Having considered the question of holiness as a doctrine and as an experience, it is but natural that we should now pass to a consideration of the same subject in its practical or ethical aspects. We have seen that a holy heart is the fundamental condition for holy living. It is specifically stated that we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them (Eph. 2:10). When, however, we pass from a consideration of Christian experience to the life consequent upon it, we are turning in some sense from the field of dogmatics to that of ethics. Dogmatics gives attention to doctrines, and answers the inquiry, What ought we to believe? Ethics seeks to answer the question, What ought we to do? Arminian theology has always given much attention to the morals and institutions of Christianity, as an examination of the works of Wesley, Watson, Clarke, Pope, Raymond, Summers, Ralston, and Lee will show. Dr. Miley also gives attention to the necessity of moral government, but treats it in relation to his governmental theory of the atonement. Our purpose, however, is not to consider the field of general or philosophical ethics; nor even the field of Christian ethics considered as a science, but only to examine more immediately the life of holiness as related to the doctrine and experience of entire sanctification. After a brief consideration of the Relation of Theology to Ethics; Revelation as the Source of Christian Ethics, and the Scriptural Basis of Ethics, we shall give our attention to the following: (I) The Development of Ethical Theory in the Church; (II) The Principles of Christian Ethics; and (III) Practical Ethics. This latter will be considered under the threefold division of (1) Theistic Ethics: or Duties We Owe to God; (2) Individual Ethics: or Duties We Owe to Ourselves ; and (3) Social Ethics: or Duties We Owe to Others.

The Relation of Theology to Ethics. As theology is the science of God and the mutual relations of God and man, so ethics as the science of duty, has to do with the end, the principles and motives of obligatory conduct. When the material of the two sciences is drawn wholly from nature, we have Natural Theology, and Natural or Naturalistic Ethics ; when it is drawn from Revelation, we have Revealed Theology, and Revealed or theological Ethics. There is no disharmony, however, between the two sources of material, since the one must

be in some sense supplementary to the other. In our discussion of General and Special Revelation (Volume I, Chapter VI), we pointed out that God discloses Himself to man, (1) through a primary revelation in nature, in the constitution of man, and in the progress of human history; (2) in addition to this general revelation manifested through His created works there is a special revelation made through the Spirit to the consciences and consciousness of men. So also in the field of ethics, God reveals Himself in two classes of law - natural and positive. (1) Natural law is that which God has written upon the heart of every man, or that which the light of reason teaches us is good or evil. Thus, the apostle says of the heathen in contradistinction to the Jews, that these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another (Rom. 2:14, 15). They are a law unto themselves, because they know in themselves what is good and what is evil, through reason which is to them the herald of divine law. Both history and experience teach us that all nations have a measure of divine revelation. This we have shown in our study of Religion and Revelation, and hence need only to point out that all nations acknowledge likewise, certain common principles of morality. Education, which has varied from age to age, cannot be the source of these uniform principles; consequently, we must find the common source of these maxims

in natural reason, which is from the Light that lighteth all men coming into the world. (2) Positive law is that which depends upon God's free will, and, therefore, can be known only through revelation. It should be noted, however, that what in one respect is the subject of natural law, in another may exist as positive law. Thus natural law reveals the necessity of a certain period of rest each week as essential to man's greatest efficiency in service; but this is also declared by positive law in the institution of the Sabbath, which is the setting apart of one day in seven as holy unto the Lord. In close connection with this, reason makes known also the necessity of divine worship; but that the time should be a full day, and this on a set day of the week, is a revelation of positive law. Similarly the Decalogue with its "ten words," all of which is based on man's relation to God, to others and to himself, is likewise accessible to reason. However, because of man's conscience being dimmed by failure to walk in the truth, the Decalogue, as a transcript of the law written in men's hearts, was also given by positive decree. We may say, therefore, of the Decalogue, that its precepts as to their substance belong to natural law; but as to the manner of their manifestation, they are a part of positive or revealed law.

Revelation as the Source of Christian Ethics. We are now brought to the position that Christian ethics must draw its material immediately from the Christian revelation. While we may and do admit that the light of the natural conscience furnishes corroborative testimony insofar as its feebler light can penetrate, we must affirm also, that nature alone can no more furnish Christianity with its system of ethics or morals, than it can furnish it with its system of doctrines. If dogma treats of God and the truth by which salvation is accomplished, so also ethics of the standards by which the Christian life is ordered, and by means of which it is given proper expression. Thus the morals or ethics of Christianity complete the science of religion ; for it is only through a combination of dogma and ethics that the plan of salvation can be revealed in its perfection. The fact, however, that there is a greater unanimity of thought respecting the standards of morality, than there is concerning dogma, may be attributed to the greater light which the moral life receives from natural reason. Dogma, on the other hand, is purely a matter of the interpretation of the Scriptures. The highest revelation of God to man is in Jesus Christ as the Word made flesh. Hence the positive element in Christian ethics is a course of life introduced into human conditions - a life actualized in human history by Jesus Christ as the God-man, and through the Spirit communicated to the community of believers. The life of Christ, therefore, whether in word, in deed, or in the spirit underlying these words and deeds, becomes the norm of all Christian conduct. His words furnish us with the knowledge of the divine will; His actions are the confirmation of truth, and His Spirit the power by which His words are embodied in deeds. With this statement as to the positive element in Christian ethics, we turn to the Scriptures as the recorded revelation of the incarnate Word, and in them we find our standards of Christian conduct, together with the promised power of the Spirit by which .these standards are to be maintained.

The Scriptural Basis of Ethics. Here we shall refer only to those scriptures which furnish the ground for the general system of Christian ethics, reserving such passages as refer to specific Christian duties for later consideration. The first question which arises is, Are the sources of Christian ethics to be derived solely from the New Testament, or are the Old Testament writings considered as a part of the Christian revelation? This subject has been previously considered in another connection (Volume I, pp.202-205), and it is sufficient to say here that the Old Testament insofar as it is applicable to

It should be observed that the scriptures are not devoted exclusively to a development of a system of moral government, nor do they teach it on the scientific plan of one of our modern writers on the subject of Moral Philosophy. But all the principles are taught in the inspired writings, and so plainly and forcibly asserted as to make the principles and facts much more readily comprehended by an unlettered and unsophisticated mind, than the best written modern volume on the subject of moral science. - LUTHER LEE, Elements of Theology, p. 332.

Christian life is still binding upon men. Certain portions of it, however, especially the types or shadows of better things to come, had their perfect fulfillment in the great Antitype; while others of a ceremonial or political nature were abrogated as belonging only to the Mosaic economy. But as to the moral law of Moses, the substance of which was embodied in the Decalogue, this was not superseded, but referred to by our Lord as of abiding authority without any special re-enactment. Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: He said; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 5:17-19).

The ethical teachings of the Gospels center in the idea of the kingdom, entrance to which is solely on the ground of repentance and faith. The acceptance of the call of God involves the subordination of all other loyalties. Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? . . . But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you (Matt. 6:31, 33). The sermon on the Mount has been called the Magna Charta of the kingdom. Here the true inwardness of its nature is set forth as an attitude of spirit - of thought, feeling and will which finds its highest expression in word and deed. The description which Jesus gives is not that of certain acts, but of a certain type of character. The true spring of obedience is found in divine love. When asked concerning the

[For as much as God requires that we should love, not above, but with all our strength, it is evident that nothing exceeding our abilities is required at our hands. - LIMRORCH, Theologia, Bk. v, chapter 25.

greatest commandment of the law, Jesus replied, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets (Matt. 22:37-40). The children of the kingdom are to be as wise as serpents, and harmless as doves (Matt. 10:16); they are to resist not evil (Matt. 5:39) and to Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell (Luke 12:5). According to Jesus, the supreme test of love is this, that a man lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13) and in close connection with this is the practical application, For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it (Luke 9:24).

THE DEVELOPMENT OF ETHICAL THEORY IN THE CHURCH

The periods which mark the development of ethical theory in the church, differ somewhat from those which are important in the history of dogmatics. For our purpose, the subject may be conveniently summed up in the following periods: (1) The Patristic Period, from the earlier fathers to the time of Constantine; (2) The Middle Ages, from the time of Constantine to the close of the Middle Ages; (3) The Renaissance and the Reformation; and (4) The Modern Period.

