ' 'The Church of England Temperance Society' '
was organized. This event marked the beginning of a new epoch
in the Anglican Communism in connection with the
question of Temperance Reform. "The Church's
Idea of Temperance' ' was now for the first time dis
tinctly formulated. Thoughtful men in America
quickly caught its significance, and discussion on the
platform and in the press followed.
Another of the speakers at the Boston Church
Congress said, "Might we not have as the issue of this
discussion, a Church Temperance Society, patterned
after that of our mother Church of England, seeking to
, arouse a rational interest in this great Reform ; to
guide it by candid study ; to cut for it channels in ac
cordance with national laws ; making.room on its broad
platform for all who seek the common end, while al
lowing in different sections the employment of special
methods." (Rev. R. Heber Newton, D. D.)
No steps were taken, however, at that time to
wards the realization of this conception. It was the
almost unanimous opinion of those specially interested,
that the time was not ripe for the formation of such a
general association as that of the Church of England
Society. That, it was thought, must be the issue of
local movements, parochial and diocesan. Four years
and more passed, and in the mean time Parochial

6 The Church Idea of Temperance .
Temperance Societies were formed here and there in
the Church in New York, Brooklyn, Philadelphia
and Baltimore. The subject, too, was brought for
ward in Diocesan Conventions and in Episcopal
charges ; and I believe one Diocesan Society was
formed in the Diocese of North Carolina.
There lies before me as I write, the Constitution
of the first Parochial Temperance Society, of which I
have any knowledge, in the Church in the United
States. It was organized in one of the suburban
parishes of New York* in the month of May, 1878,
and was modelled mainly upon the lines of the
Church of England Society.
We are concerned with it this evening because
out of this Parochial Society grew, nearly three years
later, the organization of the Church Temperance So
ciety of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Uuited
States of America, of which your Bishop is an hon
ored Vice President, and which is to-day, though a
voluntary society, yet the recognized representatives
of our whole Church in the matter of Temperance and
Temperance Reform.
Here then, in this Church Society, we have "The
Church Idea of Temperance" distinctly formulated,
and authoritively stated. What are its characteristic
features ?
First of all this — that Temperance is not equiva
lent with Total Abstinence ; and that Total Abstin
ence is not to be insisted on either as a universal ob-
*Holy Trinity Church, Harlem, New York City.

The Church Idea of Temperance. j
ligation , or as a necessary condition to qualify a man
for taking part in the work of Temperance Reform.
The Society laid down this as its first principle.
"Temperance," they said, "is the law of the Gospel"
— and as such of absolute and universal obligation.
"Total Abstinence .is a rule of conduct essential in
some cases and highly desirable in many others," but
every man must be left to decide in the exercise of his
Christian liberty, whether he will adopt this rule or not.
Now let it be said the Church Idea, so far at least,
is the Bible Idea. The Koran condemns the use of
wine as a sin, and rigidly requires total abstinence of
every good Mohammedan, The Bible does not. Con
demning drunkenness as a sin, it nevertheless de
mands temperance, not total abstinence,
This is also the idea which is enforced by the ex
ample of Jesus Christ. He did not preach total ab
stinence as a law of his Kingdom. He did not Him
self abstain from the use of wine. There were total
abstinence societies in Judea in His day. If the So
ciety of the Rechabites no longer survived, there were
the Nazarites who practiced total abstinence for lim
ited periods ; and there were the Essenes who were
total abstainers of the extremist type. But Jesus did
not join any of these total abstinence societies. John
the Baptist, the Apostle of Asceticism, was a total
abstainer ; he came neither eating or. drinking ; but
Jesus of Nazareth "came eating and drinking." Men
dared even to call him a "Wine-bibber." He gave
wine to the Wedding Guests, and he used wine in the

8 The Church Idea of Temperance.
institution of the most sacred ordinance of His relig
ion. The force of this example cannot be broken by
the plea that the wine He used was unfermented, be
cause the plea is absolutely without foundation in
Scripture — is, in fact, contradicted by Scripture. Nor
has it any support from true scholarship.
If the Church then is to be governed by the ex
ample and the teaching of her Divine Founder, she
must resist and repudiate the idea that total abstin
ence is to be required of every Christian as such, and
that the use of any intoxicant, however moderately,
is a sin. It was a very important service which the Church
rendered to the cause of Temperance Reform, when
she planted her Temperance Society squarely upon
this basis, and thus broke the yoke of a false opinion.
Well has it been said, " A false theory will destroy
any reform which builds upon it ; and the theory that
wine is a forbidden fruit, and the drinking of it is un
der all circumstances and in all social conditions a
sin, is a false theory. It contravenes the example
of Christ ; it is Mohammedan, not Christian. " (Ly
man Abbott)
Nevertheless, let it not be supposed that any
man can plead the example of Christ for the use of the
fiery waters that are used among us to-day. In that
age and in that land the art of distillation was not
known, and, of course, there were no distilled liquors
used. The wines of Palestine could not produce, in
however large quantities taken, the maddening or de-

The Church Idea of Temperance . 9
basing effects that follow the intemperate use of whis
key, or brandy or rum. Moreover, let it be borne in
mind that these wines were very mild beverages, quite
unlike the highly alcoholic wines of modern com
merce, more like the " home-made wine " of Virginia,
or California or the Rhine. There was no such prob
lem then as our liquor problem in America and Eng
land. It is as impossible to suppose that Christ would be
indifferent to the liquor traffic as it exists among us, as
to imagine him taking part in the fanaticism of some
of the very extreme so called Temperance advocates.
That he would sanction our social drinking customs as
they are found in Europe and America, I do not be
lieve. It seems to me very probable that in the pres
ent state of the drink question, Christ would be found
among the total abstainers, though I teel sure he
would repudiate as Judaic asceticism the making
total abstinence a test of a man's Christian Character.
I cannot but think that the general adoption of the
rule of total abstinence, as a voluntary self-imposed
restriction, if not as a safeguard against "the seductive
sorcery of drink, " as an example .and an encourage
ment to the large class who can only be temperate by
becoming total abstainers, would vastly strengthen the
movement for reform. I remember that the special
committee of eleven bishops appointed at the Lambeth
Conference "to consider this subject, reported unani
mously that the main weapon to be used in this war-

io The Church Idea of Temperance.
fare is the total abstinence from intoxicating liquors
by those who desire to help their fellow men. "
2. The next feature in the Church Idea of Temper.
ance is but a corolla^ from the first, viz., this : "A
union and co-operation on equal terms, for the promo
tion of temperance, between those who use temper
ately and those who abstain entirely from intoxicating
drinks as beverages. "
Here was distinctly a novelty, and, in the eyes of
the generality of ' ' Temperance Workers" a heresy, to
propose an alliance between moderate drinkers and
total abstainers against intemperance ! And not only
to invite the co-operation of those who do not abstain
from intoxicants in this holy crusade against the drink
evil, but actually to offer it " upon equal terms I "
For the first time in the history of Temperance
work in America, that large body of temperate men
(who, though not total abstainers, deeply deplore the
evils of intemperance, and are prepared to use their
influence for its suppression), was recognized as a
force that might and ought to be utilized in this
movement for reform.
The ultimate influence of this courageous avowal
of the right and the place of temperate men in a tem
perate reformation must be very great. It will utilize
a potent force hitherto entirely neglected. It will ap
peal to multitudes of good citizens, hitherto compelled
to hold aloof from the movement, and enlist their in
terest, their sympathy and their active co-operation.
It will bring a new and powerful leverage to bear

The Church Idea of Temperance. 1 1
upon the social and industrial and legislative aspects
of the problem.
In confirmation of this opinion, let me quote the
words of one of New York's best citizens and ablest
and bravest men, the late Dr. Howard Crosby. " The
Episcopal Church has found the key to unlock this
question of Temperance Reform in inviting all good
citizens who believe in Temperance to unite in the
movement for Reform. " And Henry Ward Beecher
commended the Church Temperance Society for intro
ducing a new spirit and a new method.
But has this radical change of method borne any
such fruit as was expected ? I answer, in proportion
to the seed sown — in proportion to the number of those
who have responded to the appeal, it has borne abun
dant fruit. Whoever will study the history of the bat
tle of good citizens in the metropolis against the des
potism of the liquor men there, these ten years past,
will find that the Church Temperance Society, though
feeble in numbers and weak in financial resources, has
led the lines of reform, and that it has rallied about
its banner a class of citizens who in former years have
taken no part whatever in the movement against the
tyranny of the saloon power.
At any rate we count it a vital and valuable con
stituent of the Church Idea of Temperance that it pro
claims the right and enforces the duty of all temperate
men to co-operate in the herculean task of staying the
ravages of this greatest and most appalling of the
curses that afflict modern society. It is a hydra-

12 The Church Idea of Temperance .
headed monster we seek to slay. It must be attacked
from many sides and by many weapons. The econo
mist, the scientist, the philanthropist and the legislator
as well as the preacher and the priest, should be en
listed in the cause. It presents a manifold problem
that demands the wisdom and the effort of all classes
of good citizens. It has its physiological side, its
hygienic side, its social side, its political side, as
well as its moral and religious side. Hence the
need, and v hence the duty, of summoning to the
banner of reform, every man who practices temper
ance, and is willing to enlist in the Holy war against
the Slavery of Drink.
3. But I must proceed to indicate still another
characteristic feature of the Church Idea upon this
subject. I shall state it in the words of the Constitu
tion of the Church Temperance Society, as follows :
"Supreme above all other means we recognize the
grace of God, in and through our Lord Jesus Christ,
as that by which the promotion of temperance and the
reform of the intemperate are to be sought. In depen
dence on this means we would prosecute our under
taking, and we distinctly place all methods of work
and all expedients of reform in a position of subordi
nation to the authority of Christ and His Church."
Here we touch a vital issue both in relation to
the nature of the evil and the nature of the remedy.
It was the weakness of the great temperance move
ment of a generation ago (as such leaders as Gough '
and Moody confess), that it treated intemperance

The Chnrch Idea of Temperance . 13
rather as a disease, or a weakness, than as a sin
against God, and that it distinctly ignored the Grace
of God in dealing with it, placing its reliance upon
resolutions, pledges, covenants, oaths and other ex
pedients — in short, leaning upon the broken reed of
the human will, rather than the arm of the Omnipo
tent God.
Now "The Church Idea" is the exact antithe
sis of this, vis, that Intemperance is a sin, a griev
ous sin, against- Almighty God ; that no doctrine of
heredity can absolve a man from responsibility for
it, and that our supreme hope of overcoming it must
be placed in the grace and power of the Son of God.
Again let it be said, this is the Church Idea be
cause it is the Bible Idea. No where is the sin of
drunkenness more sternly rebuked than in the pages
of that Holy Book. We do but reflect its teachings
when we call it a grievous sin, and one that will cut
a man off from the Communion of Saints, here and
hereafter. And we are equally in harmony with the
Book of God when we affirm that the Son of God can
save men from the cruel bondage of intemperance and
that no case however desperate is beyond the reach
of His Omnipotent arm, He who was manifested that
He might destroy the works of the devil, and at
whose word even the demoniac of Gadara was re
stored to his right mind, is able to-day to save the
drunkard from the accursed and degrading tyranny of
the devil . He can cast out the demon of drink, as
he can cast out the demon of lust, or of gambling, or

14 The Church Idea of Temperance.
of covetousness. Let me say to you my fellow church
men, it is still needful to proclaim with the utmost
emphasis this "Church Idea" of the nature of this
vice of drunkenness, and of the need of the Grace of
God to save men from it. Men are still glossing over
the sin as a weakness or as an hereditary inheritance,
or as a disease. And they are still preaching educa
tion, culture and the like as the remedy. But there
is no sufficient and adequate remedy for this, or any
other sin, but the Grace of God.
Some one may ask, why then does the C. T. S.
offer pledge cards to its members ? The answer lies
on the face of the cards themselves. Look at one of
them, and you will find the so-called "Pledge" is but
the declaration of a purpose "by the help of God" to
abstain in whole or in part, and that this help is to be
sought daily by prayer. This then is not an aban
donment of the principle of dependence on the Grace
of God, but on the contrary, it is an appeal to that
grace, it is the casting of one's self upon the Divine
help ; it is the record of a purpose formed in the fear
of God, and for the fulfilment of which the man looks
to the aid of his Divine Redeemer. In short, it is but
the specialization of the Baptismal and the Confirma
tion vow. He who signs one of these pledge cards
makes a record of his Baptismal vow in relation to a
particular sin : "I do renounce the indulgence which
I feel may lead me or lead others into the sin of in
temperance."

The Church Idea of Temperance . 15
4. And now I pass to the fourth constituent
element of "The Church Idea" of Temperance.
Temperance reform is the business of the Church.
Does any man ask why ? I answer because it is the
function of the Church to represent, to incarnate, if
we may dare use so holy and wonderful a word, to in
carnate Christ among men. And Christ, let us re
member, came to seek and to save the lost ; He came
to destroy the works of the devil ; He came to lift up
the fallen, and to help the helpless ; He came to re
deem and regenerate society ; in a word, to renew the
race in the image and likeness of God.
But are there any more hopelessly lost than those
"who through strong drink are out of the way ?" Is
there any work of the devil more devliish than the
wreck and the ruin he works through the instrumen
tality of drink ? Is there any curse under which society
groans more heavily than it does under the tigerish
grip of alcoholism to-day ? Is there anything that
more completely and more terribly defaces-the image
of God in man and more deeply debases the race,
than intemperance ?
Is it not plain, then, that if the Church is to do
her Master's work in the world, she must consecrate
her best thought, and her most fervent prayers, and
her most patient labor to the solution of this tremendous
problem of Temperance Reform ? Ah, my fellow
churchmen, if a pagan philosopher could exclaim,
"Homo sum, atque nihil humani a me alienum
puto, " "I am a man, and I deem nothing that per-

1 6 The Church Idea of Temperance.
tains to man foreign to me, " how much more may we
say, "We are churchmen, we are members of the
church of Jesus Christ, and we are touched by
everything that touches our fellow men. This awful
blight — this unspeakable curse — this ominous peril,
of intemperance touches us, and is of deepest concern
to us, because it is so big with woe and ruin to multi
tudes of our fellow men. "
The founders of the Church Temperance Society
in England and in the United States felt this pro
foundly, and therefore they sought to plant their
movement for reform in the sanctuary of God, both be
cause they would make it a religious and a churchly
movement, and because they would fain link it in
with the organism of the Church that it might possess,
in the very principle of its organization, the promise
and potency of permanence \
By as much as, and in so far as, this Society
strikes its roots into the Dioceses and the Parishes of
the Church, by so much and in so far will it pass out
of the category of things ephemeral and evanescent,
and become a permanent influence in the land. Men
die, but institutions live ; and this society, if it twine
itself about the institutions of the Church, shall live.
Like the ivy which clings to the walls of some vener
able minster, it will be endowed in some sort with the
stability and perpetuity of the Church to which it
has attached itself. Then will the work of Temper
ance Reform become a permanent factor in the life
and activity of the Church ; and then will it escape

The Church Idea of Temperance. 17
the fate of all merely personal movements (like that
wonderful one that had Father Matthews for its centre
and source), and of all reforms that rise upon the crest
of a temporary enthusiasm and quickly sink back again.
when the wave has spent its force.
This, I take it, is the great desideratum in the
work of Temperance Reform — a force operating
steadily and with sustained and uninterrupted activity,,
— not a tidal wave generated by some sudden vol
canic upheaval of popular enthusiasm, but a strong,
steady current, like the gulf stream, that shall flow on
from generation to generation.
Will anyone say in reply that it is quite obvious
why the Church Temperance Society should desire to
support itself by the authority of the institutions of
the Church, but not so plain why the Church should
concede to it so great a privilege ? My answer is that
such an organization affords the Church an instru
ment which she may wield with telling effect in her
battle with the powers of darkness. It cannot be de
nied that intemperance presents great and peculiar
obstacles to the progress of the Gospel in this land, so
that the Church seems compelled, (by virtue of her
commission, " to prepare the way of the Lord " ) to
bestir herself in the cause of temperance reform. But
the principles and methods of the Church Temperance
Society have received the cordial approval of the en
tire Anglican Episcopate with scarcely an exception.
And as to its practical effect — its influence upon the •

1 8 The Church Idea of Temperance.
¦public opinion in relation to the Church, I may re
mind you that prominent dissenters in England are so
impressed by the value of its work there, that they
even say the Church Temperance Society has post
poned the day of disestablishment.
I believe that if this work is cordially and earn
estly taken up by the Church in the United States, it
will go far to establish our beloved Church in the
heart of our fellow countrymen.
Gentlemen of the Church Club of Delaware, I
have endeavored in compliance with your request, to
set forth the Church Idea of Temperance in its four
distinctive features as I understand them. I feel con
fident it must commend itself to your minds as rea
sonable, broad and tolerant, and as based upon sober
and Scriptural principles without exaggeration and
without fanaticism.
Here perhaps I ought to stop. But I cannot help
saying that this great idea, which might produce such
splendid fruitage, lies almost dormant within the
bosom of the Church. There is an apathy, there is
an indifference, in the Church upon this subject which
is only emphasized and accentuated by the areas of
interest and activity here and there to be found. May
I venture to say to you, my fellow Churchmen, that
we ought to " cry aloud " and " spare not " if by any
means we may arouse the Church out of her apathy
upon this tremendous issue ? May I go so far as to
urge upon the members of the Church Club of Dela-*
ware that you take up this matter vigorously through

The Church Idea of Temperance. 19
your admirable organization and press it upon the at
tention of your fellow churchmen and your fellow
citizens ?
That great assemblage of Anglican Bishops at
Lambeth (in 1888), so cautious in all their utterances,
so conspicuously free from any tendency to incon
siderate speech, deliberately declared that the evils of
intemperance " could scarcely be exaggerated. "
My Brethren, was there not a cause ? Consider
one or two of the darkly, significant facts of this case
against intemperance.
1. The Annual Report of the Commissioner of
Internal Revenue for the year 1893, shows that duty
was paid that year on 32,000,000 barrels of beer, an
average of a half barrel to each inhabitant, men,
women and children, in this great country. It shows
further, that whereas in the year 1880 taxes were col
lected on 62,132,415 gallons of distilled spirits,
amounting to $55,918,928 in the year 1893, taxes
were paid on 99,145,889 gallons, amounting to $89,-
231,300, although there was no increase in the tax
rate. What such a vast and excessive consumption
of distilled and fermented liquors by the people of this
great Christian Nation means to the thrift, to the hap
piness, to the morals of our country ; what a har
vest of misery and crime, and sin, and sorrow, such
sowing produces cannot be told.
2. Consider another ominous fact. This enormous
liquor traffic, representing, according to a writer in
the North American Review, six or seven years ago,

20 The Church Idea of Temperance.
an invested capital of a thousand million of dollars, is
consolidated for the furtherance of its interests into a
mighty organization which governs cities, and con
trols legislation, by fair means or foul, all over this
land. Ah, my friends, state the case as mildly as we
dare — understate it to conform to the views of the
most conservative statistician — and it still remains al
most too dreadful for contemplation. It stands an
unquestioned and unquestionable fact that intemper
ance is the most prolific source of pauperism, of crime
and of domestic unhappiness ; the fruitful mother of
disease, of lunacy, of idiocy ; the procuress of divorce
and adultery ; the instigator of murder and suicide.
Oh the homes it has ruined ; the hopes it has blasted !
The hearts it has broken ! The souls it has destroyed !
The pen falls from the hand in the effort to describe
it ! The tongue falters in trying to utter it ! The
heart sickens at the imagination of it ! What is there
beautiful that it has not blackened with its foul touch?
or pure that it has not defiled ? Or holy that it has
not profaned ? It crosses the threshold of a happy
home, and presently where all was peace and unity,
behold discord and strife, sorrow and shame, poverty
and desolation ! It enters a quiet and orderly village,
and soon the public peace is disturbed ; riot and dis
order, crime and death follow in its train. It assails
the dignity of the Bar and the Bench, and degrades
talent the most distinguished and office the most ex
alted ! It dares even to invade the Sanctuary of

The Church Idea of Temperance . 21
God, and drags the very ministers of Religion down
into the pit of shame !
I ask then, in conclusion, is the Church of the
Living God to be a silent or an idle spectator of sin
and shame like this ? Has she no message or min
istry from God for such a state of things ? Will
she, like thcpriest and the Levitein the parable, pass
by on the other side, when poor humanity lies
wounded and bleeding on the highway — smitten al
most to death by this cruel enemy of the race ?
God forbid ! No, the Church must hasten to take
her part in the great battle for Temperance Reform.
She must organize against a foe so powerful, so vigi
lant, so skillful. Her children must awake from their
apathy and raise the standard of the Cross in the face
of the Enemy. As a prophetess of God, the Church
must lift up her voice like a trumpet and show her
people their transgression, — proclaiming the judgment
of God on the sin of drunkenness, preordaining also
the omnipotent power of Jesus Christ to save even the
drunkard from his sin.

Culture and Religion.

Rev. GEO. H. S. WALPOLE, D. D.
delivered friday evening, march 9th, 1894,
St. Andrew's Church.

