away. The final result of inquiry need not be feared. Truth must be the outcome. Some distinctions need to be made in this matter. There are doubting and doubting. There is dishonest as well as HONEST doubt—using these terms not as applying to the persons, but to the moral and intellectual act.

99 66

Webster defines doubt thus: "A fluctuation of mind arising from defect of knowledge or evidence; uncertainty of mind; unsettled state of opinion; suspense; hesitation." You will at once see that a doubter is not necessarily an unbeliever, though in popular language these words are often confused. An unbeliever has already decided; a doubter is still undecided. The former may have no good reason for his unbelief; the latter must have a sufficient reason for his doubt. Now, this "fluctuation," "uncertainty," suspense," "hesitation," may arise from an unnecessary defect of knowledge, from a neglect to examine and weigh the evidence carefully. In fact, there is often in such cases a total disregard of the evidence, and but little, if any, effort to remedy the defect of knowledge. It is sometimes the ignorance of the man at the wheel, and not any error of the chart by which he sails, that explains the drifting of the vessel upon the rocks. When Galileo announced the discovery of the satellites of Jupiter, the scientific world refused to believe.

66

Though such a state of mind is called to-day doubt, it does not deserve the name. It is rather a prejudice, in the proper meaning of the word. It is a pre-judgment, without any investigation. This is the character of much of the current doubt regarding the Bible and Christianity. And doubt, be it remembered, must justify itself; it must be able to give a reason for its existence. "Men miss truth," says Whateley, 'more often from their indifference about it than from intellectual incapacity," or, we might add, from defective evidence. And indifference to the truth is no adequate justification of doubting. Close observation is not needed for one to discover that much of what passes current as doubt is rather pre-judgment. "The first step to self-knowledge," says Julius Hare, "is self-distrust. Nor can we attain to any kind of knowledge except by a like process. We must fall on our knees at the threshold, or we shall not gain entrance into the temple." But this so-called doubting was never known to fall on its knees, nor to distrust itself.

Much of it is due to indolence. Gold must ordinarily be worked for; sand and dirt may be gathered in the street. Fashion accounts for much of it, for here, as elsewhere, she is a tyrant. Another cause of this sort of doubting is the idea so common that it indicates superior wisdom and liberality. We doubt the faith of our fathers, the faith of the Church, or the Bible, because we know so much. But doubt is due to lack of knowledge, and not to its presence. And such doubt forgets that we must start with certainty somewhere, but proposes to saw the limb off while sitting on it. "A thorough Agnostic ought not to be sure that he is an Agnostic; he should not, in fact, be too confident that he is himself, or that he is at all."

Reverent, rational inquiry into the foundation of our faith is possible. Without ceasing to have convictions we may examine, amend, reject, approve. It is not necessary to tear down the house in order to examine the foundation. There are some conclusions, with ages of thought back of them, that may be considered settled, and that man is a fool who thinks himself big enough to reject all these and use in his building only his own spider-webs.

Discussion with this kind of doubting is of no avail. Arguments are useless. Evidence is of no importance, except that which tells for their side. The truth is a secondary matter. That was doubt gone mad. Such doubt is anything but honest. It is moral and intellectual poison to breathe it. It dwarfs the mind, as certainly as it does the spiritual nature, and is due to anything else than superior wisdom.

The counterfeit, however, has detained us long enough. Let us turn now to the .genuine, and look at honest doubting.

This contrast has been well stated by Verney: "Doubt is the amusement of frivolous minds, but it is the unutterable sorrow of deeper souls." What, then, is the main characteristic of this "unutterable sorrow that separates it from this " amusement of frivolous minds," the demon of the nineteenth century which has been described?

Honest doubt comes from a sincere desire to know the truth; and no doubting is honest which is not marked by this paramount desire. Doubt of itself is sterile. "Doubt and live" is an impossible evangel. Not so "believe and live." Therefore it is truth in order to action. It is not truth alone as the final end, for the knowledge of truth carries with it the obligation to do the truth. Over against every truth lies a duty. Only he that doeth the truth cometh to the light. Hear Carlyle in some of his better moments, as he speaks in Sartor Resartus: "One circumstance I note, after all the nameless woe that Inquiry, which for me, what it is not always, was genuine Love of the Truth, had wrought me, I nevertheless still love Truth, and would bate no jot of my allegiance to her. Truth, I . cried, though the heavens crush me for following her; no falsehood, though the whole celestial lubber-land were the price of the apostasy. In conduct it was the same. Had a divine messenger from the clouds, or miraculous handwriting on the wall, convincingly proclaimed to me "This thou shalt do,' with what passionate readiness, as I often thought, would I have done it, had it been leaping into the infernal fire."

And again: "Most true it is, as the wise man teaches us, that doubt of any sort cannot be removed except by action.' On which ground, too, let him who gropes painfully in darkness or uncertain light, and prays vehemently that the dawn may ripen into day, lay this other precept well to heart, which to me was of invaluable service: Do the duty which lies nearest thee.' Thy second duty will already have become clearer." In brief, much must be made, in solving doubts, of the conduct of life.