The Patristic Period. During the first century, the interests of the church were primarily concerned with practical conduct rather than rational reflection. Harneck says that for the first century and a half, the church ranked everything secondary to the supreme task of maintaining its morality. The dominant note of the early church was that of divine love manifesting itself in the care of the poor, hospitality to strangers, avoidance of the sensuous luxury and vices of the pagans, and devotion to the purity of life set by Christ and the apostles. Not until the latter part of the second century was there serious reflection on ethical problems. In the progress of Christianity in conflict with paganism, the more rigid view of Montanism came to occupy a place in apologetics alongside the milder tendency of previous times. Equally dangerous but in another direction, were the mistaken views of Christian liberty on the part of the Gnostics, which led to the dangerous errors of the Carpocratians and the later pantheistical sects. It thus became the task of Christianity to more exactly determine its principles and applications of morality. Some preliminary work had been done in the Epistles of Clement, the Shepherd of Hermas and the Epistle to Diognetus, but it remained for the later fathers to formulate the ethical principles of the church. In ethics as in dogmatics there is a difference of approach in the East and in the West. The former regarded Christian ethics as in some sense supplementary to the ancient Greek philosophy, which in itself was inadequate to a knowledge of God and immortality. Christianity, therefore, brought to completion the Greek ethical principles which were assumed to be grounded in universal reason. This is the position of Justin Martyr

[Clement of Rome in his First Epistle to the Corinthians states that the motive of Christian conduct is derived from "fear" or "reverence" of God. "Let us See how near He is," he says, "and how that nothing escapeth Him of our thoughts or our devices which we make. It is right, therefore, that we should not be deserters from His will." Ignatius insisted upon right beliefs as the basis for right moral practices. False theology, he maintained, led to wrong attitudes and bad conduct. "Faith is the beginning and love the end" of the Christian life. Among the more important of his maxims are "Let there be one prayer in common; one supplication; one mind; one hope, in love and in joy unblameable." "Shun divisions as the beginning of all evils." "Let all things be done to the honor of God." Polycarp in his "Epistle to the Philippians" appeals to the words of Jesus as sanctions. Faith, hope and love are the essentials of the Christian life. Heresy was regarded as a desire to live otherwise than according to the true faith. He warned especially against covetousness, "the love of money is the beginning of all trouble." The Didache and the Epistle of Barnabas have some similarities. Christianity is regarded as a new covenant which brings God and man into religious fellowship. The Shepherd of Hermas emphasizes the struggle necessary to maintain the Christian standards, and hence the need for reliance upon divine mercy and grace. Cheerfulness, however, is given special emphasis. "Put away sorrow from thyself"; "Clothe thyself with cheerfulness, which hath favor with God always, and is acceptable to Him, and rejoice in it" "For every cheerful man worketh good, and thinketh good and despiseth sadness; but the sad man is always continuing in sin." The Epistle to Piognetus emphasizes the spiritual principle which animates Christians and keeps them from being absorbed in the things of the world. God is the source of the Christian ideal, "loving Him thou wilt be an imitator of His goodness."]

who made the Logos doctrine the foundation of his exposition. The latter, or Western fathers, maintained that ethically, Christianity was something entirely new, and, therefore, was in no wise related to the ethics of paganism. Here Tertullian is the representative apologist. To him, Christianity was a spiritual power given to the church to preserve it from paganism, organize its children into a compact army to attack paganism, conquer it and judge it. Clement of Alexandria regarded philosophy as a propadeutic to faith, and his work is a blending of contributions from Greek thought and Judaism. A number of striking ethical ideas are developed in his Paedagogus, Stromata and Exhortations. With Cyprian, one of the Latin fathers, the church came into prominence as the center of a whole field of ethics. This grew out of the controversy with the Montanists and the Novatians, and as a consequence, the relation of the individual to the church became the most prominent ethical relation of his life.

The Middle Ages. The conversion of Constantine in the fourth century brought about marked changes in the church. Freed from persecution by the State, prestige and power were soon achieved. An ecclesiasticism developed, which in turn began the persecution of pagans and heretics. Worldliness increased, and many Christians seeking for a way of sacrifice withdrew to monastic life. This gave rise to a different and distinct type of ethics.

Ambrose (340-397) in his work entitled De Officiis Ministrorum, gave to the church what is generally regarded as the first manual of Christian ethics. It was modelled after a Stoic work by Cicero, and the idea of natural law which it sets forth had a definite influence upon later scholastic ethics. This law of nature is the

[Dr. I. A. Dorner points out that the Montanists accepted the sudden outbursts of individual enthusiasm as the true medium through which the Holy Spirit communicates with the congregation, and consequently demanded absolute obedience to the dictates of this ecstatic prophecy as a condition of communion between the Spirit and the individual. The Novatians on the other hand, found the true vehicle of spiritual communion in the church itself considered as a totality, as an organization of the universal priesthood under presbyterial forms, and, therefore, were rigorous with respect to admission of members.]

law of things as God created them, and from it there is something to be learned concerning the requirements of morality. Higher than this, there is within man a knowledge of the moral through reason and conscience; but highest of all is the will of God as expressed in the Scriptures, culminating in the teaching and example of Christ. The beginnings of asceticism, however, are very noticeable in that Ambrose recognized two levels of morality - one obligatory upon all, the other as including works done beyond the requirements in order to a higher degree of perfection. He also definitely adopted the four cardinal Greek virtues - Prudence, Justice, Courage and Temperance. Prudence, however, was with him, not so much reason or wisdom, as it was the personal knowledge of God manifesting itself in human conduct. Justice must be exercised, "first towards God, secondly towards our country, thirdly towards our parents, and lastly towards all." Courage he interpreted as fortitude in the trials of ordinary life, and temperance as self-respect, modesty in all forms, and a due appreciation of others. The work of Ambrose was transitional, and led directly to Augustine's more distinctly Christian system of ethics.

Augustine (354-430) systematized the ethics of the Western church, and the principles which he advanced, were regarded as authoritative during the greater part of the Middle Ages. Here the central and dominating idea of the Christian life is union with God, an experience of perfect peace and blessedness which can be achieved only in the life to come. Hence in his City of God, he distinguishes between the earthly city which is temporal, and the city of God which is eternal. With Augustine, the moral life has its basis in God, and is in accord with the world He has created. He, therefore, opposes the theory that morality is based on social custom, a position which is commonly defined as "custom operating in consciousness." He also considered the Christian view of ethics as opposed to the Stoic apathy as regards the emotional life. He placed the greater emphasis, however, upon the will. Man must surrender his will in love. Two tendencies emphasized by Augustine led to ill effect in later history. (1) He conformed to the distinction that had become current, as to what was commanded for all, and what was counseled as going farther, and thus making for perfection. This led to an emphasis upon the works of supererogation, and the accumulation of merit, which in turn contributed to ascetic practices. (2) His idea of self-surrender, also, was no small incentive to the ecclesiastical suppression of individual liberty. He held that the church as a continuous organization had the truth and the authority to teach it. This required individual submission. Since it was of divine appointment that men should come into the church, they should do so willingly, but if not they were to be compelled to do so. It was, therefore, the sacred duty of the church to see that men came into the church, and if it lacked the power of compulsion, it was the sacred duty of the state to come to its rescue, and compel them to come, that the church might be filled. From these two tendencies, both ecclesiasticism and monasticism were given added impulse during the Middle Ages.