LECTURE II.
THE REV. G. H. S. WALPOLE, D. D.
CULTURE AND RELIGION.
There can be no question that the interest in all
that concerns Culture is growing. In the reaction
against the claims of the aristocracy of birth, there has
been a natural desire to substitute the aristocracy of
knowledge and refinement. And in spite of a some
what formidable rival in plutocracy, this desire has
been gratified, since the men of letters and science en
joy, on the whole, a wider popularity than the men
of wealth. Their works find a way into every home,
and rule thousands of whom they have never heard.
Now education fosters all such hopes and desires.
There is a- general feeling spread abroad that to be
educated, individually and socially, is the highest
ideal of life ; that with the banishment of ignorance,
we have virtue. Hence there is a disposition to sub
stitute education for religion, the fear of Society for
the fear of God, good manners for worship. So it
comes to pass that religion is more and more identified
with other worldliness ; is looked upon as useful for
prisons, penitentiaries and death beds, but of no great

26 Culture and Religion.
practical significance for the world of to-day, with its.
political, economic and scientific questions. On the
other hand, Culture confines its thoughts and opera
tions to the present world. It purposes to touch every
part of life. It not only enables its disciples to
take their place in society, but it is concerned in the
well-being of the nation, the state, the city ; it is in
terested in questions of education and labor, of politics
and intemperance. In a word, its aim is individual
and social improvement. It is not surprising then
that it meets the fancy of this utilitarian age. There
would probably be more contempt shown for the man
who would frown down upon Culture than for him who
would show indifference to Religion.
But, though many talked about Culture and hadi
a desire to be considered cultured, yet there were,
until comparatively recent times, the vaguest ideas as
to what Culture was. Every one understood Religion
to be the expression of the bond which unites man to
God, but Culture was taken in various senses, as rep
resenting refinement, education, good manners. It
had, and possibly still has, an exclusive soond which
many resented. A great statesman, John Bright,
spoke of it with some contempt as a smattering of the
two dead languages of Greek and Latin ; whilst Mr»
Frederic Harrison ridiculed the man of culture as being"
"in politics one of the poorest mortals alive, and as one
who for simple pedantry and want of good sense, had
no equal." It was time then for the apostles of Cul
ture to speak out, and in the person of Mr. Matthew

Culture and Religion. 27
Arnold they have done so. In his Essay entitled
"Culture and Anarchy," he explained what we are
to understand by Culture. Culture, he says, is a study
of perfection. Its motive force is not merely or pri
marily the scientific passion for pure knowledge, but
also the moral or social passion for doing good. Its
object is not merely to make an intelligent being more
intelligent, but to make reason and the will of God
prevail. The perfection it studies is not a mere
conformity to some outward standard, but a fuller and
fuller life. It is not a mere having and resting, but a
growing and becoming. And its attainment is in
compatible with selfishness. It is not possible while
the individual remains isolated. "Since men are all
members of one great whole, and the sympathy which
is in human nature will not allow one member to be
indifferent to the rest, or to have a perfect welfare in
dependent of the rest ; therefore the individual is re
quired, under pain of being stunted and enfeebled in
his own development if he disobeys, to be continually
doing all he can to enlarge and increase the volume of
the human stream sweeping thitherward."' Finally,
Culture is not content with anything short of the har
monious expansion of all the powers which make the
beauty and worth of human nature, and is dissatisfied
if any one power is overdeveloped at the expense of
the rest. In this respect it is claimed that Culture
has a wider mission than Religion itself.
(i. Culture and Anarchy, p. 7.)

28 Culture and Religion.
Such, then, is the aim of Culture, as given by its
best exponent, an aim surely not unlike that of the
Christian faith ; and in the pursuit of this it ranks as
its foes just those principles which we feel to be most
hostile to Religion. In the emphasis it lays on. in
wardness and spirituality, it is opposed by the world's
faith in machinery ; in the desire for a general expan
sion of the human family, it has to meet our great foe
of individualism ; in the value it attaches to the de
velopment of all our powers, it is opposed by narrow
ness. With such a lofty purpose every good man
must feel in sympathy. He may feel sad at heart
when he reflects that there is no recognition made of
the claims of God upon the soul ; but, so far at it goes,
it commands his respect. What can be better than to
study to know things as they are, and to make the
Divine order prevail ? What higher ideal for man in
himself than that described as "a becoming and grow
ing," rather than "a having and resting?" What
more necessary in these days than the counsel to con
secrate all the powers and faculties of man, and the
warning that man can only arrive at perfection in do
ing good to others ?
And we cannot complain if men who measure Re
ligion by the popular conception afloat should suppose
that Culture should be able to effect more than Re
ligion. Who is not depressed when he looks abroad
and sees Religion as it is so often presented to-day,
with its bickering and quarreling ; its low and con
venient standard ; its apparent substitution of relig-

Culture and Religion. 29
ious duties and phrases for religious life ; its cold and
repelling worship. As the disciple of Culture walks
out of some Christian building, — where the chief seats
are occupied by the wealthy and ostentatious ; the
chief influence is a dull essay on some abstruse point of
Theology ; the chief esthetic power that derived from
bad music and hideous surroundings ; — into a hall
where a man is on fire with his subject, where practi
cal problems of the day are being discussed and those
present are taking an active part in what is going on,
who can blame him if he thinks that Religion is
played out and Culture is being played in ? The con
trast is one we should ourselves feel. The one build
ing, from its consecration to the worship of God,
necessarily leads to great expectations ; you hope to
find thoughts and ideas that will kindle you, and you
are disappointed. The other makes no pretentions,
excites no aspirations, but you have at least the sense
of reality. Why then should we be surprised if the
young man, making his estimate of the Christian re
ligion from what we should all admit to be an unfortu
nate example, should believe that Culture covers more
ground than Religion, meets more of man's needs and
necessities. So long as the Christian faith remains
thus encumbered and disfigured with Puritan tradi
tions of worship, so long must we expect the Socie
ties of Ethical Culture to flourish and abound. They
are the outcome of a protest of the human conscience
against unreality, ignorance and bad taste.

30 Culture and Religion.
But it may be asked whether this is not after all
a superficial reason for the present interest in Culture
as a substitute for Religion. We frankly admit that
it is. The real cause lies far deeper. Men will not
be tempted to leave an old and well-tried system of
ethics, which has done the world magnificent service,
for one which has all the disadvantages of novelty,
unless there is some stronger persuasion than an ugly
building and a bad sermon. What, then, is the per
suading motive ? It is this. C-ilture, as we have seen,
sets forth as high an aim as Christianity on its human
side, it will be satisfied with nothing short of perfec
tion ; but — and here comes the inducement — it pro
poses to accomplish its great purpose without the dif
ficulties of religious faith. The Gospel which the
disciples of Culture preach, is — to use the words of
Professor Adler — essentially this "The good life is
possible to all without the previous acceptance of any
Creed, irrespective of any religious opinion or philo
sophic theory, — the way of righteousness is open and
can be entered directly without a previous detour
through the land of faith or philosophy. "'
The simplicity of this is very attractive. Those
who have only an outside acquaintance with the
Christian religion find in it some principles which
they would willingly forget, and never know the great
compensation which it offers and gives to its friends.
Its Creed not only contains such beautiful names as
Father and Saviour, but also the dark and awful words
(i) The Forum, November, 1893. «

Culture and Religion. 31
of sin and judgment. It is not only hopeful in its
faith in the Resurrection of the Dead and the Life
Everlasting, but very humbling in its assertion that
One suffered for our salvation. Under its teaching
life is very serious and solemn. It shows us not only
the blue sky of God's Love, but the dark clouds of
His Wrath ; not only the fresh and smiling pastures
of His grace, but also the awful cliffs and precipices of
sin and temptation. Life would seem so much simpler
and easier, so men think, if they could free themselves
of these thoughts and sail for the Land of Righteous
ness with a boat that needed no careful steering. We
can understand, then, that any Society that should
offer the blessings of righteousness, without the neces
sity of faith or repentance, would be likely to win dis
ciples amongst those who have a zeal for morality .
But, the Christian asks, if the motive power of
faith is not necessary, what other force is there by
which men may be lifted up out of their dead selves to
higher things ? Professor Adler himself raises this
very question in his article in the Forum for Novem
ber of last year. "It may be asked," he writes,
" what leverage is at our command, to what motives
can we appeal to rouse men from their inertia, and
lead them to the pursuit of the moral goal ? " And
he brings forward the Christian Prophet, Savonarola,
to answer for him. When asked, "Why is it that men
choose the life of pleasure and worldly advantage
rather than the good life which on its own account is
so much to be preferred?" the great preacher replied,

32 Culture and Religion.
" Because their eyes are blinded by the mist of the
world, so that they cannot see the good life in all its
beauty. " This, as you will see, only explains why
men prefer pleasure to goodness, not what is to make
them follow the good when they see it, which is the
question in hand. So the Professor is obliged to add
words of his own, which we are sure the Florentine
Reformer would never have assented to : — " Could
they do so " — i. e. could they see the good life in all
its beauty — ' ' it would exercise upon them an irresis
tible attraction. Hence the thing to do, " continues
the Leader of the New York Ethical Society, " is for
the teachers to see clearly the scheme of right living
and to make others to see it, to be aglow with moral
passion and to kindle in others the same fire, to be in
earnest and to infect others with the same earnest
ness. "
"The sight of the good life in all its beauty."
This then is to be the leverage. It might seem to be
hypercritical if we were to ask here, what are the
characteristics of the good life ? Is poverty of spirit
— that is, a sense of dependence upon God — one of
them ? Is sorrow for sin, another ? Is meekness, an
other ? Is humility, another ? We know how high
these are placed by our Lord, and we know too how
low Greek Culture would have placed them, if indeed
they had been allowed any place at all, which is more
than doubtful. It is true that we have a divinely im
planted instinct by which we recognize a distinction
between good and bad, but nothing is clearer to our

Culture and Religioti. 33,
own experience than that our standard of excellence is
a shifting one, and depends upon that very thing
which it is supposed to create, namely the develop
ment of moral sense. But putting aside this question
and assuming that we are all sufficiently agreed as to-
what we mean by the good life, we ask, "Will the
Vision of the Good produce goodness?" St. Paul's
words at once occur to us. "To will is present with
me, but to do that which is good is not. For the
good which I would, I do not, but the evil that I
would not, that I do. I delight in the law of God
after the inward man, but I see another law in my
members, warring against the law of my mind and
bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which
is in my members." There can be no question that
the vision of the good produces an inclination to fol
low the good ; but how to follow, St. Paul says, I find
not. This, however, may be represented as a morbid
feeling on the Apostle's part. Let us then look into
our own experience and see whether we are not dis
posed to agree wiih him. We lay aside some stirring
biography, or we come away 'from some play where
our soul has been moved to its depths by an act of
noble heroism, or we have seen a man plunge into icy
waters to save a poor suicide. We describe that which
has influenced us in glowing terms, our sympathy is
in full play, and perhaps while the fire is kindled, a
poor man presents himself at our door. He does not.
3

34 Culture and Religion.
ask for alms, but for the investigation of his case,
¦which he represents as a peculiarly hard one. The
heavenly vision is still before us and making strong
appeals for obedience. But the matter we are called
upon to interfere with perhaps requires very delicate
handling, may involve the loss of friendship, will cer.
tainly mean the loss of time and money. The lower
self makes out a very good case for leaving the af
fair alone. "Give the man a dollar and wash your
hands of it," it argues ; the Vision is clouded over.
"Quixotic," we cry, "to throw away time and money
for what may after all turn out to be a fool's errand."
And we decide against the light. The appeal has
not been strong enough to move us. We ask, "Why
should we lose for his possible gain ?" We admit
the beauty of the Vision, we acknowledge that we
should feel better pleased with ourselves if we obeyed
it, but after all we say, "It is not necessary that I
should bask in my own admiration ; I can dispense
with that luxury, and for the sake of what I like
better, put up with a poor opinion of my conduct,
which I can soon manage to rub off or forget. " It
may be urged here that such action would be the part
of weak, unworthy men, and we do not deny it;
but the number of those who do not come within
that class is so small that for practical purposes we
¦may ignore it. Our own experience then is that of
St. Paul. We may see and love the good, but with
out that strength to which he looked we feel we have
no power to follow. The leverage then seems in-

Culture and Religion. 35
sufficient. Dr. Martineau gives us good reasons for
expetcing it to be so. In his usual clear and lucid
manner, he has shown, in his Types of Ethical The
ory, that the basis of such an ethical principle is un
sound, as being selfish. If we do follow the good,
we follow it simply because in some way it pays us
to do so. We are honest because honesty is the best
policy, virtuous because we should feel uncomfortable
if we were not ; but such a motive practically kills
the virtue it seems to promote. "It is true that virtue
is its own reward, but they who seek it for its reward
lose it."
We have not much confidence then in the pro
posed ethical force ; we have too much reason to fear
that what we applaud on the stage we shall deny in
the stress of business, that what we praise in the
Church we shall ignore in the street. And the wit
ness of history does not encourage us. We agree en
tirely with Professor Adler when he says that "All
the great moral movements of the world have radiated
from great personalities ;" but those great personalities
have, with but few exceptions, been men of prayer.
Moses, Samuel, Isaiah, St. Paul, St. Augustine,
Luther, Wilberforce, and such like, to whom we owe
great reforms, were men who believed with the great
Spanish Cardinal that "to pray is to govern." On the
other hand, the great philosophers of the ancient
world, who both saw and believed in love, truth, jus
tice, purity, failed to reach them because, ' 'as they put
out their hands to grasp them, they were swept away

36 Culture and Religion.
from their embrace like phantom forms of cloud be
fore the rushing wind. Beautiful as their ideal was,
it had no heart, no life, no human reality, and no
human love could be given it. The power that has
created moral movements is associated, not with ideas,
but with a person, for then the deepest heart passion
comes in to give it a living soul." ' Was it simply a
Vision of the dignity of man that gave a new worth to
human life at a time when suicide was recommended ?
Was it simply a Vision of the glory of womanhood
that brought women out of obscurity and infamy ?
Was it simply a Vision of freedom that led men to
sacrifice themselves for the poor slaves ? The men who
were at work in these movements and chiefly con
cerned in them would not have said so. They would
have said that faith in a "Divine person was the driv
ing and compelling force. In the ideal that floated
before their minds they recognized the claim of God.
And they dared not disobey, for to disobey was sin.
As the history of the past gives us no warrant to
suppose that the Vision of the Good will produce
goodness, so too we can gather no encouragement from
the present. The men who go forth to teach, educate,
elevate and refine the "nature people," who stand by
the side of the savage races against the selfish traders,
are men of faith. The men who are in the forefront
of philanthropic enterprise, who are striving to ameli
orate the condition of the poor, assist the starving and
(i.) Stopford Brooke. Sermons. The Victory of Faith, p. 11.

Culture and Religion. 37
wretched, rescue the wandering and homeless, are men
of faith, faith in a Person.
We do not forget that the Society of Ethical Cul
ture places these moral enterprises upon their pro
gramme, and is striving with great earnestness, as
for example in New York, to carry them out, but
their forces are vastly outnumbered by that large body
of clergy and laity, sisters, deaconesses, nurses and
friends of the poor, who expect to conquer simply by
faith in a Person.
We have seen that Culture has a high aim, — so
far as man is concerned, the highest possible, — per
fection ; but we have found no reason to believe that
the leverage proposed is in any way adequate for its
purpose. But this is not the only fault we have to
find with this new plan for man's moral improvement.
It is not only disappointing, but injurious. In its in
difference to faith, it impoverishes existence. It nat
urally leads man to live more and more in a narrow
circle. ' ' The supreme value of the spiritual part of
man, the thought of God in relation to it, the propor
tion between what is and what we look forward to, is
lost sight of. Men are necessarily driven to look at
everything from their own point of view, and yet " as
Dean Church, from whom I am quoting, says, "to
confine themselves to their own point of view is to lose
sight of all that is highest in man's reason, all that is
noblest in man's hope. There are worthier and wider
thoughts of God, the soul, man's calling and purpose
in the Psalms than often under the highest light of

38 Culture and Religion.
modern culture ; it could not procuce them, and some
times hardly understands them. To pass to them from
many a famous book of speculation is like passing into
the presence of the mountains and the waters and the
midnight stars from the brilliant conversation of one
of our great capitals. There is no narrowing so deadly
as the narrowing of man's horizon of spiritual things;
no worse evil could befall him in his course here than
to lose sight of heaven. No widening of science, no
conquest — I say not, over nature and ignorance, but
over wrong and selfishness in society — no possession
of abstract truth, can indemnify us for an enfeebled
hold on the highest and central truths of humanity."'
And yet it is just these highest and central truths
of humanity that Ethical Culture takes no account of.
The discipline of schooling one's passions, educating
one's will, which we must all confess to be no easy
matter, is to be undertaken without the inspiration
that comes from the world of faith and spiritual reali
ties. A man may ask, " But what if I have no faith
in that other world, what if I cannot see that wider
horizon, do you say that there is no revelation of duty
for me ; am I to attempt nothing because I cannot see
your world of sunshine ? " No, we make no such as
sertion. All honor to the man who walks steadily
and earnestly by the little light he has, he will not
lose his reward. Our complaint is with those who
claim that it matters not whether you work in the
smaller or the larger world, whose language seems to
(i) R. W. Church. The Gifts of Civilization, p. 133.

Culture and Religion. 39
assume that you may be as perfect within the nar
rower as in the broader horizon.
But not only does the Gospel of Culture impover
ish existence, it has a more serious fault. It provides
no real protection against the inroads which are being
made on the sacredness of the family hearth. Recent
experience in life and literature only justifies what the
late Dean of St. Paul's said nearly thirty years ago.
Speaking of the Christian idea of purity and the hold
that it then had on society, he said, that there was no
more anxious question than this, whether that hold
will continue. He saw then many ugly symptoms.
heard then the muttering of revolt. We have seen the
symptoms develop into a disease which as yet has re
ceived no check, and heard the mutterings of revolt
shaped into an apparently reasonable argument. The
truth is, as he notices, and we do well to ponder his
words, thai " there is no point of morality on which
it is easier to sophisticate and confuse, easier to raise
doubts of which it is hard to find the bottom, or to
make restraints seem the unwarrantable bonds of con
vention and caprice. It is eminently one of those
things, as to which we feel it is to be absolutely the
law of our being as long as we obey, but lose the feel
ing when we do not obey. "' Now it would be
doing the School of Ethical Culture an injustice to
say that it feels no interest in this vital question.
Its most recent report states that " the subject of ma
rital relations has been frequently treated especially in
i) R. W. Church. Gifts of Civilization, p. 135.

40 Culture and Religion.
view of the increase of divorce in the United States
and all civilized countries. " But we ask, on what
ground ? There is but one, if the obligation to Divine
law be disregarded, and that is Nature. And are the
arguments from Nature strong enough to resist the
importunate pleadings of passion ? Have they not
failed again and again, even with those who might
seem to be moral heroes. The strange lapse of one of the
strongest of modern ethical teachers is only an example
of the extreme difficulty that attends the whole ques
tion of marriage when looked at simply from the point
of view of Nature. The bond of Holy Matrimony, it
is admitted by all, is necessary for the life of the
family and the state, but the cases in which it may be
broken are so ingeniously and cleverly put that it be
comes practically a silken thread to be snapped at any
time. No ! to use Dean Church's words, " Argument
is hardly a match for passions so powerful and con
stant. They are only to be matched successfully by
a rival idea, a rival fire, the strength of a rival spring
of feeling, with its attractions and antipathies, a liv
ing law and instinct of the soul. Civilization supplies
none such but what it owes to Christianity. Purity is
one of those things which Christian ideas and influences
produced ; it is a thing which they alone can save. "
' ' From the beginning of the Creation God made them
male and female. " " For this cause shall a man
leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife and
they twain shall be one flesh. So then they are
no more twain, but one flesh. What, therefore,

Culture and Religion. 41
God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. "
¦"Whosoever shall put away his wife and marry another
committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall
put away her husband and be married to another, she
committeth adultery."' It is in these clearly defined
utterances that Christ speaks to us on this vital ques
tion. We hear nothing of such sad and humiliating ex
ceptions as "incompatibility of temper," Only one
awful denial of the marriage bond is mentioned. No !
"Argument is hardly a match for passions so powerful
and constant." We need the peremptory command
from One to Whom love and loyalty is, if not a
passion a ruling motive.
Again, as Culture offers no redemption from the
bondage of narrow ideas, and the still worse slavery
of immoral passion, so it never fairly emancipates us
from our worst enemy, self. It is true that the dis
ciples of Ethical Culture pursue the good and the
beautiful that they may fill others with the inspira
tion they draw from it, and their motive is, so far, un
selfish. It is true that it is assumed amongst their
teachers that the realization of the good can only be
obtained through fellowship with others — yet Princi
pal Shairp's criticism is a just one, "that these un
selfish elements, the desire for others' good, the desire
to advance God's kingdom on earth, are awakened not
simply for their own sakes, not chiefly because they
are good in themselves, but because 'they are clearly
discerned to be necessary to our self-protection — ele-
i. St. Mark, x 6-9. 11. 12.

