---

---

---

PREFACE

There is no attempt in this book to present a complete system of theology, though much of such a system is passed in review, but only to study a special phase of theological thinking. The precise theme of the book is the relations of the social consciousness to theology. This is the subject upon which the writer was asked to lecture at the Harvard Summer School of Theology of 1901; and the book has grown out of the lectures there given. In preparing the book for the press, however, the lecture form has been entirely abandoned, and considerable material added.

The importance of the theme seems to justify a somewhat thorough-going treatment. If one believes at all in the presence of God in history—and the Christian can have no doubt here—he must be profoundly interested in such a phenomenon as the steady growth of the social consciousness. Hardly any inner characteristic of our time has a stronger historical justification than that consciousness; and it has carried the reason and conscience of the men of this generation in rare degree. Having its own comparatively independent development, and yet making an ethical demand that is thoroughly Christian, it furnishes an almost ideal standpoint from which to review our theological statements, and, at the same time, a valuable test of their really Christian quality.

In attempting, then, a careful study of the relations of the social consciousness to theology, this book aims, first, definitely to get at the real meaning of the social consciousness as the theologian must view it, and so to bring clearly into mind the unconscious assumptions of the social consciousness itself; and then to trace out the influence of the social consciousness upon the conception of religion, and upon theological doctrine. The larger portion of the book is naturally given to the influence upon theological doctrine; and to make the discussion here as pointed as possible, the different elements of the social consciousness are considered separately.

It should be noted, however, that the question raised is not the historical one, How, as a matter of fact, has the social consciousness modified the conception of religion or the statement of theological doctrine? but the theoretical one, How should the social consciousness naturally affect religion and doctrine? In this sense, the result might be called, in President Hyde's phrase, a "social theology"; but, as I believe that the social consciousness is at bottom only a true sense of the fully personal, I prefer myself to think of the present book as only carrying out in more detail the contention of my Reconstruction in Theology—that theology should aim at a restatement of doctrine in strictly personal terms. So conceived, in spite of its casual origin, this book follows very naturally upon the previous book. Some of the same topics necessarily recur here; and references to the Reconstruction have been freely made, in order to avoid all unnecessary repetition.

That this social sense of the fully personal has finally a real and definite contribution to make to theology, I cannot doubt. I can only hope that the present discussion may be found at least suggestive, particularly in the analysis of the social consciousness, and in the treatment of mysticism and of the ethical in religion, as well as in the consideration of the special influence of the elements of the social consciousness upon the restatement of doctrine. Of the doctrinal applications, the application to the problem of redemption may be considered, perhaps, of most significance.

CONTENTS

class="sectn">

The Value of the Analogy23

The Inevitable Inadequacy of the Analogy24

1. It Comes from the Sub-personal World24
2. Access to Reality, Only Through Ourselves24
3. Mistaken Passion for Construing Everything25

The Analogy Tested by the Definition of the Social Consciousness27

CHAPTER III

The Necessity of the Facts of Which the Social Consciousness is the Reflection,
If Ideal Interests are to be Supreme29

1. The Question29
2. Otherwise, No Moral World at all30
   1. The Prerequisites of a Moral World30
      • (1) A Sphere of Law30
      • (2) Ethical Freedom30
      • (3) Some Power of Accomplishment31
      • (4) Members One of Another32
   2. The Ideal World Requires, thus, the Facts of the Social Consciousness32

CHAPTER IV

The Ultimate Explanation and Ground of the Social Consciousness35

1. How can it be, Metaphysically, that we do Influence One Another? 35
   1. Not Due to the Physical Fact of Race-Connection36
   2. We are not to Over-Emphasize the Principle of Heredity37
   3. Not Due to a Mystical Solidarity39
   4. Grounded in the Immanence of God40
2. What is Required for the Final Positive Justification of the Social Consciousness, as Ethical?44
   1. Must be Grounded in the Supporting Will of God44
   2. God's Sharing in our Life48
   3. The Consequent Transfiguration of the Social Consciousness49

