TH SOME AMERICAN PROTESTANT ESTIMATES OF HE greatest pope in a thousand years has passed away and the Protestant world willingly expresses this judgment of him, declares the Methodist Episcopal Western Christian Advocate (Cincinnati). "There are those who would think this an extravagant statement," continues this official church paper of which Dr. Levi Gilbert is the editor, "and from a Catholic point of view it may be true. But those outside the fold of Rome and seeking their way to heaven through faith in the merit of the death of Jesus Christ, know this to be true. Protestantism will pronounce him a great pope." This characterization of the late Pope Pius X. further reads:. "He brought into the office of Bishop of Rome a new type of manhood. He was a scholar and thoroughly acquainted with all the problems of religion, Church, and State. He was not an ecclesiastic in the narrow sense. He was democratic, hospitable, and remarkably tolerant. As a believer in Christ and the Scripture he was conservative and orthodox, as a reading of his encyclical on 'Modernism' will prove. In matters pertaining to ecclesiasticism he was not radical, but tolerant and diplomatic. In this regard he was more responsive to the spirit of the modern mind than he gave himself credit. He seemed to feel that his kingdom was not of this world, and that God had called him to preside over things spiritual. In this regard it may be said that he was one of the most catholic of popes. He was eminently spiritual and felt a deep obligation to that part of Christendom which refused to recognize his authority. For this reason less evil was spoken of him than of any man who has ever occupied his position." Another official Methodist paper, the New York Christian Advocate, expresses the opinion that "Pius X. will go down in history as one of the most beloved of Popes, and as a man whose devotion to Christian principles entitled him to the admiration of even those who could not venerate him either as the successor of Peter or as Christ's supreme representative on the earth." This tribute is also qualified by saying: "It must always be remembered, in attempting to make an accurate estiinate of the work of any Pope in modern times, that reckoning must be made of the fact that, however autocratic the authority of the papacy may seem to be, the Vatican political organization almost wholly determines what shall be the open and avowed policy of the Pope in all those questions which touch the government of the Church and its connections with secular life." The Congregationalist, of Boston, recalls that Giuseppe Sarto came to the papal throne as a compromise: "so keen was the competition and so intense the feeling aroused by the veto on the part of Austria of one candidate's nomination that no election seemed possible except on grounds of personal character." The Presbyterian Continent, of Chicago, points out that the sway of Pope Pius will be chiefly remembered for his uncompromising attitude toward France at the time the church was disestablished there, and for his passionate endeavor to stamp out modernism among the Catholic priesthood. Comment in the American Protestant papers generally deals with phases of these policies. The Continent says: "In the former matter Pius (or Cardinal Merry del Val, his secretary of state) completely blocked compromises with the French state which the French bishops would have been glad to make and which would have left the church in much more favorable position in France than it has occupied since its disestablishment. In the crusade on modernism Pius drew to him a certain measure of Protestant sympathy, since some of the doctrines which he denounced so vigorously tended far toward agnosticism. But his method of repression partook so thoroughly of the spirit of the inquisition that no lover of religious and intellectual liberty could long applaud his course. Giuseppe Sarto, formerly Cardinal from Venice, who came to the papal throne through Austria's veto on Cardinal Rampolla, August 4, 1903, is said to have refused his benediction upon the House of Hapsburg and Austrian arms against Servia, and lamented on his deathbed: "In ancient times the Pope by a word might have stayed the slaughter, but now he is impotent." He died August 20, 1914. WHERE ORTHODOXY GIVES WAY "And he failed as the inquisition failed. Late utterances of the pope betrayed that even he was conscious of the utter ineffectiveness of the oath which he administered to all Catholic priests, pledging them to subject all their powers of individual reason absolutely to papal dictation. Despite that ironclad pledge, liberal thinking is unquestionably gaining ground daily among the Roman priesthood in both Europe and America, and most of all in Italy itself. In this respect the will of Pius X. was frustrated and the world may give profound thanks that it was." The Baptist Advance, Chicago, also referring to his relentless battle against modernism, "a battle which has not by any means reached an issue yet," asserts that "in France and the United States, and especially in Italy, the movement for liberalizing and democratizing the church goes on with sure 265 progress like the tide." The Advance Patriarch of the West, should have died opines: "He was not a great Pope but he was a good man, carrying into his high office the habits and mental vision of the humble station wherein he was born. He was a democratic soul. The poor and humble were ever near his heart. No Pope was more accessible than he. But whatever strength, whatever positiveness, inhered in his policies is believed to have reflected the cooperative intelligence of the college of cardinals, whose powers hedge about and practically control the actions of the Pope unless he be a man of positive constructive genius." The Protestant Episcopal Living Church, of Milwaukee, takes this occasion to say: broken-hearted at the outbreak of a war which he would willingly have given his life to avert, is one of the earlier of the long succession of pathetic incidents which we must expect if the war be at all prolonged. Neither universal temporal jurisdiction over emperors nor universal spiritual jurisdiction over