Monasticism became the characteristic feature of mediaeval Christianity, and provided its conception of Christian ethics. Asceticism had become established among Christians even in the time of Augustine, and much was made of those elements in the Gospels and Pauline writings which seemed to approve ascetic practices. Monasticism as a revolt against the growing worldliness in the state church, arose independently and frequently in opposition to the ecclesiastical organization. For this reason, even when allied with the church in later times, it retained much of its independence. The monastic ideal, however, soon came to be predominant, so that the vowed monks became "the religious" or regular clergy, while the nonmonastic priests became "the seculars." Basil (c. 329-379) was probably the first to inaugurate a definite movement toward community life among the ascetics. Benedict (480-543) introduced a new rule. Previous to this the monks had dwelt largely upon self-conquest, Benedict spoke of self-surrender. His monasteries were organized along communal lines with democratic rule. Perhaps no rule was less ascetic than that of Benedict. Bernard of Clairvaux (1094-1174) by his great saintliness and personal power was able to effect great reforms along spiritual lines. Francis of Assisi (1182-1226) and Dominic (11701221) brought about great changes in the conception of the ascetic life and its practices. They developed a human interest and love for mankind that drew them away from the cloister and sent them forth on an unhampered ministry of love. The ethical ideal of St. Francis was the imitation of Christ, specifically in spirit, but also largely in the details of conduct. The vows of poverty, chastity and obedience had as their purpose the full devotement of the individual to the welfare of others. Special emphasis was placed upon poverty. While the Franciscans were primarily evangelistic, the Dominicans established their houses near the universities and gave their attention largely to education. By this means they soon came to set the doctrinal standards of the church, and this through a period of several centuries. Among the later mystics, asceticism was of a higher type. John Scotus Erigena introduced Greek mysticism as found in Macarius the Egyptian, Dionysius and Maximus Confessor, and this became the starting point of mysticism in the Western church. The development took place in two forms - the, Romanic, as in Hugo and Richard of St. Victor, Bernard of Clairvaux, Bonaventura, Gerson and Molinus; and the Germanic, as in Henry Suso, Ruysbroek, John Tauler and Meister Eckhart. So far as mysticism developed an ethics, however, it retained the false principle of asceticism as a contradiction between matter and spirit, God and the world. The chief reason assigned in the failure of the mystics to develop a true ethics is the lack of a proper conception of personality. That the created soul is capable of receiving the divine, and by this means achieving a perfect union between the finite and the infinite, is an idea which first came into prominence with Luther and his doctrine of justification by faith.

Thomas Aquinas (c. 1225-1274) treated ethics as an integral part of a general philosophical and theological system. In him, ethics reached its authoritative statement. The ultimate end for which man acts, or at least should act, he called "beatitude" or "true blessedness," which when attained is all-sufficient. Nothing can satisfy except the Infinite, or the eternal goodness of God himself. Thus he lays a firm foundation for ethical theory in Christian theism. The virtue, or proper excellence of a thing consists in its being well-disposed according to its kind. Man being constituted a rational soul, ethics must be according to reason. Virtues in man are therefore the habits of the soul in accordance with which it performs good acts. The virtues are classified as follows: (1) Moral - the four cardinal Greek virtues, Prudence, Justice, Temperance and Fortitude. (2) Intellectual - understanding, knowledge and wisdom; and (3) Theological - faith, hope and love. The first two may be known by reason, but the last only by revelation. The natural virtues lead to the development of character; the theological to spiritual happiness here and life in the world to come. Thomas treated the Greek cardinal virtues, however, after a Christian method. The passions in themselves he regarded as indifferent and, therefore, to be brought under the control of the will. Of the theological virtues, love or charity was the highest and included the others in itself. The influence of Augustine, however, is clearly seen, in that Thomas accepted the twofold attitude toward morality; and while he regarded the earthly and the heavenly as compatible, those who turned their attention to the heavenly received greater praise.

The Renaissance and the Reformation. As the dominant note of the Middle Ages was the subordination of the earthly life to that of the life to come, so it was followed by the reactionary development commonly known as Humanism. Here the emphasis was placed upon the Individual life and the present world. But humanism produced no profound or widespread ethical theory. It was in fact, irreligious. The traditional views of sin and the atonement meant little or nothing, and no place was found for the contemplative type of experience. Humanism was in some true sense a return to the pagan ideals of Greece and Rome, but it did have the effect of broadening the horizons of men. The forerunners of the Reformation - Wycliffe, (c. 1324 or earlier-1384) and Huss (1369 or 1373-1415) had pointed out the moral infirmities of the times, sought to awaken interest in classical studies, and also introduced a new feature into ethical teaching - that of exalting morality as a guide into the wisdom of Christianity for the government of affairs in practical life. This was developed by Petrarch (d. 1374), Marsilius, Ficinus (d. 1499), Louis Vives (d. 1540) and Erasmus (d. 1536). Savonarola (1452-1498) especially opposed the moral corruption and worldliness of both the secular leaders of the Renaissance and the higher ecclesiastical officials. He made an effort to establish the ethical conception of the Mediaeval church, in which the thought of other worldliness should dominate both thought and conduct. "We live in this world, 0 my brothers," he said, "only to learn how to die."

The Protestant Reformation was, in some sense, a reaction from both Mediaevalism and the Renaissance. With the belief in other - worldliness inherited from Mediaevalism, and the insistence upon the present world as the contribution of the Renaissance, the ethical problem

[When the Reformation took its final stand upon Scripture, it not only escaped the great errors of the Middle Ages, but it also succeeded in establishing the true principles of Christian ethics. By the new doctrines of faith, and justification by faith, the fundamental ethical ideas of duty, virtue, and highest good, were, so to speak, melted down and recast. A new ethics appeared, bearing the characteristic marks of the double development of the Protestant or evangelical principle - the Lutheran Church with its talent for plastic representation, art, hymnology, science; and the Reformed Church, with its talent for practical action, discipline, missions, statesmanship. Though neither Luther nor Calvin has written on ethics, in the proper sense of the word, both have occasionally treated of various ethical subjects - especially in the form of expositions of the Decalogue in the Catechism. The Catechism is, indeed, the primitive form of evangelical ethics. Just as evangelical dogmatics arose from the "regula fidei" and the apostolical symbolum, so evangelical ethics grew out of the Deca1ogue. - I. A. DORNER, art. "Ethics," SCHAFF-HERZOG, Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge.]

of the Reformation period came to be, How to conceive of Christian ethics or morality, as including both the earthly and the transcendent. It insisted that life was not to be lived in a monastery but in active participation in human affairs. It opposed, however, the tendency of Humanism to make pleasure and intellectual culture the chief affairs of this life. Dr. Denny states the aim of the Reformation thus, "to expel things from religion and exhibit all its realities as persons and the relation of persons." Luther developed a form of ethical dualism in that he made morality the spontaneous manifestation of the inner life of the Spirit; and given this liberty of sonship, the Christian subjects himself to righteous service in a voluntary manner. "When we have taught faith in Christ," he says, "then do we teach also good works." Calvin was more systematic in his thinking, and grounded ethics in the nature of man as created by God. In his Institutes he includes ethics under regeneration, and expounds it in his study of the Christian Man, the Bearing of the Cross and similar subjects. He viewed the Decalogue as a statement of the fundamentals of the moral law engraved on the minds of men. To conform to the Decalogue is to obey God, and this is morality. Any tolerance of sin was a share in it. Hence in the Reformed churches, it became common practice to attach great value to the legal elements in the Old Testament, and to combine these into an ethical system in connection with the Decalogue.

Other writings of this period which contributed to Christian ethics were those of John Bunyan (16281688) who made redeeming grace the dominant characteristics of all his writings, but developed no distinct ethical theory; George Fox (1624-1690), who was singularly clear in his judgment on great moral issues; Jeremy Taylor (1613-1667) in his Holy Living regards the essential thing in morality as purity of intention; and William Law (1686-1761) gives an exposition of the Christian life according to ethical principles in his Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life. This work has been compared to Thomas á Kempis' Imitation of Christ, in that underlying all is the principle of submission and the spirit of obedience which rules out all that is unholy. "All the wants which disturb human life, which makes us uneasy to ourselves, quarrelsome with others, and unthankful to God, which carry us from project to project, from place to place, in a poor pursuit of we know not what, are wants which neither God, nor nature, nor reason, hath subjected us to, but are solely infused into us by pride, envy, ambition and covetousness." (WILLIAM LAW, Serious Call). To these may be added the name of Joseph Butler (1692-1752) whose theory is similar to that of Thomas Aquinas, but was developed independently. Bishop Butler recognized two sources of ethical knowledge - nature and reason on the one hand and revelation on the other. To him, God is the source of the moral law in conscience, in the constitution of nature and in the Scriptures; and all Christian morality is included in the love of God, of others and of self. Thus Christian ethics is at once empirical and transcendent, anthropological and theological.

