Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.-Galatians v.. 1.

I

NDIVIDUAL responsibility, directly to God, is an essential of Christianity. It is one of the features that distinguishes the latter from all other religions, even as the condition on which it rests, which alone makes it possible at the same time that it makes it necessary, is peculiar to Christianity, viz., filial love as the bond of relationship between man and God.

Among primitive peoples God was known almost solely as a mysterious, terrible Power. His voice was heard only in the thunder, and the roar of the storm, and the blasting lightning flashed from his eye.

Men feared him; and their worship was to appease him by flattery, threats, or bribery. Soon some shrewder ones among them professed special intimacy with and influence over this Being, and became the mediators between the gods and men, prophets and priests. Rapidly religion and worship grew into a system then, more and more elaborate-a slavish system of priestly tyranny over the minds and bodies of the masses. This promptly and effectually choked off every increase of knowledge, every approach to the truth, and all spiritual life and development. While knowledge and enlightenment grew in all other directions, the knowledge of God and his will and ways toward men could not grow. The organized priesthood monopolized it, distorted and misrepresented it, jealously guarded it, and surrounded it with a dense fog of myth, legend, tradition, and laws, and hid it under a mass of ritual observances, until there was scarce a grain of truth discernible, and not an act or impulse of real religion possible.

Now, with unimportant variations and some modifications, this has been the course of all religious history, in accordance with what seems to be a universal human tendency. Even Judaism yielded to it, and was bound, body, soul, and spirit, with the shackles of formalism, rabbinical tradition, and a network of legal regulations, until Christ came and de

clared, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life "the revelation of God in his true relation to man, and of man in his relation to God. And the truth shall make you free"-free from the bondage of error as well as sin; free from the tyranny of priestcraft; free from every man-imposed authority; dependent on no human mediator or master, for "One is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren." And they who received this truth, rejoicing in the liberty of this gospel, no longer trembled as the craven subjects of a heartless despot, but rejoiced as the children of a loving Father, his Spirit ever bearing witness with their spirits, and teaching them to cry, Abba, Father; fear was turned into love, and hardest duties became precious privileges.

On this foundation rock-truth, then, did Christ found his Church-the recognition of each man's personal relation to the Father through Christ the Son of God and to his fellow-men through Christ the Son of man, and the consequent love to God his Father and men his brethren. It was simply a loving family. There were no laws or rules enacted; for love regu lated the life of each and all. It was a body with one Head and many members, and as many minds and opinions and varieties of belief and custom and taste and disposition as there were members. yet none dreaming of interfering with the other. Even in their love there were dif ferences of manifestation and diversities of operation, but always one Spirit working all, and in all. Read but carefully the history of the Apostolic Church in proof of this. What glorious liberty there was among them! What radical differences of sentiment and opinion! How they withstood one another to the face! But how through it all they remained brethren beloved, in closest and most sincere fellowship! And just as soon as this ceased, as one or the other usurped authority over the rest, as councils and majorities began to infringe on individual liberty of belief, thought, and speech, so soon the family of Christ was perverted into a hierarchy.

Schisms appeared; curses and hatred, persecution and foulest corruption, wellnigh destroyed the Church utterly. For For revolting against this slavery, and denouncing the dominant despotism, Huss had to die, and the blood of thousands was shed in the wars that followedthough not in vain, for Luther took up the work, declared the independence of believers, and restored at least some of the liberty of Christianity to Europe.

Yet ever and anon since then the tendency has manifested itself, and does to this day, even in Protestantism, to deny the right, the duty, of Christian liberty to individuals, to substitute some other authority than that of Christ alone, some system of theology, some theory, some opinion of a man or a body of men, and to constrain or coerce all to bow before it. And where one or the other refuses, lo! he is forced out of the ecclesiastical organization, and becomes too often the cause of a schism in what should be the undivided body of Christ, until we have a bewilderingly motley multitude of sects and denominations, and a consequent deplorable waste of Christian energy and strength.

