The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1905-10-22

modern critical study. Within it's
wonderfully elastic boundary line, we
find room for the results of the scholar
ship of today. We no longer assume in
faliibility. We recognize the progress
in morality, in religion. in everything,
that different portions Of the Bible indi-
cate. We recognize the human error,
even while we feel the divine heart
beat underneath. To them the Bible was
book of life. To them it was the mathe-
matics of dogma; to us it is the litera-
ture of religion. TO them it was a
magazine of proof texts; to us it is
the torch of the spirit to kindle the
flames of devotion and love. It de-
creases as a theological authority; 1T
increases as a guide to duty, as an in
SEPARATION to holiness. A merely textu-
al Universalism has had it's day. We
that smiling countenance is hidden be-
hind every frowning text. Reason
from the drudgery Of Interpretation, has
been lifted to the seat of authority.
But the change that has been wrought
was all originally wrapped up in that
word Contain
The Kernel and the Shell.
"second-The Universalism of to.
day differs from that of yesterday, IN
some other respects, as the kernel diff
fers from the shell; it makes use Of the
vital and essential truth of the past
without the former discussions concern
ing the incidental and subordinate.
Gone difficulty with the Universal.
ism of other days was it's Technology
It was 10th to part with the expressions
| of orthodoxy. It used the Trlnltarlan
| formula in baptism, in benedlctlon and
doxology. altho it denied the Trinity
From some of these expressions many
suppose, even today. that the Univer
salist church believes in the. doctrine
of the Trinity. There is frequent ne
cessity to correct this impression. Il
used the orthodox phraseology tc de
scribe the work of Christ, while deny
ing the vicarious sacrifice; SC that many
thought and still think that. the only
. difference between the Uniyersalist'
extent of Christ $ work, and not a
all in it's nature. Then, too, there wer'
many discussions about the person o:
Christ. There is still diversity = o:
views. Not all in the denomination
think alike concerning the miraculous
birth, the pre- existence. of Jesus, tn
iiexact place of his classification in tn
scheme Of being, and the entire sub]ec
of the supernatural.
Another Difference.
"Third-Once More, the. Universal
ism Of today differs from that of yes
terday, as the demonstration in mathe
matics differs from the application t
practical mechanics.
cit was, indeed, necessary for grea
principles to be wrought out, for grea
doctrines to be established; and 70
this purpose line upon line, precept upo
; the Divine Fatherhood must be VERT
, ably driven into the minds of men an
fixed there. Sermon upon sermon W
piled, debate overlapping dungeons o
the future. The work was done an
we'll done. All honor to the sturd
fathers of the faith. Let none of tn
e. younger generation. who cannot realiz
the difficulties of that elder day or tn
1 heroism it took to meet them, say on
: us do our work as faithfully as the
did theirs.
The Practical Side.
fathers were not forgetful Of the pra
+ tical side Of life and society. At
convention of .Universalist churches {
E philadelphia, in 1894, at which 'articl,
Of belief and plan of organization
= understood to be from the pen Of D
= Benjamin Rush, were proposed, res
= luton was adopted declaring the hol
Z ing of slaves to be inconsistent wit
L the union Of the human race In a cor
;. mon Savior. and the obligation to, M
Z tual and univ ersal love which flow fro
s that union And DR.. Bacon says, in h
y History of American Christianity
: AS for the Universalists, the record
9 their fidelity as a body to the vario7
n interests Of social morality is not su
t passed by that of any denomination