Chapter III

IT has been seen, in the discussion.of the Free Church Catechism, what is, in broad outlines, the general body of doctrine to which the principal Nonconformist sects more or less approximate. All those, that is to say, whose names are subscribed to that formulary are at least content to accept it as a tolerable exposition of their views. Since there are, however, certain points on which each lays stress as characteristic of itself, it will be necessary to discuss these briefly one by one. First, however, a few further remarks on Nonconformity in general are necessary.

(i.) (r) It is an element common to all these sects, in greater or less degree, to repudiate ceremonialism. Since Nonconformity is an attempt to "spiritualize" religion, it is, of course, perfectly natural, since human nature is what it is, that the external should be thought to be the adversary, or, at the best, but a very doubtful friend, of the internal. Not only has sacramental doc trine in the Catholic sense ceased to be held by these sects, but ceremonial in the ordinary understood sense has disappeared with it; that is to say, at least nearly all such ceremonial as is significant of the action of God towards men. There has survived, from the necessities of the case, a certain amount of such ceremonial as is significant of man's action towards God. And the ceremonial used or omitted must be taken into account in the interpretation of such formularies as the Catechism just discussed.

A few concrete examples may illustrate this: — (a) First, all ceremonial connected with doctrines explicitly repudiated by Nonconformists has of course entirely vanished. The splendour of the altar, and, practically, the dignity of the Communion Table, has gone with all its belongings — sacrificial vestments, altar lights and the rest. But since the essence of Nonconformist Christianity lies in the " preaching of the Gospel," a corresponding exaltation has taken place with regard to the pulpit, placed as it is in the position of supreme dignity corresponding to that occupied by the altar in Catholic churches. It is curiously ironical that a movement which has as its professed object the removal of any human intermediary between God and the soul, should have as its result the substitution of the pulpit for the Tabernacle, and a preacher for a priest.

(£) Next, since all outward signs symbolical of God's Majesty have disappeared, it is natural that the corresponding outward signs of man's reverence towards God should also have nearly vanished. For example, in the vast majority of Nonconformist chapels there is no provision made for the kneeling attitude: the utmost that is practised in such chapels during prayer is a kind of crouching posture.

0. Since the preacher has taken the place of the priest, a certain unprescribed code of ritual has, from the necessities of the case, grown up around him, at least in the more wealthy chapels. The surplice has disappeared, since it is faintly suggestive of a spiritual meaning, and therefore is thought to be slightly superstitious and unspiritual; but the preaching gown, often of great splendour in its material, has taken its place, since this, together with the University hood, is significant of nothing directly spiritual. The minister's attitudes, too, in prayer, preaching and exposition, are practically prescribed for him by universal custom. So far has the exaltation of the minister advanced in recent years, that it has become the usual practice for him to wear the Roman collar in public, and to be addressed as " Reverend ".

09 With the loss of any belief in the value of externals, there has disappeared also any idea of even relative sanctity in places and days — always with the exception of Sunday, called officially "The Lord's Day ". The chapel, though in many instances at the present day built to resemble a Catholic church, and adorned with stained windows and organ, and even with the cross externally, is not thought to possess any character incompatible with its being used as a place of mildly secular entertainment or good fellowship. Political lectures are freely delivered in these chapels, and more or less festive teas held there on such days as Good Friday. It is with no thought or intention of irreverence that such things are done; rather they are the result of a definite attempt to " spiritualize "

life, and to free the soul's access to God from such use of material things as was thought to hinder it.

(2) Similar modifications have taken place with regard to all forms of liturgy. In the beginnings of Puritanism it was thought that set forms of worship were unspiritual and fettering to the free movement of the soul, and the Anglican Book of Common Prayer was held in almost as great a detestation as the missal or breviary itself. Extempore prayer, therefore, took its place.

Once more, however, human nature has taken its revenge, and those who once resented an impersonal and printed book as savouring too much of man, are now at the mercy of the personal and transient moods of one man, who prays aloud on their behalf. The inevitable result of this, too, has, however, taken place; and while in most instances the prayer is composed before hand by the minister with as much deliberation as the sermon (and, indeed, sometimes printed and published for family use), in others a frequent return is made to the Anglican Prayer Book, from which selected portions are taken in an almost liturgical order.

With regard to the celebration of sacraments a diverse use obtains; but it may be said that all Nonconform ist sacramental services approximate more or less to the Presbyterian model already described. In an in creasing number of chapels, however, some temperance beverage, or even water itself, is being substituted for wine in the communion, and the service practically always takes place in the evening on the comparatively few occasions in the year on which it is celebrated. Little separate glasses, too, are, in the interests of health, not infrequently substituted for the communion-cup.

