PROGRESSIVE ORTHODOX Y. INTRODUCTI ON. THE phrase “New Theology is applied largely and loosely to a great varietyof Opinions advocated quite independently by num erous writers i

PROGRESSIVE ORTHODOXY .

INTRODUCTION.

THE phrase “New Theology is applied largelyand loosely to a great variety of Opinions advocatedquite independently by num erous writers in manycountries . In its widest inclusion it embracestendencies which are more or less contradictory toApostolic Christianity and to the general traditionand faith of the Church . In its more correct andreasonable use it covers many movem ents of thoughtwhich are quite distinct

,one from the other

,and

are not likely im m ediately to coalesce or harmonize .Even where there is greater affinity of conceptionthere is diversity in the field which is cultivated .

One class of writers busies itself chiefly with thedogm atic problem s necessitated by the growth ofthe evolutionary Philosophy. Another is occupiedwith questions of historical Criticism . Another isabsorbed in the development of the new science ofBiblical Theology. Another seeks from a yet moreinterior and central position to state the leadingdoctrines of our religion in the light and under the

2 PROGRESS I VE ORTH ODOX Y.

inspiration of the revelation Of God which is givenin Christ . Perhaps the stamp which marks m ostdistinctly and comprehensively this new Divinity isreality ; and the phrase real Theology is in thisand other respects a better designation than newTheology.

” It is real because it deals with beings more than with abstractions, with actual processes and their rational contents more than witha p r iori assumptions , with laws of life and organicforces more than with mechanical combinations

,

with wholes or parts in their relations to wholes,with things more than with words , and with persons more than with things . Wherever an investigator in the wide d m ain of knowledge is seekingfor and touching reality he is contributing to thisTheology ; and there is consequently a strong bondOf sym pathy between all such workers , even thoughthe limitation of their labor and the narrowness Ofhuman V l S l OIl m ayhold them apart .The following essays are Ofiered as such a con

tribution. Their special themes and the mode oftreatment have been determ ined by current discussions . They make no attem pt to formul ate the NewTheology

,

” or to indicate its scope . Such an en

deavor might be too ambitious ; it would doubtlessbe premature . Along with a general unity of spiritand aim on the part of the advocates of the “NewTheology there exists, aswe have intimated , a notic eable variety of Special opinions and judgments .Not all of these can be harm onized . Not all willbe able to vindicate their character as purely Chris

INTRODUCTION. 3

tian . Some are professedly advanced as provisiomal , hypothetic , tentative . Problems are abovethe horizon which are not yet clearly within thefield of vision . Even their provisional and relative solution is at present im practicable . TOO earlyan attempt to define and system atize is likely tocram p and repress inquiry, and to promote a dogm atic self-satisfaction which is a deadly foe to

progress . The aim , accordingly, of the writers ofthese papers has been to keep clearly within therange of what is immediately necessary and prac tical . For the most part, a single line of inquiry hasbeen followed

,under the guidance of a central and

vital principle of Christianity, nam ely, the realityof Christ’s personal relation to the hum an race asa whole and toevery mem ber of it, —the principleOf the universality of Christianity.

This principle has been rapidly gaining of latein its power over m en’ s thoughts and lives . It isinvolved in the church doctrine of the constitutionof Christ’s person. It is a necessary im plication ofour fathers ’ faith in the extent and intent Of theAtonem ent . It is an indisputable teaching of sacred Scripture . I t lies at the heart of all that ismost heroic and self-sac rific ing in the Christian lifeof our cent ury. We have sought to apply this princ iple to the solution of questions which are nowmore than ever before engaging the attention of serious and devout m inds . We have endeavored tofollow its guidance faithfully and loyally, andwhithersoever it might lead. We have trusted it wholly

4 PROGRES S I VE ORTH ODOXY.

and practically. By the publication of this volumewe submit our work to the judgm ent of a widerpublic . If we have anywhere overestimated or uhderestim ated the validity and value of our gu idingprinciple, we hope that this will be pointed out. Or

if we have lost Sight of any qualifying or lim itingtruth, we desire that this may be Shown . On theother hand, if we have been true to a great and cardinal doctrine of our holy religion

,and have devel

oped its necessary implications and consequences,

we ask that any further discussion of these conclusions should rec ognize their c onnec tionwiththe princ ip lef rorn whichtheyare derived, and their legiti

m acy, unless this p rinc ip le is itself to be abandoned.

A subordinate aim of the following essays is topoint out, as the occasion arises , certain theologicalim provements which we regard as already assured .

Leaving general phrases which may easily be madeto hold either too much or too little , we would turnattention to a few fundamental doctrines , and Showin what respect there actually is improvement intheir apprehension and use . The task is not aneasy one . But no important work is, and it seemsto us to be tim ely and to promise good . There hasbeen a great change in the public m ind, especiallythat to which we are most im m ediately related

,

even within a brief period . The num ber of persons who desire inform ation as to what the New.

Theology can Offer I S Increased. Prejudices havebeen overcome . Not a few friends of progress , ifwe are not mistaken , who once were distrustful of

INTRODUCTION. 5

this Theology, have already discovered that it hassom ething in it desirable and helpful for them ;

and that even if som e of its positions and inferenc es are insecure , yet, taken as a whole , it is a realand salutaryadvance in Christian thought . Suchpersons will welcom e our endeavor

,and will deal

kindly with its im perfections . We cannot but hopethat others , at present m ore critical in their attitude

,possibly pronounced in their opposition

,may

see reason for a less unfavorable judgm ent ; m ay

even discover that the new m ovem ent really Siguifies a better apprehension of the truth and a largeruse of the power of the gospel which they and wealike have received in faith and as a sacred trust.SO far, therefore , as the new thought in theologycom m ends itself to us as a real and definite gain ,and SO far as it naturally com es under revI eW In

prosecuting the Special purpose of this volum e,we

shall endeavor to set it forth,and to indicate in

what respects it is difierentiated from the old .

We have retained the general title Progres

sive Orthodoxy under which these papers firstappeared"

. The word orthodoxy ” _ was em ployedas a concise and convenient expression of our convic tion that theological progress does not involveor require any break with the faith of the churchcatholic

,any recasting of the prim itive ecum enical

creeds,any departure from the fundam ental prln

c iples of the Reform ation . We have no specialregard for the epithet orthodox . It has been suf

fic iently abused to give ground for Ofiense . It

6 PROGRESSIVE ORTHODOXY.

suggests to some minds narrowness , arrogance , andintolerance . We m uch prefer to be recognized asdisc iples of Him who is the Truth than to be credited with conform ity to standards of belief Of hu

man construction . But we are not insensible tothe reality and worth of character in the Sphere ofthought . Human progress would be impossible ifeverything in belief were changeable . N0 mancoul d hope for m oral perfection if in the power ofchoice itself there were not the possibility of a permanent preference , or if liberty were not exercisedin a system Of things which m akes for stability.

The word orthodox designates theological character,

recognizes constant as well as variable elem ents inreligious belief, discrim inates the position and workOf those who are entitled to appropriate it from therevolutionary aim of men who deny the historicalbasis of Christianity, or resolve its doctrines intowhat are call ed the eternal truths of the Spirit, orsubstitute for the divine Spirit the hum an reason,

and are unable to save them selves from the m ethodand consequences Of rationalism . The present isrooted in the past . Christianityhas a permanentbasis in historical facts , in a faith once for all delivered to the saints , in a Canon of sacred Scrip~

ture . There is a collective and continuous Christian consciousness . Our recognition of this relationof the new to the Old is expressed in our m otto,“ Progressive Orthodoxy .

’

TO be m ore definite ,it emphasizes our belief that the positions to whichwe have assented , the conclusions we have adopted,

INTRODUCTION. 7

are in the line of that developm ent of Christiandoctrine which has been advancing in the churchfrom the beginning. First of all, the church settled its rule of faith , confessing the fundam entalhistoric facts of the gospel, discrim inating its au

thoritative Scriptures , affirm ing against Ebionismand Gnosticism the distinctness, universality, andabsoluteness of Christianity. Im pelled by the inward necessities Of its own life , as well as constrained by outward oppositions , it proceeded toaffirm yet more clearly and fully its central Princ iple . Everything in Christianitycentres in Christ.For more than a centuryafter the church becam efully conscious of the distinctness of its m l SSl on

and Of its catholicity, its thought was chiefly turnedto the doctrine Of the second Person named in itsbaptism al form ula and Apostles’ Creed . Then followed a Similar, though less protracted, concentration Of interest upon the doctrine of the HolySpirit ; then a like, though still more restricted,absorption in the question of the relation of divinegrace to hum an deprav ity. In this way resultswere reached which have stood the test Of tim e,and are a part of the belief tod ay of the universalchurch . It is through the same process of inquiry,reflection , com parison Of opinions

,growth Of belief

under the dem ands of successive periods in hum anhistory, disclosures of Providence, and prom ptingsOf the Holy Spirit

,that m ore and m ore full y the

Chr istian revelation has been translated into creedand life . Progress in theology is a progress in


method, and then a progress in result.’

It may beintensive when not extensive , qualitative when notquantitative . It is at times a matter of accent andemphasis more than of additional information andimproved statement, of interpretation rather thanof newd ata, Of combination and proportion as wellas of increased knowledge , of new order and notSimply of new m aterials . There is no doctrine ofthe Bible , however r udimentary and essential, whichis not susceptible of illumination or higher systemization in the development of a scientific faith ;and there may be an endless advance in the largerinclusion and better correlation of known spiritualfacts and truths, fdr these are intrinsically, notsimple units , or measurable quantities, or tangiblethings

,but revelations of the highest and grandest

personal qualities and actions, and of the vastestrelations and destinies . The church has alwaysproclaim ed that God is love ,

”but there can beno

question that in thought and life this truth has afar more com manding influence to day than everbefore . Christian faith has always accepted thefact of the Incarnation , but it cannot be doubtedthat enlarged conceptions of the contents of thisfact have been gained through centuries of earnestdiscussion and even bitter controversy

,or that it is

now more am ply interpreted than was poss ible toearlier thought . Nor do we exhaust the meaning '

of progress by conceiving of it as merely formal ,or intensive

,or qualitative . There is material en

largement. The church of tod ay has a fuller

INTR0DUCTI ON . 9

knowledge Of the purpose of God respecting theextension of Christianity, a better conception of

the dispensation of the Spirit and of the relationof Christianity to hum an history, than it was possible to com m unicate to the earlychurch . The fulfillm ents of prophecy yield an am pler knowledgethan coul d be derived im m ediately from the original record. Events are God’s m essengers ; providenc es are his interpreters ; the Christian centuriesare the prom ised tim es Of the Spirit, and unfold divine purposes . Som ething new is revealed in thegrowth of the Christian church, as indeed in alldevelopm ent . To deny such progressive unfoldingof the Chr istian verities is to ignore or to falsifyhistory. It has been actuallygoing on from thebeginning. It is rooted in the necessary laws andestablished conditions of hum an thought . It is awitness to the living relation which the Head ofthe church sustains to it . It is the product of thepresence and energywithin the church of the promised Spirit Of truth . To doubt that a progressthus provided for, pledged, and realized is possiblealso in our own tim e is a sym ptom of unbelief , notthe Sign of a Christian ’s faith .

The injunction, however, doubtless still holdsgood : “ Prove all things .” There m aybe noveltyof doctrine without progress, as well as progresswithout entire novelty. The question is always le

gitim ate and necessary whether any alleged improvem ent is a real advance . SO far as in thefollowing essays we have recognized progress it has

10 PROGRESSIVE ORTH ODOXY.

been under the full and constant acceptance Of thesupreme authority of sacred Scripture . Whatevernew light may break forth

,it will com e from thi s

source,as the church is led by the Providence and

Spirit of God to a better understanding of its teachings . We have no reason to anticipate that therewill be opened to theology any absolutely new doctrine

,or to practical piety any other way of salva

tion than that revealed in the beginning. If,in

the ensuing pages,opinions are expressed which

can beshown not to harm onize with the voice ofScripture , or with the religious life that the Wordof God instrumentally produces and sustains, theyare thereby judged and condem ned. We advoc atethem because we believe them to be Biblical andChristian . We use both of these adjectives bec ausethey seem to be necessary. It appears som etimesto be overlooked that an opInl on may be Christianwhich cannot be grounded in, or fortified by, an array Of proof-texts . The Bible , it Should be rem embered, is not a collection of texts designed to establish propositions in systematic theology. It iswritten after another method

,for a different pur

pose . I t presents persons,events

,principles , warn

ings and prom ises,precepts

,and exam ples . “Every

Scripture inspired of God is also profitable forteaching

,for reproof

,for correction

,for instruction

which is in righteousness ; that the man of God'

m aybe com plete , furnished com pletely unto everygood work .

” The systemization Of Christian doctrine proceeds under the laws of thought . Infer

INTRODUCTION. 11

enc es must be regulated by the nature and scopeOf the prem ises . A great historical fact, a unionof the ideal and the real

,like the Incarnation

, ra

diates light upon all the problem s of hum an history and destiny. Reason

,ill um ined by it, may

trust it and use it, and not be m isled, even thoughit cannot quote an explicit utterance Of an Apostlefor all that it discerns . Or

,if this be thought to

be too bold an assum ption,this m uch m ust be ad

m itted : Christianity is revealed as the universaland final religion for m ankind. Whatever is le

gitim atelyand necessarily involved in this prem isehas the authority of Scripture which attests thi sreligion, even though it be not a matter of directand explicit Biblical assertion . The Scripturesteach, as we have just said, the principle of theuniversality of Chr istianity

, but the hum blest disc iple of Jesus can to-day draw inferences as to themeaning of this doctrine

,as to its verification in

the progress and prospects of Christian missions ,that exceed anything explicitly declared in theApostolic preaching or writings . On a variety ofthem es conclusions are drawn and generally ac

c epted in the Christian church from the revealedcharac ter of God

,from the character and spirit of

Jesus’

s teaching,from the character of his religion ,

which are wider or m ore specific than can be provedby any particular inspired utterance . Such inferenc es are current and accredited respecting thesalvation of infants , the Obligation of the Lord

’sday, the doctrine of the Trinity, the extension and

12 PROGRESSIVE ORTH OD OXY.

triumph of the Christian church , the nature of theAtonement. The light of the gospel as a revelation of God, the light of Christianity concentratedin the Person and work Of Christ, not only shinesback upon ancient Scripture , giving it new meaning

,not only irradiates Apostolic preaching and

prophecy, but also streams along the track of the

Christian centuries,interpreting their Significance

,

and onward into the unseen universe,whose heaven

is the presence of Christ and all whose worlds areunder his sway. Single proof-texts or collectedproof-texts are not a m easure of Christianity

,nor

of our knowledge of Christianity. The greatnessof Christ is reflected in history

,as well as in Apos

tolic teaching ; In the fulfillm ents of prophecy, aswell as in the comparatively indistinct letter of theoriginal prediction ; in the advance of the churchin an appropriation of the spirit of his teaching ;in its growing power to think after Him his

thoughts and to be inspired by his love ; in thelong succession Of centuries which require new interpretations of the meaning of his second com ing ;in the evolution of the economy of the Holy Spiritwhom He sends

,and whose work is conditioned by

his Person , sacrifice , and reign. All these thingsput the church now in a relation to his religionwhich never before has been paralleled. The factsrevealed in the Scriptures speak with new tongues .We do not honor Scripture less

,but m ore , when we

trust these facts , and God’s interpretations Of them

in reason and history. They are life ; the human

INTRODUCTION. 13

mind feels their vivifying power in the world ofthought and theology, and cannot be held backfrom larger conceptions Of God and his kingdomand hum an destiny, because everything it cherishesin hope and expectation was not definitelyutteredby an Apostle in writing a practical letter to theRom ans, or the Corinthians , or the D iaspora . Theology is the science of God . God is revealed inChrist . The possibility, the unity, the verification ,of a science of divinity are given in Him . Theul tim ate test of progress

,therefore , is Christolog

ical . The point always to be determ ined with reference to any all eged im provem ent is whether itprom otes the knowledge of the central principle ofChristianity in itself or in its Operations .We suppose that it is a sense of the truth of thiscriterion which underlies the frequent representation m ade by the opponents of the New Theologythat their own system s are Christocentric . It isim plied that if they were not so the claim of thi sTheologyto be a real advance would be justified .

We gladly recognize the full measure of truth whichresides in suchc laim s . The tendencyof Christianthought has for long been in the direction of sucha method Of theological construction . One of themost m arked characteristics Of m odern theology, ascom pared with either the m ediaeval or ancient , isthe developm ent given to the doctrine of the Atonem ent . This m ovem ent culm inated in the “New England Theology.

” The doctrine Of divine sovereigntyhad still a form al ascendency

,but this sovereignty


was thought of as sovereign grace , and asadm inistered on the basis Of a universal atonem ent. This isan important approach to a Christocentric system .

The work of Christ is exalted to a position of dignityand power never before so adequately and scientific ally represented . Yet this system with allits excellences is still far from being Christocentric .Its doctrine of God and of his purposes is not yetthoroughly christianized

,but contains unassim ilated

deistic and pagan elem ents . Its theory of theAtonement subordinates the Person of Christ to hiswork . Its anthropology is individualistic

,and is

not ruled by the thought of div me sonship . Itseschatology

,with speéial m erits , is , a receptacle of

many im perfections and m isconceptions which havecrept into previous parts of the system . The wholeof it

,as Dr. Henry B . Sm ith has said, needs to be

Christologized. A truly Chr istocentric system willbe won when

,and not until, the Person of Christ

rather than his work is m ade central in redem p.

tion,and is seen at the sam e tim e to be central also

in creation,revelation , and the universal kingdom

of God . For such a theology is not a m ere pietistic eulogy Of the historic Christ, nor even a pro ;found apprehension of som e one or more Of his ,

offices or acts alone , but a system ization Of religiousdoctrine through the knowledge of God, and es

pec ially the knowledge of God’s ethical nature,

com m unicated by H im who is the beginning andend of all divine revelations . And when once thisfundam ental conception Of the nature and method

INTRODUCTION. 15

of theology is really gained it will be discerned withequal clearness and necessity that the true andultim ate test of all theological progress is its christianization of its m aterials , from whatsoever sourcetheym aybe derived.

Withreference to several of the topics c onsid

ered by us , it should be borne in m ind that as distinct

,specific, and absorbing questions of theologi

cal di scussion they belong to the m odern era ; oneof them is but just beginning to attract the attentionit deserves . Each and all

,indeed

,have from early

tim es received m ore or less notice . Certain elem ents or factors of each have been m ade prom inent.But none have been discussed as now, or within ac om parativelybrief period . The question ,What isthe Bible " could not earlier be investigated as inrecent days, for lack, apart from other reasons , ofthe requisite critical apparatus . The doctrine ofthe Atonem ent even in SO late a Confession as theWestm inster the last of the great hi storic creeds

- is m erged in the larger doctrine of Redem ption .

Many questions in eschatology,now rife

,have

never until recently received thorough consideration . The special inquiry as to the relation ofChrist’s Person

,sacrifice

,final judgm ent

,to those

who never hear the gospel in this life is becom ingmore and m ore urgent and important , bec ause it is pthe next and nec essaryone now that the Atonem enthas becom e a distinct and Specific doctrine,and theinterpretation has won general approval that it hasan absolutely universal relation and intent . We


claim in that portion of our work which Will naturally attract the m ost criticism to be pursuing thepath opened by our predecessors in vindicating thenow accepted truth that Christ’s sacrifice on Calvarywas for every m an . It is a reasonable request thatthis connection and relation of what we have to

,say

on eschatology should be kept in View, and that theconclusions reached should be tested by their harmony with the revelation given in and through theIncarnation . The ultim ate question b etween conflic ting opinions m ust be ,Which m ost perfectly ap

propriates the grace and truth revealed in Christ "We do not decline the test Of orthodoxy

,but it is

Obvious that,with reference to inquiries which could

not arise at an earlier stage of Christian knowledge Or doctrinal developm ent, and whic h havenever been adjudicated upon ecclesiastically because never fully opened for discussion , the questionof orthodoxy happily m erges in the m ore p rofitabl equestion Of truth .

We add a Single rem ark upon the general philosophic al conception of Grod and his relation to theuniverse which underlies these essays . It is amodification Of a prevailing Latin conception ofthe divine transcendence by a clearer and fullerappreciation ( in accordance with the highest thoughtOf the Greek fathers) Of the divine im m anence .Such a doctrine of God, we believe, is m ore andmore approving itself in the best philosophy of ourtime , and the fact of the Incarnation commends itto the acceptance Of the Christian theologian .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join


relations to his times and to the course of history.

For this purpose it enters fearlessly and fully intothe m ost critical and thorough examination of theproper sources of evidence . But it comes out fromsuch an investigation with a clear, positive conviotion that

,regarded as a man

,Jesus is not only like

other men, buta lso difierent from other men that

his unlikeness is an aspect of the truth or realityOf his perfect manhood , and the ground Of hisversal human helpfulness , especially of his abilityto enable men each to fulfil l the idea and purpo seOf his own personality. This development of thedoctrine of our Lord ’s hum ani ty is a characteristicand most important“

/

advance of modern theology,and we wi ll therefore dwell upon it long enough tomake evident its im port .1. The uniqueness of Jesus’s humanity appearsin its universality. Every other man finds a limitation of his nature m ore or less positive,more or lessinfluential, in his pecul iar temperament . Thoughordinarily not determinative , at least as respectsthe higher forms of the m ind’s action , it is alwaysa modifying and differentiating power . Somewhathigher than individualizing forces of this sort arethose innate m ental tendencies and aptitudes whichprom pt or facilitate difierent kinds of labor. Eachman finds it easier to work in c ertaln directions orways than in others . And then there is an endlessvariety of personal force and character securedthrough the proportion Of powers which creativewisdom allots . An accomplished critic has pointed

THE INCARNATION. 19

out,if mem ory serves us , that Plato , Milton , Ed

wards,Napoleon

,John Howard, each possessed in

a conspicuous degree the gift of im agination,and

that it was the m odification of this com m on eu

dowm ent by other gifts with which it was associatedthat m ade one a speculative philosopher, another apoet

,another a theologian , another a soldier, another

a philanthropist. And thus it comes about that noone person is absolutely like or can adequately represent any other person . This peculiarity whichdistinguishes one m an from another and from everyother we call his individuality. It fits him for hisplace and calling. It is his distinction . But it isalso his lim itation .

The uniqueness Of Christ ’s humanity appears inthis, that it was not thus circumscribed . He wasan individual m an, but his individuality is his universality. He was “

the Son of Man .

” 1 Thatwhich distinguishes Him from all other m en isthat He represents them all . His separation fromany one of uS is that which brings Him near toevery one of us. His peculiarity is that no m an’snature is so peculiar that He cannot com prehend it.He has kinship with us all bybeing our commonHead . His benevolence em braced all m en of everyrace , age, and clim e . Whosoever does his will ishis mother

,sister

,brother. His words are not

those of any school of thought. His death was forevery m an. The record

,

“ in all points tem pted1 On the signific anc e of this title see note byDr.Westc ott

in Sp eaker’s Commentary, ii. 33

- 35 .


like as we are,is as true for one reader as for

another. A life SO comprehensive and com pleterequires as its basis and prerequisite a natureequally universal . And in this its recognizedand evident universality Christ’s human natureI s WIthout a counterpart .2 . The uniqueness Of his humanity is furthermanifest from its participation in the work Of mediation between God and men . How essential isthe part it sustains in this work is suggested bythe Apostle ’s declaration

,one Mediator

,also

, be

tween God and men, him self man . This mediatorial Ofi c e Jesus alone of all men sustains . Healone is Prophet

, Priest, and King. SO exalted,

SO transcendent,are the services He renders that it

is sometimes difficul t to make real to our mindsthat it is through the human nature Of Christ theyare achieved . And since the Scriptures them selvesassure us that the divine nature entered into thispartnership by which heaven and earth are united

,

God and man are reconciled , it is very easy, In theeffulgence Of the divine glory which invests theRedeem er

,to lose Sight of that humanity which He

ever bore,and by which He accom plished his de

livering and saving work. Yet if we commit ourselves trustingly and fearlessly to the authoritativeScriptural representation , we shall soon discoverthat the hum anity of Christ is not set before us Inthe New Testam ent as sustaining merely a conditional or adminicular relation to a work whoseintrinsic and essential value comes from another

THE INCARNATI ON . 21

source . On the contrary,throughout its entire

achievem ent we everywhere see as an integral andnecessary part of it the Obedience

,suffering, sacri

fic e,victory, and glorification of a hum an nature

as real as our own . That this achievem ent had alustre and value transcending anything possible ina m erely hum an experience is also true

,as the

faith of the church has ever held . But we are notto conceive of this as an arbitrary im putation ofvalue . For this hum anity was fashioned to be theperfect organ and instrum ent Of revelation , to befreely swayed and controlled in all its m ovem entsby the will of God

,to be m ore and m ore filled with

his gifts as its powers expanded from infancy tomaturity

,to receive the Spirit without m easure , to

be transfigured by the indwelling Deity, to be glorified in God . Al l its experiences , whether activeor passive

,were those of a nature created capacious

of Deity. This is true also of other m en accordingto their m easure . Indeed

,it is the highest note

and attribute of hum anity at large . Christ couldnot be a representative m an and a m ediator, if hishum anity were not real . But it lies also in hism ediatorship that He is the head of the race , - andnot a mere m em ber of it

,and that hum anity in

Him becom es receptive of the divine fullness,so

that there are gathered up in Him all divine giftsfor men .

3 . And this leads to a yet higher peculiarity inwhich the uniqueness of his hum anity is evident .The best gifts are personal. The gift of suprem e

22 PROGRESS I VE ORTH ODOXY.

and infinite love is personal . The divine gift tohumanity is the Incarnation .

“ The Word becameflesh .

” The uniqueness Of Christ ’s humanity mostevidently appears in this , that its entire existenceis in personal union with the div1ne nature . Itscom ing into existence was by an incarnation of thedivine Word . We touch here the m ost mysteriousdoctrine of Christianity. We approach it fir st ofall as an attested fact . Certain questions respecting it, problems to which it necessarily gives rise ,will be considered farther on . Here we deal withit as a revealed fact . The Word became flesh notat Jesus’s baptism, not at his resurrection or asc ension, but this was the beginning of his life, thatthe second Person of the Trinity was made in thelikeness Of m an, so that it was predicted that theholy thing which Should be born Should be calledthe Son Of God, and that the Son Of the VirginShould be named Im m anuel ; and when the eventoccurred it was announced to the shepherdsThere is born to you this day a Saviourwhich is Christ the Lord and wise men

,guided

by the star, blended their rejoicings with those ofthe heavenly hOSt, and when they saw the youngchild fell down and worshiped Him. Make ofthese accounts what we may

,they are the fitting

beginning of the historic life that then appeared,and its only adequate premise , as Origen long ago .

discerned . And if we pursue the narrative ineither of the Gospels we constantly observe thesame phenomena. The evidences of a complete

THE INCARNATION. 23

human nature multiply as we read, but not lessmanifest is the one Person who is the centre towhich all attributes and acts are ever referred ; andso wondrously adjusted is all this that, in reviewingthe history Of the reception which these accountshave received from the great mass of readers , nothing is more striking and nothing m ore uniformthan the conviction which has prevailed that , fromthe m anger to the cross and from the cross to thethrone

,it is one and only one Person who lived ,

suffered , died , and was believed to have risen fromthe tom b and to have ascended on high .

And this first distinct im pression is only deepened by the m ost critical study. In no event ofJesus’s history, at no m om ent, and in no occurrence , whether in the accounts given by the synoptistS or in the m ore ideal representations of thefourth Gospel, is there disc losed anything like adivision of his Person . If He is weary at the wellhis weariness is that of One conscious Of his powerto give living water, of which if a man drink heshall never thirst . If He is tempted it is with thevoice still audible in the skies : Thou art mybeloved Son .

” If He is defenseless He knows thatwith a word legions of angels would gather for hisprotection . If

,He prays we hear the words :

Father, glorify Thou Me with the glorywhich I had with Thee before the world was . SOwhen we listen to his declarations respecting himself we are constantly rem inded that his consciousness is unlike that of anym ere man. We see a


human countenance,but as we gaze it is transfig

ured. We look upon a human form , but as we behold

“

it ascends and is glorified .

- For this Son ofMan has power to forgive sins, and is come to savethe lost and to give his life a ransom, and his fleshis meat indeed . And in the disclosures of prophecythis union of his hum anity with divinity is set forthas indissoluble and eternal . What is c omm only,

though in too limited a way, called his mediatorialkingdom will com e to an end when the creation , inthe Person of its redemptive Head and Lord , willbow before the throne

,and God will be all in all.

That cycle of history introduced by Adam’s trans

gr ession,or earlier in the sin of angelic spirits, will

c ome to a close,and with it that form Of dominion

determined by the existence of unvanquished rebellion but the end will be not onl y a consummation,but a new beginning

,the beginning of a m anifes

tation of the divine glory before im possible and unendurable . Yet still will there be a creation , andthat creation will be exalted through its Head ; andstill at its head will stand the man Chr ist Jesus,forever receiving the revelations of infinite wisdomand love

,forever dispensing them to the universe

and still to this Temple will the tribes go up, andin Him and through Him worship and adore .II. The unity of Christ ’s Person . The thoughts

thus far presented introduce us to the most difficultproblem of Christian theology . They also, it is believ ed, prepare for its m ore adequate treatment.There are those who woul d dismiss it at once as



It is a commonplace of theology that the personal ity of Christ is from the personality Of the Logos .For long this position has been understood to imply

~

the im personality of the hum an nature and itssubjection to the divine . CanonLiddon

,following

the theory to which we have just referred,treats

Chr ist ’s m anhood as a vesture or robe or instrument of the eternal Word . Al l its volitions arewilled, he teaches, by God incarnate . Such a conc eption is inconsistent with the integrity of Christ

’shum an nature , with the exemplary ‘value Of hi s

obedience , with revealed facts in his life . It introduc es a hopeless breach between the Jesus ofhistory and the Christ of faith

, ‘and thus would

bring about a decision of thi s leading Christological question Of our tim e fatal to the claim of Christianity. But this unfortunate exaggeration shoul dnot prejudice us against the important truth thatChrist’s personality is directly and indi ssolublyconnected with that of the divine Word . The oneis a tru e revelation and outgrowth of the other.The personality of the Word originates the personality realized in the life of Christ, determ ines itscharacter

,gives to it its inward law, secures its

unity,and thi s none the less , but rather all the

m ore,because the humanity Of our Lord is ideally

com plete and perfe ct.The Scriptures reveal to us the second Person of .

the Trinity as the Word, and as the Son, of God .

Both appellations lead us to think of God in hisethical nature . He is truth and He is love . The

THE INCARNATION. 27

second Person in the Trinity represents to us God ’sdisposition to reveal and im part him self. WhyShoul d God create " He has all the resources Of

wisdom,power

,being

,in him self. The reason or

motive cannot be found in these perfections . Hecreates because He is love , and love in God as inm an is self-com m unicative and self-im parting. Creation is divine expression , and it is som ethingmore . It is realization . When a distingui shedauthor Of fiction was told that the death of a certain character

,a creation of her genius, had m oved

a friend as though personally bereaved, She expressed with greatest intensity the sam e feeling.

Parents live again in their children . Sonship inits highest conception is realization

,the im age

and reproduction of self-hood. The Love revealedin the eternal Son , the m ystery of the divine Sonship , SOlves

'

the m ystery of creation . It determ inesalso its character. The revealing and c om m uni c a

tive purpose of the Father through the Son canonly find its adequate expression in a nature inwhich there Shall be a realization of the divine nature in the m ode and form appropriate to creation. An ideal humanity is the culm ination ofsuch a realization . The Word becam e flesh .

”

He carries the creative now also through sinthe redemptive purpose to its height of achievement . He creates a hum an soul which is as realand true a counterpart and realization Of his ownnature as He is himself the express image of theFather. And there is no more mystery in this


than there is in God’s creating at all . It is butone step farther on and higher up than that of thefirst creation . The self-revealing, self-c om m unic atIng Love of God, the Word and Son of God whocreated in the beginning, creates in the fullnessof the time a nature which is the perfect counterpart of his own , its human Side and means ofrealization

,in order that divine revelation and im

partation may reach their highest possible c

pleteness and m ay not be hindered even by them alevolence and guil t of human sin . The mysteryof the Incarnation, like that of creation , losesitself in the higher mystery of a Fatherhood andSonship in the nature of God,— in other words

,

in the inefiable fu llness of his love .We start , therefore , with a conception

~

of the

human nature of Chr ist as created by the Wordand Son of God for the realization in finite form ofthat which is his own personal characteristic , ascreated to express his truth and grace , and to Sharewith Him in his Father ’s love . In its very ideaand essence the human nature Of Christ is adaptedto such a purpose . It is finite , and the Word whocreated it is infinite . But we do not move in our

thinking,if we think correctly on thi s subject

,

m erely on this plane of contrasts . We may notforget them, but they are only a part of the truth.

The divine and human natures in Chr ist are essentiallyrelated to each other. The human nature isthe divine nature humanl y expressed and realized .

The one should be as closely connected with the

THE IN GARNATION . 29

other in our conception as a word with the thoughtit utters . The thought is unexpressed without theword. The word is em pty save as it is the bearerof the thought . The relation is as intim ate as this,but it is of a higher kind. A word is a breath , atransient

,fugitive thing . Christ ’s hum an nature

is a real im age of the divine Word . That Wordhas personality. His word which He utters increating the hum an soul of Christ is personal. Thehum an nature of Christ is in finite form the personal word of that eternal Word. It is not a foreign nature . If it were we coul d not possibly re

tain at“

once its integrity and its personal unionwith the divine nature . The new and fundam en

tal thought in m odern Christology is the essentialrelation of the two natures, so that either can knowand realize itself in the other. This being appre

hended,the standing difficulty with the doctrine is

,

if not rem oved, so reduced that it ceases to be anObjection .

2. This brings us to our second point, the act ofincarnation as constitutive of the unity of Christ’sPerson . We have

,as elem ents of the union , the

divine nature as possessed by the Logos, or in thatm ode of being which characterizes his existence

,

and an ideally perfect hum anity . Such a hum annature m ust be personal . The divine nature in theLogos also is personal . Yet neither in itself is aperson . The Logos is a person only with , in , andthrough the Father and the Spirit . The hum annature is a person only with

,in

,and through the

30 PROGRESSIVE ORTHODQX Y.

Logos . The cent ral point of Christ’ s personalityfalls into the central point of Absolute Personality.

Otherwise a person woul d be the object of supremeworship exterior to and additional to the one onlyGod . Recent writers who have derived the personality of Christ from the human nature , or else havemade it sim ply a resul tant of the union of natures

,

have not duly guarded this point . They have hada truth at heart, the vindication of the reality ofJesus ’s humanity. An im personal hum an nature ,they have seen

,is som ething defective and unreal .

But in recovering this essential truth,it is not nec

essary to go to either of the extremes just indicated.

The constitutive act for Christ’s Person is the unionof two natures . One of these , the hum an , is onl ypotentially personal, and is capable, by its veryconstitution , of entering into a div ine l ife , of finding the truth of its existence in God . The other isa particul ar m ode of the divine being, not in itselfa person

,but the bearer of a personal principle ,

and capable of self-realization in a hum an life .The act of incarnation is the union of these two .

3 . The self-consciousness of Jesus . We havenoticed before what it is as disclosed to us In theevangelical narratives . We consider it now in itsbasis and necessary form .

Al l our experiences arise from our constitutionas embodied spirits

,and our entire consciousness

reflects this union of body and soul . So Christ’s

history has for its foundation the union of twonatures . His personality presupposes thi s union .

