the colleges. And yet the city University Club is too often distinctly reactionary.

Self-discipline, work, positive and aggressive convictions and ideals, moral, social and religious leadership — these the college must show if it is to live up to the obligations of high privileges. And let us be sure it will not show these characteristics in students, if they do not exist in teachers. We may not ignore the law of cause and effect, if we want a soundly religious life in our colleges.

II. My second proposition is this: Religion in our colleges should also surely mean that the college is doing honestly what it pretends to do the work of the higher education of its students. What, at least, should such higher education mean? Surely, the personal sharing by the student in the great intellectual and spiritual achievements of the race. And we can say with some definiteness today what that calls for the personal sharing by the student in the scientific spirit and method, in the historical spirit, in the philosophic mind, in esthetic appreciation, in the social consciousness, and in religious discernment and commitment. The moral consciousness of the race is revealed in all these alike. And teachers, we may well remember, cannot share with students what they themselves have not. Not every teacher of science is a possessor of the scientific spirit. A man may teach complicated courses in history, and yet lack the historical spirit. The war has proved both these state

ments.

If the colleges will honestly do this work of higher education, religion will take care of itself. For religion is not something desirable but extraneous, to be added from outside to higher education. It inevitably permeates, I believe, a college education that is utterly true to its real ends. I am not, therefore, going to say that if the colleges will add Bible courses and technical religious means of various kinds,

though I am far from undervaluing these means, that religion will be saved in the college. The only religion that deserves to be saved must pervade the entire life of the college. I may well make, therefore, the text of all the rest that I have to say, a sentence of one of your New Haven prophets, Dr. Newman Smyth: "The whole man, in the

entirety of his being, is the organ of the spiritual." In other words, may it not be that no small part of the comparative unsatisfactoriness of the moral and religious life of our colleges is due to the fact that it has been too exclusive, too limited in its application, too lacking in vision of the allinclusive meanings of religion?

The very business of the college, then, let us see, is to bring its students personally to share in the great intellectual and spiritual achievements of the race. One cannot neglect one's primary business and be truly religious. We have talked about the scientific spirit, the historical spirit, the philosophic mind, and the rest, but we have not sufficiently perceived that higher education fails - dismally and surely fails in just so far as the personal sharing in all these falls short. This is the stern test that we must bring to all higher education. Every one of these great outstanding characteristics of our time, it is not too much to say, is very closely related to that Christian spirit which should inform the whole life of the Christian college, and culminates, indeed, in the spirit directly commanded by Christ.

First of all, the Christian college must make possible to its students some personal sharing in the scientific spirit and method - perhaps the most outstanding inner characteristic of our time. It implies wide and patient and systematic study of the facts, and insight into laws-natural, economic, political, social. And the scientific spirit means the habitual determination to see straight, to report exactly, and to give an absolutely honest reaction upon the situation in which one finds himself. That spirit alone applied to college conditions would work a revolution, bring a new sense of law into students' thinking, and a clear preception that there was no true education where there was not insight into the laws of life and obedience to those laws. Now, all this is strictly in line with Christ's own insistent demand for utter inner integrity, with his passion for reality everywhere, and with his insistence that men must come to insights and decisions and choices of their own. A genuine infusion of the scientific spirit into college life would be very like a veritable revival of religion for students and teachers alike. And we

teachers owe it to our students that we should bring them into the scientific spirit.

The historical spirit might almost be said to be an application of the scientific spirit. It is the ability to put oneself, with vivid constructive and detailed psychological and sociological imagination and insight, at the point of view of the other man of the other race, of the other time and clime, and to see things through his eyes, from his point of view. It has profoundly influenced our estimate of most important interests, as the historical criticism of the Scriptures and the whole growth of comparative religion bear witness. And all this the Christian college may gladly welcome; for it means the interpenetration of religion and life. It is, too, the very essence of the Golden Rule, and ought to be one of the great modern bulwarks against race prejudices, race contempts, and race hatreds, in the United States and out. The great world war is a demonstration of wide-spread failure at this point. Have we been taking pains to share with our students the one priceless thing that the study of history has to give the historical spirit? That would certainly help both them and us to a more Christ-like feeling. History is not to be made the vehicle of race contempt and race hatred.