THE INFLUENCE OF THE SOCIAL CONSCIOUSNESS UPON
THE CONCEPTION OF RELIGION

Introduction53

CHAPTER V

The Opposition of the Social Consciousness to the Falsely Mystical55

1. What is the Falsely Mystical?55
   1. Nash's Definition55
   2. Herrmann's Definition56
2. The Objections of the Social Consciousness to the Falsely Mystical57
   1. Unethical58
   2. Does not Give a Really Personal God58
   3. Belittles the Personal in Man

href="@public@vhost@g@gutenberg@html@files@37531@[email protected]#page_59" class="pginternal" tag="{http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml}a">59

Leaves the Historically, Concretely Christian62

CHAPTER VI

The Emphasis of the Social Consciousness Upon the Personal Relation in Religion,
and so Upon the Truly Mystical66

1. The Social Consciousness Tends Positively to Emphasize the Personal Relation in Religion66
   1. Emphasizes Everywhere the Personal66
   2. Requires the Laws of a Deepening Friendship in Religion67
   3. Requires the Ideal Conditions of the Richest Life in Religion68
2. The Social Consciousness thus Keeps the Truly Mystical70
   1. The Justifiable and Unjustifiable Elements in Mysticism71
      • (1) Emotion, the Test71
      • (2) Subjective Tendency72
      • (3) Underestimating the Historical72
      • (4) Tendency toward Vagueness73
      • (5) Tendency toward Pantheism73
      • (6) Tendency to Extravagant Symbolism76
   2. The Protest in Favor of the Whole Man78
   3. The Self-Controlled Recognition of Emotion82

CHAPTER VII

The Thorough Ethicizing of Religion86

1. The Pressure of the Problem86
2. The Statement of the Problem87
3. The Answer89
   1. Involved in Relation to Christ89
   2. The Divine Will Felt in the Ethical Command90
   3. Involved in the Nature of God's Gifts91
   4. Communion with God, Through Harmony with His Ethical Will92
   5. The Vision of God for the Pure in Heart92
   6. Sharing the Life of God93
   7. Christ, as Satisfying Our Highest Claims on Life94
   8. The Vision of the Riches of the Life of Christ, Ethically Conditioned96
   9. The Moral Law, as a Revelation of the Love of God98

CHAPTER VIII

The Emphasis of the Social Consciousness Upon the Historically Christian102

1. The Social Consciousness Needs Historical Justification102
2. Christianity's Response to this Need103

THE INFLUENCE OF THE SOCIAL CONSCIOUSNESS UPON
THEOLOGICAL DOCTRINE

CHAPTER IX

General Results

href="@public@vhost@g@gutenberg@html@files@37531@[email protected]#page_105" class="pginternal" tag="{http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml}a">105

1. The Conception of Theology in Personal Terms106
2. The Fatherhood of God, as the Determining Principle in Theology109
3. Christ's Own Social Emphases111
4. The Reflection in Theology of the Changes in the Conception of Religion113

CHAPTER X

The Influence of the Deepening Sense of the Like-Mindedness of Men Upon Theology115

1. No Prime Favorites with God116
2. The Great Universal Qualities and Interests, the Most Valuable117
3. Essential Likeness Under very Diverse Forms121
4. As Applied to the Question of Immortality124
5. Consequent Larger Sympathy with Men, Faith in Men, and Hope for Men127
6. Judgment According to Light, and the Moral Reality of the Future Life132

CHAPTER XI

The Influence of the Deepening Sense of the Mutual Influence of Men Upon Theology136

