attitude toward these difficulties determines our attitude toward a Christian program for society. If the human race is not improvable, our whole theory as to the great ends of life falls to pieces. Indeed, if human nature is not improvable, what is the use of living? Let us give our difficulty full evaluation. Yet difficult as is the task of changing habits, and especially of purifying the waters of life at their source if they have been contaminated, the truth remains that Christianity deliberately seeks to make men over. It proposes to eliminate these unlovely things if it can, at least to subordinate them. That is what Christianity is for. It is to remake men, to give them a re-birth, to change the type of manhood and womanhood. It is a reconstruction, a re-building. It is, if you please, to "amend the constitution" in the case of those who are constitutionally sour, or critical, or jealous. If human nature were perfect, or if it were hopeless to improve, in either case there would be no need for Christianity. This idea of moral fatalism, whether it comes out in the individual who says and often takes pride in saying, "I am built so and so. I have these frailties and that is all there is to it," or whether it takes the form of pessimistic unbelief in the possibilities of human progress on the moral side, is equally repellent and equally untrue. Good and evil are still in battle arrayed, and will be for endless generations. The task of Christianity is to influence all the innate tendencies of humankind to good and to set up motives that will gradually subdue the bad. It is a terrific battle. It is Armageddon. But it is not a hopeless fight; indeed it is a sure victory for the good. An English book entitled "Recent Developments in European Thought" has a stimulating introduction in which are these words: "The trainer of youth dealing with human nature in its growth puts no limitation to its powers of goodness and activity. He deplores the want of wise methods in the past, and if he errs at all, it is in an excess of optimism in believing that with new methods we may make a new man. On this enlargement of the soul we build the future." The Means of Growth No layman has better stated the means by which the individual develops toward perfec tion than Dr. Richard Cabot in his book "What Men Live By." In briefest outline, the means are as follows: Work; play; love; worship. This formula we may fairly interpret as Work, for both self and others; Love, for others; Worship of a common Father. All of these activities must be aimed at definite things. They all involve others than one's self. They all represent an out-giving. They spell the idea of self-culture for the sake of being serviceable. They represent the interplay of conscious self-culture and conscious self-giving. To quote Bascom again, "When we cultivate all our powers and find their adequate use and reward in a pursuit of the wellbeing of men, we have attained the primary conditions of individual growth." Service, then, is the real means of personal growth. Using our powers for the well-being of men is the sure way to the goal of life. He that would save his life must lose it. He that would be first among you must be the servant of all. Motives It appears then that the motive of service is essential to growth. But how can we be sure of motive? Are we certain of our own motives? Do not most of us act from mixed motives? Surely we must be cautious of judging the motives of others. Can we test motives except by deciding whether the result is what it ought to be? We can and will decide whether the action or the word seems to be Christian in spirit. But after all the main thing is, what effect does the word or the act really have upon people? It must seem to be intended for good; but mere intention is not sufficient. The despot may be beneficent, the feudal lord may be friendly, the king may be kindly; and yet the interests of society may require that we abolish the despot, the feudal lord, and the king. We have to come back to the principle that we can go no farther than to judge men or urge motives except in terms of worth-while results. We must judge the tree by its fruits, though we may not know what is going on within the tree. Does a particular thing make for character? Is it a clear-cut obligation? Is it fair to the community as a whole? Does it have the sanctions of service, that is, does it secure the common good? I recall vividly a gathering with some Chinese leaders of the "New Thought Movement," in the inner recesses of a great Chinese restaurant in Peking. These men, all young, were mostly avowed atheists. We were discussing the program of Christian education in China. They said they welcomed the work of the missionary in education, but they thought it ought to be strictly educational and not in any way tied up with Christian propaganda. When we told them we held that the Christian teaching, the Christian spirit of service, were essential to education, they asserted that they themselves were thorough believers in social service. They felt keenly that the humanitarian aspect of civilization was its most significant aspect, and they approved an education that led men and women to service to their fellows; "but,' they said, "why call it Christianity?" Why, indeed, call it Christianity? Well, as Christians we need not be too particular about definitions. Why need we insist rigidly upon |