42 Culture and Religion.
ments apart from which this cannot exist. And so it
comes that Culture, though made our end never so
earnestly, cannot shelter a man from thoughts about
himself, cannot free him from that which all must feel
to be fatal to high character — continual self-conscious
ness."' Enough has now been said to show why we have
no faith in this new system of Ethics. Its motive
force is inadequate, its sphere is narrowed, inasmuch
as it refuses to take into account all that which gives
real dignity to man and hope to life, and its indif
ference to religious faith is dangerous and ultimately
fatal to Society, as well as to the individual. It is,
then, impossible for us to give Ethical Societies the
place Professor Adler claims for them as " Missionary
Societies of the Moral Life "in partibus infidelium. "
Such an admission would be a denial of our trust. We
Christians can have no real faith in any moral life
which has n at for its basis the First and Great Com
mandment — " Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with
all thy heart and with all thy soul and with all thy
strength ; " but this is ignored. We can have no real
faith in any moral life which has not for its ideal the
Example of our Lord Jesus Christ. But the spring of
that Example, as revealed to us in the Scriptures, is de
pendence upon the Father. ' ' I can of Mine own self
do nothing. " "I seek not Mine own will but the will
of Him that sent" Me ; " and this, too, is ignored. We
can have no real faith in any moral life which is not
i Shairp. Culture and Religion, p. 93.

Culture and Religion. 43
being formed and shaped by prayer — and yet this is
ignored. We do not say that the lives of men who
ignore these things are necessarily immoral, God for
bid ; we do not say that Societies of men, formed
without any such basis, example, or inspiring life, are
necessarily immoral, God forbid ; but we do say that
in however lofty terms the aim of such lives and so
cieties may be stated, it is of necessity a lower, nar
rower and smaller aim than ours, and we have neither
hope nor confidence in it. The reasoning that under
lies an admission that Ethical Societies may be " Mis
sionary Societies of the moral life in "partibus infidel
ium ' ' of course implies that ethics may be profitably
studied and learnt without religion. Indeed we are
told that the principle of the division of labor or the
specialization of effort, which has been applied with
the most salutary results in all branches of knowledge
and in all departments of practical Hfe, should also be
applied to the cultivation of religion and morality,
and when applied, will no doubt prove advantageous
to both. The Church then is to leave the study of
Ethics to the Societies of Ethical Culture, and they in
turn will leave the study of Religion to the Church.
What a strange misapprehension of Religion ! A Re
ligion without Ethics would be even worse than Ethics
without Religion. Could the Church make up its
mind to confine its attention to so impossible a study
as this, she would be obliged to frame not only an
other Bible, but another Creed. Could she so deny
herself as to relegate Ethics to Ethical Societies, then

44 Culture and Religion.
forsooth she must find another Sacrament for her chief
service than that which demands of all those who
would seek it, that they love one another. The sug
gestion could only be made by one who knew nothing
of the real spirit of Christian Faith, or who confined
the study of Ethics to other questions than those
which concern the bases of morals. We can find no
place then for Societies of Ethical Culture.
I must turn but for a moment to contrast with
this system of Culture, which we cannot but regard as
wholly unsatisfactory, the rich, broad, powerful sys
tem of the Church.
In the Hall of Culture, Abstract* Righteousness
is the ideal of inspiration, but in the Church, Per
sonal Holiness placed before us in a perfect Life, is
our ideal. "Become ye perfect, as your Father in
Heaven is perfect. " " Be ye holy, for I am holy."
In the Hall of Culture, we are bidden to serve
our neighbor, because it is right so to do; in the
Christian Church, we have the same command, but on
the ground that he was made in the image of God.
In the Hall of Culture, our fellowship with one
another depends upon education and taste;- in the
Church it depends upon our fellowship in the same
life. " We, the many, are One Bread — One Body,
for we are all partakers of the One Bread. "
In the Hall of Culture, we are taught to face
temptation in the strength of our duty to man ; in the
Church, in the strength of our duty to God.

Culture and Religion. 45
In the Hall of Culture, the chief motive is self-
respect ; in the Church, the constraining force is God's
Love. In the Hall of Culture, the first and great com
mandment is, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor; in
the Church, the first -and great commandment is,
"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
heart, and with all thy soul and with all thy
mind. " Here indeed we touch the characteristic
difference. Directly man understands that God
cares enough for him to ask ' ' for the love of his
poor heart, " directly he realizes that this care for
him has been shown in the strange humiliation
of Bethlehem, when the Almighty Son of God en
tered the lot of infancy ; in the marvelous silence
of Nazareth, when the Architect of the Universe
worked as a carpenter ; in the wonderful ministry
of healing and teaching, when Perfect Wisdom taught
men in the imperfect words of human speech ; in the
last great amazing pleading of sorrow and pain, when
the Sinless One bore the sins of the whole world ;
when, I say, a man realizes, even faintly, that his
love has been sought for in this surprise way by One
Who dwelt in the Majesty and Glory of God, Who was
and is ' 'God over all, blessed for ever, ' ' then he feels a
compelling and constraining force which sometimes
drives him to far off places among men of unfamiliar
ways. We see young Saul, with the world at his feet,
wandering over Asia Minor — Greece — Italy — even to
Spain, amidst daily persecutions, to tell what he knows.

46 Culture and Religion.
We see Justin Martyr flinging aside the philosopher's
cloak and quiet retirement that he might bring others
to the True Wisdom. We see the accomplished and
brilliant teacher, Francis Xavier, turning his back on
what he loved and facing the heat and plagues of
India. We see John Coleridge Patteson bidding good
bye to the beautiful home in Devonshire to go forth
and meet the spear of the savage in Santa Cruz. We
see Damien craving permission of his bishop to work
and die among the lepers. We see these, and many,
many others, of whom indeed the world was not
worthy, following strange and unnataral courses, and
when we ask the motive force, they all alike cry out,
"The love of Christ constraineth me. " It was the
power of the first and great commandment that
wrought such striking illustrations of the second ; the
power of religion that effected such a splendid moral
ity ; the power of love to God that produced such a
love to neighbor as the world had never seen.
My brethren, I should much have liked to have
treated the subject from a more positive point of view,
to have pointed out some of the lessons which the
Church may learn from this new movement ; to have
dwelt upon its higher side, the help that it may give
to the purification of politics, the interest that it may
awaken in the State, the advancement that it may
give to education. I am not insensible to this side of
the question. But the error that vitiates it all is too
serious to ignore. With its Sunday meetings, it is
with some becoming a substitute for Religion, an

Culture and Religion. 47
apology for living without God in the world ; it there
fore seemed necessary to show its deficiencies, weak
nesses and helplessness, and to proclaim yet again
that " there is none other Name under Heaven given
among men whereby we must be saved" save only the
Name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The Mosaics and Memorials

OP THE

Prayer Book.

BY

The Rev. W. P. LEWIS, D. D.

LECTURE III.
THE REV. W. P. LEWIS, D. D.
THE MOSAICS AND MEMORIALS OF THE
PRAYER BOOK.
That eccentric genius, Ruskin, is in the habit of
calling attention to his books, by giving them an odd
and puzzling names. Such are "Ethics of the Dust,"
"Sesame and Lilies," "Unto this Last." These at
tract curiosity ; and curiosity makes readers. I ex
pressed my fear to one of your members, that to an
nounce a lecture on the "Mosaics of the Prayer Book"
might seem sensational. I leave it to what follows to
justify the title.
Let me remind you, first of all, that there have
been five editions of the Prayer Book of the Church
of England, since the Reformation, They are : The
first and second books of Edward VI., in the years
1549 and 1552; the Book of Elizabeth, 1559 ; James
I., 1604; Charles II., 1662. Our own book of. 1789
was a revision of the book of Charles II., and our
book of 1892 is a revision of that of 1789. It may be
regarded, therefore, as the seventh edition of the First
Book of Edward, with differences (considering the

52 The Mosaics and Memorials
history of the intervening three and a half centuries),
surprisingly small. And further, before the Reforma
tion there were five "uses," as they were called, that
is, authoritative standards of Divine service in differ
ent Dioceses, the word "use" having a much deeper
meaning than that of mere custom. They were the use
of Salisbury, Hereford, Lincoln, York and Bangor.
The first of these was the leading one. The preface
of the First Book of Edward says : "Where, there
fore, there hath been great diversity in saying and
singing in Churches within this nation, some follow
ing Salisbury use, some Hereford use, some the use of
Bangor, some of York and some of Lincoln. Now,
from henceforth, all the whole realm shall have but
one use." But, while what was diffuse was con
densed ; what was superfluous or erroneous was
pruned away, this book was no more a new Prayer
Book than the Church of England of that time, was a
new Church.
You see a number of tiny stones or wooden cubes,
painted in different colors, passsing into different
shades. They lie in confusion ; but let the deft hand
of the artist arrange them, and you have the breastpin
or the flower. Indeed, this skill does not stop short
till it has achieved a copy of one of the Masterpieces
of art. Seen a little way off, you admire the general
effect ; scrutinized closely, the skillful join, the Cal-
lida Junctura is appreciated. Now, it is thus that I
would illustrate a few places of the Prayer Book. We
may find some, so small even in their entireness that

of the Prayer Book. 53
we think they cannot be broken up ; and yet, on ex
amination, we find that they can be taken to pieces
and resolved into cubes by different hands, and some
times of centuries far apart.
"The Declaration of Absolution, or .Remission of
Sins, to be pronounced by the Priest alone, stand
ing. ' ' Such is the simple heading. Surely it is the
work of one pen. Not so ; in the two Edwardian
books, and that of Elizabeth, it stood "The Abso
lution, to be pronounced by the Minister alone."
The words "or Remission of Sins" were added
in King James' prayer book. In the book of 1662,
the word "Priest" was substituted for Minister, and
the word "standing" was added, and finally, in our
own prayer book, the words ''Declaration of" were
inserted before the word "Absolution," making it
read as it now does. So that four changes have been
made, before this simple title has been brought into
its present shape. This little mosaic is made up of
four pieces.
Take again, the versicles which precede the Ven-
ite, "Praise ye the Lord." The Lord's name be
praised." The latter seems a necessary sequence to
the former. Yet "Praise ye the Lord" stood alone,
in the first four revisions of the prayer book ; and it
was not until 1662 that the antiphon was added "The
Lord's name be praised.,"
Indeed, there is a Biblical illustration of the long
stretch of time, during which the materials of the
prayer book have been put together, derived from that

54 The Mosaics and Memorials
part of the Bible which is used six times as often in
the prayer book as any other part : the Psalter. This
also reads like the continuous work of one author,
and yet a score of authors have contributed to it, ex
tending from Moses, the probable author of the 90th
Psalm, down at least to Nehemiah (for whose author
ship of the 119th Psalm there is to my mind, strong
internal evidence), and perhaps much later ; a period
of at least a thousand years. It takes ages to form
the rocks on which God writes His testimony, and a
thousand years in His sight are as one day.
Again, up to 1662 the clergy had been described
in the Litany as Bishops, Pastors and Ministers of the
Church. This was changed to Priests and Deacons,
to oppose the Presbyterian ideas as to the nature of
the Christian ministry, which had grown up duirng
the last thirty years. We have two cubes even in this
short phrase.
Take again the group of Collects and Prayers>
which closes our order for daily evening prayer. We
open with the collect for the day from the Communion
office, which gives an eucharistic tone to these lesser
offices. This collect is in most instances taken from
the Sacramentary of Leo or Gelasius, Bishops of
Rome, in the fifth century, or Gregory in the Sixth.
The collects for peace and that for aid against perils
are of the year 494, and taken from the Sacramentary
of Gelasius. The prayer for the President and others
in authority is based upon one by Archbishop Whit-
gift for the Royal Family, written for the book of

of the Prayer Book. 55
1604. The prayer for clergy and people is to be found
in the Sacramentary of Gelasius : that for all condi
tions of men was composed by Bishop Sanderson, for
the last revision in 1662. The General Thanksgiving
was drawn up by Bishop Reynolds, at the same time,
and the prayer of S. Chrysostom carries us back to
the fifth century and away to Constantinople ; occur
ring in the Liturgy which bears the name of that
Saint. The pieces which have been put together in
this mosaic have been 1 , 200 years in collecting.
In the Communion Office we have five "Proper
Prefaces" to the Tesanctus or Angelic hymn. That
hymn is indeed the oldest part of the prayer book, for
who can tell the ages before ages, when the angels
were created ; when " All the sons of God shouted for
joy. " Those for Christmas day, and Whitsun Day,
were written for the first book of Edward VI. Those
for Easter day and Trinity Sunday, came from the
sacramentary of Gelasius, in 494 ; and that for Ascen
sion day, is due to Gregory the Great, about 600. The
prayer of humble access ' ' We do not presume to
come " is from the liturgy of S. Basil, in the fourth
century ; and the Post Communion Thanksgiving is
taken from a Mesopotamian Liturgy, in the fifth cen
tury. Gathered from every source undique collata,
are the fragments which have made up this flower.
Or take the fragments of the office for the visita
tion of the sick, beginning " O Saviour of the world."
This is derived from a mediaeval office of extreme
unction. The prayer. "The Almighty Lord, who

56 The Mosaics and Memorials
is a most strong tower, " is of 1549, and the benedic
tion " Unto God's gracious mercy " is (in substance)
the blessing with which Aaron, the high Priest,
blessed the Jewish nation. Three thousand years in
tervene between the earliest and the latest of these
fragments. Look, next, at those portions of the office for the
burial of the dead, which are not takenfrom the Bible.
The second, third and fourth paragraphs of the medi
tation at the grave, beginning "in the midst of life
we are in death, " are said to have been composed by
Notrer, a monk of S. Gall in Switzerland in the ninth
century, and to have been suggested by the danger to
which he saw some workmen exposed in building a
bridge. Our present form of committal first appears
in the second book of Edward, 1552, and is very like
a form found in the ' ' Consultations ' ' (as they are
called) of Archbishop Hermann of Cologne, a prelate
who took a prominent part in the reformation. The
prayer and collect which conclude the office, belong
respectively to the books of 1662 and 1552. " In the
midst of life we are in death, " is one of two extra
Biblical phrases which many persons suppose to occur
in the Bible. The other is ' ' God tempers the wind to
the shorn lamb." This has a very unecclesiastical
source, although the author was a clergyman. It is
found in Sterne's Sentimental Journey.
Again, the form in which the elements are ad
ministered in the Holy Communion has the air of
having been written by one author. Yet this is very

of the Prayer Book. 57
far from being the case. The earliest form that can be
found, consists simply of the words "The Body of
Christ, " " The Blood of Christ. " In the sixth cen
tury it was enlarged into ' ' The Body of our Lord
Jesus Christ preserve thy soul. The Yor£ and Here
ford uses seem to have enlarged this into the first half
of our present form, which was adopted in 1549; it
then read " The body of our Lord Jesus Christ which
was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto
everlasting life. " In the book of 1552, this was
omitted and the latter part of our present form sub
stituted. " Take and eat this in remembrance that
Christ died for thee, and feed on Him in thy heart by
faith, with thanksgiving. " This is one among the
many changes for the worse that were made in that
book. The prayer book of Elizabeth, 1559, combined
both sentences as we have them now.
There is only one more mosaic that I will put to
gether before your eyes. How smoothly do our open
ing exhortation and confession run on ; yet they were
very far from being the work of one man. For the
basis of our exhortation, we must go back to a homily
of St. Leo, in the fifth century, used in the mediaeval
church of England during Lent. The confession is,
in itself, a mosaic ef different passages in Romans VII,
We have followed too much the devices and desires of
our own hearts. " " Sin wrought in me all manner
of concupiscence, " We have offended against Thy
holy laws, " " The law is holy but I am carnal, sold
under sin . " " We have left undone those things

58 The Mosaics and Memorials
which we ought to have done : and we have done
those things which we ought not to have done. "
" The good that I would I do not, but the evil that I
would not that I do," "And there is no health in
us. " "In me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good
thing. " " According to Thy promises declared unto
mankind, in Christ Jesus our Lord, " "I thank God
through Jesus Christ our Lord. "
Thus far, the mosaics of the prayer book. Now
let us turn to its memorials.
What, you ask, is a memorial ? It is a clause,
phrase or word in the prayer book suggestive of an
ancient custom of Divine service now disused, or of a
change in ritual which has been given up, while there
remains this trace of its former existence. In some of
those cases we shall have to go to the English prayes
book, where the memorial expression has been dropped
out of our own. Three unecclesiascial illustrations
will show what a memorial is. One of the English
Courts of Justice is called the Court of King's (or
Queen's) bench. This takes us back to the times
when the sovereign actually sat in court and adminis
tered justice in person. But the custom of which the
title is a memorial, is obsolete ; for when James I.
proposed thus to air his learning, be was informed by
his own judges that he had no right to sit in the court
which bore his name.
In traveling in England, the question is often put
to you at the ticket office, "Where do you book to ? "
Now, there is no booking at all ; to register the names

of the Prayer Book. 59
of railway travelers in the end of the nineteenth cen
tury would be impossible. It is simply a trace, a
memorial, of the days of the stage coach, when there
was not one traveler fora hundred now, when everyone
was booked before starting.
The other illustration is this : The stars and
stripes of the American flag are the coat of arms of
the Washington family. They may be seen on the
monument of an ancestor of General Washington, in
little Brington Church in Northamptonshire, which
was the parish church of the family. They are thus
a family memorial.
The first I shall mention may be thought subtle,
but it is real. In Edward VI. 's first book, in the ser
vice for the baptism of infants, there is a rubric that
the water in the font shall be changed once a month
at the least. It seems to indicate a scarcity of water
in the England of that day, and certainly detracts
from the symbolism of purity, which the water of bap
tism should represent. A group of prayers was di
rected to be said, at the time of the renewal of the
water, applicable to all baptisms that should take
place during the month. In the later books, and in
our own, this direction for a monthly change was
left out, and the custom has been to renew the water
at everj- baptism. Our rubric requires that the font
shall then (that is, at the time of baptism) be filled
with pure water. The prayers have been retained,
only limited in their application to each occasion o
aptism. But one instance has been overlooked.

60 The Mosaics and Memorials
' ' Grant that whosoever is here dedicated to Thee ' ' not
only the candidates present. This one word " whoso
ever " is an undesigned memorial of the time when
there was a monthly change.
I next turn to the memorials contained in a few
of the collects. That for the second Sunday in Lent
is "Almighty God who seest that we have no power
of ourselves to help ourselves, keep us both outwardly
in our bodies, and inwardly in our souls, that we may
be defended from all adversities which may happen to
the body, and from all evil thoughts which may as
sault and hurt the soul. "
Now, why should this prayer to be kept out
wardly in our bodies and to be defended from all ad
versities which may happen to the body, belong to
this particular Sunday. The reason given is, on ac
count of the rigorous way in which the Lenten fast
was kept in early times. It was supposed that ten
days of stringent abstinence would begin to tell upon
the health, and this is a prayer to be delivered from
such ill effects. I am not aware, however, that in the
present way of keeping Lent, there is such peril to
health, as to need being guarded against by special
prayer. The collect for the third Sunday after Easter is
" Almighty God, who sbowest to them that are in
error, the light of Thy truth, to the intent that
they may return into the way of righteousness,
grant unto all those who are admitted into the fellow
ship of Christ's religion that they may avoid those

of the Prayer Book. 61
things that are contrary to their profession, and may
follow all such things as are agreeable to the same. "
This collect, thus used in the Easter season, brings
before us the fact that Easter was the great season for
baptism in the early church. By the third Sunday
after Easter those who had been so long under in
struction as Catechumens would be all gathered in ;
the admission into the fellowship of Christ's relig
ion would be complete, and the prayer for their future
Christian consistency would be very appropriate.
There is anothei collect which, although it opens
up no ancient custom, is connected with a crisis in the
world's history, which vitally influenced that of the
church. It is that for the fifth Sunday after Trinity.
" Grant, O Lord, that the course of this world may be
so peaceably ordered by Thy goverance that Thy
church may joyfully serve Thee, in all godly quiet
ness." It was written by Leo, bishop of Rome, when
the Huns were threatening the dying western empire.
Many were struck with its applicability, when it was
used on Sunday, June 28th, 1863, on the eve of the
battle of Gettysburg ; when this part of the country
was in suspense as to the fate which the fortunes of
war might bring upon them.
I may mention, in passing, the clause in the
prayer for persons going to sea, "Preserve them from
the violence of enemies." This only alludes second
arily, to legitimate maritime warfare. It carries us
back to the days when Algerine pirates infested the
sea ; and it is a prayer for deliverance from them.

