and are awaiting the growth of gold-mining and of a public opinion in Europe favorable to the restoration of silver. We may also agree that even international bimetallism would not give an ideal standard of value. But let us not shut our eyes to the serious defects of the present standard as long as its accompaniments are falling prices with the many evils incident thereto.

ARTICLE VII.

DR. GEORGE A. GORDON'S RECONSTRUCTION OF CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY.

BY THE REV. ALBERT H. PLUMB, D.D.

THE recent Anniversary Sermon before the American Board of Foreign Missions by the able and esteemed pastor of the Old South Church of Boston is entitled "The Gospel for Humanity." The author's idea of the gospel, and in what sense he regards it as for humanity, can be further learned from his volume on "The Witness to Immortality," published in 1893, and his work "The Christ of To-Day," issued in 1895.1

In these writings the author appears to hold the Trinitarian view of the person of Christ, the Unitarian view of the work of Christ, and the Universalist view of the consequences of Christ's work.

The cardinal principle in this scheme of thought is a pure assumption, and consists in the supreme authority of an idea which is styled the consciousness of Christ, but which is really the author's subjective sense or opinion of what Christ is now, by his Spirit, leading his disciples to think; an opinion which is rigidly maintained as infallible, in face of explicit teachings of our Lord to the contrary; these teachings of Christ, through his apostles and by his own lips, being waved aside as untrustworthy, because, to the author's sense, they appear incompatible with the character of God.

The author's confidence in his own ideas of the true meaning of the Scriptures is so genuine and prevailing that it saves him from all suspicion of the least taint of intentional fault 1 Both published by Houghton, Mifflin & Co.

in his peculiar use of certain terms, such as Mediator and Sacrifice. For though it would seem he might have foreseen that they would usually be understood as carrying their commonly accepted meaning, a meaning which he studiously ignores or distinctly rejects, yet his conviction is manifestly so strong that he is using them in their only true sense, that we seem to see in him a laudable desire to correct, by his use of those terms, what he deems an unfounded and harmful conception of their significance. Indeed one of the crowning excellences of these writings throughout is their deep moral earnestness and high spiritual purpose. No one can fail to see in them the workings of a powerful and cultivated mind, with a passionate zeal for righteousness, profoundly interested in the great problems of religious thought, and sincerely desirous of contributing to their just solution. In this endeavor the author moves onward with all the energy and momentum of strong conviction. His course of thought is often impetuous and fervid, and sometimes of overwhelming argumentative force. He is aided by the charm of a poetic imagination, and he has a power of expression marked by much originality, and generally by much directness and skill, yet sometimes. leaving his thought lamentably obscure.

The spirit which glows in these pages is one of broad sympathy with the interests of humanity always and everywhere, humane and generous, tenderly appreciative of the sanctities of the family, hopeful in regard to the prospects of social reform, and in every way admirable, save in the one particular already intimated,-its dogmatism, its lack of deference to the teachings of Christ. And certainly this is a very serious fault; for, according to the just canon laid down by the author's predecessor in his pastorate, the clear-seeing and sainted Manning, in so far as any person does not recognize the authority of Christ as final on all questions of religious faith, he is, in the judgment of the largest charity, to that degree lacking in the true Christian spirit, and in that respect is not

entitled even to wear the Christian name. Therein he is a rationalist rather than a Christian, because he puts the conclusions of his own reason above the words of Christ.1

In reviewing the gospel for humanity which these writings present, it will be convenient, first, to consider its contents, and, secondly, its relations.

In these writings their author aims to set forth the Trinitarian view of the person of Christ. It is often done in unfamiliar terms, and at times by such metaphysical and philosophical arguments as may seem of questionable validity to some. But if there is false logic here, there is also sound reasoning in favor of the deity of our Lord. And certainly it is an effort deserving of praise thus to ply the soul with new methods of displaying the infinite majesty of Christ, and in current forms of speech to portray his unapproachable glory. "Into the dialect of present thought," the author well says, "the meaning of the Divine Wonder must be put. There are thousands in our midst who long to hear the wonderful words of God in their own tongue."2 Evidently these books have been written in an ardent hope that they may be helpful in unveiling our Divine Lord to eyes that have been holden hitherto. If the hope shall be realized, it seems likely that therein the chief usefulness of these volumes will be found. There is indeed much extravagant praise of the benefits Unitarians are thought to have imparted to the Christian conception of life and doctrine. Very faulty representations, too, are here found of the spirit and teachings of the church which, the author thinks, required such aid. Abundant refutation of such misstatements can be found in the earlier orthodox writers. Still, it is of far more consequence that the great facts of the incarnation and the resurrection 1 Half Truths and the Truth, p. 4.

2 The Christ of To-Day, p. 35.

should be made clear, and it is to be hoped that good will result from the novelty of method and winning force of statement with which the author seeks to present the divinity of our Lord.

The stout assertions of various critics, that "The Christ of To-Day" fails to give the orthodox view of the person of Christ, have for their basis the false philosophy and loose statements in the book, which, as already intimated, only prove the author inconsistent and halting in his sincere purpose to present that doctrine.

Thus it is simple negligence which permits him to misrepresent himself in saying, "The Master and his disciples upon Tabor are not to each other as the divine and the human, but as the perfect and imperfect." If the expression had been "They are to each other not merely as the divine and the human, but also, in respect to moral excellence, as the perfect and the imperfect," the words would have fulfilled their writer's intention. In spite of, or because of, much obscurity of language, some acute critics contend that it is only a modal or a pantheistic trinity which the philosophy of the book allows. Thus the author speaks of "modes" in respect to the trinity (p. 106), such as “being and knowledge and love” (p. 101). He is understood by some to take pantheistic ground in the view that there is really but one personality in the universe (p. 110), and in affirming the identity of the divine and the human consciousness, making them differ in limit or magnitude alone. This appears too in the frequent use of the phrase "the consubstantiation of man with God" (p. 120), to which the scholarly pastor of the Roxbury Swedenborgian Church, in the New-Church Review, takes just exception.

Such expressions seem in sharp conflict with the better portions of the author's argument, and at least give occasion for much misconception. There is needed here a little of the common-sense philosophy of the Scotch school-a little of