The first theologian in the Reformed Church to treat Christian ethics as distinct from Dogmatics, was Danaeus (d. 1536). His work entitled Christian Ethics was published in 1577. In the Lutheran Church, Calixtus followed the same method in his Epitome of Moral Theology (1634-1662). The Roman Catholic theologians sharply criticized this separation between Dogmatics and Ethics as tending toward humanism and minifying revelation. The Cartesian philosophy awakened a new interest in the study of ethics, especially in the Reformed Church; and the two movements of Pietism and Methodism likewise exerted a stimulating and purifying effect. Arminianism, especially, gave great promise to the ethical side of Christianity. As marking the close of the older order and the transition to a new period, we may mention Buddaeus, Institutes of Moral Theology (1711-1724), and Mosheim, Ethics of the Holy Scriptures (9 vols. 1735-1753). With Kant and his doctrine of the categorical imperative, a new period in the study of ethics began - one which freed the subject from many of the older restrictions, but which unhappily robbed it of its profound religious motive. For a time no principle of Christian ethics was adopted. Schwartz and Flatt adhered definitely to the Scriptures without attempting any principle of scientific classification. DeWette was probably the first in modern times to point out the necessity for such a principle, and from this time, Protestant works on ethics are characterized by an attempt to attain a more scientific character. It is to Schleiermacher, however, that we must turn as the founder of modern theological ethics. The subjectivism of Kant having reached its consequences in Fichte, philosophy again turned to objectivism. Schelling advanced the theory of the identity of the subject and object, and on this basis, Schleiermacher constructed his ethics. He returned to the old idea of the kingdom of heaven, which had entirely disappeared from the philosophy of Kant and Wolff. However, he did not with Buddaeus regard the kingdom as an indefinite realm beyond the grave; nor did he accept the position of the Roman Catholics in limiting it to the church on earth. Instead, he found the kingdom in every sphere of life, by the virtuous action of the individual. Following Schleiermacher, perhaps the most important work is Rothe's Theological Ethics. This has been praised as presenting an insight "into the innermost marrow of ethical speculation," and as demonstrating "that Christianity is the realization of the highest thought of God" (Bunsen). On the other hand, it is deserving of just criticism, in that it makes the state rather than the church, the highest good, and maintains that it should be the object of the church to resolve itself into the state. In this he follows Hegel who made the state the supreme good, in direct opposition to the ethics of both the Roman Catholic and the Protestant Church.

Among the more modern works on Christian ethics are the following: Martensen, Christian Ethics (3 vols. 1871); Luthardt, History of Christian Ethics (1889); Smyth, Christian Ethics (3rd Ed. 1894); Strong, Christian Ethics (1896); Robbins, The Ethics of the Christian Life (1904); I. A. Dorner, System of Christian Ethics (1906); Stalker, The Ethics of Jesus (1909); Hall, History of Ethics Within Organized Christianity (1910); King, The Ethics of Jesus (1910); Alexander, Christianity and Ethics (1914); Scott, New Testament Ethics (1930); Niebuhr, An Interpretation of Christian Ethics (1935); and Widgery, Christian Ethics in History and Modern Life (1940).

The Principles of Christian Ethics

We have shown the relation of Ethics to Dogmatics; have indicated the source of Christian Ethics as centering in Divine Revelation; traced briefly the development of ethical theory in the church; and must now consider the principles underlying Christian ethics and their application in daily life. In our examination of Christian Perfection as the norm of New Testament experience, we found that it was a purification of the heart from sin in order to a full devotement of the whole being to Jesus Christ. Grace must first express itself in Christian experience; and from the communication of this new life and love, new standards of daily living will be formed. Doctrine may not always issue in experience; but experience if it is to be maintained must always issue in Christian living. Every doctrine, therefore, not only has its experiential phase, but also its ethical expression. God is a Person, and man is a person, hence all their relationships must be ethical. The dominant note of Christian Perfection being that of full devotion to God, this devotement becomes a fundamental principle in Christian ethics. As such, it is exercised toward Christ in His divine-human nature as the mediatorial Person; and this both as Creator and Redeemer. As Creator, His law is written in the nature and constitution of man, and is commonly known as the law of conscience. As Redeemer, His whole life and history furnish a satisfaction to the Divine Will. There can be, therefore, no lack of harmony between the new law of Christ, and the old law of a fully redeemed and enlightened conscience. But the mediatorial cannot be properly understood unless it be seen that the Supreme Law-giver, and the perfect Example of His own presence are conjoined in the Deity and manhood of the Goodman. In order that Christ might give His people a new commandment, and a perfect law of liberty through which that commandment could be fulfilled, He himself received a new commandment and learned obedience by the things which He suffered. And having learned obedience, He presented himself as at once the perfect law-giver, and the perfect Example of His own precepts. Here we find the unsearchable unity of His two natures in one personal Agent investing the subject of Christian ethics, as it does also, that of Christian dogmatics. His moral obligation, however, could not be shared, for the mystery of His suffering was twofold for sin in us, and through temptation to impossible sin in Himself. For this reason St. Paul says that he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God (Rom. 6:10). In this death to sin, He secured for us forever, (1) the law of liberty by which we are delivered from the principle of sin; and (2) the law of love as a motive to righteousness. Here, then, is the fulfillment of The oath which he swore to our father Abraham, that he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life (Luke 1:73-75).

The Law of Liberty. The new freedom provided by the death of Christ unto sin is called by St. James the perfect law of liberty (James 1:25); and again, the royal law, which according to the Scriptures is, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself (James 2:8). St. Paul speaks of it as the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, which makes us free from the law of sin and death (Rom. 8:2). The external law cease to be the law of sin and death, for the consciousness of sins is removed in justification; and the inner law of life by the Spirit furnishes the motive and the strength of obedience.

[ON THE TRUE IDEA OF SPIRITUAL LIBERTY

On the above subject, Dr. Thomas C. Upham gives us the following excellent discussion in his work entitled, "The Principles of the Interior Life." We present it in a greatly abbreviated form. He says, "It has probably come within the observation of many persons, that there is a form or modification of religious experience, which is denominated 'Liberty.' Hence, in common religious parlance, it is not unfrequently the case that we hear of persons being 'in the liberty,' or in the 'true liberty.' These expressions undoubtedly indicate an important religious truth, which has not altogether escaped the notice of writers on the religious life. The account as given by Francis de Sales of 'the liberty of spirit' is, that 'it consists in keeping the heart totally disengaged from every created thing, in order that it may follow the known will of God.' To this statement of De Sales, considered as a general and somewhat indefinite statement, we do not find it necessary to object. Certain it is that he who is in the 'true liberty' is 'disengaged,' and has escaped from the enslaving influence of the world. God has become to him an inward, operative principle, without whom he feels he can do nothing, and in connection with whose blessed assistance he has an inward consciousness that the world and its lusts have lost their inthralling power. Liberty - considered in this general sense of the term - is to be regarded as expressive of one of the highest and most excellent forms of Christian experience. And we may add, further, that none truly enjoy it in this high sense but those who are in a state of mind, which may with propriety be denominated a holy or sanctified state, none but those whom God has made 'free indeed.' We proceed now to mention some of the marks by which the condition or state of the spiritual liberty is characterized. Nor does there seem to be much difficulty in doing this, because liberty is the opposite of inthrallment; and because it is easy, as a general thing, to understand and to specify the things by which we are most apt to be inthralled.

"(3) A man who is in the enjoyment of true religious liberty will not be inthralled by inordinate domestic or patriotic affections, however ennobling they may be thought to be - such as the love of parents and children, the love of friends and country. It is true that spiritual liberty does not exclude the exercise of these affection - which are, in many respects, generous and elevated - any more than it condemns and excludes the existence of the lower appetites and propensities.

"(4) When we are wrongly under the influence of disinclinations and aversions, we cannot be said to be in internal liberty. Sometimes, when God very obviously calls us to the discharge of duty, we are internally conscious of a great degree of backwardness. We do it, it is true; but we feel that we do not like to do it. There are certain duties which we owe to the poor and degraded, to the openly profane and impure, which are oftentimes repugnant to persons of certain refined mental habits; but if we find that these refined repugnances, which come in the way of duty, have great power over us, we are not in the true liberty. We have not that strength in God, which enables us to act vigorously and freely.

"(5) The person is not in the enjoyment of true liberty of spirit, who is wanting in the disposition of accommodation to others in the things which are not of especial importance. And this is the case when we needlessly insist upon having everything done in our own time and manner; when we are troubled about little things, which are in themselves indifferent, and think, perhaps, more of the position of a chair than the salvation of a soul; when we find a difficulty in making allowance for constitutional differences, in others, which it may not be easy or important for them to correct; when we find ourselves disgusted because another does not express himself in entire accordance with our principles of taste; or when we are displeased and dissatisfied with his religious, or other performances, although we know he does the best he can. We may properly add here, that the fault-finder - especially one who is in the confirmed habit of fault-finding - is not a man of a free spirit. Accordingly, those who are often complaining of their minister, of the brethren of the church, of the time and manner of the ordinances, and of many other persons and things, will find, on a careful examination, that they are too full of self, too strongly moved by their personal views and interests, to know the true and full import of that ennobling liberty which the Saviour gives to His truly sanctified ones.

