future life. It looks to the betterment of the life that is now and here. Any careful reader of the Bible will have noticed how little attention it devotes to the future, and how much to the present life. This present life can not be insignificant in the general plan of human existence. Even if it be regarded merely as a preparation for a future life, it must still be of vast impor tance. And an order of society that shall present a favorable environment for human development must be a better condition for preparation for the future than a different order of society would be. This fact is generally recognized now in our theories of missions. We are anxious that the heathen should be christianized, not because we suppose them to be dropping into hell at the rate of sixty a minute, but because Christianity will make their life better, and purer, and happier in this world.

But Christianity proposes also to make the life of Christian nations better, and purer, and happier than it is now. It is a moral and social force for the elevation of the nations, which has by no means yet accomplished its full purpose; and the Christian minister is intended to be an organ for the exercise of this world-uplifting power. The question may be asked, however, whether the end proposed may not be accomplished by the mere presentation of the gospel as the power for the salvation of individual souls. When men and women have been converted, will not society come right of itself? What can the minister do to make it right? Can he be expected to become a teacher of sociology, and employ his mind about questions of wages, of rent, of taxation, and the like? Our answer is that it may often become desirable, if not necessary, that the minister should have something positive to teach touching the well-being of society. The inculcation of general principles may not always be enough. Instance the case of Nathan before David. It becomes necessary for the preacher sometimes to say, Thou art the man. The command, thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, sometimes needs more explicit explanation; as it did once at least in the history of Christ. But in order to give such explanation a good deal of ethical and especially sociological knowledge is required. This,

however, does not mean that the minister must in general be a professor of sociology, and that he should turn his pulpit into a stage for the habitual discussion of current sociological questions.

Thirdly, and finally, sociological knowledge will be helpful to the minister at the present time, because present social conditions are of such character as largely to hinder the success of the gospel. Among these conditions are the intense struggle for existence, the incessant conflict between capital and labor, and the estrangement of the masses, especially of laboring men, from the church. The great majority of working men do not care for the church, because they think the church does not care for them. The church, like the law, they say, is always on the side of capital against labor. not be true in the broad sense

This

may

But if the church had always

in which it is so often affirmed. plainly manifested the spirit of Christ, there would have been no occasion for the suspicion that she is partial to kid gloves and money bags. But the fact is that ministers, especially of rich and fashionable congregations, have often apologized for the wrongs of mammon; and this perhaps not so much because they were so exceedingly perverse, as because they were entirely ignorant of how "the other half" lives. A little wider knowledge of men and society would have given them larger and more generous sympathies. It has been said that in times of labor war the ministers and lawyers are generally on the side of capital. The fact has been noted that, at the time of the Homestead troubles, some years ago, when a private corporation made formal war upon residents of Pennsylvania, introducing for that purpose armed troops (Pinkertons) from another state, there was but one minister, a Methodist, in all that region who took the part of the laborers. The most charitable explanation of such facts is that so many ministers are without any knowledge of social and economic conditions. But such facts greatly injure the church. More knowledge of social and political conditions would presumably lead to different conduct. Some study of sociological science would at least teach ministers when to be silent, if they have nothing wise or profitable to say.

IX.

NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS.

[Any books noticed in this REVIEW can be obtained, at the lowest prices, of the Reformed Church Publication Board, 1306 Arch St., Philadelphia, Pa.] THE THEOLOGY OF ALBRECHT RITSCHL. By Albert Temple Swing, A.M., Professor of Church History in Oberlin Theological Seminary, together with INSTRUCTION IN THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION, by Albrecht Ritschl, Translated by Permission from the Fourth German Edition, by Alice Mead Swing, A. B. Pages xiv +296. Longman's, Green & Co., 91 and 93 Fifth Ave., New York, 1901. Price, $1.40, net.

Next to Schleiermacher no theologian of the present century has attracted so much attention and so profoundly impressed theological thought, especially in Germany, as Albrecht Ritschl. In the proper sense of the term he has founded no school of theology, and yet at the present day the great majority of living. active theologians in Germany are following more or less closely in the line of his thought. The great mediation school which once promised so much and whose best works are still worth studying, has entirely disappeared before the rising sun of Ritschlianism. And the few confessional theologians, especially of the Lutheran persuasion, who are still left, like Luthardt, are looking, sadly no doubt, towards the end of their vocation. In England also, as well as in America, some of Ritschl's leading thoughts have been gaining currency, through the influence of many students who have of late years visited the German universities. Hence it can not but be desirable to have at hand, in convenient form, a work containing correct information concerning the true nature and tendency of Ritschl's theology. There have not been wanting offers of such works. But these have generally been so divergent in their representations and some of them so manifestly unfair that they could not be received with a very high degree of confi dence. Stählin's work on Kant, Lotze and Ritschl, translated by Simon, is hostile throughout, and is a true product of German consequenzmacherei. Professor Orr, who in his Christian View of God and the World, is constantly criticising Ritschl, has evi dently not understood him. Others have followed in the wake of Professor Orr. Hence, as a result, many of the common secondhand opinions of Ritschlianism current in this country have been, in the language of Professor Swing, "as ridiculously hostile as they have been absurdly unfounded."

