dent a complete "wholesome practical training" for the Christian ministry.

The success of the kingdom of God in this world depends in great measure upon the practical efficiency of the Christian ministry. If one considers how far short the education and training of the average minister falls from the ideal, and how incomplete even the best-trained man is, in view of the immensity of the work of the ministry as a whole, it is surprising that the Church is so successful as it is. We recognize with the apostle that we have the treasure of the divine grace in earthen vessels that the excellence of the power may be of God and not of us." We know that God will fill these vessels to their utmost capacity with this treasure if only we will use them in giving it to our fellowmen. "For we are laborers together with God."

There is no labor so difficult and yet so inspiring as to work for the eternal salvation of our fellowmen. Nothing can be so awful, and yet so joyful, as to labor together with God. To take part with the Supreme Being in the accomplishment of this divine purpose is the greatest of honors, and in itself the supreme reward.

Conclusion

The ideal of the study of Theology comprehends the three constituents, "vital piety," "sound learning," and "wholesome practical training"; it involves that these shall be intertwined in just and harmonious proportions, and that all the great variety in these departments shall be summed up in a higher unity. This is the work of Theological Encyclopædia, which does not indeed attempt to give a summary statement of the contents of all types of religion, all theological learning and all Church work; but does strive to do the formal work of organizing them all into a complete and harmonious system, in which each department will receive its just place and importance, without detriment to itself or intrusion upon others. It also sets forth the varied and distinctive methods for the study of Theology, and the helps, literary and otherwise, necessary to do the work.

This Seminary has had an introductory course in Encyclopædia for nearly forty years, entitled by its first teacher, Dr. Philip Schaff, Propedeutic or Introduction to the Study of Theology; but it was not until the Graduate Department was established, by the appointment of the present encumbent to

the first Chair in the Graduate Faculty, that the higher work of Theological Encyclopædia was undertaken, of summing up the whole work of Theology into a higher unity.

And just here it is important to speak of the Library of the Seminary, which is, or ought to be, Theological Encyclopædia embodied in Literature. We have a Library which is one of the richest in the world in some departments of Theology, and one of the poorest in others. The poverty is due to the fact that the funds at the disposal of the Directors for the Library have always been so meagre. The richness is owing to the purchase, by the Founders, of the Van Ess Library, the most valuable theological library that has ever crossed the ocean; and to the special gifts of many honored givers, the chief of whom are the late Director, David H. McAlpin, and his children, continued for the past forty years. Nothing is more needed than funds to supply the deficiencies of the Library and make it adequate for the use of the Faculty and students in the harmonious proportions that the ideal of Theological Study requires, and to make it more fully what it has always been, the theological section of the Public Libraries of the city.

There was attached to the Chair of Encyclopædia, Symbolics or Comparative Theology, which rises above all the differences of religious denominations into that higher unity in which they agree, and endeavors to consider their differences in religion, doctrine and institution from an irenic point of view. That is especially necessary for this Seminary, which claims to be something better than undenominational or interdenominational: namely, as the late statesman bishop, Henry Codman Potter, delighted in saying “supradenominational.”

What Comparative Theology stands for as regards the Christian religion, Comparative Religion represents for all the other religions of the world. We must recognize that the great mass of mankind, now as well as for the millenniums of the history of our race, have been religious in the exercise of other types of piety, in thinking other kinds of doctrine, and employing other practical measures than those familiar to us in the Christian religion.

The Theological Seminary cannot safely ignore these other Religions. They must be studied with a sympathetic spirit, glad to recognize all that is good and valid in them, and with the same irenic purpose that is necessary to reconcile the differences existing in the Christian Church. We cannot any longer take the position, born of ignorance, that God has lim

ited the bestowal of His grace to those who are Christians. We cannot limit the influence of the divine Spirit to Christian lands. We see in Jesus Christ our Saviour "the true Light, which coming into the world, lighteth every man" (John i: 9). We are assured with St. Peter that "in every nation he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted with him" (Acts x: 35).