(ii.) A great feature of Nonconformist religion is found in what are known as " Revival Services," which resemble to some extent missions preached by Catholic priests. It will be remembered that in Wales not long ago there was a great outburst of fervour roused by this means.

The object of these Revival Services is primarily to awaken first a sense of sin in the hearers, and next, by eliciting in the penitent an act of faith in Jesus Christ as the Redeemer of the world and the one sacrifice for sin, to effect his conversion and salvation.

The method used in these Revivals almost entirely consists of fervent and passionate preaching and prayer, and in the raising of the emotions of those who are present; but it is almost impossible to describe to those who have not witnessed it, especially in the Celtic districts of Wales and Cornwall, the pitch of excitement that is often reached. Men and women will openly confess their sins before the congregation or relate their most intimate spiritual experiences; hysteria often makes its appearance in unmistakable forms; and there are far greater evils than all these, arising straight from the uncontrolled uprush of the passions under this violent stimulus. Further, there is the in evitable and deplorable result, that many of the " converted," experiencing later the certain reaction from such an emotional crisis, and possessing no system of direction, penance, worship and communion by which fervour might be sustained and guided, fall back again into an apathy and indifference to all religious appeal, for which there seems no remedy. This state of things is further aggravated by a certain popular doctrine that for a backslider after such a conversion as this, there remains little or no hope in God's mercy.

It must not, however, be thought that no good results follow from these Revival Services. On the contrary, it is quite certain that in some instances true acts of contrition are elicited from the penitents, souls are brought into real interior contact with God, and the foundations are laid for lives of real goodness and endeavour. It may very well be that, under the cir cumstances, the bad results predominate over the good, and the ultimate losses over the gains; yet it is necessary to remember that the good still remains. It would be extremely unwise, for example, for a priest dealing with an inquirer who has experienced such a " conversion," to treat it as a merely emotional crisis: it may, on the contrary, very well have been a real spiritual movement accompanied by the action of grace.

(iii.) i. A recent movement in Nonconformist religion, affecting not Nonconformists only, but indeed a certain class of Anglicans as well, must not be omitted here. It is the movement known as that of the " New Theology".

It would be impossible here to give an adequate account of the contents of this new tendency — so far as it is new. The Rev. R. J. Campbell, pastor of the

" City Temple," usually considered the leader of the movement, has written a volume upon the subject which must be consulted by any who would really acquaint themselves with it; but a few remarks may be made here upon its leading characteristics.

Mr. Campbell is a Congregationalist minister, and, therefore, as will be seen later, in that position enjoys a freedom not open to the ministers of those bodies under a strong central control. Yet it is remarkable that his congregation, professedly Christian, has taken so quietly, on the whole, teaching which is in its essence completely subversive of historical Christianity as commonly understood. Teachers of the " New Theo logy," however, entirely repudiate this interpretation of their system, and inform their followers that the real essence of Christianity is still retained, and in the only form in which, in the future, educated persons will be able to conceive of the contents of the ancient creeds. The old dogmas, we are told, contained a substratum of truth beneath a quantity of falsehood; and it is for the re-statement of this truth, suitable for modern times, and tenable in the light of modern knowledge, rather than for the establishment of a different religion, that the " New Theology " is designed. It is necessary to add, however, that amongst many sections of the Nonconformist public, the " New Theology " is repudiated and condemned, and its ad herents denounced as no less than apostate from Christianity. The "new theologians," too, as a class, are not considered by their brethren as very sound or erudite scholars. Yet, since the movement has won a place for itself in modern Non-Catholic thought, and is plainly only a formulation of conclusions to which many Protestant minds have been for long, and inevitably, approaching, it is necessary to give a brief account of its main characteristics.

(1) The doctrine of the Divinity of Christ, in the old sense, is explicitly repudiated. All men, we are told, are capable of " becoming Christs ". All that Christ did and was, it is within the power of other men to do and be. All are potential Christs and Sons of God: all are capable of attaining to His sinlessness and knowledge (such as they were); all can " atone " for the sins of the world by the defence of the right, by witnessing to truth, and by suffering for it, in the same kind as that in which Christ suffered on Cal vary. He is the most perfect of men, supremely the Son of Man, and, in exactly that degree therefore, the Son of God, since God is in man. There is no difference in kind between Him and His human brothers.

