The National Unitarian Conference held its annual meeting at Saratoga, beginning September 21. Thursday, as it was the first session, was opened with a "communion service," these people not having yet learned that the Lord's Day is the day for the Lord's Supper.

      The well-known politician, Senator Hoar, of Massachusetts, presided. In the course of his opening address he scored his brethren for their stinginess by saying that the sixteen Congregational churches in his own city of Worcester contributed more for their missionary [242] objects than do all the Unitarian churches, though the latter number about sixteen hundred. This shows how little the Unitarians care for their religion. If they regarded it as of much value, they would give more for its propagation.

      "Rev." Minot J. Savage, who is a radical unbeliever in everything miraculous, is chairman of the Executive Committee of this National Conference, and in his report as such, he made a remark which ought to arrest the attention of many besides the Unitarians. He said: "The greatest hindrance to the increase of Unitarian churches is the spread of the Unitarian doctrines in other churches." While rejoicing in the spread of these doctrines, he protested against the dishonesty of those who are Unitarians in fact, but "remain in churches whose doctrines they repudiate." If I had been there to hear him, I would have said: "Lay on, Mr. Savage; you can not give them a lick amiss." And I think I would have invited him to come over our way with his whip of small cords, to drive certain traders out of our corner of the temple. But the trouble about these traders in the temple is, that though you may drive them out, as our Lord did, they will come back again as they did in his case, so long as they can make money by it. "Rev." Savage will have to teach his Unitarian churches to give their money more liberally before this class will come over and stay. He should at least request Bro. Hoar not to make so public the stinginess of Unitarian churches; for, if that becomes known, all the Unitarians who are skulking in other churches and living on the fat of the land, will stay where they are while they are permitted to do so.

      Several other curious things cropped out in the proceedings of this conference. For instance, according to [243] the reporter in the Independent, some of the speakers united in defining the elements of religion, and they formulated them on this fashion: "The constituent elements of religion are: first, reverence; second, conviction of the moral order of the world for the direction of life; third, the moral energy of the world for the inspiration of life." If any reader, on seeing this, is surprised that neither faith in Christ nor repentance toward God is recognized as an element of religion, he should be reminded that the reference is to Unitarian religion, and of this the Unitarians ought to be the best judges.

      Another curious thing that turned up was the statement of one of the speakers, Dr. John W. Chadwick, that "the argument for the divinity of Christ involves an atheistic element; it eliminates God from history in order to justify the supernatural claims that are made for Jesus." Why did not some of us think of this before? Why have we not observed that to think of God as sending his only begotten Son into the world, eliminates God from history? That to believe in Jesus as the Son of the living God, and as the Messiah for whose coming God overruled all the preceding ages, is to eliminate God from history? I doubt whether we ever would have discovered this if Dr. John W. Chadwick had not pointed it out to us.

      Another speaker, "Rev." Charles F. Dole, told the conference a thing which I have believed for several years, but which I have scarcely ventured to tell lest I should give offense. In a paper on the points of contact and difference between the "new orthodoxy" and Unitarianism, he declared that "the new orthodoxy is substantially the same system of religious philosophy as the Unitarians hold. It has eliminated the devil, the fall of man, and similar features, from the mediæval [244] scheme; but it differs from Unitarianism in holding to the old idea of the Bible and of the unique and exceptional life of Jesus." I could say to Dr. Dole, Don't be uneasy, Doctor; these adherents of the new orthodoxy who have eliminated the devil and the fall of man, are not holding a very tight grip on the old idea of the Bible and of Christ. If you knew them as well as I do, you would see that their grip on the Bible and on Christ is beginning to relax, and you will soon find them over on your side if you will only stir up your Unitarian churches to the giving of bigger salaries.

      Another interesting feature of this conference was the presence of the great evangelist, B. Fay Mills--his presence not as a looker-on, but as one of the regular speakers. He held in his address, that "the whole system of dogmatism and priestcraft, Protestant and Catholic, is doomed and must go; and that an inspirational religion must take its place." Here is another and a new kind of religion--inspirational religion. Of course the evangelist that was, knows what kind of religion that is, and it is to be hoped that on some favorable occasion he will tell us. When he does so we can put his definition of it in a group with those definitions mentioned in the first part of this article, and then we shall know better than we now do what religion is. But Mr. Mills also said, that in order to establish this inspirational religion we must have three things, "a great thought, a great personality, and a great occasion." I should think so; especially a great thought--an article which appears to have been missing in that conference. Mr. Mills felt the need of it, and he insisted that they must find it. He finally discovered it, and he said: "The great thought may be thus outlined: Absolute faith that justifies not [245] only the right, but, also, seeming evil; unbounded hope that sees health emerge from all corruption; unlimited love that solves all individual and political problems." Well, if that is the great thought which we must have in order to establish inspirational religion, I am afraid that I shall never be able to help Mr. Mills in establishing it; for this thought is too great, or too misty, or too something, for my small cranium. I heard Mr. Mills preach a few times two or three years ago, and I understood everything he said; but since he has gone off after "inspirational religion" his great ideas are too profound for me.

[SEBC 242-246]