Let us turn, then, to the figures of speech employed by Jesus to express his conception of the spiritual community. He did not take the state as his model nor, like some today, call his disciples an army; he spoke of them as a family, as a flock, and as the free citizens of his Father's kingdom. They were a family because they were united in the spirit of brotherhood; they were a flock because they followed the Good Shepherd; they were the citizens of the kingdom of God because the passion of their lives was to do the will of their Father in heaven. This was the threefold unity which the presence of Jesus produced, and to it we must return in the power of the Holy Spirit. What prevents it? There was never more brotherly kindness among men than there is to-day. All Christians are trying to follow the Good Shepherd, and all will to do the will of God. But in spite of this we have not been able to agree upon the way in which the existing unity can express itself. Well, if it were once admitted that each of the ways now in use had certain advantages, might we not agree to honor one another in the continuance of those ways which have been found by experience to nourish the spiritual life? If that were our spirit, we should be able to see why the different plans for church unity on which so much earnest labor and a sincere desire for nobler religious life have been expended, yet have failed, and we believe must continue to fail until we find the way of Jesus in the realization of the spiritual unity for which our Saviour prayed. fundamental idea of the difficult Johannine passage (15: 15), 'But if all prophesy, and one come in that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all: and thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face, he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth' (I Cor. 14:24, 25). The evangelist gives a wider application to the idea of Paul. He imagines the church as a whole confronting the incredulous world and impressing it with the sense of a divine power, which finds expression in the various Christian activities. In this manner the work of the spirit will have a universal significance, although its proper and exclusive sphere is the church."-"The Fourth Gospel," E. F. Scott, p. 337.

I am convinced that a vital unity of Christians cannot be obtained by ignoring the past. I believe that what is now needed is a fair statement of the position of each of the churches, so that there will be a better understanding of the reason, not alone for the original separation, but also for the continuance of each. It is because of this that I shall venture, even at the risk of being thought sectarian, to point out why, in my opinion, the Episcopal Church is not justified in allowing itself to be absorbed into a general American Church, which might fail to safeguard those things without which I fear the larger church might lose much that is of permanent value. But the same is true of all the churches. Not by ignoring our differences, but by emphasizing our principles, shall we be in a position to know what is of permanent and what of merely temporary value.

I would suggest then that, paradoxical as it may seem, the first step toward more effective association will be found not in ignoring the differences of the churches, but, on the contrary, in glorifying them. "He that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his works may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." Suppose each of the churches were to set forth in popular form the reasons that lead its members to think that their church was not only justified in separating from some other group in the past, but is also justified in continuing to bear witness to that aspect of truth which seems to them valuable for the whole body of Christ, it might be that there would result such a mutual understanding and respect for one another as would enable each church to learn from every other, and so prepare the way for some more effective association of the various churches than is now possible. Too long has the "hand" said to the "foot": "Because you are not the hand you are not of the body." Let us now see what each member has to say for itself, and what it believes to be its value not to itself alone but to the whole body of Christ.

It is because I believe that the Episcopal Church has a gift for the American Church of the future that I would not have it enticed into a poor imitation of the Roman Catholic Church; not that I fail to recognize that the Roman Church has also a contribution to make, but only that it is unwilling to make its contribution till every other church has denied the grace which God has given it. And, on the other hand, I believe it would be a loss to the future religious life of this land were the Episcopal Church to be absorbed into a great American religious trust, without the assurance that the things which those who belong to that church have found helpful will be guarded and kept for the welfare of those who are to come after. But what I believe of the church which I know best and love most, I believe also of all the churches. With this in mind, and because I know of no book in reasonable compass which so deals with the Episcopal Church, I venture to ask the reader to look with me into the meaning of that church and consider if it have not a value which has not been appreciated, partly because of the sectarian spirit in which the value of it has been too often exhibited.

CHAPTER IX

THE ENGLISH TRADITION

THE first question which will be asked by those in the Episcopal Church who have been in the habit of thinking of their church as the exclusive depository of God's grace, is: "What advantage, then, have we who belong to this church, if it be once admitted that the means of grace, which we have been taught can be found only in an organization which enjoys the apostolic ministry, are really existent in other organizations?"

In order to answer that question, it might be well for us to remember that the crisis which came to the Jewish Church and ended so disastrously, came also to the Apostolic Church, and, therefore, may come to us as well, even if we have the apostolic ministry.

Only careful students of the New Testament know how near the Christian church came to making the great refusal, under the leadership of the prince of the apostles, Simon the son of Jonas. They also know that it was Paul who saved the church, even as the author of the Book of Jonah would have saved the Jewish Church.

The early Christians inherited from their Jewish fathers a repugnance to the Gentiles. They found it almost impossible to believe that those who had not enjoyed the privilege of the Law had, nevertheless, been under the guiding hand of God. So when Paul said that "God hath made of one blood all nations to dwell on the face of the whole earth, that they might seek after him and find him," the question which immediately arose was: "What advantage then hath the Jew?" If the Jew has no exclusive privilege, what advantage has he? So, in the same way,

it will be asked to-day: "If we of the Episcopal Church, with our apostolic ministry, have no exclusive privilege, what advantage have we?" In other words: "If this church of ours, differing from our Protestant brethren in manner of worship and in discipline, is unable to enter into perfect communion with our fellow Christians in this country, would it not be better for us to abandon those things which are peculiar to us, and be absorbed into the religious life of America? If we do not do this, are we not schismatics?" It must not be forgotten that those who ask the question have no intention of doing this, but that they ask the question simply because they believe it to be valuable in controversy. Nevertheless, it is a fair question and should be answered.

What advantage, then, has the Episcopal Church? If by advantage is meant means of eternal salvation, I answer frankly that I believe we have none that is not shared by all the disciples of Jesus. But if by advantage is meant what do we hold in trust for the future religious life of this country, then I say with St. Paul: "Much every way."

In every organization there are three things which distinguish it: doctrine, discipline, and worship. We shall speak of these a little later. For the moment, I should like to speak in a more general way of certain characteristics of the Episcopal Church, which are either lacking or at least are not emphasized in other churches.

The first is that, so far as I know, the Episcopal Church is the only American religious organization that is consciously endeavoring to keep alive the spirit of unity among the English-speaking peoples of the world. And this it is seeking to do by reminding us of the fundamental glory of the English people. This the Episcopal Church tried to do in the beginning and is trying to do to-day.

Whoever will take the trouble to read carefully the Preface to the Book of Common Prayer will see that our fathers were very particular in stating that they had no