THE INCARNATI ON. 31

It is form ative for his life and consciousness, justas the constitution of the soul in union with thebodyis the foundation of its history. The analogyis not perfect

,but in both cases alike two elem ents

without confusion or loss of properties are so unitedas to be the germ of a developm ent. The personality of Christ existed prim arily as a latent power,as does all other hum an personality. And as thebasis was com plex

,so the unfolding consciousness ;

never sim ply divine,never m erely hum an ; never

the two in addition,or collocation

,or separation,

the one rem aining unaff ected by the other ; neverconfused

,blended

,interchanged . That which is

div ine Shines in and through what is hum an thatwhich is hum an possesses and therefore can revealwhat is divine . It is like the union in physics offorce and m atter, onlywithout there being on eitherside inertia . It is like the union of reason andunderstanding in rational thought

,only it is far

higher than a harm ony of facul ties . The divine nature and the human interpenetrate each the other.The divine inf orm s the hum an . The hum an re

c eives and expresses the divine . The one in condescending love and sym pathy m akes everythingbelonging to the other its own . The latter approhends whatever the form er has as its own good , thetruth, the perfection in which it finds its own fulfillm ent . And of this process

,which is ever recip

rocal, there is in consciousness a centre . It is thepersonality of the creative Word, but not sim plythis . It is the personalityof the created nature ,

32 PRO GRESSIVE ORTH ODOXY.

but not merely this . It is the one as afiec ted bythe other. It is the latter fulfil led in the former.It is that point of rest and union

,and therefore of

l ife and power, where the divine nature realizes theexperiences of the human as its own

,where the hu

man realizes that its completeness and perfectionare In God. It is the centre of a divine-humanconsciousness, and this personal centre is the GodMan.

This personality was not fully realized in the beginning. There was not only growth of the humanity of Jesus, but a progressive union with thedivine . Here is the truth in the theories of theKenotists, who maintain that the Word, at the Incarnation, laid aside, or suspended the exercise of,his attributes of omniscience

,om nipotence

,and

the like . This is but a clum sy and somewhat violent and unethical m ethod of appropriating certainundeniable facts ; such as the lim itation of Jesus

’s

knowledge,the perfect hum an reality of his earthly

life,the veritable growth of hI S consciousness and

personality from the mom ent of the Incarnation .

The Incarnation itself,though real at the begin

ning, was also a process which had steps which the

records of Jesus’s life enable us in som e degree to .

trace and understand . At every stage his historyhad a m eaning for him self. Not only his birth, buthis visit to the Temple

,his baptism

,his tem pta

tion, transfiguration,crucifixion , resurrection , were

epochs in his consciousness, events fraught withmeaning and new powers for his own Person . The


34 PROGRESSIVE ORTH ODOX Y.

body,the church , is before all things, and in Him

all things consist,and through Him all things are

reconciled,whether things upon the earth or things

in the heavens . The sam e conception is dominantin the Gospel and the Epistles of John .

ChriSt is not onl y the earthly culmination,

“ butalso the eternal source and principle

,of revelation .

He who created all things is ip so f a c to the Revealer. In the Incarnation He has carried revelation to its highest conceivable stage and m ode

,how

ever augmented it may be in degree and power .Were the divine Being at any point in the futureto cease to make him se lf known through this m ethodof real manifestationthere would ‘be retrogressionand decline in God’s self-communication to hiscreatures .Christ is the Head of the church . All its members are united to each other in Him . We cannotsuppose this relation to term inate in the trium phof his kingdom . It is moral and spiritual . Gratitude for redem ption can never be exhausted norsuperseded . When we further reflect that redem ption recovers the im age and likeness in which manwas created

,and which were first fully shown in

Jesus,we see that his Headship has a foundation

in the perm anent constitution of the soul , and isfitlyas enduring as its im m ortality.

When,by the aid of hints and suggestions of

revelation,we look out still m ore widely upon the

universe that i s and is to be we see an equallyim perishable and yet vaster unity . The essence of

THE INGARNATI ON. 35

all religion is com m union with God . The mostperfect realization

,and therefore the m ost adequate

medium and guaranty of such fellowship , are givenin the Incarnation . Al l the elem ents of a final

,

perfect,absolute religion for all finite Spirits are

realized and m ade available in the Person of theGod-Man . It is fitting that such a Person shouldbe

,and Shoul d always be , not only the Head of the

redeem ed,but also the Head of all other holybe

ings in the entire creation . This is his positionaccording to the Scriptures

,and nothing can be

conceived m ore congruous and rational.Within the narrower range of vision opened to

us in the history Of the earth and ofman science isbeginning to discover the traces of a vast progressand developm ent . Such an evolution looks to anIncarnation as its adequate goal . Al l things pointto m an,

and m an is perfected in the Son of Man .

The only idea which fulfills the aspirations andharm onizes the discords in m an ’s religious historyis such a union of transcendence and im m anence

,

necessity and liberty, idea and fact, law and grace ,as m eets us in Christ . The history of religionleads on and up to Him ,

and He possesses all theresources requisite for its greatest possible futuregrowth . He is the Al pha and Om ega ; the Absolute , revealed ; the Infinite , personally di sclosed ;the

_eternal Power that m akes for righteousness

realized in the Righteous One . The endeavor toChristologize theology, that is , to m ake Christ thecentre , is, in the last analysis, sim ply a return to


reality, to the truth of fact, of history, of creation ,of humanity, of the divine method of revelation, ofthe actual governm ent and the eternal kingdom ofGod . It IS thinking God’s thoughts after Him In

his ownd isclosures of his being,character

,and will .

A theology which is not Christocentric is like aPtolem aic astronom y

,it is out of true relation

to the earth and the heavens, to God and his uni

verse .What has been said im plies the absoluteness ofChristianity. It is the religion of the cross and ofredemption ; and it is more . It is the religion ofnature and reason as well . Its foundations werelaid in creation

,in the constitution of the human

soul , in its essential relations to the nature of God.

It m eets the obstacles interposed by sin and guilt,by acts of redeeming love which are its glory but

its ul timate reason and motive are to be found inthe ethical nature of God , which caused Him to willthat the good which is original and

’

eternal in Himshould be imparted to beings made to be partakersof the divine nature . It comes into existencethrough the fulfillm ent of an absolute purpose ofdivine self-revelation and self-com m unication . As

it is not in its origin contingent upon Sin, so it isnot to pass away with the conquest of evil . Thechurch has always had some

"

sense of this truth ofthe essential supremacy of Christianity. Cyprianhad never persuaded m en that there is no salvationoutside of the pale of the church had not Peter,filled with the Holy Ghost, proclaimed that there

TI—IE INCARNATION . 37

is but one nam e wherein we m ust be saved. Thecaricature im plies the origm al , the counterfeit thegenuine . The church needs tod ay, in all its thoughtand life

,the stiffening power and the stim ulus of

this truth of the absoluteness of Christianity. Itis gained by a right apprehension of the Incarnation . And it is , in our judgm ent, one of the greatest services the “ New Theology is rendering

,

that it is making m ore and m ore evident and fam iliar both the premise and the conclusion of thisgreat argument

,developing the Biblical teachings

which authorize it and the aux iliary testim onieswhich are becom ing available through the m odernstudyof the history of religion and through theprogress of science .We cannot dwell as we would upon the immediately practical advantages of a theology whichbuilds upon the fact and doctrine of the Incarnation . It is evident that the m ore clearlythe realityand wOrth of the Person of Christ are discernedthe stronger becom es the motive to every Christianvirtue . Nothing, as we have said, at the presenttime is more needed in this sphere than a firm erconviction of the solidity

,the reality, the absolute

suprem acy of the gospel . Make its central Personcontingent

,relative

,transitory, and such is the out

look of m en to-day,and such the whole attitude of

their m inds to truth , that they cannot be won tothat absolute devotion to Christ which is essentialto Christian living and Christian work. All m en

and all generations that have powerfully advanced


Christ’ s kingdom have first been subdued by Him.

He was their absolute Lord . How, with the ex

pansion Of knowledge characteristic of our age,

how,tod ay

,is the Person of Christ to fil l the vis

ion of his followers as He fil led that of the martyrchurch " The solution of the problem

,it is b e

l iev ed,I s to be found in such an advanced doctrine

of the Incarnation as that we have attem pted tooutline . With the larger knowledge of creationthere Should be gained a truer perception of whatDr . Westcott has felicitously cal led The Gospelof Creation .

” 1 The gospel of redemption wil l notthereby be obscured, (but it will be set in largerrelations .We do not claim for the later thought upon theIncarnation any exclusive originality. Fruitfulsuggestions for this doctrine , reaching beyond thestatem ents of cre eds and the ordinary practice ofthe church , lie all along the path of itshi story.

For half a century it has been specially prom inentin theological investigations and controversies .Our contention is that the “New Theology isappropriating the results of these discussions andapplying them

,that it is an advance upon previous

eflorts in the sam e field, and that its m erits in thisregard entitle it to friendly consideration, and area pledge of its usefulness . And for the sake ofdistinctness we will close with a concise sum m ary

1 See his instruc tiv e and adm irable essaywith this title inThe Epistles of S t. John, pp . 273- 315 . London Macm il lanCo . 1883 .

THE INGARNATION. 39

of points in which this progress appears to us tobe especially m anifest. 1. In a better understanding of Christ’s hum anity, —its historic reality, itsuniversality, its essential relation to the divinenature , its personality. 2. In a better apprehen

sion of Christ’s personality — the personal unionin Him of divinity and hum anity. Neither natureis sacrificed to the other

,and such a conception

of each is gained that their union appears as thenecessary basis of the one historic , personal life .3 . In a better understanding of the actual historyof that life

,whether considered in its relation to

the divine plan of creation and revelation,or to the

actual events in its earthly career, or to its state ofexaltation and glorification . 4. In a better understanding of the revealed central position of Christin the universe , and of the absoluteness of Chr istianity. 5. In the consequent gain of a better positiou from which to justify and develop the motiv es to Christian virtue and activity.

The question which lies nearest the heart of allmodern disputes in theology is the one alreadystated : IS the Jesus whose life we know on its human side the Christ in whom religious faith findsits appropriate and permanently satisfying Object "Stated philosophically, all m odern conceptions ofChrist and of Christianity reduce to these threeWe have either the historical without the ideal

,or

the ideal without the historical,or the union of

both. We maintain that the New Theology

40 PROGRES S I VE ORTH ODOX Y.

answers this fundamental question more philosophic ally, more Biblically, more practically than anypreceding theology. The Jesus of history

“

is theChrist of faith the Christ of faith is God revealedand known.



simply to indicate the lines along which intelligentChristian thought is m oving, and to recognize someof the conclusions which are gaining acceptance inrespect to the revelation of God’s love in the sacrific e of Christ . It wil l be left to the reader tonote for him self the modification, or even di sappearanc e , of crude theories through which, at onetime or another

,atonement has been regarded.

The starting-point from which inquiry has usually set forth has been the sin of man . Man sinned

,

and the race becam e corrupted . Therefore,Jesus

was born , suffered , and died, in order that manm ight be saved from / sin . But thi s view is too narrow. I t puts part of the truth‘ in plac e of thewhole . It virtually declares that if there had beenno sin

,we Should not have known God in Chr ist.

The Old Latin hymn would have been correc t inrepresenting Sin as a blessing, af el ioc c ulp a , sincethrough it we have such and so great a R edeemer.There is also a difficulty in believing that but forthis insignificant earth the most glorious revelationof God might not have been given at al l . Theprincipal defect

,however

,is that Christ is made

contingent on sin,and that sin , therefore , appears

to be not only more fundam ental than Christ, butan absolute necessity

,in order that God might re

veal himself in Chr ist. The Old sub and sup

lapsarian theories are waym arks of the struggle ofprofound m inds with this great difli c ulty.

But redem ption from sin, even if the m ost important

,is but one of the revelations of God in

THE ATONEMENT. 43

Christ ; and to understand it we need to find itsrelation and proportion . The correct and Scriptural starting—point is the m ediation of Christ in itsuniversal character. Christ m ediates God to theentire universe . Through Christ the worlds weremade , and through Him they consist . In H imwere all things created

,in the heavens and upon

the earth,things visible and things invisible . To

Him ul tim ately not the earth only, but the whole

universe is to be m ade subject , things in heavenand things in earth and things under the earth.

John as well as Paul perceives this truth . Indeed,the Gospel of John com es to earthly redem ptionfrom the larger View of universal mediation . Firstwe learn that all things were m ade by Him , andwithout Him was not anything made that wasm ade

,and not until He is known as Head of the

universe do we perc eive , nor can we well understand

,that He is the Life and Light of m en. The

whole truth , then, is that Christ is the revealingor manifesting principle ; or, m ore exactly

,that

through the Logos , the Word, the second Personof the Trinity, that which is absolute fullness andtruth in God is com m unicated into finite existenc es that through the Eternal Word the createduniverse is possible that therefore the universe isChrist’s, the revolving worlds and they that dwelltherein are his

,to the glory of God the Father.

The created universe and all rational beings arethrough Christ and in Christ . Therefore He m e

diates or reveals God to any part of his universe


according to the condition or need which may existin that part. If at anypoint his

'world is sick,

weary, guilty, hopeless, there Christ is touched andhurt

,and there He appears to restore and com fort.

This earth is,it may be, the sheep lost in the wil

derness, while the ninety and nine are safe in thefold . Christ cannot be indifferent to the least ofhis creatures in its pain and wickedness, for hisuniverse is not attached to him externally, but vitally. He is not a governor set over it, but is itslife everywhere . He feels its every movement , mostof all its Spiritual life and spiritual feebleness ordisease, and appearshn his glorious power even atthe rem otest point . If there were but one Sinner,Christ would seek him . If but one planet were invaded by sin, Christ would come to its relief. Itis, of course , true that in order to reveal God in aworld of sin and guilt the historical conditions, andespecially the snfiering conditions , of our Lord

’slife must have been

,in important respects, what

they would not otherwise have been . It is alsoprobable that the profoundest disclosure of the loveof God in Christ has been made in the redemptionof sinful man . But only the conditions , not thepower and r eality of Christ

,are contingent on sin .

As the redem ption of men reveals to principalitiesand powers in heavenly places the manifold wisdomof God, so our thought of the Person and work ofChrist is enlarged by knowing his universal

"

relations

,and we perceive m ore clearly the Significance

of his humiliation to earth . Other orders of beings

THE ATONEMENT. 45

know Christ better because He suffered on earth .

“ This planet,” says Dorner, “

m aybe the Bethlehem of the universe . But if this planet and thesin of man exhaust the meaning of Christ’s m ediation

,we are left among absurdities and confusions .

Bethl ehem itself could not be a sacred nam e ifthere were no Jerusalem

,nor Sam aria , nor u tter

most parts of the earth,to which from Bethl ehem

He goes out, whose goings forth have been from ofOld, from everlasting.

The opinion,therefore

,has reason in it that

there woul d have been the Incarnation even ifthere had been no sin . It is not easy to believethat the Word of God would not have becom e fleshbut for Sin. Man was created a physical being.

He was destined for a physical, earthly development

,and to people the m aterial world . In his

perfection he is to have that which corresponds tothe body, a spiritual body. His knowledge ofGod was to com e through Christ and the nearestm anifestations, we can readily im agine , would inanyevent have corresponded with the actual conditions of “

m an’s existence and progress . It m aybe , indeed , that the hum an race woul d have com eearlier into the knowledge of God through Christif there had been no sin that, while Sin had m uchto do with the conditions of our Lord’s life andwork, it m ay actually have retarded his historicalappearance .It would be interesting to Show

,if space allowed,

that the Incarnation itself has im portant relations


to the reconciliation of man and God ; that thePerson of Christ

,realizing as it does the affinity

of divine and hum an , the perfection of human c haracter in union with God , and other possibilities ofhum anity, has m ore to do with our restoration toGod thanwe have commonly supposed . And it isalways to be rem em bered that the work of Christhas no meaning apart from his Person ; that hiswork is not something set off by itself on which wecan depend, as if the Atonement were a thing, aquantity of suffering endured, an im personal result. His own self bare our sins in his own bodyon the tree . Godwas in Christ reconciling theworld unto himself.”

Having gained what may be called the perspective of the earthly revelation of God in Christ

,we

are at a point where we can inquire concerning thespecific relations of our Lord ’s sacrifice to the redem ption of sinners . The very best word the gospel gives to express the complete resul t of Christ’swork is reconciliation , a word signifying that Godis brought into a new relation to man and that manis brought into a new relation with God . The ultim ate fact

,however

,is that God ’s relation to man

is changed in Christ from what it otherwi se coul dbe

,and that therefore m an ’s relation to God is

changed. Redem ption thus o riginates with God,who in Christ finds a way through obstacles to thesinner

,so that He can righteously forgive and

bless . Because God is reconciled in Jesus Christman repents and begins a new life . The gospel

THE ATONEMENT. 47

never reverses this order of dependence . It doesnot say that because m an repents God is a forgivingGod

, but because God is a forgiving God thereforem an repents . And it teaches also that God canbe a forgiving God

,because Christ sufiered and

died and rose again .

How and why is this true " Why cannot Godforgive outright and unconditionally" What isthat in the Person and work

,and especially in the

death of Christ without which God could not forgive men " What doeS Christ do to change thefeeling or attitude of God towards the sinful race "We no longer ask whether repentance is necessaryor not

,but onl y if repentance is not enough why

Shoul d there be m ore and other than the turningaway of m an from Sin and folly to God "It might be enough to suggest

,at this point

,that

the power and inclination to repent are not foundexcept when God is revealed in Christ ; that onlybecause Christ has brought God to men in a newlight are they stirred to penitence . But we mustsearch for deeper truth .

The re is a m ovem ent of thought which has gonebeneath or has gone back of the thinking which atone tim e was satisfied to rest in the sovereignty ofGod. Al l com m ands

,penalties

,favors

,blessings

issue , it was once thought, out of the will of God .

It was God’s wil l to accept Christ ’s sufierings as asubstitute for the punishm ent m an deserves, andignorant, wicked m an had no right to inquire,Whydoest thou thus" But the conviction is now clear


that the will of God is directed by the reason ofGod ; that instead of saying it is right because Godwills it we should rather say God wills it becauseit is right. Right and wrong, goodness and badness , holiness and sin, have their own intrinsic quality according to what they are . Righteousness isgrounded in reason , is rational . S in is againstson

,is absurd . The consequences Of holiness and

of sin cannot be set aside by the wi ll of God . Hi s

fiat cannot change the right and the reason ofthings . ThereforeHe does not punish man merelybecause He has threatened to punish, but Hethreatens punishm ent because it must in the natureof the c ase inevitablyfollow on sin. God cannotbless man in his sin ; otherwi se He would not beGod

,and sin woul d not be sin . Distinctions of

right and wrong, of true and false, woul d disappear

,and moral chaos woul d ensue . The Opinion

that because God is good He will not let his children suffer, but will forgive them and save them ,

sees only the happiness of man , and has no perc eption of ethical well-being . What we are nowemphasizing is the marked tendency of thought torecognize the intrinsic

,necessary character of law

and right,and the inevitableness Of the results of.

conduct . This necessity was present to Anselmwhen he formulated the theory that an exact equivalent must be rendered for the penalty of sin ; thatGod m ust be satisfied com pletely, and coul d be satisfied only by the death of Christ, whic h takes theplace of the infinite penalty of sin . His use of the



but atonement itself has been declared impossible .It is thought that there can be no deliverance whatever from the hard consequences of wrong-doing ;that whatsoever a man soweth that must he alsoreap ; that Jesus has no other power than that ofa teacher who shows men the right way

, and suinm ons them to such endeavor after im provement as

they may still be capable of making.

Now the message of the gospel unquestionably isthat man is not bound under ethi cal in the sense inwhich he i s bound under physical necessity ; thatforces are available for the moral and spiritual lifeby which man c an be delivered from the worst consequences of sin , and can become a new creature .

Transform ation may be rapid and complete . Manmay be translated from the dom inion of m ercilessnecessity into the life of freedom and love . Thenew and higher force is the revelation of God inChrist

,through which the power of Sin is broken

and the penal ty of Sin rem itted. If all this is true ,the gospel gains a profounder m eaning than it hasever yielded before . The church com es now toman

,well aware that he cannot be separated from

custom , habit, heredity, fixedness of character, thesocial organism of which he is part. It is seenthat redem ption m ust be grounded in reason, andm ust m eet the actual conditions of life and character and society. Atonem ent must express andreveal God as the suprem e Reason and perfectRighteousness

,who cannot deny himself, and who

cannot disregard nor annul the moral law which is

THE ATONEIII ENT. 51

established in truth and right . Christian thought,

having established itself on the intrinsic, absoluteright and on the inexorableness of law so firm lythat these m aybe accepted as postulates in all theinquiry

,agreeing so far forth with Anselm on the

one hand and with the latest natural ethics on theother

,is going forward now to learn if any ethical

ends are secured by the revelation of God in Christ,and secured in such a way that God energizes inm an and society for a m oral transform ation so radical and com plete that it m aybe called salvation.

redem ption,eternal life

,divine sonship .

The New England theology is distinguishedam ong system s of religious thought in this centuryin that it took up the problem at this stage andtried to find the truth in this relation . It attem ptedto discover the ethical ends which are secured bythe atonem ent. It em phasized the fact that otherm ethods than punishm ent can express the characterof sin in the sight of God and of the universe . Itasked the right question

,and gained part Of the

right answer. It has not held its ground,because

it practically exhausted the significance of atonem ent under the analogy of hum an governments andcourts of justice, which are but one result, andrather a rude result

,of the ethical life Of m an, and

also because the approach of the penitent to Godin Christ is more direct than it can ever be underthe thought of a vast universal system of government . This is the question to-day concerning atonement, What moral and Spiritual ends are secured


by the sacrificial life and death of Christ " Howdoes God ’s attitude towards m an change

,and man’s

attitude towards God change , so that there is effi

cient power for the transformation of ethical andspiritual life as against the tendencies of moral corruption" Evidently the result is of a kind thatcannot be brought about by sheer omnipotence

,but

only, if at all , by truth and love . Thought mustmove in the Spiritual, not in the physical realm.

There are two lines Of approach,which converge

towards the sam e resul t, and both of which are determ ined by the mediation of Christ in what mayproperly enough he call ed his substitutionary relation to men .

One View of atonement is gained by consideringthe historical Christ in relation to humanity and asidentified with it ; in which view we see that therace of men with Christ in it is essentiall y different in fact

,and therefore in the sight of God, from

the same race without Christ in it. It was foundin our study of the Incarnation that Christ ’s uniqueness is his universality ; that while every other manhas but a limited relation to his fellows Christ hasaffinity for all men ; that He draws all men untoHim that He possesses that which all men need .

’

So we have become accustomed to the thought thatChrist has an organic relation to the race . He isan individual

,but an individual vitally related to

every human being. He preferred to be called theSon Of

-Man . Paul sees in Him the Head of humanity, the second Adam . He is one who is not

THE ATONEMENT. 53

himself a sinner, yet is a m an ; who is not him selfcontending against Sinful and corrupt tendencies ,yet has so identified him self with hum anity that itsburden of suffering rested on Him , and every manwas within reach of his sym pathy. His divinity,indeed

,is in nothing more clearly Shown than in

his perfect hum anity ; in the fact that He was notm erely the ideal m an, but the universal man ; hishum anity not som ething strange to his divinity, butits best and purest organ .

Humanity m ay thus be thought of as Offeringsom ething to God of em inent value . When Christsufier

‘

s, the race suffers . When Christ is sorrowful,the race is sorrowful . Christ realizes what humanity could not realize for itself . The race m aybeconceived as approaching God

,and signifying its

penitence by pointing to Christ,and by giving ex

pression in Him to repentance which no wordscould utter. Thus we can regard H im as our sub

stitute , not because He stands apart, not becauseHe is one and the race another

, but because He isso intim ately identified with us, and because inessential respects the life of every one is

,or m aybe ,

locked in with his . The representative power whichbelongs to m an in his various relations com es to itsperfect realization in Christ . In the fam ily, ingovernm ent, in business , in society, representativeor substitutionary relations are the rule, not theexception . Much m ore has Christ the power perfec tlyto represent us or to be substituted for us, because there is no point of our real life where He is


not in contact with us . Here is the truth of Mo

Leod Cam pbell’s view of atonement . The entirerace repents or is capable of repenting throughChrist. It renders in Him a com plete repentance .He is the Am en of humanity to the righteousnessof God’s law

,to the ill desert of sin

,to the justice

of God ’s judgm ents . What was dimly shadowedunder the old dispensation and in heathen worship , through sacrifices expressing by an act whatcould not be expressed by a word, is taken up andcarried on to perfect realization by the sacrificeand death of Christ

,in which hum anity ofiered its

best, its holiest, to God. Thus all the figures andphraseology Of the altar are properlyand naturallyapplied to Christ . He is ofiered for our sins, inour stead , for our sakes . He is a propitiation toGod . These expressions sym bolize a real truth,because Christ was made in all respects like untohis brethren .

But Christ’s power to represent or be substitutedfor man is always to be associated with man ’spower to repent. The possibility of redeem ingm an lies in the fact that although he is by act andinheritance a sinner, yet under the appropriate influenc es he is c ap able of repenting. The power ofrepentance rem ains

,and to this power the gospel

addresses itself. Christ suffering and sym pathiz

ing with m en i s able to awaken in them and expressfor them a real repentance . It is to this power thatChrist

,the holy and the merciful, attaches him self.

Realizing it in some , and being able to realize it in

THE ATONEMENT 55

all , He represents humanity before God. Now thepower of repentance

,which , so far as it exists , is

the power of recuperation, is superior to the ne c essities of past wrong-doing and of present habit . Itis the one fact which can never be estimated forwhat it may do

,which baffles the calculation of the

wisest Observers . The penitent m an,SO far as he

really repents , is in the exercise of a freedom whichresists and alm ost subjugates the forces of evil. Inunion with Christ, who

.

brings spiritual truth andpower to m an

,repentance is radical . Man left to

himself cannot have a repentance which sets himfree from Sin and death . But in Christ he is movedto repentance which is revolutionary ; in Christ hecan express repentance

,for in union with Christ he

adopts the feeling of Christ concerning sin againstthe God of love . If man unaided could becometruly repentant, he woul d becom e holy, and wouldbe the child of God . This was admitted by J0113.than Edwards . But it is only in Christ that hehas such knowledge of God and of himself as isnecessary to a repentance which is revolutionary.

It is not true, we adm it and insist, that repentancewithout Christ is availing for redem ption, for m an

of him self cannot repent but, on the other hand ,it is not true that Christ ’s atonem ent has valuewithout repentance . Christ ’ s sacrifice avails withGod because it is adapted to bring m an to repentanc e . This gives it ethical meaning and value .

He is one,in with the race

,who has the power of

bringing it into sym pathy with his own feeling


towards God and towards sin and so God looks onthe race as having this power in Christ , a powerwhich

,when realized, melts away the iron fetters

of what we call necessity and fate . The signifi

c ance of the gospel on this side is that the sacrificeof Christ is not in vain ; that on account of Christman can be delivered from condemnation, and canhave God’s smile instead of his frown ; that thecaptive of nature and law can go free as a penitent,restored child of God, through the love of Him whois the Son of God and the Son of Man .

The substitution is not of Christ standing on thisside for the race standing on that side , but the racewith Christ in it is substituted for the race withoutChrist in it . This Christ in with the race is re

garded by God as one who has those powers of instruction, sympathy, purity which can be impartedto his brethren . Likewise the individual in Christtakes the place of the individual without Christ

,is

looked on as one whom Christ can bring to repentance and obedience , and so is justified even beforefaith develops into character . Al l is not ac c om

plished instantly, but the result was assured whenChrist became obedient to the death of the cross .He saw Satan falling from heaven when as yet hisdisciples had made but a beginning Of the subjugation of evil .The race is reconstituted in Christ

,and is other

in the sight of God, because different in fact, becali se containing powers for repentance and holinesswhich, without Christ, it would be hopelessly destitute of.



their redemption except at the cost of sufferingfrom the sin of man and of dying at their hands

,

shows both the intrinsic badness of Sin and theundiscouraged love of God to sinners . Whatreally occurs is the approach of God to men inChrist, who Shows by his words and life the Fatherunto them who draws them back to God in recoilfrom sin

,and whose suffering, by reason of sin ,

condem ned sin m ore unmistakably than the punishment of it could have done .Sin is to be looked on not only as an obstaclewhich keeps m an from com ing to God, but also asan Obstacle which keeps God from coming to man .

i

God loves man , and would bless him. But Sin im

pedes God’s love , sets it back , awakens God’

s disapproval

,SO that instead of blessing he must con

dem n and punish. The ideal relation of God islove

,but the actual relation is wrath . The sin of

m an prevents God’s love from flowing forth,so that

the God of love 1S in reality hostile to man . InChrist God can come to man in another relation

,

because Christ is a new divine power in the race toturn it away from sin unto God .

God does not becom e propitious because man re

pents and am ends,for that is beyond man’s power. ‘

He becom es propitious because Christ,laying down

his life , makes the race to its worst individual c a

p ablo of repenting, obeying, trusting ; and He doesthis in such a way that God’s abhorrence to sin isrealized

,the m ajesty of law honored

,the sinner

and the universe convinced of the righteousness ofthe divine judgments .

THE ATONEMENT. 59

The first and the greatest punishment of sin isseparation from God

,the withdrawal of those influ

onces from God by which man is blessed . Theconsequences of sin in body and character are secondary, are only resul ts of separation from God .

It is because God is far away that such c onse

quenc es follow. In Christ,the lowly

,the snfiering,

the trium phant,God can com e near to man to bless

him . Christ brings God the Person to m an theperson , and in such m anner that God is known asthe God of holy love

,the loving and holy Father.

The goodness Of God leads m an to repentance .Man is at peace with God

,and the worst punish

ment of Sin is righteously rem oved .

It is true,then

,that Christ suffered for our sins,

and that because He suff ered our sins are forgiven .

But the suffering was borne because it lay in thepath to redem ption . The realization of God’s lovein Christ was possible only through the sufferingand death Of ChriSt and because He snfiered anddied in bringing the knowledge and love of God tom en it is no longer necessary that m en shoul d suf

fer'

all the consequences of sin. The ethical endsof punishm ent are m ore than realized in the painand death Of the Redeem er

, through whom manis brought to repentance . His death is a new fact,an astonishing

,revealing

,persuasive

,melting fact ,

in view of which it would be puerile to exact literal punishm ent of those who are thereby m adesorry for Sin and brought in penitence to God.

But it is all inseparable from repentance or appro


priation. There is thus a limit to the vicariousprinciple . It is limited in its application by thepersonal relation of every man to Christ. He whois not m oved to penitence and faith by Christ isunder a greater condemnation . If he is incorrigiblethe condem nation i s final and irreversible .The large truth of atonem ent, however ill us

trated, and from whatever side approached, is thatexc ep t f or Christ God could only punish sinnersby withdrawing himself more and more from themthat in Christ their repentance and renewal becomepossible and God can bring them to their true destination. The race is other to God than it coul dbe without Christ, and God is other to the racethan He could be without Christ. That is , Christis the Mediator between God and man . Startingfrom the human side we m ay say that God is thereconciled God

,the forgiving God, because man in

Christ,seeing God as He is , and sin as it is

,is the

penitent m an,the ”believing man, the Christian

man . Or reversing the order and advancing to theultim ate fact that redemption originates with God

,

we may say that‘

m an is the penitent and obedientman because God in Christ is the reconciling andforgiving God . In any thought of atonem ent andredemption we m aynot lose sight of Christ

’s vitalrelation either with God or man. His work is oneof reconciliation

,of m ediation . But the work origi

nates with God . Man could never have producedthe Christ . God so loved the world that He gavehis Son . It is therefore the final fact that God is

THE ATONEMENT. 61

reconciled to man, and therefore man is reconciledto God .

It is not to be supposed, however, that God hasbeen reconciled to the world only eighteen hundredyears that before Christ cam e He was the God Ofjustice and Since then has been the God of m ercy.

Strictly speak ing, there was never a tim e when Godwas not reconciled, not having been before , for theLamb was slain from the foundation of the world .

It was in the divine purpose from eternity thatthere should be incarnation and atonement . Butas manifested or realized in tim e

,from our point

Of view, God’s di sposition was changed when Christ

snfiered and died . At least, the m anifestation ofGod ’s grace waited for the m anifestation of Christand depended on it. Therefore we can say “ be

fore and after in relation to redem ptionthrough Christ . But considered either as historically m anifested, or as eternally purposed, it is truethat but for Christ God would be forever alienatedfrom men . It is on account of Christ that God

can forgive , on account of Christ that m en are notleft helpless a nd bondem ned under the necessitiesof unchangeable law. Humanity with Christ in itis propitiated to the divine thought from all etermity . Not till the propitiation is realized do weknow that a Sufficient reason exists to make it rightand possible for God to forgive sin . To the worldbefore Christ cam e God was unreconciled, becausethe world had no knowledge of God in Christ. TOthe individual

,so long as he knows God only on


the side of nature and law, God is unrec onciled .

Not till he sees Christ in his sacrificial love doeshe know that God can and will forgive . The actual snfierings and death of Christ in history arenot

,however, a mere seeming . A realized is not

the same as an unrealized purpose . The sacrific eof Christ on earth has a real value

,and is not fully

operative until it is an accom plished fact. Thecomplete truth is that the sacrifice of Christ is anindispensable condition of the forgiveness of sin .

It may be said, then , in view of our discussion ,that the present movem ent of thought seeks to findthe union of obj ective and subjective elements . Atcertain periods the sabrific e of Christ and its results towards God were looked on as external tomen

,and almost independent of them. There was

a definite reality which coul d be measured and setoff by itself. At other periods the results in ex

perienc e and faith have been more prominent .The Atonem ent has been thought of as an influenceworking in man

,and as having no reality or

ing apart from that . The mutual relation of thegreat reality of reconciliation and the appropriationof faith is coming to be more clearly recognized .

God in Christ,and Christ in man . I in them

and Thou in me,that they may be perfected into

one .It may be thought that the battle was long agodecided concerning the extent of atonement, thatthe Atonement is generally believed to be universalin extent

,not for the elect alone, but for the whole

THE ATONEMENT. 63

world,and that no one questions it. But all that

is involved in its universalityhas not been accepted .

Can it be considered universal if a large portion ofthe race know nothing of the historical Christ andthe redem ption that is in Him " The extent ofatonem ent resides not so m uch

,it is to be remem

bered,in the thing done

,in the am ple provision

made, but rather in the personality of Christ. He

is the universal Person, as we said at the outset .His religion

,therefore , is the universal, absolute

religion . There is no salvation in any other. Healone is able to bring God and m an together . Thiswould seem to lead us to the conclusion that thefinal word concerning destiny is not pronouncedfor any m an till he knows Jesus Christ and Himcrucified . Further consideration of this inferencewill be found in connection with the discussion ofeschatology. It is m entioned now as bearing onthe relation of the divine justice to the divinem ercy. The view has been taken that justice condem ns the sinner to death before or until atonementis m ade , and that Christ rescues the Sinner fromhis

f

just doom . It has been said,therefore

,that

God m ust be just, and m aybe m erciful, as if theexercise of m ercy were not necessary to God in thesense in which justice is necessary. But we m ustnow conclude that justice does not pronounce itsfinal word till God has revealed him self in all hisintended manifestations of righteousness and love .Justice is concerned that every attribute of Godshould be displayed is as jealous for the rights of


love as for those of holiness . If it is God’s verynature to love

,if it is a desire of his to save men

from sin,justice sees to it that love is not deprived

of its rights,and is not hindered in any of its im

pulses . We may go so far as to say that it wouldnot be just for God to condem n men hopelesslywhen they have not known Him as He really is

,

when they have not known Him in Jesus Christ.And it is evidently the intent of God that all menshould know Him through Christ . The judgm entdoes not come till the gospel has been preached toall nations . The gospel is preached to a nation

,

not when within certain geographical boundaries ithas been proclaimed at scattered points, but onlywhen in reality all individuals of all the nationshave known it .Atonement, that is , the gospel , is universal , ah

solute . I t is to be made known to every creature ,and then cometh the end . To suppose that suchknowledge of God as reason and conscience giveis

,in reality

,the knowledge of God in Christ, is to

reduce the historical Christ and atonement throughhis sacrifice to an accidental , precarious position .

