Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1880-06-12

creeds opens the door to endless con-
fusion and perplexity, and il is perfectly
clear that it can emily issue in de-
stroying what little faith remains in the
churches which contemplate this desper-
ate concession TO scientific thought. The
useleasness of such concession, moreover,
is, or should be, apparent. The truth is
that not only laymen but ministers have
ceased to believe in the old creeds. That
fact is conclusively demonstrated by the
proposal for creed revision. The main in
centive to this movement, however, prob
ably is the disagreeable consciousness
forced upon ministers who try to hold
their congregations, Of the irreconcilable an
tagonism between the doctrines they
actually preach and and the dogmas of the
Churches. Most ministers find it neces-
sary to teach very modernized versions of
their creeds, for they know they would
empty their churches if they did not. Of
course they feel the embarrassment of this
divergence from the official doctrines of
the Churches, and therefore those of them
who have insensibly acquired the scien-
tifc habit of thought seek to modify the
creeds, instead OF surrendering their new
views and holding fast to the primitive
positions of the Churches.
There is no salvation in revision of
creeds, however. Change in creed is
synonymous with abandonment of belief.
For while the scientific habit of thought
predisposes to state of constant readiness
for new light, and for prompt adaptation to
fresh discoveries in every direction, it is
evident that such frame of mind cannot
have any connection with Theology, which
consists in dogmatic assertion Of a particu
lar scheme of things as the only admissible
creed. Viewed from the standpoint of
self-interest it must be admitted that the
Catholic Church has been wise in persecut-
ing doubters, for doubt is fatal to Theol-
oey. OF course it does not follow that the
selfish policy of the Catholic Church in
volved any good for mankind. 1t has
involved no real good, but vast evil.
Nevertheless theologians are not polite
or true to their profession in admitting
doubt as a factor in religious sys-
tens, nor can such systems be
maintained by any such methods. The
Yale theologians have in truth parted
company with their religion, but have
not yet discovered the separation.
They have at present no creed, but only
party platform. and this platform they feel
the necessity of adapting to the changing
views OF the people. In SO doing they
abandon the only ground upon which
Theology can stand Henceforth they
may preside over literary clubs, or lyce-
ums, or whatever else they choose to call
them, but churches in any true sense they
viii not preside over. For there can be no
vitality or force in q creed which is always
open to change, aud the force and scope
OF which depend, not upon any assumed
revelation from heaven, not upon any pre-
tended credentials from the Supreme, but
upon the discoveries of science, the results
Of the laboratory, the quarry and the
library. The inevitable outcome of re-
vision of creeds in this way must he the
dwindling down Of religious claims and
professions to semblance of that peculiar,
attenuated, diaphanous creed, of which
Matthew Arnold is the chief living expo
neut. We shall then have churches in
which discourses viii be preached,
no longer about God and Christ
and the Atonement, and Hell and Heaven,
but about the necessity OF yielding to the
gentle pressure of that something, not
ourselves, which makes for righteous
ness.' 1t is scarcely necessary to fore
tell the fate OF such experiments. Those
who think for themselves will need no
such perfunctory aids to reflection, while
those who do not think viii miss the sup
port which is all they seek in religion.
The Churches. in word, viii have become
too scientific for the credulous, and not
scientific enough for the scientific. Their
concessions to the modern spirit of research
and inquiry Will be fatal tc them. They
viii lose their hold upon the public mind
altogether, and all because their advanced
thinkers cannot see the impracticabihty of
their attempted reconciliation between
Science and Theology. The union between
Night and Day is in fact not more utterly
impossible.