CHAPTER VII.

TO CHURCH MEMBERS.

THERE are many good people, who, without fully comprehending what is meant by Christian Science doctrine, hesitate to listen to it because it seems to conflict with that doctrine to which they have already been committed, sometimes by inheritance, sometimes by accident, and sometimes by the previous assent of their own minds, which they hesitate to change. Consequently they are torn between the new and the old, and fear to appear to others, who do not comprehend, to go against that which many have believed in, because of the good results they have seen from the old beliefs in the lives of others.

To such—and my experience tells me there are many-I have this message. Just as the doctor, and chemist, the business man, the psychologist, the spiritualist, and the Christian Scientist are on a journey to the same destination by different roads, so also, in the matter of church belief, are the Unitarian, the Universalist, the Presbyterian, the Baptist, the Episcopalian, and any other denomination you may name. You cannot put

new wine into old bottles, and present progress is a growth out of the old, false, materialistic theories. The truth has always been the same. The only thing that has changed is man's opinion about the truth, and it will continue to change till the day when instead of "seeing through a glass darkly" we can see "face to face" (Bible). No man can tell all of the truth, no man (save by demonstration) can tell that what he states is truth; statements made by that limited instrument the human reason, are always subject to change, but the essential truths are the same though the statement be different, and from time to time the application of the statement becomes a little wider and more near to the actual life of men.

Let me see if I can make you understand what I feel to be true about this. I am Presbyterian. My affection and my support, if not my fullest acquiescence in its beliefs, belong to that Church, and so long as I can do so without actually running counter to its real underlying beliefs, or either repudiating or concealing my own, I propose to give that Church my service. I am at home there, and though there are many things in the written statements of the Church which I do not believe (and in that I believe I have good company for there are many others), I believe that I can worship God there better than elsewhere because it is my place. If I should go to the Christian Science Church there would still be many things in the written statements of that Church which I could

not believe (and in that I would again have good company for there are many others). The same thing would be true in the case of any church to which I might choose to go. No one of them would state all of the things which I believe (in written statements of belief) nor would there be any of them which would not contain some things (in their written statements) in which I do not believe. I am frankly not a believer in creeds, but I think that the place where I go to worship God and to help others to worship God on Sundays (for my life should be a continuous worship day by day) should be that place where, because of my associations, I can give and get the most good, and unless my beliefs, in some way not seen now, interfere hereafter with those of others I intend to continue to attend the Presbyterian Church. If, later, my beliefs will not allow that (and it may be that practically I will find I am mistaken as to the possibility of living new beliefs in old surroundings), I will cheerfully go to some other place, because God is everywhere, and I can't find any church that exactly states my idea of truth at present. Further, if I stay, I am not going to quarrel with my friends, either in or out of the Church, about non-essentials. I recommend in this connection that you read again Emerson's Essay on SelfReliance. I have attended all kinds of services in all kinds of churches, including Catholic, and should you put the sermons in a bundle and then redistribute them, without the names of authors,

no one of the congregations would know whether they were receiving a Catholic, Presbyterian, Baptist, or Christian Science sermon, granting that Christian Scientists had sermons. For mark this, very few sermons nowadays are doctrinal. Both pastor and people have found that in human doctrine is not necessarily the truth, but the essential truths are the same in all churches; and is not this an illustration of the fact that all the little byways we have followed are leading through experience and by retracing one's steps into the great one road of truth which leads direct to God, and an earnest of the day when men will stop arguing about non-essentials and all think only of the real essentials of worship?

For what have I really said in this book that any church cannot accept and approve? Let us see. I have said:

(1) God is infinite and no man should worship or ascribe power to aught but Him.

To be sure I have drawn some conclusions from this premise that you may not agree with and I don't ask you to till your own experience brings you to it. For instance, to me, submitting to the dictates of the body, without protest, is just as much idolatry as bowing down to any other material image. I can't avoid it at times, but I know that this is because of life lived under the condemnation of "loving darkness rather than the light." Again, I do not believe in the existence of evil and of matter as real, and my life is made

more joyful every day because I know that there is no seeming power opposed to God which I cannot overcome as Christ Jesus proved, but that my journey is exclusively toward knowledge. I need waste no power in "resisting evil" but "can overcome evil with good" (Bible). These conclusions, I say, you may not be able to agree with, but if we both keep the premise on which we do agree in mind every moment of our lives, and try to live it, we will find the true conclusion some day, won't we? If I am wrong I will be brought to know it. If you are wrong, likewise. And when we know the whole truth, we will both have the same conclusion, so why worry about non-essentials? If we are truly and persistently trying to live the premise, we get nowhere by disputing about the conclusion which we neither of us can see at present except through a glass darkly. Let us therefore state our beliefs frankly, but if we do not meet with agreement stop talking and let the truth itself be its own missionary to both sides of the argument.

I have said:

(2) The Christ Spirit is the way to salvation.

To be sure I have stated my own belief as to the way in which that is brought about and as to the nature of Christ's mission. For instance, I think that I have to live right to be saved. Living rightly means to me living by some means in the consciousness of God, knowledge of whom is eternal Life. It may not require long experience to reach