Nor is a man educated who quite lacks the philosophic mind. Men need to see life steadily, and to see it whole; to ask ultimate questions, and to inquire as to life's ideal interpretation and its final meaning. Thoughtful living is hardly possible otherwise. No age has more needed the philosophic mind than our own, so complex, so transitional, so revolutionary, possessed of so stupendous resources. And in all its final interpretative task, philosophy comes inevitably to essentially religious questions. The kinship is unmistakable. The fact seems to be, that the full answer of religious faith is needed to enable philosophy to reach its goal of a completely rational world. Serious, thoughtful, philosophical study, that earnestly takes into account all life's data, is at home in the Christian college, and is closely akin to expressly religious inquiry. Religion has suffered from a superficial and hand-to-mouth education. We owe to the student in proportion to his capacity - the philosophic mind, and religious life will be deepened thereby.

Nor can the college leave out of account the realm of esthetic appreciation. How deeply significant esthetic appreciation is, is forced upon one by various lines of thought. Esthetic interests make for the balance and sanity of even the most earnest college life. The fact that the great method of coming into all the great spheres of value is the same method of staying persistently in the presence of the best with honest response, is also most suggestive of the close kinship of the esthetic to the moral and religious. The frequent profoundly moving and thrilling power of the beautiful can hardly be understood at all, except upon some such hypothesis as that of Lotze, that the beautiful, so clearly seen in a mere fragment of the world where we had no right to expect it, seems to us a kind of divine prophecy and promise of the ultimate harmony of all. This sense of the beautiful, too, thus finds its natural culmination in religious faith. Not to have introduced our college students into an intelligent appreciation of the great realms of the beautiful in literature and music and art, is to have cheated them of no small part of their rightful racial heritage, and to have left them less sensitive to the appeal of the ideal everywhere. The habitual association of the true, the good, and the beautiful is not meaningless.

It is still more clear that a man does not belong to the modern age, who has not shared in its most marked characteristic the social consciousness. A college education today that does not bring its students to a personal sharing in the social consciousness, is pretty nearly a farce. It must be confessed that our higher institutions of learning have at this point too often lagged behind, and even proved reactionary. And yet, nowhere more than in this essentially moral task is the race working out the problem of social progress. It has still much to learn of complex conditions and laws natural, economic, political, social but it knows something, at least, of its ideal and goal, and knows the essential method of the scientific mastery of its problem, realm after realm. At no point is our generation more closely akin to the Christian spirit than in its social consciousness. The college ceases to be Christian, so far as it fails in the social consciousness. And yet our college men find it all too easy

to count themselves comfortably in the privileged classes, with small vision for a civilization that shall truly measure up to the standards and ideals of Christ. Here particularly may it be said, "Where there is no vision the people perish." We owe our students the social consciousness. Religion and morals would at the same time be revived.

Finally, no imperative upon the races has been felt more keenly or more persistently than the demand for religious discernment and commitment. We have seen how naturally and even inevitably the other outstanding racial tasks look on to the essentially religious goal. Religious faith is profoundly needed, as reason, motive and power for all these other tasks of the race. We cannot hope that students will come into the full meaning of these great intellectual and spiritual achievements of the race without the motive power of the religious life. The permanent meaning and value of life must be built upon the conviction of an infinite purpose of good back of the universe, of faith in a heart of love in all life. And our educational task cannot be finished without bringing our students vitally to share in religion. For, as Eucken says so characteristically for our own time, "Not suffering, but spiritual destitution is man's worst enemy." All this means that we have no occasion to apologize for religion in college education. In truth, we can deal seriously and adequately with our educational task only as religion permeates the whole. And that result, I am contending, we cannot reach, if we are treating religious education in any exclusive and fractional fashion. There must be the most honest, thoroughgoing and broad-minded application of the spirit of Christ to every phase of our college life. Christ, not convention, is to determine aims and means.

By methods no less broad and far-reaching than these is religion to be kept in its true place in our colleges, and the Christian ideal in education to be achieved. There must be a rigorous application of the principle of the obligation of the privileged, in higher education, carrying with it an atmosphere of self-discipline, of work, of positive and aggressive convictions and ideals, and therefore of enthusiasm and leadership in the great world tasks. And the colleges must honestly do what they pretend to do. And that cannot be