clearer conception. But the search is at heart the same. It is the desire of the finite to get nearer in spirit to the Infinite. No search for truth is possible save by those open minds that believe there is truth to be found. And this belief in something larger than man's present knowledge naturally carries with it the sublime conception that this object of our search is boundless and perfect. And what more can any one mean when he says God?

Infinite perfection is God; and he who to-day by any path is seeking after truth, even some partial and limited truth, has begun to "look for the Lord." Every clear thought will bring him nearer to the thought of God. The open and watchful mind cannot fail at last to grasp the thought of the perfect order that pervades all nature, and reaches out into the future to lead that also in right ways,-the thought of a faultless meaning in the advance of this irresistible order, the thought of Infinite Perfection as the real object of all human search. We say we are looking for truth. But the fact that we are never satisfied, that we go on forever looking for more, and yet more of truth, shows that the truth is but a part of something grander than its steady march. That perfect whole in which truth abides, in which also we must search for goodness, for love, and for all other excellent things in their completeness, may be called by any name you please. A name is merely a convenience for ready reference, and I find it most satisfactory to call this perfect whole of which I am speaking by the name "God." The time-honored word will serve. Used in its modern sense, it will convey to others your clearest thought. Use it to signify the largest truth and highest force you can now conceive, and let its meaning enlarge whenever finer conceptions come to you. Then to you the word "God” will mean all the truth toward which you are grow ing, and infinitely more; all the goodness you are striving to win, and infinitely more. It will mean a perfect Power of love which manifests all truth, and is all virtue.

You see that the way by which our Church endeavors to make men religious is not by forbidding them to investigate, not by shutting up their minds with a creed, but by arousing them to independent thought. We know that every one who

thinks for himself, and ceaselessly presses onward after truth, will sooner or later rise into reverence for that truth. So we plead for the open mind. He who is willing to learn is in the way of escaping from all narrowness of spirit, all selfishness, all vice, and all ignorance. But he who cannot trust his own mind is the meek supporter of all iniquities. Through him political corruption, social evils, and spiritual ignorance run rampant in the world. We must teach such men to think, and so lead them into the joy and strength of the open mind. In this our Church does but act in harmony with the spirit of the times. Progress is in the air we breathe. In science, in art, in manufactures, the world presses onward with rapid strides. It only remains for us to show that the same advance is characteristic of theology, that in truth religion is the natural climax of all long-sustained mental progress. To this end we direct all our church labors. Whatsoever educates the irresolute or untrained mind, whatsoever sets minds free from old trammels. whatsoever makes minds yearn for growth, comes within the scope of our church work. Thus we lay the foundations of faith. After a man has learned to reason, then he goes on with us to find out more of the Eternal.

Truly we are blessed in our mission. We do not claim a monopoly of the open mind, and we rejoice to see its fine activity in many other quarters. Yet no church has greater cause for zeal and hopefulness than ours, since we are squarely and unreservedly committed to this endeavor which is so high that it cannot fail of success. What we aim to do is to inspire men to be natural. Our follies, sins, and idleness are against nature; and as soon as any man follows the real bent of his mind he goes on to whatever strength he is capable of. the deep things of the soul. mind open, and it starts forth in search of the Eternal, like Sir Galahad after the Holy Grail. Reverence, faith, high character, and large usefulness lie along that way.

So it is in

Once get a

"What can we do o'er whom the unbeholden Hangs in a night with which we cannot What but look sunward, and with faces cope? golden

Speak to each other softly of a hope?

"Can it be true, the grace He is declaring? Oh, let us trust him, for his words are fair!

Man, what is this, and why art thou despairing?

God shall forgive thee all but thy despair."

A TRIUMPH OF CHRISTIANITY.

THE COMING PARLIAMENT OF RELIGIONS.

A remarkable document lies on my desk. It is the preliminary programme of the "World's First Parliament of Religions." It heralds the gathering of representatives of all the great religions of the world and of all the great historic branches of the Church in Christendom. It outlines a series of subjects on which these representatives are to be invited to speak,- a programme covering all the great themes of religion. It exhibits the noble plan on which this conference of the devout has been projected. It indicates the catholic and fraternal temper in which the summons is sent out to all the world. It is an earnest of the mutual respect and tolerance which are intended as the controlling spirit of the assembly. It is a forecast of the better day which is some time to dawn on the religious world, and which will lead the nations, through a better understanding of one another, to draw nearer together in the unity of the spirit which is the bond of peace.