Indulgence is asked while another quotation is given from one who cannot be accused of any theological bias, and whose words many have received as a new Gospel. "This, then," says Mr. Emerson, "is the right ground of the sceptic-this of consideration, of self-containing, not at all of unbelief, not at all of universal denying, or of universal doubting-doubting even that he doubts; least of all, of scoffing and profligate jeering at all that is stable and good. These are no more his moods than are those of religion and philosophy. He is the considerer, the prudent, taking in sail, counting stock, husbanding his means, believing that a man has too many enemies than that he can afford to be his own; that we cannot give ourselves too many advantages in this unequal conflict, with powers so vast and unweariable ranged on one side, and this little conceited popinjay that a man is, bobbing up and down with every danger on the other. It is a position taken up for better defence, as of more safety, and one that can be maintained; and it is one of more opportunity and range; as when we build a house, the rule is, to set it not too high nor too low, under the wind, but out of the dirt."

Would that these wise words might be pondered by every one who has been caught or tempted by the false lights of to-day, many of whom seem to think that the coarser, less reverent, more flippant, less reasonable, and more scoffing and universal their unbelief is, the better it is, and the more honest they are.

Possibly some one may be ready to say, "If all this is true, then not every one can be an honest doubter." And so saying, he would speak the truth. It does take

an honest, earnest, sincere, thoughtful man to be an honest doubter. He must be able to give a reason for his doubt, or else give it up. He must seek in every possible way to remedy the defect of knowledge or evidence, and when the light comes, however faint it may be, his heart and head must follow it even unto death.

There are, there have been, such noble souls among the high and low, who, through the deepest darkness of doubt, have been led into the light of triumphing faith. Such a man was the celebrated English essayist, John Foster. Much alone, disliking society, he was never idle nor thoughtless. He wore a path in the solid pavement of his church at Chichester by his nightly vigils, wrestling with his doubts. He struggled for hours in prayer for light; he besought the dead to speak to him of the unseen; persistently did he cry out that he might know the truth in regard to God, and eternity, and immortality. Out of such deep experiences the light came, and he fashioned those great thoughts that stirred his generation so mightily, and have been the sheet-anchor to many a soul since under like temptations.

Justice Coleridge, of England, tells us that when Arnold of Rugby was in college, he was greatly troubled over some statements in the Thirty-nine Articles. "He opened his mind to a friend, from him he received the wisest advice, which he had the wisdom to act upon; he was bid to pause in his inquiries, to pray earnestly for help and light from above, and turn himself more strongly than ever to the practical duties of a holy life. He did so, and, through severe trials, was finally blessed with a perfect peace of mind and a settled conviction."

We need ever to remember that mysteries surround all thinking. If we wait for all these to be explained, doubt will never end, action will never begin. We see only in enigmas here. The light is not clear, nor yet is it dark. Truth is not all known, neither is it wholly wanting. The earth in which we dwell is not all a plain. Thank God for it. There are mountains and valleys, the stormy ocean and the peaceful lake, the rushing torrent and the waters of quietness, the barren waste and pastures of tender grass-in and by some of these we may rejoice, find rest, and gain strength; through some of them we must fight our way with tireless energy, disciplined by the conflict; but out of them all enough truth shall come to light our way heavenward, as it grows brighter and brighter unto the perfect day.

It will thus be seen that mere familiarity with current discussions, skill in raising objections and making them appear as formidable as possible, the hearing or the reading of a few coarse, scoffing lectures, all of these do not of themselves make a man an honest doubter, though they may make him a thoughtless unbeliever.

He is certainly to be pitied who decides that he will decide nothing; who doubts God and His Word, and lives as if they were not true, without ever asking whether he himself is true; who is contented without knowing whether he is safe, because he knows not whether he is right; who, amid the storm, can jest and laugh, caring not who is at the helm, heeding not whether the hoarse murmur he hears is the noise of the surf upon the fatal rocks toward which he is surely drifting, or only the freshening breeze that is bringing him into the haven.

NO. IV.-VOL. I.—THE THINKER.

N

GERMAN

CURRENT

THOUGHT.

KINGDOM OF GOD, COMMUNITY, CHURCH. BY PROF. E. HAUPT, Halle (Zeitschr. für Theologie und Kirche, 1892, First Part).—The distinction between the first and third of these terms has long been known, and is now becoming still more emphatic. The second term has a novel look, and yet there is reason for it. Dr. Haupt uses it for the Church as found in the New Testament, reserving "Church" for the Church of subsequent developments. If the distinction could be maintained, it would. undoubtedly prevent the confusion now existing between two very different things. In the first part of his paper the writer expounds the three terms in their mutual relations, and in the second part draws some practical conclusions. We will notice the first part.

