Orthodox Rationalism [pp. 294-312]

OR THIODOX RA TIONA LISM.
it seems to me, the signs of the times who look for another
Christ or a new Gospel. But a great change is taking place in
methods of theological inquiry and modes of religious expression. We feel this new, fresh breeze as the coming of a reviving
Spirit over the old and parched fields of theological study. The
movement has already rejuvenated our biblical literature, and
it rustles through the sermons of many who know not whence
it cometh nor whither it goeth. But it is a better method,
born of the Spirit, for the renewal of theology and, the revival
of faith.
A few words of more specific characterization of this better
method in theology may serve to bring out more clearly the
distinctions already generally described in the endeavor to show
the rationalistic vices latent in much orthodox theology.
The better method is dynamical rather than statical. It
deals, that is to say, with forces and formations rather than with
constitutions and constructions. It seeks to interpret results in
mind and history by following with patient investigation the
processes of life through which they have come to be what they
are. It seeks to understand the living, growing synthesis of the
unities of nature, not content with the mere analysis of formed
products, or the philosophic dissection of dead thoughts. This
more scientific method may be illustrated by reference to certain characteristic differences between the Scotch philosophy,
which has largely dominated New England theology, and the
best German metaphysics since Kant. The Scotch method is
statical and constitutional; the German method of faith is
dynamical and genetic. The former, that is to say, takes up
the mind as one might a music-box, and notes the tunes which
it has been made to play; or as one might examine a mathematical instrument, and read off its signs. These, it holds, are
our first faiths, the native music of the soul; these are the tests
or "criteria" of truth, and all rational belief must begin by accepting them in good faith. If we will not use these, we have
no means of making any scientific survey of the universe. This
constitutional philosophy has the merit of definiteness, clear
ness, and logical cogency, but it is out of relation to modern
evolutionary thought, and fails to meet fully the demands of a
scientific method in theology.
309
0