62 The Mosaics and Memorials
The Communion office affords interesting mem
orials. Let me mention two of them. You recall the
rubric, "Then shall the Priest, the Bishop, if he be
present, stand up, and, turning to the people," pro
nounce the Absolution. And at the close, "Then the
Priest, (the Bishop, if he be present) shall let them
depart with this blessing." Now, it is eminently
proper, that, at every service the Bishop, if present,
should pronounce the Absolution and Benediction,
for "Without all contradiction, the less is blessed of
the better. ' ' But why this careful reservation in his
favor, when he is present at a celebration ? For you
will observe, it is assumed that in the Episcopal pres
ence, a Priest may be the celebrant. And, of course,
a Priest is as capable of offering the Eucharistic Sac
rifice, as a Bishop. The Bishop celebrates as Priest.
I think these Rubrics are memorials of a state of
things which has long since ceased. In the early times
dioceses were much smaller than they are now. Each
town with a small surrounding territory was a diocese
in itself. Accordingly the Bishop's Cathedral Church
was far more important than it is now, even in dio
ceses so small as those in England. It was the Church
in which the principal functions were held. To it,
both Priests and Laity flocked, and the Bishop, as
Rector, was, of course, the Celebrant in the Holy
Communion, with assistant Priests. The Basilica
with a semi-circle of Sedilia for the Clergy (which was
the usual shape), shpws this. Here, we may suppose
the great body of the communicants received. Now, all

of the Prayer Book. 63
this is changed . Dioceses are larger and in this coun
try a few years ago the Cathedral was so utterly un
known that its introduction was considered a novelty.
But in this Rubric which reserves to the Bishop (when
he is present), the Absolution and the Benediction, we
have, I think, a memorial of the time when he was
the usual Celebrant ; and his Altar the Altar of the
Diocese. To bring out the other Eucharistic Memorial, let
us begin at the fountain head, and trace downwards 1
"Salute one another with an Holy kiss," "Greet ye
one another with a kiss of charity." These apostolic
directions, perfectly natural and proper as the expres
sion of Christian brotherhood among Oriental nations,
related to the celebration of the Holy Communion,
and were meant to express the Christian love that was
to circulate among communicants. In the Liturgy of
St. Clement are the Rubrics, "And let the Bishop
salute the Church, and say, let the Peace of God be
with you all, and let the people answer, and with thy
spirit." And let the Deacon say to all, salute one
another with the Holy kiss, and let the Clergy kiss
the Bishop, and of.the Laity, the men the men and
the women the women." Later, it would appear that
the celebrating Priest saluted the Deacon with a kiss
of peace, accompanied by the words, "Pax tecum,"
"Peace be with thee," and a small plate of gold or sil
ver, or copper gilt enameled, a piece of carved ivory
or wood overlaid with metal, was carried around,
having been kissed by the Priest ; in order, as it were

64 The Mosaics and Memorials
to communicate this kiss of peace. Hence it was called
the Pax. Many such are to be found at this day in
museums and Church treasuries all over Europe. In
a catalogue of the ornaments of St. George's Chapel,
Windsor, occurs this "item a fine pax, silver gilt, en
amelled with image of the Crucifixion, Mary and John,
and having on the top three crosses, with two shields
hanging on either side."
I have thus given you the pedigree of the Ex
hortation, "Ye who do truly and earnestly repent you
of your sins and are in love and charity with your
neighbors, draw near with faith." These words are
simply the older Anglo-Saxon substitute for the fer
vid Oriental greeting, and are a memorial of it. I
have seen this kiss of peace and charity, in the Rus
sian Church in Paris, (It is called the Holy Eastern
Church), exchanged by the women, directly after re
ceiving the Holy Communion.
A few illustrations, gathered here and there, will
close this branch of the subject.
The following Rubric precedes the order for daily
morning and evening prayer in the English prayer
book :
"The Minister shall read with a loud voich some
one or more of the sentences of Scriptures that follow
"With a loud voice." So, before the Lord's Prayer,
"With an audible voice." The reason is, that the
Lord's Prayer has been said in the offices for the dif
ferent hours, under the breath, the Priest raising his
voice at the words "Lead us not into temptation,"

of the Prayer Book. 65
to which the choir responded, "But deliver us from
evil." The Reformers wished to break up this prac
tice with regard to the Lord's Prayer, and to extend
the change to the whole service. Curiously enough,
there is no such direction preceding the Lord's
Prayer, at the beginning of the Communion Office,
and why ? Because that had always been distinctly
made an exception, and the Priest directed to say it,
so as to be heard.
In our prayer for Congress there is^what may be
called an ecclesiastical flavor. The reason is this:
With the changes in language incident to the change
in form of government, it is the same as the English
prayer for Parliament. In both we have the prayer
for thy Church. Again, "These and all other neces
saries, for them, for us, and thy whole Church." This
prayer first appears in the present form in the revis
ion of 1662 ; and among the deliberations of the Lower
House of Convocation at that time (which answers in
a general way to the clerical part of our House of Cler
ical and Lay Deputies), we find an entry, "The form
of prayer for Parliament and Synod was introduced."
The Synod or Convocation, the Church Parliament,
used to sit at the same time with the State Parliament.
With this fact in view, the author of this prayer in
cluded both in its scope.
The Rubric preceding the Te Deum in the entire
series of English prayer books, requires it to be said
or sung in English. The preface to the first book of
5

66 The Mosaics and Memorials
Edward says, "The service in this Church of Eng
land, these many years, has been read in Latin to the
people, which they understood not." What a change
this was.I close with the title for the first day of Lent,
Ash. Wednesday. This one syllable opens up a mem
orial of the Ashes, carefully prepared from one of the
great feasts, sprinkled upon the head in the form of a
cross ; or on the forehead of penitents kneeling, or of
those about to communicate with the admonitory
worlds, ' 'Remember that thou art dust and ashes, and
±o dust thou shalt return."
Your lecturer trusts that he has justified the title
"Mosaics and Memorials of the Prayer Book." One
cannot but be impressed with the vast labor that has
been spent in bringing all these materials together
and welding them into one harmonious whole.
Four languages, the three over the cross, Hebrew,
Greek and Latin ; and our own English have con
tributed to make it what it is. These materials in
clude about thirty-three centuries, for part of the
Institution Office is an American composition of this
very century. It was not completed until 1808. The
changes in our present prayer book from the former
edition seem small, yet the hard work of twelve
years was necessary to bring them about, and the
work cost the temporary loss of health of the chief
actor. It is worth mentioning that each of our
American prayer books was preceded by an unsuccess
ful experiment, the book of 1789 by the proposed

of the Prayer Book. 67
book of 1786, and that of 1892 by the book annexed
of 1883. Think of the labor spent upon those books,
which, after all, were not judged fit to be a finality.
If the facts that have been stated lead you to prize and
study the book of Common Prayer more and more,
they will not have been put before you in vain.

Christian Nurture,
BY
REV. GEORGE WILLIAMSON SMITH, D. D.,
Delivered at St. Andrew's Chjtrch,
Nov. 14, 1894.

LECTURE IV.
REV. GEO. WILLIAMSON SMITH, D. D.
CHRISTIAN NURTURE.
A marked change has taken place within a half
century in the views entertained in regard to the re
ligious training of children, and indeed on the whole
subject of education.* In the general revolt from the
severe views and methods which formerly prevailed in
New England, more care is exercised to see that children
are secured their individual freedom than that they are
properly disciplined and instructed in religious ways.
It is noticeable that while no pains are spared to pro
vide the best physical and intellectual training, and,
on occasion, all needful pressure will be brought to
bear in these directions, the religious endowment of
the child is often regarded as something apart from
his true nature. It is to be dealt with by indefi
nite suggestions and timid persuasions, rather than
by positive teaching, under a trembling fear that some
undue encroachment may be made upon God's re
served right in the child. This is in marked contrast
with the views which prevailed two or three genera
tions ago. Then the responsibility for religious train-

72 Christian Nurture.
ing was recognized, and whatever deficiency might
be permitted in other directions, there was no dan
ger that this vital matter would be neglected.
The question before us this evening relates to the
extent to which responsibility for a child's religious
training must be acknowledged.
2. It is reported that a distinguished writer, lately
deceased, on being asked when education should be
gin, answered, "A hundred years before the child is
born." Such is the late Dr. Holmes' emphatic testi
mony to the importance of heredity. It is so well
known that we need only state it. Few of us have
not met with the doctrine of heredity as an excuse for
many weaknesses and objectionable habits of individ
uals who cross our path. Not so often, perhaps, we
find the Christian graces attributed to the same cause.
One manifest result of organized society is the ac
cumulation of property so that each generation be
gins where the other left off. Like the Israelites on
entering Canaan, the new generation possesses great
and goodly cities which they builded not, and houses
full of all good things which they filled not, and wells
digged which they digged not, vineyards and olive
trees which they planted not. In like manner each
generation inherits physical, intellectual and moral,
and we add, spiritual traits which are the result of the
lives, labors and devotions of its fathers. On this
point we are indebted largely to modern research
which has demonstrated that while man has natural

Christian Nurture. 73
instincts like the brutes, a large share of those he now
possesses are the result of education. Such are those
which constitute the difference between the savage and
the civilized man. A living writer points out that
' 'those characteristics which constitute the difference
between the men and women of modern Christian
communities and the men and women of ancient
heathen civilization, have been acquired under the
guiding and controlling influence of Christianity. They
began in voluntary acts, performed from choice and
conviction, and most often, not without self-denial,
sacrifice and danger. These acts are repeated by per
severing effort until they become fixed habits, and
they are transmitted by the law of heredity to their
offspring. In this way the virtues of those early be
lievers have become so much a matter of habit and of
course with us, that we forget that men and women
have not always been such as we now see them, or
that we are indebted to what Christianity has done
for us, for this beneficent change. Virtues which were
then scarcely so much as thought of, which people
were neither expected to have nor respected for hav
ing, have now come into vogue and are regarded as
indispensible to respectability in any social commu
nity."* The same author reminds us that Galton, in
his work on Hereditary Genius, contends that from
this point of view the institutions of celibracy and
monasticism during the Middle Ages were a great dis
advantage to modern Europe. They withdrew the
* W. D. Wilson, D. D. Foundations of Religious Belief .

74 Christian Nurture.
most intellectual, the most gentle, and the most re
fined of both sexes, as clergy, monks and nuns, from
the ordinary sphere of life and parentage, so that the
race was propagated by the coarsest, least intellec
tual, and the most animal part of the population.
In this paper it is assumed that the law of Hered
ity is accepted as governing the transmission of tenden
cies, at least, to children, and that this enhances the
strength of all educational influences that fall in with
with these tendencies, whether for evil or for good.
2. Children come into the world by no volition of
their own, and are the most helpless of earthly crea
tures. They are dependent upon others for shelter,
for food, and for a thousand attentions necessary to
their existence. Never in all after life, are weakness
and want so great; and they call for constant and in
telligent care such as only experience can give, while
the children themselves are unable to make their wants
known or even to construe them as wants. The food
which shall nourish them, the objects which shall first
and lastingly impress their senses, the early thought
which shall awaken their intelligence, the actions
which they shall instinctively imitate are all under
the control and direction of some other person . There
is still, so to speak, an organic connection between
parent and child. The child is still enveloped in the
personality of the mother, and is the most precious
part of her own being, from which, only long after, is
he separated. He learns to live under the smile of
love, and he shrivels under the frown of anger ; but

Christian Nurture. 75
he cannot choose to hear or see other than what is of
fered him. When he begins to understand, he must
hear such words as others utter, and accept such sen
timents as are poured into his soul. He must go to
the teachers selected by his parents, study the books
given him, associate with the company in which he is
placed, be pressed and shaped and formed, in language
and manners, in the mould selected by the parents.
The Creator might have sent people into the
world in the full possession of their powers without
these limitations. The only example which we have
of this is in Adam, and it is a most discouraging one.
He might have created them an order of beings instead
of a race , and caused each one to stand or fall in his own
individuality without the power of good and evil over
others, which is the awful birthright of every child,
and the awful responsibility of every parent. Nay,
further, He might have given instant maturity to every
child at birth. That He did not do so implies a pur
pose to be accomplished For reasons satisfactory to
Himself, the Creator provided that people should be
bom young and helpless, and be placed in the charge
and under the control of those who had lived, and
learned by observation, experience and training what
is right and good, and what is wrong and evil. They
are, as we have seen, absolutely at the disposition of
others. It is idle, under these circumstances, to claim
exemption from responsibility for the religious bent
of the child. There must be religious training, or
life is dwarfed and impoverished at the outset.

76 Christian Nurture.
One great department of thought and sentiment
will be left unawakened ; and neglect in this re
gard, while the other faculties are exercised, puts
the child, on the best construction of the case, at a
disadvantage all the days of his life. A wise mother
knows that children imbibe tastes, habits, and even
principles for life from those with whom they are as
sociated, even in infancy ; and reserve in one direc
tion is just as certain of life -long effect as positive
teaching in another direction.
Now Memory is continuous. The memories of
children will be filled with knowledge of some kind —
why should that which will make them wise unto Sal
vation be excluded ? Memory will go with them as
they advance in years. It will recall with reverence
the religious teachings of early years. In life's dark
est hours they will be a safeguard and solace, and in age
a ground of hope when consciousness of other things
tends to cast them down. There is wisdom in the
Eastern legend which relates that Solomon, tormented
for the wickedness of his mature years, yet had a prom
ise that" his heart consumed with flames" should in
time be relieved of its anguish because of the piety of
his youth. The holy memories of early years often
come in to preserve from despair those who have
fallen ; and many a soul launched suddenly on the dark
and mysterious ocean in which the path of life ter
minates, instinctively lays hold of the memories of
home, of Sunday School and Church Festival, as a
raft of safety on the troubled waters.

Christian Nurture. 77
The Godly Nurture of the child is provided for
and guarantees are given for his proper rearing, in this
fact of his helplessness and his entire surrender into the
hands of those who are under the most powerful mo
tives to see that what he needs is given him. The
helplessness is met by a mother's love, which is the
strongest affection known to the human race. The in
stinctive identification of the mother with her child
puts at the child's service the quick instincts, the de
veloped intelligence, the trained faculties and the
matured experience which his helplessness requires.
Maternal love seeks for the child everything that is
best for him. The mother sees here an opportunity
for the cultivation of virtues and graces which she
confesses she has failed to acquire. She knows the
great possibilities of human life as well as its failures.
With heart swelling in gratitude to God for His un
speakable mercies, she would naturally fill the young
mind with beautiful and holy thoughts of heaven, and
of God. Again, while the power which provides for the
child's wants is accompanied by the disposition and
intense longing to do what is best for him, the child
is the incarnation of receptivity. He eagerly reaches
out for that which will expand and develop his being,
and fill its capacity. He is endowed with a spirit of
imitation, and instinctively repeats what is done by
others. The tricks and tone of voice of the parent
will come to the surface in after life. He will im
plicitly believe the most improbable statements if

78 Christian Nurture.
made by some one whom he trusts. There is a readi
ness to accept them without any other proof than the
mere statement. " No age, " says Bushnell, " offers
itself to God's truth and love and to the quickening
spirit whence all good proceeds, with so much ductile
feeling, and susceptibilities so tender. The child is
under power and authority, too, for that very purpose
it would seem, of having the otherwise abstract prin
ciples of all duty, impersonated and made visible, and
thus brought home to his practical embrace ; so that
learning to obey his parents in the Lord because it is
right, he may thus receive, before he can receive it in
tellectually, the principle of piety and obedience. "
And there is another aspect of our subject about
which a word ought to be said. Everything in life
receives a color or construction from the mind which
apprehends it. The same events will appeal to differ
ent minds in different ways. If the mind can be per
manently colored (and it seems to follow from what
has been said that it is colored,) by the influence of
early years, it is imperative that a child learn to see in
all things the presence and power and love of God. This
is the source of contented submission in all life's sor
rows and vicissitudes. The parent can determine in
large degree the happiness or unhappiness of the
child's future by imbuing his mind with Christian faith
at a time when it is plastic and ready to receive its
bent from those to whom God has said : "Take this
child and nurse it for Me, and I will give thee thy
wages."

Christian Nurture.

79

If, now, the case has been stated correctly, it fol
lows that every precaution has been taken that
the child may be brought up "in the nurture and ad
monition of the Lord. " To neglect the opportunity
of instilling holy thoughts and good desires, to refuse
to exercise parental authority in regard to religious
teaching and observances does not secure the child's
independence. That is out of one's power. He is de
pendent, purposely made so. He would naturally
plunge into evil by his own experiment from the simple
impulse of curiosity , or the instinct of knowledge . He
is made dependent for the sake of security from evil,
and to give him a moral and spiritual bias before physi
cal maturity, with its strong passions, is attained.
The facts of natural life have been set forth at
much greater length than was intended ; but they
seem to establish a sufficient foundation for all the
claims of Christian people as to the propriety, right
and duty of religious teaching. We pass to the
special provisions made by our Lord in Holy Baptism
for directing and strengthening the forces already
brought into operation for the training of the child.
3. By the establishment of a spiritual discipline,
the law of heredity and the impulse of maternal love
have a chance to do their appropriate work.
The Church with its teachings and holy offices
has been established as the instrumentality for the
nurture of the Divine life in the child. Its influence
and power continue after the age of independence is
passed, and it surrounds a man with safeguards and

80 Christian Nurture.
strengthens him in his spiritual nature as long as life
lasts. Into this spiritual family he is born, or reborn
in Holy Baptism. As by his birth the child is placed
in new relations to its parents and to the world, so by
being born into the Church by Baptism he is placed in
new relations to God through the instituted channels
of grace. " It is the Spirit that giveth life " in the
beginning, and it is by the operation of the Spirit that
the true life is developed from the germ in the natural
life, into maturity. The fruits of the Spirit as enumer
ated by St. Paul are especially exhibited in childhood.
We recognize the force as well as the beauty of
our Lord's declaration, that •''of such is the kingdom
of heaven." The ordinances of religion involve influ
ences of the most lasting character. The person who
uses them is under a course of training, by which his
nature is purified of its corruptions and carried on to
perfection. In the life of the family, every thing
depends upon the kind of influence and the objects with
which the child is surrounded, as to what language it
shall use, what manners it shall have, what temper it
shall cultivate. By incorporating him into the Church,
he is placed where all good received into his heart in
other relations will be strengthened and made a sure
possession ; and the especial graces of the Spirit,
which appertain to a never-ending life, will be im
planted and increase. And methinks this is no small
thing, that the child should grow up in the knowledge
that he is of a nature so exalted that it is capable of
union with the Divine Nature ; and that the Son of

Christian Nzirture. 8r
God has verily, taken this nature upon himself. Nob
lesse oblige, men say, and it is a most powerful motive
in a man's soul to truth, honor, valor and generosity.
But how insignificant in comparison with the con
sciousness that he is a "son of God" is all thought of
earthly rank, and wealth and honor, to which this
sentiment ordinarily appeals !
It is not a baseless assumption that the child, too
young to choose for himself, should, by his parents
who have him as it were in their own lives, be given
the advantages which have wrought in them that faith
and character which they know belong the children of
God. If they should provide for their child's bodily
and intellectual wants, things which they know and
believe to be for his welfare, they cannot, without
failing in their highest duty, neglect to place him un
der those influences by which he is to be brought up in
"the nurture and admonition of the Lord." By and
by the parent's guidance will give way to the volun
tary choice of the child, or the parents may die when
he is yet young; the life of the family will cease ; its
members be scattered ; but the Church survives fath
ers and mothers and families, and protects with its
sheltering arms, instructs by its teachings, and
strengthens by its sacraments, those who, though
grown to manhood in the world, are yet children of
God. What is taught in early years in the Family con
tinues, and is the permanent factor in education in the

82 Christian Nurture.
Larger Family of the Church, into which the child is
incorporated by Holy Baptism.
4. It is of the utmost importance that during that
period of life when parental authority relaxes its
vigilance, because the child must be separated more
and more from the fireside and act as a free, moral
agent, that the principles of Christian life which have
been instilled into his mind should be made his own
by a continuance of the same influence in the society
into which he is introduced. This is generally ac
knowledged. Provision for religious instruction and
religious services is widely advertised by schools
which appeal to parental solicitude. I know of no
school which ventures to recommend itself to the
great public by repudiating all professions of a relig
ious character. On the contrary, it is sometimes
found that parents who are openly indifferent to relig
ion will carefully select for their children some school
in which religion is made prominent.
Our individuality is never a simple thing. The
atmosphere which we breathe, and the opinions of
those around us largely determine our dispositions. If
a child finds in the new world of school the elements
of the home life which is dear to him, he takes them
to his heart with avidity, and thus makes his own, by
voluntary choice, the faith and love for which he was
prepared by causes operating upon him before he
could act for himself. It should be further remem
bered that we are never, all our life long, beyond the
reach of laws which affect our character. In the Family ,

Christian Nurture. 83
the Church, the School, the State, there is a spirit
which either favors or opposes religion, and all men are
more or less subject to it. If the spirit of the Family
and the Church are on one side, and the spirit of the
School on the other, then it is odds but that the
School will awaken in the young mind, just begin
ning to act for itself, a desire for emancipation
from restraints, and for the enjoyment of a coveted
freedom. Instead of a continuous and harmonious
development on the line of Family and Church
life there will be a divergence when what was made
much of in earlier years is discredited, by being made
little of when life with its allurements and temptations
opens out before him. If a boy find in College an in
difference to religion, or if it seem to be tolerated only
as a concession to weakness, he soon comes to consider
it as an assertion of manhood to disregard it altogether.
If he find it relegated to an inferior position, if religious
studies and religious services are indulgently excused
while the secular exercises are sternly exacted, is it
strange that he should learn to put upon the same
level as the authorities over him, the teachings of
Home and the Church? I beg to suggest as worthy of
serious consideration whether the college days of a
boy, when the intellect is most active and greedy, and
the avenues of knowledge are all opening out before
bim, when the temptation which assailed our Lord
when He was a young man approaches with its al
lurements, and good and evil daily struggle for the
mastery, when character is forming and settling —

84 Christian Nurture.
whether these are not the days when God's word and
will, His love and His promises should be exalted by
services, and sacraments, and daily prayer ? By these
things we co-operate with the Holy Spirit of God, which
exists with the natural life and struggles with it for the
gradual subjection and ultimate destruction of one or
the other. This Church of ours with its conservative char
acter, its Catholic faith, its educational methods which
have accomplished so much in the past, has no mean
or insignificant part to play in this country, if she
will offer her well-rounded system of Christian Edu
cation and Culture, amid the wreck and chaos of old
educational systems and methods.
5. Up to this point we have considered the case of
only that small part of our youth who are in circum
stances to enjoy such educational advantages as their
parents may elect. With the overwhelming number
of children this is not the case. They cannot have
the entree to the noble boarding schools which are in
creasing daily in number and influence. They can
be spared only to attend the public schools for a few
years before they enter upon the work of the office or
the factory. These public schools do not, and do not
pretend to give religious instruction and they are,
therefore, regarded with by disfavor many devout and
godly people. It is alleged that to sharpen the intel
lect without cultivating the moral nature is to do in
jury rather than good to the individual and to the
community. To make men keen-witted without sub-

Christian Nurture. 85
jecting them to corresponding moral restraint is to
prepare a danger for the future. Individuals become
more adroit and skillful in bad practices, or firebrands,
for example, in the confusion attendant upon the re
adjustment of our industrial system. On the other
hand, in view of the prodigious power of a religious
education of a certain kind upon an individual, the
great majority of citizens refuse to permit the introduc
tion of religious teaching into the Common School-
The moral training involved in school discipline is
deemed all that it is wise to attempt. I state the
case weakly and inadequately, I am aware, but my
aim is. simply to recall the fact.
In this state of affairs the question is often asked ,
What are we to do for the children in a religious way ?
Now let me say, my friends, that I am thankful that
we have our common schools ; I am thankful that
their business is instruction rather than education ; I
am glad that they do not meddle with the sacred right
and prerogative of the Family and the Church. I am
glad that they afford no excuse to the one or the other
to neglect the duty and privilege of training young
people in the knowledge and love of God. Both the
Church and the Family are divine institutions ap
pointed for this very thing, while the common schools
are established by the State as an instrumentality for
training young people to discharge the duties of citi
zenship. The Divine Command which bids us give
to Caesar the things which are Caesar's, tells us also
to render unto God the things which are God's.