1. The Real Unity of the Race136
2. Deepening the Sense of Sin139
3. Mutual Influence for Good in the Attainment of Character145
   1. Application to the Problem of Redemption147
   2. The Consequent Ethical and Spiritual Meaning of Substitution and Propitiation150
4. Mutual Influence for Good in our Personal Relation to God160
   1. In Coming into the Kingdom160
   2. In Fellowship within the Kingdom162
   3. In Intercessory Prayer164
5. Mutual Influence for Good in Confessions of Faith167
   1. Complete Uniformity of Belief and Statement Impossible169
   2. Complete Uniformity of Belief and Statement Undesirable171
6. The Consequent Importance of the Doctrine of the Church177

CHAPTER XII

The Influence of the Deepening Sense of the Value and Sacredness of the Person
Upon Theology179

1. The Recognition of the Personal in Man180
   1. Man's Personal Separateness from God180
   2. Emphasis upon Man's Moral Initiative181
   3. Man, a Child of God183
2. The Recognition of the Personal in Christ184
   1. Christ, a Personal Revelation of God184
   2. Emphasizing

the Moral and Spiritual in Asserting the Supremacy of Christ185

The Moral and Spiritual Grounds of the Supremacy of Christ188

• (1) The Greatest in the Greatest Sphere188
• (2) The Sinless and Impenitent One192
• (3) Consciously Rises to the Highest Ideal194
• (4) Realizes the Character of God195
• (5) Consciously Able to Redeem All Men196
• (6) Complete Normality under this Transcendent God-Consciousness
        and Sense of Mission197
• (7) The Only Person Who can call out Absolute Trust198
• (8) The One, in Whom God Certainly Finds Us199
• (9) The Ideal Realized200

Christ's Double Uniqueness201

The Increasing Sense of Our Kinship with Christ, and of His Reality205

The Recognition of the Personal in God.207

1. The Steady Carrying Through of the Completely Personal
   in the Conception of God. Guarding the Conception208
2. God is Always the Completely Personal God212
   • (1) Consequent Relation of God to "Eternal Truths"212
   • (2) Eternal Creation214
   • (3) The Unity and Unchangeableness of God216
   • (4) The Limitations of the Conception of Immanence217
3. Deepening the Thought of the Fatherhood of God218
   • (1) History, no Mere Natural Process218
   • (2) God, the Great Servant219
   • (3) No Divine Arbitrariness220
   • (4) The Passibility of God221
4. As to the Doctrine of a Social Trinity222
5. Preëminent Reverence for Personality, Characterizing
   all God's Relations with Men226
   • (1) Reflected in Christ226
   • (2) In Creation230
   • (3) In Providence232
   • (4) In Our Personal Religious Life233
   • (5) In the Judgment237
   • (6) In the Future Life240

THEOLOGY AND THE SOCIAL
CONSCIOUSNESS

---

INTRODUCTION

THE THEME

No theologian can be excused to-day from a careful study of the relations of

theology and the social consciousness. Whether this study becomes a formal investigation or not, the social consciousness is so deep and significant a phenomenon in the ethical life of our time, that it cannot be ignored by the theologian who means to bring his message to men really home. This book is written in the conviction that, while men are thus moved as never before by a deep sense of mutual influence and obligation, they have also as deep and genuine an interest as ever in the really greatest questions of religion and theology. Interests so significant and so akin cannot long remain isolated in the mind. They are certain soon profoundly to influence each other. And this mutual influence of theology and the social consciousness form the theme of this book.

Two questions are naturally involved in this theme. First: Has theology given any help, or has it any help to give, to the social consciousness?—the question of the first division of the book. Second: Has the social consciousness made any contribution, or has it any contribution to make, to theology?—the question of the second and third divisions. That is to say: On the one hand, Have the great facts which theology studies any help to give to the man who faces the problem of social progress—of the steady elevation of the race? On the other hand, Has the great fact of the immensely quickened social consciousness of our time, with all that it means, any help to give to the theologian in his attempt to bring the great Christian truths really home to men, to make them more real, more rational, more vital?