This is the foundational fact of the New Covenant, I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts (Heb. 8:10). While in Christianity, this law is supernatural, it is in some true sense, the law of reason restored, and more than restored. The Divine Spirit in the hearts of regenerate men seeks to work out perfect obedience to the law of righteousness as taking place by the bestowment of a new life in harmony with the external law, it will be seen that the believer unfolds in his spiritual life according to his own nature, and not by means of outward compulsion. This inner law, therefore, amounts to self-government restored. It is the rule of God's Spirit in a renewed self, according to the original idea of the Creator for man. Men are thus in their new natures under the authority of the Holy Spirit, and having their souls in subjection, they become a law unto themselves, not without law to God, but under the law of Christ (I Cor. 9:21). Thus the law is not made void, but established through faith (Rom. 3:31). We are indeed delivered from the law of sin and death, but not from the law of holiness and life. While the law is written upon the heart, it is still a law, and, therefore, necessitates the dignity of an external standard also, in conformity with the inner law of life. The fundamental fact then, in Christian ethics, is the law of life, by which man is delivered from outward compulsion, and given the freedom to develop according to the new law of his nature. Thus he keeps the law, by the unfolding of his inner nature which is now in harmony with that law. The keynote of this new nature is love, and thus love is the fulfilling of the law.

The Law of Love. We have seen that holiness and love are closely related in the nature of God. Holiness is the divine nature interpreted from the standpoint of self-affirmation, while Love is that same nature viewed as self-communication. Both are, therefore, equally of the essence of God. The holiness of God requires that He always act out of pure love; while love seeks always to impart Himself and that self is holy. (Cf. Christian Theology, I, pp. 382ff.) We have seen, also, that the Wesleyan conception of Christian Perfection is a purification of the heart from all that is contrary to pure love. Considered from the standpoint of the inner Law of Liberty, Christian Perfection is deliverance from sin; considered from the standpoint of the royal law, Love is both the principle and the power of perfect consecration to God. Charity or divine love, which has its source in the nature of God, and which is imparted to the individual soul by the Holy Spirit through Christ, becomes, therefore, in its full ethical meaning, the substance of all obligation - whether to God or man. To the individual self, it is the fulfillment of a perfect character, for love is the pleroma (plhrwma) of religion as well as law. St. Peter makes it the crown of all graces introduced into the life and sustained by faith (II Peter 1:5-7). Love thus becomes the sum of all interior goodness, and the bond of perfectness which unites and hallows all the energies of the soul. St. Paul makes love the end of the commandment in much the same sense that Christ is the end of the law for righteousness. (I Tim. 1:5). Here charity or holy love is represented not only as the crowning grace of Christian character, but the point of transition in the relation of the individual to the social structure. It is, therefore, the anakafalaiwsiV or summing up of the law in perfect love which never fails (I Cor. 13:8). It is a love, says Dr. Pope, "which neglects no injunction, forgets no prohibition, discharges every duty. It is perfect in passive as well as active obedience. It 'never faileth; it insures every grace adapted to time or worthy of eternity. Therefore it is that the term perfect is reserved for this grace. Patience must have her perfect work; but love alone is itself perfect, while it gives perfection to him who has it." (POPE, Compend. Chr. Th., III, p.177).

Conscience as the Regulative Factor in Christian Experience and Conduct. We have discussed the law of liberty as an inward deliverance from the being and power of sin, and the law of love as the propulsive power of righteousness; it remains now for us to discuss conscience as the regulative factor in Christian experience and conduct. It is not our purpose, however, to discuss the place of conscience in philosophical ethics, but to use it in the Pauline sense as an integral part of vital religious experience. He says, Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned (I Tim. 1:5). Here St. Paul analyzes Christian experience as follows: A stream of charity or divine love, flowing from a pure heart, regulated by a good conscience, and kept full and fresh and flowing, by an unfeigned faith. This faith refers, of course, to the constancy of trust in Christ, who by His Spirit sheds abroad the love of God in the hearts of the purified.

1. Conscience in ordinary usage "covers everything in man's nature that has to do with the decision and direction of moral conduct" (Standard Dictionary). While This may be a true description of conscience in popular speech, it is too vague for theological use. In our attempt to be more specific, however, we must constantly bear in mind the following facts: (1) Man is a moral being by virtue of being a person; for moral nature is an essential element in personality. (2) The spirit as the controlling factor in man's complex being, is a unit, and, consequently, is not divisible into parts. Being thus indivisible it always acts as a unity, and intellect, sensibility

[As science means knowledge, so conscience etymologically means self-knowledge. In the moral being, conscience is the queen of every inward spring of action, will is her subject; and as all legislative function and delegated judicial authority emanates from the sovereign, so conscience is, objectively, the unwritten law of the heart, as founded on those eternal principles of right and equity and truth that are as rays from the throne of God; and, subjectively, it passes judgment upon the thoughts of the heart and the actions of the body. If conscience be obeyed, it approves, and then it is pure; but if it be dishonored and its voice disregarded, such disloyalty can only lay up materials for remorse. This authoritative principle of the mind and soul of man is referable only to the original gift of moral and spiritual life as the soul of man. "In the likeness of God made he him"; and as mental consciousness is our evidence of the existence of thoughts, desires, feelings, and other states of the mind, so conscience is a standing testimony of the divine genesis of the soul, as a direct afflatus from God. This fundamental element of man's moral being is proof to him of his religious relation to his Maker; it declares the mysterious intercommunication that subsists between the spirit of God and the spirit of man; and it indicates the natural revelation of God's will made to man through reason. Conscience is the representative of this inner revelation, which, proceeding forth from the creative spirit of God, infuses itself into the spirit of man, and as a plastic energy forms and molds him, by conveying to him the cognizance of God's will and of man's duties in His sight. Thus conscience is our moral sense continually held in check by the Spirit of God; it is the very soul of our loyalty to

Him; it is the "religion" of a true communion. WHEWELL, Elements of Morality, sect. 263.]

and will are present in every activity. But while the soul always moves as a unit, one form of activity may so predominate at a given time, as to be discriminated and defined. For this reason, we define the intellect as the soul thinking; the sensibility, as the soul feeling; and the will as the soul choosing or exercising volition. So, also, if we restrict our definition of conscience to certain modes of self-activity, we shall not be understood as implying that the whole self is not active, but only that the peculiar functions of the moral nature are predominant. We may, therefore, define conscience as "the self passing judgment upon its conformity, or nonconformity, in character and conduct to moral law, that is, as right and wrong, with the accompanying feeling or impulse to obey the judgment of righteousness." (ROBBINS, The Ethics of the Christian Life, p. 79.) In this view of conscience, the functions of discovery or annunciation of moral law are not attributed to it. It is rather as Kant represents, to be regarded as a judge presiding over a court (Cf. Christian Theology, I, p. 307) , who decides that this desire, this affection, this purpose, or this deed is in accordance with moral law, and therefore right. Upon this decision, a feeling corresponding to the judgment follows, either impelling to action in accordance with the decision, or dissuading from any action which may not be in harmony with it.

2. Conscience derives its authority from the law whose requirements it enforces. As it is the majesty of the law which gives validity to the decisions of the judge in civil courts, so it is the law of God which gives validity to the decisions of conscience. Its province, therefore, is not legislative but judicial. Its decisions are always those of a just and incorruptible judge according to the laws he is set to apply. Since then, the authority of conscience is derived from the authority of the law according to which its decisions are made; and since this law is found primarily in the nature and constitution of man, it follows that the authority of conscience is not external but internal. Its voice does not come from without, but rises from the depths of his innermost being. It is the whole of his being interpreting man to himself. The law by which it judges is the inner moral law of man's nature, and any external law derives its obligatory force from an appeal to this essential law of man's moral being.