86 Christian Nurture.
Where parents delegate their power to persons chosen
by them to discharge the duties of religious training
in connection with secular training, under the author
ity of the Church, as in our choice schools, they are
discharging their Christian duty towards their child
ren in a way which brings together the three instru
mentalities of religious nurture very effectively, and,
perhaps, most profitably. But no common school
could do this. The parents cannot select the teach
ers. The number of children assembled for a specific
purpose is too great for effectual religious education,
which is very much of a personal thing. It cannot be
done by wholesale — still less by an authority not
recognized as religious, and the Stace cannot confer re
ligious authority. While there are no better, as there
are no more useful or honorable people than the great
body of public school teachers in this country, they
cannot fill the position of Parent, or Minister of Relig
ion, by virtue of any commissions given them by the
State. I believe it would be a most deplorable thing to
teach people to look to the common schools for Chris
tian nurture. In the Faribault plan this was not pro
posed, but an accredited and recognized religious
teacher was to be introduced into the common school,
at certain times. And let us be thankful that even this
has failed. When people have learned to depend upon
the public schools for religious as well as secular in
struction, the result is most disastrous when, in the
swift revolutions to which states are liable, the control

Christian Nurture. 87
passes into other hands. If the Family and the Church
have surrendered their power to others, or gone into
partnership with them, they cannot easily recover con
trol. They have taught people to look elsewhere for
education in religious matters, and when it ceases to
be given there, the Divine authority has been so dis
credited that it takes long to recover it. On this point
I find an instructive editorial in the " Church Stand-
aid " of July 28, 1894. It is entitled " An Ethical
Experiment. " It grew out of the fact that by the
union of Church and State in France the Church was
accustomed to do its educational duty to children
through the instrumentality of the State school's, thus
absorbing them into the church. The Family also had
been largely relieved of the responsibility of caring
for the child's religious training at home. By the
revolution of 1870, the Government of France fell into
the hands of men of Atheistical tendencies, and the
Church could no longer control the work of education.
It found itself helpless. Its own independent system
having been abandoned, on the expectation of using
the schools established and maintained by the State,
it was not ready for the work now devolving upon it.
The result was a strikling illustration of the necessity
of religious training on the one hand, and of the im
prudence, to call it by no harsher name, of depending
on any secular arm to do the work of God.
The editorial is as follows : "It is maintained by
secularists and agnostics that morals have no connec
tion with religious belief. Their favorite argument

88 Christian Nurture.
is the argument of experience. They point to men of
unquestionably pure and noble character who have
had the misfortune to lose religious faith, and con
clude from such instances that the loss of faith does
not and cannot injuriously affect conduct or charac
ter. The fallacy is obvious enough. These men,
even when they think they have ceased to be Chris
tians, are in fact products of Christianity. They in
herit Christian culture. They have been educated in
a Christian atmosphere. They are saturated with
Christian prepossessions. As a man who becomes
blind, is still a man, it may be said that these persons,
even in the darkness of unbelief are still, ethically
speaking, Christians.
"The only experiment which could adequately
settle the question at issue would be to take young
children and educate them in the principles of atheism.
That experiment has unhappily been made on a large
scale. Since the fall of the Third Empire, leading
French statesmen have sought to impress upon the
youth of France an atheistical education. Religion
has been banished from the schools. The very name
of God has been erased from their text-books. In an
immense majority of cases it is to be feared that the
French home has been as godless as the school ; and,
if statistics are to be trusted, the number of French
men — and, consequently, of French fathers — who con
form even externally to the requirements of any kind
of religion, is almost incredibly small. Practically
speaking, therefore, the youth of France have been
brought up for twenty years past in accordance with
the views of secularists and atheists.
"Now, it is a singular fact that while the num
ber of criminals has not greatly increased in France,
the great majority are boys of twenty years old or less,
and it is said by men who are intimately acquainted

Christian Nurture. 89
with the criminal classes that 'the most daring, hard
ened and sanguinary criminals with whom French
justice has had to deal of late, have been with few ex
ceptions mere youths !' M. Guillot, a magistrate of
large experience, who has been connected with many
famous trials, declares 'that although statistics show
no general increase, the contingent of young criminals
is growing more and more numerous, and that youth
ful miscreants were never so remarkable as now for
cynicism and ferocity.' 'I had supposed,' he says,
'that during my long career as Juge d' Instruction, I
had seen the lowest depths of human corruption ; but
it is only since I have had to do especiaily with young
criminals that I have become acquainted with it.' M.
Guillot does not hesitate to declare that the with
drawal of religious influence from the instruction im
posed upon the children of the people has had much
to do with the production of these juvenile criminals.
Man}' of them, he says, are completely debauched at
the age of thirteen ; and when they are brought be
fore the Judge they appear to be perfectly reckless.
They do not even to pretend to shed a tear, and they
appear to be perplexed and astonished when they are
asked to account for their evil conduct. The convic
tion forced upon M. Guillot by his own practical and
painful observations is that to deprive children of re
ligion is to rob them not only of the religious idea,
but of all ideas, and is followed by the loss of all sense
of duty. "That is what Christians believe; and now that
the Christian belief has been so sadly verified in a
crucial experiment, it might be hoped that secularist
theories would be somewhat modified. But will they ?
We suspect not. There is, therefore, only so much
the more need that Christians should require the secu
lar education of the schools to be fully supplemented

90 Christian Nurture.
with religious training at the Church and in the
Home." The editorial dwells upon one aspect of the ques
tion in presenting the need of Religious Instruction ;
but it suggests another, that such instruction should
be quite independent of the State. As the writer says,
we must look for Christian nurture to the Church and
the Home. These two are permanent in their form,
in constituent elements and the spirit which controls
them. As Dr. Dyke says in his lectures on Sociology f
"the Home lies at the center of social reform. As it is
one of the chief sufferers when things go wrong, it is
also one of the chief remedial agencies, because its ef
fects are felt at the fountain head." The Family
should co-operate with the School and the Church,
rather than let these absorb the functions of the
Family. The early training in the home is all im
portant and should continue. "It would be well for
parents to keep well informed about the work in the
common schools so that they could supplement their
efforts." It would be well for the parents to be well
informed of the work of the Church, especially in the
Sunday School, that they may supplement and
strengthen it.
Not to weary you further, I venture to suggest
that to the two Divine Institutions of the Family and
the Church, we must look for the impartation of the
knowledge that maketh wise unto Salvation, and for
the nurture which will, as in the case of the child of
Nazareth, make men perfect before God.

Immortality.

SOME ASPECTS OF THE ARGUMENT FOR IMMOR
TALITY OF MAN.

REV. CHARLES JAMES WOOD.

"The ordinary preception of sensible things or
matters of fact involves the determination of a sensi
ble process, which is in time by an agency that is not
in time."
T. H. Green, Prolegomena to Ethics.
Man is not by any means convinced as yet of his
immortality. All the great religions have in concert,
more or less positively, affirmed it to him ; but no safe
logic proves it, and no entirely accepted voice from
some farther world proclaims it.
Sir Edwin Arnold, Death, — and Afterwards.
" 'Where are the dead people ? Why don't they
come back ?'
'They live with God,' answered Margaret.
'But God is everywhere,' says Johanna. And so do
you. If God can live- with me and with my
dead people, isn't it unkind of Him to live with
both of us apart?'
'Hush, hush, Elias. No. He knows it is better for
you to live here now, and He will bring you to
them afterwards.'
'And does Tonnerre [the dog] live with God too ?' "
Maarten Martens, God's Fool.

LECTURE V.
REV. CHARLES JAMES WOOD.
IMMORTALITY.
It will not be possible for me to cover all the
ground connoted by the title of my lecture. I shall,
therefore, attempt to avoid the more beaten paths of
the argument, and to pursue some of the less fre
quented ways. There are certain aspects of the argu
ment for the Immortality of man which deserve
our attention even at the expense of a complete, sym
metrical and well-balanced plea. I trust that you pi e-
fer me to lead y'our thoughts along these by-paths
rather than in fields you know as well as I.
This is not a sermon or a theological brief, but
an inquiry. The question is too serious to trifle with.
It ought to be settled, if possible, for our satisfaction
upon some solid basis. Men are not going to believe
in immortality because Bible or Church says so, for
that is a begging of the question. The Bible does
not teach absolute and universal immortality of the
soul, with any certain voice. It is clear that some of
the writers of the sacred books of the Hebrews be
lieved in a continued existence of man after physical

94 Immortality.
death. ('•) Some did not>' It does not seem prob
able that the Hebrews were unaware of the prevalent
opinion of neighboring races in absolute immortality.
The relations of the inhabitants of Canaan
with Egyptian and Assyrians could not have
left them ignorant of that cardinal doctrine of the re
ligions of the Nile and Euphrates valleys. We find
a form of the idea of immortality prevalent in the
Priest's Codex of the Hexateuch. Also, the Semitic
languages contain vestiges of this doctrine, even in
the roots of words. We cannot therefore accept the
statement that the Hebrews had no concept
of immortality unless very late in their tribal
existence. It is possible for us to suppose
that the mission of the Hebrew nation to form a
righteous commonwealth was deemed to be attain
able best by avoiding all other- worldliness, and by
fixing the attention of the people upon this life.
The example of other religions had been a warn
ing to Judaism not to emphasize the life after
i. Eg. Gen. III. 22. V. 24. VI. 3. II. Sam. XII. 23. II.
Kings, II. 1-11. Ps. XVI. and XVII. 15. Is. XXVI. 19. Dan.
XII. 2. fProv. XI. 4-7-19-28. XII. 28, perhaps.) The universal
myth of a tree of life implies general belief that the cause
of immortality resides outside humanity, not inside. The
Soma of Hinduism, and the Ambrosia of the Greeks were the
food of immortality. The Egyptians, Mexicans and Persians
as well as the Assyrians had each their tree of life, symbolical
of the same idea, that immortality is to be acquired.
(2) Piepenbring, Theology of the Old Testament, 263, ff.
Smend, Lehrbuch der A. T. Religionsgeschicbthe, §27.
Schultz, Old Testament Theology, II-328.

Immortality. 95
death and postmortem rewards and punishments. The
Hebrew system had its fault in materializing religion,
but, after all, its main object was attained. And,
while the word, immortality occurs nowhere in the
Hebrew Bible, yet the idea is there, even when denied,
as by the author of the book we call Ecclesiastes, and
by some of the Psalm writers.^ Graetz thinks that
the belief in immortality was not accepted by the
Jews till they had been discouraged by national de
feat, captivity and subjection.
It may have been, or it may be, either
now or in the future, that there exist races of
men who have no concept or idea of immortality.
As a matter of fact no such race has been found. The
study of comparative religion and myth furnishes sin
gular theories of a future life, but they are affirmative,
not negative. Mr. Tylor observes W'The theory of
the Soul is one principal part of a system of religious
philosophy, which unites, in an unbroken line of men
tal connection, the savage fetish worshiper and the
civilized Christian." The idea of immortality is
universal. How did it arise ?
It is coming to be recognized that feeling, or
sense, is a fundamental factor of life and thought,
that some facts like the mathematical axioms
are known to us by feeling and not by reason,
at any rate not by syllogism. The univer
sal belief in continued existence of the person is due,
1. eg. Ps. VI. 5. LXXXVIII. 10. CXV. 17.
(2) Primitive Culture, I. 501".

96 Immortality.
I believe, not to the savage's theory built upon his
dreams, (l) but to this innate sense or feeling. Words
worth touches upon it in his familiar ode, as :
* * * Those obstinate questionings
Of sense and outward things,
Falling from us, vanishings ;
Blank misgivings of a creature
Moving about in worlds not realized,
High instincts before which our mortal nature
Did tremble like a guilty thing surprised.
Robert Browning reminds us of the reality of this
sense from which it is impossible to reason ourselves
away. * * * " How can we guard our unbelief,
Make it bear fruit to us ? — the problem here.
Just when we are safest, there's a sunset-touch,
A fancy from a flower-bell, someone's death,
A chorus-ending from Euripides, 
And that's enough for fifty hopes and fears
As old and new at once as nature's self,
To rap and knock and enter in our soul,
Take hands and dance there, a fantastic ring,
Round the ancient idol, on his base again,
The grand Perhaps !"
(1) King, The Supernatural, Its Origin, Nature and Des
tiny ; H. Spencer's Sociology, Max Muller's Anthropolog
ical Religion.

Immortality. 97
And even Fitzgerald's pessimistic and sceptical
Omar Khayyam is driven to cry out in protest against
the assertion of universal mortality.
" Ne'er a peevish boy
Would break the Bowl from which he drank in joy ;
And He that with His hand the Vessel made
Will surely not in after Wrath destroy."
It would be easy to multiply quotations from the
poets in witness of the validity of the sense of immor
tality, but I will add only one more which expresses
clearly the recognition of this feeling, which is a fact
and factor with which we cannot decline to reckon.
The lines are from Bayard Taylor.
"So, oft, some moonlight of the mind makes dumb
The stir of outer thought ; wide open seems
The gate where through strange sympathies have come
The secret of our dreams ;
The source of fine impressions, shooting deep
Below the falling plummet of the sense,
Which strike beyond all Time and backward sweep,
Through all intelligence.
All outward vision yields to that within,
Whereof nor creed nor canon holds the key ;
We only feel that we have ever been,
And evermore shall be."
I grant you that this feeling is entirely subjective,
but is it for that reason necessarily an illusion or an.

g8 Immortality.
hallucination ? It belongs to man in his normal state.
The universality of the feeling is against the suppo
sition that it arises from morbid conditions. We must
therefore recognize this sense as a fact. What shall
we do with it ? It is fully as valid as the feeling of
individual existence ; it is as universal as our knowl
edge of the human race ; therefore, it is not scientific
to deny its testimony.
Hume's argument against immortality is the
strongest in modern times. More recent objectors
have added nothing to Hume's arraignment of the
theory. In his reasoning there are weak as well as
strong points. His fundamental error is in assuming
that the soul is only a bundle of perceptions. (l> If this
were true, sleep or trance or a faint would amount to
non-existence and destroy the identity of the in
dividual. Philosophers may admit such a supposition
as that when they sleep they do not exist, but plain
people of common sense never will. Again, Hume
says that " the Gospel alone brought life and immor
tality to light." This statement involves a mis
translation of New Testament Greek*2' and a false
statement of fact. Man from the earliest years that
we can trace in language and in legend and in myth
has believed in his own immortality. Again, Hume
i See Green's acute refutation of this theory, "Prolego
mena to Ethics," p 69. ff.
2 II Tim. The word is not aOavaaia, immortality, but
afdapnla. incorruption. At I Tim. VI. 16 it is written that God
alone has immortality.

Immortality. 99
urges that ' ' what is incorruptible must also be ingen-
erable." Iron is generable, so is the crystal, and both
have been generated, probably since mankind. They
are incorruptible, at least crystal is. Certain infusoria
are generated and at the same time they also are im
mortal. They may be destroyed but they never die.
Likewise, biology teaches us that the basis of plrysical
life, protoplasm or bioplasm, cannot die. The germ
plasm of Herr Weismann would be warranted quot
ing the boast of Shelley's Cloud, " I change but I
cannot die." In this instance physical science fur
nishes an analogy of great force in favor of the im
mortality of all life.
It is true that this argument goes far. It proves
the deathlessness of all living organism, as well as of
the human individual, unless we urge that the perpet
uity of life is conditioned upon conformity to the
environment. Readers of Professor Drummond's
" Natural Law in the Spiritual World," are familiar
with the data and details of this argument. So,
while Hume's negative reasoning is weak, as negative
reasoning on this point must from the nature of the
case ever prove to be, some of his positive state
ments are strong and deserve attention. He is right
in asserting that the theory of natural immortality or
indestructibility of the human mind is implicitly the
atheism of Spinoza.
He is right also in pointing out that the assertion
of absolute immortality, when based upon the identity
and continuity of perception, implicitly includes per-

ioo Immortality.
haps the plants and beasts, because we cannot say
with certainty that they have no mentality, no per
ception. This, the author of " Where is My Dog,"
has recently used seriously in the affirmative and,
with Pope's poor Indian,
" Thinks admitted to that equal sky,
His faithful dog shall bear him company."
Mr. Huxley finds difficulty in understanding how
the soul, a pure immaterial body, could act and be
acted upon by the material body. But Mr. Huxley
mistakes in assuming that the two are of different
nature. In point of fact we do not know what in its
last analysis matter will prove to be, whether whirl
ing vortices of force, out -put of will, or atoms hard
like grains of sand and mechanically indivisible. In
light of modern investigation the latter theory appears
untenable. When you, with all your hopes and fears,
with all your thoughts and will, with all your loves
and ambitions, your dreams and character, stand
in some museum or laboratory looking down upon a
specimen-case containing the elementary substances,
salts, gases, acids, water and flint, etc., that, when
combined, would make up your living,' palpitating
body, can you deny the possibility of a resurrection
into a higher life ? What then is the curious central
force which combines these elements into an or
ganism so wonderfully different from its constituents ?
Whence came the force ? Whither does it go ? To
say that it ceases to exist when these elements sepa-

Immortality. 101
rate, is to make an assumption without the support of
inference and analogy. Against such a supposition the
doctrine of the indestructibility and conservation of
energy must protest, upon grounds purely scientific.
For the force which makes a living organism and
abides therein is not, scientifically considered, a result
but a cause. It is a peculiar force which science can
not create by combination nor can it analyze.
Therefore, science cannot show that this force may be
transformed into some other form of force. Physical
phenomena disprove its quantitive and qualitive co
ordination with the material organisms. It is a well-
known fact that the material part of the human body
is in a state of continual flux, so that in the case of a
person who has lived seventy years the molecules
have changed several times. But the man remains
the same individual. What is it that persists and
predominates these changes ? What is it which
remains entire and the same amidst this ceaseless
process of dissolution ? The answer is obvious. And
if the soul persists and survives this continual disso
lution, why should it not survive the final dissolu
tion? While the argument that I am about to state may
not appeal to the average mind, yet it has seemed to
me worthy of your consideration and reflection. The
principle of human mentality works upon the condi
tions of space and time yet is not conditioned by them.
Who can measure or weigh a thought or the soul that
thinks ? How describe the quantity of mentality ?

102 immortality.
Similarly, the experiences of dreams and ecstacies
show how litfcle the time element controls or conditions
the soul. W We appreciate Kant's words, "Time passes
but in it passes all that is changeable." Now, if this
be true, we get a glimpse at eternity in the soul.
Perhaps the Hebrew writer meant this when he said
of the Creator, "He set Eternity in their [men's]
hearts."2 I hardly need point out the conclusion. If
eternity be in the substance of man's soul, then time,
change, and decay have no place there. "Alles
Verganliche Istnur ein Gleichnis."
I admit that this argument is metaphysical, yet
it is none the less founded upon a fact in the sphere of
mentality, (i. e., the soul,) with which we are forced to
reckon, and it signifies somewhat to the most rigid
empiricist. Other metaphysical arguments starting from the
simplicity, the continuity and the identity of the
soul, I shall for the present pass by.(3) They are
bewildering and they do not absolutely prove. Yet
out of all the controversy of centuries this has come
forth as a plain, positive result, — there is in the consti
tution of man a something which is the substantial and
permanent condition of existence, the foundation
of identity, of sensation, of perception of the
phenomena which we call "worJd." The phe
nomena shift and change, phantasmagoria of the
i Du Prel, Philosophy of Mysticism.
2 Eccl. III-ll.
3 See page 113 below.

