IT has been said that we are living in a period of change; in fact, that as a generation we are ushering in a new age. We are told that our age is not static, but dynamic. That there is a large measure of truth in all this we shall be prepared to admit, and, further, to confess that it is only in so far as there is movement that there can be life. In the realm of thought, whether we look at the secular world or the Church, we shall see movement at work.

      What are the chief changes being wrought out to-day? Let us look at the secular world. Here we find two great forces at work, each represented by definite parties. There are those who argue for the value of the individual over against that of society. "Liberty" has now become their watchword. "Preserve the rights of the individual," they say. Under such a creed individualism is necessary to personality. In the opposite school stand those who plead for the social idea. It is true their plea is sometimes marred by crudities, and its force thus made to appear weaker than it really is; but, nevertheless, it is demanding widespread attention.

      When we turn to the world of Christianity we again see two great movements of thought. On the [15] one hand, we have those who, in every denomination, are pleading for the organic unity of the Church. Conferences everywhere speak loudly of the strength of this movement, which seeks to gather all Christians into one Divine Society, to enjoy one fellowship. On the other hand, there are those--perhaps moved by their disgust at the failure of organised Christianity--who see no value in the Church. Institutionalism to them spells legalism and ritualism, and even worse still, sacramentalism. "The Gospel is before the Church," they cry, as if this were the end of all controversy upon the matter. The bitter experience of Church oppression and dogmatism, from which the Reformation never really freed Christianity, has led them to expect very little from any organised system. For them the individual Christian must ever transcend the Church and her institutions. The watchwords are, as before, "freedom," "liberty," "no oppression."

      After all, in the secular and Christian world the same movements are at work: they are identical. It is the individual versus society. Individualism and Socialism are set up as opposites; they can have no affinities. Is this really so? Surely it is the very negation of all our experience. Is it not rather true to say that the individual life would perish apart from social relationships? Fellowship is a very necessity of our being. Long ago it was said that man was a gregarious animal; but this is only to state half the truth. Apart from fellowship man would cease to be what he is--he would become something less than man. We need not hesitate to assert that what is true in the natural realm is true [16] also in the spiritual. Man seeks fellowship in the Christian life. The Church, therefore, is seen in a new light--it is no longer something imposed upon man from without, but something which satisfies his inmost spiritual needs. It is for this reason that the Church becomes permanent as a fellowship which is necessary to the development of the individual soul. It is true, in one sense, that the Gospel is before the Church, but the Church grows out of the Gospel in a perfectly natural way. These two represent the two aspects of our life, the individual and the social; and both are necessary to each other. The danger comes when the Church discards the Gospel--that from which she sprang. Then the individual is lost sight of and institutionalism develops into the grossest sacramentalism. But there is the opposite danger of discarding the Church, and depriving the individual soul of the very society which is necessary to its development, if not to its existence. The danger here is for religion to degenerate into mere morality--the spiritual life is merged into the ethical. After all, the way of the individual moral life is the very opposite of the way of the Cross. Of itself it is sure to end in, "God, I thank Thee that I am not as other men." Christianity is not so much a way of salvation as of service, and He who served mankind in His Body has given to us a Body--the Church--that we too may serve the world, and so glorify Him.

      From all this it is refreshing to turn to the historical evidence. From a study of the New [17] Testament documents two things can he stated with assurance. First, it is clear that Jesus came with the express purpose of founding a society, which was to be a permanent witness to His ministry. His coming was heralded by one who preached, "The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand." Even taking into account all the current Jewish apocalyptic beliefs, there can be no doubt about the fact that Jesus came to found a Divine Society. It is true that, for a time, even this very society itself had but a hazy notion of what was its particular nature and mission. For many years the idea was primarily that of the Kingdom, which would fulfil all the Messianic hopes of the most ardent zealot from amongst the Jews; but by the close of the Apostolic age there was a clear conception of the Church. Secondly, it is clear that Jesus did not Himself set up this society, but left the work to a band of His chosen followers. Thus the Church was founded on "apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner-stone."¹ Here, then, are the three elements in the Divine foundation. We shall examine only the first: Jesus Christ, the chief corner-stone².

      Nothing is clearer than that the Church is founded on a Person, and not upon a creed.³ Christianity is not a philosophy or a theology, but primarily a religion. Philosophy and theology may be useful, and, indeed are; but they must never be placed as a substitute for the personal relationship [18] between the individual and Jesus. Christianity is essentially individualistic in its message. But this is not to deny the value of the corporate side. It can only mean that the corporate side is made possible through personal evangelism. It is for this reason that the Church must always be evangelical, and this evangelical character of the institution is only possible through maintaining the reality of the personal relationship between the individual member and Christ. This the early Church never lost sight of--it placed no intellectual barriers between its members and the Head; it demanded no other subscription than that which pulsated with life, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."⁴

      Who was this Jesus who became the chief corner-stone? Normally, we look upon God as some Being infinitely great. Absolute, infinite, omnipotent, are the words by which we define Him. This is all reflected in our human life. "How can we get on in the world?" is the insistent demand of Christians as well as pagans--there is really little difference--after nineteen centuries of Christian teaching. It was so when He came. The world was full of self-adulation; hopes were entertained not only in Judaism, but outside it, of the coming of a Kingdom in which there would be grandeur, magnificence, pomp, wealth and all that the human heart holds dear. On all this Christianity descended, with shattering effect, in the form of a little Child born in a stable outside Bethlehem. It was so [19] ridiculous the world could have laughed. The world had yet to learn that the intrinsic greatness of God is His capacity to stoop. But have we yet learnt it? The early Church stumbled for a long time in darkness with her false Messianic hopes--His nearest followers asked for the thrones on His right and left. Many centuries had not passed until the Church, filled with this pagan philosophy, and disappointed of her apocalyptic hopes, was dominated by Erastian views, and gloried in the high places in state and empire. From this sin she is not to-day free; for both in bodies controlled by Erastian and non-Erastian views, there are those who have forgotten the ways of Bethlehem and the Cross. We are all alike guilty; we have forgotten from whence we came. Our amour propre is so easily offended, and if we do not look for crowns of gold and gates of pearl, we have used the Church to our own advantage sufficiently far to forget that she is the great means of service--nay, let us say sacrifice--which God has set in the World. Can we wonder that men have turned against the Church! We must all be prepared to take our share of the blame. What, then, is the remedy? Let us get back to that small company of child-like, unassuming souls who have done more to redeem the world than all other forces. Then shall we have a Church which may well be catholic yet ever evangelical, individualistic and yet corporate, free and yet ordered, which will perpetually speak to the world because of her living contact with Him who is the Head. The way of such a Church, however, will never be that of worldly glory, but of service to humanity. [20]

[EOCU 15-20]