It is one of the chief sources of the weakness of the Church of Christ to-day that, instead of sameness of spirit, love, being recognized as the one all-sufficient bond of union between believers, sameness of opinion on this, that, or the other theological question is insisted on as necessary. "Believe what we believe," cries the majority, "think as we think, or leave the Church; you are none of us." What right has any majority to impose its speculations on me, or to make me accept its interpretation of God's word and will? Nowhere yet in God's kingdom has any majority been given such authority, or indeed been given any authority, any right or recognition whatever, in spiritual affairs. God has made me individually responsible to him, and to him alone. Christ has made my spirit forever and absolutely free by making me a member of his family, where all who love him are brethren. And so long as I love him truly, no majority on earth or in heaven, no synod or council, conference or House of Bishops, nor any other creature, can put me out of his family or deny me fellowship with my brethren.

No Church has the right to do this. For the Church is a divine institution in the same sense in which the family is a divine institution. It is not a mere human organization, like a political, mercantile, or beneficial association. If it were, it might make its own conditions for membership. It might say, You must think and teach as the rest do, or you cannot associate with us. But it is not, any more than the family is. The sole condition

of my being a member of my family is the fact of my being the child of my father. No human power or authority can disannul this relationship. And so long as through faith in Christ I am a child of my heavenly Father, neither can this relationship, and my consequent membership in his family, the Church, be disannulled. To be born again by faith and live in the fellowship of love are sole conditions, made by him who alone is the Head, who alone has the right. And to add or to take from them so much as an iota is presumptuous folly and sin, a denial and usurpation of his authority.

Nor is there any truth in the specious plea heard often of late from those who, too cowardly to expel a member, try thus to throw the onus of blame on him, that if a man, especially a minister, finds that he cannot agree with the theories and opinions insisted on by his Church, i.e., by the majority, it becomes his duty to withdraw from it, or at least not to preach and teach what it does not approve. Did Christ withdraw from the Temple, or Paul, or any of the early witnesses to the truth which was not approved of by Judaism? John Huss neither withdrew from the ecclesiastical body whose errors and evils he denounced, nor did he keep silence. Neither did Luther, nor Wesley, nor any of the great reformers, until they were forced to do so. They knew that from the outside they could do little to improve the Church's condition; they felt it their duty to remain and work in it to purify and reform it from the inside. The truth had made them free from the bondage in which the majority of their brethren still were bound. And they not only had the right, it was their solemn duty, not to hold their peace, but to labor for the emancipation and uplifting of the rest. They were not bound to stand by the majority against their own conviction. No one is.

No one, indeed, would deny the majority the right to decide on the form of organization of the Church, or any part of it. This is a merely human creation, necessary, perhaps, for mutual assistance, convenience, and greater efficiency in Christian work; but still only a means, and never to be made an end in itself. Those who accept this organization must abide by the laws and ordinances agreed to by the majority in all matters pertaining to the government and outer regulation of the body; or, refusing, let them withdraw from it, or let the body itself exclude them. But in all matters of the spirit, of belief, conviction, opinion, or conscience, the organization has no authority whatever, but every individual member has a right to be absolutely free and independent. The organization exists for its members, not the members for it. And in no wise is it ever to be mistaken for the Church itself-any more than the scaffolding of a building is to be taken for the edifice itself.

Nor is it a menace to the Church if its members hold different opinions. The Apostles themselves did this. Even on so vital a question as the resurrection of Christ they were not agreed at first. The two going to Emmaus, e. g., though they had been told that Christ was risen from the dead, doubted it, and ascribed the report to mere woman's credulity and talk. Thomas openly declared his unbelief on the subject, and said: " Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe." And yet no harm was done the Church-perhaps because he was not expelled from among their number, nor abused by the rest, but was still their brother in Christ and fellow-Apostle. Let, then, the members differ as widely as need be, so long as one and the selfsame spirit worketh in all, it will not hurt the Church. On the contrary, it would be death to it if there were no differences death from stagnation. Surely no one would maintain that it already possesses all truth, and that there are no deeper, larger views ever to be obtained. There must be. But how is it to be done unless we are not only free to confess that

Our little systems have their day,

They have their day and cease to be:

They are but broken lights of Thee, And Thou, O Lord, art more than they, but also free to examine and criticise, and by all means try to get fuller knowledge and ever clearer light?