(2) The teaching of this school concerning God is indistinguishable from Pantheism. Human consciousness stands in the same kind of relation to Divine consciousness, as that in which a bay or harbour stands to the open sea. There is one vast Spirit permeating all, transcendent only of creation in so far as it is in itself unlimited and creation is limited. All energy and activity is Divine in its very essence; even the most "sinful" and uncontrolled energies rise from the action of " God "; such passions as those of lust or greed are, though deplorable, manifestations of a Divine power, and embody real, though mistaken and reprehensible attempts, to realize good. There is no sin, in the strict sense, there is only ignorance and selfishness and limitation. There is, therefore, in reality nothing corresponding to the idea of Atonement, or of the offering of an innocent and willing victim to God, by which offering sin might be remitted.

(3) The "supernatural," too, in the understood sense, has no existence. There are not two worlds, of nature and grace, but one only, with one set of laws permeating the whole. " Miracles " are impossible; events apparently miraculous are but unusual mani festations of some natural law not yet understood. The Virgin Birth and the Resurrection of Christ are not facts; their definition was only a crude and mistaken manner of embodying spiritual facts that underlay belief in them. The essence of the Resurrection-dogma, for example, lies in the survival and the living power of Jesus Christ in the world to-day.

On principles such as these it is easy to see what the " New Theology " makes of the doctrines of the sacraments and of grace. Grace is merely the Divine energy working in the soul almost blindly; the sac raments are but occasions of, and picturesque incen tives towards, virtuous effort. The utmost that they can effect is, like the effect of the Cross itself, merely a dramatic appeal to the finer and nobler emotions of men.

(4) The doctrine of Hell is of course entirely repu diated, and Universalism has taken its place.

Such are, more or less, the principal theological conclusions formulated by the new movement; and they are accompanied, in the realm of exegesis, by a very radical form of " Higher Criticism," by which the utterances of the Apostles and of Christ Himself are criticized with entire freedom; and, in the realm of politics, by advanced Socialism. The movement is, in all its branches, perhaps the most characteristically " modern " of all modernities, and embodies the very latest and most transient conclusions of the most re cent and popular tendencies. Antiquity and tradition are reckoned as of no importance at all; and, while experience is considered as the sole foundation of religious truth, the "experience" of the past is dismissed as childish and immature: the present only is held to be of any considerable value. In this respect, as well as in some of its theological conclusions, the movement shows an affinity with the extreme forms of continental " modernism "-1

It is this movement that is beginning to affect — or perhaps, even more, to express — the tendencies of all modern religious thought that is unconfined by authoritative formularies. While most Nonconformist bodies have indeed certain trust-deeds by which a continuity of teaching is supposed to be secured, and by their faithfulness to which their right to hold en dowments, devoted to those respective codes of belief, is intended to be tested; yet the terms in which these deeds are drawn up are often so vague and indefinite

1 It is interesting to note that at a recent meeting of the " Congregational Union," the authorities, while showing a certain disapproval of the "new-theology" tenets, refused, as a matter of fact, explicitly to condemn them — no doubt in the interests of "liberty".

IO *

as to permit of enormous divergencies from the substance which they were intended to embody. So long as the old phrases are employed and certain terms of communion and discipline observed, new interpretations may be developed to an astonishing extent, without the letter of the law being infringed, or the endow ments forfeited.1 Anglicanism, too, in a lesser de gree, is capable of these adaptations (and has therefore to some extent been affected by the " New Theology "); but the Thirty-nine Articles and the Prayer Book as well as the retention of the Three Creeds, at any rate up to the present, make impossible such a complete evacuation of the Christian position as has been accomplished in certain of the Nonconformist congrega tions. The Broad Church School, however, as has already been remarked, exhibits some characteristics of this recent movement; and the temper of mind in which such a theological point of view takes its rise and flourishes, if not the theological standpoint itself, is of very wide prevalence at the present day in Non-Catholic circles. The movement for the abolition of the Athanasian Creed is a recurrent symptom of this tendency.

2. The difficulties in meeting satisfactorily such " theologians " as these are, of course, innumerable and disheartening. For, first, there is practically no plat form at all on which the controversy can be conducted. Not only is all present-day external authority in i A recent case, still subjudice, shows the possibility of the expulsion of a minister from a chapel for refusing to preach the Calvinistic creed laid down by the trust-deeds of the chapel.

matters of faith repudiated by them, but the very appeal first made by their Puritan predecessors to the Bible as the written Word of God, is also set aside. According to their system there is no infallible authority anywhere, since all men are equally liable to error, and the human authors of the Scriptures no less than the rest. The one court that must be obeyed — and that a fallible one like all others— is the interior consciousness and " experience " of each individual. There is no final revelation anywhere: " Revelation " at the best is a gradual and continuous process, carried on by the Divine action in the best consciousness of the best men, slowly, with many mistakes and much retracing of steps, emerg ing, not into absolute truth, but into the nearest to it that can be attained. Obviously, then, if there is no final court of appeal anywhere — not even in a written book, I have no more right to object to another man's " experience" than he has to object to mine. Argument becomes very nearly impossible.