souls, availed to enable him to restrain that devout son of the Church, the Austrian emperor, from precipitating the war. Thus, even among Roman Catholics, does fact stand out clearly as greater than theory. If ever the extreme Roman claims could be justified in practice it would be by exercising the prerogative of interdict over the Austrian empire to-day. But the Pope ate out his heart in grief and died, rather than apply this extreme treatment which Roman theory placed in his hands for such occasions. Roman theory clashed against the Twentieth Century and fell to "That Pius X., Bishop of Rome and pieces." C WHAT THE CHURCH MUST YIELD TO AN traditional orthodoxy orthodoxy hold its own? That it cannot has been the insistence of the representatives of progressive theological and religious thought all along, but this has been met with a vigorous denial on the part of the protagonists of the old faith. Now the latter are evidently yielding and are trying to determine just how much must be yielded up by the church to modern thought. The most significant utterance from the conservative side comes from the pen of Pastor Primarius Hunziker, of Hamburg, who until recently was a shining light of the theological faculty of the University of Erlangen, easily the strongest conservative body of savants in Germany. In his work entitled "Germany in the Reign of Emperor William II." ("Deutschland unter Kaiser Wilhelm II."), he devotes a long chapter to this problem. His conclusions are substantially these: The results of the historical consideration of the Bible and its religious teachings, especially in regard to the sources and basis of Christianity, demand that the following old views of the church must be discarded if the church's thinking and the scientific thought of the age are not to become absolutely irreconcilable: 1. The doctrine of the verbal inspiration of the Scriptures is absolutely and forever gone. It is only a burden to theology to try to maintain it, nor is it necessary to do so. 2. The exclusively supernaturalistic conception of the Biblical history, according to which it is the record only of MODERN THOUGHT a divine plan and its providential development, has become entirely untenable. 3. The traditional dogmas of the old church are by no means the product of purely Biblical thought; they contain much that is of human origin, and the terms "Biblical teachings" and "Church teachings" are by no means identical. 4. The religious fundamental principles of the Reformation, the formal, that the Scriptures are the sole and absolute sources of faith and life; and the material, that man is justified by faith alone, have never been consistently carried out either in the history of the Protestant churches nor in the Confessions, nor in the great dogmaticians of the 17th century, the defenders of orthodoxy. Hunziker further elaborates some of the practical consequences of these compulsory retrogressions of the church. He says: How far can the church yield in these matters and still preserve its historical identity? Hunziker declares that two extremes must be avoided; one is the recognition of any and all radical thought, such as the Monism of Haeckel, and the other is the rejection of all that is new and novel in religious thought. He advocates "the golden middle way," but does not say where this is to be found. A practical illustration of what this life and death problem of Protestantism may mean is seen in the case of Professor Seeberg, of the University of Berlin, easily the most learned representative of conservative theology in Germany. In several addresses delivered recently in Finland on the "Christ Problem," he practically denied the divinity of Christ, more in substance than in form, and all Germany resounded with the clash of arms on the question whether Seeberg and. men like him can still be regarded as "churchly," or must be declared to be "modern." Seeberg has vigorously replied in the Reformation of Berlin. The advanced religious press universally expressed the conviction that in view of Seeberg's position the terms "orthodox" and "liberal" mark a distinction without a difference, and that' while the Protestant churches are still nominally and in their government "orthodox," are "The conviction that the church must give up these doctrines has long since been felt by the thinkers and is now fast filtering into the minds and hearts of the laity. As a result not a few of those who tion have nevertheless turned from the want to abide by the teachings of tradiold methods of orthodoxy and apologetics and are trying to reconcile as much of these as possible with modern psychological and religious thought. Others are disgusted that official churchdom still claims to abide by doctrines which its own untenable. advocates must know trinal disintegration is now going on withThere is no doubt that a process of docin the church's thinking. Even the fundamental principles of the plan of salvation, such as the divinity of Christ, are becoming the object of general skepticism." practically they are not So. The Chronik of Tübingen says, "the difference between 'positive' and 'liberal' in church matters is virtually a dead issue in the church of to-day." 266 LITERATURE AND ART Literature and the War. 'HAT will be the effect of the war on literature? That question is engaging the chroniclers of letters. If, as a writer in The Nation remarks, laws are silent during the clash of arms, how still must letters be! When the face of the earth is undergoing change, when the nations' armies confront one another along a line estimated at any length up to three hundred miles, when there is no seaport so lowly, no summer resort so humble, that it cannot indulge in the luxury of hearing "heavy firing" at least once a day, when the long-drawn and terrible cry of "Wextra" comes bellowing down the street at intervals of half an hourwhen all these things are happening, who, he asks, cares to read books? However much one would like to steep oneself in literature, calm is beyond human power. "What books can you read or discuss, without having your mind brought back to the one great and terrible subject? Shakespeare? His pages are full of