3. From the view of conscience just stated, it follows that its decisions before the law will always be infallible, that is, they will always be in accord with the law of reason. This would be true if men were in their normal state. But another factor enters here. Man is not in his normal State. The law of his being is obscured and perverted as a consequence of original sin. Hence although conscience always makes its decisions according to the law, the latter being obscured or perverted, the decisions will in these instances be erroneous. For this reason, God has given to man an external law as a transcript of his own true inner life, and this law is found in the Word of God.

4. While conscience in the absolute sense is the utterance of God's voice in the soul, and is thus beyond the power of education or development (Cf. Volume I, p. 129); the term is also used in a relative sense as involving our own moral consciousness under the eye of God. In this sense, it is the positive assimilation within

the soul, of those principles of truth and goodness necessary to bring man's will into

conformity with the will of God. Two things are involved, (1) the inner impulse, and (2) the light of truth. The former is conscience proper which says "Find the right and do it"; the latter or moral judgment is strictly speaking no part of conscience, but the standard by which conscience operates. Since this moral judgment is true only insofar as it is enlightened by the Word of God, we are led to the conviction that in the Christian life, the Scriptures are the only authoritative rule of faith and practice. Further still, it will be seen that the conscience in this relative sense as involving the whole moral process, is subject to education and development, as conscience in the subjective sense is not. Hence the Scriptures refer to this relative aspect when they speak of a good or pure conscience; or of an evil and defiled conscience.

5. We are now prepared to understand the meaning of St. Paul when he speaks of a good conscience as

[Conduct is based upon two things, namely, knowledge and conscience. Some teachers of psychology would prefer to say that conduct is based upon conscience alone, and then attribute to conscience two faculties. First, impulse, which is accepting or rejecting right or wrong when it appears; second, discrimination, which is the faculty of conscience that tells right from wrong. In this short discussion we prefer to hold that conduct is based upon two things, knowledge or light, and conscience, and then confine conscience to one function, namely, impulse, accepting or rejecting when right or wrong appear. In any case, we will all admit that some people have more knowledge or light than others have, and that some consciences, with proper training and education, have greater power of discrimination than others. These facts must be taken into consideration in the study of ethics. R. T. WILLIAMS, Sanctification, The Experience and Ethics, pp.51, 52.

the regulative faculty of the soul. A good conscience is one which is enlightened by the Spirit of truth, and, therefore, always makes its decisions according to the standards of God's holy Word. Similarly, also, the conscience may be distinguished as pure (I Tim. 8:9; II Tim. 1:3); evil (Heb. 10:22); defiled (Titus 1:15); weak (I Cor. 8:7); and seared (I Tim. 4:2). To these are sometimes added such descriptions of conscience as steady or wavering, morbid or sound, enlightened or dark. In its objective sense, conscience may be distorted by ignorance or vice, and so form erroneous judgments; and as subjective, it may justify and bring peace as the effect of goodness; or it may condemn by the pangs of remorse. It is for this reason that the earlier moralists spoke of it as the sunthrhsiV or "inner guard" which kept watch over the hidden sources of the will.

(2) It is an absolute rule, and one for universal observance that we should never act contrary to the dictates of conscience; even though it be warped by error or prejudice. The moral tone of every action depends on its close dependence with the inner rule; and the morality of the agent maintains a relative proportion with respect for the decision of conscience, and an honest determination in following it out to its legitimate conclusion. To act contrary to conscience must always be wrong, irrespective of the abstract right or wrong of the action; and whether that wrong be capable of correction or not. For moral culture is the abiding duty of man; our position today must not be taken as a fixed point, but as a state of transition to something better. The law of the mind must be brought gradually into closer conformity with the law of God, that is absolutely "holy and just and good"; and converting the soul" in proportion as it seeks to assimilate its teaching. Conscience is never formed, but is always in the course of formation. Therefore, though for the present, we may err in following the guidance of a mistaken conscience, yet it is better to err for a while in this direction than to be disloyal to the inner rule, which would only weaken its check upon our actions, when conscience becomes more completely informed by the supreme rule. To be unconscientious is always to be immoral. He, therefore, whose conscience is clouded by error, must abide by the consequences of such error; but he sins not in the mere following of his conscience. But he whose conscience has a wrong direction, which with proper pains and regard for the truth might be adjusted, sins when he acts in accordance with its dictation. (WHEWELL, Elements of Morality, section 275.)

PRACTICAL ETHICS

Practical ethics is the application of moral principles in the regulation of human conduct. Having discussed these principles, we must now consider their specific Christian application in the manifold and complex situations of life. Here as in other departments of theology, the methods of classification vary. Generally, however, the subject matter is arranged in the twofold division of (1) Duties to God, and (2) Duties to man; or the threefold classification of (1) Duties to God; (2) Duties to self; and (3) Duties to others. As to the order of treatment adopted here, we may say that since God is the foundation of all moral obligation, theistic ethics naturally comes first. Strictly speaking, all obligation must be to God as the Moral Governor, and all duties must, therefore, be duties to God. Here there is a parallel to the truth in dogmatics that all sin is ultimately against God. The duties to self come second in order, as essential to the formation of Christian character. This is necessary in a system which holds that the tree must first be made good if the fruit is to be good (Matt. 12:33); and, also, that there can be no fruit except the branch abide in the vine (John 15:4, 5). Christian character is unfolded only in loyal relation to the divine. Lastly, there is the regulation of the external conduct toward others, as having its source in, and flowing from the character of the individual. We shall then, in our treatment of Practical Ethics, observe the following outline: (I) Theistic Ethics: or Duties to God; (II) Individual Ethics: or Duties to One's Self; and (III) Social Ethics: or Duties to Others. Following this, we shall give brief attention to the Institutions of Christianity as being a part of Social Ethics, and yet differing in this, that they are more specifically corporate than individual in character. Here we shall mention (1) Marriage, and the duties of the family; and (2) The State, and the duties of citizenship. This will bring us to a consideration of the Church, which forms the subject matter of the two following chapters.

(I) THEISTIC ETHICS: OR DUTIES TO GOD

The three theistic virtues are faith, hope and charity. These, whether considered in themselves, in their effects, or in their growth and perfection, occupy the first place in the Christian life. Upon these, all other virtues depend. As compared with the so-called moral virtues - prudence, justice, courage and temperance, the theistic virtues constitute the end or objective of the Christian life; while the moral virtues are either the means by which this is attained or the consequences which flow from it. The theistic virtues are superior also, in that by them we are actually united to God - to God as truth by faith; to God as faithful, by hope; and to God as the supreme good, by love. Viewed from the ethical standpoint, we may analyze these virtues as follows: (1) Faith is at once an act and a habit, an act in that it is the outreach of the whole being toward another, consciously exercised; it is a habit, in that it is a conscious repose in the merits of another. Faith is sometimes distinguished from knowledge in this, that faith rests upon the authority or testimony of another; while knowledge arises from the perception of truth in the object itself. The sins against faith are infidelity, heresy and apostasy. Infidelity is unfaithfulness to God; heresy is unfaithfulness to truth or persistence in error or; while apostasy is in its strictest sense, a defection from religion. (2) Hope is that divine virtue which furnishes the motive whereby we trust with unwavering confidence in the Word of God, and look forward to the obtainment of all that He has promised us. Like faith, hope may be viewed either as an act or a state, and in either instance, the motive and the objective are the same. Hope relates to the future and, therefore, implies expectation, but every expectation cannot be classified as hope. Only desirable objects can be hoped for. The sins against hope may be twofold - either despair or diffidence on the one hand, or presumption and false confidence on the other. Despair is the abandonment of all hope of salvation. Diffidence consists in hoping without due confidence. Presumption is taking advantage of God's goodness to commit sin; while false confidence is hoping in an inordinate manner. (3) Charity or divine love is the virtue whereby we give ourselves wholly to God as the sovereign good. It is a divinely infused virtue, the motive of which is God's goodness, and its object both God and our neighbor. Charity considered as an ethical virtue in its broadest sense signifies complacency in what is good. In a stricter sense, it is that affection which wishes well, or desires what is good, to another. If we desire good to another, not on his own account but for ours, we have the love of concupiscence, because it proceeds from a desire for our own advantage. If we wish well to another for his own sake, we have the love of benevolence; and if this is mutual, we have the love of friendship. Charity may be either perfect or imperfect. In order to be perfect it must (1) be inspired by a perfect motive; and (2) it must loyally adhere to God with the highest appreciation. If it fails in either of these aspects, it falls short of perfect love. Three things demand our attention in the further consideration of this subject: (1) Reverence as the Fundamental Duty to God; and (2) The Duty and Forms of Prayer; and (3) The Supreme Duty of Worship.