Or again: On the one hand, do theological doctrines—the most adequate statements we can make of the great Christian truths—best explain and best ground the social consciousness, so as best to bring our entire thought in this sphere of the social into unity? Is the Christian truth so great that it not only includes all that is true in this new social consciousness—is fully able to take it up into itself and to make it feel at home there—but also, so great that it alone can give the social consciousness its fullest meaning, alone enable it to understand itself, and alone furnish it adequate motive and power? Is the social consciousness, in truth, only a disguised statement of Christian convictions, and does it really require the Christian religion and its thoughtful expression to complete itself? Must the social consciousness say, when it comes to full self-knowledge,—I am myself an unmeaning and unjustified by-product, if there is not a God in the full Christian sense? and, so saying, confirm again the great Christian truths? This is the question of the first division.

On the other hand, since the task of any given theologian is necessarily temporary, and since any marked modification of the consciousness of men will inevitably demand some restatement of theological doctrine, the question here becomes—To what changed points of view in religion and theology, to what restatements of doctrine, and so to what truer appreciation of Christian truth, does the new social consciousness naturally lead? How do the affirmations of the social consciousness, as the outcome of a careful, inductive study of the social evolution of the race, affect our theological statements? This is the question of the second and third divisions of the book.

Our discussion must of course assume and build on the conclusions of sociology, and of New Testament theology, especially the conclusions concerning the social teaching of Jesus.

THE REAL MEANING OF THE SOCIAL
CONSCIOUSNESS FOR THEOLOGY

INTRODUCTION

THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE THEOLOGIAN

First, then, what is the real meaning of the social consciousness, as the theologian must view it? The answer to this question involves a preliminary one: What is the point of view of the theologian in any investigation? One can only give his own answer.

First of all, the theologian, as such, is an interpreter, not a tracer of causal connections. He builds everywhere upon the scientific investigator, and takes from him the statement of facts and processes. With these he has primarily nothing to do. With reference to the social consciousness, therefore, he does not attempt to do over again the work of the sociologist; he asks only, What does the social consciousness, in the light of the whole of life and thought, mean; not, How did it come about?

The theologian, too, is a believer in the supremacy of spiritual interests; this is his central contention. He affirms strenuously, with the scientific worker, the place and value of the mechanical; but he is certain that the mechanical can understand itself even, only as it is seen to be simple means, and thus clearly subordinate in significance. His problem is, therefore, everywhere, that of ideal interpretation, not of mechanical explanation. But, while he has nothing to do with the scientific tracing of immediate causal connections, he recognizes causality itself as requiring an ultimate explanation, that cannot be mechanically given. The theologian must be in this, then, an ideal interpreter, and an inquirer after the ultimate cause.

The theologian assumes, moreover, the legitimacy and value of the fact of religion; for theology is simply the thoughtful, comprehensive, and unified expression of what religion means to us. The meaning of the social consciousness to the theologian involves, therefore, at once the question of its relation to religious conviction.

The point of view of the Christian theologian involves, besides, the reality of the personal God in personal relation to persons. Theology is in earnest in its thought of God, and knows that God is everywhere to be taken into account; that, if there is a God at all, he is not to be exiled into some corner of his universe, but is intimately concerned in all, is at the very heart of all; and that, therefore, it is not a matter of merely curious interest or of subsidiary inquiry, whether we are to look at our questions with God in mind.

Finally, the Christian theologian tries everywhere to make his point of view the point of view of Christ. The theology, upon which he ultimately stakes his all, is Christ's theology. He knows that there is much concerning which he cannot refuse to think, but upon which Christ has not expressed himself either explicitly or by clear inference; but in all this unavoidable supplementary thinking he aims to be absolutely loyal to the spirit of Christ.

From this point of view of the Christian theologian, now, what does the social consciousness mean? The answer may be given under four heads: (1) the definition of the social consciousness; (2) the inadequacy of the analogy of the organism, as an expression of the social consciousness; (3) the necessity of the facts, of which the social consciousness is the reflection, if ideal interests are to be supreme; (4) the ultimate explanation and ground of the social consciousness.