How can Christianity be the universal religion unless it recognizes, with St. Clement, that the Philosophy of the Greeks was as truly a preparation for Christianity as the Law of the Hebrews: and that the practice of ancient Israel of taking up into the Old Covenant Religion elements of good, especially from the Babylonian and Persian religions, and of the ancient Church in appropriating from the Greek, Roman and Oriental Religions valuable material, is the true and wise course for modern Christianity to adopt, by enlarging this theory and practice so as to comprehend all of the Religions of the world. They are all in their way preparatory for Christianity, and will, as we anticipate, eventually be absorbed into a higher, broader and more perfect Christianity, that will be world-wide in its conception, and which will think nothing alien to it that is proper for union and communion with God.

The Graduate Department is not limited to the comprehensive studies thus far mentioned, but embraces advanced work in all departments, Biblical and Historical, Doctrines of Faith and morals, theoretical and practical, where the Professors are at work, busy as bees, searching the foundations, and all that has thus far been acquired, by the exact methods of sound philosophy and scientific criticism, to extract the honey of wisdom, conserving all that is real, true and valid, and eliminating it from all that cannot endure the tests of truth and righteousness, reaching out in all directions to win everything that is right and good for the service of God. I have mentioned the more comprehensive studies because they have their special place and importance for the Graduate School of Theology.

It is just this expansion of Theology into such a great number of studies, overlapping and entwined with so many other departments of human learning, that makes it impracticable any longer to conduct the study of Theology apart from the Universities. The Theological Seminary and the University are in mutual need of each other. When this became evident a few years ago, relations of courtesy and mutual help were established between this Seminary and Columbia Uni

versity, largely owing to the wisdom of our Director, the Honorable Seth Low. This was subsequently extended to the New York University and to other institutions also. While these relations are valuable to undergraduates they are still more valuable to graduates. For it is just in the higher and more comprehensive ranges of Theology that relations with the University become necessary. It is indeed an important part of the work of Theological Encyclopædia to consider the relation of all education to Theology, in the most comprehensive classification of all knowledge, professions and arts.

The sad warfare that has too often been waged between the partisans of Theology and Science has no place in the higher ranges of Theology. It could never have taken place except upon its lower levels. The ideal of Christian Theology is to recognize all that is good and useful in all human knowledge, in all human activities and in all life, and to build all into a temple of divine Wisdom.

Theology is now, as ever she must be, divine knowledge. She is by nature, as the daughter of God, gentle, patient, loving, and most gracious, welcoming all learning and all workers of good to the feast prepared in her hospitable palace. But she has been too often misrepresented by evil spirits, who have for a season usurped her place.

An ancient Hebrew sage saw a counterfeit of Wisdom seated upon a lofty seat at the door of her house, ignorant and clamorous, with loud, imperative voice, urging the passer-by to turn in and drink of her stolen waters and eat of her secret, soul-destroying bread. Divine Wisdom herself is busy in her palace providing a feast for her guests. She sends forth her maidens with the invitation:

Come, eat of my bread and drink of the wine I have mingled. Forsake Folly and live; and go in the way of understanding. (Prov. ix:5).

And so St. Paul conceives of the household of God, the embodiment of Christian theology, as:

"Built upon the foundation of apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the chief corner-stone; in whom each several building, fitly framed together, groweth into an holy temple in the Lord; in whom ye also are builded together for a habitation of God in the Spirit." (Eph. ii: 20–22.)

Our Founders may have had this passage in mind in their ideal, for it is a Theology at once vital, constructive and efficient-vital in union and communion with God in the Spirit

constructive, building on Jesus Christ as chief, and on apostolic foundations, and on all teachers and workers in all ages; their several buildings all fitly framed together in comprehensive unity-and practically efficient: growing ever higher and larger into that completeness and perfection of structure worthy of the God of Glory and of Grace.