Reverence as the Fundamental Duty to God. Reverence has been defined as a "profound respect mingled with fear and affection," or a "strong sentiment of respect and esteem, sometimes with traces of fear." Coleridge defined it as a "synthesis of love and fear." As

[Reverence is the supreme and eternal duty and grace of the created spirit. It is both the source and the issue of all godliness. The three passages, "Holy and reverend is his name" (Psalms 111:9); "Hallowed be thy name" (Matt. 6:9); "Sanctify the Lord God in your hearts" (I Peter 3:15), in their combination teach us first how awful is God in Himself, then that the coming of His kingdom is the universal acknowledgment of His majesty, and finally that this reverence must be the inmost sentiment of our individual hearts. Reverence is fear tempered by love. In the Old Testament the fear predominated, in the New Testament the love; but the sentiment of reverence pervades all religion on earth and in heaven. Whether as sacred dread or loving fear, it abideth always. As the spirit formed by religion it is universal in its influence. It is the habitual sense of the presence of God that gives dignity of life, and makes the character of him who cultivates it venerable. It extends to all divine things as well as to the name of God himself: to His Word, to His ordinances, to His created temple of the world, and to all that is His. In His presence more particularly it is awe. - POPE, Compend. Chr. Th., III, pp.225, 226.]

such, reverence is the supreme duty of man the creature to God the Creator. It is the sentiment from which all worship springs. Awe adds to reverence the implication of solemn wonder mingled with dread, in view of the great and terrible presence of Deity, or of that which is sublime and sacred by virtue of that Presence. Reverence when expressed silently is known as adoration, and carries with it the added idea of homage or personal devotion. Praise is the audible expression which extols the Divine Perfections; and Thanksgiving is expressed gratitude for the mercies of God. The duty of the devout spirit, therefore, is to offer to God the adoration of a creature, the homage of a subject, and the praise of a worshiper. St. Paul in his enumeration of the works of the flesh, mentions two as violations of divine things -idolatry and witchcraft (Gal. 5:20). (1) Idolatry is commonly defined as the paying of divine honors to idols, images, or other created objects; but it may consist, also, in excessive admiration, veneration or love for any person or thing. Thus covetousness is regarded as idolatry (Col. 3:5). (2) Witchcraft is the practice of the arts of a sorcerer or sorceress, which was commonly believed to be the consequence of intercourse with

Satan. The injunction, therefore, forbids all enchantments, necromancy, spiritism, or

other of the so-called black arts.

The Duty and Forms of Prayer. Prayer is a duty which is obligatory upon all men as an expression of the creature's dependence upon the Creator. It may be said that what the habitual sense of reverence is to adoration and praise, the spirit of dependence is to prayer. Dr. Wakefield defines prayer as "the offering of our desires to God through the mediation of Jesus Christ, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, and with suitable dispositions, for things agreeable to his will." (Wakefield, Christian Theology, p. 492) . Desire is excited by a sense of want or a felt need, and leads immediately to prayer. One thing have I desired of the Lord, that will I seek after (Psalms 27:4). Without a proper appreciation of the importance of divine blessings, prayer will be unavailing. Hence the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence and the violent take it by force

(Matt. 11:12). Prayer must be offered to God, through Christ, and in the Spirit, in order to be acceptable. Prayer must also be offered for things agreeable to the will of God, and the petitions must be presented with faith in His promises. Dr. Pope points out that "the formal acts of prayer are manifold, expressed by a number of terms common to both Testaments, and combining the spirit and the act. The leading word proseuch is one of those. It is always prayer to God, and that without limitation. When St. Paul exhorts, in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God, he distinguishes from this general prayer the dehsiV or supplication for individual benefits. It is the difference between prayer and petition. The requests of the supplication, aithmata , simply express the individuality of the prayer: the supplication noting our need (dei), and the request the utterance of that need. When our Saviour said, In that day ye shall ask me nothing (John 16:23), He used another term signifying, in the case of the disciples, the interrogation of perplexity: there it is erwtan, which is changed for aitein in what follows: Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you. The former word is used of our Lord's own prayer, never the latter: hence the former has in it more of familiarity, and is never used of human prayer. Save, indeed, in one passage, which leads us to the prayer of intercession. St. John changes aithsei into erwthsh concerning

cerning the sin unto death, I do not say that he shall pray for it (I John 5:16): we may ask in confidence concerning every other sin, but concerning this we are to leave the erwtan to Christ. Intercessory prayer has no term to express our precise idea of it. The exhortation is generally to supplication for all saints, and for all men, after the example of the Lord's intercession. In the passage to Timothy St. Paul uses for once the word enteuxeiV, intercessions, which, however, means familiar and confident prayers, as coming from the word entugcanein literally to fall in with a person and enter into familiar speech with him. In the strength of Christ's intercession we also are commanded to intercede, or to speak confidently with God on behalf of others: save indeed with the one reservation mentioned above. Intercessory prayer must blend with all our supplications." (POPE, Compend. Chr. Th., III, pp. 228, 229.)

The general duty of prayer is usually divided as follows: (1) Ejaculatory Prayer; (2) Private Prayer; (3) Family or Social Prayer; and (4) Public Prayer.

1. Ejaculatory Prayer is a term applied to "those secret and frequent aspirations of the heart to God for general or particular blessings, by which a just sense of our habitual dependence upon God and of our wants and dangers may be expressed while we are employed in the common affairs of life" (Wakefield). It denotes a devotional attitude of mind and heart in which a constant spirit of prayer is maintained. It includes all those impromptu expressions of prayer and praise which flow from a heart which is cultivated to Rejoice evermore,

[In speaking of ejaculatory prayer, Dr. Wakefield says, "The cultivation of this spirit is clearly enjoined upon us by St. Paul, who exhorts us to 'pray without ceasing,' and 'in every thing' to 'give thanks'; and also to set our 'affection on things above,' exhortations which imply a holy and devotional frame of mind, and not merely acts of prayer performed at intervals. The high and unspeakable advantages of this habit are, that it induces a watchful and guarded mind; prevents religion from deteriorating into a lifeless form; unites the soul to God; induces continual supplies of divine influence; and opposes an effectual barrier, by the grace thus acquired, against the encroachments of worldly anxieties and the force of temptations. The existence of this spirit of prayer and thanksgiving is one of the grand distinctions between nominal and real Christians; and by it the measure of vital and effective Christianity enjoyed by any individual may ordinarily be determined. - WAKEFIELD, Christian Theology, p. 295.]

pray without ceasing, and In every thing give thanks (I Thess. 5:16-18). This form of prayer was held by the fathers as a distinguishing mark of genuine piety, but the habit needs to be guarded against any formality which would leave the impression of irreverence.

2. Private Prayer is expressly enjoined by our Lord in the words, But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly (Matt. 6:6). The duty of private prayer is further enforced by the example of our Lord and His apostles. The reason for the institution of private prayer is shown by our Lord's words, to be that of friendly and confiding communion with God in all those matters which pertain to the deeper feelings and interests of the individual. The strict performance of private prayer has ever been regarded as one of the surest marks of genuine piety and Christian sincerity.

3. Family or Social Prayer grows out of the nature of the social structure itself. Family prayer is basic as respects the whole system of Christian worship. The worship of patriarchal times was largely domestic; and the sacred office of father or master of the household passed from Judaism to Christianity. Early Christian worship was at first chiefly confined to the family, and only gradually took on wider significance. Hence family worship became an essential factor in the public services, by inculcating a spirit of devotion and by training in the forms of worship. Parents may as well conclude, therefore, that they are under no obligation to feed and clothe their children, or to educate them for lawful employment or one of the professions, as to conclude that they are under no obligation to afford them the proper religious instruction. Social prayer may be broader than the family; or it may be limited to a few individuals from different families. Here again we have the words of our Lord, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven (Matt. 18:19). "From all these considerations, we conclude," says Dr. Ralston, "that family prayer, though not directly enjoined by express precept, is yet a duty so manifest from the general principles of the gospel, the character of the Christian, the constitution of the family, the benefits it imparts, and the general promises of God, that it must be of binding obligation on every Christian who is the head of a household." (RALSTON, Elements of Divinity, p.780.)

