STUDY V. MODERN SUBSTITUTES FOR

CHRISTIANITY.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that hath been made. And the light shineth in the darkness; and the darkness apprehended it not." (John i. 1-5.)

"There was the true light, even the light which lighteth every man, coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and they that were his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he the right to become children of God, even to them that believe on his name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only-begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth." (John i. 9-14.)

PART VI. ECLECTICISM.

In the midst of the confusion of faiths the Japanese have thought they could compound a new religion out of all the best elements of the various religions. Accordingly, many a Japanese will tell you that he is neither a Buddhist, a Shintoist, nor a Christian; but he is all in one. A similar movement arose in New England in the last half of the last century. A prominent educator of the East has recently espoused a new religion bordering on some such theory of religious values. The Religion of Reason during the French Revolution was a movement in the same direction. But this French religion was not able to make much progress. One of its representatives, feeling that they had incorporated into it every good element of all religions, was at a loss to know why it did not win more adherents. Accordingly, he asked Talleyrand what was necessary to make this religion a success. It is said that the old diplomat replied: "I should advise you to get yourself crucified and rise from the dead on the third day.'

This strikes at the very heart of the difficulty. Religion is not a theory, it is a fellowship; and to be a fellowship there must be loving persons on both sides.

"As the nutritive elements of the soil cannot be made to minister to life and movement by being brought together and can fulfill that function only when taken up by a living organism already present, so religious truths cannot be combined into a living whole by a mere process of juxtaposition. A living religion sufficiently comprehensive in its fundamental principles can be hospitable toward truths found anywhere in the limits of the accessible universe; but the simple compiling of the truths will not make a religion endowed with victorious energy.

991

Principles in themselves have no transforming power. It is life that transforms; and a religion that is simply a compilation of principles is useless. What the human race wants and needs is great purposes and principles incarnated into a person. This no eclectic religion can furnish. If the eclectics are to make a successful religion, they will not have the simple task of compiling elemental religious truths; but they must create outright a God who incarnates them all.

'Sheldon, "Unbelief in the Nineteenth Century," pages 216, 217.

STUDY V. MODERN SUBSTITUTES FOR

CHRISTIANITY.

"There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus made me free from the law of sin and of death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh that the ordinance of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For they that are after the flesh mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit." (Rom. viii. 1-5.)

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that hath been made. And the light shineth in the darkness; and the darkness apprehended it not." (John i. 1-5.)

PART VII. THE ETHICAL CULTURE MOVEMENT.

THIS is not essentially a religion, but a declaration that supernatural religion is unnecessary to life. It is closely akin to Positivism in that it makes an idealized humanity the object of its endeavor, and it is related to Eclecticism in that its moral code is an attempted compilation of all the best elements of moral truth to be found. Felix Adler, the founder of this movement, in his book on "The Religion of Duty," says that we cannot get our religion from authorityby which he means the Bible-we cannot get it from philosophy; we cannot get it from science. "All really religious persons will agree that religion is primarily a matter of experience.'

991

The central element in that experience is spirit. By this he does not mean what he calls ghosts or what he calls a universal world ghost-a god. By spirit he means a "nonmaterial something" which dwells in us. This spirit is a kind of all-pervasive essence in which the human race is united. "The very idea of spirit is that of unity expressing itself in plurality and of endless differences fused together in an all-embracing unity.' The indwelling spirit is not

1Adler, "The Religion of Duty," page 8. Ibid., page 15.

something personal, but, on the contrary, decidedly impersonal. It is the common feeling we have for others, the bond of unity between man and man. It is, therefore, the world ground of all true morality. Hence morality is of the very nature and constitution of man. It is the essence of the universe, and in response to morality one finds himself in harmony with the universe. This universal, all-pervasive spirit is a kind of cosmic urge, or universal impulse, pushing all humanity forward to a higher and truer destiny. Inasmuch as this spirit pervades all men to a greater or less degree, it gives dignity to all human beings.

This movement has two definite contributions to make. First, it lends sacredness and dignity to all life and brings all men into a common brotherhood. Secondly, it puts emphasis on moral action as the very essence and meaning of life. It thus checks up all religions on their moral content and justly calls them to make their practice as good as their creed.

But the weakness of the ethical culture movement lies in its failure to explain this cosmic urge. How does it come that the heart of the universe is moral? How does it happen that in adjusting ourselves to this all-pervasive, impersonal spirit we find ourselves acting morally? There cannot be any explanation save that this all-pervasive, impersonal spirit is moral. But here we have a contradiction of terms. Whatever is moral is personal, if language means anything. Things, essences, impersonal entities do not have morality ascribed to them. Hence the ethical culturist must either cease to call his "spirit" moral or must impute to it some kind of personality. Now, if it be personal spirit, then we have no new theory, for Christianity has for centuries taught that the Spirit of God within the soul urges men on to moral endeavor. This same Spirit has united men into a common brotherhood and has given a high and dynamic motive for brotherly action or morality.

It would appear, therefore, that if ethical culture is really new, its philosophy is not true; and if there is truth in its philosophy, it really is nothing new.