There is no evidence whatever that the race is div ided into two great sections, one of which is dealtwith on the basis of the gospel, and the other onthe basis of law and natural conscience one on abasis Of justice , the other on a basis of grace . As,

before Christ cam e,God exercised forbearance for

the Sins of the past and because Christ was coming,but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent,



How,then

,shall they call on Him in whom they

have not believed,and how shall they beli eve in

H im of whom they have not heard"In the Atonem ent Christ the Son of man bringsall hum anity to God. N0 member of the race isseparate from him who thus ofiers himself.In the Atonement God provided redemption for

the world by realizing his holy love in the eyes ofall the nations .The ul timate fact for every man will be his relation to Christ, in whom dwelleth all the ful lnessof the Godhead bodily

,and who in all things was

m ade like unto his brethren .

ESCHATOLOGY .

A THEOLOGICALprofessor, having been invited togive a course of lectures on Eschatology, declinedon the ground that he coul d not separate that sub

j ec t from the rest of his doctrinal system and discussit independently. There is no doctrine , indeed,which can be taken out of its relation to other doctrines and rem ain intelligible . The paradox m ightbe m aintained that no doctrine Shoul d be considereduntil all the other doctrines had been discussed .

It is especially true of eschatology that correctviews depend on the conceptions one has

,not only

Of the several truths, but of the very character,significance, and tendency of the gospel as a whole .To som e it seem s easy to give

,and legitim ate to

expect, a direct answer to any question that m aybe asked concerning the final destinies of m en.

When inquiry is m ade,for instance

,as to the tim e

within which probation is lim ited,why cannot any

one express his opinion in a Yes or NO But whileone ’s affirm ative or negative may be all that hiscontroversial opponent cares to ascertain , yet thereasons which lead to a given conclusion are of theutmost importance

,for they both interpret and


qualify the final answer, even if that answer isexpressed in a m onosyllable . The view which istaken of the person of Christ

,of atonem ent

,of “ the

entire revelation of God in the gospel,must deter

mine the views which are to be held concerning theage which follows after this earthl y period concerning the destiny of individuals

,nations

,the

hum an race . It may seem also that an appeal toScriptur e shoul d be decisive onall the vexed questions which have arisen as to the last things .

‘But

if there were unm istakable declarations in the Bible,

there woul d be no vexed questions . Besides,on

this subject as on all other subjects,Scripture is

cum ul ative and progressive along the line of develOping principles, so that the triumphs and judgments of the future must be seen in the perspective of the whole revelation God has given inJesus Christ . Christianity must be understoodprofoundly if a comprehensive view is to be gainedof the ul timate issues of hum an destiny under thegospel . It is our intention , however, to keep our

reasoning well within the recognized teaching ofthe New Testam ent

,and to consider

,so far as m ay

be necessary,particul ar passages which are claim ed

to be decisive of controverted points . Our m ethodis to recognize first som e of the great facts andprinciples of the gospel which m ust underlie anyconclusions on this subject

,leaving for the sequel

som e discussion Of a single related question aboutwhich agreement is not at present com plete .Two observations may be Ofiered by way of pref

ES GHATOLOGY. 69

ace : one , that we are m oving in the realm , not ofaccom plished history, but of unfulfilled prophecy.

The statem ents of Scripture which relate to judgment and heaven and hell are predictive

,and

therefore have the characteristics of prophetic teaching. We find grand outline , dependence of resul tson moral conditions

,great spiritual contrasts , rather

than minute details of tim e and circumstance .The future is not

,however

,all vague and undiscern

ible . But, since the teaching is prophetic, we knowwhere we may and where we m aynot look for certainty we may be m ore certain of principles thanof the particular application of principles . Forinstance , we know that the redeem ed are to be forever with Christ, but we do not know what thatunion will involve of condition and service . Theother observation is, that these predictions arechiefly occupied with the com ing trium phs of thegospel. The wicked are

,indeed

,frequently warned

of their danger ; but when thought is directed on

wards it is almost invariably for the purpose ofgiving assurance that the kingdom of Christ willreach at length a glorious consum m ation . Thecondem nation of the wicked is som etim es repre

sented as part of that trium ph and incident,to it .

The dark fate of the wicked is but the Shadowcast by the brightness of the glory. There is aoc ordinglya clearer di sclosure of the blessedness ofthe redeem ed and the victories of the gospel thanOf the condition of the lost . The kingdom of re

dem ption is not a point of light in the m idst of sur


rounding darkness , but the wicked are a point ofdarkness in the midst of surrounding light. Evenso severe a thinker as Professor Shedd concludesthat the bottom less pit is an inSIgnific ant hole towhich the refuse of m ankind is consigned .

l

It is im portant to learn first if there are anycentral facts or principles from which we can procoed in the attempt to reach sound conclusions .A. THE FACT AND THE PRINCI PLE or JUDG

MENT .

1. The Fact . Predictions of the future carryus on to the day of judgm ent as the time when theconsummation of the gospel will be accomplished .

Then the destiny of all men will be irrevocablyfixed . It will be the final crisis for the humanrace . Whatever may be the decisive point in tim efor individuals, this is unquestionably representedas the crisis for hum anity as a whole under thegospel. The first advent of Christ was unto salvation . The second advent is unto judgm ent andvictory. After that tim e the kingdom of righteousness will be undisturbed by oppositions of evil .Until that tim e men will be translated from thekingdom of sin into the kingdom of Christ . After .

the judgment there is no reversal of conditions, butonly the fulfillm m t of that which is already determined .

1 Hel l is only a c orner of the universe . The Gothic

etym on denotes a c ov ered-up hole . In Sc ripture hell is a‘pit,’a lake ; not an oc ean.

’I t is ‘bottom less,’ but not bound

less. NorthAmeric an Review, February, 1885, page 170;

ES GHATOLOGY. 71

The time of judgment is left uncertain . Thegospel m ust first be preached to the nations , and,therefore

,as was observed in the preceding discus

sion concerning atonem ent,not at scattered points

within each geographical em pire,but in reality to

all people . We need not take space here to deliucate the intervening advances of Christianity onearth

,with regard to which prediction is not want

ing in the New Testament. Neither do we lingerto indicate the conditions under which the redeem edafter judgment will come to perfection. We arenow em phasizing the fact

,as one of the most evi

dent in the Scriptural teaching,that the day of

judgment— the second coming of Christ— is thefinal and suprem e crisis for the hum an race .The purposes of our present discussion do not require us to consider the belief in universal restoration nor the belief in conditional immortality

,

we are of course aware that a com pletetreatm ent of eschatology would include the c onsideration of those Opinions . Our object at present

,

as interpreters of progressive orthodoxy,is to in

quire what opinion is to be maintained by thosewho do not believe that all men will be finally re

deem ed, and who do not discover any Biblical warrant for the expectation that any one endowed withrational and spiritual powers will cease to exist.Scripture predicts, then , as a great fact to be realized in the future , that there is to be a day ofjudgm ent, when there will be a final separation ofthe righteous from the wicked .


2. The Principle of Judgment . In another respect the predictions of Scripture are unmistakable .It is clear that Christ is to be the judge . Chtist

is to be on the judgment seat. Again and againthis is plainly declared . The Son of Man is to bejudge of the world. The Father hath given himauthority to execute judgment because he is theSon of Man . When the Son of Man Shall comein his glory all nations shall be gathered beforeHim . That judgment i s to be rendered by Christis taken for granted throughout the New Testam entin many an allusion and assumption , as if everyone who knows anything of the gospel knows thatChrist will com e to be our judge . Now this meansmore than that in addition to his offices of Redeemer and Master Christ is also appom ted Judge .It m eans that all men are to be judged under thegospel ; to be judged by their relation to Christ.God reveals him self in Christ for the enlightenm entand redemption of men . This is the clearest

,the

most gracious , the supreme revelation ; and if menare judged by Christ, they are judged in accordance with that revelation which He brought to theworld. They are not to be judged under the lightof reason and conscience alone, but under the lightof the gospel of Christ. They are to com e before his

j udgment seat, not as those who are dragged thereforcibly to meet a judge of whose person, character,or even existence they know nothing, but as thosewho are brought there as the necessary result ofthe knowledge of God which has been given them



of Christian thought . In accordance with thi steaching of the gospel is the prediction , repeatedlymade, that Christ is to judge the whole world, allthe nations , all the dead, sm all and great.It is in consequence of this principle that we believe the knowledge of God in Christ to be finallydecisive of character and destiny. Whether or notany knowledge of God besides that given by thegospel is decisive, there can be no question that thegospel does determine the destiny of all to whom itis made known. There are no higher

,no m ore influ

ential motives under which m an can be brought toGod. If Christ does not, no other power can drawm an to God. Whoever will not believe on Chr istis incorrigible and hopelessly impenitent . Thereremaineth no more sacrifice for sin, not becausethe divine patience but because the divine resourc esare exhausted. There is no other whom God cansend to those who will not reverence his Son .

Therefore a process of judgment is already goingon . Wherever the gospel is proclaimed, Christ isalready testing men . Character is becoming fixedfor good or evi l as men yield to his approaches orrepel them . He that believeth not is condemnedalready

,because he hath not believed on the only

begotten Son of God.

” For this reason the gospelis urgent with m en. It gives

‘

them no promise ofto-morrow. Its word is Now. Repent now. Be

lieve now. This is the day of grace , because Godis revealed in Christ, and now you are moved torepent of sin and believe in Christ. The urgency

ES CHATOLOGY. 75

is not in view of the fact that death may com esuddenly, though that is a solemn consideration ,but rather in view of the fact that to-m orrow theremay be no inclination to respond to the love

,

ofGod which is offered in Christ , and which tod ayis neglected or rejected. To-day if ye will hearhis voice harden not your hearts .

” The fathers inthe wilderness were not destroyed at once . Fortyyears long did God deal with them

, but in vain .

Behold now is the acceptable tim e .” Thus itmay be that the destiny of som e is irreversibly determ ined long before they die . That is a decisivepoint whenever Christ is presented and there is aninclination to receive and obey Him. When ac.c eptanc e of Him is real the believer is saved forever from sin. When rejection of Him is final, sothat there is no further possibility that Christ willresponse

,there is no rem aining hope of deliv

c rance and purification from sin . It is, therefore,a legitimate and almost necessary conclusion thatthe destiny of all m en to whom the gospel is givenin this earthly life 1s decided while they are in thebody. The apostle

,addressing those who in this

earthly tabernacle already know Christ , remindsthem of the tim e approaching when theywill bemade manifest before the judgm ent seat of Christ,that each one m ayreceive the things done in thebody. He im plies that the earthl y life 1s decisivefor those to whom he was writing

,although he was

thinking of the fidelity rather than the salvation ofbelievers . There is much reason also, in the nature


of the case, to believe that this present life is themost favorable opportunity for moral renewal inChrist.1 The gospel is an earthly, historical religion

,wrought out in the deeds and sacrifices of the

man Christ Jesus, who lived under the conditionsof a human , earthly life , who dwelt in the cities andvillages of Judea, who walk ed in the vall eys and onthe mountains of Galilee

,and who died on a hill

side of thi s earth . Our bodily life is the acceptable time to be saved by Him who in the days ofhis flesh offered up prayers and supplications withstrong crying and tears .At this point the ( discussion m ight terminate .The principle of judgment in accordance with whichthe destinies of men are determined we believe tobe that which has now been defined. As to thecondition of those who are finally condemned theBible gives only obscure hints and vague imagery

,

and we certainly have no heart to speculate on eitherthe surroundings or the feelings of the lost . As

to the condition of the redeemed , we believe that

1 The words also, in the nature of the c ase hav e been

inserted in the sentenc e as it was first printed in the AndoverReview. The m eaning without this c lause is apparent as ex

plained by what im m ediately follows . But either through

m isunderstanding or for som e other reason the sentenc e has

been detached from its c onnec tion and satirized bysom e writ

ers as if we had no stronger word to sayev en c onc erning

those to whom the gospe l is preached in this life . The c loseof the paragraphis m erelya se c ondaryc onsideration, in ad

dition to the urgent m otiv es to repentanc e alreadym entioned

in the v erysam e paragraph.

ES CHATOLOGY. 77

they are with Christ and share his glory, probablywith m ore fullness after the day of judgm ent thanduring the period between death and judgm ent .But our present discussion, as we have already indic ated, does not require detailed inquiry concerning the blessedness of the saved. We could stophere

,but for a related question which has long per

plexed and disturbed believers . It is a question asto the judgm ent and the destiny of those to whomthe gospel is not made known while they are inthe body. We m ust continue the discussion, then,in order to consider, as it m ay seem to deserve ,this difficult question . It is

,in our opinion

,to be

looked on as an appended inquiry, rather than asan essential question for theology. Still it is notwanting either in practical or speculative im portance , and, at any rate , is at present much in dispute .B . A RELATED QUESTION .

What is the fate of those m illions to whom Christis not m ade known in this life , and of those generations who lived before the advent of ChristThis m ay, perhaps , be onlya tem porary question.

The tim e m ay com e , we think wil l com e , when allwill hear the m essages of the gospel during theearthly lifetim e

,and will know the gospel so thor

oughly that knowledge and corresponding oppor

tunity will be decisive . Then there will be lessoccasion for perplexity, as there will be no apparent exclu sion from those opportunities which atpresent are given to only part of the great hum an

PR0GBES S I VE ORTH 0D 0X Y.

The question we have raised is not new. Norare any of the proposed answers new, althoughsome of the reasoning is the outcom e of a moreprofound thought of the gospel than has beengained in preceding periods . An instructive l esson for impressing the difficul ty of our 1nqu1ry I S

a history of the various opinions which have beenheld during the Christian centuries by honoredleaders and revered saints ; such an historicalsketch

,for exam ple , as Dean P lum ptre g l v es m his

recent book entitled The Spirits in Prison .

” Noanswer which has yet been given is entirely freefrom objections . Every one , unless he declines toaccept any solutl on, has an alternative before him ,

and must rest in that conclusion which se ems tohim most nearly in accordance with the large meaning of the gospel

,and which is exposed to the few

est serious objections . Certainly any one shouldbe slow to condem n those whose opinions on thisvexed subject do not agree with his own hypothesis . There is no explicit revelation as to the destiny of those who on earth have had no knowledgeof Christ. Therefore any inference that is drawnfrom the doctrines of the gospel

,and from the in

terpretation of incidental allusions of Scripture ,must be held with confession of som e rem ainingignorance on the part of the reasoner . The theory‘which we shall advance presently i s offered underthese conditions .The answers which have thus far been proposedmay be reduced to three , the first of which is held

ES CHATOLOGY. 79

by only a few,while current opinion is for the most

part divided between the other two .1

1. The first theory is that the heathen are hopelessly lost unless they have the gospel in its historicform during their life on earth . Thi s is maintainedboth from fact and from supposed necessity. Itbeing assum ed that there is no opportunity of re

pentanc e after death, facts are pointed to as conc lusiv e, for as matter of notorious knowledge theheathen are universally corrupt

,and die in their

sins . Thus Professor Kellogg, in his article onFu ture P robation, printed in the PresbyterianReview for April last

,distinctly says : Whether

this be true ” ( that the Spirit of God m ay renewthe hearts of m en who have never heard of Christ) ,we greatly doubt never am ong the heathen havewe ever m et or heard of one meeting any personwho gave eV1denc e of being born again before thattheyhad heard the gospel. The final c ondemnation of all heathen is also argued as of necessity.

The argum ent m aybe reduced to this form : thereis no salvation except through Christ the heathenhave no knowledge of Christ ; therefore the heathenare to be cast into hell . Thus the article which wehave just quoted contains also the following dec laration : The pla1n teaching of the Holy Scrip

1 The opinion that this question presents insuperable diffic ulty, and that we m aytrust the wise and m erc iful God to dowhat is right, presents, of c ourse , no answer to be c onsidered,

sinc e it is onlya c onfession of ignoranc e . I n the last sec tionof the book the agnostic position is brieflynotic ed.


tures is that while the heathen have not from“thelight of nature light enough to save them

,they do

have enough to condemn them .

” That is,if the

language m eans what it says,it is impossible for

anyof the heathen to escape from a sinful state,but nevertheless they all are condemned to c v er

lasting woe , on account of their sins . They neednot have been as sinful as they are

,although they

m ust have been sinful in their essential character,and for this additional sin

,which even with the

light they have they might have avoided,they are

lost for ever and ever.This theory is a terrible impeachment of the divine goodness, not to say justice . Is it like Godto deal thus with men " Will He leave them in

their sins, without any possible means of salvation"The most inconsequent reasoning which leads tosome other conclusion is preferable to the inexorable logic, if it be logic, which pushes on to thisheartless, unchristian view. We do not wonderthat the writer we have quoted falls back on thesovereignty of God . He argues that it is inc omprehensible to us

i

whythe offers of grace are withheld from a large portion of the race . God hasm ercy on whom He wil l have mercy, and we haveno right to interpose our curious inqu iries . But

the very question at issue is precisely this, whetherGod does withhold the offers of grace from any ofhis wandering children . It is not denied that theheathen are wicked and blam eworthy

,that they are

much worse than they need to be , that they are



nor that clergymen of the Presbyterian Churchcoul d concur in maintaining the view that while

the heathen have not from the light of nature lightenough to save them , they do have enough to c ondem n them .

” This theory is only a restatement ofthe doctrine of arbitrary election and reprobation .

We turn,then, to the theories which remain , and

which find a larger num ber of adherents . One ofthese theories is that salvation is possible withoutany knowledge of the gospel

,and yet by reason of

the gospel the other, that saving knowledge of thegospel may be given after death to those who inthi s life do not obtairr it .

_2. The former of these theories,and the theorywhich is the second answer we are to c onsider,while not destitute of support, is obliged to confrontsome serious objections , practic al as well as theoretic al . And if, as we shall find, it coversexceptional cases

,the grave problem remains un

solved . The theory attempts to guard the beliefsthat salv ation is possible without knowledge of thegospel

,and that it is thu s possible during the

earthly life . In addition , it is maintained by som ethat this salvation

,althoughobtained without knowl

edge of the gospel , is essentially by m eans of thegospel . We must take space and patience to ascertain how m uch this theoryaccom plishes towardsa satisfactory explanation of the difficulty beforewhich it stands .Appeal is taken to facts . A few exceptional

individuals, scattered among the mass of heathen,

ES CHATOLOGY. 88

seem to show that salvation is possible withoutknowledge of the gospel . Socrates , Cato, Aurelius, Buddha, and others seem to have had thecharacteristics of Christians . A pure and loftypersonage is occasionally found among the unchristian peoples to-day who

,we cannot help thinking

,

is accepted of God . Such facts Scripture confirm s,it is m aintained . In every nation , says the apostlePeter

,he that feareth God and worketh righteous

ness is acceptable to Him . The account of judgment given by Matthew leaves the im pression thatsom e , b ecause they were hum ane and benevolent,are saved, although they did not know their servicewas really to Christ . Also

,it is argued

,and with

justice, before the tim e of Christ , Abraham andm ul titudes of his descendants were saved by faith

,

and , of course , without knowledge of Christ. Theseconsiderations would seem to establish the possibility of salvation without knowledge of the gospel,and to show that the workings of God ’s grace are

not lim ited to the revelation m ade in Christ.It should not be forgotten

,however

,that these

are exceptional cases . The possibility of salvationunder these conditions seldom becom es reality.

The vast majority of the heathen die in sin . Paul,as Professor Kellogg clearly shows

,does not ad

m it the exceptions, but declares that all the heathen

are under condem nation . The great apostle adm itsthat if they were righteous theywould be approv edof God

, but is careful to state that as m atter offact they are not obedient ; that all have sinned and


c ome short of the glory of God . It has also beenheld very generally that the exceptional personages

,

if there are any, are probably brought after deathto knowledge of Christ. Socrates

,it has often

been said, would have been a Christian if he hadknown of Christ . It has been supposed that theexceptional virtuous characters were peculiarly re

c eptive of Christ , and probably after death had fortheir com pletion the knowledge which was lackingwhile they were on earth. Plato has often beenrepresented as meeting Christ and worshiping Himin the world of spirits . The View, when it is thusenlarged

,seems to be that som e at death are still

capable of redem ption , and that they will not failof it

,but will have the knowledge which is nec

e ssary to salvation , a view not essentially unlikethat which will be presently considered . A greatmultitude not so blam eless as Socrates and Buddhamay still be capable of redem ption

,as , indeed,

proves to be the case when the gospel is preachedto them during the earthly life . If it is maintained that the n um ber of those who are acceptedof God is not sm all

,lf

i

nt that there are many votaries of religion seeking earnestly towards God ac"cording to the light they have , and who constitutea better element in every nation , what is really believed is that they are on the way to clearer knowledge

,and that they will know God in Jesus Christ.

It is not held that no m ore is necessary and thatthey will have no further knowledge

,but that they

will be saved, in the true meaning of salvation,

ES CHATOLOGY. 85

through the knowledge of Christ . That knowledge , in the nature of the case , will be given afterthey die .As to Abraham and his descendants

,the instance

is clearly exceptional . They had m ore than thelight of nature . They had a special revelationfrom God concerning his righteousness and mercy.

They knew of redem ption on condition of penitenceand faith . Their knowledge of God

,although oh

scure,was in m any respects the knowledge given

afterwards m ore fullyby Christ . And, while theirsalvation proves that knowledge of the historicChrist was not absolutely necessary, still they wererecipients of

,

that which was preparatory to the gospel and directly predictive of it . And

,besides

,it

has always been believed that for the com pletenessof their redem ption they had c learer knowledge

,

after death,of God ’s love revealed in Christ . It

has even been held by som e that the patriarchs andprophets waited for their full salvation until Christhad actually appeared on earth to realize the loveof God to m ankind

,somewhat as the early m artyrs

are represented in the Apocalypse as waiting andpraying for the trium phs of the Redeem er, withoutwhich they could not be satisfied . It is , indeed,declared that those who were saved under the oldcovenant received not the prom ise

,God having pro

v ided som e better thing for us,that they apart

from us ( of the new covenant) should not be m adeperfect . The instances cited

,then

,are exceptional

a few virtuous heathen,and they

,perhaps, only

86 PROGRESSIVE ORTHOD OXY.

receptive of salvation but not actually regenerate ,and the Jews who were under a special revelationwhichwas preparatory to Christ , and which the

heathen world did not share . To show that thereare many who would accept Christ if they knewhim is not to show that they are saved by the lightof nature , but woul d rather go far to establish theOpinion that they will know Christ after they die .From exceptions it is not satisfactory to argue togeneral conclusions . The practical difficul ty re

m ains , after all exceptions are adm itted , that thelight of nature does not suffice for salvation in anycom parison with the light of the gospel ; that thereligions of the world, in the very broadest view,must be looked on only as preparatory to the gospel ; that as matter of fact the heathen die in theirsins

,condemned indeed for much sin they might

have avoided , but yet practically without the meansof salvation from a sinful state . If this possibility,so seldom realized

,is a satisfactory solution of the

dark problem , it w ill, of course , be adm itted thattheir probation is lim ited to this life . If this is allthat God in his love and righteousness does fora large and thus far the vastly larger portion ofthe race and yet gives the gospel to others

,then,

certainl y, he ofiers to them all he has to offer whilethey are in the body. In apparent inconsistencywith this view, its advocates are som etim es heardsaying that God will do all that can be done forthe salvation of every one of his children .

For practical purposes this explanation is not

ES CHATOLOGY. 87

m uch better than that which preceded it. According to either view, the im m ense majority of m en

die in their sins without hope of salvation . Theonlyadvantage of the theory that salvation is possible under the light of nature is that it is notquite as difficult to vindicate the divine justice incondem ning those who are disobedient. But theground gained is scarcely appreciable , and, besides ,we have reason to believe that God’s dealings withmen will vindicate his goodness and m ercyas wellas his strict justice . Indeed, justice , as was pointedout in the discussion of the Atonem ent , is the guardian of all the attributes , and therefore does not pronounce the first, but rather the final, word .

But this theory is still further attenuated to m eanthat the knowledge under which it is possible formen to be saved who never hear of Christ is es

sentially knowledge of the gospel. There is noessential difierenc e , it is said, between the knowledge of duty and therefore of God

,which reason

and conscience give , and the knowledge of dutyand of God which the gospel gives . It is arguedthat the m utual relations of m en in society m akeobligatory the law of love to m an, and inferentiallyof love to God, and that the gospel gives noother law, even if it enunciates that law moreclearly; that therefore conscientious heathen , living up to the knowledge they have , are actuallysaved through Christ and his atonem ent , althoughtheyhave no knowledge of the actual Christ, norof his sacrifice for the sins of the world.

88 PROGRESSIVE ORTH OD OXY. .

Now, this reasonm g, if it may so be called, 1s

v identlyresorted to in order to make the theoryagree with the accepted view that salvation fromsin and reconciliation to God are possible onlythrough~ Christ . I t is indeed true , but that is notwhat this explanation means, that God

’s relation tothe entire race ln all the generations is other thanit woul d be but for Christ. A race into whichChrist is incorporated 1s not dealt with by God asit would be otherwise . Thus, while the work ofChrist was not as yet accomplished

,God exercised

forbearance for the sins of the past. It is also truethat the great religions are suited to prepare theway for Christianity in some such sense as Judaism was related to the gospel . God, we believe , iseducating all the nations towards the gospel. But

the theory we are considering is of quite anothersort . It is that the knowledge gained , by reasonand conscience is practically equ ivalent to theknowledge gained through the gospel not as clear

,

but the sam e ; less advantageous , but really identical . I t is true enough that Christianity is harm onious with reason , and commends itself to therational and moral c onV1c tions. It is al so certainthat so much truth concerning God as reason candiscover is an essential part of Christianity. Butbecause the less is part of the greater it is nottherefore essentially the sam e . Christianity is asource of knowledge c onc ernm g God which is notgiven by the external un1verse nor by the c onstitution of man , but only by Christ. Because reason


90 PROGRESSIVE ORTHODOXY

and exposed to the necessary consequences and itis a power of deliverance from sin, the power of anew life . The gospel

,therefore , 1s not so m uch

som ething taught as som ething done ; a great divine work wrought out in actual hi story

,under the

knowledge and p ower of which men are broughtinto a new and holy life . Christianity is not anethics , but a redem ption . It is not man seekingGod by the obscure light of reason and the prom ptings of conscience , which is the search of men in allthe idolatries of heathendom

,but it is God seek

ing man in the person and atoning work of JesusChrist

,his only Son bur Lord . Jesus said to Nic

odem us that the need of moral renewal is wellknown without a revelation , that it is a thing ofearthl y knowledge . But man coul d never knowby reason or conscience the heavenly thing thatGod so loved the world as to give his only begottenSon that whosoever believeth on Him should notperish

, but have everlasting life . That God realizes his love in Jesus Christ , and energizes throughHim for the redemption of sinners

,is the gospel

,

and thi s is not essentially the sam e as the groping of m en after God , who has not so revealed himself unto them . This dangerou s theory puts thegospel on a level with other r eligions , and gives ita precarious position . Reduced to a syllogism ,

the

theory m aybe sum m arized thus : Men cannot besaved except through Christ and his gospel ; mencan be saved who never heard of Christ and hisgospel therefore

,the knowledge men have by na

ES CHATOLOGY. 91

ture is really the gospel of which they never heard.

The m ajor prem iss is alm ost universally accepted .

It is Professor Kell ogg’s postulate,and it is also

ours . But the proposition which has been slippedin under the guise of a minor prem iss is really aflat contradiction of the major , while the conclusionis far out on the road in com pany with forms ofunbelief which were long ago driven out in defeatand sham e .Has it com e to this

,that within evangelical cir

cles the battle m ust be fought again on the oldissue between natural and revealed religion " Mustour brethren , whom we love while we deploretheir error

,

” again be held back from acceptingthe opinion that Christianity is only a system ofmoral teaching " Evidently the theory

,in this

form of it, is open to serious objection , since itthreatens to underm ine the foundations of the gospel

,by ignoring its distinctive character as a re

dem ption from sin.

Apart also from the tendency of this rationalistictheoryto reduce Christianity from its unique position, the practical result apparently would be toc ut the nerve of m issions

,

” for the theory is , first,that the heathen can be saved without the gospel,and, second, that theyalready have the gospel,essentially. Therefore

,while it m aybe desirable

and com m endable to send the gospel with its clearerlight, no im perative necessity is laid on the churchto proclaim Christ to the heathen .

We think it will be admitted that no one woul d


dream of saying that the heathen have the gospelin any real sense unless he m ust think so in - orderto escape som e other conclusion which he has beforehand determ ined to rej ect, no m atter what violence is done to reason , and even to a correct conc eption of Christianity, to say nothing of com m onsense . Who , contem plating the heathen on the onehand as they really are

,and pondering the divine

and sav 1ng significance of the gospel on the otherhand, believes that in any practical or even intelli

giblo sense the heathen have the gospel " It woul dbe better to take refu

ge m a confession of absolute

ignorance,or to hide in the ambiguity of unc ov

enanted m ercies .We have dwelt at some length on this theory,partly because it is just now som ewhat in vogue

,

and also becau se those who hold it denounce ln

severe term s others who are better satisfied with adifierent explanation . We do not deny liberty toany one to entertain this opinion , although it seemsto us foreign to the most obvious characteristics ofthe gospel , because we admit the problem to be adark and difficult one, at the best ; but we cannotrefrain from expressing surprise that the adherents .

of a view which is m anifestly open to grave obje ctions and serious inconsistencies should be horrifiedat others who do not happen to agree with them inreference to a question which has always been per

plexing , and to which no answer yet given is eu

tirely free from objections .This theory has little advantage over that first

ES CHATOLOGY. 98

noticed . According to that,the heathen m ust be

lost . According to this,it has to be adm itted that

the overwhelm ing m ajority are lost . A possibilitywhich does not rise into any appreciable realization fails to rem ove the difficul ty. When this possibility is still further reduced by the attem pt toprove that it is the gospel in another form

,earnest

inquiry is alm ost insul ted . Such explanation i1icreases the perplexity which it pretends to relieve .We are still confronted by the problem . Is thereany other hypothesis which affords light " Can nomore be said than that God will do what is right,and we m ust leave all in his hands " Have we noreason to expect

,in this life

,a m ore definite expla

nation3 . The conclusion which most naturally suggestsitself is that those who do not know of God’s lovein Christ while they are in the body will haveknowledge of Christ after death . This answercertainlyhas the

'

m erit of sim plicity and intelligibleness. If it is true

,then every one will have a

real knowledge of the gospel,and r at the day of

judgment will be approved or condem ned in viewof his acceptance or rejection of Christ

,who , either

before or after death,but before the final judgm ent

had been m ade known as the Redeem er from sin .

There would still rem ain the m ystery of that freedom which m akes it possible to reject Christ, amystery which rem ains on any supposition , butthere woul d be relief in the thought that no onewill perish without clear and sufficient knowledge


of the Saviour. But the apparent obviousness ofthis conclusion may be a reason for suspecting it.And we certainly have to inquire if it does not involve other difficulties so serious that it is better toattem pt no solution whatever, but again to confessignorance .This theory is opposed for two reasons . It issaid to be destitute of Scriptural sanction

,and to be

unsafe . We m ust consider,then

,such passages of

Scripture as relate to our q uestion , and afterwardsnotice what m aybe called the prudential objections .It is urged that Scripture not only does not sus

tain , but that it is clearly opposed t o the theory.

It i s to be noted on this point that the passageswhich have a direct bearing are very few

,that

those which are used inferentially are about equallybalanced

,as m any looking one way as the other,

and that there 1s wide diversity of opinion concerning the interpretation of all the passages in question.

Professor Kellogg may be trusted to have collectedall the passages which he thinks are decisive asagainst the theorywe are now considering. Afterdiligent search we can discover only two such passages in his article , nor have we ever been able todiscover others in the New Testament which caneven be claimed as unequivocal .One is the reminder of the apostle to the Corin

thians that before the judgm ent seat of Christ theywill rec e1ve the things done in the body. But thispassage is lim ited ln l ts reference to those whohave heard the gospel, and it 1s not legitimate to

ESCHATOLOGY. 95

stretch it to a universal application . This lim itation has the sanction of em inent scholars

,and is ad

m itted by som e who reject the idea of future probation for the heathen . The passage , then , is notdecisive . Singularly enough Professor Kelloggdoes not use it in that portion of his article whichdeals with our specific question , but in the m oregeneral discussion of a probation for all m en. Itis worthy of rem ark that no other passage distinctlyrefers to the bodily life in relation to judgm ent.The only other passage which is claim ed as ex

plic it and decisive is in the second chapter of R0mans

,where Paul says that as m any as have s1nned

without law shall also perish without law. But eventhi s statem ent

,direct as it seem s , is found in the

m idst of a discussion the aim of which is to showthat all m en have absolute need of the gospel ;that for Gentile and Jew alike there is no hopeapart from the gospel ; that all m en by reason oftheir sins are shut up to the gospel ; that the nations left to them selves woul d perish ; having notthe law they woul d perish notwithstanding

,as the

Jews having the law woul d perish notwithstanding.

The apostle was describing the actual present condition of Gentiles and Jews

,to show that there is

universal need of the gospel . And at the end ofthe sam e sentence he affirm s that all men at lastare to be judged according to mygospel by JesusChrist .” What is

,

clear is the apostle ’s teachingthat there is no salvation except thr ough the gospelof Christ . It is not as clear, it is indeed doubtful ,

96 PROGRESS I VE ORTHODOX Y. ,

if he was thinking of the lim its of time within whichthe gospel m ight be presented.

We have reached the end so far as passages areconcerned which are claim ed to have immediaterelation

“

to our inquiry. Every one must judgewhether these verses

,taken separately or together

,

are so unequ l voc al as to establish the certainty thatthere is no hope for the heathen after death . Thererem ain passages which are employed inferentially.

Som e of these look one way and some the other,

and they are few at the most.The parable of the rich man and Lazarus is notin point ; if for no other reason , bec ause Dives andhis brethren had Moses and the prophets . Theyhad the exceptional advantages of the revelationmade to the Jews . They were not heathen .

