copal. Tested not as in the foregoing comparison by number of churches, but by number of sittings, the order remains the same for the four larger, but the Congregationalists and Episcopalians would outrank the Lutherans and Christians. Tested again by value of church property, the Roman Catholics come second, and the Episcopalians fifth. Yet far more striking than these relative contrasts is the enormous growth of American Christianity as a whole, a growth which, as the figures clearly show, has more than kept pace with the rapid stride of population. A careful estimate makes the whole number of religious organizations existing in the country at the beginning of the Revolution less than nineteen hundred and fifty. The total population was then estimated at three and a half millions, which would show a church for every seventeen hundred souls. By the recent census, the total number of church organizations is returned at more than seventy-two thousand, which, in a population of thirty-eight millions, would show a church for every five hundred and twenty-nine. In other words, while the population has multiplied eleven-fold, the churches have multiplied nearly thirty-seven fold. The aggregate value of church property cannot be subjected to the same test, since we have no means of estimating the amount a century ago; but in 1870 it reached the considerable sum of three hundred and fifty-four millions. An illustration of the working of the voluntary principle is furnished in the fact that the church which seemed hopelessly shipwrecked by the Revolution, and which, as some of its most sincere supporters thought, had no prospect of existing without the public aid on which it had so long depended, now ranks for its property as fifth in the whole land. A recent Bampton lecturer affirmed that the experiments of voluntaryism and dis-establishment, when tried in England under the most favorable circumstances, had proved signal failures. In this country the church of Hooker and Tillotson has certainly shown herself able to go alone. But the most extraordinary increase of ecclesiastical wealth is seen with the Methodists and Roman Catholics, because a century ago they had absolutely nothing. Indeed, the rapid ratio of increase during the last two decades might well attract attention, were it not that this vast amount of property is distributed among so many

different bodies. Such statistics are of course very unsatisfactory tests of the real growth of religion. Even could the precise number of professed Christians be ascertained, we should still be quite as much in the dark. The subtle forces of the invisible world disdain the rules of arithmetic. Yet statistics, after all, afford us the only means of reaching general conclusions; and much as we hear of the decay of faith, and of the growth of religious indifference, it seems certain, from this comparison, that the positive institutions of religion have not, during the last century, lost their hold on the mass of the American people. A more zealous and liberal support has nowhere been accorded to them.

Facts like these lie, however, on the surface, and similar comparisons might be multiplied to any length. It will form a more instructive task to trace the less obvious phenomena of our complex religious life. We have seen that a century ago the speculative faith of the various religious bodies then existing in America was singularly homogeneous. The church organizations that gave tone to American society heartily agreed in accepting the most precise dogmatic system to which Protestantism had given birth. Perhaps no feature of our religious progress is more striking than the wide-spread reaction that has been witnessed, not so much against any particular tenet of the old theology as against the whole dogmatic apprehension of Christianity. How far this reaction has been helped by any change of political sentiment is a curious question, but one not easily answered. Mr. Lecky expresses the opinion that, "if in the sphere of religion the rationalistic doctrine of personal merit and demerit should ever completely supersede the theological doctrine of hereditary merit and demerit, the change will mainly be effected by the triumph of democratic principles in the sphere of politics"; and he might have drawn an illustration of his theory from the fact that the great religious revolt in this country from the exclusiveness of Calvinism was coincident with the great democratic revolt from the conservative politics of the founders of the Republic. If a connection could be established between the two, it would be by no means the first instance of two movements essentially distinct, yet due, in some measure, to the same general causes.

This religious reaction assumed various forms, and was attended with very different results. Its most direct and obvious effect was seen in the rise of new religious sects, but its influence was destined to be powerfully felt in modifying some already existing. One of its earliest fruits was the formation, near the close of the last century, of the "United Brethren in Christ," made up of seceders from the German Reformed and Lutheran bodies, and now numbering nearly fifteen hundred churches. The numerous sect of "Christians," which sprang up simultaneously in three different localities, near the beginning of the present century, and now numbers more than thirty-five hundred churches, was an illustration of the same movement. So was the remarkable "Declaration" of Alexander Campbell in 1807. But by far the most important phase of this reaction is shown in the enormous growth of Methodism. It would argue a most superficial acquaintance with this great movement to define it as essentially a protest; but it is not the less true that in the religious history of this country Methodism represents a profound popular reaction. In this light the rise of this great and influential body must be viewed as the most signal religious fact which the past century presents. When their first conference met at Baltimore in 1784 they collected but sixty preachers, and it was reckoned that in the whole country they could muster but twenty more. Dr. Stiles did them no injustice when he spoke of them in his Election Sermon as "very inconsiderable." They were not only few in number, but poor and unknown; they worshipped in barns, in back streets, and beneath the canopy of heaven. By the census of 1870 they were credited with more than twentyfive thousand parish organizations, and a church property of seventy millions. Their own statistics for the past year give more than twenty-six thousand preachers, and a church property of more than eighty millions. The churches have increased at the rate of two for each secular day throughout the year. They are now by far the most numerous religious organization in the land, and with a zeal and confidence fully proportioned to their strength. A phenomenon so striking cannot be explained but from the operation of some powerful cause. The growth of Methodism may be attributed in part to its wonderful

