sition, and should be quenched without delay. The ethical and religious spirit should obtain more and more in the national life; the Senate of the United States should be condemned when it holds a session on Sunday; railways should stop their trains on the Lord's day; and the Church. should be more aggressive in evangelization, and consecrate its wealth and energies to the fulfillment of the commission to gospelize the world. Years will be required to relieve the nation of its burdens; sacrifices will be made by those who believe in man and God; and after many vicissitudes of reverses and successes it will finally dawn upon the American nation that it is a kingdom of God, purified of its evils, and ready for the service of Him who is on the great white throne. Let us believe that God intends to build up a great nation on this continent: a nation of freemen; a nation of intelligent, God-fearing citizens; a nation that in the order of Providence will order peace throughout the world by keeping peace itself with all nations; a nation born to minister to the earth the things that make for righteousness, justice, fraternity, equality, holiness, and heaven.

DENOMINATIONAL CONSCIOUSNESS.

It is not a misuse of language to speak of a religious denomination as having attributes of personality, for it manifests in every stage of its development and its adjustments to social conditions all the feelings and traits of character that possess the living man. We see both selfishness and philanthropy, egotism and humility, courage and timidity, zeal and indifference, sensitiveness and callousness, in all the organized religious bodies of the world; we see, moreover, in them, all the infirmities as well as the excellences, all the auxiliaries as well as the stumbling-blocks, to prosperity, as we see them in individuals. The denomination is a living organism, not only reflecting the idiosyncrasies of its constituency, but also exhibiting a peculiarity of temperament, or marks of individuality, that distinguish it from every other kindred body, and from its own component elements. Methodism, Presbyterianism, Episcopalianism, each is as distinct in mental and moral phenomena as Simpson, Crosby, and KnoxLittle. Its self-consciousness is among its primary features, the recognition of which is essential to an understanding of its purpose and an explanation of its methods.

To say that self-consciousness is a necessity is the same as saying that it is a condition of existence, for as an individual without consciousness is morally powerless to act, and therefore without responsibility, so a denomination without a consciousness of itself, or a knowledge of its powers and functions, is incapable of movement and inefficient as an organization. Temporary suspension of consciousness is only a temporary evil; but an extinct consciousness in both cases is death. The first condition of activity, therefore, is denominational self-recognition; that is, it must be aware of its own existence, it must be acquainted with itself, apprehending its powers and resources, and in its introspection it must compass certain aims.

and the methods by which they may be fulfilled. This much at least is implied in knowing itself; and as it knows itself, so the entire body moves and acts, harmonizing with its consciousness of existence and purpose. The Methodist is a special force so long as he feels that he is the embodiment of free grace; the Baptist energizes as he talks of the ordinances in their relation to the religious life; the Presbyterian feels as strong as a mountain, though he skips like the hills, when he preaches the sovereignty of God; and the Episcopalian steps with measured precision as he shouts that the apostles are behind him and making music for him. The denominationalist, whatever his name, is confident in his representation of a principle, and, holding his own individuality in abeyance, stands forth as the exponent of the larger individuality of his denomination. This identification of himself with his denomination is the acme of consecration, and this absorption of individual consciousness in the common and larger consciousness of the Church is a sign of efficient churchism, which, well regulated, may contribute to the enlargement of Christ's kingdom. In short, such consciousness is inseparable from churchism; it is the cement that holds it together, but it must not be dry or untempered.

Here is the beginning of the possibility of evil. Whether it is better that the man be lost in churchism than that churchism be lost in the man is a question that needs some turning over before it can be permanently dismissed from consideration. If we say there is or should be a limit to the manifestations of the spirit of churchism, it is because, viewing Christianity in its gospel wholeness, it is essentially better than denominationalism, and never was intended to be overshadowed by its growing proportions. We must outgrow the theory that a religious organism, with Christian impulses and a Christian surname, is necessarily the incarnation of Christianity; for the two may be, though, historically considered, they have not been, entirely distinct: but it is apparent that the tendency of modern churchism is to magnify the raison d'être, and to enforce Christianity through its channel, as if its communication through any other would be invalid and ineffectual. If we shall grasp the conception that Christianity is larger than any type of it, as the whole is greater than any of its parts, and that probably no denomination is in exclusive possession of the whole truth and nothing but the truth, we shall relate the one to the other in a just order. Such has been the triumph of denominationalism over Christianity that it has produced a species of bigotry the most blighting, proselytism the most annoying, and set in motion a type of religious machinery for the advancement of the peculiarities of churchism that must shock the world for its offensiveness; thus reversing the natural order of manifestation, which allows to Christianity the precedence, and locates denominationalism in a subordinate position. To charge this evil upon any single organization is not our purpose, for, in this respect, all are guilty at the bar of judgment, and reformation should commence every-where. If the peculiarity of a churchism is a doctrine, or an ordinance, or a ritual, or a song, or an instrument; if the ground of its existence and the end of its warfare are the maintenance of its specialty; if