The case of Cornelius is more pertinent, inasmuch as he was a Gentile , and is said to have beenacceptable to God before he had the gospel. But

if not a Jewish proselyte , he was so impressed byhis knowledge of Judaism that he c ontributed

'

lib

erallyfor its support. The history of the man isrelated to show how Peter was convinced that thegospel would find reception among the Gentiles aswell as among the Jews . Above all, it was of theutm ost im portance that the gospel should bepreached to Cornelius , who when he had believedon Christ was a very different m an from Corneliuswithout ChristPaul’s question in the tenth chapter of Romans ,How shall they believe in Him of whom they



dition of those to whom it is not given. The Bibleis practical rather than speculative .What

,now

,are the passages which are thought

to g1ve encouragement to hope for the heathen "One ‘of these passages is Peter’s allusion in the

third chapter of his epistle to Chr ist’s preaching tothe spirits 1n pr1son. The preponderating conclusion of scholarship is that Christ appeared in theabode of the dead between his crucifixion and resurrec tion. That his message was other than thegospel

,least of all that it was an exultant c ondem

nation of the lost, we find it impossible to believ e .The inference is natflral , though not necessary, thatif Christ preached to the contemporaries of Noah

,

the wickedest of former generations, his gospel isalso made known to the heathen nations who havehad even less than the warnings of Noah. The belief of the ancient church , a belief which has heldits ground till the present tim e, that Christ descended into Hades , is a legitimate inference fromPeter’s teaching, taken in connection with Paul ’sparenthetical question in the fourth chapter ofEphesians

,Now this, he ascended, what is it but

that he also descended into the lower parts of theearth" He that descended is the same also thatascended far above all the heavens .Even m ore significant is 1 Peter iv. 5, 6 : Whoshall give account to him that is ready to judge thequick and the dead . For unto this end was thegospel preached even to the dead, that they mightbe judged according to men in the flesh, but live ac

ESCHATOLOGY. 99

cording to God in the Spirit . Here it is expresslytaught that, in order to make the judgment universal

,the gospel was preached to all the dead as

well as to the living. There is the identical connec tion of thought which we have indicated . Judgm ent by Christ is preceded by the preaching ofthe gospel to the living and the dead . The passageis unequivocal . It can no longer be maintainedthat the dead referred to are the spiritually dead,or that anyothers are m eant than all the dead ofform er generations . Both the fif th and the sixthverses have the sam e general application to all thedead . And the very object of preaching the gospelto them is that they m ight be judged in the wayaccording to whi ch all m en are judged in respectto the life in the flesh

, but m ight yet in the waycharacteristic of God have opportunity to live inthe spirit. The interpretation of Professor Kelloggthat the preaching to the dead was to the m artyrswho

“

are now dead but who heard the gospel whenalive is too fanciful to deserve serious consideration .

Another passage is that in the gospels concerning the sin against the Holy Ghost

,which shall not

be forgiven, neither in this world nor in that whichis to come . These words of Jesus do not affirmthat any sins will be forgiven in the world whichis to com e ; but the inference is natural from hissolem n declaration that the sin against the HolyGhost cannot be forgiven in the world to com e,that other sins m aybe forgiven hereafter . And,

inasmuch as this sin is generally thought to be no


other than the willful rejection of Christ,the in

ference is still more natural. It is possible,hoW

ever, that Christ meant only to speak strongly, andwas employing an emphasized negative .” Professor Kell ogg argues that the world to come was,in the opinion of the Jews , to begin with the resurrec tion, and that Christ had no reference to anage between death and resurrection , but to an agefollowing the interm ediate state . If we correctlyunderstand this explanation, the inference wouldbe that all sins can be forgiven all the way on upto the resurrection ; that is , in thi s age or world ;and possibly, except the s1n against the Holy Ghost,the period which is ushered in by and follows

the resurrection . Thi s explanation the professore steems better and more precisely pertinent to thepresent issue than the emphasized negative the

ory,or the “ turning rhetoric into logic theory.

Again, if the inhabitants of Tyre and Sidon are

to be condemned to everlasting woe , in what sensec an their judgment be more tolerable than that ofChorazin and Bethsaida If Sodom , with the

knowledge of Christ,would not have been over

thrown,and if Tyre and Sidon would have re

pented, can we believe that the knowledge of Christwill forever be withheld from them" And is itcertain that our Lord had in m ind more than thetem poral calam ities to which those cities had beenexposed by reason of their sins " Was he thinking of the everlasting destiny of all the individualswho dwelt in them"


102 PROGRESSIVE ORTHODOX Y.

Bible more unm istakable than that the world toits every individual is to be judged by Christ

,and

that Christ was offered for the sins of the wholeworld The Scriptures plainly teach the universalityof

“ Christ’s work in its intent,its application

,

and its consum m ation . The burden of proof, evenon the Scriptural side

,rests upon those who aver

that any portion of the rac e is excluded from theprivileges of the gospel . It is not incumbent onus to quote Scripture which shall show that theheathen do have the gospel before they are judged.

It 1s incumbent on those who oppose our view toquote Scripture which shall show that the heathendo not have the g ospel before they are judged .

But even in view of specific pass ages, althoughthey are few

,we claim that no one of them is de

c isiv e against the hope which may be entertainedfor the heathen , while there are others, especiallythose in the epistle of Peter, which m ayfairly beclaimed to favor that hope .The obj ections which are urged most strenu

ously against the hypothesis of future probationfor the heathen are prudential . The consequencesof such a hope are held to be dangerous . If it isadm itted

,so the argument runs , that there are any

who may have opportunity after death , will not thehope be encouraged that som e in Christian landswill also have such opportunity " Many are readyto say that they have not had a fair chance here ;and as men are so prone to delay, they will be moresecure than ever. We do not deny that there is

ESCHATOLOGY. 103

force in this consideration . Such m isuse mightbe m ade of the breadth of the gospel . Men deferrepentance for various insufficient reasons , presuming too much on the m ercy of God

,or on the m ore

convenient season . But we do not accept this Oh

jec tion as conclusive against the theory. It is difficult to judge of the usefulness of a particul ar helief . N0 one can tell how m any are hardenedagainst the gospel because the Opinion has been ad

v anc ed that all the heathen are hopelessly lost .Perhaps the harm done by encouraging delay woul dbe m ore than offset bythe harm done through narrow conceptions of the love of God . It is certainthat m any have been prejudiced against the gospelby representations of God which m ake Him a severe and tyrannical Sovereign . It is certain thatconscientious

,intelligent m en have shrunk from

identifying them selves with a church and from em

bracing a religion whose God leaves the vast m a

jorityof the race without opportuni ty of salvation .

There is danger on both sides,and it is impossible

to decide on which side it is greater .h

Another prudential objection is that the m otiveof m issions is weakened . Urgency to send thegospel abroad will be reduced

,if it is believed that

the heathen can be saved after death . We denythat this is the m ain m otive of m issions . Christ’scom m and is explicit and urgent . The glory of hiskingdom requires the propagation of the gospel.But it is a question which has not been sufficientlyconsidered , what the effect is likely to be with the


heathen themselves, if this or that opm l on 1s held.

The regard of the heathen in m any nations for anc estors is known to be almost their religion . Whois prepared to say that it would be safer

‘to tell the

Chinese and Japanese that there is no hOpe for anyof their ancestors , than to adm it or even teach thatin other worlds the same Christ may be offered tothem who is offered now to their descendants "The gospel is not lim ited to the Western nations .Christianity is to be Asiatic and African , as wellas European and Am erican . God’s dealing withthe nations which have long been in darkness isnot determined by the false hopes which some whohave heard the gospel all their lives may cherish ,and which they all the tim e know are not wellfounded . We do not consent to argue the question on prudential grounds . These reasons havebeen mentioned only to show how inconclusive theyare

,and that there is m uch to be said on both sides

from any such point of view.

To escape from a dilem ma, it is surm ised bysome that

,not after death, but at the m om ent of

death,clearer knowledge may be obtained . It is

urged that at that suprem e mom ent the veil of flesh .

no longer obscures , and a sudden illum ination m ay

be vouchsafed . Perhaps this is true , though suchindications as are given do not show that the mindis usually active at the m om ent of dissolution . But

this hypothesis is open to all the prudential objections which are urged against enlightenm ent afterdeath . If it is believed that at death knowledge is


106 PRO GRESSIVE ORTH OD OXY.

‘

many of the heathen because they are so corruptthat -

.they woul d not accept Him , it must be repliedthat no one can be sure of that that the sam ecould be said of many in Christian lands ; that itwoul d amount to believing that the gospel is presented in earnest only to those who are sure to ac

cept it ; and that this view is either Universalismon the one side , or the old doctrine of arbitraryelection and reprobation on the other. Our belief1s

, that somewhere and som etim e God will revealhim self to every one in the face of Jesus Chr ist,and that the destiny of each and all is determinedby the personal relation to Christ . If we did notbelieve thi s , Christianity would no longer be for usthe universal religion

,and the teaching that Christ

is Son of Man,the universal man

,the Head of hu

manity, would be robbed of its significance .That man even in another world can refuse the

proflers of grace is in accordance with that freedomand responsibility which are always and everywhereboth the glory and mystery of rational, m oral being

,and which c reate no greater perplexity of

thought m the case of the rejection of Christ afterdeath than 1n the case of the rejection of Christ before death .

I t is custom ary to argue from the present ex

istenc e of sin and evil in the world to the probabilitythat it may continue forever, and that som e maybe lost who never had even the opportunity of salvation . How, it is asked, can we reconcile it withthe goodness of God that He should create a world

ESCHATOLOGY. 107

in which sin and suffering shoul d be present forages " How

,then

,can we decide anyof these dark

questions from our opinion of what God m ight beexpected to do " We subm it that the argum ent isirrelevant . If sin is at length to disappear entirely,there would be m ental relief

,and its existence now

would not be so m ysterious . The tem porary presence of sin presents no such problem as the everlasting presence of sin . The argum ent is one ofthe weakest to bring against the doctrine of universalrestoration . So if the heathen

,at present corrupt

and ignorant,are at length to be enlightened and

to have space for repentance,the problem i s entirely

different from that which confronts us on the supposition that from their very birth they are doom edto everlasting woe . The existence of sin

,which

cannot he escaped nor overcom e,is infinitely m ore

perplexing to thought than the existence of sin fromwhich redem ption is to be made possible . ThatGod permits sin at all is indeed m ysterious , butthe m ystery darkens if the majority of the race cannever by any possibility be delivered from it .It m aybe thought by som e that the question wehave been discussing is not of the first im portance .And it is true that

,taken by itself, apart from the

principles to which it is related,it cannot be con

sidered one of the fundamental questions . Thatis to say, one

’s opinion concerning the opportunities of the heathen after death is of secondary consequence as com pared with his Opinion concerningthe Person of Christ and other cardinal doctrines.


It is also adm itted that on the practical side itshould not have the prom inence of other subjects .

The preacher of the gospel has little or no occasionto argue his opinion publicly. When the gospel isactually presented it is urgent for immediate acceptance with those Whom it addresses . In preachingthere is alm ost no occasion to debate with hearersthe prospects of those less fortunate than themselves . But the opinion one has on this subject isof great consequence , when it is considered as anindication of his conception of the gospel of Christ .Even the preacher, fr om whose serious functionsthis apparently speculative question seem s rem ote ,is affected in the tone , the breadth, the influenceof his preaching by the thought he has of the extent and significance of God’s love to men as it isrevealed in Christ . And for the theologian , indeedfor every one who ponders deeply God ’s graciousdealings with sinful m en, it m akes a

‘vast differencewhether he holds that cruel conception of Godwhich m eans that vast multitudes of his childrencan by no possibi lity be saved , or that narrow conc eption of God which m eans that the gospel is littlemore than the light of the unaided reason of misguided men

,or that conception of God which recog

nizes the universality of the‘

gospel of redem ptionand the suprem e significance of the final judgm ent,and which m eans that God will not withhold fromany of his children that knowledge and m otivewhich alone are able to save them from their sins .We do not think it necessary, therefore , to claim



stand on firm ground ln passing over from theJesus of history to the Christ of faith " Themovem ent of Christian thought with which wesym pathize signifies , in its deepest m eaning, the exaltation of Jesus Christ as the Head of hum anity,the Son of God

,the Redeem er of men

,the Medi

ator of God to the whole universe . For us He isall this

,or else He is in no pecul iar sense sent of

God,and we have no gospel of redem ption . We

have accepted one side of the great alternative , withall it m ay involve . We bel ieve Him to be the Redeem er of m ankind

,the Lord of the living and the

dead , the effulgence of God’s glory, and the veryim age of his substance . As a corollary from thisbelief, we are confident that all mem bers of thehum an family are to know God in Christ. We believe that all the m ore obscure revelations of God,and all the religious as truly as the religion of theHebrews

,have been an education of the nations

preparatory to the clear,glorious , and potent reve

lation of God in Chr ist . We believe that theBiblical representations of the final judgm ent byChrist and of the triumphant consumm ation of theredem ptive kingdom mean that the end is notreached till all m ankind

,the least and the greatest,

the wisest and the most ignorant, the purest andthe most depraved, have the knowledge of God

’sam azing love in Jesus Christ our Lord . We shouldbe content to expend our toil of thought, our debate and contention on the great principles of thegospel to be intent and constant in honoring our

ES CHATOLOGY. 111

divine and hum an Redeem er and in persuadingm en of the suprem acy, authority, efficacy, and uni

v ersality of his gospel of redem ption . But sincethe issue has been joined on the question which isat present so warm ly debated , we are willing tom eet it at that point, and to go back from the

corollary to the principle,from a single application

to those central truths of Christianity in the lightof which only can the question receive a sufficientand a com plete answer.The question back of all is as old as the gospelitself. It was first asked by our Lord when He inquired, Who do m en say that the SON OF MAN

is "” As of old the answer has been insufficient .One of the prophets, an Elijah , a Jerem iah , onesent to a favored part , but to only a part of thissinful world . The Master’s searching questioncom es closer : But who say ye that I am"

” Theanswer was in the question as He first asked it.He is the SON OFMAN .

THE WORK OF THE HOLY SP IRIT.

THE mystery, which attaches to the name andattends the operations of the Holy Spirit

,seems to

som e m inds to preclude any attem pt to determineor even to place his work in its relation to historicChristianity . Other

(minds, we c onceive, prefer to

leave the whole subject in mystery in the supposedinterest of the larger hope .” The unknown iseasily made to cover vast possibilities of mercy.

Given a power like that of the Holy Ghost,and

who may venture to put any lim itations‘

upon thedivine intercourse with m an, the div1ne 1nc entives

to his repentance,or the divine forgiveness" Who

may , affirm that God is not at work in som e realand efle c tiv e way for the salvation of m en irrespec

tive of their knowledge of the Atonem ent Nay,who can assert that the m anifestation Of the Spirit '

is not as truly a revelation of God, and therefore as efficacious in hum an salvation , as the disclosure of his nature and love 1n the person of Jesus Christ What warrant have we for attachingsupreme importance to the revelation of God inChristThese questions

,which are presented as they



duc ed to show that character in those communities is rapidl y attaining final perm anence in evil.Do the facts of heathendom , with or without thisconclusion

,justify the theory" If they do not

,

what is its practical value " And on the otherhand

,if the facts of heathendom can be m ade to

show a large and sufficient work of the Holy Spiritwithout the knowledge or use of the life and deathof Christ, what is the ground of Christian missions" Why send the gospel of Jesu s Christ tothose who have the gospel of the Holy Spirit "We have thus far assum ed in our interpreta

tion of Progressive Orthodoxy,that Chr istianity

meaning by it the revelation of God ln the life anddeath of Christ in their moral and sacrificial power— is God’s method of salvation for the race . Wehave not discussed , and do not care to discuss ,the possibilities of salvation apart from the divinemethod . The hope of m an is in the power of God.

We prefer to know where and how God is at work,

where and how the divine energl es are going forthin behalf of man according to the divine purposeand choice . The Scriptures, as we believe , discloseone way

,a

_way sufficient and inclusive.“They

everywhere reveal unity of method in the moralgovernm ent of God . As we have rem arked in thediscussion of the Atonem ent , There is no evidencewhatever that the race is divided into two greatsections

,one of which is dealt with on the basis of

the gospel,and the other on the basis of law and

natural conscience one on a basis of justice , the

THE WORK OF THE H OLY SPIRIT. 115

other on a basis of grace . As, before Christcam e

,God exercised forbearance for the sins of

the past and because Christ was com ing, but nowcom m andeth all m en everywhere to repent, so ul

timately all the nations and all the generations areto be dealt with through Him who tasted death forevery m an.

”

But unity of method in the salvation of the racedem ands as its working correlate identity of m o

tive . We say identity rather than equality of motive

,for absolute equality would be im possible . So ,

too,we should prefer to say that m otives shoul d be

identical rather than equivalent,because the latter

term is indefinite and opens endl ess di scussion.

Identity of m otive requires that the influenceswhich are em ployed be drawn from the sam e sourceand urged by the sam e agency. Christianity

,it is

acknowledged,has brought in upon the m ind of

m an a new and di stinct class of facts relating tohis salvation . But it does not rely upon the bareknowledge of these facts for the accom plishm ent ofits purpose in the salvation of m en. It seeks tovitalize them with spiritual power

,and make them

convictive and persuasive . Christianity,we are to

rem em ber, is m ore than a religion of ways andm eans : it is a religion of m otives . If we accustomourselves to think of the Gospel as a plan or schem ewe m ust

.

not overlook the power which gives it vitalityand m akes it

' efficacious . That power is theHoly Spirit . Historic Christianitypresupposes andincludes the work of the Holy Spirit

,as the work

116 PROGRES S I VE ORTH OD OXY.

Of the Spirit assum es and rests upon the facts ofhi storic Christianity. The work of Christ and thework of the Spirit are not sim ply related theological terms ; they stand , in the practical development of GOd

’

s purposes , in the relation of m utualdependence .For the sake of distinctness we state our position

in the following postulates1. The work of the Holy Spirit

,as a work in m a

tiue, fulfills and makes effective the method of salvation proposed by Christianity .

2. Historic Christianity alone offers sufficientm ater ia l in motive , ln the life , death, and resurrection of our Lord

,for the natural and efficacious

work of the Holy Spirit .

The Christian conception of man is that of manunder m otives from without working toward hissalvation . This is

,perhaps, the distinguishing

characteristic of Christianity. All other religions,

it has been said,represent man as seeking God .

Christianity alone represents God as seeking m an.

It will be seen that the pr1nc 1ple which is here suggested holds good under the narrowest interpreta~

tion of the Christian system . Christianity is thereligion of the divine search-whether there be fewor m any sought after. If we start within the lim itations of an arbitrary election we have a lim itedatonem ent and a lim ited work of the Spirit, buteven here the prom inent fact is that of Christ dyingfor the elect and the Spirit working for their sal



who was to make all things clear to them , was to gobefore them and act t hrough them in the convincem ent of the world " And He, when He is come ,will convict the world in respect of sin

,and of right

eousness,

“

and of judgm ent : of sin , becau se they believe not on m e ; Of righteousness , because I go tothe Father, and ye behold m e no more ; of judgment, because the prince of this world hath beenjudged .

” It is nowhere affirm ed or assumed in theGospels that the world with unaided vision woulddiscern the cross

,or with untroubled heart would

seek its reliefs . The(cross was yet to be revealed

to m en in the hidings of its power. When theexcitem ent of the crucifix ion had passed away

,and

the scenes attendant upon it had been forgotten,

Jerusalem was to be moved afresh and irresistibly.

Another Presence was to be there,unseen, im palpa

ble, but felt, as m en feel the w1nd and fire ; Hence

the calmness of Christ under the postponement ofresults . Hence

,also , the tone of assurance and

triumph which m arks his final utterances . Theclosing pages of John ’s Gospel brighten and glowunder the expectation of the Spirit beyond thepages of the p rophets under the hope of the Messiah .

In c laim ing, as we have done , that the Holy

Spirit in his work represents the place of motive inChristianity we do not affirm that his work is irresistible . Man is his own m aster under Christianityas without . We have no wish to dispute the dietum of a past generation that God governs mind

THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. 119

by motive and not by force . What we wish toaffirm and m aintain is sim ply the Scriptural position that Christianity is the religion of m otive , afact of which the presence of the Holy Spirit is theunm istakable sign

,and to which his work bears

perpetual testim ony. And we are the m ore persuaded to insist upon this position because it is sooften practically denied . We are

,for exam ple ,

continually rem anded back in present discussionsto the question Shall not the judge of all theearth do right " as an easy and final settlem entof al l perplexities . This is a question which Christianitytakes up and adopts as its own,

and at theproper tim e asks with a significance which is decisive , but it is not the first question which it asks .It does not have precedence in the order of tim e .Unless Christianityignores its verypresence in theworld , unl ess it denies the facts of its origin andhi story, it m ust present God working through m o

tive before it presents Him sitting in judgment .Christianity itself starts the question, to which itgives precedence , and in answer to which it invitesthe m ost earnest thinking

,even high specula

tion,” What can the God and Father of m en,

who has revealed him self in Jesus Christ, be ex

pec ted to do for his children before He deals withthem in judgment When this question has beenanswered

,answered in the spirit and according to

the logic of Christianity, the answer to the form erquestion comes in place

,and becomes simple and

final .


In like manner it is beginning to be urged bythose . who see no necessity, in the interest of grace ,for a Christian opportunity for all men

,that any

lack in opportunity or motive can be m ade up inleniency Of judgm ent : as if the Christian oppor

tunity and the Christian m otive had their m oralequivalent in leniency of judgm ent . An ill ustration will expose the fallacy of this concession . A

m an is arrested for stealing. It is proved upon thetrial that he was born of a race of thieves

,that he

was trained in bad associations,that he never had

any wholesom e restraints or incentives brought tobear upon him . In consideration of these factsthe judge foregoes the ordinary sentence

,and dis

charges the prisoner. What is the result " Sim plythat the man returns to his stealing. The rem ission of sentence has had no moral effect. Indeed,in such a case , the waiving of judgm ent m ight befairly interpreted to be a confession of previousinjustice on the part of society . Judgm ent, at leastas a finality

,has no remedial, no educational, power.

It produces no ethical result . It leaves characteras it finds it. By no possibility , therefore , can thefeebler exercise of judgment be made an equivalentfor the use of m otive . And when we apply the caseto Christianity and consider the motives which ithas introduced and the prov131on which it has madefor their enforcem ent

,what can we find with which

to com pare it in its power to reach and change thehuman heart" Where shall we look for the equival eut of Christianity



God. This communication of the divine l ife in itsfreeness and fullness follows a like free and full

revelation of it . The knowledge of Christ precedesand is necessary to the natural work of the HolySpirit . Even the personality of the Spirit awaitsthe personal revelation of Christ. Throughout theOld Testam ent the Spirit appears chiefly as an ihfluenc e in the New Testament He is a person .

And the name by which He is there known indicates his special work . He 1s invariably the HolySpirit

,or the Holy Ghost a name used but two

or three tlm es in the Old Testament . Once within6

the pages of the New Testament, we no longerread of m spl rations like that of Bezaleel. Theinspirations of the Holy Spirit pertain to the ministryand Person of Christ. The Com forter, eventhe Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in mynam e, He shall teach you all things, and bringto your rem em brance all that I said unto you .

When the Com forter is com e , whom I will sendunto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth ,which proceedeth from the Father, He shall bearwitness of me He shall glorify me : for Heshall take of mine , and shall declare it unto you .

”

The offices of the Spirit were to be henceforthassoc iated with sin and redemption . He will convictthe world in respect of sin , of righteousness , and ofjudgment.” “ The fruit of the Spirit is love , joy,peace

,longsuffering, kindness, goodness , faithful

ness , meekness , temperance .” The imm ediate gifts

of the Spirit were such as naturally followed the


incoming of Christianity and attested its power.‘To one is given through the Spirit the word ofwisdom and to another the word of knowledge ,according to the sam e Spirit to another faith , in thesam e Spirit ; and to another gifts of healings , in theone Spirit ; and to another workings of miracles ;and to another prophecy ; and to another discernings of spirits ; to another divers kinds of tongues ;and to another the interpretation of tong ues ; butall these worketh the one and the sam e Spirit, div iding to each one severally even as He will .

”

And the perm anent m inistry of the Spirit in thesoul was to be that of com fort

,hope

,assurance in

the gospel of Christ . The Spirit him self bearethwitness with our spirit

,that we are children of

God : and if children, then heirs ; heirs of God, andjoint-heirs with Christ ; if so be that we suffer withhim , that we m aybe also glorified with him .

” Nowthese and kindred passages of the New Testam entthere are none which are not kindred with thesepoint to the sam e conclusion . They show the

relation in tim e and in effect of the work of theSpirit to the revelation of the person and ministryand death of Christ . As the com ing of Christ involved the gift of the Spirit, even to the disclosureof his personality

,the designation of his offic es , and

the assurance of his abiding presence in the world,so the gift of the Spirit seem s to us to presupposethe new facts

,the new relationships , the new m o

tiyes , which centre around the Person of Christ .We confess

,therefore, our utter inability to under


stand the meaning of those who say that the HolySpirit i s the present Christ

,

” or the essentialChrist and who

,therefore

,affirm that every man

really has an understanding of Christ and a Christian opportunity. The terms , as used with this inference , seem to us absolutely vague and confusing.

They take away at once the personality of the HolySpirit, and the significance of historic Christianity. To our minds the New Testam ent teaches

,not

that the Holy Spirit is a substitute for the personalChrist, not that through his general work He makesamends for the want

pf knowledge of the work of

Christ, but that it is the distinct and glorious officeof the Spirit to give efficacy to the life and sacrificeof Christ, as they are brought into direct and conscious relation to men , and to bear witness in theheart

,when once Christ has been apprehended by

faith, to the reality of the Christian experience .To be m ore specific What is the method of the

Holy Spirit in the convincem ent of sin " Is it notthrough a crucified and rejected Christ " Is notthe cross the background upon which the guilt ofthe individual life is thrown out" And are not thestandards which Christianity sets up in society the '

very ground and reason for the sense of sham e oversocial sins" What makes the exposure of sin possible Certainly not the existence of sin, for themore comm on and revolting the form s of sin maybe , the less meaning can be attached to their ex

posure . There can be no exposure of sin in theheart of Africa

,in many of the islands of the sea,



trine,than in all statutes besides .

ders of Sinai are no m atch for the silent thundersof Calvary.

” It woul d greatly simplify our ideaof the conviction of sin to rem ember that there canbe no real conviction of sin without a corresponding revelation of righteousness ; and, further, thatrighteousness expressing itself in sacrifice is themost terrible indictm ent possible of sin and of thesinner . But where can this expression be foundoutside Christianity Where in the realm of natural law can the Spirit find m aterial in motive fitted to this m ost difficult of all tasks the conv inc em ent of sin " And is it not in this union ofa holy sufferer for sin with a holy convincer of s1n

that we have the true solution of the sin againstthe Holy Ghost " Has not the church judgedrightly in identifying this sin with the persistentrejection of Christ against the patient efio

'

rt of theHoly Spirit " Christianity has introduced a newclassification of sins ; it has created a new speciesit points to the unforgiven , the unpardonable sin .

Where can we look for this save in the shadowcreated by its own light "And if now we turn to the renewing and transform ing work of the Spirit Within the soul we findthe sam e direct relation to Christ . As beforeChrist was the argum ent

,now He is the pattern.

The Spirit works toward Christ in the reconstruotion of character. It is enough to say of his workthat it is in the endeavor to make men over intoChristians . The end is actual and manifest like


ness to Christ . Regeneration thus acquires a largeand an exact m eaning under Christianity. Wewould not deny the existence of regenerate lifeoutside Christianity ; and as respects the Jewisheconom y we adm it as m uch in regard to regeneration as in regard to atonem ent . Everything canbe said of the Old Testam ent saints except thatthey were Christians . And these all, having ob

tained a good report through faith , received notthe promise ; God having provided som e betterthing for us that they without us should not bemade perfect. Our contention at this point isthat under Christianity the Holy Spirit works inhum an nature toward a higher, a m ore definite , anda m ore available standard . Conform ity to law isthe despair of the m ost obedient souls . Likenessto Christ is the reverent am bition of the hum blestdisciple. There is that about the relation of Christto men which makes the “ im itation of Him possible . He is the head of the race ; we are therefore enjoined to “grow up into him in all things,which is the head .

” He became incarnate ; Hewas made like unto his brethren He was tem ptedin all points like as we are ; we are therefore en

c ouraged to appeal to Him for help , assured thatwe shall find grace to help in everytim e of need .

”

He is the second Adam , the restorer of a lost m an

hood , through whom we m ayattain a nobler natureand destiny; we are therefore put in confident ex

pec tation of the com pleted work within us .

“ Be

hold, now are we the sons of God ; and it doth not

128 PROGRESSIVE ORTH ODOX Yn

yet appear what we shall be , but we know thatwhen He shall appear, we shall be like Him ,

for weshall see Him as He is .” And every m an,

”the

Apostle most significantly adds,that hath this

hope in him purifiethhim self, even as He i s pure .”

Where now, we a sk , are there facts and assuranceslike these , without the range of Christianity, ofwhich the Holy Spirit can take advantage in carrying on the process of regeneration " And howwithout these can the process be m ade defin ite

,real

,

and assuring to the soul of man " If we say theleast, we can say no less than that when we passbeyond the method of the conscious renewal of thespiritual life in Christ we pass at once into what isexceptional, vague , and indeterm inate .We will only specify, in further illustration of

our position , the renovating work of the Holy Spiritin society. As we have already shown, it is thework of the Spirit in the revelation of righteousness and of righteousness , as we know, and fear,and love it in the person of Jesus Christ whichmakes the comm on work of the exposure of socialsins effective, or even possible . But Christianityoffers more than contrasts . It is more than a background for the exhibition of sin . It furnishes thedirect material for all progres s and for all reforms .Especially through its new conception and new re

quirem ents concerning man does it work for therenovation of society and the

x

elevation of the race .Christianity is declaring itself more and m ore asan organic force . It is entering into every rela



foll ows in the order of dependence upon the revelation of God in Christ ; that it draws its argumentfrom the Person and work of the Redeemer ; andthat it proceeds from and toward Christ in the renewal of the lifeof the individual and in the renovation of society.

THE CHRI STIAN.

THE questl on is continually recurring as to thelegitimacy or propriety of claiming the Christianname and affirm ing the Christian hope for personsof exceptional character, irrespective of their Christian experience and faith. Som e person, Jew orGentile

,becom es conspicuous for h1s Virtues or

charities . In the event of his death the questionsare quite sure to be put to the Evangelical Church,What do you call this m an, and,What of his future"The reply which is made is always according to thedictates of the moral sense . Practically, the Evan

gelic al Church never denies the courtesy of theChristian nam e or the hospitality of the Christianhope to those whose lives illustrate the Christianvirtues . But theolog l c allythese exceptional cases

”

create no - little confusion . The answers which theycall out are apt to put a strain upon the theologicalsystem s .The m ost recent discussion in point has been c c

c asioned by the death of the em inent Jewish philanthropist, Sir Moses Montefiore . In answer tothe usual question about the Christian salvation ofsuch a man

,Dr. A . A. Hodge writes as follows in

The Independent of Septem ber 17 , 1885


In c om m on with all who m aintain the integrityofCatholic Christianity, we firm lybelieve that hum an natureradic ally and univ ersally c orrupt and guilty before

God, utterlyinc apable of self help in the wayof expiation,of m erit, of spiritual renovation . Whenev er a hum an

being is found, as a m atter of fac t, to be rec onc iled to

God, and bya holylife giv es evidenc e of possessing a

holynature , we with perfec t c onfidenc e attribute the re

sult to the applic ation to the person in question of the

expiating virtue of Christ’s sac rific e and of the regenerating power of his Spirit. We believe , therefore , that,without exc eption, the ac c eptanc e of each m an withGoddepends, not upon anysupposed natural goodness or per

sonal m erit, but whollyupon the fac t of the m an’s personal relation to Jesus Christ. The establishm ent ofthis personal relation to our Lord, so as to c onstitute one

a benefic iaryof his redem ption, is generally c onditionedupon personal rec ognition and c onfession of Him . Thisis even essential whenev er intellec tually possible . But

it is not absolutelyessential , as is prov ed in the c ase of

those dying in infancy, and of idiots. On like groundsof princ iple it m ight hold true in the c ase of som e exc ep

tionally enlightened heathen. The charitable form ula

of ‘inv inc ible ignoranc e,’

used and greatly abused by

Rom anists, rests ultim ately upon a true princ iple , and

has always been prac tic allym ore or less rec ognized byorthodox Christians.

”

The whole communication from which this extract i s taken is thoroughly manly in its tone , andis most delightful reading, as a large-hearted inter

pretation of the Calvinistic symbols in their bearing upon the matter at issue. The difficulty of the


134 PROGRES S I VE ORTHODOXY.

manism . The case of the “ exceptionally enlightened heathen is com pared with that of infants ,of whom it is said that it is p roved that the personal recognition and confession of Christ is notabsolutely essential to entitle them to become benefic iaries of his redemption . How proved " The

Scriptures say nothing of the method of the sal

v ation of infants . The doctrine of their salvation,if the dem and be made for specific proof-texts, isextra-Scriptural . The doctrine is an inference , le

gitimate and necessary , as we believe, but still aninference from the Christian conception of God.

The proof of the inferential character of this belieflies in the historic fact that it is

'

only with the

widening of the conception of God that we havethe belief in the salvation of all infants . Until wereach the Christian conception of God, we have thesalvation of elect infants .” And in the absence

he fail ed to apprehend the historic Christ. This is in

their v iew salv ation bym agic .

’

N0 , this is not salvation by m agic this is m ore like

salvation bym erit,or m oral charac ter, a kind of salvation

perfec tlyplain and inte lligible , but not as we had supposed

the kind ac c epted and adv oc ated by the rest of the church.

The churchdoc trine of salvation we had assum ed to be that

of justific ation byfaith. Paul and Luther ev identlydid notre lyupon personal attainm ents in charac ter, but upon the

personal appropriation of the righteousness of Christ.

What we hav e chara c terized as salv ation bym agic is a

salvation whichis presum ed to be effec ted bythe Atonem ent,

when the Atonem ent is tak en and applied to an individual

without anyc onsenting or ev en c onsc ious relation to it on hispart. Su cha proc ess is a pure abstrac tion on the hum an side ,

a sec ret transac tion in the c ounc ils of the Most High.

THE CHRISTIAN . 135

of any direct statements of Scripture in regard tothe doctrine itself, any variation from the prescribedmethod of salvation is purely specul ative . If wewaive the exercise of m oral agency, and ignore thenecessity of a personal appropriation of Christ

,

what have we left but a kind of baptism al atonement and baptism al regeneration " We think itm ore reverent, as it is certainly more reasonable ,to believe of infants and heathen alike

,that accord

ing to the developm ent of moral agency they arebrought into conscious relations to Christ

,and that

according to their needs they are enabled to personallyappropriate his redem ption . We questionthe advantage and the right of m odifying the natural and reasonable conditions of Chr istianity underthe stress of “ exceptional cases .” Allow Christianity to be, what it claims to be , universal inits relation to the hum an race , and the necessityfor any modification of its conditions is rem oved.

Unity of method becomes the rul ing principle inthe m oral government of God. We have onestandard L of judgment for all m en, one method ofsalvation, one

‘

suprem e and sufficient m otive to re

pentanc e . Divide the moral adm inistration of Godinto the departm ents of law and grace , and therewill be the constant endeavor to transfer, by som esecret process

,first the few, then the m any, who

are under the condem nation of law, into the hopeof grace . Salvation by Christ ceases to be theopen, plain, real thing it is, and becom es som ethinghidden , vague , unverified and unv erifiable by thehuman consciousness .

136 PROGRESS I VE ORTH OD OXY.

But the real question in respect to the Christiansalvation goes beyond all exceptional cases .” As

Dr. Curry rem arks in the sam e discussion, Theimportant question respecting this class of cases isnot whether a devout and pure-minded heathen orJew c an be saved, but whether persons of thoseclasses are

,except in a very few and exceptional

cases,such in m ind and heart ; and granting that

all such , if such there are , are accepted of God,’

the case, as one of f a c t, is not much relieved .

