Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 4.djvu/638

 6l8 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY

tians have always crystallized into the social groups of school and state and church, as well as the social reforms that have always accompanied its religious revivals, abundantly evidence this fact. But the church, except as its zeal for others has too often committed it to a pauperizing charity, has never flat- tered men into believing that their miseries were simply the result of environment. It has dared to cut deep into the heart of that lie, and to teach that sin is at the bottom of misery. But it does something more — it defines sin as the voluntary withdrawal of a man from his normal life with God and fraternal life with men. Irreligion, it holds, lies behind social iniquities. Then, having clearly in mind the disease, it undertakes the remedy. By the interpretation of God through human love, it shows men the way to that religious environment that is the source of righteousness. By the story of its Christ it inspires men to sacrifice in social service. As sin is selfishness, so right- eousness is fraternity. The great ecclesiastical doctrine of regeneration has, therefore, a social application, not by accom- modation, but by necessity. Regeneration is nothing more than the change of a man's life from insulation to social union. He is a son of God, and therefore a brother of men. In the Chris- tian sense, therefore, to produce regenerate individuals is inevita- bly to produce a regenerate society. Goodness in the Christian sense is social, not monastic. To determine the forms in which this social goodness shall express itself does not fall within the power of the church as an institution. Reforms are for church members, not churches. Any economic or political expedient that will best and most effectively express Christian fraternity will be supported by Christian church members if only their heads are as clear as their hearts are warm.

And it is precisely here that evangelical religion is resultful as a social force. We may well thank Unitarianism and ethical societies for their insistence upon morality and rational faith. But with all possible respect for their profound theological influ- ence, with notable exceptions, they cannot be said to have exer- cised wide influence over the masses. The age today, as never before, knows the right, but needs the power to do the right.