CHRIST AND THE CREEDS.

MODERN CHURCHMEN CONFERENCE.

(TBOK OP* OWlf COBRMPONTIIHT.)

LONDON, August 11. At the Conference of Modern Churchmen, now in progress at Girton College, Cambridge, the outstanding feature in the debate: "What do We Know About Jesus?" was the part taken by Dr. Foulkes Jackson, joint author with Professor Lake of the remarkable treatise "Beginnings of Christianity," which has given rise to so~much controversy in theological circles. The conference, presided over by Canon Glazebrook. is following the line of thought "Christ and .the Creeds." On the occasion under notice the debate was opened by the Rev. C. W. Emmet (vice-principal of Ripon Hall, whose principal is the Rev. H. D. A. Major, who was formerly in New Zealand). Mr Emmet held the opinion that the historian could not isolate the Gospels when asking what could be learned about Jesus. Part of the material which he must take into account was that Jesus was the kind of man who could draw to Himself, whether before or after His death, all the conceptions of supernatural greatness current in His age, and who became the starting point and the abiding inspiration of a movement which survived all its rivals. There were various conceptions current of Him—the traditional, the eschatological, and-the liberal Protestant. They all agreed that at least : He counted supremely. The "Christmyth 1 ' theory believed that he neither counted nor existed. The view lately put forward by Professor Lake seemed to suggest that Christ existed indeed, but did not really count. Such a conception could never be satisfactory to the historian. On every side the Gospel gave the impression of one who was at least an overwhelming personality. It was indeed agreed that early Christianity took little interest in the personality of the historic Jesus. In so far that that was true, it only confirmed the general authenticity of .the Gospel portrait, since it could not be explained as the outcome of apologetic or controversial interests; nor was it relevant to compare tho great characters of fiction. They lived as the expression of the experience of a single creative mind. 'The Gospels were the product of a process not of any one artistic genius. If they embodied so original a portrait as that of Jesus, it must be in essence historical. In so far as the phrases ot traditional Christology failed, it was not because they exaggerated His greatness or significance, but because all explanations were partial and inadequate in face of the mysterious personality of one who revealed the perfection of God and of man. The Rev. H. R. Lightfoot (Fellow of Lincoln College. Oxford), saw a certain danger in the subject. It was possible to know our Lord too humanly. Christianity was essentially a religion of devotion to a real person who was believed to have lived an historical life. The incarnation was its one great dogma, and the church was only Christian so far as it had the mind of the fdunder. It was no historical accident that Jesus of Nazareth was regarded as the author of our faith. Having referred to some of the essentials of the mind of Christ, as it lay before them in the Gospels, the speaker observed that what was perhaps most, significant of all was that He left no code, no book, no system. He.only left Himself. Fundamentals of Bellgion. Dr. Foulkes Jackson intervened because he felt he was in part the cause of the' choice of *hat most interesting of topics, which he believed was that only a body such as theirs would venture to bring forward in these days. No one could fail to notice how carefully, last year, the official leaders of the Church abstained from raising the question of the fundamentals ot their.roligion. The Lambeth Conference, it was €rue, invited all Christians to unite with them on the basis of the Nicene Creed, but that was all. The bishops did not so much as hint on the method of its reception of the difficulty of reconciling the formulas of the fourth century with modern views as to the sense in which Scripture should be interpreted, or with the philosophy of the prosent day. Aptly they were content with the formal acceptation of avdogmatic statement, almost incomprehensible to those unacquainted with theological terminology of a remote past, and practically impossible for a man living in our days to give an ex animo assent. Of the difficulties which perplexed most of them, the Bishops offered no solution. "Here it is otherwise," added Dr. Jackson. "We have deliberately chosen to discuss the very fundamentals of the Christian faith and to face, and not to shirk, that most pointed of all questions, 'What think ye of Christ?'" . , The reason for that choice he bad tne vanity to suppose was the publication of the first volume of the "Beginnings of Christianity," whioh Professor Lake and he had edited, and in which they had endeavoured to produce a scientific statement of the condition of primitive Christianity and to invite the critics to correct them if they were in error. The hostile criticism to which the concluding chapters of the book had been subjected came mainly frpm Anglican reviewers, and they had also been severely rebuked by the liberals of their own Church, who had his sincere sympathy. •'They are fighting a hard fignt, n proceeded Dr. Jackson. "On the one hand they see that they are losing tha support of the public because there is little demand for reasonable presentation of Christianity. People are saying, as they* did formerly, 'Give up your impossible dogmas and your selievident myths on wJiich they are based and let us have a plain statement of the essentialsVof Christianity.' There is a growing conviction, no less dangerous because it now rarely finds a voice, that Christianity can be ignored. Men no longer care about the sort of sermon they once listened to with attention, and are less and less troubled by religious doubts —not because they have ceased to doubt, but because they are hardly interested at all in the religious problem. What, therefore, is needed is something which will arouse and stimulate men to shake off this lethargy and cause people to realise that religion is one of the most important things in the world." The Need for Truth. That was being done more successfully outside than within the Anglican Communion, but, Dr. Jackson doubted whether that type of liberal Christianity was likely to endure. Its weakness appeared to him that it was unhistorical and took no account of the fact that Christian religion was living oiganisin which had been subject to the Taw of growth and development, and that every step in its progress was the logical consequence of what had gone betore. Having instanced how easy it would have been to have disarmed the critics of "beginnings," both amongst the authors and the sacramentalists, he said tho authors ihad not done so because they were convinced that the present time was one in which the Church needed a plain statement of the difficulties of modern Christianity, that it might realiso where it stands, and he appealed to them as liberal Churchmen to credit Dr Lako and himself with honesty of purpose. "The danger at the present time," concluded Dr. Jackson, "is from tho caution of our friends. Liberal ChorchmaJiship is in peril of becoming tho Canute of our age. It has too long endeavoured to sit upon the throne and tell the advancing tide where to step. We are always wondering whexo to

draw the line and find peace, where we can say, 'We have progressed far enough.' Our efforts are doomed to failure. In no field of human activity has it bjeen possible "to follow truth to a certain spot and there stop, for whenever men do this truth still advances and is lost to them. Therefore I .appeal for fair treatment at your hands. If you consider we have gone too far, point out our real -mistakes, and if you convince us, we will retrace our steps Otherwise we mean to go forward, for we are aware, as yon are, that Christianity can never survive among the educated—and that treans, at no distant date, among mankind — unless we face and prefer truth to all other considerations.''