We m ay freely adm it that, of every nation , evenJews and heathens

,he that fears God and worketh

righteou sness is acceptable to him , and yet doubtingly ask respecting all these classes, Are therefew that be saved "’ The real and living question

,a veritable question of flesh and blood

,is not

that of theological hospitality toward the exc ep

tional life outside Christianity, but rather that ofthe large and active relation of Christianity toevery life without . The real question is in no senseone of hospitality at all, but one rather as to the div ine right of every individual of the hum an race inChristianity . Must the Chr istian nam e rem ain ofnecessity and forever an exclusive name as respectsthe majority of mankind

,a designation of privilege

for the few,rather than of opportunity for all" And

are the great masses of men in the past generationsto be simply represented in the kingdom of God byhere and there a soul who has clim bed up som e otherwayinto the Christian fold, while they are to rem ainin their hopelessness and helplessness Whenever


138 PROGRESSI VE ORTHODOX Y.

sary condition of the decisive choice of the soul foror against God . The knowledge of right and wrongmay not be the sufficient condition for such a

choice . If, therefore , ln our charity we apply theRom ish principle of invm c ible ignorance we

must extend the working of that principle beyondthe knowledge of right and wrong

,to the knowledge

of Christ and his salvation .

1

We have approached the subject before us

through the current discussions about the Chr istian salvation because they indicate the sensitiveness of the Christian m ind upon thi s matter. N0part of the church cares to insist upon the exclusiveness of the Christian name and hope . It is1m possible , under the m oral ssense of our time , tomaintain the absoluteness of Christianity and itsexclusiveness ; to affirm that the Christian is theonly type of man acceptable to God , and deny toany m an the opportunity to becom e a Christian.

As we have seen,the speculation in regard to the

1 The reachof this princ iple is indi c ated byDr . Hodge m

these generous words I t is obv ious that there is a worldwide distanc e between an inte lligent and m alignant reje ctionof the historic Christ, his Person and offic es c learlyappre

hended, which is the dam ning sin, on the one side , and on

the other a failure to re c ognize Him as m isapprehended be

c ause of inte lle c tual bias, or the m isrepresenting charac ter of

the m edia throughwhichhis rays are transm itted. I t is c er‘tain that a m an who reallyrej e c ts Christ rej e c ts the Father

who sent Him . Henc e the c onv erse is true : that the m an

who has tru lyrec ognized the Father c oul d nothave real lyrej ec ted Christ.

”

THE CHRISTIAN . 139

Atonem ent as secretly applied to the exceptionallyenlightened heathen , whatever we m ay sayofits value within its own sphere , entirely overlooksthe m oral uses of the Atonem ent in the enlightenment of all unenlightened souls . The only consistent and far-reaching solution of the problem

,as

we think, lies in the principle advocated uponthese pages . Progressive Orthodoxy matches theabsoluteness of Christianity with its universality.

It m aintains the Christian type as the only type ofm an acceptable to God, by allowing to everym an

his right in Christianity. It affirm s and m agnifiesthe Christian Judgm ent as the one event awaitingall m en, and under the sense of the certainty ofthat event

,with its everlasting issues , it ac knowl

edges the reasonableness of assum ing that everym an will first have his Christian opportunity

,

that he will know Christ in his sacrifice before hem eets Him in judgm ent .Passing

,then

,to the more definite considera

tion of the Christian,we assum e that the Christian

man is the m an acceptable to God . The New Testam ent proceeds upon thi s assum ption . Its assuranc es and prom ises , its present benefits and its certainties respec ting the future , are applicable onl yto the Christian .

Our first inquiry is , Whence com es the Christian " How do we gain this type of m an" Wem aysayof the individual Christian , as we knowhim

, that he is the result of a definite religioustraining, or of a definite religious process, which


we call conversion . But this does not answer thequestion

,Where do we get the type The Chris

tian was not born under the light of nature . Hewas not developed in the school of law, albeit thelaw was a school-m aster to lead to Christ . It m aynot be unnecessary to rem ind ourselves unfortu

natelythe saying is not a truism that the Chr istian is the product of Christianity. The type oflife which he represents cam e in with those factsand ideas which belong to historic Christianity.

And the type 1s perpetuated through the‘prev alenc e

of these facts and the supremacy of these ideas .Christianity invariably precedes the Christian , creating those conditions , and setting in m otion thoseagencies

,which need but the cooperation of the in

dividual will to produce the required resul t inChristian character. Christianity produces ‘a newconsciousness in the race , which makes possible theChristian consciousness . Man is another being tohim self in the light of the Incarnation and Resurrec tion. The Incarnation does not create a newvalue ln m an it does m ore : it reveals to him hisreal value in the

-

thought of God. The Resurrection does not confer immortality upon m an ; it ,

gives him the moral advantage of im m ortality ; itputs him under the power of the endless life .Wherever Christianity goes it speaks to menthrough these facts . And because it speaks throughfacts its language is

’

positiv e , awakening, and assuring . There is no uncertainty in what Christianitysays of man or to him . There is no con


142 PROGRESS I VE ORTH OD OXY.

domination and caprice of nature in the one thoughtthat he is a conscious being . Pascal says

Our whole dignity c onsists in thought. Man is but

a reed, the weakest in nature , but he is a thinking reed.

I t is not nec essarythat the entire universe should arm

itself to c rush him . A breath of air, a drop of water,suffic es to kill him. But were the univ erse to c rush him ,

m an would still be m ore noble than that whichkillshim ,

bec ause he knows that he dies, and the univ erse knowsnothing of the advantage whichit has ov er him .

”

Law elevates man to the dignity of a responsibleagent . When he finds himself addressed in thelanguage of moral authority, to which he is capableof responding

,he takes a new measure of himself.

It is greater to hear the Thou shalt,” and Thou

shalt not,” of m oral law than to stand in the place

of a master am ong inanimate forces . But morallaw can only tell m an what he ought to be . Itleaves him confronted with duty. Christianitycomes in to tell him what he may be . It is a revelation to him of his possibilities . It confrontshim

,not with a legal standard, but witha Life in

which he may read his possible character and destiny

,and through which he may attain that char

acter and destiny. It assures him of help sufficientand unfailing. It links his struggles and aspirations

,even his very repentin

’

gs,to a power which

was at work for him before his efiort for himselfbegan

,and which will go on , in his behalf, in its

steadiness and strength amid the fluctuations of hisown strivings. We ,

” says Paul to the Christian

THE CHRISTIAN. 143

converts of Asia Minor, are his workmanship,

created in Christ Jesus unto good works,which

God afore prepared that we should walk in them .

And again , to the Christians at Philippi , Beingconfident of this very thing, that He which began agood work in you will perfect it until the day ofJesus Christ .”

Christianity thus conditions the life which is tobecom e Christian before the process begins whichis‘to m ake it Christian . When the Christian ideais apprehended, its revelation of God in his purpose

,its interpretation of man in his possibilities

,

as it is practically apprehended under the trainingof the Christian hom e and school and church

,then

the process through which the Christian is developed , though it m aybe in som e cases severe andprotracted

,is simple and clear . It is all expressed

in the personal act of repentance toward God,and

of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ . The personalappropriation of Christ in his life and death constitutes a sinner a Christian . Henceforth he represents

,according to the reality of his faith and

the seriousness of his purpose , the new type ofmanhood . In his individual l ife he is called, byvirtue of this change , “ a new creat ure ,

” “ a newcreation . As related to other men, he belongs tothe Christian type .Our second inquiry concerns the place of theChrist ian before God. What is the position intowhich he is brought by virtue of his relat1on,

through penitence and faith,to Christ The New

144 PROCRESSIVE ORTHODOXY.

Testament uniformly expresses this condition or

estate by one term— sonship . It knows no otherterm which is not included in this . The teachingsof Christ, as indeed his personal relations withmen

, all point to the establishm ent of thi s relationship . But we are so apt to interpret the saym gs

of our Lord ini

some exceptional way,as if they

were not good when detached from his person, andcould not be transferred to the life of the church

,

that we often fail to apply them in their realityand fullness to the more important questions ofChristianity. So that it is only as we pass overinto the actual workings of Christianity as a system that we come to understand the practical signific anc e of this idea of sonship . When we readthe Epistles of Paul and John

,as these writers ad

dress themselves to the life c om m g in from Judaism and heathenism , we see that Christianity isproceeding upon the one principle of building upcharacter and developing personalityon the basisof the filial relation . Paul makes this principlemost conspicuous, by boldly transferring the workl ug of the divine

’

power in the training of life fromthe legal to the filial basis . He assures those towhom he writes that the place of sonship is theirs ,theirs by the bestowal of grace and according tothe rlghts of faith . They were in it. This wasthe first thing for them to believe . Nothing couldbe accomplished in them or through them ,

in aChristian way, until they believed it. The factonce accepted in full and hearty assurance , the



love, the sense of God’s partnership with him in the

struggle and in the result . So that here again theChristian IS not at work sim ply for something toc om e to him in reward

,but equally because of

something which has com e to him for which hewould make return . Heaven lies before him ln

expectation , but the springs of his activity, thesources of his endeavor

,lie deep in the conscious

ness of that love which assures him that he is achild of God .

It m aybe said that we have sketched the idealChristian . We reply that we have sketched thereal Christian . If the average Christian life doesnot express itself in the way which has been indic ated, it is owing to the prevalence of the spirit oflegalism in the church . We grant the prevalenceof this spirit . From the beginning until now ithas been difficult to persuade m en to believe inChristianity, and to live according to Christianity.

Hence Paul at the first and Luther afterward .

Legalism follows close upon.

Christianity in’

theceaseless endeavor to formu late its doctrines

,to

prescribe its methods , to dom inate its life . If thechurch is to maintain the freedom of its faith andlife

,it m ust be through the maintenance in faith

and life of the idea of sonship .

We reach our third and last inquiry, as we ask,What is the office of the Christian in the world "Does Christianity withdraw him from the world orcarry him farther into its life " The ruling pr1nc 1ple of legalism

,in this regard , is separation result

THE CHRISTIAN. 147

ing in exclusiveness . What is the ruling spirit ofChristianityWhen we say that the m ethod of legalism re

sults in exclusiveness we do not intend to characterize the earlier dispensation . The voice whichsum m oned Abraham from his kindred and from hiscountry declared the purpose of this separationthat in him all nations of the earth m ight beblessed . This separation was to be grandly inc lus1ve 1n l ts result . The sam e purpose separated out

Israel as a people , restricting its intercourse , andsubjecting it to peculiar discipline , but keeping itsspirit large and open through the developm ent ofthe Messianic hope . It was only as the purpose ofthe separation was lost sight of that the nationallife becam e hard and exclusive . The dwindling ofthe hope allowed the growth of the narrower typesof the national faith . Judaism gradually ceased tolook upon the world in the light of opportunity.

The world cam e to represent m ore and m ore tem ptation from which the chosen people was to defend , itself. Christianity instantly reversed thisconception of the world

,and by this change of con

c eption m ade it safe for its disciples to go into allthe world in fulfillm ent of the com m and of Christ.The danger or safety of one ’s relation to the worldalways depends upon his conception of the world .

To the Christian the world is harm less so long as itrepresents the idea

,

of opportunity. It is safe forhim to gain and use all whic h it has to offer,thought, wealth , or power, if he can keep this ideauppermost in his m ind .


The office of the Christian in the world is to comm unic ate Christianity to the world . Self-proteotion 1s secondary, or rather it is m ost com pletelygained by the fulfillm ent of this object . The individual Christian represents this purpose , and thechurch . The church is the Christian organized tothis end . There are other uses of the Christianorganization

, but this is the object which givesmeaning and advantage to all others . This c omm unic ation of Christianity to the world through theChristian

,in his individual or associated life

,is ef

fec ted in various ways . The earliest, as it has beenthe m ost persistent

,method was that of testiniOny.

The Christian stood out in the world representinga new fact

,a new principle , a new faith . Through

his life he advertised Christianity. The simplerhis life

,the m ore natural his faith

,the more he

called the attention of m en to his religion . Not

infrequently this natural and unostentatiou s witnessto his faith cost him his life . Then Christianitywas com municated to other lives . Persecution carried it even to the hearts of persecutors . Som etim es the witness to the faith found expression inprotest against prevailing im moralities and cruelties . Christianity declared itself in appreciableand effective ways for the rights of m an. TheChristian becam e the cham pion of hum anity. Theresult of these c onflic ts— the result was always adeliverance or a reform carried Christianityfarther

-

and farther into society,and established it

m ore securely in the respect and affections of men .


150 PROGRESSI VE ORTH OD OX Y. ,

even organic,without becom ing form al . The

Christian is a m em ber of the fam ily, a factor insociety, a citizen of the state . He is a partner inthe affairs of men . He deals in adm inistration.

He is a student, an inquirer into things of com m onconcern

,an adventurer, like other men, into the

unrevealed and unexplored realms of thought. Inall these relations and employm ents he has the op

portunity to leave the personal im press of hisChristianity. Probably nothing is more effectiveor helpful to Christianity than the action of theChristian man

,when he is m ost unconsciously the

Christian . But in all fthese relations there is needfor the intentional and well-considered applicationof Christianity. These are all to be Christianized

- vitalized with the Christian spirit,and informed

with the Christian purpose . Som etimes it is diffic ult to cause the individual Christian to see thathis personal responsibility extends beyond the use

of his personal exam ple . If I am a Christianin my business ,

‘

he may ask,have I not fulfill ed

my duty " No . It is your duty to make it easy,in som e cases to m ake it possible

,for others to be

Christians in the sam e business . Nor is it suffic iently considered that it may be easier to one

’sself to attem pt a reform in a given business, whenits m ethods have becom e unchristian and im m oral ,than to attem pt to m aintain alone the true andChristian method . There m aybe tim es , under thecom petitions of business

,when the Christian m an

m ust resort to questionable m ethods , or succumb to

THE CHRIS TIAN . 151

failure , if he cannot change the m ethod and lift thestandard . Andwhen we pass from m atters of m oreprivate interest to those of public concern , the ne

c essityfor the active and cooperative c om m unic a

tion of Christian m ethods and principles becom esapparent . Present examples are to be found in the

m ovem ent for the protection of the fam ily, and inthat for purity in political life .The com m unication of Chr istianity

,however, as

sum es its large and im perative form as it finds expression in the endeavor of the Christian to fulfillhis Lord’s com m and in the conversion of the world .

Christianity is a salvation . That sal vat1on 1s

m eant for every m an. And m en are to carry it toone another. It is to be on its hum an side a com

m unic ated salvation . It has no other visible powerof extension . The figure of the seed or the leavendoes not applyto Christianity as a salvation extending from m an to m an. The hum an elem ent is theactive elem ent in its extension . There m ust be agoing into all the world

,a preaching of the gospel

to the whole creation . This going into all theworld m eans searching through the City, followingalong the trac k of em igration or com m erce or ad

venture , penetrating into the dark and well-nighinaccessible places of the earth . This preachingthe gospel to the whole creation m eans that whereever m an lives the Christian has a message forhim .

And we are not to forget that the known contentsof the m essage are the reason for the going. Christianityis to be carried because it is a gospel, good


news ,” “ glad tidings . Like his DivineMaster the

Christian is sent not to condemn the world,but

that the world through him m aybe saved .

” It isto be feared that Christianity is suffering m ore atpresent in the missionary form of expression thanin any other. Christianity is apprehended as a

faith, as an institution, as an organic force in so

c iety. We fear that it is not sufficiently apprehended as a gospel . The church stands equippedwith organization ; it lacks , if anywhere , in thespirit of communication . But this lack is serious

,

and if long continued will visibly dim inish the m issionarypower of the church . We are wont to sayin the consciousness”of any spiritual want that thechurch needs a revival of religion. Let us be morespecific

,in the sense of our present want, and say

that the church needs a revival of Christianity.



ing its utm ost dem ands in his death as well as inhis life

,offering him self an utter sacrific e for it ,

and rising in the power of God in attestation of itsvictory. A universal religion for a sinful and guiltyrace im plies a universal Sav1our . A moral andSpiritual recovery of mankind, even as an aim ofbenevolent purpose , presupposes the provision of apower in m otive and a use of this power proportionate to the evil to be confronted and the good tobe accom plished .

“ It was the good pleasure of theFather that in Him shoul d all the fullness dwell .”

The full ness was set over against the need . Christianityis not a matter of words, but of deed and ofpower. Its salvationwas not offered until it coul dbe made efiec tual . As its a1m 1s human transformation

,a regeneration of the individual which

is a new creation, a moral renewal of society whichrealizes in this world the kingdom of heaven

,a com

pleted fellowship above , which is the consum m ationin body and soul , and the eternal fellowship , of theholy from every generation and every realm ,

~

itmust bear within itself all the forces requisite forthe achievem ent of such resul ts . These powers areprovided and pledged in the nam e into which itbaptizes and not until God was thus revealed werethey supplied and made available and eff ective .Transient theophanies , typical sacrifices , gifts of theSpirit there were before ; but no Incarnation , noAtonement

,no descent and indwelling of the Holy

Ghost. All antecedent revelations had been preparatory and partial, and all spiritual renewals no

CHRISTIANI TY AND MISSIONS. 155

less anticipatory,prophetic, and incomplete . Jesus

alone lived a perfect life alone rev ealed the Fatheras the necessary and real correlative of an actualconscious sonship alone entered into the entirerange of hum an need and represented it in perfectobedience

,righteousness, and love before a m erciful

and holy God ; alone drew into the race , in thefullness of its power to transform and save , the ab

solute good there is for m en in God ; alone prov ided the perfect pattern which could be used in them oulding of character ; alone im parted the motivepower which could reach to all conditions of hum anlife and stages of hum an developm ent

,through the

preaching of the gospel and the dem onstration of

the Spirit . Whatever we m aythink of antecedentrevelations , the apostle teaches us the large fact andtruth in the case when he says , even of the days ofJesus’s earthl y m inistry, The Spirit was not yetgiven , because Jesus was not yet glorified.

” Therisen exalted Chr ist sent the Spirit. Then, thenfor the first tim e, was there in the world a religioncompetent to a world-wide m ission .

‘That Christian m issions thus imply and restupon the absoluteness and universality of Christianity has been evident throughout their hi story.

Entire subm ission to Jesus’s suprem e authority, relianc e upon his divine power, belief in the sufi

c iency and com pleteness of the gospel and m itsnecessityfor hum an salvation , have been the constant sources and signs of their power. Even wheresuch principles have been restricted in their applica


tion or theoretic allyj m paired, they have been theheart and soul of m ovem ents which will alwayscom pel adm iration . If in the line of thought onwhich we shall now proceed attention is turnedpredom inantly to what is defective , it is not because we are unmoved by the greatness and glory ofwhat has been achieved, but because we hope thatby such a method lessons may be learned whichwil l be helpful in the performance of duties whichare at hand .

The early church entered with zeal on the workof individual testimony to the saving power ofChrist . The gospel wa s soon promulgated throughout the Rom an Em pire , and beyond its boundaries .The witness of martyrdom shows how real was thebelief in the absolute supremacy of Christ . Thenote expressed by the word catholic marks thechurch’s sense of its wholeness or completenessin doctrine and m em bership

,and

,finally

,Of its uni

v ersality, and thus points to the universality of“

thegospel. But in various ways these predicates ofChristianity were impaired . At the outset a crassmill ennianism clouded the vision of very many.

The heathen nations were regarded as rul ed by dem ons . The confl ict between good and evil in thisworld is a battle between Satan and Christ . Thevictory will be won by the visible coming of Christto set up his kingdom at Jerusalem . The nationswill be judged

,not saved . Justin Martyr tells us

that, although those who were orthodox Christianson all points were assured as to the truth of this



thoughts of the kingdom of God . The churchstarted on a career of influence and authority inunion with the state . W ith power cam e the antic ipation of earthly dom inion . Augustine becam efor mediaeval history the exponent of the alteredopinion .

’

The m illennium was now understood tohave begun with the first Advent

,or at least with

the conquest of the Em pire . The kingdom of Godis the catholic or universal church

,which may be

known byits historical connection with the churchesfounded by apostles . It is an outward visible or

ganization ; there is no salvation outside of its pal e,although not all within it are true mem bers andwill finally be saved . Here again was an encroac hment upon that spiritual quality which is essentialto any true conception of the absoluteness of thegospel . With this conception of the church was - assoc iated in Augustine ’s m ind

,though not as a log

ical sequence,the doctrine of a division of m ankind

into two classes whose final destination should illustrate two aspects of the divine character

,its justice

and its grace . He seems to have regarded the former as a more im portant attribute or quality thanthe latter ; at least he teaches that more by far arecondem ned than saved

,in order that thus m aybe

'

shown what is due to all . The church never ratified Augustine ’s predestinationism , although it affirm ed his doctrine of the prevenience and supremacy of grace . Nearly every great m issionary ofthe mediaeval era was a monk ,1 and monastic Au

1 Mac lear , A H istoryOf Christian AI issions during the id

dle Ages, p . 406 .

CHR ISTIANI TY AND MISSIONS. 159

gustinianism was ordinarily a diluted doctrine . Twoprinciples

,however, becam e established in West

ern m issionary belief, original sin and the ne

c essityof baptism . All m en are by nature exposedand justlycondem ned to eternal punishm ent . Divine grace operates for the rescue of the lostthrough the visible church , by its priesthood andsacram ents . All not saved by these instrum entalities perish everlastingly. At bottom there was aconception of God inconsistent with the absoluteness of Christianity

,and even with his ethical per

fe c tion. For it is as necessary that God shoul d bebenevolent as that He should be just

,and justice

itself is deprived of its prerogative when it no longer m aintains the rights of redeem ing love . Un

less the justic e as well as the com passion of God

are pledged to Redem ption , it can no longer claima place in the divine purposes . And if Christianityrepresents but a subordinate attribute or qualityof the divine nature it is but an im perfect good,and can play but an inferior part in the universe .The m ediaeval thought of God and of Christianitywas profoundly dualistic

,save as it gained a seem

ing unity by an exaltation of an unethical om nipotence . In neither way could Christianity be rightlyinterpreted . Where this thought was m ost ethical,it m ade Christianity som ething subordinate andlim ited ; where it was least ethic al , it m ade Christianityarbitrary. Medizeval m issions suffered fromthese causes . They aim ed too little at spiritual conquests . They were not inspired by the conception


of Christianity as a revelation of universal andabsolute love . To the church at large the heathenwere but as Turks . That the form er should fallby the sword of the divine justice was as fitting asthat the latter should be m assacred by Cru saders .Happily nam es like those of Raym und Lull andSt. Francis of Assisi rise up to qualify such statem ents . We speak only of the general sentim entand practice .One of the most striking evidences of the failure of mediaeval Christianity to appreciate the univ ersalityof the gospel is found in one of its noblestproducts

,the De Im itatione Christi ” of Thom as

21 Kem pis . This little book has had a circul ationbeyond any other writing outside of the sacredcanon . It is the flower and finest fruit of m ediaevalmysticism . One must read it often to appreciateits strange power, its unworldl iness , its deadly hos

tilityto pride , its au stere solid sweetness , its calmdeep undertone of condem nation for every endeavorto satisfy an im mortal spirit with anything but thelove of God .

The late Dean of St . Paul’

s , Mr . Milman , haspassed a severe judgm ent on this book . Its aim,

he afi rm s, is entirely and absolutely selfish . Neverwas there such a m isnom er as its title . Much m ay

be said in m itigation of this censure . To escapefrom selfishness 1s the purpose of the practical mys

tical school,and although this is less pronounced

in the De Im itatione than in the Theologia

Germanica,

” it is still there . The writer com bats



ness through Christ, an acceptance of Him in hispersonal truth and love

,so that He becom es the

inspiring principle of a new life of gratitude anddevotion . The doctrine of spiritual personalgeneration thus regained its rights . And m orethan this , the divinely appointed method of com

plete spiritual restoration again became clear. But

as piety alone , even the profound and spiritual pietyof the m ediaeval m ystics

,did not produce m ission

aries , so the evangelical apprehension by the'

Re

form ers of the way of salvation was equally for atime inoperative . The reason

,if we mistake not,

was at bottom the sam e . In neither case was aone-sided individualism overcom e ; in neither wasthere a due appreciation of the universality of thegospel .The failure of the Reformers to grasp the mis

sionary idea is som etim es excused on the ground oftheir absorption in the task im m ediately obligatory. The apology is valid , perhaps , as respectsthe actual organization of m issionary movem ents .But som ething m ore than the absence of activeparticipation in such efforts appears . The missionary idea itself a recognition of the Christian dutyto evangelize heathendom —is wanting.

1 I n thecase of Luther his eschatological opinions obscuredhis vision . He thought the end of the world wasat hand

,and that the heathen were doomed to de

struction . We cannot but suspect at tim es in hi s1 So Dr.Warnec k inHerzog and P litt

’

s Real Encyc lOpadie,

x . 37 sqq.

CHRISTIANITY AND MISSIONS . 163

feeling toward Jews and Turks a slight survival ofthe old Teutonic barbarism , as in Tertul lian

’

s exultation in view of the last judgm ent there appearsto be som ething of Punic ferocity. Calvin hada larger faith as to the extension of Christianity ;but, so far as we have observed, nowhere urges theobligation resting upon the church to christianizethe heathen nations . When he com m ents on thegreat com m ission his thought is engrossed withthe equality which it im plies between Jews andGentiles . The Apostle Paul was not asham ed ofthe gospel

,because it is the power of God unto sal

vation to every one that believeth to the Jew first,

and also to the Greek,” that is , to the pagan every

where . Calvin’s thought, like Luther’

s,concerns

itself not with heathen Gentiles but with Christian,

who,under the gospel, are m ade equal to the Jew.

The duty of sending m 1ss1onaries to the unc on

verted heathen is not recognized in his com m ent .It seem ed to him to be perfectly just for God toconsign all the heathen to endless punishm ent onaccount of original sin , apart from their actualtransgressions , and it was

-

not fitting that anysub

jec t of the infinite sovereign should question hisacts . Doubtless he would have rejoiced to hearthat Protestant Christianitywas gaining a footholdanywhere, and he would not have been indifierent

( as perhaps the Genevan support of Villegaignonshows) to any m issionary undertaking for whic hProv idenc e seem ed to be opening the way. But hisconception of Christianity was colored through and


through by his conception of God as an absolutesovereign , who sends salvation to whom He willsand withholds it from whom He wills . Redem ptionis particular

,not universal ; Christianity is a m eans

to an end,a special rem edy in a particular exi

gency,- not the consummation of God ’s revelation

to the universe of his ethical nature as perfectLove . A world-wide m issionary thought and aim

,

it m ight be supposed, would spring up . in a

’

m ind

so thoroughly im bued as was Calvin ’s with reverence for the divine sovereignty before such a c ommand as that on which he com m ents . But it didnot. The words that I have spoken unto you arespirit and are life .” The great comm ission isthe outcom e of the great sacrifice . If the latter isconceived of as limited, the form er is not likely tobe apprehended as universal . Count "inzendorfinterpreted the divine sovereignty better than Calvin when he said The whole earth is

’

the Lord’s ;men ’s souls are all his I am debtor to all .These words were uttered in 1741. They struck

the key-note of m odern m issions ; but m any decades were still . to pass away before the leadingProtestant churches

,other than the Unitas Fra

trum,were moved to action .

Many powerful influences conspired to bringabout such a movem entThe Rom an Catholic powers lost the suprem acyof the seas . The colonial power of England roseto an extraordinary height . Colonization and trafficbrought the leading Protestant nations into connec



addresses of Dr. David Bogue , who has been call ed,not undeservedly, the father of the London MissionarySociety. As one specim en of many we citea few sentences from a docum ent put forth in 1818bythe Church Missionary Society :

Whither c an the fainting eye of m iseryturn but tothis great Protestant Em pire 9

“Where , then, is our lov e to our fellow-c reatures, if

we do not rise to c om m unic ate to them that unspeakableblessing, whichhas first v isited us, that it m aybe sent onto others P Where is our hum anity, our benev olenc e ,

our c om passion, if we spring not forth in this offic e of

grac e " What " shall the unhappywidow still perishon

the funeral pile shall the helpless infant still sink nu

der the hand of its parent shall the deform ed orgies ofJuggernaut c ontinue to prev ail, and the bone s of the

wretched pilgrim whiten its plains shall the horrid ritesof c annibalism yet subsist, and tem ples for the worship of

dev ils be openlyreared shall all the disgusting c ere

m onies of im purity and blood rem ain in undim inished

forc e shall ignoranc e and v ic e and despair brood ov erthe fairest portion of the globe , and the prostrate uh

derstanding and sav age passions of m an bind him a

slav e to earth - and shall Britons hesitate to c onv eyto

the sev eral sufferers the knowledge , and grac e , and life ,of an eternal Redem ption

"” 1

A further and yet m ore im portant influence camefrom the religious revivals of the last century,the Pietism of Spener, the lVIorav ian and Wesleyan m ovem ents , the preaching of Whitefield , the

1 I nv itation to assist the Altemp ts of the ChurchM'

issiona ly S oc i

etyf or the Conversiong"

the Heathen. London, 18 18 .

CHRISTIANITY AND MISSIONS. 167

Great Awakening inthis country. With thesewere connected im portant doctrinal changes , partic ularlya clearer and m ore Biblical apprehensionof conversion as a spiritual renovation wroughtby the Holy Spirit through the influence of truthapplied as m otive

,and a recognition of the Atone

m ent not m erely as sufficient for the salvationof all m en,

but as intended for all . The firstorganized action which ushered in the new m is

sionaryera cam e from the Calvinistic Baptists inEngland . WT

hen William Carey, its originator,at a m eeting of clergym en proposed for discussionthe topic The duty of Christians to attem pt thespread of the gospel am ong heathen nations

,an

elderly divine ‘ sprang to his feet,and thundered

out,“ Young m an,

sit down " When God pleasesto convert the heathen He will do it without youraid or m ine . ” We see the old Calvinism and thenew here in conflic t . Carey found supporters inm enwho adopted the principles of what abroad wasc all ed “Am erican Theology,

” and is known hereas “

_

Edwardean or “New School ” or “ New England divinity. All the earlier and m ore im portant societies the Baptist Missionary

,the Lon

don Missionary, the Church Missionary seem tohave been founded and supported by m en who hadbroken m ore or less openly with the old Calvinism ,

and obtained larger conceptions of the Atonem entof Christ than it afforded. Even when the oldphraseology is retained the em phasis is difierent.In this c ountry, where the new doctrine had gained

PROGRESS I VE ORTH ODOX Y.

powerful supporters,it becam e prominent at once

in pleas for m issions . In the serm on preached byDr . Woods in Salem

,at the ordination of the first

m issionaries of the Am er1c an Board ( February 6,he urged, as a m otive for effort to seek the

conversion of all m ankind,

” the plenteousness ofthe provision which Christ has made for their salvation,

”an atonem ent not only sufficient for

Asiatics andAfricans,

”but m ade for them as well

as for us .

” He rebuked as indicative of the limited and exclusive spirit of Judaism any lower estimate of the Christian dispensation .

Besides the postulates of universal sinfulness anduniversal atonem ent, one other was generallyc epted by the founders of modern m issions , nam ely,the indispensableness of revealed truth . The lastnam ed principle , like the first, struck its roots intothe traditional theology . The Savoy Declaration ,adopted by the Congregational churches inEnglandand Am erica as a Confession of Faith, affirmedthat the

“ Prom ise of Christ, and salvation byHim is rev ealedonlybythe Word of God neither do the works of c reation or providenc e , with the light of nature , m ak e dis

c ov eryof Christ, or of grac e by Him , so m uch as in a

general or obsc ure way; m uch less that m en destituteof the rev elation of H im bythe _prom ise or gospel shouldbe enabled thereby to attain sav ing faith or repentanc ef ’

This necessity of a knowledge of revealed truthis the burden of early missionary sermons preached



advance in thought requires time to work itselfclear, to perfect its somewhat disturbed connectionswith the past, to measure its strength and discoverwhat it can contribute to the future . Luther sawthat in the Reformation principle of justification byfaith only lay the germ of a new doctrine of personality; but how slowly this conception has dev eloped its power. So, l n the principle of theuniversality of theAtonement which introduced themodern era of world-missions ,

” was involved thedoctrine

,which 1s just beginning to m ake itself felt,

of the personal relation of Jesus Christ,the inc ar

nate Redeem er,to each and every member of the

race . For the new and inspiring ‘thought in therise of modern m 1ss1ons was not simply that Christ

'

spassion is sufficient for all, this was the conservative orthodoxy of the day, but that He died

“

inintention and purpose for all . Intention and purpose im ply and establish a personal relation

,and

this relation rem ained to be thought out if themovement begun was not to be arrested in m id

career,and the absoluteness of Christianity still

left in shadow and partial eclipse .There were as usual in such cases traditionalprepossessions and assumptions which were not yet ‘

adjusted to the new principle or excluded by it.One of these was a belief in the universal doomof the pagan . The Reform ers inherited the Au

g ustinian doctrine of hum anity as a m assa p er

ditionis . Only sovereign grac e rescues those whoare elected to salvation . Chr istianity, instead of be


ing absolute and universal, was interpreted as partic ular and exclusive . Luther began to break awayfrom this m ode of conception when he learned toread the doctrine of election in the wounds ofChrist ; but the dogm a of universal and dam nableguilt by Adam ’s sin stood fast . The Biblical judgm ents upon the heathen were understood to includetheir final doom . The m eans of grace were nec essary to salvation , and the heathen were destitute ofthem . There being no hope beyond

_ the presentlife

,all were regarded as lost . A Lutheran pastor

in Denm ark was ordered to leave the kingdom onaccount of having preached what was condem nedas the dam nable heresy that by God’s grace evenheathens m ight be saved .

’ The Reform ed doctrine adm itted the possibility of the salvation ofsom e pagans by election , but m ade little or no account of it . In the beginning of the last centuryand the close of the preceding, religious people inBoston and vicinity were deeply interested in aseries of Tuesday lectures by the Rev. Sam uelWillard

,pastor of the South Church , and one of

the'

m ost em inent divines in New England historybefore the days of Jonathan Edwards . These lectures were published posthumously, with a prefaceby Joseph Sewall and Thom as Prince in which thisbody of divinity is characterized as “ one of thenoblest and choicest we have anywhere metwith, or we are apt to think has yet appeared in theworld .

” Hardly any book, we are told , has beenmore passionately wished for. The author raises


the question “ whether we may have any groundedhopes of the salvation of such as never enjoyed theScriptures"” and reasons to the conclusion thatanysuch hope is groundless .

“There is no reason to be giv en for it, yea, and it

tends to subv ert the gospel and m ake the ordinanc es of itunnec essary, to enc ourage m en in negle c t and ignoranc eof the S c riptures for either theym ust be sav ed withoutChrist, which is im possible or byHim without be lieving,whi ch takes away the new c ov enant c ondition ; or believ e without knowledge of Him , which takes awaythe

verynature of Faith; or c om e to the knowledge of Him

som e other way, which is unac c ountable ; the light ofnature will not do it 5 th(e onlywayof God’s appointm entis bythe Sc riptures ; to suppose any other is to im poseupon God.

The further inference is drawn that but feware saved compared with the rest of m ankm d.

”

A century later, in the sermon already nam ed, Dr.Em m ons still reasoned in the same strain . Theheathen have been given up to

“ judicial blindnessand hardness of heart .” They do not possess themeans of grace without which no soul can be saved

,

and they will continue to go down to hell untilGod

'

sends,them the gospel .” In their memorial

to the governor of Bombay,December 4, 1813, the

first missionaries sent out by the American Boardto India affirm

We looked upon the heathen, and alas three fourthsof the inhabitants of the globe had not been told thatJesus had‘tasted death for everym an.