4. Public Prayer is used in a wide sense to include every branch of public worship, such as prayer, praise, the reading of the Scriptures, and the singing of psalms and hymns and spiritual songs. Public prayer was a part of the Jewish worship, at least from the time of Ezra, and was performed in the synagogues. Our Lord frequently attended and participated in these services, and by this means placed His approval upon the practice of public prayer. This duty, however, is also founded upon the express declaration of the Scriptures. In his instructions to Timothy, St. Paul says, I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men (I Tim. 2:1); and again, I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting (I Tim. 2:8). The Epistle to the Hebrews contains a similar injunction also, Let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching (Heb. 10:24, 25). Public worship is designed to benefit each individual worshiper, to keep alive the sense of dependence upon God as the Giver of every good and perfect gift, and to publicly express the grateful remembrance of every material and spiritual blessing.

The Supreme Duty of Worship. The union of all the offices of devotion constitutes divine worship. This is the highest duty of man. It includes the active offering to God of the tribute due Him, together with the supplication of His benefits. Both the active and passive phases are involved, as in the text, The Lord is good unto them that wait for him, to the soul that seeketh him (Lam. 3:25) Worship blends meditation and contemplation with prayer, and these through the spirit, strengthen the soul for its work of faith and labor of love. As worship marks the consummation of all ethical duty to God, so the end of all worship is spiritual union with God. This is the goal set for the church by our Lord in His high-priestly prayer. He prayed that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us (John 17:21). This is not, however, a pantheistic union, as pagan mysticism taught, but a personal, spiritual union, in which the identity of the individual is preserved. It is a union of affection, of like-mindedness, and identity of purpose. "Worship is the recognition of Christ," says Bishop McIlvaine, "and the ascription to Him of everything which is beautiful and glorious and desirable. It is the necessary tendency of all true worship to assimilate the worshiper into the

[Worship has played an important part, not only in the history of the Christian Church, but in the history of the world. Even in the most primitive forms of human life and civilization, worship has always been a prominent activity. As civilization advances, the forms of worship change, but the practice of worship never dies. The great moments of life, birth, marriage and death, have ever been the occasions for special acts of worship. It may be said that over the whole course of history, man has paid more attention to his worship than to any other activity. We need, therefore, to clearly distinguish its meaning, that we may better enter into this valuable experience. Intelligent participation in worship is more valuable than the unintelligent following of mere custom.

likeness of the being worshiped. Thus the public and private worship of Christ becomes one of the chief agencies in our redemption. The thoughts and feelings of the heart demand for their completeness, a corresponding expression. Faith finds this expression in the services of the church and the duties of the Christian life.

[ Evelyn Underhill points out that in the phenomena of worship, two currents of life meet - one proceeding from the transcendent God, the other flowing from the religious life of the subject. The descending current includes all forms of revelation, the ascending, all forms of prayer. Nor does the mutual action of the two currents exclude the primacy of the divine action; for this is manifest, not only in the descending current of the Word, of Revelation and the Sacraments, but also in its immanent action within the life of souls. This acknowledgment of our total dependence upon the free action of God, iminanent and transcendent, is and must ever be a part of true worship. It is interesting to note that the term "prevenient grace" so popular in Arminian theology, is again coming into use, in connection with the idea of worship. Man could never have produced this disposition of the soul. It does not appear spontaneously from within the created order. The awed conviction of the reality of the eternal over against us - this sense of God in one form or another, is in fact a revelation of prevenient grace, proportioned to the capacity of the creature. It is something wholly other than ourselves, and not deducible from finite experiences, it is "the splendor and distinctness of God." The easy talk of the pious naturalist, therefore, as to man's approach to God, is irrational, impudent and irreverent, unless the priority of God's approach to man be constantly kept in mind. (Cf. EVELYN UNDERHILL, Worship.)

(II) Individual Ethics: or Duties to Oneself

Individual ethics is that division of practical ethics which treats of the application of the moral law to the regulation of man's conduct insofar as it has reference to himself as an individual moral agent. There is a sense, of course, in which man's character is dependent upon his external obligations, but it will be simpler to treat individual ethics as forming the Christian character; and reserve the treatment of external obligations for the division of Social Ethics. Man's duty to himself is frequently summed up in Self-conservation, Self-culture, and Self-conduct. For the purpose of this Work, however, with its emphasis upon the development of the Christian life, a simpler outline will be more appropriate. We shall, therefore, give attention to the following: (1) The Sanctity of the Body; (2) The Province of the Intellectual, Emotional, Moral and Aesthetic Powers of the Mind; and (3) The Development of the Spiritual Life.

The Sanctity of the Body. Since man's physical existence is essential to the fulfillment of his mission in this life, it is his first duty to conserve and develop all the powers of his being. Christianity regards the body, not as a prison house of the soul, but as a temple of the Holy Spirit. This gives sanctity to the body; and the preservation of this sanctity becomes a guiding principle in all matters of physical welfare. The specific duties pertaining to the body are as follows:

1. There must be the preservation and development of the bodily powers. This becomes a high and holy duty, for man's existence in the world depends upon this bodily organism. This is intuitively recognized as soon as the agent comes to realize the relation existing between the soul and the body. He who neglects his physical being, places his whole mission in jeopardy; and he who destroys it, brings his mission to an end. Hence self-murder is strictly prohibited. Wherever there is a morally enlightened conscience, men have agreed that suicide is contrary to the end for which life is given. So, also, self-mutilation is forbidden. This includes any bodily injury or dismemberment, such as disfigures the body or prevents the complete functioning of the physical organism. Christianity is opposed to ascetic practices also, such as were found among the mystics of the Middle Ages, and as they are practiced in pagan countries at the present time. The fasts and self-denials which Christianity enjoins upon men, are intended to invigorate rather than enfeeble the human system.

2. There must be the care and culture of the body through exercise, rest, sleep and recreation. Man was made for labor and for rest, and both are essential to his physical well-being. The mere possession of wealth does not exclude man from the duty of labor. The world owes no man a living who is able to earn it for himself. Holiness dignifies labor and makes it delightful, whether with the hands, the head or the heart. It also dignifies rest and makes the Sabbath a symbol of the spiritual "rest of faith." Too often there is a failure to discern the true meaning of the Sabbath which is not only for worship but also for repose. Many never give their bodies a Sabbath, Sunday being as laborious as the other days of the week. As the soil of Israel came into possession of its Sabbath by seventy years of captivity, so those who fail to make the Sabbath a day of worship and rest, may finally observe these Sabbaths by enforced rest through the providence of God. In the highly specialized forms of labor demanded by modern civilization, the tension of both mind and body is such that periods of rest and recreation become an essential factor in the preservation of the body. This recreation should be such as to renew the physical powers, and minister to both the mental and spiritual life of the individual.

3. The appetites and passions of the body must be subjugated to man's higher intellectual and spiritual interests. Some have assumed that holiness implies the destruction or near destruction of the physical appetites and pleasurable emotions. This is not according to the Scriptures. Holiness destroys nothing that is essential to man, either physically or spiritually. The appetites and passions remain, but they are freed from the incubus of sin. The early disciples ate their meat with gladness and singleness of heart (Acts 2:46); and one of the apostles warns against those seducing spirits who go about forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth (I Tim. 4:1, 3). Holiness, however, does not necessarily compel a normal condition of the appetites and passions. Sometimes perverted appetites exist for a time in those who have clean hearts, but who have not had as yet, any light on these specific matters. Both perverted and unnatural appetites are so subject to the power of God as to be instantly regulated or destroyed through faith. All appetite is instinctive and unreasoning. It knows nothing of right and wrong, but simply craves indulgence. It never controls itself, but is subject to control. Hence St. Paul says, But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway (I Cor. 9:27).

4. The care of the body demands proper clothing, not only for protection and comfort, but for propriety and decency. The question of dress, therefore, not only concerns the welfare of the body, but becomes, also, an expression of the character and aesthetic nature of the individual. It is for this reason made a matter of apostolic injunction. In like manner also, that women adorn themselves [kosmei'n] in modest apparel [ejn katastolh/' kosmivw/, in apparel becoming], with shamefacedness [metaV aijdou'" with modesty or shamefacedness] and sobriety [swfrosuvnh", soundness of mind]; not with broided hai