THE NEW THEOLOGY.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XLII, Issue XLII, 18 May 1907, Page 1

THE NEW THEOLOGY.

BEY. R, J. CAMPBELL'S NEW BOOK, Thero was an extraordinary rush, in London for the "New Theology" book written by Rev. R. J . Campbell. Five editions were puOHshv-d within a few days, and the idjiuand in America is expected to bo create!*! than in the Old-country. Universal testimony is iborn-o to the frank, fearlefis sincerity of the book: bub many "iof ithe critics Ithiuk that loyal believers mi the Okl Theology will not be seriously disturbed by the views express 'id. 'Nevertheless, the book may accowline! to tho London '•'•Clmistiaii World." '-'cause not a few readers to reconsider] theii) attitude ,in rog'ard to the New Tiheotofy ih gemerai; and Mr Campbell's exposition of it in particular: for its ona thing to follow a man's teaching fugitively through dot-ach-ed sermons, aud auito another to sbudy a systematic presentatinn of that teaching in volume-form. As .iO stands, the book, with its vitallyconnected chapters, compels evi-n a casual reader to recognise that jus-. Uco cannot be done to Mr Campbell's ideas on various subjects unless they are veiwed in the light of tho one great principle that doimiuates all his thinking. That* principle is tho essential oneness of God and man, and, also, by way of corollary, the essential oneness of Ihuman ity. This is a plnilosoi:*hically sound position and would seem to be involved in any intelligible viiew of tho fatherhood of God; and it must bo credited to Mr Campbell that ho ls faithful throughout to his govern ing idoa," If we had (says the same paper) to give tho Leibrg's extract of the reviews, we should do it by quoting the London "Daily Telegraph's' closing dictum that Mr Campbell hag written un exceedingly interesting book, but he has not demolished the Old Theology.' The "'Liverpool Post's" review is one of tho ablest. It may. 'be from the pen of Sir Edward Russell. The "Post's' conclusion is that while, ''it is possible that the thoughtless, uninstructed Christian will find his faith somewhat rudely shaken" by Mr Campbell's book, "the thoughtful anid thinking Christian, whoso faith is the result, of firm, intollir gent, and profound conviction, will road the book iwith due attention and -due appreciation, after which he will turn with a sigh oi relief and -gratitude ito -the* Old Theology." The "Manchester Guardian," in a two column review, declares that the 9trenth of the Uook lies in its incisive clearness 0? statement, its passionate moral fervor, the breath of its religious[ sympathies, ' aad tho optimism ,of its sr.cial vision. The "'Westminster Gazette,", after subjecting the .book to somewhat searchingi analysis, dismisses it as an attempt to combine hegeHamism with Christianity. The London "Record" fAnglicanj says: — "The real purpose -jf tho book seems to be the onr. .ini an that Christianity is founded on a double misconception — first, in re- \ Uance on the Bible as a statement ' of fact where , according to Mr Campbell, it is merely 'myth*; and secondly, the complete misunder•••/tianding of all the main statements of tho New Testament ias 10 our j Lord." "Sooner or later." ;uids the paper, "the followers i-f iho 'Now' Theology' will find tih-erosplvcs adrift [ from all faith, or will .*-:ei>k consolation in tho bosom of 'he Church of Rome." j In the ."British Weekly," Dr. Robertson Nicoll follows up his re-' oent attack on Mr Campbell's views by a seven-column article criticising the book severely. Ho declares that it "is even more acutely at issue with historic. Christianity than wo sfcould have expected." JThe only personal .attack which Mr Campbell makes in his book is on Dr. ' Nicoll, w\hom he charged with deliberately misquoting, and referrocl to Dr. Nicoll's system of quotations as "a good illustration of the sinfulness of sin. In tho case atall events, Mr Campbell beltved in the reality of sin. To this Ih - . Nicoll replied that Mr Campbell's sermons arc "a mass of contraodictions." To meet Mr Campbell's statement that tho teaching in. tho book is only what he preached in tho City Temple, and previously a*b Brighton. Dr. Nicoll publishes tho full text of a sermon on "'Tho Psyohology of At onemont," preached by Mr Campbell in Birmimghiaim in I*B*9B. The sermon it may bo safei ly be said, is of tbe most orthodox kindKey, Dr. Horlon makes a strenuous appeal for fair and just treatment, of Mr Ca/nip*belL •'•'■lf -I had any influence in. tho religious world*, ho .writes, "1 would usa it all to say:— 'Do wait, and tread and weigh' before you judge. - Do recognise the transparent sincerity and earnestness of this man, who, in deolaring tho truth (that, is in; him, faces tho crucifixion of the orthodox ,'world. If ho bo wrong, show it by clear evidence, not by rancorous abuse and tho vilo reflections of tho vulgar mind that he is an unfaithlEul minister who 'takes pay' to preach one thing and preaclj.-s another." Mdanwhila (ho a/dds), these points, at least, are established:— "Mr .Campbell does not deny tho existence oil sin, or tho need of Atonement; he does not deny the divinity or authority of Christ; he is not a Unitarian, Indeed, he may be rank-ad witl.! Romanists as justifiably as -with Unitarians. iHe has an equal sympathy with both, but cannot support; either. Hlis real affinity ia with the Quakers. Ho is the George Fox of the twentieth century; his doctrine is of the! sanie kind) as Fox's though ho is no fanatic and is quite free from Fox's ecccnttrioities; the central truth is what Fox taught, but he is in greater sympathy with the thought and needs of his time. And,, "like Georg« Fox, he must, I fear, sufTer, be misunderstood, denounced, a-nd opposed."