The argument with them then — such as it is — must begin at the very beginning; and yet even so it is an argument that is, humanly speaking, almost bound to fail of its effect, since, as will have been seen, the new theologian, however profound his spiritual humility may be, is practically, from his very premises, bound to take his stand upon the most intense form conceivable of intellectual pride. Certainly this pride takes most seductive and appealing appearances; it shapes itself into a confession of entire ignorance, but its humility is tempered by an insistence upon the ignorance of all other men as well. That no formulated dogma can be possibly true, at least in the sense in which it was drawn up, is an inevitable corollary from the statement that " Revelation " must always be continuous; that a twentieth-century divine is in certain matters qualified to judge and to condemn the fallible and immature teaching of Jesus Christ and His Apostles, is a further corollary of the same statement. And yet one further corollary follows from the premises of the " new theologians," to the effect that the most recent opinion of modern days is more trustworthy than any conclusions of departed saints and doctors.

The argument, then, if it can be conducted at all under these conditions, must begin, as has been re marked from the very beginning, and deal with such subjects as the existence of a Personal God, evidences of the Divinity of Christ, and the proofs of His Divine Mission. It is, of course, extraordinarily easy destructively to criticize the philosophical and exegetical positions of the " new theologian," yet not much pur pose would be served by this method, since he is, on his premises, as ready to declare himself as wrong as his adversary. It is not demolition that he needs — his misfortune is that he has already demolished too much — it is rather a patient and painstaking building-up before his eyes of the solid bases of the Christian religion in its more elementary and fundamental as pects.

Yet with all this should go a cordial recognition of his good intentions, his intellectual energy, and his fearless, if rash, proclamation of his opinions even to his own personal detriment, as well as of certain true principles which he has rescued from the crum bling ethics of many of his Protestant brethren.

(a) It is something gained that he is not a formalist of the Pharisaic type. The movement, in fact, is very largely energized by a healthy reaction against a mere repetition of formularies not assimilated, and a mere slothful reliance upon the Cross of Christ without any effort to correspond with its teaching. There is no more bitter fruit anywhere of the discredited doctrine of Justification by Faith only than the life of spiritual lethargy and worldliness which its professors are en abled by it, almost conscientiously, to lead. The " new theologian " at least has done this: he has faced facts and attempted to think about them; he has refused any longer to acquiesce in a system of mere unintelligent emotionalism; he has determined to repeat no longer phrases which have become to him meaningless fetishes.

(b} It is true that his system is a caricature of thought, but it is thought that he has caricatured. He has realized, for example, something of the doctrine of Divine Immanence, and if he has forgotten its correlative of Divine Transcendence, it is something that he has not forgotten them both. " Immanence" has be come for him such an amazing reality that he may be pardoned if, for a while he conceives of it as the only reality. This sympathy with the creature is so intense that he has, temporarily, confused it with the Creator.

(c) It must be remembered that even his Socialism itself is an honest attempt to embody his new perception of the brotherhood of men. He is so filled with a realization of human rights that once more he has forgotten Divine rights; and his heresy, as a whole, startling and blasphemous though it is to Catholic ears, takes, like all other heresies, what strength it has from true principles rather than from false. His logic is pitilessly correct; all that is wrong with rt is that it begins with wholly inadequate and faulty premises. Even his very intellectual pride itself is largely due to the same considerations; if man were, in reality, the highest manifestation of the Divine Life, and the process of time an inevitably widening Revelation, the most recent religious thinker would be perfectly right in considering himself not only the heir of all the ages, but the Lord and Master of the whole world at that stage of it in which he lives.

(iv.) A further characteristic of Nonconformity should be mentioned here, which, though not in itself connected with any dogmatic position, is yet so intimately bound up with the system as to be responsible to a large extent for that system's success among the middle-classes of England. This is the social life fos tered and encouraged by the chapels.

