Words, Words, Words by F. M. W.

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Aug 26, 1909

“Words, Words, Words”

By F. M. W.

The recent declaration of Dr. Eliot of Harvard, giving what he believes should constitute the new religious belief of mankind, has justly aroused much adverse criticism on the part of religious journals throughout the country.

The United Presbyterian, in pointing out several misleading errors in Dr. Eliot’s new platform of religious belief, says:—

Dr. Eliot, president-emeritus of Harvard, has been letting his light shine along the path of the immortals; but it comes a long way from being the light of the world. When a man undertakes to put himself on a level with Jesus of Nazareth in providing a way of redemption for the human race, he should be

sure that he is the bearer of a divine message. He should not attempt to lead his fellow men without a star in the heavens, or undertake to destroy the hope of the human race until he has something better to put in its place. . . . The whole thing recalls the words of old Polonius and Hamlet:—

“Polonius.— What do you read, my lord? “Hamlet.— Words, words, words. “Polonius.— What is the matter, my lord? “Hamlet.— Slanders, sir.”

The Lutheran, in an article in a recent issue, which the United Presbyterian also favorably quotes, gives this excellent review of the salient features of this latest attack upon the foundations of the Christian faith:—

1. “It will not be bound by dogma or creed.” That is to say, religion is no longer to be a matter of belief, but of good works only. Hence it will make little difference whether the Bible teachings about God, about man, about sin, about redemption in Christ, about eternal life and eternal death, be accepted or not. He who accepts them all has no better chance of pleasing God and doing his will than he who rejects them all. “By their fruits ye shall know them,” and hence what difference does it make whether you plant an apple seed, a cucumber seed, or a poisonous berry seed? As all men can not believe alike, what’s the use of believing anything?

2. “The new religion will not be based upon authority. There will be no supernatural element; it will place no reliance on anything but the laws of nature.” So away goes the Bible,—without whose indirect rays of light Dr. Eliot himself would have walked in darkness. Hence we are no better off than the American Indian who had nature for his Bible. The horizon of our spiritual world has its boundaries fixed by what we can here see and feel and touch. Surely this is reducing religion to lowest elements. Are we really better off with such a religion than the South Sea islander was before he was transformed by the gospel?

3. “In the new religion there will be no deification of remarkable human beings. God will be so immanent that no intermediary will be needed.” Thus with one fell swoop is the divinity of Christ brought prostrate. That must be a wonderful educator indeed who can unmake him who is called “The mighty God, . . . The Prince of Peace.” Wonder where Christianity with all its remarkable conquests would be to-day if the apostles and all Christians down to the present had believed as Dr. Eliot does?

4. “The new religion will not attempt to reconcile people to present ills by the promise of future compensation.” And so there is, after all, no gateway of relief leading from the sorrows and sufferings of this present life to joys that lie beyond? Verily how mistaken Jesus and his followers must have been to hold out to the weary and heavy laden the promise of blessedness unspeakable hereafter! If that sort of religion were to be preached in the churches for one year, how many people would be left in the pews to listen to it?

5. All that seems to have a semblance of vitality about this new religion is that it “will be based on the two great commandments”—love to God and love to man. But who is God? How are we to know him if he is not revealed? How can he be revealed if there is no other book but nature in which to read of him? So this new religion takes us away from faith and brings us to two great commandments, and before these it leaves us helpless and undone. Thus we are to have the flower and the fruit of religion, but it must be cut off from its stem. What a wilted thing it will soon be.

But Dr. Eliot wields an enormous influence in the educational world, and therein lies the sadness of this utterance of his before a body of intelligent men. Unitarianism has seldom had a more potent hearing than it received from his lips. But the church of Christ will go on preaching the old gospel of Christ and him crucified,—that gospel which though foolishness to men, is yet the power of God and the wisdom of God. Between the teachings of One who spake as never man spake and the teachings of Dr. Eliot, who speaks very much as a man and very otherwise than Jesus did, it will not be difficult for men who feel the limitations of their nature to choose. Really Dr. Eliot’s new religion is very old—as old as unbelief itself.

It is gratifying to see some of the religious journals of the day rise up in defense of the fundamental truths of the Bible and Christianity. On the other hand, it is painful to see the rapid trend of many prominent educators and churchmen toward open or disguised skepticism and infidelity. These times call for brave men with unshaken faith in divine revelation and Christian experience.

F. M. W.