’ We‘

saw them



the doctrine of free moral agency. Bishop Butler’s Analogy— which logically

,it should be no

ticed, stops far short of the conclusion to which thedogm a in question has been pressed

,— helped to

its diffusion and general acceptance . Combinedwith the" received opinions as to the necessity of revealed truth and of faith to salvation

,it left open

for the heathen world no door of hope . Christianity was excluded from the great majority of m en

who had lived , and for whom the Saviour died , asa m otive or means of recovery. Faith turned to afuture m illennium , and fondly counted up the myriads of the saved . But a universal atonement limited in its operation bfythe being who made it wasa contradiction too palpable and violent to rem ainconcealed . The great forces of progress which hadhelped to bring in a new m issionary age workedagainst such lim itations . The sentim ent of hum anity

,itself a child of the gospel , protested against

them . More thorough acquaintance with the Scriptures under im proved methods of interpretation

,

the heightened influence of the gospel,bringing

men ’s minds into larger knowledge of the mind ofChr ist and deeper sympathy with his love to m en,

clearer and higher consequent conceptions of thetrue character of God , gradually changed the toneof Christian thought about the heathen . Theirmoral degradation was even better understood thanbefore . Their need of the gospel was no less clear.But God’s purpose concerning them was less andless dogmatically affirmed. Probably the old ap


peal from their inevitable doom never had the effec tiv eness som etim es attributed to it . Dr. Jam esA. Alexander, writing in the Princeton Review

”

in 1848 , affirm ed that the great m ass of Christiansin Am erica took no real interest in Foreign Missions

,

” and gave as one of the reasons for this apathy a secret skepticism as to the real danger ofthe heathen . This “ skepticism ” has not beenlong in revealing itself. The plain truth is , re

marks a brilliant orthodox New England theologian

,that hum an nature and sanctified nature

give out.

” Berkeley was said by Reid to haveproved by unanswerable arguments what no manin his senses can believe .” It has happened inthis wise again and again with theological dogmasnot founded in Christianity. That the heathen

,as

other m en, are lost without the redem ption prov ided in Christ, that theyneed the m issionary andthe gospel , are evident tru ths . For ourselves weaccept the doc trm e of the fathers of m ode rn m is

sions that m en everywhere need for recovery themeans of grace , but the conclusion that all arelost who do not receive them in this life is anothermatter. Even when such a dogma is theoreticallyheld it is no longer pressed in pleas for m issions .The secretaries of our m issionary societies, so faras we are aware

, with possiblyhere and there anexception , do not now touch this chord . The organof the London Missionary Society

,with commenda

ble frankness,has recently remarked

“There was a tim e, and this not long ago, when the


m ost forc ible appeal for m issions was drawn from the

belief that the heathen who did not hear of Christ m ustdrop into a hell of unending torm ent. The noblerthoughts of God whichhav e of late taken possession of

the church hav e rendered it im possible to believ e thatm en c oul d be eternallylost for not having believed truthsnev er offered for their ac c eptanc e.

We cannot regard this language as in any re

spect too strong. The intelligence and heart ofthe Christian church not m erely decline to acceptthe old dogm a of the universal perdition of theheathen , they repudiate it . In the absence ofany thorough reconsideration of the subject s ometake refuge in agnosticism ; others refuse to thinkon the subj ect ; others resort to a v ague assertionof the divine leniency, a proportioning of judgment to light and opportunity ; others are reasoning

,along ever fading lines of m oral attenuation

,

through the lowest supposable degree of savingfaith in a pious Hebrew to the dimm est spark ofspiritual light in a pious Gentile ; others are re

v iving the doctrine taught in the notable Apology of Robert Barclay ( A . D . which addsto a rem arkable statement of the universality ofthe Atonem ent the confession of an equally universal supernatural enlightenm ent of mankind during a day or opportunity of grace ; others find thissaving knowledge of the Father and the Son in thenatural conscience , a doctrine which Barclay, asthe church generally

,has deemed Socinian and

Pelagian.

” Whatever the theory or mode of re



tian missions , woul d the problem presented be spe~

c iallydifficult or urgent . The only question wouldbe

,how the argum ent for m i ssmns shall be adapted

to such a changed attitude of m ind . But the realissue is m uch broader and deeper . The questionof the salvation of the heathen is simply one aspectof the fundam ental religious question of our tim ethe claim of Christianity to be the one perfect andfinal religion for m ankind. Involved in this issueare inqu iries such as these Is the final judgm entuniversal " Do the ultim ate destinies of men turnon their personal relation to Christ " Is Christianity essentially ethical

/

and spiritual" Is its salv ation mediated by motives

,including personal in

fluence,addressed to and operat1v e m the hum an

reason,afiec tions, and will " Is there one system

of salvation for Jew and Gentile,as one final judg

ment " Is God’s purpose of creation and redem ption fulfill ed except as He m anifests him self toevery hum an being as Redeem er as well as JudgeWhat inference upon this question is legitim atefrom the universality of Christ’s Person in its constitution, the universality of Christ’s atonem ent

,

and the universality of Christ’ s judgm ent " Howand why is He the Son of Man

,the second

‘

Adam ,

the Creator,Mediator

,and Ruler of the universe "

We cannot but think that the interests of m issions to the heathen require a readjustm ent of pleasin their behalf in the light of the Scriptural andrational answers which must be given to such questions . If thi s is not done there is danger not


merely of the loss of a particular m otive to missions

, but of a loss of faith in the prm c 1ples whichunderlie the whole m issionary m ovem ent . Thecause of m issions hitherto has rested , as we havesaid

,on the postulates of universal sinfulness

, uni

versal atonem ent , and the indispensableness offaith . It rests ultim ately on the divine comm and

(Matt . xxviii . 18 which im plies the universality and absoluteness of Christianity. The dogm aof the dam nation of the heathen is not one of thesepostulates , nor is it a Biblical teaching, but a corollary whic h now depends upon a dogm a which is nopart nor presupposition of the gospel—what of thelim itation of probation for all m en to the presentlife . This dogm a is now working, as do all nutruthful exaggerations , with a disturbing and injurions effect . It is driving its advocates to positions inconsistent with the fundam ental axiom s ofChristian m issions . They cannot accept the oldconclusion of the universal perdition of the pagan .

They continue , however, to insist upon the lim itation of probation. The only and necessary reliefis in a reduction of Christianity

,a lessening of its

claim s , and a corruption of its ethical and spiritualquality. The endeavor is to find grounds of hopefor the heathen outside of Christianity

,or outside

of the known sphere of its operation as moral andspiritual truth working as a new and m ighty motive-power in the form ation of character. That,in quarters where this lim itation of probation isdeem ed essential to orthodoxy

,the drift of opinion


is strongly in this direction is abundantly evident.The caution, indeed, 1s still interposed that the evidence requires us to hold that the hopeful casesare rare and purely exceptional, but the line ofmovement entered upon and the motive to it po intdecisively in one direction

,namely

,to a very large

inclusion in the kingdom of Christ of men who aresupposed to be saved by Him without knowledgeof Him, and by none of the m eans or m otives whichare distinctive and characteristic in the Christianlife . For the movement cannot be arrested by therecognition of merely exceptional cases . Thisbrings no relief. It does not m eet the real dificul ty. It fails to takhaccount of the efi c ient causeof the change in men ’s views . That cause, as theChronicle of the London Missionary Society

asserts, is the growth in Christian consciousness ofnobler thoughts of God, as revealed in JesusChrist .” Exceptional cases are wholly inc omm en

surate with the magnitude such a revelation introduces into the problem . To say that Christ isfitted by the foreordained constitution of his Personto sustain a personal relation to every man , thatHe actually died in intent and purpose for everyman , that He will judge every man , as He createdand redeemed every man

,and then to say that in

calculable m illions of these “ very men will neverhear of the gospel as a provision of mercy forthem

,will never have opportunity to accept it, and

that the comparatively few of t heir number who willbe saved will be recovered without the establish



probation,it will in our judgment become more and

more difficult to m aintain in effectiveness the princ iple ,

which experience testifies lies at the “ veryheart of Christian missions the indispensablenessof the gospel .A firm and practical conviction of the rightfuland sole suprem acy of Christianity has been thesource of the strength and the heroism of the greatest, the m ost efiec tive m issionaries from the daysof the Apostle of the Gentiles to the present hour.We are in earnest that no dogm a be interposedwhich limits the operation of its divine power toconditions which exclude its exercise in anyintelli

gible way, or on any extensive scale . We believe,

and we think there is need of asserting the princ iple , that the author of Christianity will give it intim e

,as in all other respects , a fitting opportunity

for its operation . We would send out missionarieswho can ask men to renounce all other systems because they are persuaded that Christianity, and thisalone , fulfills all that is good in every other, andmeets the deficiencies of every other ; m issionarl eswho in the light of all of God’s revelations of himself

,whether by human reason or hum an history

or special inspiration of prophets and apostles or byIncarnation

,with clear intelligence and perfect as

surance of faith will present Christ as the rightfuland the only Saviour and Lord ; and we would notweaken their message by loading it with a dogm aof the doom of the ancestors of the men to whomthey preach

,a dogma contradi ctory to the name

CHRIS TIANI TY AND MISSIONS. 183

they proclaim and into which they baptize , or byaccom panying it with an apology for Christianitywhich lowers it in principle to the lev el of otherreligions

,or m akes it essentially a system operative

in som e occult way and not as the truth as it isin Jesus .”

The historical course we have followed hasbrought to view only a few salient features of themissionary activity of the church. Many m ovements which would deserve attention in but a briefsketch of m issions have been wholly unnoticed .

Enough,however

,has been presented to suggest

most im portant lessons.It is evident that the m ere letter of the divinecom m and is insufficient to awaken the spirit of m issions . This has stood before the eye of the churchfor eighteen centuries

,and yet how partial the

response " That the church has been derelict induty in this m atter cannot be questioned . Wewould not write a word which could be understoodas an attem pt to condone a culpable apathy andunbelief. Yet it would seem that the commandof

'

our Lord has a fullness and grandeur of m eaning which require tim e , and varied and protractedexperience , for their developm ent. However thism aybe , the divine wisdom and grace, which overrule the errors and sins of m en for the sublim estends , have led the church from one degree of attainm ent in the understanding of the gospel to another, and have “ proportioned its opportunities forexpansion to its growth in intelligence and purity.

184 PROGRESS I VE ORTHODOXY.

It might almost of itself justify the introduction ofthe Second Epistle of Peter into the Canon that itso deeply and spiritually interprets the delay in thecom ing of the Lord . Tim e , we are taught, is of noaccount

,as m easured by days or m ill enniums

,in the

plan of aBeing who does not wish that any shouldperish , but that all should come to repentance .He will secure for his purpose of redem ption fittingopportunity . I ts character will not be changedby hurrying anything. Moral processes will begranted the necessary periods . God has alwayscared more for the quality of faith than for its

quantity. If his church is not ready to proclaimthe pure gospel of the Father, the Son , and theSpirit

,He may allow it to work out its own salva

tion with fear and trem bling through weary genorations before He vouchsafes to it the opportu

nityof a world-wide m ission .

It is of“ im portance to note that the adv ance of

Christianity has been identified hitherto with adeeper and wider apprehension of its absolutenessand universality. The first progress of the gospelwas arrested until the church grasped the idea ofa universal k ingdom of God in this world. Whenit was gained

,Europe lay at her feet . Mediaeval

missions and Christianity are the outcom e . Themovem ent was then debased and corrupted by formal ism and sacerdotalism . When recovery cam e , andthe absoluteness of divine grace—the im m ediatecom m unication to the individual believer of the infinite good of salvation _ was reasserted

,religion


186 PROGBESSIVE ORTHOD OXY.

any soul to which this wisdom has not been re"

vealed,and this power has not been applied

,is

beyond the p ale of redemp tion, and that we c an

say that such motives are lim ited for all men bythe Opportunities of the present life . Positively,it is essentially an advance in the apprehension ofwhat is a fundam ental predicate of the gospel ,its ethical absoluteness . To suppose that progressin this direction , as it becomes apparent and is

generally understood, wil l impair the claims ofmissions or retard their progress 1s to m iss thelesson of history, and to take counsel of fear ratherthan of reason and Christl an faith . The ApostlePaul instructs us frOm hi s own experience , as towhat is the . deepest and most potent m otl ve tom 1ss1onary effort ; it is the constraining powerof Christ’s love

,who died for all

,that they which

live should no longer live unto them selves, butunto Him who for their sakes died and rose again .

”

The church which beyond all others has trustedthe sim plicity and power of this m otive has mostthoroughly wrought into its membership the m l s

sionaryidea. In his admirable lectures upon theMoravian Missions ,

” so careful and intelligent ahistorian as the Rev. A. C . Thom pson

,D . D . ,

has

affirm ed If all Protestant churches had beenequally devoted, equally enterprising, for the lastc entury and a half, not an unevangelized m an or

wom an would now rem ain on earth.

But some one may possibly suggest : all, then,

that is nec essary now for the promotion of interest

CHRISTIANI TY AND MISSIONS. 187

in missions is to urge the principles and m axim s ofMoravian piety. At least it is not desirable to propose any new theological questions . But this is tooverlook two facts : Many Christians are not Moravians, and we are not raising any new questions .To gain in its fullness of power the central m otiveof the Christian life each division of the churchmust take it up for itself into the organic development of its own life . To each true church is givenits own line of thought

,its own sphere of duty, its

special task,for the good of the whole and for a

richer and broader unity. The questions we havetouched upon in their bearing on m issions are notfirst propounded by us. They are before the public . They com e up in a m ovem ent already far advanc ed. They cannot be set aside nor suppressed.

No greater mistake , as a m atter of policy, could bemade by the friends of missions than to seem towish to avoid them . One of the m ost pathetictouches at the recent seventy-fifth Anniversary ofthe American Board was the allusion of a m issionary to the fact that during the years of this Soc iety

’

s history two entire generations of heathenhad passed away. What of the unnum bered generations

, the innum erable m illions, that have diedwithout the gospel " Once

,the advocates of m is

sions had a definite answer. Theywill not repeatit . What will they say

7 What ought they tosay " Our suggestion is

,that they answer “

ac

cording to Christianity.

”

And one word more upon thi s point . No prog


ress is conserved save by allowing its principlesscope and freedom of development . Anyattemptto arrest their growth in apprehension or practicalapplication is an expression of distrust in them

,

and tends to their overthrow. The church,having

gained the doctrine of the universality of theAtonement, cannot stop with this advance . To do so

would be to irnperil what it has won . Nor,having

once learned the lesson of a universal humanenessfrom the phil anthropy ” of God our Saviour,

” 1

can it now close or dull its ear to this divine teaching without peculiar guilt. The Creek Church , inits centuries of sterility and decay

,1s a standing

warning to any body of Christians that would dec line to follow out the principles with which it isintrusted to their legitimate conclusions, and thusfail to conserve by progress .It is a noteworthy and ausp1c l ous fact that theplatform s of the older and the m ost im portant missionary societies are pledged by their history to allthat is catholic in Christian belief and fellowship .

We believe that missions should always be conducted in this large-minded and large-heartedspirit that young m en should be attracted to suchservice by the grandeur of its aim

,and welcom ed

without scrutiny as to their theological opinions beyond what is necessary to ascer tain their full acceptance of fundamental Christianity in their beliefsand in their consecration of purpose . We wouldraise , as a dividing question , no issue upon the mode

1 Titus iii . 4.



tion. The islands of the Pacific and the continentsof Asia and Africa will, erelong, be m ore thoroughl y crossed and recrossed by routes of traveland traffic than was the Roman Empire when itwas conquered by the early church . As never before the world is prepared for the gospel. Has the

church a gospel for the world "

VIII .

THE SCRIPTURES.

WHAT is the Bible How did this collection ofwritings come into existence " What are its distinotive predicates Our inquiry assum es , of course, tobe m ade byChristians , and to concern itself withone of the facts of a divinely established religion .

It professes, therefore , to depend upon Christiansources for the inform ation of which it is in search .

“70 m ust begin by considering what those sourcesare . Evidently they consist

,in part at least

,of

the great Christian facts of which the Bible bearswitness . We know the im m ediate historical an

tec edents of the Scriptures , bothm their outwardappearance and in their higher significance . Bythem we can and m ust

,to some extent

,be guided

in form ing our conceptions of how the Scriptureswere produced, and what they are . Are theyto beour sole guide, or does Christianity furnish us othermeans of information to be used in connection withthem " This is equivalent to asking whether Christianityprofesses to give us as im m ediate revelationinform ation as to the way in which the Scriptureswere produced, for evidently only information ofthis kind coul d take its place beside examinationof the facts out of which they grew.


Some believe , it is true , that our religion, viewedas a whole in its divine character and supremevalue, gives us the knowledge we are seeking.

They contend that the book which should conveyto men the essential content of such a religion musthave been written in a certain way. For only so ,they claim

,could it have had the power of im pres

sion necessary to its task. We may be sure,there

fore , that God made just such and such a Bible .The hope of reaching the goal we are seeking bythis short cut may be tem pting. But can it be indulged when one considers the assumption it involves as to man ’s ability to see all of the waysof procedure open to God in establishing his religion" How can any finite mind think itself sowell acquainted with the sum of historical forcesas to be able to declare just how a Bible must beproduced which woul d best carry the gospel to theworld " Some general predicates of the writtenvehicle of revelation m ight perhaps be assumedwith m easurable confidence

,but not such as would

satisfy the desire of the Christian mind and heart .Surely the surprises of God’s providence shouldhave by this time taught us our inability to predictjust the means by which He will bring his ends topass .But we can know just what the Bible is from

revelation , if we have a revelation about the matter.

Is this in our possession " No ; for the Scriptures

( to Christians the depository of revelation, whatever else they may be) do not undertake to tell


194 PROGRESSIVE ORTH OD OX Y.

Canon, in the historical evidences of their originand nature .Possibly, however, som e m aythink that we haveno right to assum e that the antecedent facts fullyaccount for the Bible , since , although it is unquestionablyto a certain extent their product, a specialoperation of Alm ighty power, of which we are notinform ed, m ayhave given to it its highest qualities .But surely in the absence of a clear revelation thatsuch special divine power was em ployed

,we have

no right to assert its exercise . If without its usethe Bible as it stands can be accounted for

,it be

comes unnecessary. And m ore than this is it notunreasonable

,not to say 1rreverent, to add a new

kind of divine activity to those of whose operationin establishing the kingdom of God sacred historyassures us " Christian faith finds a reveal ing purpose of God in the manifest order and connectionsof that history. It infers from the teaching ofprophet and apostle , and the words of One greaterthan they

,that the events recorded took place in

connection with such causes , natural and supernatural, as are presented in the sacred narrative , tothe end that men might see behind the causes Creddisclosing his disposition towards man . Its conv ic tion that this series of facts contains a divineobject-lesson absolutely forbids it to try to im provethe teaching by inventing other facts and thrustingthem into the representation . It says

,therefore ,

that if the forces visible in sacred history appear tothe be sthuman vision to have produced the Bible ,

THE SCRIPTURES. 195

God must have wished m en to believe that theydid produce it .We m ust seek, then , knowledge of the distinctivequality and value of the Scriptures by studyingGod’s revelation given in history. A collection ofliterature is before us, ideas and narratives conv eyed by hum an m inds to other m inds in hum anlanguage . As Christians we recognize qualities inthese ideas and narratives which are wanting toother literature . We wish to obtain a knowledgeof these qualities as exact as possible, and try tofind out what distinguished their authors from othermen that they could write such books . We know

,

too,from the historical knowledge which belongs

to our faith that these writings were very intimatelyconnected with the great revealing facts . Wewish to see as clearly as we can what this connection was ; in other words , the process by whichfact-revelation m ade the Bible . we go back

,there

fore, to the places and tim es in which these Scriptures were com posed, and see how they cam e to bewritten .

We m ust at the outset recognize the distinctnessof the New Testam ent Scriptures from the Old .

The question of the com parative religious value oftheir respective contents m aybe left in abeyancewhile we direct our attention to their historicaldiversity. They are parted bym any centuries , theygroup themselves about difierent centres, they areunlike in structure and in lang uage . Though theyunite to form a higher unity, -it is a unitym ade of


the wholes constituted by the union of each group.

The first owes its value for the church to an eventwhich followed its com position , the second to itshaving succeeded and been created by this sameevent . We must therefore approach them separatelyto find out how they cam e to be . The factthat the New Testam ent lies the nearer to us

,and

that we are better informed respecting the circumstances under which it was written

,woul d natu

rally lead us to turn first to it,apart from any feel

ing we might have as to its greater value .We naturally begin with its oldest books

,the

earliest literary product of the life of the apostolicchurch , the apostolic Epistles . They are c hieflypastoral letters

,written to various Christian com

m unities by their respective authors , who were inmost cases the founders of the churches addressed.

They belong to the —apostolic teaching, and had fortheir im m ediate readers , and all future ones, just .the claim which their authors had .

- Whatever ispeculiar in their com position, or extraordinary intheir value

,is to be found in the apostolic teaching

generally. For there is not a scintilla of evidencethat God assum ed to the m inds of the apostles anew relation as soon as they sat down to write , andthat, in consequence , what they wrote had a diflerent quality from what they said . St . Paul sent aletter to the Galatians censuring them for fallingaway from the doctrine of justification by faithwhich they had received from him , and vehementlyreasserting it as the central doctrine of the gospel.



to impart a spiritual gift,which even this crowning

letter of his life woul d not bring to them . Weshould not dwell upon what seem s to us so obviousbut for the fact that the assum ption of a specialactivity of the divine Spirit upon the apostles andother writers of Scripture in the act of c om posntion

, endovving what came from their pens withqualities possessed by no other Christian teaching

,

is a m ost fruitful source of confusion in the en

deaver to find out what Scripture is . It is insistednot only that is there no evidence of such an act

,

but that the supposition of its existence is contraryto facts which lie on the/fac e of the Scriptures . Itis claim ed that we have no m ore right to discriminate between the written and the oral teaching ofPaul as difierent in kind than between those of anyother public teacher. It is asserted that the pec uliar and supernatural qualities which belonged toany one part of his teaching belonged essentiallyto it all . Not that those qualities dwelt in everypart of it in the same degree . No doubt the stressof special circum stances or extraordinary im pulsesfrom the Spirit

,or

,stil l more likely, both, som e

tim es lent unusual clearness and penetration to hisutterance of divine truth . Passages in som e of hisletters can be pointed out, to which Christian sentim ent has always attached pecul iar im portance .Som e of his Epistles are m ore elaborate , som e moreeloquent

,some more com plete in respect to the de

v elopm ent of certain leading truths than others .Very likely he always put truth into a m ore com

THE SCRIPTURES. 199

pact form when he wrote . But such incidental andform al peculiarities of his letters m ust be passedover if we are to ascertain what they really are .We m ust go back to the man from whom theycam e and study his situation

,calling

,and spiritual

endowm ents .He and his fellow apostles had personal ao

quaintance of the Lord Jesus Christ . Al l of themexcept Paul had known the m ighty power of hispersonal influence and exam ple , culm inating in hispassion . They had been taken possession of by thenew divine life which poured down upon the worldat Pentecost

,and were ful l of the HolyGhost .

Paul’s case was different from theirs,yet not so

different as at first appears . He knew Christ inperson , for he saw Him before Dam ascus with hisown eyes . That contact with the Lord on the outward plane of life , knowing Him to be the Lord ,was, in its peculiar influence upon the spirit , theessential fact qualifying for apostleship . It gave agrasp of the fact of Incarnation

,it gave a tension

to Christian conviction whic h could com e fromnothing else . One m ust have seen the old dispensation passing over into the new to have the m ostvivid possible convictio

'

n that it had done so . Onemust have laid eyes upon Christ in order to havethe freshest and m ost stim ulating possible sense ofhis having been here . This the apostles had ,and theyhad besides the qualification for Christianpreaching, only second to this , of having grown upas Jews . All the results of the divine revelation

200 PROGRES SI VE ORTHODOXY.

and training in Judea were gathered up in theirspiritual history. They could appreciate Christ inhis connection with the past ( without which therevelation made in Him was only a glorious fragment) as only Christian Jews could do .These qualifications would have been of littleservice had they not been made effective by the su

pernatural gift im parted to their possessors . Theapostles were the bearers of a revelation m ade immediately to each of them by the Spirit of God .

Of the fact of such revelation they were conscious ;by their consciousness of it the form of their teaching is moulded . We

(turn to their religious life

and study this wonderful experienc e‘in the light of

their own testimony, in the hope of gaining such aknowledge of it as shall lead to an adequate conc eption of the nature of the teaching which flowedfrom it .The fundamental characteristic of the revelationborne by each apostle was its vitality. It was anessential part of the spiritual life . The gift receivedby the infant church on Pentecost was not m erelythe bestowal of this or that capacity ; it was thatof living in a new and higher way . Out of itsqu ickened and mightily invigorated life leaped itsnew deeds of heroic devotion . From this fresh andever-renewed fountam flowed its teaching. Theapostles began to preach Christ because new conc eptions of Him had com e into their hearts , andwere struggling for utterance there . A new typeof teaching begins with Peter’s Pentecostal serm on .



chiefly, but in the whole renewed personality, theapostles preached and taught .The vital nature of the knowledge is reproducedin the vitality of the teaching . This quality chieflydistinguishes the apostolic Epistles and the otherdistinctive ly spiritual books of sacred Sc rlpturefrom all other Chr istian literature . Nothing elseever written shows personality so penetrated by thetruth of Chr ist . You may try to draw out theteachings of one of John ’s Epistles into other formsof statement , and you will find your task as hopeless as the endeavor to extract just the perfum e ofthe rose from its crushed petals . You may obtainanother very pleasant odor, but not that fragrance .The truth ln the Scripture statement has a delicatearoma which we find in the Scripture alone .

In saym g that the apostolic teachm g 1s the expression of the spiritual life of its authors and

wears the im press of their respective personalities,

we do not take one jet or tittle from its sacrednessas a revelation . If God be pleased to convey truthto man in a way other than by the immediate contact of his Spirit with the individual hum an spirit,He must use some external m edium

,and if the

c om munication is to be of a m ore connected and

influential kind than that m ade by the sign lang uage of nature , the m edium em ployed m ust be insome sense hum an . It m ust

,at least

,be expressed

in words which man has made to convey his ideas,and which partake , therefore, of the limitationsand im perfections of the se ideas . Now, if it should

THE SCRIPTURES. 203

please God to produce a book of oracles by sheerand stark m iracle , or to dictate the contents of oneto a scribe or num ber of scribes , the teaching wouldnot com e m ore directly from Him than when asoul in vital contact with Him freely utters, underthe leading of his Spirit

,the truth which is the ele

ment in which it lives . In this latter case He controls and shapes the teaching. Whatever of manis in it is there as his m edium of expression. If itis given when the m an in whom it dwells pleases ,it is when God pleases

,too

,for the will of this or

gan of revelation is gladly responsive to God ’s life .But we need not argue the case on the groundof a p r ior i possibility; we have all that we contend for in the great Christian facts . The teaching of our Lord was his

,and it was the Father’s .

To deny it any of the essential qualities of hum anteaching is sim ply to deny the essential qualities ofhis hum anity and to reject the Incarnation. If itwas the utterance of a hum an mind and heart

,it

shows that God can reveal him self through a hum an life nay, that such a life is the best m ediumof his revelation, for there is no

“ divineness inChrist ’s words which does not find expressionthrough their hum anity. And he who doubts thatredeem ed m en can be so brought into the life ofGod that they, too , shall be worthy bearers of hisrevelation m u st deal with Christ’s words : Sanctify them in the truth : thy word is truth . As

thou didst send me into the world , even so sent Ithem into the world.

” It is,therefore

,with these


Scriptures as with the person of our Lord , theunion of the divine and hum an in whom they imperfectly resem ble and typify. To deny their os

sential hum anity is to take away their divineness .For as the divine is subtracted from Christ by re

moving from Him the human soul which is itsdwell ing-place and point of contact with m an, so am echanical view of m an ’s agency in revealing divine truth im plies the denial of a living connectionof God with the Christian life

,— yes

,—and the

denial of the central fact on which that life rests .We do not urge this as defending a theory of the

nature of Scripture which is on trial before the barof speculative reason,

but to take away any lingering unwillingness to look at the plain facts of thec ase . For the humanity of the Scripture is so apparent that no one can help finding in it the freel yevolved product of its authors’ religious life , whoseeyes are not holden by dogm atic prejudice . Theapostolic letters are preem inent in literature forthe degree in which they wear the stam p of theirauthors ’ individuality.

And this we regard an essential condition oftheir unequaled excellence . Our reverence form an is such that we can easily believe the best medium for conveying God’s truth to the world to bea human life filled and inspired by this truth .

And when we com e under the influence of theapostolic letters we feel that their vitality penetrating the truth is of the very essence of their disclosing power. I t is not so m uch that we draw



are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge .”

The Spirit showed the things of Christ unto hisapostles . The revelation must shape itself to thepersonality of each recipient . That which is re

vealed in"

Christ is God in his work of redem ption ;and

, because the k nowledge gained is vital knowledge , it m ust vary with the tem peram ent of eachwriter

,for each human soul is by its constitution

especially fitted to appropriate certain elem ents ofGod ’s character and to appreciate the revelation ofthese m ade in his treatm ent of the world . HencePaul’s apprehension of God in Christ could not beidentical with Jc hu ’s .

i

Again , we a ppeal to fact,and insist that the subtle diversity of the apostolicteaching is as undeniable as its fundam ental unity.

The writings of John add no new doctrine to thatgiven in the Pauline letters but if they were blottedout the Christian revelation would lose a ‘very prec ions elem ent - the Johannean conception of thegospel

,preem inent for ethical depth and force .

No other mind could so present Christianity as afellowship of God with man in holy love . Throughno other medium does the truth com e with suchsplendor as when it stream s through this transparentSpirit . We hold with Neander that Paul , John,Peter

,and Jam es ( whom we —m aybe perm itted to

c lass am ong the apostles) , each represents a distinct and perm anent typ e of character, and that , inmaking each the bearer of a . separate revelation ,the design of God to give m en a conception of the

THE SCRIPTURES. 207

truth in Jesus rich in its m anifoldness is distinctlym anifest .It will be asked , “ If the revelation partake ofthe characteristics of the m an through whom it isgiven

,m ust it not share his im perfection "” If by

im perfection be m eant such defect of character as1s 1m plied in the lack of ideal sym m etry, we answer,Yes . The m any years spent in Pharisaic bondagem ust have left an abiding influence upon St . Paul ’scharacter ; for grace cannot m iraculously obliterateslow m oral growths . We could not but expect thathis bitter experience should have led him to find inthe doctrine of justification by faith a relativeprom inence which it would not wear to any whohad not borne a chain like his . But this featureof his apprehension of the gospel is not its weakness , but its strength , because it is seen to belongto the m an, and to be im plied in the experiencewhich fitted him as no one else could be fitted todeclare the gospel of righteousness through faith.

If the question m ean , Must not such sin asstil l dwelt in the apostles have tinged their religious c onceptions and teaching with error " — we

reply, This could not have been unless theywerem ore under the influence of m oral evil than wehave any reason to suppose them to have been .

The effect of sin upon the perceptive faculties lagsbehind its influence upon the will . Men usuallyknow better than they do . The best of m en are

the m ost penitent, for the elevation of their moralstandard outstrips even their im provem ent in conduct .


We cannot, therefore , correctly measure thepurity of the religious conceptions which the apostles had

,by com paring their lives with the absolute

standard of hum an goodness . That their teachingwas not v itiated by such m oral defects as still clungto them is plainly shown by the fact that the mostconspic uous fault comm itted by any one of themafter Pentecost

,so far as our knowledge goes , and

one which bore the closest relations to the trans

gressor’

s conception of a vital religious truth , wasnot reflec ted in his teaching. Nothing in Peter’sEpistles would lead one to infer that he had dissem bled to the Judaizers at a critical juncture inthe history of the church .

1

We can hardly believe,indeed, that the truth as

revealed through the apostles had such absolutepurity as we must suppose it to have had if perfectbeings had been the m edia of revelation . We mustrecognize a certain quality in the words of our Lord ,a brilliant and serene lustre , a

'

perfectness ofproportion

,which we cannot find even in theirs .

We som etim es discover in their successiv e letterssigns of progress into m ore adequate conceptionsas

,for exam ple

,in Paul’s teachings concerning

marriage . In som e rare cases one side of a truthis so frankly presented that only by finding a correlate elsewhere are we saved from m isconception ;as in Jam es ’s teaching concerning justification .

But the slight blem ishes in the very finest opticalinstrum ents do not prevent our obtaining fromthem data which to the hum an m ind of finest train

1 Ladd,Doc trine of Sacred S c rip ture, 11. 424 .



God . We can see that their situation and theirexceptionally exalted life m ake foll owing teachersdependent upon them as they were not dependentupon any predecessor except Christ that theirconceptions of our Lord are the framework intowhich all the subsequent thoughts of his churchabout Him and his work must be set, and the normby which the teaching of the church must shapeitself.This follows of necessity from their historical relation to the Incarnation . They were living link sby which God Incarnate was joined to the life ofthe world . That the world might know Him inthe divine hum anity

,there must be som e men inti

mate with Him , whose personal acquaintance shouldbe expanded and purified by the inner revelationof the Spirit, so that they could tell the world Whoit was that they had known . That which wasfrom the beginning, that which we have heard , thatwhich we have seen with our eyes, that which webeheld

,and our hands handled

,concerning the

Word of life declare we unto you also .

” Therelations in which the apostles stood to the previoushistory of the world and to its contem poraneou s lifewere a part of their peculiar qualification for pre4

senting Christ to mankind . He stood in such immediate connection with the past that no one couldadequately know Him who did not know the factsof which He was on the hum an side a part . Judaism was in its flower in H im ,

and 110 one c ould fullyknow this part of Him who did not know Judaism

THE SCRIPTURES. 211

from the inside . He was the explanation of the relation which the Hebrew nation he re to the life ofthe race

,and no one could adequatelygive the ex

planation who did not know bypersonal experiencethe strength and the weakness of Hebraism . In aword

,the Incarnation is not really apprehended

until it is apprehended in its historical setting,and only those who saw that setting with their owneyes could worthily describe it . We add to thesequalifications that of preem inent endowm ent of theHoly Spirit . We would gladly cherish the thoughtthat other teachers m ight arise

,from whom should

flow even m ore copious stream s of living waterthan those which welled from the hearts of theapostles . But we are com pelled to regard the circ um stanc es of their lives as excluding such a hope .We cannot think the gift of the Spirit a sheer m iracle of power. We m ust believe that as a bestowalof the divine life it has its appropriate and essential conditions in m utual relations existing betweenthe hum an life and the divine . And we cannothelp believing that the conditions of its bestowm entexisted in adegree absolutely unique “ in the daysjust following the resurrection of our Lord ; thatafter the am azing act of divine love for m an thenconsum m ated there should follow im m ediately asurpassing influx of divine life into the worldthat the divine hum anity of Jesus should, throughthe Spirit

,have its m ost intense power upon the

race at its point of historic contact with it . Thechurch

,we believe

,has always felt and will always


feel that there can never be another Pentecost,as

there can never be another Calvary.

For these reasons we hold that the conceptionsof Christ presented in the apostolic revelation are

not onlythe m ost vivid, but the m ost com prehensiveand the most just which any m inds in this stage ofbeing can have. We believe that these m en wereso placed and so gifted that they saw Christ ’s nature and relations to m an with both m ore penetrating and broader vision than that of any otherseers ; that the main features of his life and m ission , the truths of his eternal being, the outlines ofhis historical relations, were mirrored in their m indswith such just perspective that We m ust seek allour knowledge of Christ within the lim its and nuder the outlines of their teaching. The church isever adding to its knowledge of Christ, and the exegetic al process is certainly not the exclusive m eansof making the increm ent . Out of m ere study of

books did not com e its growing knowledge ofChrist’s relation to God

,and to m ankind, nor its

conception of the breadth of his redeem ing work.