its keenest sensitiveness is always manifest at one point-the point of separation from other bodies; if its most exposed nerve is the nerve of denominationalism, it needs to educate itself into a broader life and to subordinate its peculiarities to those of the gospel system, which, Johannean in one direction, Pauline in another, and Petrine in still another, was in the whole a Christ-system, richer than any of its individualities, and the source of their beauty and perfection. In this statement we are not suggesting the extinction of the denominational spirit, but merely upholding the supremacy of Christianity, and affirming that in point of order and relation it should precede and direct all denominationalism to its legitimate end. In other words, while denominationalism should be the instrument of Christianity, Christianity in no sense, nor to any degree, should be the instrument of churchism.

The evil of the reversed relation of the substantives is far-reaching, seriously affecting denominational life and character, and placing it at a disadvantage in its conflict with the world. Denominationalism, intensified into a persistence to nominate itself as supreme before man, degenerates into sectism, which, as history shows, is favorable to the growth of all the passions, methods, and irregularities of bigotry and self-centered religious enthusiasm. Sectism feeds upon itself, and, using Shakespeare's language, increases its appetite by its food. It believes in itself more than in any thing else more than in Christianity, with which it claims to be identical. It becomes narrow in the interpretation of the Gospel, uncharitable in its relations with other bodies, haughty, dictatorial, egotistic in character, a twister of history in its behalf, a trimmer in the presence of moral conditions to gain its purposes, and a self-confident, overweening organization whose chief end is its own glorification. Roman Catholicism is an example of the general statement on a large scale, for it could light the martyr's fire, open the door of the dungeon, or subject the unrelenting heretic to torture, because he dared to exercise his religious freedom. But at this point, though perhaps in not so tragic a way, or to so great an extent, Protestantism is responsible for considerable mischief by reason of the exclusiveness of its sect-spirit, and the inherited taint of a selfishness that seems natural to religious organisms in general. We oppose transubstantiation; but is consubstantiation so far removed from the error of the papal sacrament as to justify the organization of a separate Church for its propagation? We oppose the fables of the papacy; but some of them are more tolerable, considering their symbolic uses, than the awful fables of predestination and the doctrine of a mathematical limit of the number to be saved and lost; yet upon the latter a great religious body stalks forth, as if it were commissioned from heaven to declare the foreordained mathematical results of redemption. We oppose the papal priesthood, with its celibacies, absolving prerogatives, and alleged control of the inhabitants of purgatory; but what excuse can be offered for a Church the logic of whose claim of apostolic descent would lead to the very powers exercised by the rotten priesthood of Rome? We oppose the physical mummery, the candles, bells, incense, and the external ritualism of the old Church; but a

Protestant body exalts baptism by immersion into so great prominence as to make the world believe that one's salvation is determined rather by the quantity of water applied to one's person than by his faith in the Son of God. We oppose the infallibility of the pope; but a Church rears itself on the dogma of the so-called historic episcopate, claiming to be the Church by virtue of its unprovable heredity, and vaunting itself as the chief proclaimer of the decrees of God. What is the difference between the inferential infallibility of the Church of England and the absolute prerogative claimed by Leo XIII.? We state the infirmities of Protestantism by contrast, and in this bold way, that the spirit of sectism that intrinsically characterizes it may be manifest and that its evil may likewise be recognized.