It seems to me admissible and pertinent to point to this wonderful, this hitherto unparalleled, event, in its relation to the Christian Church and its relation to the spirit of Christianity. It is a memorable occurrence in the history of the world. It is an occurrence which should be studied in many ways. But in no direction is its meaning more worthy of thought than in the expression it affords of the soul of the Church in modern days. It is a revelation of the spiritual attainment of the nineteenth century. More than that, it is a proof of the attitude of the Christian Church toward the religious world, which, it is to be hoped, will be noted by all those who are so fond of denouncing the Church for its narrowness or deriding it for not appearing at the front in the religious progress of the world.

For here is an invitation the broadest, the most hospitable in its spirit which has

It is

ever been extended to religious men. an ecumenical council of all who worship God. It is a conference of all religions. It is a summons to all men who believe that the soul has relations to the Infinite Life, to come and say what they hold for true. It is the very first time such a platform has been built or such a company assembled. And the thing to be noted, first of all, is that this call emanates from Christian men. It is the achievement of the Christian Church. Over against all the sneers of the foes of the Church, of its defamers and its detractors and its satirists, set down this fact. The call to the first great gathering in the name of all religions goes forth to the world bearing the autograph of the followers of Jesus Christ. Among those who have signed it are a Catholic archbishop, an Episcopalian bishop, a Presbyterian, a Baptist, a Methodist, a Congregationalist, a Universalist, and a Unitarian. The honor of this broad invitation belongs to the Christian Church. It is the fruit of a Christian spirit. It is the impulse of Christian catholicity. The call'does not emanate from any of the people who pose before the world as the champions of religious liberty as against the churches. It comes from no free religious association, nor any body or sect, within or without the Church, whose aim and effort have been toward freedom in belief and the comity of religions. It is a call which has the sanction not alone of a local committee, but of representative religious leaders throughout Christendom. It is an expression of the hospitality of nineteenth-century Christianity.

It is true there are those who will regard this conference as anomalous and inconsistent with Christian practice. To some Christianity represents only a sect; and it will seem to them that no sect is broad enough to consistently offer a platform upon which all men may frankly utter their religious views. Then there are others who feel that it is improper to invite men to proclaim beliefs which are regarded as false and unwholesome by those who give the invitation.

But the name "Christian" can suggest a sectarian spirit only to one who misses its universals, and is committed to a narrowing interpretation of its contents. Christianity stands for the universal fatherhood. It de

clares the universal brotherhood. It proclaims a universal saviour. It predicts a universal salvation. It teaches a universal ethics. If we are to judge by the contents of the faith, there is nothing in it which is inconsistent with the broadest views, the warmest sympathy with the entire human race, the recognition of the struggle toward light and truth of all the sons of God. Because Christianity does not yet embrace the world, because it contains numerically but a fractional part of the world's worshippers, because it presents a special doctrine and view of truth, it is not, therefore, to be charged with a sectarian spirit or treated as mere denomination. If ever the world has a universal religion, be it Christianity or some other, one thing is certain: it must come just as Christianity is coming to men, to a part before it reaches the whole, with teachings and truths which must be peculiar to itself until they have become the property of the world's mind. The Church Universal has to begin as a church in particular. But, though it be a sect in numbers and relation to the whole, in spirit its bounds may be as broad as humanity. Its truths may be all-comprehensive. The geographical test, the test of the statistician and the census-taker, are not the only or the proper ones by which to judge a religion. The hope and faith which some of us entertain, that Christianity will one day embrace mankind, rests on the conviction that its truths are adapted to the nations, its spirit inclusive of all, its progress toward the consent and adhesion of mankind.

