New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1917-06-17
"The Future of Religion"


The question of the relation of the war
to religion appears to have shifted from
the earlier debates as to what should be the
attitude of religion to the war to discus
sion of what will be the effect of the war
on religion. Following the lead of II. q.
Wells, THE New Republic" publishes an
article by Professor Lake which attempts
to make more explicit Weiss prediction of
what will be the religion of the future.
This is not the first occasion in modern
times when men have asked the question
is religion dead?" 1t was asked and fire.
quently answered in the affirmative by the
rationalists of the eighteenth century, and
again by the scientific partsans of the
nineteenth. 1t is by no means the first
time that those interested in conserving or
making more vital the life of faith have
drawn a distinction between the religious
impulses of the individual and convention
allied belief as it existed in institutional
and traditional forms. Emerson did that,
so did William James, as well as Hegel and
Kant and a long line Of reformers and
prophets reaching back to early antiquity.
There is nothing particularly novel in this
latest appeal to the man outside the church
to save religion.
| It is, however, symptom of these times
that in the present discussion the content
Of religious experience is shifted from the
passive to the active; from doctrine to pur
pose. The tendency of the new" religious
thought, like the humanist movement in
philosophy, with which it is doubtless re-
lated is to resolve the old problems of be-
lief simply by abandoning them and NOV
ing to new fields, to assert the religious
significance of that which has hitherto
been regarded as wholly Secular" activity.
As Professor Lake says: "1n war and in
peace men subordinate their own interests
to those Of some higher aim, in which, ex-
press it how they may, they find the true
purpose of life. Therefore, that this is
religion do not doubt; but whether it will
officially retain that name is another
question"
All this is welcome enough to certain
type of mind, but will it be welcome to a
sufficiently large number TO justify the pre-
dicton that it is to be the religion of the
future? After the war there is likely to
lie lust as much difference among men on
religious questions as there was before.
No one doubts that the war is causing
great psychic changes, just as it must re-
suit in social and political changes, all Of
which will have their effects upon re-
ligious belief. But it would seem that the
evolution of the religious spirit, in so far
as it creates new faiths to stand beside the
old, has a way of creating something quite
new and unforeseeabe. Who in the ration
alist and scholastic eighteenth century
could have predicted the Wesleyan move
ment? Who in the materialst and scien-
tlic later nineteenth century could have
foretold the rise and spread Of Christian
Science? II is characteristic Of new move
ments in religion that they come up
against the wind and bring with them val
uations which are always novel and sur
prising.
II is not necessary, in order to argue for
the survival Of religion, to forecast the
forms which religion in the future will
take. Mr.. Wells and others peering into
the beliefs of the future are really carry
ing with them there the beliefs which they
already have. They are simply confessing
their present faith, and, like all good be-
levers. claiming the future for IL. They
are better propagandists than prophets.
And the Catholic, Calvinist and Jew will,
Of course, each claim the same privilege
for his own faith.
Whatever becomes Of this or that con-
yention, the religious interest will not die
while man remains ANYTHING more than a