Immortality. 103
unknown. The one thing we know abides. W'Our
belief in the soul's unity rests not only in our
appearing to ourselves such a unity, but on our being
able to appear to ourselves at all." Now, although
this be settled, yet it does not prove absolute immor
tality, because it carries with it no assurance that the
soul now existent will always exist. Immortality
means endless existence.
The inference from the principle of survival in
nature is that what is fitted to survive will continue
its existence. So the souls fitted to live will live,
those not in conformity with the environment perish ;
though perhaps not often instantaneously. For a liv
ing creature placed in an air-tight room inevitably suf
focates if only gradually. This analogy, if true, is far
reaching in its result as we shall see later.
If you believe that there is a God, the moral
Governor of the universe, it is difficult to reconcile
that belief with the supposition that no human being
survives death. For as it is awful to contemplate the
endless existence of souls in a universe empty of the
Father of spirits, so is it ethically unreasonable to
contemplate the solitariness of God when all
souls have died out. Such a denoument would
reduce the universe to an Aristophanic irony,
a diabolical farce. . Even Kant admits this, as every
theist is forced tq do.
Is continued existence of the conscious individual
man after death an ascertained fact ? The universal
1 Lotze, Microcosm us.

104 Immortality.
consensus of mankind to the faith in continued exist
ence of man furnishes a powerful argument, which
throws the burden of proof upon the denier, but it
does not prove with scientific certainty, i. e., accord
ing to the method of physical science. This proof the
spiritists and spiritualistic mediums boast that they
give. Their claim to be heard is that they alone can
convince the world of immortality. Some of them
confront us with the awful prospect of an immortality
without God.*1' Is the evidence of the spiritists trust
worthy and adequate ? The Seibert Commission
pronounced the whole mass of spirit phenomena that
they examined to be composed of illusion , hallucina
tion and fraud.'2' The prestidigitators assert that
they can produce any of the manifestations afforded
by spiritualistic mediums, or in seances. The late
W. Irving Bishop, who repudiated any connection
and compact with spirits or ghosts, caused more
striking phenomena than those offered by spiritual
istic mediums. The theosophists also deny the com
mon theories of spiritualism, and claim to produce the
same manifestations of astral bodies and demons.*3'
Consequently all this sort of proof fails. But let us
look a little in this direction. The Society for
Psychcial Research, which contains the foremost
psychologists in England, has been long engaged in
I F. P. Cobbe, Essays, deals with this proposition as
incredible. 2 Report of Seibert Commission. University of Penna.
I 3 Occult World, A. P. Sinnett. Isis Unveiled, H. P. Bla-
vatsky, I. 69. 345. A Modern Priestess of Isis. Solovyoff.

Immortality. 105
the rigid examination of this question of continued
existence as proven by apparitions or phantasms of
the dead. While the laws of psychic phenomena are
still largely unknown, the investigations conducted by
Professor Sidgwick's committee have yielded some
conclusions of permanent worth.*1' The special pur
pose of this committee was to determine the value of
the testimony given by apparitions of the dead to the
fact of existence of man continued after death. All
allowance was made for subjective error, for halluci
nation, fraud, illusion and the like. A considerable
residuum of undeniable evidence remained. Was
this due to chance ? The question still remains open .
We must calculate the probabilities according to the
mathematical law. Such calculation shows that an
appearance of a phantom of a dead person by chance
is one in 19,000, i. e., it should be 19,000 to 1 that
there is no causal connection between the death or
dead person and the phantasm, but as a fact the
ratio of such undeniable occurrences is about 19,000,
to 440 i. e., 40 to i.*2'
This furnishes a presumptive argument in favor
of continued existence. Even if we suppose the cause
of these apparitions to be due to telepathy of the
deceased and not an actual presence of the ghost, the
state of the case remains the same .
1 Proceedings Soc. Psych. Research 26. X. 25.
2 Apparition and Thought Transference, Frank Podmore
P. 225.

106 Immortality.
Telepathy or the transferrence of thought without
media of sensible material, I believe to be regarded as
an established fact.*1' This fact, together with the
curious phenomena of subconsciousness investigated .
by M. Alfred Binet, of Paris, demonstrate an opera
tion of human intelligence which is beyond the
known limitations of the brain and nervous system of
the human body.*2' These phenomena afford a pre
sumptive refutation of the theory that the intelligence
ceases when the brain stops working, as Edgar A.
Poe illustiated to the extreme in his horrid tale,
"The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar." However,
we have no other theory to explain the phenomena of
telepathy, double consciousness, and similar psychic
phenomena, save that of the dual nature of man, soul
and body. As scientific thinkers we are driven to
accept this hypothesis, and the hypothesis assumes
the form which forbids us to doubt the possibility if
not probability of the soul's continued life. No sci
entific law or statement can be absolutely proven as a
fact, only there can be an enormous probability in its
favor, as for example the law of gravity. The same
difficulty, namely of seeing now these can be in
fluence across distance, across void, Wirkung in Feme,.
stands as much in the way of our believing in gravity
as in telepathy. The theory of the soul's continued
existence has in its favor this enormous amount of
probability. The highest developed scientific

i Id.
2 The Double Consciousness, Alfred Binet.

Immortality. 107
thought does not now deny immortality in a sense.
On the contrary, it asserts, "the continuance of
mentality," but not of individual "mentality. This,
when sung by George Eliot in her famous verse
about corporate immortality, and coldly stated by
Wundt*1' in terms of physiological psychology,
amounts to nothing more than an abstraction, un
less it be a restatement of the pantheistic theory
of Sakyamuni, Spinoza and Schopenhauer. But
philosophically considered this pantheistic mental
ity is a dream, as Von Hartman has demonstrated.
The Absolute must philosophically considered be un
conscious. Thus physiological psychology affords us
no assistance, it completes the circle of self-negation,
and the wearied intellect takes up the burden of the
poet, —
"The day is dark and the night
To him that would search their heart ;
No lips of cloud that will part
Nor morning song in the light :
Only gazing alone,
To him wild shadows are shown,
Deep under deep unknown
And height above unknown height.
Still we say as we go, —
'Strange to think by the way,
Whatever there is to know,
That we shall know one day.' "
1 Human and Animal Psychology. W. Wundt. p. 438.

108 Immortality.
It already appears that the point of contest for
the future is the term, personality. At that point the
ology, metaphysics, and psychology must meet to set
tle their differences and come to an understanding.
For the serious, sincere sceptics of the day profess a
faith in God and immortality, but not in a personal
God nor in a personal immortality. I accept the fol
lowing definition of personality : " The quality in a
subject of being consciously an object to itself." Now,
while it might well be possible, as Professor
Knight1 suggests, that there might be a higher mode
of existence than the personal, yet that mode is not
really conceivable by common sense, and it seems to
me unscientific to entertain the conjecture as a work
ing hypothesis. On the other hand, if this definition
be true, it follows that the infinite may be the most
truly personal, because he requires no non-ego to be
come conscious. If we proceed a step farther in our
logic and posit that He is infinite, because entirely
holy, that it will follow that as man progresses in
righteousness his personality becomes more fixed and
his immortality more probable. God is immortal be
cause he is holy. Man is immortal after the likeness
of God. According to this view it is character and
not substance which is the ground of immortality.
This principle answers Hume's objection and corre
sponds to our Saviour's doctrine of Eternal Life. It
also gives us a glimpse of whatever truth there may
i Aspects of Theism, p. 200.

Immortality. 109
be lurking beneath the oriental theory of Metempsy
chosis. My own conclusions about the teachings of Jesus
touching this matter of immortality have been fully
set forth elsewhere,*1' and I need not repeat them at
this place . Jesus the Christ did not mention immor
tality 2> but his doctrine was of Eternal Life. ' ' Eter
nal " signifies quality before it does quantity. It is a
perfect life before it is an endless existence. This is the
teaching of Jesus. New Testament theology is con
cerned with eternal life and the resurrection. Theo
ries of facultative or "of conditional immortality put
this in other terms than those Jesus used. Yet be
cause conditional immortality is destined to be the
dominant doctrine of the theology of the newer day, I
think that I ought to present its claims in a manner as
unbiased as I am able.
The most complete and comprehensive statement
of theory will be found in a work by Dr. E. Petavel-
Oliff, of the Genevan School, entitled " Le Probleme
de rimmortalite."*3' The Reverend Edward White, of England, and
the Reverend Charles A. Oliphant, of Massachusetts,
have both written upon the subject, but not with the
1 Survivals in Christianity, chap. VI.
2 Except in connection with resurrection He said, St.
Luke XX-35, that those who are worthy to attain resurrec
tion die no more.
3 This work has been translated into English, by Mr.
Frederick A. Freer.

no Immortality .
skill and learning of the Swiss theologian. The the
sis of Dr. Petavel's work is this : " Man, who is heir
presumptive of immortality, will not ascend the
throne without fulfilling the conditions, entering into
communion with Jesus Christ and walking in His
footsteps."*1' The objections to this theory of conditional im
mortality will readily enough occur to you as I pro
ceed, but after all has been allowed there remains a
balance in favor of the plaintiff, and therefore it
seems worthy of a careful consideration and an ex
tended statement.
In the theologies of Christianity there are three
rival theories about the fate of the soul after the death
of the body "of this flesh."
First, there is the traditional dogma of universal
and essential immortality of human beings, with end
less individual conscious existence in either bliss or
torment. Second, there is the theory of universalism, in
cluding the two varieties of the notion, future proba
tion and restoration. The medieval doctrine of pur
gatory, borrowed from natural religion, seems to have
been accepted as a method of mediating between the
first and second theories.
Then, there is conditionalism, theosophic, fac
ultative, scientific, and Christian, all four dif
fering from one another in their explanation
of the conditions upon which immortality is to
i II. 215.

Immortality. 1 1 1
be enjoyed. Whatever be the form, whether that of
Col. Sinnett, or of Spinoza, or of Prof. Henry Drum-
mond, or of Dr. Petavel-Oliff, in that form of conclu
sion meet the great intellectual currents of the day,
viz : (i) the inquiries of Biblical theology, (2) of
rational theology, (3) of post- Kantian philosophy
both transcendental and Darwinian, (4) of progressive
orthodoxy and applied Christianity.
In traditionary theology confusion has been
caused by the use of the word death in two theological
senses ; (a) cessation of life, (b) separation from God.
Death, say the couditionalists, always in the Bible
means cessation of life, and not the perpetuation of
life, albeit in agony.
The word " salvation " means conservation, pre
servation of existence. Saviour, Zojrrjp, means life-
giver. It is from e«> allied to i<'u>, to live. -<o.'u*
the causative form, means to make live. Hence Sav
iour, -MT7jp, means literally, he who makes to live.
The theory of the natural and indefeasable immortal
ity of man is accused by conditionists of being due to
the admixture of Platonism in early Christian theol
ogy. As a fact, the idea of natural immortality is older
than Plato and wider than Platonism. It belongs to
the animistic stage of human culture. When logically
analyzed we find that this theory of universal and
essential immortality is inseparable from a pantheistic
theology.'1' In the intellectual development of the race
1 The reverse of this in Hindu religion, eg., Khandogya
TJpanished 1-3, is only apparent, not real.

112 Immortality.
it has consequently negatived or neutralized itself in
human religion. For Pantheism in all its forms denies
everlasting retribution because it cannot believe that
God suffers, nor can it see any real distinction between
good and evil . The hell of modern orthodoxy is a sur
vival in Christianity of the pagan Tartarus. In reality
no one believes in an endless torment of the majority
of men in such a hell We are only light half be
lievers in that casual creed. Serious reflection shows
us that such a theory involves an eternal dualism
which denies God. Consequently men take refuge in
a belief in final restoration or in conditional annihila
tion. Some may suppose that they still believe in the
old Protestant formulas of Heaven and Hell, but their
life and actions disprove the pretence.
Christian conditionalism accepts heartily the
old theological formula, "man was created posse
non mori, that he might become non posse mori."
"Man is a candidate for immortality. Perpetual
life becomes the portion of the man who by faith unites
himself to God. The immortalization of man is the
purpose of the Divine Incarnation. The life of the
obstinately wicked is transitory. Even though pro
longed beyond the tomb, it must be finally extin
guished." This is Christian conditionalism, not fac
ultative immortality of philosophies.*1' Is it founded
I That is to say of Spinoza, Locke, Rousseau, W. Hum
boldt, Quinet, Madame de Stael, Victor Hugo, Browning,
Prof. Drummond, Hobbes, Whately, Dodwell, Watts and
Tennyson.

Immortality . 113
on the letter and spirit of the Scriptures and it is ac
cording to the analogy of the faith and of nature ? Is
it true that the soul has no native, necessary, essen
tial, inalienable, and absolute immortality ? So pro
found a thinker as Rothe remarks that " It is no
longer maintained that the human soul possesses
immortality by virtue of a supposed simplicity of
substance." The theory of Christian Conditionalism
when stated as it has just been calls for our serious
consideration. Is it true ? Is it useful ? Will the
acceptance of it make men better and hasten the com
ing of the Kingdom ? I believe that truth should
serve love. Let us turn first to a rational investiga
tion of the theory of Christian Conditionalism.
1 . Comparative anatomy and physiology furnish
no proofs of an immortal intelligence.*1' There is
no qualitative distinction between the mind of man
and of other animals. The common notion that the
instinct of animals is a special distinctive faculty is
not proven true. Science sees in man no exception
to the law of death. If evolution be true, the native,
unconditional immortality theory is in a dilemma. But
in accordance with Romans VIII, 19-24 Conditionalism
and Darwinism harmonize. I have already pointed
out the difficulties attending the use of analogies
drawn from biology. Plato, Bishop Butler and Drum
mond have relied too much upon this weak kind of
argument.

1 See Ladd, Philosophy of Mind, chapter xi.

114 Immortality.
The philosophical proofs of absolute immortality
are fallacious, says Dr. Petavel. Is he right ?
(a) Take the ordinary metaphysical syllogism :
The soul is a spiritual substance, a spirit ; a spirit is
indivisible, i. e., it cannot disorganize, decay or per
ish ; therefore, the soul is immortal. The objection
is obvious. Though indissoluble it might perish, as
a wind dies away, or a current of force fails and ceases .
It will not help the argument to say that the force
does not actually cease but changes its form, for
where then would be personal identity and individual
immortality, which is the only kind of deathlessness
that it is worth while to consider.
Again, it has been argued that if it be absolutely
endless, the soul had no beginning, and therefore its
pre-existence was from eternity. Now, since the
eternal is also infinite, the soul would be God or
God the soul.*1'
Even were this not logically true, God is able to
return to nothingness that which He called out of
nothingness. Aquinas and Des Cartes agree upon
this. Thsugh the substance of the soul were im
perishable, that would not imply exclusively an end
less perpetuity of the individual personal conscious
ness. I have already pointed out how Buddhism and
biology perceive this conclusion. Lotze calmly ob
serves*2' "There is no need for the soul to be immor
tal." So upon this side and upon that dialectics un-
i This is the conclusion of the Vedanta philosophy.
2 Lotze, Microcosmus p. 55.

Immortality. 115
dermine this hypothesis or so called metaphysical
proof of unconditional immortality.
(b) If we turn to the ontological proof of uni
versal and essential immortality of th ensoul, shall we
fare better ?
It is urged that to every idea there is a corre
sponding reality. All men have the idea, — im
mortality, therefore, all men are immortal. The
major premise is false in its implication. At any
rate, reality does not involve actual personal preser
vation. The idea that I have of $1,000,000 does not
make me worth $1,000,000. This argument, then,
proves only that immortality is generally possible.
(c) The teleological argument for absolute immor
tality is familiar to us in the fine, strong pages of
Butler's Analogy. It argues from design in nature,
from the principle of continuity, and from human
hope and aspirations. While these arguments, even
after the upset given some of them by the theory of
evolution, do certainly give firm ground for belief in
an existence of life continued after the dissolution of
the body, they do not prove either an endless exist
ence nor an universal immortality, unless we are pre
pared to admit the endless continuance of the whole
earth, because, for aught we can say to the contrary,
the universe is filled with life, and the poet who says,
"There is no death " quashes Bishop Butler's whole
case. However that may be, the change of the • grub
into the butterfly does not assure unending existence
to the butterfly.

1 1 6 Immortality .
(d) The moral proof of immortality rests upon
our consciousness of freedom, of responsibility, of
retribution and of compensation. Like the teleo
logical argument, this has been accepted by Plato,
Socrates and Cicero, by J. S. Mill, Renan and Ulrici,
by Bunsen and by Kant, as a sufficient ground for
belief in continued existence of the human person. Its
requirements do not imply an endless life of all souls „
but a potency of endless life. The conclusion of the
Conditionalists is that while pure reason gives suffi
cient ground for belief in a survival of the individual
soul after physical death, it does not warrant us in
inferring thence an absolute, necessary, essential, end
less and universal immortality.
Let us now turn our attention to their Biblical
argument for conditional immortality.
So far as lexical interpretation goes, the Septu
agint version binds together the Old Testament and
the New Testament. This the late Dr. Edwin Hatch
brought to our notice. If we know exactly the mean
ing of a Hebrew word we know exactly the meaning
of its corresponding Greek word in the New Testament,
for New Testament writers used words in the LXX or
Hellenistic sense. Vice versa, we can tell precisely
the understanding of the Hebrew text used by the
LXX, if from any source in the New Testament we
can get the exact meaning of the corresponding
Greek word.
Now lexical research gives the following grounds
for the theory of utter extermination of the wicked. I

Immortality. 117
select only a few of the words, and it appears to me
that both the Hebrew and Greek words used in the
Bible to denote the destruction of the wicked mean
annihilation or extermination.*1'
The philological argument appeals to students
alone. To others it appears like special pleading.
For a broader consideration we ask, what is the
general trend of the Old Testament teaching ? What
has Old Testament Theology to say of the immor
tality of the wicked ? Nowhere in the Bible
can be found the expression "immortal soul."*2' God
said to Adam, ' ' In the day thou eatest thereof thou
shalt surely die." Satan was the first to contradict
this, suggesting absolute immortality — " Ye shall not
surely die." God did not say to Adam, " you shall
die in body, but yourself, or soul, will live, to en
dure endless punishment. The words are, " thou [thy
self] shalt certainly die ! " Or perhaps more literally,
utterly die is involved in the Hebrew idiom.
In the Old Testament death means cessation of
life, not a continuation^' In sheol there is no work
1 Appendix I.
2 Nevertheless the idea of immortality underlies the Old
Testament writings. It is evident from (1) the term used
for the abode of disembodied spirits T\attt in clear dis
tinction from the grave 1U or 3}j?.. Gen. XXVIII-5,
XLIX-33, L-2-10. , (3) (2.) belief in the art of necromancy,
araising dead spirits by magic? Lev. XIX-31. XX-6-7. 2
Kings XXIII-26. Is. XIX-3. Zech. XIII-2-5, (3) use of the
phrases like " giving up the ghost," "gathered unto his
fathers" or " to his people."
.3 Gen. XXXVII-35. Job XIV-12.

1 1 8 Immortality.
nor device, nor knowledge. (''"Those who do evil shall
be destroved forever."*2' "He shall perish forever."
Out of 23,205 verses in the Old Testament only
four are claimed to teach unconditional immortality.
In the later books of the Old Testament the idea of
a resurrection becomes predominant. Through the
Alexandrian synagogue the Platonic heresy of native
immortality, we are told, crept into Jewish and Jew
ish-Christian doctrine, as may be seen in Apocrypha,
the Talmud, the Mishna and the Kabbala.
It may be observed in this place that the Old
Testament never confuses life with good or happiness,
nor death with suffering nor sin.*3' For instance,
Moses said " I have set before this day life and good,
and death and evil." Upon this Dr. Franz Delitscb
says, "There is nothing in all the Bible to imply
native immortality. "**'
Let us see if New Testament Theology is
consonant with this teaching. The doctrine of
, the New Testament is that*s> "God only hath
immortality ' ' and that, ' ' as the Father hath**'life in
Himself, even so hath He given to the Son to have
life in Himself:" And Jesus says, "*?'As the living
1 Eccl. IX-5-10.
2 cf . Ps. XXVII. Job XX. A concordance will give a
large number of these expressions.
3 Deut. V-33. XXVIi:?-22. Ps. XXI-4.
4 Commentary, on Gen. III-22.
5 cf. 2 Thes. I-9. 6Ae0poc ai&vios signifies annihilation
eternal in its effect.
6 St. John. V. 26.
7. St. John VI-57.