To such a religion there can be no danger, there can appear no impropriety, in inviting all men to come to its board and utter the highest they have received of truth about God. Christian men concede nothing of their claim for their faith as God's revelation of certain final truths about himself in thus creating a forum whence all religions may say their best word. Indeed, no finer, no more splendid act of faith in Christianity was ever performed than this proffer of an opportunity for every system to say its best say, backed as it is by the invincible assurance that the gospel will suffer no loss, but only win new lustre in the comparison. In order to be tolerant, in order to have the widest spiritual sympathies, we do not need to throw

away our faith that Christ's gospel is God's best, his special word to man. "So far," says Bishop Brooks, "from earnest personal conviction and generous tolerance being incompatible with one another, the two are necessary each to each." "It is the natural feeling of us all," said Frederick Maurice, "that charity is founded upon the uncertainty of truth. I believe it is founded on the certainty of truth." Only souls that believe implicitly and serenely, with the broadest and most intelligent faith in their religion, would dare invoke a test so searching, a comparison so unreserved. This invitation is a chivalrous and loving challenge to them to come and say their best, and withal a pledge to match their best with a better out of the lips of the Saviour of the world.

That phrase suggests a thought which evidently lies in the minds of some who recoil from it, and deny the reality of a universal salvation through Jesus the Christ. They ask how we can properly call Jesus the Saviour of the world, when there are many lives in which he is not the only or the supreme saving power; and it seems especially out of harmony with the spirit of this gathering to cling to the idea that Jesus can possibly be the Saviour of the world, in the face of so many devout and religious souls who look to other great souls as their Saviours. But where is the inconsistency or the impertinence? If we believe salvation to be the progressive acquisition of the highest truths and the deepest spiritual energies, and if we believe that these have been combined and incarnated in the person of Jesus Christ, may we not hold that the nations of the earth and the individuals in those races will not touch and realize their divinest life except as they rise to the height and sink to the depth of "the truth as it is in Jesus"? In the view of an enlightened Christian, the believer in the other great religions, the devout, the conscientious, the God-fearing follower of Confucius, of the Buddha, of Mahomet. is right in his attitude, is facing toward the perfect truth and the perfect life, is "justified" if you will, but not "saved." For salvation is more than a matter of the soul's attitude: it involves the soul's advance, its march up the paths of sacrifice and love, its climb up the heights

of truth. The world is not saved, nor any soul in it, when it has turned to God and found him. There is still all the diameter of the spiritual spheres between the soul and its perfected life. If there be differing values at all in the systems of religion, surely no man's salvation is fulfilled till he has found the highest truth about God and embodied it in his life.

So, with the conviction always in his soul that Jesus alone has the words of the eternal life, the Christian may sit down at this board which his own hospitable and universal faith has spread, as it has been well called "This Round Table of the religious chivalry of the world," in the simple faith that he is offering to the world one more evidence of the universality of that faith which has in it all the elements of the universal religion. But there is another question which this novel gathering will suggest. It is the It is the query as to the breadth and the comprehensiveness of Christianity in its relations to this composite body. These are days when men want the broadest doctrines for belief; and, if they enlist under any banner, they seek that which is the emblem of the broadest fellowship and truth. Then there are those who feel that Christianity is too narrow to give them elbow-room. They want the most comprehensive truth and the most unlimited fellowship. So in their view Christianity will seem to stand for a truth narrower than that represented by the whole of this august assemblage; and its truths, they infer, will appear but fragments of the whole. Is this true?

The name in which all these brethren will meet is the broad and overshadowing one of God. They gather as religious men and worshippers; and religion and worship imply Deity. Many are asking to-day if it is not a broader thing to be a theist than to be a Christian. They hold that theism is a broader name than Christianity, and commend its comprehensive inclusiveness, as that will be illustrated at Chicago. In one sense, and one sense only, they are right. If they are hunting for a name which will cover the most people, then they should choose theism; for undoubtedly that identifies more people than the term "Christianity." But, if they seek a phrase which covers the most truth, then Christianity is the word for them. Theism is a broader

term in religion, because it is a lower term. It includes more people, because it includes fewer and vaguer ideas. Christianity is the higher word, because it stands for the largest meaning, the greater truth about God. It is more specific, particular, descriptive. So, if we apply the geographical test, if we seek for words which will apply over the largest area, let us by all means have theism. But, if our idea of breadth in religion is to cover the most truth, we shall stick to Christianity. Theism is not in any large sense the broader term, because the broadest term is always the truest. Theism does not stand for so much truth as Christianity, because it does not go so deeply into the particulars of truth.