Mr. Charles Booth's studies of the religious influences of London show plainly enough that Nonconformity, with one or two exceptions, has practically no effect at all upon the lowest class of the population; and what is true of London is true elsewhere. Chapels simply do not flourish among the very poor. Neither has Non conformity any power at all among the Upper Ten. It is the widespread strength enjoyed by this system of belief among the comfortable and tolerably well-to-do, that gives it its power to-day. And that power is sustained to a very large degree by the admirable manner in which the life of the chapel is extended and organized in such departments as those of recreation, study and social meetings, amongst those classes who can enjoy these things in common.

For example, a great feature of Nonconformist activity lies in its Men's Meetings or " Pleasant Sunday Afternoons". That this kind of semi-religious entertainment1 has a deplorable result upon real religion (for, quite naturally, attendance at this half-concert, half-lecture affair is soon thought to fulfil all the duties of worship) cannot be denied. Yet, on the other hand, its success in attaching men to the chapel system is equally undeniable. They find there that religion is presented to them in a form that makes practically no demands at all upon self-denial, and is made further palatable by excellent music, easy companionship, and interesting short ethical lectures. Their conscience is soon satisfied that they are not neglecting religion altogether, and they are entertained by the very process itself. Nor are they usually troubled much at these services by the preaching of any dogmas except the most reassuring and comfortable. Further, in connexion with the Men's Meetings, there are organized even more social entertainments, outings, excursions and popular lectures; and at almost every point in

!The author noticed recently in Boston, U.S.A., the title of" The Under-dog " announced as the subject of the sermon in a Baptist Chapel.

the members' lives it is to the chapel that they look for encouragement and recreation.

No doubt in their origins these semi-religious meet ings were aimed at the drawing under the influence of religion men who were altogether alienated from it, in the same kind of manner as were the " Oratorios " of St. Philip; yet the lack of any coherent system of worship or of any definite code of religious observances in the Nonconformist bodies, has resulted in the weakening rather than in the strengthening of real spiritual life by these means.1

Other extensions of the same system are to be found in the " Mothers' Meetings," the Bible Classes, and above all, in the Sunday Schools. In all, the religious intention is evident, and the religious element always present; yet the inevitable result of a lack of definite dogma and practice has come about, and it is probably in the " teas " and the excursions and the entertain ments, and the " prize-givings " rather than in any explicit Christianity, that their strength lies.

Lastly, the unsacerdotal form of belief has made possible yet one more enticement to certain kinds of minds to adhere to the chapel— and that, the oppor tunities offered to the talkative and complacent to en gage in more or less ministerial work. Any man -with a gift of speech can easily find opportunities of exercising it; he can conduct Bible Classes or give addresses with considerable freedom; and if he has

1 At a recent Nonconformist gathering in Hull, one of the speakers earned a considerable degree of unpopularity by his very outspoken criticisms of the P.S.A. system of religion.

true zeal and devotion he can honestly feel that he can use these gifts to real advantage. It is a common complaint amongst converts to Catholicism, drawn from those circles, that their personal service is no longer required; and it would be as well for priests who have to deal with these to consider whether there are not certain kinds of work that might be entrusted to them — the superintendence of clubs, the visiting of the outcasts, or even the instruction of other converts in the more elementary stages.

(v.) It may be seen, then, as a whole, that Nonconformity corresponds very closely with the various sections of the Church of England, always excepting that of the Ritualists; and it is for this reason that it does not seem necessary to discuss them at greater length. Roughly speaking, there is no clear doctrinal difference between the average old-fashioned Nonconformist and the strict Low Churchman, or between the " New Theology" and extreme " Broadchurchism". It is the "Establishment" only that divides them. It cannot even be said that they differ as regards the doctrine of the ministry, since the Low Churchman re pudiates, as warmly as any Nonconformist, belief in any exceptional grace bestowed by the bishop's hands, and to the Broad Churchman and the "New Theologian" the whole thought is simply alien. Neither does the Book of Common Prayer cause much real difference, since the Low Churchman borrows prayer-meeting methods from the Nonconformist, and the Nonconformist liturgical extracts from the Anglican. What has been.drawn out therefore at considerable length in this book, as regards the positive dogmatic standpoints of various sections of the Church of England, may be taken (with the general exceptions already noted, and particular exceptions to follow) as tolerably accurate in the case of the corresponding Nonconformist sects. It is hardly to be doubted, therefore, that in case Disestablishment should presently come about, very large portions of the Church of England would gradually find their way into communion with those who most keenly sympathize with them, but who are at present removed from them by the fact of Establishment and the spiritual drawbacks which, in the case of a National Church, are inseparable from that fact.