Year: 1879


Phillips Brooks, of Boston, which is de-
serving Of thoughtful consideration for
more reasons than one. 1t is. we believe,
the first appearance of that distinguished
scholar and eloquent divine in the field OF
literature outside of the publication OF de-
tached sermons. and it may readily be un-
derstood that the occasion is no common
message to wider public than that OF his
own denomination and vicinage.


In the opinion Of DR.. Brooks ''the charac-
teristic sccpticism of to-day, whether it be
that Of the untaught people or OF the
learned scholar, is marked by it's complete
ness and despair. 1t does not suggest any
substitute for the religion which it disbe-
lieves and which in its active moods it
labors to destroy. 1t rejects not certain
doctrines only. but the whole body of the
Christian faith" This statement may be true
of that attitude of mind which is correctly
designated by the term ''scepticism," it
can hardly be accepted as an accurate
Characterization of that great body of nom
Christian thought which Dr. Brooks evil
IDENTIFY has in mind. This observation is
more than a mere verbal criticism, it
touches the very root of the matter The
scepticism Of the last century and of the
first half of the present century no longer
exists, it has almost become q lost art, its few
''survivals". being found chiefly in the ranks
of the clergy themselves or of the members
Of orthodox churches. The attitude of
modern non-Chrstian thought is not one
of scepticism, it is one of profound faith in
a long array OF doctrines which the ortho-
dox pulpit as yet refuses to indorse. The
faith of the evolutionist is often cherished
with an earnestness and fervency almost
unknown to the churches.


1t is not because of isolated doubts that
the positivist or evolutionist refuses assent
to the creeds of the churches; it is because
he has his own creed, which has very little
in common with the former. The tables
are turned upon the churches, and it is
now in them that real scepticism is chiefly
found, whether it take the form of doubt
of theological or evolutional creeds.


The evolutionism of the present day is not
aggressive 1t has not been learned from
"Tom" Paine, from Voltaire. or even from
Strauss, of whose writings the great ma
jority of modern cultured non-Christians
are contentedly ignorant. It's true origin
is what Matthew Arnold calls the Zeit
Geist, or spirit of the times, and its sole
ambition, as regards the churches, is to be
let alone. Traditional Christianity is no
more offensive in its eyes than traditional
Buddhism or Islamism, provided it do
not interfere with freedom of thought and
action. The modern evolutionist is pro-
foundly satisfied that men and women are
not to be convinced by argument, and he
wisely declines to make the useless effort
Whereas Paine, Voltaire and Strauss spent
laborious years in familiarizing themselves
with the Bible in order to point out it's
alleged errors contradictions and absurdi-
ties, the modern non-Christian thinks it
labor lost to weary himself with the details
of an obsolete or obsolescent religious sys-
tenn.


The charge that nom Christians Qor so we
translate the expression popular scepti-
cism) have no substitute for the religion
which they disbelieve is conspicuously in
correct. 1t would be easy to frame q creed
rivalling in length the creeds OF the
churches and containing no doctrines save
those which are believed by millions OF nom
Christians with q unanimity far greater
than that of the churches themselves.
Without attempting to parody the forms of
words held sacred by the Christian world
it may be suggested that there is something
worthy ofattention in the attitude Of the null
torments OF the Inquisition for faith which
they might thus express:-'I believe in the
eternity Of matter, force and intelligence;
in the conservation and correlation of the
forces in the nebulur hypothesis in the
struggle for life in the survival Of the fit
test in the doctrine of heredity in the
greatest good of the greatest number in
the preponderance Of the stronger motive
in action along the line of least resistance
in the invariability Of law; in the progress
sive development of all things, and the ulti-
mate perfectibility of humanity"


The noticeable feature Of all this is the
fact that every one of these doctrines is dis
tinctly an acquisition of the present CEN
tury, and usually of the present generation.
These beliefs are not dogmatically opposed
to Christianity, except so far as Christian
ity itself has placed itself in needless oppo-
sition to them. Many OF the above doctrines
are held as firmly by Christians as by non-
Christians, and the Drift of belief is steadily
toward the incorporation OF the whole body
of evolutionist doctrine into the unwritten
creeds Of the churches. These unwritten
written creeds, but then the latter
are but the expression of varying
phases of faith usually long posterior to
the founding of Christianity. The evolu-
tionists have not wilfully and consciously