organization; yet it would seem that in this country the extremely autocratic character of that organization, while securing it extraordinary efficiency, could not have gained it popular favor. The vital power of Methodism must be sought, not in its form, but in its spirit. It is impossible to account for its rapid growth, save on the hypothesis that it met a great popular want. And it is equally impossible not to recognize the fact that this adaptation lay in the sharp contrast which it presented to the prevailing faith. The immense popular influence of Methodism lay in its bold appeal from "the theology of the intellect" to "the theology of the feelings." Calvinism, throughout all its camps, "lay intrenched in the outworks of the understanding"; but to souls sated with theological formulas, Methodism, with its direct intuitions of divine truth, came like springs of water in a dry and thirsty land. Wesley rejected all creeds but the simple symbol of the Apostles; and if his American disciples departed from his example in adopting articles of faith, they conformed to his spirit in making these articles "a simple compendium of the Universal Church, excluding even the peculiar features of the Wesleyan theology." They insisted, always and everywhere, that religious faith is not a logical conviction. Making their appeal at once to man's spiritual nature, laying no stress on nice theological distinctions, they naturally held knowledge of Greek and Latin in light esteem as a qualification for saving souls. Not one of the men who founded Methodism in America, with the single exception of Coke, had received a college education. Asbury, whose influence was incomparably greater than that of Coke, had never enjoyed this advantage. The great feature of early Methodism was its faith in immediate inspiration. Its leaders lived, like Loyola, in a world of ecstatic visions. Not only were they inwardly called of God, but sometimes, like Garrettson, they heard the audible voice of the Spirit. The religious Genius of New England had recognized in love the benign sum of all morality; but the doctrine which his followers had obscured with the metaphysics of the will, became with the Methodist a burning impulse. The Quaker had exalted the Inner Light, but what with the disciple of Fox had sunk into an inoffensive quietism, with the disciple of Wesley

became the impulse to an unexampled effort. It was estimated that Asbury, during the forty-five years of his untiring ministry, rode a distance that would have taken him twelve times round the earth. When we read the story which one of the early missionaries of Methodism tells of himself, but a story which hundreds, doubtless, might have repeated, "I traversed the mountains and valleys, frequently on foot, with my knapsack on my back, guided by Indian paths in the wilderness where it was not expedient to take a horse; and I had often to wade through morasses half-leg deep in mud and water; frequently satisfying my hunger with a piece of bread and pork from my knapsack, quenching my thirst from a brook, and resting my weary limbs on the leaves of the trees," who does not seem to hear in these words the ring of the verses, "in journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils in the wilderness, in weariness and painfulness, in hunger and thirst"; and who can doubt that the causes which gave Methodism its early success were the same that first carried the gospel to Damascus, to Antioch, to Corinth, and to Cæsar's palace? As Methodism has exchanged weakness for strength, and poverty for wealth, its outward aspect has greatly altered; the plain meeting-house has become the highly decorated church; the unlettered preacher has learned to emulate the culture which he once held so cheap; colleges and theological schools have been generously endowed, and a powerful periodical press discusses with dignity and erudition doctrines which once struggled for utterance from burning tongues; yet neither learning nor culture were the weapons with which Methodism achieved its early triumphs, and which caused it, in the striking words carved on Philip Embury's tomb, "to beautify the earth with salvation."

At first glance it may seem that the growth of the Baptist denomination, which now ranks as second in the land in point of numbers, contradicts what has been advanced, since the Baptists, in the usual acceptation of that name, are a Calvinistic body. But while it is true that this body, as a whole, accept the modified Calvinism of Andrew Fuller, yet it is not the less true that their distinctive tenet involves a logical denial of that "doctrine of hereditary merit and demerit"