Such a product‘

shows the revealing presence of theSpirit. But in m aking the revelation He has used ,as the facts show

,He could not but use , as the

Christian reason shows,the apostolic teaching as

the constant m edium of revelation , the ever-presenthelper and gu ide of the advancing mind . Thegreatest thinkers of the church have found themselves in all their thinking, in closest sympathywith and dependence upon the apostolic teaching.



dence . We m aywell believe that the sp1r1tual exaltation of the apostolic circle in the early days ofthe church would bring back to their recollectionthe words of their Master with preternatural vividness . We m ust also recollect that their spiritualsym pathy with Christ ’s teachings would certainlyprevent them from attributing to Him any teachingor deed not worthy of his character. We havehere am ple guaranty of the essential accuracy ofthe apostolic tradition . If we cannot predicate itsabsolute perfection

,if we m ust attribute som e de

v iation from accuracy even to the process of translation from Aram aic into Greek, we m ust rem ember that this living way of preserving our Lord ’ssayings and deeds gives these mem oirs the sim plicity and artlessness and lifelikeness in which theyfar surpass all other biographies . What has beensaid of the synoptic Gospels m ay be said of theActs . There is not the slightest internal or external reason for pronounc ing it a history set downfrom m iraculous divine dictation . It claim s to bea continuation of Luke ’s Gospel, and probablyrests in part

,like that

,upon earlier docum ents . It

is to be regarded as true to the facts and the lifein the facts . It could only have been written byone taught by the Spirit to know the events narrated in their true meaning a nd value .Of St . John ’s Gospel,

4written to show the outlines of Christ’s life as it lay transfigured in themind of the beloved apostle

,the divine glory stream

ing through every word and deed , we have only to

THE SCRIPTURES. 215

say that in it he two distinct elem ents of divineknowledge , the two m ost precious of all , the teac hing of the Master and of the m ost spiritual of hisdisciples . We need not stay to discuss the rem aining books of the New Testam ent Canon . Thechurc h has placed them beside the apostolic writings because it has believed them to possess theapostolic qualities . That no other ground can besuccessfullyurged for the right of an anonym ousscripture like the Epistle to the Hebrews to a placein the Canon is evident . That the general c on

sensu s of the church in the canonicity of this orany writing has the strongest claim to respect, allChristians will adm it . That the judgm ent so givencan add nothing to the intrinsic value of such aletter

,all Protestants m ust hold. But they also

agree in believ ing it the best of reasons for devoutly seeking in such a writing the mind ofChrist .We cannot extend our inquiry to the Old Testa

m ent . The quantity of m aterial to be dealt withhere is so great , and the unsolved problem s so num erens and intricate, that any attem pt to show thenature of its structure from the correlated facts

,not

covering m anym ore pages than are left to us, wouldbe absolutely worthless .we feel the lim itation the more keenly from ourconviction that just here the claim s of our m ethodneed especial vindication . A fault in discussionsabout the nature of Scripture

,which has been

,per

haps, more insnaring than almost any other, is the

216 PROGRESSI VE ORTHOD OX Y.

habit of drawing its predicates from the study ofthe New Testam ent alone . We m ust m ake our

protest against this prac tice by heartily ac knowl

edging that our work is defective according to thestandard which we have ourselves set up . Onecannot

“

fitly answer the question What is ' theBible "” until he has exam ined the contents ofeach Canon . He has no more right to characterizean Old Testam ent Scripture from any New Testament Scripture than to regard the office of a He

brew prophet as identical with that of an apostleof Jesus Christ. What though he m ayrecognizein the genesis of either com position a supernaturalelem ent " He has he more right to say that thepatent historical diflerenc es do not enter into thevery nature of the writing than that Paul’s workand Isaiah’s were essentially the same .The practice of interpreting the Old Testamentby assum ed New Testam ent canons has

‘

m ade theform er seem lifeless and unintelligible

,and caused

many of the m ore inquiring m inds of the church tocease trym g to gain an intelligent and c om prehen

sive knowledge of its contents . This has wroughtthe great mischief of 1m pa1r1ng the church

’s knowledge of Holy Scripture, the New Testam ent aswell as the Old ; not

'

only because the New cannot be understood except through the help of theOld

,but because the Old Testam ent rightly stud"

ied gives a weapon with which to break the crustof form alism which had grown upon the New.

The thorough investigation of the former now go



surely does not foll ow, from his teaching that aMessianic Psalm was written under im mediatedivine im pulse

,that He held all the books of the

Old Testam ent to have been composed under similar conditions . Nor does He say what relation thePsalm bears to the special revelation given to itsauthor

, whether’

it was dictated to him ,or he was

left to work out his inspired conception into literaryform by conscious elaboration ; whether the contents of the Psalm came in one moment of exaltation, or had long lain in his mind .

But certainly ,” it may be said

,when our

Lord told the Pharisees that the Scripture cannotbe broken (Mm) , Helent his authority to a certainconception of its composition . For to say that itsevery statem ent carries divine authority is to saythat the divine mind so immediately controlled theaction of al l the human m m ds em ployed in produc ing it that its authorship is sim ply God

’s act .”

The argum ent rightly assum es that such a divinesanction of each statement made by these Scriptures implies a specific way of writing them ;

namely,by setting down words divinely dictated.

But we cannot accept the construction thus putupon this saying of Christ. For it would makethe saying flatly contradictory of those other teachings in which He criticises and am ends certainstatements of the Old Testam ent as to men ’ s m oralobligation . They are as plainly a part of its teaching as the profounder spiritual teaching of thePsalms . We feel confident, therefore, that our

THE SCRIPTURES. 219

Lord meant no more by the words under discussion than an explicit recognition of the Old Testam ent Scriptures as the source of spiritual knowledge for the Jewish nation .

Another cause of repugnance to the historicalway of finding out what the Old Testam ent is ( onevery effective

,we believe , with Christians who are

not profess1onal students) is the assum ed insuffic iency of the data.

“We are so far from theevents which produced even the very latest of theHebrew Scriptures ; no treatise has com e down tous which throws such light upon the circum stancesand conditions of their authorship as the Actsthrows upon that of the apostolic Epistles ; therange which they unitedly traverse is so im m ensethere is so little in the books them selves that re

veals their structure ,— it is hopeless to try to infer from them and from what they say how theycame to be written .

” Yes,to infer as much as we

know about the genesis of the Epistle to the Re

mans . But m any’

of these Scriptures only deal withhistorical facts , often lying remote from the au

thor’s life and ascertained from secondary sources .These obviously have com paratively little that issubjective to be accounted for. But we find in thephenom ena even of these writings ground for certain large and definite inferences concerning therelation of their respective authors to the factsnarrated, and to the great spiritual fact of whichevery event in the history of the Hebrew peoplewas a part. We may safely infer from them that


a book which describes the death of Moses was not,

all at least, written by Moses ; that a narrativewhich contains two accounts of the creation wasmade— to some extent, at any rate by editingancient docum ents ; and that an exalted prediction of the Messianic kingdom was not written inthe same spiritual condition with that in which acom pilation of proverbs was made . And, speaking generally, the phenomena of these Scripturesfurnish sufficient data for ascertaining the internal relation in which their respective author orauthors stood towards the divine revelation carried in the advancing life of the Hebrew nation .

For these writings all breathe the religious spirit.Even those of them which deal exclusively withhistorical events describe these events with devoutaim and pious feeling . The collection of nationalproverbs reflects a mind which viewed earthly prudence chiefly from a religious standpoint . And

so far as an author shows a religious apprehensionof the events of which he treats , and especially ofthose of them with which he is in immediate contact

,so far of course does it appear that the re

vealing Spirit dwell ing in and fostering the national life has made him its especial organ . The

revelation which God m ade in Israel consisted, as ,

another has well said,of two distinct elem ents

national experiences,and the interpretation of these

experiences by men gifted with supernatural insightinto the meaning of Jewish history . It is the judgment of the Christian church that the Old Tes



here is the inferiority of the earlier stage of revelation shown

,in that the supernatural revelation

had not fully penetrated and appropriated the natural facul ties even of those i nwhom God’s Spiritdwelt most fully. But it is claim ed that the prophotic teaching was , like the apostolic, essentiallypervaded by its authors’ personality, and that inproportion as we find ourselves discovering God

’

s

m ind in this teaching, we find it inform ing andillum ining the mind of the prophet . This showsus that we have only to go on learning m ore fullywhat each prophet was

,in his work for his people

and his devotion to his people’s God, to learn more

fully the distinctive quality of his teaching. All

the inform ation we need as to the special relationhis writings and those of his fellow prophets re

spe c tiv elyhere to the divine revelation to Israel ,and bear to the larger revelation given to theChristian church , lies before us in the Old Testam ent , if only we ai e not too indolent or too deeplyprejudiced to seek it there .How plainly the self-revealing power of Scrip

ture appea1s in the Psalms "What does the churchreally care for a theory as to the way in which theywere produced " It hears the m usic of God ’s voicespeaking in the hearts whose penitence

,doubt

,as

piration, gratitude , j oy, they express , and knowsthat they came from Him . It is pure sc l1olasti

c 1sm to try to find an explanation of the fifty-first

Psalm in any other thing than the heart whosepenitence pulses through it. And the Messianic

THE SCRIPTURES. 223

Psalm s will tell what they mean , and how God re

vealed him self in them , if we will not insist uponinventing a theoryas to how they were m ade andtrying to get out of them an interpretation whichjustifies this theory.

A third and yet m ore influential source of unwill ingness to rely on historical m ethods for knowledge of what the Old Testam ent writings spec ifically are

,is the belief that the free use of this

method ( and it is rightly assumed that any use ofit im plies the right to use it freely) im perils re

ligious interests . I t is rightly felt that problem sof authorship cannot be solved without attem ptingthe solution of the historical problem s underlyingthem, and it is said that scholars in trying to solvethe latter may draw from the phenom ena of theOld Testam ent conclusions prejudicial to the trustworthiness of som e of its writings

,and so give

Christian faith (one of whose vital elem ents isconfidence in all of them as essentially truthful ) adeadly wound .

This objection im plies either that those who raiseit have no faith in the capacity which historicalscience supposes itself to possess of reaching soundconclusions , or that they do believe that it has thiscapacity, and fear that if it were em ployed upon

the Old Testam ent Scriptures , it would draw fromthem conclusions perilous to Christian faith . Thelatter alternative is ruled out by our conviction thatwe are addressing heartily believing minds . Tak1ng the former, we ask why it should be thought


that the pursuit of historical science is anm snaring

process , and that historical scholars must be dupes "Why pass such a judgm ent upon this single one ofthe departments of investigation "Do we find any reason in the nature of its subz

jec t for assuming that the m ind of man , whichactsrationally in contact with other them es

,will be

com e insane as ‘soon as it approaches this one "Surely there seems to be no reason why men shouldall have a mental disease showing itself just here .Do we find, then, on examining the work of historical students

,that its manifest ( though unac

c ountable) irrationality shows that the human mindcannot safely touch fthis class of subjects " N0 onecan answer the question in the affirmative withoutfolly who has not m astered the critical and constructive m ethods which modern history has fashioned, and gained extens1ve knowledge of its em

ploym ent of them . Whoever has closely watchedthe application of those methods to Hebrew historywill know that the process has not been irrational.He will have seen a progressing ac c um ulatii m ofsignificant facts and successive deductions steadilyadvancing m clearness and adequacy to explain thefacts . As in other departments of science, he willhave seen theory replacing theory as the facts havebecome better known and their m utual relationsmore clearly perceived . And we venture to affirmthat if he be not prevented by prejudice from giving to the operations of the human mind in thisdepartment of knowledge

‘

such confidence as he


226 PROGRESSI VE ORTH OD OXY.

istic treatment of the Old Testam ent Sc rlptures.

It does not think that its methods can be morefairly distrusted because some have used them im

perfectly ( as it hopes to show) than those of physical science can be im pugned because som e greatbiologists have believed that they could establishmaterialism by scientific treatm ent of vital facts .

The attitude taken towards Old Testam ent studies in som e quarters is but a denial of the claimsof historical science . Those who adhere to andpreach this intellectual Sadduc ee1sm m doing soare fighting against Christianity, which in all itsappeal to the human mind justifies man’ s c onfidence in his own faculties . They might easilyhave learned from the experience of the churchthat attempts to make man believe science an impossibili ty must inevitably result in disc rediting anysystem or faith in whose behalf they are made .We must not assum e that the prejudic e felt bymany towards the scientific study of the Old Testament is due entirely to the distinctive positions ofrationalistic scholars . It m ust be owned that

"

theleading evangelical students of the Old Testam entwho belong to the progressive school suggestchanges in the ordinary conception of Hebrew his .tory

,which

,in the judgment of some , Christian

faith cannot consent to make . But until it hasbeen clearly shown that Christian faith is irrevoeably com m itted to the entire correctness of thetraditional View of the development of the Hebrewlife

,the prejudice has no sound fe lm dation. The

THE SCRIPTURES. 227

revision of the ancient interpretation of such passages of the Old Testament as lie next the dom ainof physical science should m ake us very slow to believe that advancing hi storical inquiry may not re

quire a sim ilar modification of our view of OldTestament history. But our implicit acceptanceof Christ’s teachings is an essential part of Christian faith.

” Yes,and has evangelical Biblical

science come into antagonism with any teachingof Christ in its assertions about the compositionor structure of the Old Testam ent " “ He has asc ribed the Pentateuch to Moses, and the laterchapters of Isaiah to the prophet cal led by that

3 ,nam e . No , He has m ade no such ascription . \

He has in quotation followed the Jewish habit ofnam ing the hec k from its reputed author. It is afair question as to whether, in the act of speaking,the person of the author was before his m ind .

Certainly He had no thought of making the fact ofauthorship a part of his teaching. One m ight aswell claim that a minister comm its him self to theview that al l the book ascribed to Isaiah was written by that prophet

,in saying to a congregation

that he will read a chapter from the book of Isaiah .

And even if one is convinced that our Lord ao

c epted the traditional view of the authorship ofthe books in question , he cannot hold that Hisauthority is com m itted to that view until he hassatisfied him self that Christ claim ed to be om niscient during the days of his hum iliation ,— a be

lief irreconcilable with his own declaration that He


knew neither the day nor the hour of his secondcoming.

But has not Christ wrought into his teachingthe great facts of Hebrew history

,and thereby

committed Christianity to a certain construction ofthat history "” To the great constructive principlesof Hebrew hi story as given in the Old Testament

,

and to certain large facts in which the se principlesare embodied , he has certainly com mitted it . Indeed , his personality implies , as its antecedent onthe human side , such a national life and religiousfaith as we find depicted in the Hebrew Scriptures .But it has not been shown , we believe that it cannotbe shown, that the traditional conception of Hebrewhistory in its details finds a sanction in the teachingsof Christ. Who can maintain that He directly ordirectly taught that all the Pentateuchal legisla

tion was given in Moses ’s time " Who can find inhis words light as to the real nature of the changein the national life which caused the establishmentof the monarchy" Clearly, Christian faith mustleave the settlement of such questions to historicalscholarship . It has no reason to fear any conclusions to which science may come respecting thosesacred facts

,for it knows its own life to be some

thing which human opinions did not create , andwhich

,therefore

,no change - of hum an thinking can

destroy. Anyconceptions of history which are essential to its life it knows must be true , since Godwho has revealed himself to it through the mediumof these conceptions cannot lie . Therefore it should


280 PROGRESSI VE ORTH OD OXY.

spec tivelybear to the religious life of the Hebrewpeople, and to the divine revelation which that lifecontains . This inquiry involves , of course , thestudy of the historic revelation which lies back ofthese Scriptures

,and of which they are products

,

just as the study of the New Testam ent Scriptures involves the study of the revelation borne bytheir respective authors and expressing itself inthem . This assumption of spiritual principles running through the events of Hebrew history andjoining them into one teaching im plies that c onc eption of human history

,as shaped by God to ends of

revelation and redem ption,which the hum an mind

has rec e1ved from Chfistianity. Here,as through

out our discussion, we assume the truth of theChristian view of God in his relations to man .

The Christian belief that Christ is the culminationof God ’s historic revelation 1m plies such a conc eption of Hebrew history as our Lord himself had .

This must underlie Christian study of the OldCovenant Scriptures . To know the ancient dispensation as the Old Covenant is to know it as bothpreparatory of and explained by the New. To studyits Scriptures in their larger relation to its life isto study them in their relation to the purpose whichshaped that life .To try to know the Old Covenant revelationwithout seeking its com pletion in Christ is like exam ining a tree in midwinter. The various partsof the organism cannot be understood until thatappears for which the organism exists. And the

THE SCRIPTURES. 231

dignity of each element of this revelation can berightly estim ated from the Christian point of viewalone . If Christ is the suprem e and final revelation He is the test of all preceding revelation . Ifwe accept Him as God ’s suprem e and final revelation

,we m ust bring preceding revelation to this

test. We cannot escape the process of com parisonif we woul d. He brings us his own conception ofGod

,of life , of duty. It claim s to cover the whole

horizon of truth , and dem ands possession of everyspiritual and rational faculty. If we will have itas ours we m ust hold it separate from and aboveevery other. Whatever else com es to us as fromGod must present its credentials to Christ’s truthin our mind and hearts . This is not only the teaching of Christian faith it is the teaching of Christ.When He told us that certain precepts of the lawwere to be replaced by spiritual m axim s more inharm ony with the nature of God, He taught us toapply Christian principles to all the law and prophets , and to regard all in them which is not consistent with those principles as superseded by thenew revelation . For no one thinks

,surely, that

when He m ade exceptions to certain provisions ofthe Mosaic code

,He m erelyam ended a law which

whenever not am ended holds good . Such an interpretation woul d comm it his authority to theeternal validity of the sacrificial sv stem . N0 ; wemust with our Lord recognize a progress in revelation , and not attem pt to find in Old Testam entsaints , even the loftiest spirits of them all, the se


fuller and purer conceptions of God andhis wayswhich were brought into the world by the Iucarnation. And if we do not expect to find them inthe men, we shall not feel ourselves compelled todistort facts m the endeavor to find them in thebooks which the men wrote .Such use as we have been able to make of whatwe contend to be the one m ethod of finding out

what the Bible is will have disappointed som e ofour readers by not including a precise definition ofinspiration , or the activity of God upon the mindc ommunicating Christian truth or fact . But sucha definition is not needed to explain sacred Scripture , and indeed can

/

not be adequate to the facts,

both because the activity in question is not separable as to kind from God’s supernatural actionin creating and sustaining a regenerate life, and asa vital fact partakes of the mystery which belongsto that life ; and because it is not, in point of degree

,a constant quality, but varies with the indi

vidual through whom truth is com m unicated, andthe changing conditions of his life and work . Wehave never seen a definition of inspiration whichwas rooted in the realities of sacred history, notone which did not seem to us an attempt to infera cause for the Bible from such a product as theinventor desired to see in sacred Scripture . Whilewe no more venture to try to make one than to define the relation of God ’ s activity to the inspiredwords of Christ

,and do not think that the Bible ,

as a most complex and varl ed series of facts, can



We do not deny that the immediate c onnectionof sacred Scripture with the living facts of revelation has caused it to hear som e of the im perfections inherent in the nature of those facts so faras they belong to the life of man . This we see tobe incident to the method of God ’ s revelation

,and

the permanent fixing of that revelation in contem

poraneous Scripture . VVe can trust Him for theexcell ence of the method . Nay

,we can gratefully

recognize his adorable wisdom in selecting it ; s1nc ethe Bible , which brings the living reflection of hisself-revealing acts, is, in its reality and freshness,far m ore effective in putting men into contact withthe se acts than a perfect description of themmirac ulouslydictated could have been . We not onlyclaim that this our conception of the Scriptures islacking in no elem ent of reverential regard forthem

,since it presents them in their immediate

contact with the realities which most . deeply stirthe Christian heart, and as the only means bywhich those realities are known but we furtherclaim that it is the only Scriptural conception .

One who insists that the church view of Scripturemust be derived from a source outside Scripturalfacts is in this very thing unscriptural , unless hec an produce som e im m ediate declaration from theBible as to its own nature , ,

which declaration weaffirm

,as at the beginning

,cannot be produced .

We must, therefore , take the Biblical facts , to allChristians confessedly divine and revealing, as ourguide in this matter, or be m spl rit anti-Biblical .

THE S CRIP TURES . 235

For the fear that the aggressive power of Christianitywould be lessened by the general prevalenceof thi s conception of Scripture , we confess our

selves to have little respect. Christianity can neverlose headwayby com ing into truer conceptions ofanything. God will not let it suffer from findingout what the Bible is, and telling m en what it is .And its procedure in gaining m en’s hearts mustbe sim ply preaching Christ. If it be said that thepreaching

,in its full sense , im plies satisfying the

m ind that He is indeed the Christ, we answer thatmen sadlyham per them selves in their endeavor todo this by undertaking to establish

,as the nec es

sarypostul ate of his divine nature and mission, theperfection of a book whose chief ground to confidenc e is its connection with Him and m anifestpossession of his truth .

Christian Apologetics has enough work to do inproving Christ to reluctant minds , by m oral andspiritual data, without entangling itself in such anabsurd procedure as this .We m ight go further

,and insist that the antag

onistic view of a perfect book,produced by an as

sum ed series‘

of m iracles,superadded to the super

natural events in which God ’s hi storical revelationwas made, a book to whose every statem ent thedivine authority is com m itted

,weakens Christian

ity bybringing it into coll ision with historical andphysical science . But this argum ent we will notpress . For the i ssue is to be decided, not by exhibiting consequences , but by weighing facts .

CONCLUSION. CHRI STIANITY ABSOLUTE AND UNI

VERSAL .

THE preceding series of theological papers hasbeen a discussion of the prm c lpal doctrines of thegospel, in order to recognize some of the linesalong which advancing Christian thought has morerecently been moving. We have considered the Incarnation, the Atonem ent, Eschatology, the Workof the Holy Spirit

,the Christian, and the Bible ,

to discover in what respects clear and positive improvem ent has been made on statements of belief which once had general currency. We havenot pretended to create a theology, but only tomodify or to enlarge established doctrines . Whenwe have used the term New Theology it has beenonly as a convenient designation of a fresh movement in theological thought, only as the sym bolof a quickening which we share in com m on withmany others . In the exact use of term s there can ,of course , at this late day, b e no such thing as anew theology. We are not so silly as to supposethat modern religious thought is independent of anancestry. Sturdy growth has old roots . The truthwe study has engaged earnest thought throughout



religious knowledge men gain apart from the gospel " How is this universal gospel related to thoselarge numbers of the hum an fam ily who are en

tirely ignorant of it, and to the generations thathave passed away without knowledge of it" We

2

have been very far from affirming that the universal ityof the gospel has been only recently recognized, or that only the few accept it . On the contrary, we have taken for granted that no oneamong se -called' evangelical believers for an instantdenies it . It is one of those postulates which canbe assumed without debate in every discussion concerning the truths of the gospel . We have beenasking ourselves , and have been asking our readers ,not , Do you believe that Christianity is the su

preme and universal revelation of God to men "but, How much do you mean by its universalityand absolute supremacy

,and can you believe as

you do in this respect, and at the same tim e entertain certain oplm ons which seem to be excludedby the claims and the scope of Christianity " Tobelieve that besides the name of Jesus there isnone other nam e given under heaven am ongst menwhereby there can be salvation, to believe that ourLord spoke truly when He said, “No man comethto the Father but by me ,

” is of necessity to havecorresponding opinions concerning man ’s power toknow God without Christ, and concerning God

’spurpose to give men that knowledge and motive inthe absence of which they cannot be saved . It isthis enlarging thought of the gospel in its univer

CHRIS TIANI TY UNIVERSAL. 239

sality which is bringing em barrassm ent on thedefenders of all theologic al system s which wouldconfine the gospel within lim ited and arbitraryboundaries . It is this m ore generous recognitionof the scope of the gospel which, while it inspires alarger hope for the unchristian nations, at the sam etim e anim ates a great courage in proclaim ingamong them the religion of our Lord and SaviourJesus Christ .Let it not be forgotten

,however

,that only with

a great price has this freedom been obtained . Notto m ention earlier conflicts

,we are scarcely yet out

of the sound of warfare concerning the extent ofthe Atonem ent . It is not necessary to go out ofthe present century, nor indeed back of the oldergeneration still represented am ong us, to find our

selves by the side of those who contended earnestlyfor a universal as against a lim ited atonem ent .The greatest service of the New England Theologywas l n galnm g general assent to the universalityofatonem ent . In the ethical field its service was lessperm anent , though at the tim e more highly extoll ed . While it was , perhaps, enough to expect ofone generation that it should restore to use an es

sential principle, yet it m ust be adm itted that theNew England Theology failed to apply consistentlythe truth it had rescued . To this generation thetask rem ained of bringing other facts and opinionsinto harm ony with the principle of universality .

Our fathers were , concerned to show that universalatonement does not of necessity procure universal


salvation . The difierenc e was marked b etweensufficiency and efficiency, between atonement andredemption . The great outside world of heathendom being Impenetrable and practically unknown

,

the question had not becom e pressing,how an

atonement could be universal while nine tenths ofthe hum an race , through many centuries , had beenleft in total ignorance concerning it .Yet, although this universal character of thegospel is

‘

now generally recognized,it may be

clawed that at the present time conviction of it isdeeper because its grounds are better understood .

In the former tim e , besides the quotation of spec ific texts, it was custom ary to argue universalatonement from the divinity of Christ. A divineSaviour must be a Saviour sufficient for the re

demption of all m en. But we also find in thehumanity of Christ, with equal reason , the universalityof the gospel . As shown in the article on Incarnation

,the charac teristic of his humanity is that

He stands in universal relation to his brethren.

He is the universal man , the head of humanity,theSon of man . Also

,and this is perhaps the most

considerable of recent enl argements in Christianthought , we are finding in the Scriptural teachingof judgment by Christ confirmation of his universalrelation to men . We are learning that this m eansmore than that the judgment is divine and therefore cannot mistake , more than that it is sym pathetic and therefore will not be severe . SinceChrist is to judge the world, we know that the



sinful propensity and sinful character that theyhave not in them selves the power of renewal . Al

though some are less guilty than others, althoughsom e will receive a more lenient judgm ent thanothers

,the facts remain that all have sinned and

come short of the glory of God, and that left tothemselves there is no hope of salvation .

The universality of atonement has been insistedon both in the treatm ent of that subject and inthe discussion of other doctrines .The indispensableness of faith in Christ in order

that sinful man may be restored to sonship withGod has been repeatedly affirmed and continuallyassumed .

(I

We have accepted these postulates in their lengthand breadth. We have not reduced but ratherhave magnified their meaning . We are perfectlyaware that a tremendous claim is thus made forChristianity

,in respect both to the sufficiency of

atonem ent and to the exclu sion of any other wayof salvation

,but we believe the claim is explicitly

supported by Scripture , and inseparable from“

anyjust thought of Christianity as a divine revelation .

A natural inference from these prem l ses 1s thatevery one will know God as He is revealed in thelove and sacrifice of Jesus Christ . If Christ was

g1v en for the whole world, _and if no one can besaved except by faith in Christ

,we are alm ost

driven to the conclusion that Christ will be m adeknown to every individual of the human race in allthe generations past, present, and future, and that

CHRI S TIANI TY UNIVERSAL. 243

everlasting destiny is determ ined for everypersonby his acceptance or rejection of Christ . This conelusion we have therefore gladly and unhesitatinglyadopted . We have not

,however, expressed as pos

itive an opinion concerning the circum stances andseasons within which Christ will be revealed tothose who do not know Him in the earthly life .But we frankly adm it that it seem s to us probablethat those who in this life have no knowledge ofChrist will not be denied that knowledge , with itscorresponding opportunity, after death . Still, somuch that is perplexing rem ains in respect to God’sdealing with the nations of heathendom that wewill not be so presum ptuous as to press our opinionon any who are not ready to receive it, nor so vainas to suppose that we have found a com plete solution of one of the deepest m ysteries of God’s governm ent of the world . We are content to m aintainthese three postulates, and to let them establishsuch conclusions as appear m ost reasonable in thelight of candid and reverent reflection .

Som etim es acceptance of a truth becom es m oreconfident when the alternatives to it are clearlyrecognized . If this or that alternatl v e m ust be re

jec ted, the opinion which rem ains will have m oreprobability. The alternative is to surrender oneor m ore of the three postulates we have m entioned .

It m aybe denied that m an has in him self no powerto escape from sin

,or that atonem ent is universal,

or that faith in Christ is indispensable to salvation .

One alternative , then, is the theory that atone


ment was made only for the elect . God chosesome from all e ternity unto salvation . Then Hesent . his Son to redeem them , but not to redeemany others . Atonement was made for only part ofthe hum an family. It was sufficient for the purpose . So , besides the elect who have actuallyknown Christ, there are elect infants and electheathen who in some mysterious way

_are saved bymeans of the Atonement . This theory surrendersthe second postulate . The Atonement is not universal . It holds that sin is universal , and thatfaith in Christ is indispensable , but denies that theAtonement is universal . It has the merit of consistency . There is need to argue the questionhow Christ could have suflered for the whole world,while yet the vast majority of m en die withoutknowledge of Christ, for it is not adm itted thatChrist did suffer for the whole world . But its consistency is bought at a terrible price . ~ The conc eption of God is unscriptural, the doctrine ofChrist is unchristian , and that sentiment or consc iousness which is the product of the gospel is outraged . That alternative we have not even argued.

Such a gospel cannot be preached . Such a Godcannot be loved .

Another, and really the only other, alternative isthe surrender of both the first and third postul ates .By im plication it is denied that faith in Christ isindispensable to salvation when it is argued thatthose who have not the gospel can be saved fromthe1r s1ns notwithstanding. If the light of reason



only ln the affirm ative . How, then , does it appearthat knowledge of Christ i s indispensable to salvation " And if they were saved by living up tothe light they had, why may not conscientious evenif more ignorant heathen also be saved " To thesequestions we must reply, as we replied before , thatthe knowledge of God granted to the Jews was different in kind from the knowledge attainable byothers , and that we therefore are not justified inargum g from the Jews to the Gentiles . The Jewsoccupied an exc eptional position . They were therecipients of a special revelation from God. Theywere vouchsafed a knowledge of God along lineswhich led on to the cOm plete revelation in Christ.They knew the r lghteousness and compassion ofGod . Above all

,they had learned that God seeks

man in pity and forgiveness for his redemption.

With Abraham in som e dim but real vision theysaw the day of Christ . This would prove that itis not indispensable to salvation that one shouldknow Christ in the actual circum stances of hisearthly work . But there was a real foreshadowingof Christ such as was not opened to the Gentile nations . That revelation , even now, is found to havebeen so intimately related to the complete revela-v

tion in Christ that we bind up the record of it withthe gospel to make our Bible —in its indissoluble or

ganic unity. It m ayalso be repeated that the belief has always been cherished that devout Jewswere brought after death to their full salvationthrough the knowledge of Christ . But the Jews

CHRISTIANI TY UNIVERSAL . 247

present no real exception to'

our principle , for salvation was m ade known to them through the atoning and redeem ing love of God, and Judaism i sinseparable from Christianity. But when we areasked to go farther, to argue from the Jews to theheathen, from the Psalm s to the Vedas , from theProphets to the books of Confucius , to believe thatthe light of reason and conscience without any revelation whatever differs not in kind but in degreeonly from Christianity

,we confess ourselves unable

to follow. When,in order to save the postulate of

faith in Christ ( for there evidently is no other reason, since observed facts would never suggest it) ,when it is soberly argued that the com parativelygood heathen are saved by their faith in Christ

,

although they never heard of Him , that Christ isessentially known when He is not known at all

,we

reallymust be excused from m aking so fancifuldiscriminations . It is intelligible that those whodo not know Christ durm g the earthly life will belost, for want of that knowledge although we cannot bring ourselves so to believe . It is intelligiblethat those who do not know Chris t during theearthly life may yet live so righteously that theywill have a place in the kingdom of the redeem edat last ; although such persons are confessedly seldom found, and when they are supposed to befound it is believed that they ultimatelyknow Godin Christ, and thus only are redeem ed from theirsin . It is intelligible

,and we think probable

,that

those who do not know Christ during the earthl y

248 PROCRESSIVE ORTHODOX Y.

life will know Him in the life beyond . The extension of tim e seems necessary to the absolute anduniv ersal religion . But it is in our opinion neitherintelligible nor probable that men are saved by aChrist of whom they know nothing whatever. Thistheory we can best characterize still as salvationbymagic. We have pondered it well

,and think it

leaves Paul ’s question still unanswered : Howshall they believe in Him of whom they have notheard"” We are slow to conclude that men aresaved from their s1ns and restored to sonship withGod without know mg Christ and believing in Him .

We are not convinced that character becomes fixedm r ness and likeness to ‘God apart fromthe gospel. Some conscientiousness there may be ,some moral amendment

,some conformity to the

light given . In such cases men are not hopelesslycondemned

,for they are c ap able of salvation . But

are they redeem ed from sin Are theyWalk lng mnewness of life " Have they the purity and libertyof the children of God " Would there not be radical changes if Christ were known and received "Let us remem ber that the question is not concerning the blameworthiness of those who have beenobedient to the light they have . The question iswhether any besides those who receive Christ havepower to become the sons o f God , whether theycan be saved in any sufficient meaning of salvationunless either before death

,or at death, or after

death, the light of the knowledge of the glory ofGod shines upon them in the face of Jesus Christ .


250 PROCRESSIVE ORTHODOX Y.

remaining signs of moral health" Whatever maybe the fact, we certainly have not a knowledge ofmen s ufi c ient to warrant us in affirming that anyone to whom Christ has not been made known isalready incapable of salvation . We do not dareto affirm as m uch of any individual who has ap

parentlybecom e fi xed in wickedness and unbeliefunder the full blaze of the light of the gospel .The mighty working of the Holy Spirit in corrupthearts has so often reversed our judgment that wehave learned to despair of none . Much less , then,is it permissible to conclude that any heathen

,

however wicked he maybe , but who has not heardof Christ, is hopelessly lost . And if such a onegoes out of the world, as millions do, without knowledge of Chr ist

,who shall dare to say, in the ab

sence of any word of Scripture to that eflec t, thatthe clear light and the mighty m otive of the gospelwill be withheld foreverIt seem s to be thought by some that our prin

c ipal contention has been to show that no one canbe saved without knowledge of Chr ist, and that ifa few exceptions - could be discovered our principlewoul d be overthrown. But we have been endeavoring to show that no one can be lost without having .

had knowledge of Christ. The Jews and the piousheathen have been cited to prove that salvation is

p ossible without knowledge of the historic Christ,and consequently it has been concluded that ourprinciple breaks down . But even if we should haveto admit that some abatement must be made from

CHRISTIANITY UNI VERSAL. 251

a strict interpretation of our principle so as to makeroom for these exceptions , we should still press themain question . The real difficulty is that millionsof m en die , not only without knowledge of the gospel

, but also without showing signs of moral renewal

,and we ask

,Are all these multitudes

,through

so m any generations , hopelessly lost " Opinionsmay differ about the salvation of the few exceptionally virtuous heathen . But opinions cannot diff erabout the masses of heathendom who die in theirsins . Must we , can we , believe that they are eternallydam ned " Is it possible that God will neverbring to them the light and m otive of the gospel ofJesus Christ" We think, indeed, as we have re

peatedlyargued, that salvation in any proper senseof the term is realized only by faith in Christ

,that

conscientious heathen have only a capacity more orless for redem ption . Neither have we at any pointso narrowly interpreted Christianity as to lim itknowledge of Christ to acquaintance with the factsof the earthl y life of Jesus of Nazareth . We havemeant knowledge of God ’s atoning and redeem inglove ,

'

which the Jews received dim lywi thout knowing the historic Christ which

,we believe

,is given

after death to those who,seeing Him for the first

tim e , see Him as He is , perhaps without the intervention of biography and history

,but which

,we

think, is not in any intelligible sense given to theheathen nations before death . Therefore , when itis asked, Are not som e persons saved without knowledge of Christ"we answer, Possibly ; although, ex


c ept the Jews , to whom a revelation was made , redeemed persons outside Christendom are admittedto be exceedingly few. But when all has been conc eded ou that side that can possibly be claimed

,the

real difficulty remains as grave and persistent asbefore .