These four topics form the subjects of the four chapters of the first division of our inquiry.

CHAPTER I

THE DEFINITION OF SOCIAL CONSCIOUSNESS

The simplest and probably the most accurate single expression we can give to the social consciousness, is to say that it is a growing sense of the real brotherhood of men. But five elements seem plainly involved in this, and may be profitably separated in our

thought, if that is to be clear and definite:—a deepening sense (1) of the likeness or like-mindedness of men, (2) of their mutual influence, (3) of the value and sacredness of the person, (4) of mutual obligation, and (5) of love.

I. THE SENSE OF THE LIKE-MINDEDNESS OF MEN[1]

If a society is "a group of like-minded individuals," if the "all-essential" requisites for coöperation are "like-mindedness and consciousness of kind," as Giddings tells us, then certainly a prime element in the social consciousness is likeness and the sense of it—a growing sense of the mental and moral resemblance and "potential resemblance" of all men, and of all classes of men, though not equality of powers.

"Equality of need" among men, too,[2] to which sociology comes as one of its surest conclusions, implies a common capacity, even if in varying degrees, to enter into the most fundamental interests of life, and so points unmistakably to the essential likeness of men in the most important things.

So, too, sociology's unquestioning assertion that both smaller and larger groups of men constantly tend toward unity, assumes potential resemblance.

And the uniform experience and prescription of social workers, that really knowing "how the other half lives" brings increasing sympathy, also affirm the fundamental likeness of men. Every painstaking investigation of a social question comes out at some point or other with a fresh discovery of a previously hidden, underlying resemblance between classes of men.

From the careful, inductive study of social evolution, too, the men of our day see, as no other generation has seen, that the great force always and everywhere at work in that evolution has been likeness and the consciousness of it.

For all these reasons, this generation believes, as men never believed before, in the essential like-mindedness of men; and this deepening sense of the like-mindedness of men is certainly one element in the modern social consciousness.

II. THE SENSE OF THE MUTUAL INFLUENCE OF MEN

A second element in the social consciousness, and, perhaps, that which has most of all characterized it through the larger period of its growth, is the strong sense of the mutual influence of men—that we are all "members one of another."

1. Contributing Lines of Thought.—It is worth seeing how firmly planted the idea is. Several lines of thought have united to induce men to emphasize—perhaps even to over-emphasize—this way of thinking of society. The influence of natural science, in the first place, has been inevitably in this direction. Its root idea of the universality of law forces upon one the thought of a world which is a coherent whole, a unity with universal forces in it, in which every part is inextricably connected with every other. So, too, the acceptance of the theory of evolution has led science to regard the whole history of the physical universe as an organic growth.

Psychology, also, with its present-day emphasis, in Baldwin and Royce, upon the constant presence and fundamental character of imitation, and its insistence upon the still more fundamental impulsiveness of consciousness which Dewey believes underlies imitation,[3] is really proclaiming exactly this element of the social consciousness. And the whole assertion by the later psychology of the unity of man—mind and body, and of the complex intertwining of all the functions of the mind, is in closest harmony with a similar view of society.

Philosophy, too, is exerting all along a half-unconscious pressure toward the thought of the organic unity of society. That philosophy may exist at all, it must start from the assumption of a universe, a real unity of truth, and its problem is to find a discerned unity. It knows no unrelated being, and, consequently, whether it theoretically accepts the formulation or not, it must admit that, as a matter of fact, to be is to be in relations. It asserts as a universal fact, what natural science and psychology both affirm in their own respective spheres, the concrete relatedness of all. It cannot well deny the same thought when applied to society. Its repeated attempts, moreover, to conceive all as a developing unity, and the profound influence of the analogy of the organism upon its history, both further sustain the organic view of society.