Fatal to spiritual development as is the sectism of the Church, which, interpreted, is a species of schism, for it prevents union, it is also a hinderance to that outward success that is contemplated in the visions of prophets and apostles and the teachings of the Master. What must the world think of the Church that seems more concerned for itself than for the Gospel? that will fight more valiantly for baptism than atonement ? that is more wedded to history than to the prophetic future? that seeks proselytes rather in the spirit of bigotry than in the broad generosity of the apostles that covets association with secular powers and agencies in preference to influences that are spiritual? that glories more in its name than in the highly exalted name of Jesus Christ? that points to its temples with pride, while the millions are wasting away in sin, and it is doing little to rescue them? that puts any thing in advance of its great commission to preach the Gospel to every creature and then declares that the world is on the verge of destruction? As sectism is promoted the power of Christianity is weakened, for as others detect the governing motive of a sect to be itself rather than the salvation of the world, they lose faith in, if not respect for, both the organism and that which it is supposed to represent. If Christianity is not multiplying its adherents so rapidly as might be expected in these days of its opportunity, it is quite as much because of the weakening influence of sectism as because of the depravity of the race. As Puritanism was in its purposes strong but weak in its methods; as the Reformation was both aggressive in design and offensivein its practice; as Greek Christianity is both an influence and a stagnation; as Latin Christianity is both a blessing and a calamity; so Protestantism is fortunate in its mission but unfortunate in some of its methods for the salvation of the race. Until denominational consciousness is subordinated to the larger consciousness of Christianity, by which zeal for Christ will eclipse zeal for sect, the union of Protestantism and the greater union of Christendom will be delayed, and so the final triumph of the kingdom of Christ will wait for a generation of Christians who will know neither bond nor free, male nor female, Protestant nor Greek, Latin nor Copt, sect nor creed-holder, but all who are friends of Christ shall be co-workers with him, and shall be one with him in the great regeneration.

THE ARENA.

COUNT TOLSTOÏ ON IMMORTALITY.

THE article by Dr. Ross C. Houghton, in the last number of the Review, on Count Lyof Tolstoï, omitted to represent the views of the Russian on one of the distinctive doctrines of our religion.

Coming out right after Easter, as did the Review article on the great Count, it is pertinent to quote, without note and comment, from Tolstoï's My Religion, pages 147, 151, 153, as follows: "The idea of a future eternal life comes neither from Jewish doctrine nor from the doctrine of Jesus, but from an entirely different source. We are obliged to believe that belief in a future life is a primitive and crude conception based upon a confused idea of the resemblance between death and sleep-an idea common to all savage races." If this is Tolstoïism we question the statement of Dr. Houghton that the noted reformer is "enthusiastically prosecuting an independent search after the true religion as contained in the Gospel of Christ." Again, to quote Tolstoï: "As opposed to the personal life, Jesus taught us, not of a life beyond the grave, but of that universal life which comprises within itself the life of humanity, past, present, and to come." Finally, this modern apostle of a peculiar form of pantheism concludes: "The entire doctrine of Jesus inculcates renunciation of the personal, imaginary life, and a merging of this personal life in the universal life of humanity, in the life of the Son of man. Now the doctrine of the individual immortality of the soul does not impel us to renounce the personal life; on the contrary, it affirms the continuance of individuality forever." These teachings of strange admixture of truth and error help one, at least, to agreement with Dr. Houghton in the conclusion that, "The more we study and analyze Tolstoï's religion the stronger is our conviction that it is eminently of this world, and based largely upon terrestrial considerations." And as to such considerations, after trying to get at the true inwardness of these as set forth in his socialistic writings, one comes to accept, as alarmingly true, a recent statement of the Review Editor himself, that in reality "Tolstoï is a more dangerous anarchist than Herr Most." Germantown, Pa. JAMES HEPBURN HARGIS.

A THEORY OF MIRACLES.

Under the above title there appeared in "The Arena" department of the Methodist Review for March-April an article which, to my mind, is open to grave objections, because tending to reduce the miracles of turning the water into wine, and raising Lazarus and the widow's son from the dead-the two principal miracles of Jesus's ministry-to simply masterly scientific experiments.

To the question whether there was any force in the dead body of Lazarus that by intensification could cause its reanimation, the writer answers, Unquestionably;" but to the commonplace thinker this notion is