especially, such men as Whipple are needed to remind authors and readers once again of the fact that the first requisite to the highest results in letters is vigor of thought and vigor of conscience-a valid something to say, and a valid purpose in saying it. Even in literature itself, there are some elements more important than those that are specifically literary, and these, as Whipple unceasingly insists, are the educational and the ethical. Mind and moral purpose first and, after these, in due succession, taste and art and æsthetic grace, and this is a succession upon the due adjustment and observance of which, as we must believe, the very existence of Modern Letters, as a helpful factor in the progress of the race, necessarily depends.

It was because the clear-minded and clear-eyed Whittier detected, at the outset, in the character and work of Whipple, this mental and moral soundness, that he chose him instinctively as a life-long friend, and gratefully commended him, as an author, to his own and to every succeeding generation.

Whittier and Whipple, the Poet and the Essayist—the impersonations of character and culture in vital combination. What better can be desired for the developing interests of American Verse and Prose than that they be committed, without reserve, to the safe and sacred guardianship of authors such as these!

ARTICLE III.

CRITICISM AND THE COMMON LIFE.

BY THE REV. A. A. BERLE, BRIGHTON, MASS.

AMONG all the chapters of change which the progress of the scientific spirit in all forms of inquiry has wrought, none is more remarkable or full of moment than that which has to do with the religious opinions of our generation. The causes which have brought this about are many, but it is enough to enumerate three; viz. the revival of critical science in all its forms, the rapid succession of objective and experimental examples of the method, and the changes within the domain of biblical criticism itself. The almost universal acceptance of the doctrine of evolution in one or another of its modes has affected not only the stupendous results that have appeared in natural history and biology, but also others of like importance in the literary, critical, and historical fields as well, and the whole circle of human knowledge is at this present moment groaning under the attempt to force it all, and all at once, into the evolutionary mould. Theology, also, has been brought into this curious spectacle, as the latest captive to be dragged after the triumphant chariot of the evolutionary creed.1

The mental activity thus engendered could not but be productive, and a vast literature has accumulated in a few years, all of which has for its problem the reconciliation of traditional views with the new doctrine, or the annihilation of the old views and the presentation of the supplanting

1 Dr. Lyman Abbott's "Evolution of Christianity" is the most interesting of the recent works. It is a curious collection of theological definitions and scientific generalities, but none the less a stimulating book.

new ones.

The outflow of this material has not yet quite ceased, though there seems to be a cessation in the volume, even if the quality is little improved. The introductory passages in all these works are exactly alike. They begin by lauding the progressive spirit of the times, the critical nature of the period through which we are passing theologically and otherwise, and urge the need of bringing the religious thinking of the time into line with the new movements that are demonstrating their presence so effectively in other sciences. Universal theological unrest and the undeniable insufficiency of traditional theology are the assumed but unproven postulates of this class of productions. It is always the representation of absolute atheism in the future, that moves these saviours of religion to their sacred task of rehabilitating the religion of the Christians of this genera

tion.

The spectre is not a new one. It is as old as the beginnings of the Hebrew priesthood, and has survived ever since. No age but has fancied itself one of general and unprecedented scepticism. At no period has the church lacked a sufficient number of zealous advocates who predicted her utter ruin unless certain changes were instantaneously incorporated into her creeds. The rather peculiar fact must here be noted, that while the new doctrine usually was based upon such dire predictions as to the future of faith, all it usually asked for itself was tolerance alongside of the deadly errors which it sought to correct. Simultaneously it has always been the case that the new view was resisted with courage and power begotten of the equally secure belief that the general adoption of the view was fully fraught with all the calamity that its progenitors feared in the event of its rejection. Meanwhile the verdict of history has been that the cause of true religion has not been endangered by any one view, and that the calm judgment of the Christian church, arising from her appeal to experience and practical worth,

has been nearly, if not quite, correct as to the real force of the ideas brought to her notice. It has sometimes taken considerable time for this consensus of judgment to crystallize, but it has never failed to do so when the issue was of sufficient importance to command general attention.

THE RE-EXAMINATION OF THE BASES OF FAITH.

Meanwhile we cannot lose sight of the fact that the church is making the most widespread and exhaustive reexamination of the fundamental truths of Christianity which she has ever made. The popular conception of the truths of Christianity is permeated by a spirit which cannot be called otherwise than scientific. The spread of intelligence, which but a few years ago was the exclusive possession of the few, has induced the opinion that the average man can, with but little technical equipment, sufficiently scrutinize the logic, if he may not question the facts, of the expert. This is recognized in the popular interest in scientific questions, as evidenced in the attendance at lectures, the discussions in magazines, and the attention of the daily press to subjects until recently all but completely ignored. Christianity is being examined with a view of determining what its form should be, and what its popular presentation should include. But it must not be supposed that Christianity itself is on trial. Except in spots the civilized world has become so convinced of that practical utility of the Christian church, and the necessity of the general adoption of Christian ethics, that it would not in this rapid age give its time to any discussion respecting the merits of Christianity itself. The question before it is, What is Christianity, and how shall we at the earliest possible moment secure its world-wide adoption? For this reason the bases are being examined for the purpose of discovering what are the permanent, and what are the transitory, elements of Christian belief; for the existence of both no one will seriously question.

Naturally such an inquiry must begin with the Scriptures. It could not begin otherwise, and if it could, it would soon find itself here, with precisely the questions agitating that are the topics of current discussion at the present time. The reason for this is also very clear. Upon the ground of Christian experience the church can readily see that no final statutes can be enacted. Upon the phases of the spiritual activity which from time to time make their appearance, no argument can be builded. Against the various benevolent enterprises no word of criticism, except as to method and results, can be raised. Hence, if the church would at all register her wish and opinion as to the adequacy or inadequacy of this or that doctrine, she has been forced to attack its biblical basis or authority. No attack is thus made upon the Bible itself, but upon the biblical basis of the received doctrine, and it is the misconception of this fact that has given rise to the acrimonious discussions which have so disastrously affected the church in recent years. The faith of the church is that body of truth which in general finds acceptance among Christians, and in the last analysis is the belief in the divine authority of the Bible. Any attack upon the Bible is a renunciation of Christian faith, since upon the basis of biblical ideas and iblical requirements the whole rationale of the Christian church rests. But this acceptance of the divine authority of the Bible does not, cannot, and never did involve the acceptance of any given view of the character, authorship, or purpose of any book in the Bible, and cannot be affected by any such view, except as such a view distinctly and unmistakably has for its conclusion the rejection of the Bible as the divine standard of faith.

Under these conditions, there must be periods when the church, for her own understanding of the contents and the ideas apart from their connection with the sacred text of this book, must exhaustively re-examine all the material which she has woven into her garment of common life. She