Christianity, as well, has been a powerful factor in this direction from the beginning, for it really first gave the Idea of Humanity.[4]

2. The Threefold Form of the Conviction.—Sustained, now, by all these movements in natural science, psychology, philosophy, and Christianity, this thought of the mutual influence of men has taken three forms: that mutual influence is inevitable, isolation impossible; that mutual influence is desirable, isolation to be shunned; that mutual influence is indispensable, isolation blighting.

(1) This second element in the social consciousness has meant, then, in the first place, a growing sense of the inevitableness of the mutual influence of all men, and of all classes of men; that we are all parts of one whole, each part unavoidably affected by every other; that we are bound up in one bundle of life with all men, and cannot live an isolated life if we would; that we do influence one another whether we will or not, and tend unconsciously to draw others to our level and are ourselves drawn toward theirs; that we joy and suffer together whether we will or not, and grow or deteriorate together.

(2) But the mutual influence of men means more than this: not only that we do inevitably affect one another in living out our own life, but a growing sense of the fact that we are obviously not intended to come to our best in independence of one another; that we are made on so large a plan that we cannot come to our best alone; that we are evidently made for personal relations, and that, therefore, largeness of life for ourselves depends on our entering into the life of others.

(3) But even more than this is true. It is not only that entering into the life of others is a help in my life, it is the great help, the one great means, the indispensable, the essential condition of all largeness of life; it is the very meaning of life,—life itself. We are to find our life only in losing our life. Life is the fulfilment of relations. When we try to run away from the variety and complexity of these relations, we are running away from life itself. The indispensableness of these relations to others is assumed, also, in the assertion by the sociologist of an evolution toward a society, at once more and more complex, and more and more perfect.

But if I grow in the growth of another, the other grows in my growth. If the only thing of value that I can finally give is myself, the value of that gift depends upon the largeness and richness of the self given. For love's own sake, therefore, I must grow, must strive to

bring to its highest perfection that work which is given me to do. A person is a social being called to contribute to the whole, in the line of his own best possibilities. One's largest ministry to others is to be rendered, then, through sacred regard for one's own calling, considered as exactly his place of largest service. Or, to put it the other way: I can come to my best only in work so great and in associations so large that I may lose myself in them in perfect objectivity.

The mutual influence of men, therefore, is unavoidable, is desirable, is indispensable; isolation impossible, hindering, blighting. This is the true solidarity of the race, in which there is no fiction, no hiding in the inconceivable, and no pretense.

III. THE SENSE OF THE VALUE AND SACREDNESS OF THE PERSON

The third element in the social consciousness, the sense of the value and sacredness of the person, follows naturally from the sense of like-mindedness and of mutual influence, but needs distinct and emphatic statement.

It is less easily separable than the other elements named, and, indeed, may be made to include all the others, and does, in a way, carry all with it. Thus broadly conceived, it has seemed to the writer that—with the return to the historical Christ—it might well be called the most notable moral characteristic of our time.[5] But, though less easily and definitely discriminated, one who knows deeply the modern social consciousness would surely feel that the very heart of it had been omitted, if this growing sense of the value and sacredness of the person did not come to strong expression. Reverence for personality—the steadily deepening sense that every person has a value not to be measured in anything else, and is in himself sacred to God and man—this it is which marks unmistakably every step in the progress of the individual and of the race. Without it, whatever the other marks of civilization, you have only tyranny and slavery; with it, though every trace of luxury and scientific invention be lacking, you have the perfection of human relations.

This sense of the value and sacredness of the person not only characterizes increasingly the whole social and moral evolution of the race, but it is to be seen in the clearly conscious demand for equality of rights, and, especially—to take a single example—in the growing recognition that the child is an individual with his own rights; that he has a personality of his own of a sanctity inviolable by the parent; that there are clear bounds beyond which no one may go without personal outrage. The recognition by psychology of respect for personality as one of the three or four most fundamental conditions—if not the most essential of all—of happiness, of character, and of influence, is explicit confirmation of the truth of this element of the social consciousness.