"The Kingdom of God" may be regarded as the fundamental conception in Christ's teaching; and yet, like other great ideas, it is nowhere defined by Christ Himself. We are left to gather its import for ourselves from the whole teaching of Christ. Language gives little help. The phrase in itself might mean "the sphere of God's rule" or "God's position as ruler." These meanings would fit some passages, but not all. The phrase on Christ's lips grew out of Old Testament germs. Though the phrase itself is not found in the Old Testament, its component elements are there. Israel was God's peculiar people. God was to rule, not only over Israel, but through it over all mankind. Neither of these purposes was realized; and so the realizing became a vision of the future. Then the idea took another turn. The demands of the kingdom, which may be summed up in the thought of righteousness, came to be viewed more and more as the conditions of the blessing and salvation which God bestowed on His people. "The phrase became a comprehensive name for salvation, for the sum of the blessings which God's rule was to bring with it." This side of the idea became increasingly prominent, not what the kingdom required, but what it gave. "Blessed is he that eats bread in the kingdom of God." It was quite in keeping with the loving spirit of Christ that He should emphasize this aspect of the doctrine. "To Him, as to Judaism, God's kingdom is a designation of the state when the highest good and all the blessings included in it belong to men. And this idea is carried much further by Jesus than was the case in Judaism. For whereas the latter regarded righteousness as a human work, which was the condition of spiritual blessing, to the Lord righteousness was itself a part of the blessing-not a postulate, but a consequence of the opening of the kingdom of heaven, and so finally a work and gift of God."

But while formally the Jewish and Christian conceptions are similar, their contents are essentially different-in one case worldly, in the other spiritual. This is the deep significance of the phrase, “kingdom of heaven," which points, not to the locality, but to the nature of the kingdom. Incidentally, Dr. Haupt vindicates the genuineness of the phrase in Matthew, to whom it is peculiar. "Its absence in Mark and Luke is explained by their books being designed for heathen Christians, who knew nothing of the religious application of the word 'heaven.' It would be inexplicable how Matthew should attribute the expression to Jesus if He had not used it, since both expressions were equally familiar to Judaism then." The choice of the term, with all the other teaching of this kind, was a protest against the earthly, material meaning which the Jews were only too ready to give to God's promises.

"Even on earth the real nature of a kingdom, such as the Roman or German, lies not in local or temporal association, but in the moral character which grows out of the co-operation of the most diverse factors-psychological, geographical, historical. Every kingdom has its definite stamp, one may say its individual, moral aspect, and into this character every separate member is born; it makes him, in distinction from foreigners found there, really and truly a member of the nation. So in the idea'kingdom of God,' Christ thinks first of its inner essence, the sum of the features characterizing it, which is just this-it is the state in which God exercises His rule in dispensing spiritual blessings. Where these blessings exist, there is God's kingdom, and therein it consists. As every kingdom is an organism, so also is this; but not an organism of an outward kind, not a particular form of visible things, but an organism of purely invisible, supra-earthly, supra-sensible, supra-worldly relations, blessings, gifts, and powers. It is a state where within this earthly world, nay, under its forms, another higher world attains realization—the world of eternity. This kingdom Christ brought into the world, for in Him this eternal life, this fulness of supra-earthly blessings was really existent. In the moment, therefore, when He existed, God's kingdom existed potentially in all its fulness, as the entire fulness of whatever the plant produces is contained in the seed-corn. Thus we see why Jesus speaks of the kingdom of God before speaking of a community. Individuals enter the kingdom, which must therefore exist first. It exists when He exists. Certainly it is not to remain shut up in Him; children are to be born to Him, as the dew from the dawn; but its existence depends not on all this, but on the existence of Christ Himself. It is thus clear how this kingdom is described now as present, now as future; the one, inasmuch as its full contents already exist, its powers are at work, its gifts are offered to be enjoyed; the other, inasmuch as it has not yet attained full victory outwardly in the world." "The kingdom of God, therefore, is for Christ a comprehensive phrase for the New Testament salvation in the widest sense."

Community, the New Testament" Church," is a much simpler idea. The phrase kingdom of God" occurs seldom in the Apostolical writings, either in the writings of Paul, who was not Christ's immediate disciple, or the other Apostles. Even in Christ's discourses in John it rarely occurs. Haupt explains this by the freedom and independence given to the Apostles, enabling them to vary their language according to circumstances. The phrases corresponding in the Apostles' writings to "kingdom of heaven" are such as salvation, life, eternal life, inheritance, &c. Community or Church does not correspond to it. We could not say, "The Church belongs to the poor or to children," or conversely, "If thy brother will not hear thee, tell it to the kingdom of heaven." "The relation between the two ideas is this: Kingdom of God is the sum of the gifts of salvation, community the sum of its subjects; one is the state in which the persons are, the other the persons who are in that state. We thus see how Christ speaks so little of the community; for in His lifetime God's kingdom existed only in Him."

66

The doctrine of the community is especially Paul's work, chiefly in the Ephesians. 'Homogeneousness is its essential mark. But the point in which this unity has its root needs to be rightly apprehended. Doubtless homogeneity of faith, identity of faith in Christ, common hope, are necessary signs of the community; but that which binds the community together most closely is what God has done in them and given to them. It is in the common character of the blessings they enjoy, of the Divine powers given them, of adoption, peace, eternal life, and so of purely Divine gifts to the community, that not merely the root, but the essence of their unity lies. . . The community (Church) is thus the aggregate of those to whom God has given