Immortality. ng
Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so he
that eateth of me shall live because of me." Jesus
teaches immortality as conditioned,*1'" This do and
thou shalt live. " St. John says of his gospel, ' ' These
things were written that ye might have life."'2' The
idea is summed up in these words, ' ' He that doeth
the will of God abideth forever." " Life eternal,"
says Reuss, ' ' is nothing more than that which is now
simply called life, the adjective merely expressing in
finite duration of existence, permanent, imperishable."
In the New Testament life is never confused
with holiness. "lam the Bread of life."*3' Bread is
a symbol, not of holiness or happiness, but of main
tenance of life. In the New Testament parables the
wicked are tares or chaff, cast into fire ; they are
burnt up, annihilated, otherwise stone or metal would
not have been used for figure of those who survive for
ever. ' ' The wicked are destroyed both body and soul in
hell."4 The wicked man utterly destroys, annihi
lates himself ia-orbv ik anoXlaa?. 5 " God," says author
of The Epistle to the Hebrews6 " is a consuming fire
I. cf. St. Luke XX, 35-36.
2. St. John XX-31.
3. St. John VI-48.
4. St. John V. 25-29. St. Matthew X-28.
5. St. Luke IX-25. cf. XVII-33. <nro>J.vpi means to
abolish, to annihilate (cf. Matt. V.-29-30): never, to endure
pain. 6. Heb. X-29. XII-26.

1 20 Immortality .
which shall devour (consume) all adversaries."
Nothing of them remains. St. John knows nothing
of a natural immortality. "God sent his Son that we
might live through him."1 In the Apocalypse only
the righteous have access to the tree of life. The
wicked rise only to die the second death. The fires
of Gehenna burn up and destroy utterly the offal.
The chaff is destroyed, the fruitless brand is pruned
from stock of humanity. Jesus Christ says in effect,
few there are that are saved. Universalism cor
rects this and says, all will be saved or nearly
all. Olshansen, who is conservative and cau
tious, says, "The doctrine of the immortality
of the soul is not to be found in the Bible nor even its
name." To this assents Th. Henri Martin in a work
approved by Pius IX. All this makes a strong case
for the Conditionalists. Yet there is more to be added
for those who would seek out the old paths to walk
therein, who desire to know the Catholic faith. The
creed is not explicit but the fathers of the church
have spoken.*2'
We now pass to consideration of passages asserted
as irreconcilable with conditional immortal life.
ST. MATTHEW X-28.
And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able
to kill the soul : but rather fear him which is able to destroy
both soul and body in hell.
ST. MARK IX43-48.
And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off ; it is better for
1. I. Ep. St. John. II-17.
1 Appendix II.

Immortality . 121
thee to enter into life maimed, than having two bauds to go
into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched :
Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not
quenched. And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off : It is better for
thee to enter halt intp life, than having two feet to be cast
into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched :
Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not
quenched. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out : it is better for
thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than
having two eyes to be cast into hell fire :
Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not
quenched. 1. cor. xv. 16-18
For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised :
And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain : ye are yet
in your sins.
Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are per
ished. EPHES. II. I.
And you hath He quickened, who were dead in tres
passes and sins : II THES. 1-7-9.
And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord
Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels.
In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not
God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ :
Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from
the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power.
REV. XIV-II.
And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever
and ever : and they have no rest day nor night, who worship
the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of
his name. Now relative to these it may be briefly observed,
as to the first text, Dr. Petavel-Oliff insists upon the
literal lexical meaning of iSa<fa^io-ai and >i-,t/.i<nu,
i. e., abolish. As to the second text Reuss says fire

122 Immortality .
that burns and worm that gnaws are symbols of total
destruction, " eternal continuance in state of annihi
lation." (cf. Jer. XVII. 27. Are the palaces still
burning ?)
Now as to the next passage. Pauline theology
teaches either a future re-union of soul and body or
disappearance of soul. I Cor. XV-18 x-oaovth.1.
Bengel says ' ' dead believers would be as if they
had never believed." The passage in Ephesians
clearly has a proleptic sense. In Thessalonians
dnb npoo-ojTzno denotes not separation, but the source
of the consuming fire. Lastly, will "death" and
" hell," (Rev. XX- 13, shows death and hell contain
no more souls) suffer agony forever ? Then some
other interpretation than everlasting, enduring pain
must be found. Prof. Bonnet says, " It tells of a des
truction without any hope of restoration."
The conclusion of the conditionalist theory is
this : Salvation is not eternal felicity alone but con
servation. Sin makes eternal life impossible because it
brings in more mortality than we can counteract by
best endeavors. For this, an expiation is necessary.
Expiation is placating the majesty of offended law, it
is not merely restoration to previous condition of
righteousness. As man by no amount of pain could
expiate the offended law, Jesus died and expiated
sufficiently. He thus brought life and immortality to
light. Now in living after the manner of Jesus we
expiate sin (fill up that which remains of the suffer-
1 cf . Bruce, St. Paul's Conception of Christianity:

Immortality . 123
ing of Christ,) and the satisfaction of Jesus' the
death added, conserves our existence, saves us, ren
ders our life unending. But by Baptism and the
Eucharist we must enter into vital union with
Christ.1 He that doeth the will of God abid-
eth forever.2 This could not be said if every one
abideth forever. "God shall be all in all," hence
evil is temporary. Eternal punishment in the tra
ditionary sense means eternity of evil. This is dualism
of the Manichees. It is selfcontradictory and logi
cally atheistic. Dr. Petavel concludes with observ
ing that, " The episode of evil in the history of the
world is a dismal parenthesis, which God has per
mitted in order to provide scope for the exercise of
liberty." This is as full and fair a presentation of the
ground work of the theology of conditional immor
tality as I know how to make. It has its strong
points and its weak. I should say it is in some form
the coming orthodoxy, and even now the faith of a
large number of thoughtful Christians.
I have stated the theory of Christian Condition
alism in pursuance of my plan to touch upon the less
beaten paths of the doctrine of immortality. I have
put in the strongest way the conditionalists' state
ment in order to be fair. As it has been stated,
1 1 This system, it will "be observed, restricts salvation to
those who have become aware of the historic Christ, and
have accepted his sacraments. This is not Pauline doctrine.
2 I John 11-17.

124 immortality .
it seems to lack moral sanction. Perhaps if the
teachings of Jesus were more carefully examined
this defect might be made good. It may be shown
that while the destrnction or annihilation of the
wicked is the result of their wickedness, that des
truction will not be instantaneously coincident with
physical death. There will be a resurrection of
the unjust as well as of the just. If the analogy be
pressed of death ensuing by reason of non-conform
ity to the environment it will appear that the second
death is the torment of a slow decay and disintegra
tion in the world of spirits. This position will, I
think, then be consistent with the teachings of
Jesus Christ and will satisfy the universal instinct
for compensation and justice, while free from the
objection of an eternal existence of evil which
amounts to dualism and denies implicitly the
omnipotence, and even the very eternal existence of
God. I presume that with me you will feel that thus far
nothing has been proven, nothing settled touching the
immortality of the soul. True ! The human in
tellect can never prove God and immortality because
they are the basis of all proof. We do not need to
prove them. Man will never be able to divest him
self of these two concepts. Men may deny them but
Man cannot get rid of them. As the French sceptic
pointed out, the very denial is an assertion.
With Kant we are forced to acknowledge this,
' ' That conviction (that there is a God and a future

Immortality. 125
life) is not a logical but a moral certainty : and, as it
rests on subjective grounds (of the moral sentiment),
I must not even say that it is morally certain that
there is a God, etc., but that / am morally certain,
etc. What I really mean is that the belief in a God
and in another world is so interwoven with my moral
sentiment, that there is a little danger of my being
the latter, as there is any fear lest I should be de
prived of the former.1 But rigidly accurate reason
ing demonstrates that there is no certitude stronger
than what a person knows himself. All other certi
tudes and knowledge are based upon this. It seems
to me more certain than what Mr. Fiske calls " a
supreme act of faith." It is a constituent element of
the human mind. It is a fundamental feeling back of
which we cannot penetrate. As Browning finely
says :
" I cannot chain my soul, it will not rest
In its clay prison, this most narrow sphere :
It has strange powers and-feelings and desires,
Which I cannot account for nor explain,
But which I stifle not, being bound to trust
All. feelings equally, to hear all sides:
Yet I cannot indulge them, and they live,
Referring to some state or life unknown.
O God, where does this tend — these struggling
aims ?
1 Kant. Critique of Pure Reason. Max Muller's Trans
lation. Vol. II-711.

126 . Immortality.
What would I have ? What is this ' sleep '
which seems
To bound all ? Can there be a ' waking ' point
Of crowning life ? The soul would never rule :
It would be first in all things, it would have
Its utmost pleasure filled, but, that complete,
Commanding, for commanding sickens it. s
The last point I can trace is, rest, beneath
Some better essence than itself, in weakness :
This is ' myself,' not what I think should be :
And what is that I hunger for but God ?
My God, my God, let me for once look on thee
As though naught else existed, we alone !
And as creation crumbles, my soul's spark
Expands till I can say, — Even from myself
I need Thee and I feel Thee and I love Thee :
I do not plead my rapture in Thy works
For love of Thee, nor that I feel as one
Who cannot die : but there is that in me
Which turns to Thee, which loves or which
should love."
Not in reason nor in philosophy but in the high
est deepest sense of our being we rest secure, that
we have the ' ' power of an endless life. ' ' Permit me
in closing to add this admirable summary of what I
have been saying, by the Reverend Doctor McClane.
The question, " If a man die shall he live again ? ' '
has ever been and must ever be one of profound in
terest to men. The prevailing spirit of any age will
determine the mental attitude of men toward such a

Immortality. 1 27
problem, and their readiness to receive or to reject a
doctrine of immortality. The men of a credulous
age who are ready to believe in the realization of the
desire of the heart or 'in the substantial reality of the
form which appears in a dream of the night, will be.
lieve in a doctrine of immortality without much evi
dence. The men of a sceptical age, especially if in
clined to materialism, will demand the reappearance
of a material body bearing " the print of the nails,"
the visible marks of past form, before they will be
lieve. The men of a scientific age will approach this
question in the reverent spirit of science, seeking to
ascertain the source of the question which is of itself
significant, and to find an answer which rests upon
known facts or upon recognized scientific conditions.
We may, therefore, ask : Does the science of our day
recognize any sufficient basis for the doctrine of im
mortality ? "To be, ' ' says Lotze, ' ' means to stand
in relations," that is to say, what anything is or is
to become is not determined simply by its own
nature, but also by the sphere of its relations and by
the objects with which it is related by means of cor
respondence. "All organic beings," says Mr. Dar
win, " have been formed on two great laws — unity of
type and the conditions of existence. In fact, the
conditions of existence is the higher law." That is
to say, the permanence and the perfection of every
organic being depends upon its finding and fulfilling
the conditions of its existence. According to bio
logical and psychological science there are two condi-

128 Immortality .
tions which must be realized, if there be an eternal
life, {a) There must be an appropriate, eternal, and
unchangeable environment with which living beings
may correspond, if moral, mental, and vital powers
are to exist forever, (b) There must be, in any cre
ated being, a capacity of entering into correspondence
with such an environment and the attainment of such
correspondence if it is to endure forever. If there is
in the universe no form of existence but such as is
changeable, transient and perishable, there can be no
eternal correspondence, and, therefore, no eternal
life. If there is any creature which has capacity only
to correspond with that which is transient and per
ishable, there can be for that creature no eternal life.
Science demands that there should be an eternal un
derlying being, and relation and correspondence with
that being, as the condition of perfect and permanent
life. Mr. Spencer says : " Perfect correspondence
would be perfect life. Were there no changes in the
environment but such as the organism had adapted
changes to meet, and were it never to fail in the effi
ciency with which it met them, there would be eter
nal existence and eternal knowledge." And we may
add that if such existence is to be a moral one there
must be a moral environment. According to this sci
entific conception also only that which enters into cor
respondence with the abiding environment would
abide ; for, as Mr. Darwin says, " Natural selection
acts so as to produce that which endures." And
Lotze says : ' ' That will last forever which accord-

Immortality. 129
ing to its excellence and its spirit must be an abiding
part of the order of the universe. What lacks that
preserving work will perish." According to these
scientific conditions, perfect and permanent corres
pondence with a perfect and permanent environment
would constitute and secure immortal life. This sci
entific basis of eternal life is precisely the basis upon
which the Scriptures base the doctrine of Christian
immortality. According to the Scriptures, the self-
existent and eternal God who only hath immortality
hath given to his Son, Jesus Christ, to have life in
himself, and hath made him the medium through
which men may come into abiding correspondence
with himself, and may thereby life forever. To know
the only true God and Jesus Christ — that is, to know
by communion or correspondence — is eternal life.
This knowledge is the knowledge of love, which has
in it reverence, and faith, devotion and obedience.
" Every one that loveth is born of God and knoweth
God." The man who knows God thus is brought
into perfect and permanent correspondence with that
perfect and permanent environment which perfects,
and, therefore, makes permanent the essential ele
ments of his nature, and which fits him, according to
Lotze's philosophical conception, to be a part of a
coherent system of things which must forever abide.
The conception of the New Testament is that the
visible world with which man may limit his corres
pondence is destined to pass away, but God will abide
amid all mutations and all evanescences, and he who

130 Immortality.
is in communion with God will abide forever. ' ' The
world passeth away, and the lust thereof" — the out
ward form and the inward desire — " but he that doeth
the will of God abideth forever. ' ' Dr. Dorner, speak
ing in the name of theology, says : "Accordingly
everything depends on the communication of the
divine life to man being assured. This is only
secured to Christians through Christ. Here, there
fore, it is sufficient to have recognized the possibility
of the soul's immortality, and its destination for this."
St. John, speaking in the name of Christianity, says :
' ' And this is the record that God hath given to us
eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath
the Son hath the life." This leads to the statement
of the single and simple truth that the conditions of
immortality which science demands, and which phi
losophy declares to be sufficient, are the very same
conditions as those upon which the Christian Scrip
tures base the doctrine of eternal life. The Christian
basis of immortality is pre-eminently a scientific basis
of immortality."

Appendix I.
TERMS DENOTING FATE OF WICKED.
12K, perish into nothingness : vanish : be lost:
blot out : etc.
a-K&Xkvpi abolish, annihilate. Ps. IX-5. Ezek.
XXII-27. Dan. VII-26. Num. XXIV-20. Deut.
VII-24. VIII-19-20, XI-17. Job IV-9, XX-7. Ps.
XXXVII-24, etc. St. Matt. II-13, X-28. Mark III
1-6. Luke VI-9. XVII-27, 29. St. Jno. X, 10.
Rom. XIV-15, etc.
'idk eat up : devour : consume.
iadiu, <f>ayu, icaTeodiu, Kareipdyu, Deut. VII.16. Is. I-
20, etc. Matt. XIII-4. Luke XV-30. Heb. X-27.
Rev. XI-5.
^dn = hcieiiru, remove. Zeph. 1-2. Hos. IV-3.
Luke XXII-32. Heb. I-12.
JH3 = an6Xh]/ii.
¦nn = o-pevwpi, extinguish. Job. XVII-5. XXI-
17. Prov. XIII-9, XX-20, XXIV-20. Is. XLIH-I7-
Matt. XXV-8. Mark IX-48.
iro = afavifa, job XXII-2o,with 2 Chron. XXXII-
21 (cf. 1 K. XIII-34) it means extermination cf. also
Heb. VIII-13. James IV-14. I Pet. IV-18. I Cor.
V-5. I Thes. V-3. Thes. 1-9. I Tim. VI-9.
mo = dnodviioKu, to die utterly. Gen. IX. 11 like

1 32 Appendix.
™D, Ex. XII-15. Lev. XVII-14, XXIII-29. Acts
III-23. Nahum. I-15., II- 1. cf. Matt. V-29, XVIII-
9, etc. nnD = diraAe'upa, E^aAe'ufio, Gen. 1-7. Rev. III-5.
Gen. VII-4. Phil. IV-3, etc.
N!fD, to find, with negative, not to be found, i.
e., non-existent. Job XX-8. Dan. XI-9. Ps. X-
15, XXXVII-36. Jer. L-20. Rev. VII-8, XVIII-21,
XX-n. I. Pet. IV-18.
In the Septuagent and in the New Testament
Karapxeu = ^tn and signifies forced cessation of work,
life, existence. Gal. V-n. I. Cor. XV-24, etc.

Appendix II.

The testimony of the Fathers appears to be sur
prisingly in favor of the conditionalist interpretation of
Holy Scriptures. The Apostolic Fathers never speak of
absolute and universal immortality, says Dr. Petavel,
and he adduces a number of citations worthy our ex
amination. i.1 " The way of the Black One is tortuous, it
leads to death eternal, wherein are things that des
troy men's souls. * * * He who chooses
[evil] shall be destroyed with his works. The
wicked will be finally destroyed in the approaching
day of judgment, when the world and the evil one
(or evil) will be exterminated."
s" The struggle to obtain immortality."
* "Should God reward us according to our works,
we should no longer exist, "s 6The Eucharist is
termed the " Medicine of immortality, i. e., an antii-
dote against death. Immortality, says St. Clement,?
i St. Barnabas. 90 A. D. Epistle, XX. XXI,
2 St. Ignatius. 115 A. D. Ep. to Rom.. VII.
3 2 Ep. to Cor. VII.
4 Ep. to Magnes. X.
5 ova In ta/iev.
6 Ep. to Ephes., XX. <j>dppanov adavaaiac, avrldoroc tov pi)
airodavelv. 7 100 A. D.

1 34 Appendix.
in the ist Ep. to Corinthians, "is the gift of
God."1 2" Those who are absorbed in wordly occu
pations will remain withered and dead in the age to
come. They will be burnt up as dry wood, their
death will be final. Those who are dominated by evil
desires will perish forever, for lusts are deadly. They
consume and kill the wicked."
3If we are pleasing to God in this world we shall
obtain the future world, for God will raise us up to
do his will. 4The last chapter of the Didache teaches
that the wicked shall not survive the last judg
ment. sThe righteous shall not die any more but
the wicked shall be punished so long as it shall please
God that they exist and be punished. 6Epistle of
Diognetus speaks of the punishment "which must con
tinue until the end " i. e., unto consummation. "The
soul is not in itself immortal but mortal. If it con
tinues solitary it tends downwards towards matter,
and it dies with the flesh."? 8Was man created
mortal? Not so. Immortal? Neither so. Man
was made neither mortal nor immortal, for if the Cre-
i XXXV.
2 Pastor of Hermas 154 A. D. Similitudes IV. (insub-
stance. „ ) St. Polycarp. 155 A. D.
3 f To Phillip, p. C, II.
4 150 A. D.
) St. Justin Martyr 164.
5 \ Dial, with Trypho, V.
6 C, X, pe%pi t'eaovq, 165 A. D.
7 Tatian 172 A. D. Ager, Greeks XIII.
a I St. Theophilus of Antioch, A. D., 186.
) To Autolycus II-37.

Appendix. 135
ator had made him at once immortal, he would have
made him a god : if he had made him mortal, God
would appear as the cause of his death.
Therefore, neither immortal or mortal did he
make man, but as we have said above, capable of
either destiny, in order that he might incline to the
things of immortality, and keeping God's command
ments, might obtain immortality as his reward, but if
he should turn aside to the things of death, disobey
ing God, he would become the cause of his own
death." 'He who preserves this gift of life, shall receive
length of days forever and ever, but he who rejects it
deprives himself of the gift of duration to all eternity
and will justly be deprived of perpetual life. Souls
receive their life and their perpetual duration as a gift
from God. Man should not suppose that to himself
belongs naturally the incorruptibility which is an at
tribute of God above. Unbelievers will not inherit
incorruptibility. 2Enlightened we become sons : as
sons we become perfect and immortal." * * *
" God's commandments are the short and direct way
that leads to immortality." s" What arrogance it is
on your part to claim God as your father and to pre
tend that you are immortal as he is. God will not
enrich himself by making us as Gods, he will not im-
1 St. Irenaeus. Heres, II. 34. A. D. 197.
2 St. Clem. Alex. A. D. 220.
3 Arnobius. A. D. 310. This is capable of two interpre
tations, but Arnobius' well understood position as a Condi
tionalist makes it clear which to take as his meaning.

136 Appendix.
poverish himself by leaving us to fall back into noth
ing." I" If, having once had no existence, they were
called into being by the presence and loving kindness
of the Word, it was a natural consequence that when
men were destitute of the knowledge of God they were
turned back again to non-existence (for evil is non-
being and good is being) they should, inasmuch as
they were called into being from God who is, be for
ever left destitute even of being, i. e., should be de
stroyed." 2If only we think it out evil diminishes existence
and tends toward non-existence. 3" There would be
no difference between the just and the unjust if every
man born into the world should become immortal.
Immortality, therefore, is the wages and reward of
virtue: it is not ingerent in our nature." A vest
ige of this ancient doctrine remains to this day in the
Roman Mass. 4" Grant that the Savior of the world
may be the giver of immortality to us."
I close with the words of a modern " father, "5
' ' Life to them (wicked) must be the beginning
of destruction since nothing but God and that which
pleases Him can permanently exist!" It must be
concluded that if the Fathers will bear the interpreta
tion put upon them in the places referred to above, the
Conditionalist theory makes a strong point. The
student must judge for himself.
1 St. Athanasius. A. D. 373.
2 St. Augustine 430 De Moribus Maincheeorum II-2.
3 Lactantius. A. D. 330. Inst. Div. VII-5.
4 Roman Missal Post Comm. for Christmas.
5 Archbishop Thomson of York.

