The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1902-02-09

U1nai thfisuannty as tne ehp'cS~'oho
Il, then, the case for doctrinai Chris
tlanity bopelessy II is the object OF the
hook before us TO show that this IS not so.
In his ninth chapter Mr.. Mallock iscusse
the theory of authority put forward by
the Church Of Rome, but rejected Ivy all
Protestants, and lie contends that, II 1t
were adopted, IL would complete their own
theories, reconcile their contradictions, and
make Of them a logical whole. Before, how
ever. we sum up his arguments on behalf
of this thesis, let us note what he says
about the Broad Churchmen who MAIN
tain that Christianity has no need OF doc
trine at all. Is the Broad Church party
really independent Of doct rine. he asks
He fnds this party composed oftwo sections,
one Of which regards Christ as euperhu-
man; the other. as merely human. He
submits tina the position taken by the
former OF these sections IL utterly illogical.
However, such doctrines as those OF Christ's
miraculous birth, Of his external pre- exist
ence. OF his c~oequality with the Father. OF
His being the Logos by whom the world
was made. may be set aside by the teach
ers with whom we are now concerned lthe
conservative Broad Churchmenl and silently
utntot ny tftA tb tAAt INV ~ -
~lations; yet, 20 long as these persons main
tain that IN any objective sense and In any
way whatsoever Christ differed in his ma
ture generically from the nature OF COM
mon men; that He still lives in a sense in
which other dead men do not live; hat He
hears our voices when we pray TO him az
other dead men would not hear them; and
that He cares for us and helps us In ways
which to other dead mel would be impos-
sible-so long as these persons maintain.
build upon and insinuate any such propo-
sitions as these, their profession that
they have liberated Christianity from the
yoke OF doctrine is false" Even IL their
doctrinal system contained only this one
proposition, that tho nature of Christ was
gsnerically superhuman, h essence oil
their system would be a proposition assert
ing the actually Of an event which in tho
first place was miraculous, and, In the
second place. not demonstrable by ordinary
proof; and, so far as the difficulty OF believ-
ing such an event Is concerned, OF defining
and supporting it by my definite authority,
II is q difficulty which IL the same alike in
degree and kind, whether one such event
happens 10 be concerned or a hundred.
Moreover, a doctrine of this kind cannot
stand by itself. Any assertion Of Christ's
s%uperhuman natu implies a whole theory
Of supernatural revelation, and, in so far
as such a doctrine differs from that Of ira
ditional Christianity, 1t must for the de-
tails il rejects supply corresponding sub
s~titutes. In a word. the more conservative
section Of the Broad Church party has
merely exchanged one supernatural system
for another; and its members differ from
traditional Christians. not In freeing them
selves from doctrines, but in imagining
that they have done 80: and in having. con-
sistently with this conception Of their po-
sition, deprived themselves OF every pos
sible argument by means OF which such
doctrines as they actually cling 10 might
be defended. Their position. therefore,
with regard to the traditional Christians on
the one hand, and TO Broad Churchmen OF
a more extreme type on the other, Is a
position yet more unsta BILE, and logically
far more helpless thar that which is occu-
pied by either of their two neighbors.
1t Is only the position occupied by those
extreme Broad Churchmen who regard
Christ as merely human that Mr.. Mallock
deems worth discussing, Is the religion
Of this section Christianity at allp Is 1t
a development Of Christianity In the old
sense Of the word or an abandonment OF
it2 Does h resemble Christianity more
than do other religions7 Our author con-
cedes that any religion which adopts the
moral teaching OF another may with a
certain plausibility claim TO be a continue
ton OF il. 1t Is not disputed that the kind
OF morality which Is preached by Broad
Churchmen resembles that which is preached
by the doctrinal Christians. In many
points, however, II also resembles that
which was preached by Buddha and by
some Of the Greek philosophers; and the
question tina Mr.. Mallock would ask is
how far the religion OF the Broad Church.
men is identical with the Christianity Of
the past in a way essentially other than
the way in which it is identical with
the religion Of the Buddhist, the Platonist
or the Stole. Answering his own question
he considers in some detail the position
taken by Mrs. Humphry Ward, whose
views are indistinguishable from those
of the extreme Broad Churchmen. After
an examination of her opinions he arrives
at the conclusion that all she can profess
logically is a natural theism. specialized
by a strong personal sympathy with the
man Jesus, Sucn n TtllHlon avn int wv
practical essentials of Christianity: it can
speak neither with authority nor with
defniteness, A purely human Christ can
be invested with no supremacy. He can
supply the moral lever with no fulcrum.
Neither will no~n-miraculous Christianity
enable us to deduce from it any fixed and
certain rule OF life. This is evident from
the conflicting answers given TO the
question OF marriage and divorce and
TO other practical questions arising out Of
Christ's most distinctive ~utterances; such.
for example, as his injunction, If
you would be perfect, sell all you have
and give It 20 the poor, and come and
follow me- Undoubtedly, some features
Of Christ's teachings remain the same
for everybody, but they are those which
are least distinctive and least definite;
as soon as they are translated into definite
terms all agreement as to their meaning
and binding character ceases among
Protestants. In fine, the Christianity OF
the Broad Church party may he a religion
of some kind, but. except for its assumed
name, Il IL not Christianity at all.
Mr.. Mallock has no expectation that he