“

Are multitudes of men lost without knowledge of God’s atoning and redeeming love in JesusChrist" Can they be finally and absolutely condem ned if they have known nothing of God’s finaland absolute revelation of himself to mankind "Can any one be hopelessly lost who has not somuch as heard of Him who tasted death for everyman " We , therefore, contend that universal judgm ent by Christ means that every man is to bejudged by his relation to Christ ; that no onewillbe forever condem ned unless he has rej ected the salvation which is in Jesus Christ.It should, perhaps , be explicitly stated, in orderto prevent m isapprehension , that our Opinion thatthe heathen after death will obtain knowledge ofChrist does not mean that their probation c on

tinues on and on till the day of judgment , whilethe probation of others is lim ited to this life . Thatknowledge of Christ which is decisive may comeimmediately after death , so that probation speedilycom es to an end . Our contention is that destinyis determined by one ’s relation to Christ, and thattherefore to every one Christ, sooner or later, willbe made known . The judgm ent day is the end ofprobation for the race as a whole . Then everyland , every nation , every generation , will have



ture denounces endless woe on heathen who havenever heard of Christ, and that, therefore , we cannot be required to believe that their doom ishope

less ; that when the few sporadic instances of piousheathen are pointed to for relief they are foundto be inadequate to solve the trem endous problem .

He therefore relegates the whole matter to infinitewisdom and justice and love . He does not be lievethat the heathen are lost

,nor that the few moral

,

even if essentially Christian,heathen relieve the

immense difficulty, and therefore he is a Christianagnostic , com mitting the world in trium phantfaith and hope to the Infinite Father. He ex

plic itlydeclares thatwe can neither see nor affirmWhat becom es of the heathen hereafter. To thisconclusion a majority of Christians have probablycome . It certainly shows great progre ss that thisposition is quite generally held . Much is gainedwhen untenable theories are intelligently abandoued . It 1s an im portant discovery as wel l asadm ission that the Bible nowhere teaches thatheathen who have never heard the gospel are hopelessly lost . Therefore

,when it is said that the

Scripture does not teach that the heathen have opportunity of salvation after death, we can at leastreply that it does not preclude that hope , for itnowhere teaches that the heathen are lost, and thattheir opportunity is lim ited to this life . But wehave no contention with the agnostic, and we thinkhe has no reason to have contention with us . Weare agreed in rejecting certain outworn and um

CHRI STIANI TY UNI VERSAL. 255

christian theories . He does not deny that God’sway m ay be to give knowledge of Christ afterdeath

,only he is not at present convinced . He

will adm it that such a m ethod is not unworthy ofGod nor unreasonable in itself. When ignoranceis confessed under the saying that God will dowhat is right

,we, of course, agree . N0 one be

liev es that God will do what is wrong. Our conv ic tion, however, is that the revelation of God inChrist enables us to understand in certain respectswhat is right for God to do or not to do . We believe it is right for God to judge the world byJesus Chr ist, for we therefore believe that thejudgment of m en is determ ined by their relationto H im who has already been m ade known to themas Saviour. Agnosticism on this subject is likelyto be tem porary. It is a resting-place where onestands who has c ut loose from unchristian theories .Search of the Scriptures and profounder study ofChristianity will be likely to carry him on to theprinciple we have so often enunciated and em pha

sized . We think agnosticism can properly rem ainonlyconcerning the m ode in which that principlewill be applied to m en in the great variety of theirmoral condi tions .We have dwelt on the relation of the heathenworld to the gospel longer than m ight seem necessary. The reason is that the gravest objectionto the universality and absoluteness of Christianityis at this very point. The Scriptural representations of the gospel

,and its intrinsic character,


show it to be universal ; yet, as matter of fact,only a sm all fraction of the hum an race in the longsuccession of the ages has even heard of Jesu sChrist. How, then , it m ayfairly be asked , can itbe considered the universal religion " The acute

“

Strauss urges the force of this obj ection . He declares that, since so large a portion of mankindknow nothing Of Christianity, it cannot be nec essary to salvation

,because not the universal re

ligion ; and that, if certain virtuous heathen are

saved, then the gospel is proved not to be the universal religion , because not necessary to salvation .

1

The only reply 1s that until the gospel does fill thewhole earth knowledge of it must be given afterdeath to those who are deprived of its blessings before death .

We need not linger to review the several articlesof our series in the light of the absoluteness ofChristianity. The Incarnation shows Christ theuniversal man vitally related to the whole hum anrace . The Atonement shows Christ suflering withthe race and for the race , and thereby giving mankind a power it coul d not otherwise have . TheHoly Spirit uses as highest and final m otive forevery m an the truth as it 1s m Jesus . Man can bebrought to “God only through Christ the Sav iour ofthe world . The Bible is the suprem e authority forman

,because it em bodies the gospel of the only be

gotten Son of God .

We have also endeavored to show that there c an1 Christliche Glaubenslehre, i. pp . 268- 274 .



way,whether in pretence or m truth, Christ is pro

claimed ; and therein I rejoice, yea, and wil l rej oice .” We may not discourage those who

'

preach

Christ because they believe that the heathen nothaving the gospel in this life are hopelessly lost.Neither may they discourage those who go forthwith enthusiasm to proclaim Christ who is the onlyRedeemer and rightful King of men, and whosekingdom is a universal and an everlasting kingdom .

Both in respect to our thinking and our toil wemay share the expectation of the great apostle whowas both theologian and missionary, when he said,Till we all attain unto the unity of the faith, andof the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a fullgrown man , unto the measure of the stature of the

fulness of Christ.”


THE ANDOVER REVIEW.

NOTICES OF THE PRESS .

The Andover Rev iew is m ak ing theologyof interest to persons

who are not theologians . No religious m onthlyperiodic al thatc om es to us is quite so interesting from a popular point of v iew,

and yet without anyapparent effort to be so . New York Times.

The Andover Review for Novem ber opens with a paper on

The New Educ ation,

” byProfessor Palm er, of Harvard, whichis a v igorous defense . I t is to be followed in the suc c eeding num

bers with further disc ussions byother teachers. This is puttinga rev iew to good serv ic e . The editorial work is full, rich, andSpicyas usual . The I ndependent (New York).

People look with expec tancyto the Andover Review for freshand popular treatm ent of soc ial and ethic al subjec ts, as well as forscholarly c ritic ism s and able handling of theolog ic al and philoSophic al problem s . Christian Union (New York ).

The Rev iew c loses its first year with a rec ord of work in theSphere of theology, philosophy, c ritic ism , and soc ial discussionwhichhas never been surpassed in English periodic al literature,and has m ade a strong im pression upon the religious and thoughtful life of the whole c ountry. I ts m ore original artic les havegone far to instruc t the m inds and change the Opinions of theleaders of thought.—Boston H era ld.

The Andov er Rev iew of Marchhas a v ery sensible editorialartic le on Com m on School Methods . I t would be useful to takethis essay, c onvert it into a trac t

,and c irc ulate it widelyam ong

teachers, parents, and Boards of Educ ation. I t c ertainlyWouldgive them som ething to think of .—New York Observer.

The Andover Review is m aintaining the highposition whichittook in the relig ious and intellec tual world withits first num ber.

In our judgm ent it has no equal in the field whichit oc c upies .

The Advanc e (Chic ago).

Always liberal and progressive , it has been an honest exponentof m odern religious thought, though none the less orthodox inal l the essentials of Christianity. Ev ery leading question hasbeen disc ussed

,thoughtfullyand ably, by som e of the preem inent

theologic al writers of the age . I t not onlydisc usses the theore tic al questions that agitate the tim e , but is strong and prac tic al indealing withthe great questions rising c onstantly in the work of

thl

e

phurch throughout the world . The Da ilyAmerican (Nashv

vi le

In its thoroughly satisfac tory progress, the Andover Rev iewhas bec om e a strong expounder of soc ial questions of the day

,

and prom ises a future of great influenc e. I t is both earnest andthoroughlyaliv e to c urrent thought, and looks to the highest inm oral ityand religion. Boston Journal .

We hear no rev iew m ore frequentlyreferred to or quoted fromnowadays than the Andov er Rev iew,

which seem s to have c on

f l ou ted the public m ind— the thinking sides of it— in an nu

usual degree, and to be awakening , if not form ing , nbl ic opinionson a good m anyim portant questions. Literary 14

1/10e (Boston).

The Andover Rev iew, for the average preacher, is the best inthis c ountry. I t is v ersatile

,up to the tim es, scholarly, non-sec ta

rian,evangelic al, progressiv e . Besides, it is a m onthly; thus by

its frequencym aking its appearanc e the m ore welc om e . I t alwaysc om es to hand prom ptlyat the first of the m onth. M issionaryRec ord (S t. Louis).

In ev erynum ber we find som ething to be espec iallypreserv ed.

The Churchman (New York).

The Andov er Review,whichhas reached the end of the sec ond

year of its l ife,has c om e to the front of periodic als of its c lass in

Am eric a . P rim arilyreligious and theologic al, it is also literaryand full of artic les of prac tic al worth. The sudden em inenc e to

which this rev iew has sprung is partlydue to the frankness and

fearlessness withwhichv iews m ore in ac c ord withm odern thoughtthan with anc ient dogm a are se t forth. For thoughAndov er isorthodox its stafi" of theologic al professors are not sleepilyorthodox .—Morning Hera ld (Halifax).

The departm ents of B iblic al and Historic al Critic ism and of

Theologic al and Religious Intelligenc e are unusuallygood. The

Andov er Review has reached the front rank , and m aintains its

plac e . The Christian Advoc ate (New York ).

In the Andov er Rev iew rational orthodoxyhas a strong and

fearless cham pion. While it is readyto prov e all things ,”it is

not afra id to“ hold fast that which is good,” sim plybec ause it

happens to be old . The great fault of m ost of the apostles of

new ideas is that theyare unable to see anything good in that

whichis old. The Andover Rev iew is supposed to be the m onth

piec e of the new theology; but it nev er fails to do substantial justic e to the old theology, a v irtue which a great m anyso-c alledleaders of m odern thought m ight do well to im itate . New York

Tribune.

The first v olum e of the Andover Review has been,c ertainly, a

brilliant suc c ess in the patronage it has sec ured, in the c ordialrec eption it has rec eived from both the relig ious and sec ul ar

press , and in the abilityand v arietyof its literaryand apologe ticc ontributions. "ion

’

s H era ld ( Boston).

On the whole , the Andover Review is dem onstrating its raison

d’

etre, and deserves to be, as it is, the m ost popular religious re

view in Am eric a to-day. The Religious H era ld (Cong ).

The Andover Review c ontinues to be m anly, frank , thoughtful ,and progressive . I t is bec om ing evident that the Andov er theology, as at present, is a new leaven rather than a new departure.

b'

pringfield Rep ublic an.

NO rec ent religious rev iew has assum ed prom inenc e m ore

swiftlyor deserved it m ore thoroughly.—Philadelphia Press.

The Andover Rev iew is deservedlypopular, bec ause it m eets

a general want and never fails to fulfil l its high prom ise . I ts

matter,always varied, is adapted to a varietyof scholarlytastes.

The Messenger (Philadelphia).

For the scholarlydisc ussion Of the m ost rec ent phases of religious thought we know of nothing superior to it.

- P ittsburghChristianAdvoc ate.

The Andover Rev iew well sustains the reputation generallyac

c orded to it am ongst our neighbors ; the m ost valuable theologic al m agazine published (On this c ontinent. The Week (TOronto, Canada).

The Andover Review, an Am eric an religious and theologicalm onthly, which deserv es attention and welc om e on thi s s1de the

Atlantic . The Christian World (London).

The Septem ber Andover Review brings to a c lose a series Of

well-c onsidered artic les on The Religious P roblem of the Coun

tryTown,

”espec iallyas theyhave it in the growinglyhetero

geneous towns Of New England. Thi s num ber of the Andover

is, like its predec essors, an able and readable addition to our re

view literature . The E vangelist (New York).

The Andover Review is always one Of the m ost suggestive and

valuable reviews of the problem s Of life . Evening Traveller

(Boston).

HOUGHTON, MIFFLIN AND COMPANY,

4 PARK ST., BOSTON.


2 e zg zons zc atzons 0

John Brown, B . A .

JOHN BUNYAN : H is Life, Tim es, and Works. WithPortrait and I ll ustrations . 8vo

,

John Bunyan.

THE PILGRIM’

S PROGRESS . New P op u lar Edition,fromnew plates. WithArchdeac onAllen’

s Life Of Bunyan (illustrated),and Mac aulay’s Essayon Bunyan. 62 wood-c uts . 12m o

,

TH E SAME . Holiday E dition, c om prising , in addition tothe P opular Edition

”

, a steel portrait Of Bunyan,and eight c olored

plates. 8vo,full gilt,

Lydia Maria Child.

LO OKING TOWARD S SUNSET . A book for those who are

approaching the evening of life . 12m O, gilt top, half c alf

,

$5100.

j am es Freem an Clarke , D . D .

TEN GREAT RELIGIONS. An Essay in Com parativ e Theology. Withan Index .

(8vo

,half c alf

,

TH E SAME . 12m o.

CONTENT S : Ethnic and Catholic Religions ; Confuc ius and theChinese ; Brahm anism ; Buddhism ,

or the P rotestantism of the East ;"oroaster and the "end Av esta ; The Gods of Egypt ; The Gods OfGreec e ; The Religion Of Rom e ; The Teutonic and S c andinav ianReligion ; The JewishReligion ; Moham m ed and I slam ; The TenReligions and Christianity.

TEN GREAT RELIGIONS . Part I I . A Com parison of allReligions. 8vo, half c alf

,

TH E SAME . 12m o.

CONTENTs : Desc ription and Classification ; Spec ial Types, Lawof D ev elopm ent ; Origin and D ev elopm ent of al l Religions ; TheI dea Of God in all Relig ions ; Anim ism ,

Polytheism ,Pantheism

, D i

theis1n ,Trithe ism ,

and Mono theism ; The Soul and its Transm igra

tions in all Religions ; The Orig in of the World in al l Religions :

Ev olution,Em anation

,and Creation ; P rayer and Worship in al l

Religions ; Inspiration and Art in all Religions Ethic s in all Religions ; Idea of a Future State in al l Religions ; The Future ReligionOf Mankind.

The author has given the world a bOOk unique in design and exe

c uzion in its attem p t to trac e the doc trines we have nam ed through

a ll religions the work has no predec essor. The Churchman (NewYork ).

COMMON-SEN SE IN RELIGION . A Series Of Essays.

12m O,

As the c om m on-sense of religion is the m ost c ertain realityOf all

life,the title Of these essays is adm irably chosen. I t m ust arrest at

tention in fac e Of the c onservative determ ination to relegate religionto the dom ain Of darkness, dream s

,disease, myths, and other unc ero

tainties. Advertiser (Boston).

Hang/tion, Mzfii in c‘b' Co. 3

Joseph Cook .

BIOLOGY. WithPreludes on Current Events. EighteenthEdition. 3 c olored illustrations.

TRAN SCENDENTALISM . WithPre ludes on Current Events.

ORTH ODOX Y. WithPreludes on Current Events.

CONSC IENCE . WithPreludes on Current Events.HEREDITY. WithPreludes on Current Events .

MARRIAGE . WithPreludes on Current Events.

LABOR . WithPreludes on Current Events .

SOC IAL ISM . WithPreludes on Current Events.

OCC IDENT . WithPreludes on Current Events. (A newvolum e . )

ORIENT . With Preludes on Current Events. (A newvolum e .) ( In P ress . )Eachvolum e

,12m o

,

Mr. Cook did not take up the work he has ac c om plished as a trade,

or byac c ident, or from im pulse ; but for years he had been preparingfor it, and prepared for it byan overrul ing guidanc e . He lightens and thunders, throwing a v ivid light on a topic byan expressionor c om parison,

or striking a presum ptuous error as bya bolt fromheav en.

—JAMES MCCOSH , D . D .

Rev . M. Creighton.

HISTORY OF THE PAPACY DURING TH E PERIOD OF THE

REFORMAT ION . Vol . I . The Great S chism —The Counc il of

Constanc e , 13 78—1418 . Vol . I I . The Counc il Of Basel—ThePapal Restoration, 1418—1464 . 2 vols . 8 vo

,

Thom as De Quinc ey.

ES SAY S ON CHRISTIANITY, PAGANISM, AND SUPERSTITION .

12m o,

The Dham m apada.

TEX TS FROM THE BUDDH IST CANON, c omm onlyknown as

Dham m apada, with ac c om panying Narratives . Translated fromthe Chines e by SAMUEL BEAL, P rofessor of Chinese , UniversityCollege , London. 8vo

, gilt top,

Professor J . L . Dim an.

TH E TH EISTIC ARGUMENT AS AFFECTED BY RECENTTHEOR IES . Edited by P rofessor GEORG E P . FISHER . Crown

8 vo,

The author has su c c eeded in m aking it c lear that rec ent sc ienc eim pels us to a point where the nec essityOf adm itting the existenc e Of

God is irresistible ; that its m ost elevated c onc eptions and widest

4 Rel ig ious P ublications of

generalizations render it ne c essary to ac c ept the presenc e and c on

stant effic ient energyOf God as realities ; and that the m odes Of oper

ation which sc ienc e disc loses are in harm onywith the fundam entalprinc iples and pos tulates Of Christianity. B ritl ShQuarterlyReview.

D r. D im an c onc edes to his opponents everyadvantage Of debate ,adopts their phraseology, follows their m e thods Of reasoning , grants ,

to them everyprinc iple that theyhav e es tab lished whollyor approxi

m ately, and , indeed, a great deal that is sc arc elym ore than c onjecture and yet he is able to present a defense Of theistic doc trine thatwill seem m ost adm irable and m ost c onsolatoryto its adherents and

m ost em barrassing to s om e of its enem ies . He has c onduc ted theWhole disc ussion withrare ability,

and has furnished sound reasoningat ev ery suc c essive step . Tim es (New York ).

ORATION S AND E S SAYS , W ITH SELE CTED PARISH SERMONS .

A Mem orial Volum e,witha portrait. 8vo

, gilt top,This volum e c ontains, in addition to other papers , the following

S erm ons : The Son Of Man ; Christ, the Way,the Truth, and the

Life ; Christ, the B read Of Life ; Christ in the P ower Of His Resur

rec tion ; The HolySpirit, the Guide to Truth; The Baptism Of theHolyGhost ; The Kingdom Of Heav en and the Kingdom of Natureand a Rev iew entitled Religioii in Am eric a, 1776

—1876 .

JosephE’

dkins , D . D .

CH INE SE BUDDH ISM . A volum e of Sketches, Historic al,D esc riptiv e, and Critic al . 8vo

, gilt top,

Eight S tudies Of the Lord’

s Day.

12m o,

A thoughtful exam ination of the Sc riptural and historic al groundsfor the Observanc e of Sunday.

HughDav eyEvans , LL . D .

A TREATISE ON TH E CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE OF MARRIAGE .Witha Biographic al S ketchOf the Author , and an Appendix c ontaining Bishop Andrewes

’ “Disc ourse against Sec ond Marriage,

”

etc . 12m o,

Ludwig Feuerbach.

THE ES SENCE OF CHRISTIANITY. Translated from theS ec ond Germ an Edition byMARIAN EVAN S (George Eliot). 8vo,

g ilt top,John FIske .

TH E DESTINY OF MAN,VIEWED IN THE LIGHT OF H I S

ORIG IN. 16m o, $1 00 .

TH E UNS EEN WORLD , AND OTH ER E S SAYS . 12m 0,

TH E IDEA OF GOD AS AFFECTED BY MODERN KNOWLEDGE . A Sequel to The Des tiny Of Man. 16m o .


6 Rel ig ious P ublications of

HenryJam es.

TH E SECRET OF SWEDENBORG . Being an Eluc idation Ofhis Doc trine Of the D iv ine Natural Hum anity. 8 vo, $2 .50.

We adm ire the m etaphysic al ac uteness , the logic al power , and thesingular literaryfoi c e Of the book , which is also rem arkable as c arrying into theologic al writing som e thing besides the hard words Of

sec ular dispute, and as presenting to the world the great questionsof theology in som ething beside a Sabbath-day dress.

—Atlantic.MonthlySOC IETY TH E REDEEMED FORM OF MAN

, AND THE EARNE ST OF GOD ’ S OMN IPO TENCE I N HUMAN NATURE . Affirm ed in

Letters to a Friend. 8vo,

S am uel Johnson.

ORIENTAL RELIGIONS , AND TH EIR RELATION To UNIVERSALRELIGION. By SAMUEL JOHNS ON.

I ND IA. 8VO, 810 pages, $5 .00 , half c alf, $8 .00.

Sam uel Johnson’S rem arkable WOI k IS devoted whollyto the religions and c iv ilization Of India, is the result Of twentyyears

’study

and reflec tion byone Of the soundest scholars and m ost acu te thinkers of New England, and m ust be treated with all respec t, whetherwe c onsider its thoroughness, its logic al reasoning , or the c onc lusionunac c eptable to the m ajority, no doubt—at which it arrives. Re

public an (Springfield).CH INA . 8vo, 1000 pages, half calf,Altogether the work Of Mr. Johnson is an extraordinarily rich

m ine Of reliable and far-reaching inform ation on all literarysubjec tsc onnec ted withChina . . He dec idedly im presses us as an authorityon Chinese subjec ts .

—E . J. EITEL,yP .h D .

,Editor of The China

Review (Hong Kong ).

PERSIA. 8vo,8 29

"

pages, half c alf,LECTURE S

,E SSAYS

,AND SERMON S . With a portrait, and

Mem oir by Rev . SAMUEL LONGFELLOW . Crown 8vo, gilt top,

This v olum e c ontains,in addition to a Mem oir Of Mr. Johnson and

other artic les, Serm ons on theLaw Of the Blessed Life , Gain inLoss,

The Search for God, Fate, Living byFaith, The Dutyof Delight,and Transc endentalism .

Thom as S tarr King.

CHRI STIANITY AND HUMANITY. Serm ons . Edited, witha Mem oir

,byEDW IN P . WH IPP LE . Fine steel portrait. 16m o

,

$2 .00.

Houg/ztou, M ifil iu Co. 7

The Koran.

SELECTIONS FROM TH E KORAN . ByEDWARD WILLIAMLANE . Sec ond Edition

,revised and enlarged, withan Introduc tion

bySTANLEY LANE POOLE . 8 vo, g ilt top,

See WHERRY (Rev . E .

Alvan Lam son,D . D .

TH E CHURCH OF THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES ; or, NOtic es of the Lives and Opinions Of the EarlyFathers, with spec ialreferenc e to the D oc trine Of the Trinity illustrating its late orig in

and gradual form ation. Rev ised and enlarged edition. 8vo,

LucyLarc om .

BREATH INGS OF THE BETTER LIFE .

“ Little Classicstyle . 18m o

,half c alf,

A book Of choic e selec tions from the best religious writers Of all

tim es .

HenryC. Lea.

SACERDOTAL CELIBACY IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH .

Sec ond Edition, c onsiderablyenlarged. 8vo

,

One Of the m ost valuable works that Am eric a has produc ed. Sinc ethe great historyof D ean Milm an

,I know no work in Englishwhich

has thrown m ore light on the m oral c ondition Of the Middle Ages,and none whichis m ore fit ted to dispel the gross illusions c onc erningthat period whichPositiv e writers and writers Of a c ertain ec c lesiastic al school hav e c onspired to sustain. W. E . H . LECKY, in H istoryof Europ eanMora ls .

Sam uel Longfellow and S am uel Johnson.

HYMNS OF THE SPIRIT . 16m o, roan,A c ollec tion Of rem arkable exc ellenc e .

W. A . Mc Vic kar, D . D .

LIFE OF THE REV. JOHN MCVI CKAR, S . T. D . Withportrait . Crown 8vo,

William Mountford.

EUTHANASY ; or, Happy Talk towards the End of Life.New Edition

,12m o

, gilt top,

Rev . T. Mozley.

REMINISCENCE S, chieflyOf Oriel Col lege and the Oxford

Mov em ent . 2 vols. 16m O, half c alf,

0

Many before now—Oakley,Froude

,Kennard

,not to m entio

n

Newm an him self—have c ontributed to the storyOf the Trac tarIan

8 Rel ig ious P ubl ic ations of

Movem ent. None Of these,not even the fam ous Apologia, will c om

pare withthe volum es now before us in respec t to m inute fullness,

c lose personal observation, and charac teristic touches.—Professor

PATT ISON, in The Ac ademy (London).

Elisha Mulford, LL . D .

THE REPUBLIC OF GOD . 8vo,A book whichwill not be m astered byhastyreading ,

nor bya c ool,sc ientific disse c tion. We do not rem em ber that this c ountry haslatelyproduc ed a Spec ulative Work Of m ore originalityand forc e .

The book is a noble one—broad-m inded,deep, breathing forth an

ever-pre sent c onsc iousness Of things unseen. I t is a m ental and m oraltonic whichm ight do us all good. The Critic (New York ).NO book on the statem ent Of the great truths Of Christianity, at

onc e so fresh, so c lear, SO fundam ental , and so fullygrasping and

solv ing the religious problem s Of our tim e,has yet been written by

anyAm eric an. Advertiser (Boston).I t is the m ost im portant c ontribution to theologic al literature thus

far m ade byanyAm eric anwriter. The Churchman (New York).

Rev . T . T. Munger.

TH E FR EED OM OF FAITH . Serm ons. 16m o,

CONTENT S : PrefatoryEssay: The New Theology; On Rec eptionof New Truth; God our Shield ; God our Reward ; Love to theChrist as a Person ; The Christ

’

s P ity; The Christ'

as a Preacher ;Land-Tenure ; Moral Environm ent ; Im m ortality and S c ienc e ; Imm ortality and Nature ; Im m ortality as Taught by the Christ ; TheChrist

’

s Treatm ent Of D eath; The Resurrec tion from the Dead ;The Method Of P enalty; Judgm ent ; Life a Gain ; Things .to be

ON THE THRE SHOLD . Fam iliar Lec tures to young people on Purpose, Friends and Com panions, Manners, Thrift, SelfRelianc e, etc . 16m o

, gilt top,LAMP S AND PATH S . Serm ons for Children. 16m o,

J . A . W . Neander.

GENERAL H ISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION ANDCHURCH . Translated from the Germ an byRev . JO SEP H TORREY,Professor in the Universityof Verm ont. With an Index volum e .

The set,withIndex, 6 vols., Index volum e

,separate,

“Neander’s Church History is one Of the m ost profound, c are“

fully c onsidered,deeply philosophized, c andid

,truly liberal , and in

dependent historic al works that hav e ever been written. In all

these respe c ts it stands head and Shoulders abov e alm ost anyotherchurchhistory in existenc e. Professor CALVIN E . STOWE

, Andover,Mass.


I O Relig ious P ublic ations of

E . Reuss.

H ISTORY OF TH E SACRED SCRIPTURE S OF THE NEW TEStam ent. ByEDUARD (WILH ELM EUGEN ) REUSS , P rofessor Ordi

narius in the Evangelic al Theologic al Faculty Of the Em perorWilliam ’

s University, Strassburg , Germ any. Translated,with nu;

m erous Bibliographic al Additions, by EDWARD L. HOUGHTON ,A . M . 2 -vols. 8vo

,

Edward Robinson, D . D . , LL. D .

HARMONY OF TH E FOUR GO SPEL S , in Greek . Ac c ordingto the Text of Hahn. By EDWARD ROB INSON

,D . D .

,LL . D .

,

P rofessor of Biblic al Literature in the Union Theologic al Sem inary,New York . With Notes . New Edition. Rev ised byM . B . R I D

DLE,Professor in the Hartford Theolog ic al Sem inary. syo

,

HARMONY OF THE FOUR GOSPEL S,in English, ac c ording

to the Com m on Version. WithNotes. New Edition. l 2m o,75

c ents .

BIBLICAL RE SEARCHE S IN PALE STINE . 3 vols. 8vo, withm aps, P ric e of the m aps alone,D ean Stanley said of these volum es : Theyare am ongst the v ery

few books of m odern literat ure of whichI c an trulysay that I haveread everyword. I hav e read them under c irc um stanc es which riv

eted myattention upon them while riding on the bac k of a c am el ;while trav eling on horsebac k through the hills Of Palestine ; underthe shadow Of my tent, when I c am e in wearyfrom the day

’s journey.

These were the sc enes in which I first bec am e ac quainted w ith thework of Dr. Robinson . But to that work I have felt that I and all

students of B iblic al literature owe a debt that c an never be effac ed.

”

PHYS ICAL GEOGRAPHY OF TH E H OLY LAND . A Supplem ent to Biblic al Researches in Palestine .

”8vo

,

A c apital sum m aryof our present knowledge.—LondonAthenceum .

HEBREW AND ENGLISH LEX ICON OF THE OLD TE STAMENT,

inc luding the Biblic al Chaldee . From the Latin of W ILLIAM GE

SEN I US,byEDWARD ROB INSON . New Edition. 8vo, half russia

,

ENGLISH -HEBREW LEX ICON : Being a c om plete VerbalIndex to Gesenius

’Hebrew Lexic on as translated byROB INSON .

ByJOSEPH LEW I S P OTTER,A . M . 8vo

,

A GREEK AND ENGLI SH LEX ICON OF TH E NEW TE STAMENT . New Edition, revised and in great part rewritten. 8vo,

Professor JosiahRoyc e .

RELIGIOUS ASPECT OF PH ILO SOPH Y. 12m o,

Rev . Thom as S c ott.

THE BIBLE , W ITH EX PLANATORY NOTE S , PRACTICAL

Houg/zton, Mijfi’iii <5“ Co. I I

OBSERv ATI ONS , AND COP IOUS MARGINAL REFERENCES . ByRev . THOMAS SCOTT . 6 v ols. royal 8v o ,

sheep ,I believe it exhibits m ore of the m ind of the Spirit In the Sc riptures

than anyother work of the kind extant . Rev . ANDREW FULLER.

J . C. Shairp .

CULTURE AND REL IGION IN SOME OF THEIR RELATIONS .

16m o, gilt top,

A . P . S innett.

ESOTERIC BUDDH ISM . Withan Introduc tion prepared expresslyfor the Am eric an Edition, by the author. 16m o

,

William Sm ith.

D ICTIONARY OF TH E B IBLE , c om p1ising its Antiquities,Biography,

Geography, and Natural History. By W ILLIAMSM ITH . Edited by Professor HORATIO BALCH HACKETT and

E"RA AB BOT,LL . D . In four v olum es

,8vo

,3 667 pages, with

596 illustrations. Cloth, bev eled edges, strong ly bound,full sheep ,

half m oroc c o,

half c alf,extra

,

half russia , full m oroc c o , gilt, tree c alf,There are several Am eric an editions of Sm ith’s D ic tionaryof the

Bible, but this edition c om prises not onlythe c ontents Of the originalEnglish edition, unabridged, but v ery c onsiderable and im portant

additions bythe editors,P rofessors Hac kett and Abbot

, and twentysix other em inent Am eric an scholars .

This edition has 500 m ore pages than the English, and 100 m ore

illustrations ; m ore than a thousand errors of referenc e in the English edition are c orrec ted in this

,and an Index of Sc ripture I llus

trated 13 added.

No sim ila1 work In our own or in anyother language is for a m o

m ent to be c om pared Withit. Qum terlyReview (London).

Newm an Smyth,D . D .

SOC IAL PROBLEMS . Serm ons toWorkingm en. 8vo, paperc overs, 20 c ents .

Robert S outh,D . D .

SERMONS PREACH ED UPON SEVERAL OCCASIONS . Witha Mem oir of the author. 5 vols. 8vo

,

Harriet Beecher S towe .

REL IGIOUS POEMS. I llustrated. 16m o,

Joseph P . Thom pson, D . D .

AMERICAN COMMENTS ON EUROPEAN QUE STIONS, International and Religious . 8vo

,

HenryThornton .

FAMILY PRAYERS , AND PRAYERS ON THE TEN COMMAND

I 2 Rel igious P uhl ioaz‘ious.

MENTS,with a Com m entary on the Serm on on the Mount

,etc .

ByHENRY TH ORNTON . Edited by the late Bishop EASTBURN , ofMassachusetts . 16m o

,

Probablyno published v olum e of fam ilyprayers has ev er been thevehic le of so m uch hea l t-felt devotion as these . They are what

prayers should be—fervent, and yet perfec tly Sim ple . ChristianWitness .

Professor C. P . Tiele .

H I STORY OF TH E EGYPTIAN RELIGION . Translated fromthe Dutch

,withthe c oiiperation Of the author

,byJAME S BALL IN

GAL. 8 \ O gil t top, $3 00 .

HenryVaughan.

See HERBERT .

Jones Very.

POEMS . With a Mem oir by WILLIAM P . ANDREW S .

16m o, gilt top,

Poem s unique in their qualityam ong Am eric an poetry, alike fortheir Spiritual into and their absolute sinc erity. CHARLESELIOT NORTON .

E . M . Wherry.

A COMPREH ENSIVE COMMENTARY ON THE QURAN : Com

prising Sale ’s Translation and Prelim inary D isc ourse , with addi

tional Notes and Em endations . Toge ther with a c om plete Indexto the Text, Prelim inary D isc ourse

tB

and Notes. 3 vols . 8vo, g ilt

top , each$4 50.

John G . Whittier.

TEX T AND VERSE . Selec tions from the Bible and fromthe Writings of John G. Whittier, chosen byGER ’

I’

RUDE W. CARTLAND . 32m o, 75 c ents.

JohnWoolm an.

THE JOURNAL OF JOHN WOOLMAN . With an Introduction byJOHN G. WH ITT IER . 161no

,

A perfe c t gem . His is a beautiful soul . An illiterate tailor ,he

writes in a style of the m ost exquisite purityand g 1ac e His m oralqualities are transferred to his writings . His relnion 1s lov e . H is

Christianity1s m ost inv iting . it is fasc inating . . CRABB ROB INSON

,in his Diary.

N . B . A Catalogue of a ll the public ations of HOUGHTON , MIFFLINCO .

,c ontaining portraits of manydis tingui shed authors

,and a full Cat

a logue of their Rel igious Books,withc riti c a l notic es and f ull p artic ulars

m regard to them ,to

gcll be sent to anyaddress on app lic ation.

HOUGHTON,MIFFLIN CC.

, BOSTON,MASS .

11 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET; NEW YO RK .

Documents

PROGRESSIVE ORTHODOX Y. INTRODUCTI ON. THE phrase “New Theology is applied largely and loosely to a great varietyof Opinions advocated quite independently by num erous writers i