Let knowledge grow from more to more,
But more of reverence in us dwell,
That mind and soul according well
May make one music as before,
But vaster.

Too long has it been the reproach of the Church that all the progress it has made towards larger, fuller truth and deeper knowledge has been in spite of its councils, synods, and clergy. Improvement had to be sought for and found by those outside the organization. Those within were bound hand and foot by tradition and decrees and precedents; they were denied the liberty that was theirs by divine right; or, if they insisted on it, they were crowded out or excluded by force. Then, long afterwards, when all the world had accepted the results of their thoughts and labors, the Church "authorities had to stultify themselves by reluctantly doing

the same.

And the multitude made virtue of the faith they had denied.

Has not this done the Church infinitely more harm than the extremest liberty of thought and criticism among its members, the widest differences of belief and opinion, could have done?

As a matter of fact, always in the past the life of the Church has been fullest, most earnest and active, during the periods when there was most liberty of thought and research among its members, most criticism, most difference of opinion; for then the Scriptures were most widely and diligently studied, and there was the most intense interest taken in their teachings. And, contrariwise, where this liberty was most restricted, where individual research was most hampered by ecclesiastical authority, and differences of opinion were forbidden till a dull uniformity resulted, there we find that there was most spiritual indifference and deadness. And it is so to-day. It must be so; for it is a virtual denial of Christ's sole headship, and a substitution of pope, council, synod, or popular opinion in his place, if not absolutely as head, yet as mediator between the soul and God. No Church can do

this without vital injury to itself; and no man has a right to submit to it. He vio lates his manhood, and sins against his Saviour, if, for any cause whatever, he consents to have his individual liberty taken from him. It is the gift of Christ; to Christ he must answer for it.

I have said that the Christian life of the Church and of each individual depends upon their maintaining the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free. History amply proves the truth of this so far as the Church is concerned. A little consideration will as clearly show it to be true in the case of the individual.

It is well known that personal experience of any fact makes that fact immensely more interesting, more real and important to us than it could be if received merely at second hand. I read one of Stephen Crane's realistic descriptions of battle, and it is horrible indeed. Yet how tame and pale it appears after I have myself been in the ranks that charged the enemy, have with my own eyes seen the blood flow, and with my own ears heard the curses and prayers and groans of the dying. This I can never forget while life endures. Or, I follow another as he works out some mathematical problem, and give my assent to the result. But am I interested, am I convinced, in anything like the degree that I would be if I worked out the problem myself, and reached the result independently? Now, the great trouble with a vast majority of our latter-day Christians is just this, that they know the truths of the Gospel only at second hand. The whole system of Christian theology is worked out for them and the results are communicated to them. The precious truths of our religion are all carefully wrapped up by experts, labeled, and handed to us. We gratefully accept them, but scarcely ever go to the trouble of opening the parcels and examining the contents. It is so easy simply to take the preacher's word for it, or the creed's and catechism's! And then we are sure of having it much more elaborately worked out, and probably much more correctly, than if we had to find it all out by searching the Scrip tures and by hard thinking! Yes, much easier, my friends; but how deep does it all go? To what extent does it really impress us, enter our soul, and affect our life? No doubt our theology would be

less logical, less symmetrical, a system far less complete, if we had actually to gather it ourselves from the Bible and from our own heart's experience and our own mind's thinking. But though we gained only a few fundamental truths thus independently and originally, they would be infinitely more to us, of more importance and value, of more power, and more vitally influential, than all the tomes of theology ever written by others, all the creeds ever composed, and all the sermons ever preached.