The Church and the Age.

By

THE RIGHT REV. LEIGHTON COLEMAN,
S. T. D., LL. D.,
BISHOP OF DELAWARE.

LECTURE VI.
THE RT. REV. LEIGHTON COLEMAN,
Bishop of Delaware.
THE CHURCH AND THE AGE.
The Church as a society embodies an idea that is
older than herself. Indeed, it is eternal ; being of
God. We may reverently say that it is embodied in
Him. For there are three distinct persons in the one
God: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Thus the Church
may be accounted a representation of God. She is-
called most truly His body: with members of diverse
gifts and diverse offices, but all united for one common
purpose or end ; a corporation easily identified in
every age. The three persons in the Godhead have also-
their several offices and works, and yet all agree in
the one object of their revelation to man, and can be
even more clearly identified in every age.
But the Church and the Age are two different.
things ; however much .they may be related to each
other. In speaking of the Church , I would be understood
as speaking of her as she is ; not as she too often ap
pears to be from the inconsistent utterances and lives.
of her disloyal members.

140 The Church and the Age.
The Church differs from the age in nothing more
than in her Immutability. We talk of the spirit and
•characteristics of a certain age, as of a spirit and of
characteristics that are unlike those of another age.
And the line of demarcation thus drawn is clearly
recognized by all.
But the Church is ever essentially the same. It is,
indeed, the one institution for all men that never
changes, and that, by its very character, never can
change. Other societies, — even many that have survived
for generations — have undergone numerous altera
tions, and are subject to other changes with but lit
tle reason or interval. Agitators abound ; and easily
find supporters among the restless adventurers of the
day. Impressions are made upon them more or less
lastingly, according to circumstances; but in time they
may be utterly transformed.
Amid all the vicissitudes and — may we not add? —
— vagaries to which these human societies are liable,
it surely is, or ought to be, a matter for devout con
gratulation that the Church is unmoved and immova
ble ; that, true to her Divine origin and to her Divine
bead, she is, like Him, "The same yesterday, to-day,
and forever. "
This is no unmeaning phrase, but the statement
of a fact. To substantiate the assertion, one needs only
to compare the Church of to-day with the Church as
found in the history of any and every preceding period,
from the beginning of the Christian era. She will not

The Church and the Age . 141
always appear in her full vigour, nor always exerting
the same influence ; but she will always appear in her
integrity. She owes no allegiance to any age, as hav
ing formed her or reformed her. It is the age that
owes allegiance to her ; and by her own inherent
power she purifies herself.
Thus we are brought to consider the Indepen
dence of the Church, as contrasted with the servility
of the Age. What, after all, is the Age ? Is it not, to
a large extent, the outward expression of the domi
nant characters of a given period ? And do not these
characters, for the purpose of gaining the ascendency
or of holding it, bargain away, in many instances at
least, their own conscientious convictions ? Having
begun by catering to the fickle and unscrupulous sen
timents always to be found on demand, manly self-as
sertion becomes increasingly difficult, if not eventu
ally impossible. Base motives and corrupt methods
abound on every hand, and alluring inducements to ac
commodate herself to the spirit of the age are con
stantly presented to the Church. At times, it must be
confessed, she comes perilously near to accepting
them, and so enslaving herself. Such is her chronic
need of financial means and such at times her undue
reliance upon merely numerical strength, that it is
not, perhaps, altogether wonderful that here and there
her representatives should be found willing to sacrifice
her eternal principles to some temporary success.
But, thank God ! the Church in her corporate
capacity has been true to her independence, and gives

142 The Church and the Age.
to the age in many splendid instances proof of her
ability — because of her Divine origin, and because,
too, of her reliance upon Divine aid and direction — to
resist the glittering promises of secular patronage.
The Church once more differs from the Age in
maintaining the truth in proper proportions. There
is hardly any age that is not distinguished by some
one characteristic, which is more marked in it than in
other ages. This is almost of necessity the result of
holding some one truth out of proportion to other
truths. It is an error quite easy to commit, and one
which, from its growing out of enthusiasm for some
special phase of duty, takes on the guise of virtue.
It is the province of the Cljurch to hold and pre
sent the truth always in its entirety, giving to its
several portions their proper emphasis, in order and
symmetry. Indeed, it is the failure to do this, the
exaggeration of the importance of some particular
tenet or principle, that has led so many at times to
cut themselves off from the Catholic Church. The
very essence of such organizations is the variety of
their opinions, as promulgated by individual leaders
who labour, for the while at least, under the excite
ment of some distorted view of religion.
The age is very apt to favour and flatter the zealot
with his one idea, and to make many believe that the
great work of the world's reformation will be best ac
complished by following in his wake.
Undoubtedly, there are periods when certain
abuses or wrongs have reached such a degree of mag-

The Church and the Age. 143
nitude as to demand and warrant some especial war
fare against them. And the man who, under such
circumstances, leads the attack may, perchance, de
serve the name of hero.
But there is always danger lest, in the extraor
dinary concentration of forces in the one direction, the
vigilant and many -handed enemy may succeed in his
attack in another direction, for the while not so well
guarded. Therefore it is that the Church discourages any
such discrimination between the great truths which
she is commissioned to proclaim as would imperil the
soul by enforcing the importance of one at the ex
pense of the other, equally indispensable. She not only
inculcates law, but order likewise. Ill-ordered re
ligious views lead on by degrees not onl $>to absurdity,
but to spiritual revolution or anarchy. The fruit-
fulness, the beauty, the very life of a tree depends not
simply upon its possessing roots and branches ; but
upon these being in their natural order. So a well-
ordered system of instruction is essential to the health
and safety of both body and soul. And I know of no
institution among men which so insures this to them
in every age as the Church of God: which, under the
controlling power of order, makes the many into one,
and with that unity is capable of answering always a
definite purpose in a world so much given to diversity.
Where else, indeed, could such unity and integ
rity, with just and proportionate enforcement of truth,
be found ? Empires which seemed to be as firmly

144 The Church and the Age.
fixed as the everlasting hills have actually crumbled
away. But the Church, although existing in these
defunct empires, has gone on in continuous, perpetual
life and activity, and is proving more and more, age
by age, the right of her existence, and the necessity
for her existence.
These various characteristics of the Church, her
Immutability, her Independence, her Symmetry, may
well serve for the foundation of one other in which she
very widely differs from the Age, namely, her Au
thority. The Age really has no authority. It may
have its influence ; and this influence may be strong,.
and comparatively lasting. It may indeed be so strong
as to be taken by some for authority. But if a soul
so disposed to consider it, and yet anxious not to be
misled, it may be in matters of great concern, asks of
the Age : Who gave thee this authority ? what
answer can be given ?
Will the Age say that it has authority because of
the voice of the majority ? But real authority comes
from above, not from below. And history does not
afford any sanction to the theory that righteousness
and numbers are always found together. The great
est crime ever perpetrated upon the earth was the
cowardly act of one who gave sentence that it should
be as the clamorous populace demanded. The famil
iar adage : Vox Populi, vox Dei, is open to several
interpretations. It may mean that God inspires the
people's voice. But it may also mean that whatever
the people demand God is ready to approve.J.

The Church and the Age. 145
It is the worship of the majority that causes
much of the present weakness and corruption of so-
called political morality. For if the will of the ma
jority be always right, the object of statesmanship, of
political life in general, will always be to take the side
of the majority.
This, however, is not statesmanship. Plato of
old called it Flattery. It saps the very foundation of
all authority, and practically puts conscience to death.
Clearly, therefore, the Age can lay no just claim
to authority. But the Church can. Hardly anything impressed
His hearers as much as the authority with which
Christ delivered His instructions. It is so, speaking
in His name and by His commission, that the Church
delivers her instructions to-day.
She may seem to be, and actually may be, with
the minority oftentimes; but this in no wise impairs
her Divine charter.
She founds her claim to be heard not upon the
consent of her members, nor even upon the wisdom
and equity of her utterances; but upon the sovereignty
of her Head. Assured of this, she speaks with no un
certain sound, saying : Thou shalt ; and Thou shalt
not. In answer to the suggestion that the popular
will, whether right or wrong in itself, should be
obeyed, Washington wrote prior to the adoption of
the Federal Constitution : "It is too probable that
no plan we propose will be adopted. Perhaps, another
dreadful conflict is to be sustained. If, to please the

146 The Church and the Age.
people, we offer what we ourselves disapprove, how
can we afterwards defend our work ? Let us raise a
standard to which the wise and honest can repair ; the
event is in the hand of God."
It is just such a standard that the Church always
carries in her hands ; the standard of rightful au
thority. Of course, she encounters opposition. The Age is
very apt to say something disparaging of her au
thority. It may even go to the length of denying it
altogether ; and, with effrontery, invade her domain.
In many instances, when they meet, one or the other
must give way ; they cannot go together. And the
Age forsooth pleads necessity, says it cannot rise to
the Church, and deems the Church unreasonable if she
will not herself descend. But the soul that has already
experienced the inconstancy of the Age, and has
yearned, in its own restlessness and uncertainty, for
some steady, reliable guidance, rejoices in the privi
lege of belonging to a visible organization which
claims and deserves to speak with authority.
Indeed, any age might be glad for such an organ
ization, whose members make a habit of obeying con
scientiously its dictates, as the laws of a spiritual
mother. For having so yielded to such authority, men
will be much more apt to discharge faithfully any
minor obligations which may rest upon them in their
various walks in life.
Still another characteristic of the Church in which
she differs from the Age, is her Impartiality. She

The Church and the Age. 147
treats all her children alike. Partaking of the spirit
of her Divine Head, she is no respecter of persons.
Let me remind you again that I am speaking of
the Church as she is, and not as she at times seems to
be in the conduct of those who are untrue to her prin
ciples. I know that not infrequently among them
leniency is shown in one direction, and denied in an
other, that some are favoured and others ignored. But
for this unjust discrimination, the Church as such is
not to be held responsible. Her teaching is always
against it. The chief antagonist in her way is the
spirit of the Age. A spirit which, with the added force
of heredity, maintains distinctions among men based
upon grounds utterly indefensible.
The Church realizes her maternal relations to
those who belong to her, and refuses to allow such
differences as exist between them to prejudice her for
or against any one of her children. She furnishes the
one home, to which all may come as to a veritable
place of refuge who are in anxiety, disappointment,
weariness, and want. What the visible temple was to
the Jews, such and much more is the Church to the
Christian soul, to every Christian soul.
While as yet she has not been able to bring about
a total reformation as to the partiality which still
disfigures our boasted civilization, yet no one can
doubt that, except for her example and influence, it
would much more extensively prevail.
In the very beginning of her history, St. James de
nounced personal distinctions in spiritual matters as

148 The Church and the Age.
contravening the primary principles of communion
and fellowship in the body of Christ, in Whom there
is neither rich nor poor, and Who will judge all impar
tially, having Himself given liberally to all alike.
The abuse of which St. James treats in his General
Epistle, * and to which St. Paul also alludes in his
First Epistle to the Corinthians, f is ever and anon
reappearing under different forms and auspices. In
New England, there existed for a long while a custom
that was styled "dignifying the house," by which
from time to time seats in places of public worship
were assigned to families or individuals in accordance
with their " age, state and parentage."
Such respect of persons is by no means unknown
to-day ; and, however so free the Church herself may
be from any complicity in the matter, it is well that
in our age, where it still so largely obtains, she should,
as occasions arise, give to her children the most em
phatic assurance of her equal love for them all, and of
her determination that they all alike shall share in
her privileges and gifts.
Time will not allow me to speak of but one more
characteristic in which the Church differs from the
Age. It is that of Personal Affection.
One can easily love the Church. It would, how
ever, seem unreal to speak of loving the Age. The
latter may have a clearly defined identity. But it is
not a personal identity. And so there cannot be evoked
in its behalf such affection as can only be aroused in
one person for another person.
* St. James I. II. \ I. Corinthians XI. 21.

The Church and the Age. 149
The name Mother which we so often and so rightly
give to the Church is sufficiently descriptive of
the relations in which we stand to her, and justifies
the passionate and abiding love which is cherished
for her by all her loyal children. By the Christ-or
dained sacraments which she administers, we are born
again, and nourished in body and soul. By her in
structions, we are taught the right and the wise way,
and warned against the wrong and the foolish way. In
our wants, she supplies us ; in our distress, she com
forts us ; in ourconflicts, she upholds us ; in our fears,
she cheers us ; in our rejoicings, she likewise rejoices;
and in death closes our eyes in humble, yet buoyant
hope. No wonder, therefore, that in our times of need and
sorrow and joy she is so tender, and so vigilant, and
withal so faithful. We should love her with such
love as is borne by dutiful children towards their
earthly mothers. No wonder if, when her good name
is imperilled and her cherished designs are languish
ing, we ardently espouse her cause and give her our
best devotion.
Neither need we be surprised if, when her mem
bers are untrue to her, disown their allegiance to her,
and refuse to heed her earnest calls for their sym
pathy and aid, she feels herself dishonoured, and is
grieved at heart. We would not treat our earthly
mother so, nor trust another who so treated her.
. It must be that men fail to understand or appre
ciate this relation to her when they neglect or refuse

150 The Church and the Age .
to discharge their obligations to her, and by their
inconsistent conduct put her to open shame.
By the very characteristics which we have al
ready considered, she proves her right to bear this
title, Mother, and challenges our unchanging and
unmeasured love. It was for her that Christ gave
Himself. In her, His honour is pledged. She is the
reward of all His sorrows. He has espoused her as
His bride. He has infused into her His own spirit 1
and His spirit is life. Thus she will ever be, for she
cannot die nor change. His own changeless truth
insures her immutability.
This may suffice as to some of the differences
between the Church and the Age.
We must treat more briefly of the relations ex
isting between them.
These relations are of necessity intimate. Of the
same necessity, they are not always friendly. Indeed,.
we have already seen that they are at some points in
real and irreconcilable opposition to each other.
The question always is : Which of these two
rivals shall rule? Perhaps we ought, first of all, to
ask : Why should they not be more in harmony
with each other ? I may appear to some to be blam
ing upon the Age what more properly belongs to the
worse side of the world. But I am inclined to think
that, after a careful and candid examination of the
forces which are at work among us, it will be found
that there are some which, from their very constitu
tion and character, can only be denominated the Age.

The Church and the Age . 15 r
On this same account, the Church cannot afford
to ignore them ; and would not if she could. It is her
business to impress herself upon the Age, rather than
from it to receive impressions. She is not, and never
can be, the Church of any particular age ; but she is>
and always must be, the Church of all the ages.
It is not for her to adapt herself to the ever-chang
ing spirit or temper of the times ; but, conscious of
her responsibility as the custodian of the immutable
faith, to proclaim and exemplify it at all times and
under all circumstances.
She may, indeed, with entire consistency, ac
commodate her methods of work, and even adjust
herself as to objects of work, in accordance with what
may be the special features and needs of any given age.
For while fixed as to the faith itself, she may be flexi
ble as to the means whereby the faith shall be shown. *
And so it is well for her to know the Age, and
even to note its smallest transformation, its most
insignificant characteristic, that thus she may be ready
always to aid in moulding it aright.
It will not do for her to allow the Age to be in
advance of her in anything that concerns the common
good. This preeminently is her field ; and her mem
bers are deserving of reproach when they keep her
from its prompt and thorough cultivation.
There is no genuine wrong which she ought not
immediately to try and right. There is no real want
which she ought not as instantly to try and fill ; nor
* St. James II. 18.

152 The Church and the Age.
woe that she ought not at once at least to alleviate.
It is not only hers to instruct and guide, but to
go after, until she find, the erring and the lost; not
only to inform but to reform all that may be within her
reach. We sometimes hear discussions as to what is
styled the Coming Church. But, biethren, the Church
has already come ; and that for which every age has
the right to look is the Going Church — the Church
that is all the while going on her errands of mercy
and light and grace and love.
The great difficulty which the Church has in
thus assuming and retaining her proper relations to
the Age is that there are not enough of real Churchmen
belonging to her.
By this I mean that there are not enough of her
members who realize what she actually is, and what
is her true mission in the world. They have but an
indistinct idea of her Divine origin, and of the lofty
purposes of her Divine Head. Their own connection
with her is formal, unvalued, and inoperative. They
suffer her domain to be invaded by any and every op
ponent. When her Catholic Doctrine and Discipline
are denied and set at naught, they look on calmly, if
not complacently. Opportunities, well named golden,
for advancing her interests, and thus of blessing their
fellows, are allowed by them to go by altogether un
improved, else are turned to but little account, be
cause of their own half-heartedness and indolence.
When a contest arises between the Church and the Age,

The Church and the Age. 153
and her supremacy in matters purely spiritual is at
stake, how often do they either stand aloof, or cow
ardly desert her !
Every manly instinot would rise to condemn
such conduct towards one's natural mother. Why
should it not become impossible towards the Church ?
I would that there were such a personal identifi
cation with her on the part of her members as was ex
emplified by a devout Churchwoman only a few days
ago, who, in speaking to me concerning the affairs of her
own parish, said : "When St.  's is in debt,
I feel that I am myself in debt ; and when anything
goes wrong there, I feel that I have done wrong. ' '
Such a spirit as this, if it were but more common,
would do very much towards enabling the Church to
accomplish her many-sided work in the world.
Grant that many of the questions with which the
Age is dealing are difficult of solution, no mere diffi
culty should dishearten those who belong to the Body
of Christ. The very power of the truth which she
has to proclaim should inspire us with an invincible
courage, while it should also endue us with pa
tience and forbearance amidst temporary failure and
oppression. There is at times a restraining of His might and
a hiding of His wisdom, which we may reverently say,
characterise the mind of God ; and so we must be
content to tarry His leisure, nor let our eagerness
outrun His perfect plans. The development of
Church life is that of growth ; not per sallum.

154 The Church and the Age .
But nothing can excuse us for anything like in
difference or treachery. Whatever the will of God
may be, it must ever be right for us to design a gen
erous service in His behalf, to strive earnestly for the
faith committed to our care, to witness against an un
believing and wicked world, and to strive for organic
unity among those, who honour His holy name.
And all this truly majestic work is to be done
not only by the Church in her corporate or collective
capacity, but also, in a measure and under certain
circumstances, by her members in their individual
capacity. It is largely the result of individual influence
that the Age takes on some of its most distinct fea
tures—the life or work of some one person here and
there, of strong will and persevering effort.
And so the Church will impress the Age, not
simply by her unity and concentrated labours, but also
by the single members here and there who, out of her
fullness and imbued with her spirit, may in isolated
undertakings promote her ultimate designs.
Thus it is that evefy member of the Church
ought to feel that, because of his relations to her, he
also has relations to the Age ; and therefore, ought,
even though at times he work alone, to make his own
distinct contribution to the general contribution of
the times in which he lives.
It was, I am sure, in some such spirit as this that
the Church Club of Delaware was organized, and I am
happy to believe that in the same spirit it has gone on

The Church and the Age. 155
and prospered. Likewise, this course of lectures has
been designed ; and I earnestly pray that what may
thus have been said may be so blessed by God that
every member of the Club and all other members of
the Diocese may be illumined and stimulated to a
higher life, a nobler impulse and a more efficient dis
charge of their whole duty to God and man.
This is the pattern which our own branch of the
Catholic Church has to-day a wide and glorious op
portunity of setting before the people of America. I
believe that there has never been a time when she was-
so much looked to by our fellow citizens in general to-
guide them in the more important concerns of life.
Certainly, the statistics of her growth during the last
half of this closing century will bear me out in this
statement. In 1832, the first year in which any such
summaries are published in the General Convention
Journal, there were :
Clergymen (in 18 Dioceses) - 592
Baptisms for three years - - - 23,127
Communicants, in 16 Dioceses - 30,939'
Sunday School Teachers, in 10 Dioceses 1, 743.
Sunday School Pupils, in 14 Dioceses 24,218
In 1892 :
Clergy in 64 Dioceses and American Mission
ary Jurisdictions ... - 4,150
Baptisms for three years - 180,527
Communicants - - 561,702
Sunday School Teachers - 42,828-
Sunday School Pupils ... - 394,464.

156 The Church and the Age .
In 1844, the number of communicants was about
60,000 ; the number of members about 300,000. The
population of the United States was about 18,000,000.
In 1894, the number of communicants was about
-600,000; of members about 3,000,000. The popula
tion was about 65,000,000.
In fifty years, the population of the country in
creased 260 per cent. ; while the number of our com
municants increased 900 per cent.
It is easy to see how commanding will be the po
sition of this Church if the present rate of gain be ac
celerated during the next few years as it has been
-during the period now under review. With the Divine
Word, Ministry, and Sacraments, the Catholic Creeds
and Liturgy, and a Constitution in such harmony with
that of the nation, she has a mission whose nobility
and grandeur can hardly be overestimated. What
more glorious privilege than by our consistent lives
as Churchmen to share, under her auspices, in mould
ing our beloved country for the Church and God ? And
Christ is God. In His name, we set up our banners.
By His grace and for His glory , we go forth conquer
ing and to conquer.

It seems scarcely necessary to say that the Church
Club is not responsible for any individual opinions
on points, not ruled by the Church, which, the learned
theologians who have been good enough to lecture
under its auspices, may have expressed.