Professor Swing's work differs from most of the works preceding it in that it rests upon thorough knowledge of the subject with which it deals, and proceeds from a mind in sympathy with the various positions discussed. Professor Swing does not be lieve that Ritschl is a dangerous theological teacher, or that Ritschlianism is subversive of evangelical Christianity. He

quotes approvingly a letter addressed by Dr. Philip Schaff to Dr. Mann on the occasion of Ritschl's death, which occurred in 1889. The letter is as follows: "So Ritschl is dead; but not his school. I do not have so unfavorable an opinion of it as you have. It is a reaction against the Hegelian much-knowledge and all-knowledge. It once more leads away from the realm of speculation and up to the sources of revelation, and from confessional ecclesiasticism to biblical Christianity. At any rate, Ritschl has started a movement in theology." In harmony with this opinion of Dr. Schaff's Professor Swing says, "But I have a deep interest in Ritschl also for his own sake, because his historical method is more suggestive than that of any other modern writer on the subject of doctrine. He has introduced a method of analysis which is revolutionizing historical and doctrinal study." If in relation to Professor Swing's attitude to his subject we were to make any criticism, we should say that he manifests perhaps slightly too much anxiety to establish his orthodoxy. Orthodox in a sense Ritschl doubtless is, but not in the sense of the prevailing confessionalism, whether Lutheran, Canvinistic or Arminian. He does, however, upon occasions appeal to the Lutheran confessions in support of his positions.

Professor Swing's material in this volume is arranged in six chapters. The first chapter contains a general introduction, in which, besides a biographical outline, we find a general discussion of Ritschl's aim and method. His aim is said to have been to "make divine revelation positively normative for everything in Christian theology." His method is described as historical, analytical, constructive and practical. The following sentence shows the extent of Ritschl's practical tendency: "In dogmatics," he says, "one should take up nothing that cannot be used in preaching and in the intercourse of Christians with one another." The second chapter is entitled: Presuppositions for an Understanding of Ritschl from the History of Doctrine, and here it is shown that the theologians who exercised most influence upon the mind of Ritschl were Bernard, Luther, Calvin and Schleiermacher. Attention is called to the fact that neither Augustine nor Aquinas were among the theologians from whom Ritschl received the most impulse. The third chapter deals with the Presuppositions for an Understanding of Ritschl from Philosophy. Here, of course, comes under consideration Ritschl's theory of knowledge. To this the most serious objection has usually been made. He has often been represented as a subjective idealist, for whom God, sin and redemption are only subjective phenomena. But nothing could be wider off the mark than this representation. Ritschl, in his theory of knowledge, it is generally conceded, follows Lotze; but Lotze is no subjective idealist. There are essentially three theories possible as to the relation of the knowing mind to its object in knowledge. There is first the Platonic theory, which

holds that, while the thing known works upon the mind through its changing characteristics, yet itself remains forever at rest behind its phenomena, and must be known apart from them. Then there is, secondly, the Kantian theory, that the thing in itself cannot be known at all, but only its phenomena. And, finally, there is the Lotzian theory, that things are known in their phenomena; "with which theory," says Ritschl, "I agree." Ritschl's theory of knowledge determines his relation to metaphysics in theology. On this subject Professor Swing quotes from Ritschl the following sentences: "It is an inconsiderate and incredible assertion that I exclude all metaphysics from theology. *** [ follow a theory of knowledge which, in the determination of the objects of knowledge, is governed by a conception of the things, and consequently it is metaphysical." Hence the charge so frequently made that Ritschl in his theological thinking discards reality and rests merely upon phenomena, is wholly unfounded.

The general subject of Chapter IV. of the book under notice, is "Ritschl's Conception of Particular Christian Doctrines." The first subject treated in this chapter is the Bible, which, according to Ritschl, is the only source of positive Christian theology. To serve as such, however, the Bible must be used critically, for not everything in the Bible may be turned into permanent Biblical truth. In such use of the Bible there can be no question of infallibility to demand infallibility could only lead to the Roman Catholic Church. The next subject discussed is that of the person of Christ. The divine sonship of Jesus, according to Ritschl, is revealed in the mutual knowledge of the Father and the Son, but to explain this mystery by formulas of any sort is impossible. On the subject of the Holy Spirit we are told that Ritschl's theory of knowledge does not deny, but most strongly affirm its reality. In the section on the work of Christ in behalf of His community it is shown that, according to Ritschl, Christ's mediatorial work has value for God as well as for men, but that the vicarious punishment doctrine of the atonement is, of course, rejected. In Chapter V. we have a presentation first of Ritschl's doctrine of sin and guilt, and secondly of the forgiveness of sins. On these subjects Ritschl has written his largest work entitled Rechtfertigung und Versöhnung. Professor Swing devotes twenty pages to the elucidation of their meaning, which it would be futile to attempt to reproduce in a few sentences. The wrath of God forms the subject of the last section of this chapter. In the last chapter the author sets forth, first, Ritschl's relation to mysticism and pietism. Here we are told that "for Ritschl the line of thought of the unio mystica is outside the field of churchly teaching." Next follows a summary and general estimate of Ritschl's teaching. Here we quote a few sentences relating to Ritschl's conception and use of the Bible. Every school which treats the Bible as divine means, and not as à priori dogmatic authority, will naturally see the