UNION
152
UNION
ordination continuos, hroak up into parties, or drift,
away, or set up opposition societies. Almost any
Protestant Church among the many around us will
supply an illustration of this. At one time its ruling
authority is recognized by all the members to be the
authentic interpreter of its formularies, and all are
prepared to submit to it. It is then a united Church
in itself. Later comes a time when a number of its
members grow dissatisfied with these formularies, and
refuse to accept tliem at the hands of their church
authority. Then disunion sets in; either dissent from
the letter of the formularies is tolerated, and intestine
divisions arise, or some split off and set up for them-
selves opposition Churches elsewhere.
If this is the law of all human societies, is it not to be anticipated that the Christian community is also subject to that law, in other words that its unity is to be secured by the submission of its members and component Churches to the one ruling authority which 'S duly set over them all? It will be objected that this principle of authority, if allowed to prevail, may suffice to secure unity in Christendom, but not unity in truth. As soon as the time comes when it is the conviction of individual members or groups of members that their ruhng authority is departing from the truth, they cannot but give the preference to truth over unity, which in fact is what has happened in the history of Christendom, and has caused the present disunion. The answer to this difficulty is that the human mind is indeed bound to truth, and acts irrationally if it does not pursue it at all co.sts; but none the less it is rational for the individual mind to subordinate its personal judgments to those of a mind which can give it a securer guarantee of truth than it can derive from its own reasonings; it is, therefore, supremely rational for it to submit to the mind of Christ, whensoever this can be securely ascertained. If Christ communicated His own mind to His Apostles as to the doctrines and laws He desired His Church to receive and obey; if His Apostles transmitted these Divine communications by tradition to future gener- ations; if a living authority duly set over His people has watched over the safe transmission of this tradi- tion; and, if the Holy Spirit was sent by Him to abide in His Church and secure this living authority in the faithful discharge of its trust — then, so far as we can see, the duty to truth and the duty to unity are fully harmonized, and a way opened for the reunion of Christendom without any outrage being done to the nature of the human mind. This, it may be said, is only an inference based on the law of human societies and the nature of the human mind. Can it be safe to take it as sufficing to determine a question of fact, such as is the question whether our Lord really did make this particular provision for the safeguarding of His revelation? But if it were only that, at least it proves that this princii>le of a Divinely guarded mag- isterium is not irrational, but on the contrary is, so far as we can see, the only principle capable of harmoniz- ing the two certain facts, that our minds are by nature bound to truth at all costs and that our Lord prayed and therefore provided that we might all be one in faith. A principle, however, of this value must be regarded as resting on a much firmer basis than mere inference, especially when it is associated with the massive historical fact that the oldest and greatest of all the Churches — which is also the only one that has known how to secure unity among its children with- out injury done to their sense of truth — has all along been ruled by this very principle in the sure behef that it rests on the express words of Christ. Should not this send us back to a study of the words as they came from Christ's lips, and a.s they were understood by His Apostles, to see if those words do not correspond with this belief of the later Church?
And here we join on to the historical survey with which this iirlicle comiiieticcd, for in that survey has
been epitomized the evidence from the New Testa-
ment and the early Christian writings, which shows
that, if we are to credit these records, our Lord did
establish and impose this very system; that the
Apostles, whom He sent forth to lay the foundations
of the Church, did so understand Him; that the
Church of the second century, as represented bj' St.
Irenoeus, likewise so understood Him.
VII. Prospects op Reunion. — If corporate re- union were a practical ideal, capable of being realized at no distant date, it would have enormous advantages, for it woidd greatly facilitate the task of those who feel the sadness of their present isolation. But, the conditions of this mode of reunion being such as we have seen, it is unfortunately impossible to regard the prospect of its realization as other than discouraging. Why is it that those who tell us with transparent sincerity that they long for the time when Christen- dom will be united once more so persistently resist the rule of tradition and submission to the Holy See, though as capable as ourselves of ajipreciating the reasoning of the last section, and admiring the results which that rule can produce in the communion of the Apostolic See? Why is it that they continue, in the face of all their past disappointments, to stand out for their principle of comprehension, and to ask for reunion on the basis of mutual concession and con- tract? Obviously it is because they are still domi- nated by those self-same principles of religious divi- sion which we discerned in the earher part of this article, when we were tracing to their ultimate causes the schisms that troubled the first four Christian centuries. We counted five such causes: "I cannot belong to a Church in whose doctrines I find insoluble intellectual difficulties", or "which cannot find a place in its .system for religious experiences I take to be the direct voice of God to me", or "which claims to put fetters on my mental liberty", or "which runs counter to my national attachments and antipathies", or "which involves me in opposition to my temporal rulers". These principles, we said then, all or some of them, would be found likewise at the root of all subsequent schisms, and have not the summaries above given proved the truth of this? In the Oriental schisms, though private judgment on doctrinal subtle- ties had its part, the chief agencies at- work were national antipathies and subservience to temporal rulers. In the sixteenth-century revolt all the five influences were fiercely active. Many Catholic doctrines — as, for instance, those of transubstantia- tion, the sacramental principle, the merit of good works — were condemned as offensive to the private judgment of the Reformers. The doctrine (Lutheran) of justification by faith was an egregious example of putting absolute trust in the assumptions of emo- tionalism, indeed was the first step towards trans- ferring the basis of faith from the preaching of the word to the so-called testimony of experience. How repugnant to these Reformers was the idea of sub- mission to any teaching authority save tlieir own is evidenced by their denunciations of popes and priests; how much they were possessed by the principles of Nationalism and Erastianism is evidenced by the way in which they allowed their rulers to split them up into national Churches and gain their favour for these by stirring up their national animosities. At the present time, among the Churches of England and America which are asking for reunion — or rather, some of whose members are asking for reunion — these same sentiments still prevail, with some modification as regards their particular application. Is not this sufficiently attested by the tone of the criticisms which come so readily to their lips? " I cannot bring my mind to believe in a Trinity in Unity, in a God- man, in a sinless man, in an atonement, in transub- stantiation, in original sin, in the power of a little water to wash away sin, in a power of absolution