When I look at some old cathedral, I admire it for its grandeur, its symmetrical beauty, its rich symbolism, its magnificent proportions; it is a wonderful structure. But, with all its elaborateness and completeness, I would not take it in exchange for a little log cabin I know, rude and unsymmetrical and small, which is my home. This I love. I know every stone in its foundation, every log in its walls, for I myself have built it; my own hands have fashioned each log and stone. It is my very own. It fits me as a garment. It is to me what no cathedral built by others could ever be. Such is the difference between the elaborate theological systems others constructed, and that which I myself have gathered from the Scriptures and really made my own conviction and experience. The cathedral's gloom and chill could never be my home. But in the cabin's warmth and light I can live in peace and do my life's work with joy.

Why, then, should others insist on building a cathedral for me? Or why should I pretend to inhabit one? Is not perchance this the very reason why there is so much coldness and indifference in the Church to-day, because so many of us pretend to believe a great deal more than we really do? We pretend to believe every article of every Protestant creed, and every proposition of every orthodox work on theology. We are not willfully nor even consciously hypocrites in doing this. We ourselves believe that we believe them all, simply because we imagine that not to disbelieve is the same as to believe.

After all, is not this all that the complacent orthodoxy of the multitude amounts to? They do not disbelieve! But neither do they believe with anything like a positive faith, a real personal conviction, even some of the simplest and most vital truths

of the religion they profess. If they did, they could not be the self-satisfied creatures they are, the cold and disinterested men and women we find in our churches by thousands. No wonder their professions have so little relation to their lives, and their Christianity to their characters. What we do not disbelieve does not affect us. But what we believe does. I had rather have them disbelieve a great deal they profess, if only they would also honestly believe a very little.

No wonder, too, that they get so little enjoyment out of their religion. Its most precious gems of truth they never really perceive. This storehouse of truth and beauty, the Bible, is full of such gems; but these poor people see and know nothing but the words and phrases which stand for them. These words are like the bags in which precious stones are sometimes carried and stored in the vaults of our banks. On the bags are written" Pearls," “Opals,” “Diamonds." For months and years, perhaps, no one opens the bags actually to see and examine the stones. So far as that is concerned, they might as well be mere sand and pebbles. So they who accept the authority of tradition, or the preacher, or the commentary, in definition of such blessed words as Grace, Repentance, Faith. Eternal Life, the Blood of Christ, and never think of using their liberty to open up the words and see for themselves the inexpressible beauty and fullness of truth contained in them. Words so soon become stereotyped, mere empty sounds! We use them instead of ideas. We sound them, but never think them. And, worst of all, we talk of believing them, when to us they convey nothing that can be believed. Tradition has hidden the reality securely away, authority placed its stamp on the outside, and the world contentedly passes the whole from hand to hand, from mouth to mouth, without ever a glimpse at the inside! 'We be lieve in the blood of Christ." Stop a moment to think. What do you mean by "believe"? What do you understand by

"the blood of Christ"? Ask some such questions and see how few will be able to answer them. Then think what an empty, hollow mockery their faith and their religion must be to such as these who have . allowed themselves to become "entangled again with the yoke of bondage."

Surely the man or woman who has opened up, thought out for himself and made his own the rich, throbbing, living truth contained in any one such foundation-word, though he doubt half the rest of the creed, is richer in spirit and fuller of the truth than he who merely quotes a dozen creeds and only knows the words of the whole Bible by heart! And surely he is also the more genuine Christian and truer church member of the two. What pastor would not far rather have a congregation of real Christian searchers of the Scriptures, thoughtful, honest, and earnest, even though no two of them interpreted alike their teachings on Providence, Prayer, Inspiration, Sanctification, to say nothing of minor subjects, than one whose members were a unit in not disbelieving whatever he told them, and ready passively to accept any interpretation at second hand? For

There lives more faith in honest doubt, Believe me, than in half the creeds. O for more thinking Christians, however independent, in our churches! Why will men be satisfied with the dried fruit of the tree of knowledge, or fruit selected, canned, and preserved for them by others, when the tree itself stands free for all to come and pluck it fresh for themselves? They know not what they miss, what satisfaction, what peace, what joy!

Don't be content to have others tell you about the things of the soul, about truth, and about the beauty of holiness. Try them yourselves. He who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, himself invites us to "Come and see !" "And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely."