The Chicago “Inter-Ocean,” in commenting on Dr. Eliot’s prophecy of a “new religion,” observes that “such a religion might bring to some few spirits a mild sensual happiness, but it could do nothing at all to establish its own professed ideal of the brotherhood of man, because it would be purely individual and egotistical in its nature. Such proposals and prophecies are, of course, the product of the arid mind which says ‘partisanship’ and imagines it has said ‘ignorance;’ which says ‘doctrine’ and imagines it has said ‘bigotry;’ which says ‘dogma’ and imagines it has said ‘narrowness.’ It is all a mistake to call this “product of the arid mind” a new religion. The statement of Solomon that “there is nothing new under the sun” applies with astonishing aptness to ecclesiastical history. All the expedients imaginable seem to have been exhausted by which men would evade the simple duty of believing the truth and escape responsibility for doing their plain duty to God and man. In the rubbish-house of church history can be found the disjointed parts which Harvard’s ex-president has pieced together. In this composite will be found upon close analysis Unitarianism, deism, rationalism, natural evolution, not a little infidelity, and a few other scraps.