IV. THE SENSE OF OBLIGATION

But the elements of the social consciousness already named lead directly to a growing sense of obligation. Every man carries in himself his only possible standard of measurement of all else. A growing sense of the likeness of other men to himself quickens at once, therefore, the sense of obligation, and leads naturally to the Golden Rule. Recognition of mutual influence, too, inevitably carries with it a deeper sense of obligation; for, if we do affect others constantly, then we are manifestly under obligation not only to do direct service to others, but so to order our own lives as to help, not to hinder, others. The sense of the value and sacredness of the person plainly looks to the same deepening of obligation.

As an element of the social consciousness, the sense of obligation means for a given individual, a growing sense of responsibility for all; and for society at large an increase in the number of those who feel the obligation to serve.

The growth in each of these directions cannot be questioned. There is no privileged class, in whose own consciences there is not being recognized more and more the right of the claim that they must justify themselves by service which shall be as unique as their privilege. In consequence, the conception of the governing classes is steadily changing, for both the governed and the governing, to some recognition of Christ's principle, that he who would be first must be servant of all. The sharp insistence of the sociologist that "organization must be for the organized" expresses the same thought. One must add sociology's double assertion, that society is really advancing toward its goal, and yet that a chief condition of the progress of society is unselfish leadership.[6] This can only mean that there is, increasingly, unselfish leadership, more and more of conscious, willing coöperation on the part of men in forwarding the social evolution.

None of us can return to the older attitude of comparative indifference, nor can we honestly defend it. We do have obligations and we own them; we are judging ourselves increasingly by Christ's test of ministering love.

V. THE SENSE OF LOVE

And the social consciousness ends necessarily in love, in the broader, ethical meaning of that word. We shall never feel that the social consciousness is complete, short of real love. All the other elements of the social consciousness lead to love and are included in it. Even the sociologist must bring in as necessary results of the consciousness of kind—sympathy, affection, and desire for the recognition of others;[7] and he finds these always more or less distinctly at work among men.

These further considerations from the study of evolution confirm this result: that man is preëminently the social animal;[8] that with man we have clearly reached the stage of persons and of personal relations;[9] that the very existence and development of man required love at every step;[10] and that the chief moral significance of man's prolonged infancy is probably to be found in the necessary calling out of love.[11]

So, too, it has become constantly more and more clear that our obligation, what we owe to others, is ourselves; and the giving of the self is love. It seems to be thrust home upon social workers everywhere that there is no solution of any social problem without a personal self-giving in some way on the part of some; that there is no cheaper way than this very costly one of love, of the giving of ourselves—whether in

the family, or in charity, or in criminology.

The point, already noted, that the progress of society depends on leaders who will serve with unselfish devotion, is only another emphasis upon love as an indispensable element of the social consciousness.

And the social goal—equality, brotherhood, liberty, when these terms are given any adequate ethical content—is absolutely unthinkable in any really vital sense without love.

Any attempted definition of love, moreover, resolves at once into what we mean by the social consciousness. If we define love as the giving of self, this is exactly what, with growing clearness and insistence, the social consciousness demands. If with Herrmann we call love, "joy in personal life"—joy, that is, in the revelation of personal life, this can only come in that trustful, reverent, self-surrendering association to which the social consciousness exhorts. If with Edwards we call love, willing the highest and completest good of all, we reach the same result. Or if with Christ in the Beatitudes, or with Paul in the thirteenth of I Corinthians, we study the characteristics of love, we shall hardly doubt that a complete social consciousness must have these marks of love.

These elements, then, make up the social consciousness: the sense of like-mindedness, of mutual influence, of the value and sacredness of the person, of obligation, and of love; and all these, with their implied demands, only point to what a person must be if he is to be fully personal.

With this definition in mind, we may now ask, whether the analogy of the organism can adequately express the social consciousness.