for words. And this strengthening vision, this sense of union with Divinity, this, and not anything artificial or legal or commercial, is what science will some day tell us is the inner meaning of the Redemption of Man.

INV

CHAPTER XI

SIN, SUFFERING AND WRATH

N the last chapter certain great topics were dealt with so briefly that if left without amplification they may give rise to misunderstanding; indeed their treatment has already aroused some criticism, notably an extremely friendly comment by Dr. Talbot, now Bishop of Southwark, published in the Hibbert Journal, wherein, while criticising judicially, he nevertheless holds out a hand of welcome.

This article was replied to sufficiently in the succeeding number of the Hibbert Journal, and not much of my reply need be here reproduced.

I will only say that whereas in the greater part of the present book, and indeed of my writings generally, the mode of treatment aims at being positive rather than negative-seeking to construct rather than to destroy, and hoping to replace error quietly by substitution of truth-the last chapter does to some extent take a negative or destructive attitude and accordingly demands extremely careful treat

ment.

I do not conceive of myself, however, as attacking Theology or Theological doctrine: I discern an element of truth in nearly every doctrine, perhaps in quite every doctrine which the human race has been

able to believe for a long period; but I am seeking to scrutinise more closely, and if possible display to greater advantage, that side of those doctrines which faces us across the frontier of our scientific territory. This side has been less efficiently attended to by the builders than the façade devoted to edification; and some or our own outworks approach so near to the Theological position on its more prosaic side, that an occasional raid, inspired by admiration and conducted with reverence, may be pardoned.

It looks to me as if part of the building were needlessly obscured by coatings and stucco and excrescences, once thought ornamental. Perhaps this extraneous matter had the useful effect of protecting the building through times of ignorance and violence, but some of it is now seen to be little better than disfigurement and crudity, hiding the beautiful structure beneath; it was this extraneous matter alone that I intended to attack in my last chapter.

But in this legitimate restoration work at the present day a number of operatives are engaged; some doing their occasional best from outside, like myself, others, as regular workmen acting from within, like Dr. Talbot. With his scheme of the structure, as seen from his point of view and stated in the Hibbert Journal, I have extremely little cause to disagree. He is one of the many whom I referred to as having already emancipated themselves from errors of the past to a large extent; and if it still seems to me that here and there in his statement traces of crudeness remain, who am I that I should suppose

myself capable of infallibly detecting and evaluating all forms of crudity?

I notice that Professor Masterman admits the crudity of ordinary statements of Christian doctrine, but justifies it as necessary to catch the attention of ignorant laymen, who are accustomed to speak in terms of "blood." I think it possible for the clergy to over-estimate the crudity and ignorance of the laity. A professional jargon is apt to be employed which by habit may sound appropriate on Sundays, but does not represent the mental attitude of anyone at other times. Perhaps spirit and character once resided in the blood, as compassion in the bowels, virulence in the spleen, love in the heart, and other emotions in other viscera, but few persons imagine that they live there now. I say nothing against the methods of the Salvation Army in its own sphere of activity: these may be justified by their results. I somewhat doubt whether ordinary Church procedure is so justified.

I suggest that it is not wise to assume too invincible an ignorance on the part of habitual worshippers. It may, for instance, be of doubtful wisdom to withdraw documents from common use on this ground alone, and at the same time to suggest that nevertheless they convey essential truth to clerics instructed in refinements of interpretation; it is rather too suggestive of the attitude of the priests in John vii. 49. The really learned in theology are respected by all, but they are infrequently encountered. It would be fairer to admit that some of the documents in use

are themselves imperfect and antiquated, that they have been in many respects outgrown, and that truth as now perceived can now be more clearly expressed. But I refrain from any more ecclesiastical suggestions.

Perhaps, however, I may unobtrusively remark that such expressions as righteous vengeance, angry Father, wrathful Lamb, do not seem satisfactory forms whereby to represent what the Bishop well calls "a stately and austere conception of order." Nor is it likely that "the bright front and buoyant tread of early discipleship" arose from anything so negative as sin overcome: it was not that which animated the Apostles; and though it certainly contributed to the inspiration of the Magdalene, we should hardly speak of "bright front and buoyant tread" in her case.

Something more positive is needed to explain any living and energising enthusiasm. The incidental treatment of sin in Chapter X. is, however, one of the points on which further explanation is certainly desirable; and all the supplementary points I now propose to deal with may be grouped under four heads as follows:

1. That evolutionary treatment of sin is apt to minimise unduly the sense of sinfulness.

2. That it is misleading to deny the revealed Wrath of the Holy One against sin.

3. That heresy lurks in any non-professional treatment of the relation between the Humanity and Divinity of Christ.