towards the world's gropings after God seems to savor more of atheism than of Christianity."
Mr. Stead does not see that the Archbishop's position leaves any logical foothold for the modern study of the science of religions. " The religion, so big with its own authority that it cannot stoop to hear and understand and welcome the worth of other human strivings after God, seems but a sorry caricature of the Meek and Lowly One." "The Parliament of Religions .... is meant to be the home of human brotherhood in its Godward phase. We cannot well conceive as halting haughtily on its threshold that Divine Lowliness which tabernacled long years unnoticed in human flesh, and moved unpretentiously among the common ways of earth and gently won men to a fellowship of trust and love," Mr. Stead closes by expressing his regret that the leading religious official of the Empire of Great Britain, " which, next to the earth itself is the hugest known standing Parliament of Religions, should have discountenanced the first great effort of mankind to actualize its religious brotherhood.
The opinions of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion in the United States were very largely favorable to the Parliament. Bishop William E. McLaren, of Chicago, wrote:
The project will undoubtedly commend itself to those who bestow some thought on the subject. Certainly the Religion of "God manifest in the flesh " has no reason to deprecate frank and friendly contact with the various theistic faiths, with the purpose to discover at what and how many points they touch and harmonize. I believe that the Anglican Communion throughout the world will not hesitate to assure itself a proper representation in the proposed congresses.
Bishop F. D. Huntington wrote:
The plans sketched in your letter and in the Address strike me as justifying themselves at once to reason and good sense and Christian hope. With the wisdom and energy represented in your Committee, they cannot fail to awaken a vast interest and accomplish lasting results. I should be glad to serve or promote it [the end proposed and desired] at least by intercession, for the sake of Christ and his kingdom among men.
Later, however, this honored bishop came to a different conclusion, and felt that Christ and his Church would not be honored at the proposed parliament.
Bishop Thomas M. Clark of Rhode Island, declared that "the conception of this movement is a grand one and unexampled in the history of the world." Bishojj John F. Spalding of Colorado, Bishop John Scarborough of New Jersey, Bishop D. B. Knickerbacker of Indiana, Bishop Seymour of
