onwards in the path of true spiritual progress has been taken after a return to the study of Holy Scripture ; and this return has meant in every instance a fresh flowing forth of influence from the same wonderful Personality.

THE REFORMATION

When we consider the period of the Reformation we find all these influences at work, but in a new situation. The invention of printing, the discovery of the New World, the revolution in astronomy with which the name of Copernicus is identified, the new learning which found its prophet in Erasmus : all these wonderful things conspired to produce an expansion of the human mind unexampled in history.1

It was the greatest epoch since the beginning of the Christian era. Man found himself in a new world -a world with a vaster outlook, a wider horizon, than had ever been imagined by his forefathers. Liberation of thought was inevitable. Of this change, Luther's Freedom of a Christian Man is the characteristic expression. The essence of this little book is its affirmation of the liberating effect of faith, not negatively, but positively. The soul which is in a true relation to God is endowed with the Freedom of the Heavenly City, and while, through faith and charity, the servant of all, is yet above every authority which would limit his freedom. Thus every Christian man, no matter how lowly his station in this world, or how common his work, is engaged in a sacred duty as truly as the priest who ministers at the altar. Also, it follows that his conscience must assert itself against every power which would demand its submission.

For Luther, faith is personal trust in Christ-a personal relation to God. He insisted on the sense of direct responsibility to God and dependence on Him alone. He holds that God cares He holds that God cares "for each soul

1 See R. H. Murray, Erasmus and Luther.

separately as though there were only one soul and no other on earth existed."1 Here we trace the influence of the mystics, of whom Eckhart and Tauler may be regarded as the most characteristic spirits. It is now recognised that their share in the spiritual preparation for the Reformation was of vital importance. The immediate access of the soul to God, to which they witnessed so impressively, is indeed the very cornerstone of Luther's life and doctrine, as it has been the foundation of all evangelical teaching ever since. It is strange that, as Dr. Murray points out, he appealed usually to St. Paul for his proofs. To us of to-day, the source of this teaching is Christ Himself.

THE RIGHT OF PRIVATE JUDGEMENT

It is clear that Luther's way of presenting his doctrine of faith, with its implication of the freedom of every individual soul, is full of danger. It leads directly to that chaos of individualism which has marked a large part of the Christian world since his time. It involves exactly the difficulty which attaches to St. Paul's teaching when he writes, "He that is spiritual judgeth all things, and he himself is judged of no man." Yet, with all its difficulties, this doctrine is one which, from the very nature of things, must be presented to the growing intelligence of mankind. It stands for a truth which is final and unavoidable. There is in every mind an ultimate faculty of judgement which, once its reality has been revealed, must be recognised. When a man, convinced of the truth, and having done his best to make sure that his conviction is the truth, feels that it is his duty, in the sight of God, to abide by this decision at all costs, he has reached a position which is morally inexpugnable. This is the stronghold of an Athanasius contra mundum. It is Luther's "Here I stand.

1 Murray, op. cit. ch. iv. p. 135. See pp. 130 ff.

I

can do no other." Two principles are involved: the absolute sovereignty of truth, and the finality of personality. Expressed in the language of religion, God and the soul of man are here face to face. No human authority has the right to intervene.

A crucial illustration of the moral and intellectual situation which thus comes into being is the position of one who in our time deliberately submits himself to the authority of the Papal See. Here the claim to infallibility is urged with all the parade of great pretensions. If a mind is merely overwhelmed by these pretensions, or yields through moral weariness, the decision has no spiritual value whatever. Only when there is conviction and deliberate choice can the action be morally justified. But this conviction and deliberate choice mean that the Papal claims have been submitted to the judgement of the individual and have been accepted. Their value for the individual is the value of his own judgement. He may fortify his decision by appealing to the multitudes who accept the authority of the Papal See, or by consideration of its august history and splendid monuments; but, in every instance, he passes judgement on the evidential value of these various considerations. In the last resort, the infallibility of the Pope resolves itself into the infallibility of his own private judgement.1 find, in fact, when we penetrate deeply enough into the grounds of conviction, that, for the mind whose decision is truly conscientious, there is no power or authority which can intervene between God and the soul. This is the essence of Luther's doctrine. is an eternal truth.

AUTHORITY IN RELIGION

We

It

Where, then, is the seat of authority in Religion? When the principle of individual liberty is thus set

1 See Salmon, Infallibility of the Church, ch. iii.

forth it seems to lead directly to chaos. If there be no authority above that of the intellect and conscience of every man, how can there ever emerge such a consensus of belief as will secure some degree of unity among Christian people? Yet it is certain that the Christian Faith was intended from the very beginning to form a bond of union and to create a fellowship among men. The existence of such a fellowship, and the idea of it, are primitive possessions of the Christian ethos. They come before all developments of doctrine.1

In considering this question it is worth while to turn aside for a moment from the agitating controversies of theology and consider the calmer realm of science. It is important to reflect that the whole wonderful progress of scientific discovery and its growing success and certainty date from the liberation of the human intellect in the sixteenth century. Since that liberation the advance of science has been unceasing. It is the greatest achievement in the whole of human history, and the most surprising, when we consider how much has been accomplished in a few centuries. And not only does this marvellous advance date from the liberation of the human mind, but it is clearly due to that liberation. It has taken place for the simple reason that research is open to every man, that the investigator can challenge any conclusion and give his reasons for doing so. Yet this complete liberty, instead of resulting in chaos, has produced a universal consent over vast ranges of knowledge. Here liberty has proved itself the parent of order.

The cause of this complete agreement of liberty and order is clear. Dominant over the whole realm of science is reason, that is, the disciplined use of intelligence. The end of scientific activity is truth,

1 See Acts ii. 42, iv. 32; 2 Cor. xiii. 13; Phil. ii. 1, etc. See also Dr. Anderson Scott's article, "What happened at Pentecost," in the volume entitled The Spirit.

the principle which guides the search for truth is reason. No one in these days can for a moment admit any other authorities. other authorities. No institution, no individual, no system, no book, can be put into competition with them. In our day, we have seen the great authority of Newton and the immense system of thought about the physical universe with which his name is identified freely challenged. Our prejudices may rebel, but our minds recognise at once the right of every investigator who believes he has gained a larger and truer view of the universe to place his doctrines before the scientific world and prove them if he can. Truth and reason must ever be supreme.

This

This illustration presents us with a principle which would seem to cover the whole realm of thought. There is nothing in the nature of things to confine it to the natural sciences. It is this: the only kind of authority which can bring liberty and order into agreement is that which rules by appealing to the spiritual faculties of every individual and which asserts itself by persuasion. It would be enough to say of such an authority that it must rule by its appeal to the reason, if the word reason be used in the widest sense. is largely a question of words. The essence of the whole matter is that no controversy can be settled by the fiat of any man, or any society of men, or by the authority of any tradition or body of teaching. Only by evidence and demonstration of fact, presented in terms intelligible to the mind, and always subject to the tests of further examination and verification, can scientific truth be established so as to claim the general assent of mankind.

This is not, as some seem to think, the assertion of material methods. Quite the contrary. It is the liberation of spiritual principles. It is the complete setting free of knowledge, imagination, will-among the highest powers of the spirit of man-that they may dominate the material. From a religious point of view, it is