It de

Theism, for example, only affirms God,— a creative and a ruling Power. Beyond that it does not go, it cannot go, and remain theism in general. theism in general. Christianity, a particular kind of theism, affirms more. clares this Power to be goodness, wisdom, love. It affirms providence and fatherhood of God. It affirms our kinship to this divine nature, and his to us. It is broader in its contents, and truer to the nature of things. Therefore, it is a higher word than theism, a profounder word, a more significant word, and, so far as truth is concerned, a broader word.

The same fact is illustrated in other classifications which we have to make. The lower term always includes the most individuals. Thus the term "mammal" includes more individuals than the term "man"; and the term "animal" includes more than "mammal." But the word "man" stands for a higher thing than the word "mammal," and the word "mammal" for a higher thing than "animal." Just so the word "Christian" means more than the word "theism," though it covers less people. There are more theists than Christians. But there are less particulars of truth covered by the word "theist" than by the word "Christianity."

But, if you insist on the word which covers the most people as the watchword of your faith, then you are inconsistent in stopping with theism. Religion is a broader term still; and there are those who find even that term sectarian, and are content with nothing less than "ethics" or the search for the good. Indeed, the moment

About eighteen months ago I wrote an article for the New York Sun on "The Future of American Christianity," in which I pointed out some of the religious forces now at work in this country which are rapidly modifying popular Christianity, and are destined to still more profoundly change our religion. All sorts of people, with all sorts of ideas, are coming into this country every year from the four corners of the globe; and, as the American people are destined to be decidedly a mixed race, so their religious, political, and social institutions will be of various types. This was the fundamental thought of the aforesaid article; and among the forces which would in time produce religious variety I mentioned a Mohammedan propaganda that was then being originated in India. My authority for this statement was a letter from a prominent American in Manila, Philippine Islands. This letter, dated May 26, 1891, said: "There is now on foot, among some of the educated, intelligent Moslems of Bombay, Ind., a movement toward the organization of a Mohammedan mission to the United States, the object of which will be to establish churches there in which the true doctrines of Islam will be taught. This mission will be under the patronage of wealthy Mohammedans, one of whom has already donated a well-equipped steamship for the transportation of the missionaries and their literature; and it will be carried forward with the purpose of working earnestly and perseveringly to bring to intelligent Americans a perfect knowledge of the true doctrines of Mohammed, as well as to dispel the erroneous ideas concerning him

which have been acquired from misstatements and misconceptions of Christian historians." This letter was received in July, 1891. Now come two printed lectures by and from the writer of the letter; and, as the secret is out, I am at liberty to state his name, and add some new facts. One of the lectures before me was delivered at Bombay, 10th of November, 1892, and the other was delivered "at the Public Garden, Hyderabad, Deccan, India, November 25." The lecturer (and writer of the letter quoted) was Hon. Alexander Russell Webb, late United States consul at Manila. Appended to one of the lectures sent me is a letter from "Badrudin Abdulla Kur," dated at Bombay, Sept. 12, 1892, which was published in the Bombay Gazette; and, as it states facts of importance, I quote it verbatim. It is captioned "Mohammedan Propaganda in America," and runs :

To the Editor of the Bombay Gazette:

Sir, -For the last two years I have been in correspondence with Mr. Alexander Webb, United States Consul at Manila. Mr. Webb has fully studied the religious systems of the East; and, being convinced of the truth of Islam, he has embraced this faith. By his last letter and telegram he informs me that he has resigned the post of consul-general at Manila, and has started for America via Burma and India, to establish a mission at New York for the propagation of the Islamic faith on the American continent.

As the subject has attracted a great deal of attention in this country, I think, sir, that the scheme of American propaganda framed by Mr. Webb, as well as his last letter to me, may be fitly placed before the public at this juncture. More than seven thousand rupees have been already collected at Hyderabad, Deccan; and it is evident that in this epoch-making last decade of the nineteenth century the Islamic world is fully prepared to push its triumphs in the Western world through the fine instruments of persuasion and preaching.

Let it, however, be said, to the credit of the English race, that, without their noble instincts of justice, love of truth, and moral courage, the task of propagating Islam in their enlightened country would be simply hopeless. Yours, etc.,

BADRUDIN ABDULLA KUR.

Following this is a long letter from Mr. Webb himself to Mr. Kur, which confirms the foregoing letter. Mr. Webb says, among other things: "I have sent my resignation to my government, and I am await