alarums and excursions-'Once more unto the breach, dear friends!' is recalled to literature are wrought. Humiliation, bereavement, destitution, the utter downfall of a nation's hopes, form the source of a new awakening, the birth-pangs of a new school of fiction that will live because it is vitalized with pity and humanity and noble courage. Let us take one or two examples, to see how this principle has worked out in the past; and first of all, in the Franco-Prussian War. "What effect did that war, bitter and remorseless, and ending with its Shylock bargain of territory and tribute, have upon German literature? Mr. William break of hostilities had been received in this country. There has been some American verse, and many voices have been raised in England. Kipling waited longer than the other, but at last the inevitable poem came. The Poet Laureate, as the writer in The Nation goes on to say, has written a poem, and Mr. Stephen Phillips has written a much better one about the defence of Liège. Alfred Noyes has abandoned his pacific attitude and, in verse, commended England's war. Watson upbraids the Kaiser in a sonnet, and Henry Newbolt has published an invocation to England in the London Times regarded by some as one of the finest occasional poems of the war. The prose writers are only beginning to mobilize. Wells assails the Kaiser in vigorous prose and proclaims the downfall of "Krupp worship, flag-wagging and all the sham efficiency which centers at Berlin." Bernard Shaw disapproves of the war and hastens to strip away any illusion of patriotism or nobility from England's or any other country's share in the conflict. In this country a war diary from the pen of Professor Hugo Münsterberg, to be your memory, and you pause to reflect published by Appleton and Company, that the besiegers and besieged of Harfleur are now fighting side by side. Thackeray? You must not open 'Vanity Fair,' or you will hear the guns of Waterloo, as Waterloo itself is hearing them again. As for Kipling The earth is full of anger, Go up against our path! "If you shrink back to the classics, even there you are not safe. For, as Don Marquis has pointed out, you cannot read a page of Caesar's Commentaries without being reminded that: 'Horum omnium fortissime sunt Belgae . . . proximique sunt Germanis, qui trans Rhenum incolunt, quibuscum continenter bellum gerunt.' T Writers Flock to Arms. HE poets, as Heine once said, form the heroic rear-guard of great armies. Poetry has been the only literature so far produced by the war. In Germany, Gustav Bloem is said to have written a poem as stir is expected with interest. Behind the veil of the censorship, to quote again from our weekly contemporary, how many books are making! "Now we get confused reports of battles that turn out to be skirmishes, and rumors of battles that may be very real indeed. It will be months before we can know. Nations that hold dominion over palm and pine cannot go to war without sending the echoes of their thunder to the uttermost parts of the earth." T The Aftermath of War in Fiction. HE aftermath of the war in fiction will undoubtedly be immense. Discussions of this phase must necessarily be largely conjectural, but if we may judge the future in the light of literary history, there is one thing, remarks The Bookman, which may be affirmed with a fair show of confidence: directly the stimulus of the war, the that the country which shows most country which undergoes a rebirth of its finer creative instincts is not the No one who even pretends to keep track of Continental letters will claim that any great masterpiece of creative writing, any play or novel of world-wide interest was begotten directly or indirectly by the fortunes of this war." And so it was with France. In the closing years of the sixties there was a dearth of novelists of the first rank. Balzac and Stendhal were gone, Mérimée was soon to follow: Gautier, Cherbuliez, George Sand, to mention a few big names at random, had already given the world their message. "Of the younger writers, just a few, Daudet, and Zola, had put forth their first utterances, but their value was still problematic. And then, all of a sudden, came the cataclysm of Sedan, the siege, the Commune, the loss of Alsace and Lorraine. And straightway there followed a sort of literary renaissance, the sudden springing up of a small host of their first inspiration from the smoke young writers, many of whom drew of battle, and who, taken together, did nineteenth century an illustrious period much to make the closing years of the in French letters." TH French Letters After 1871. HE foremost literary fruit born. out of defeat for France was Zola's "Débâcle." Daudet, too, did not become fully conscious of his vocation until after 1870, perhaps, as the trials of the siege of Paris and the one of his critics conjectures, "through humiliation of his country, which deepened his nature without souring it. "It would be easy to multiply the list of novels and short stories based more or less directly upon the Franco-German War, whether by younger writers or by ring to the Teuton imagination as "The proud conqueror, but the vanquished, veterans who saw their chance and Watch on the Rhine." His poem, as well as the work of his fellows in the German tongue, has not yet reached this country. In fact, up to the end of August hardly any German newspapers or magazines published since the out the one which has suffered the pangs of siege and invasion. "The arrogance of conquest, the pride of prosperity and power are not the substances from which the finer things in "Une Idylle pendant le Siège" by François Coppée, of Edmond About's "Roman d'un Brave Homme," and the novels of Erckmann - Chatrian. The real interest of the question before us,. seized it. One thinks for instance of THE EFFECT OF WAR ON LETTERS T "Pierre Loti is not what might be Wars Fought Out in called a war artist; he is too fond of the Imagination. painting exotic scenes and hours of dalHE war that now faces Europe liance. Yet it must not be forgotten that and Asia has been fought out for three years before the outbreak of before in fiction, at least in some hostilities he had already begun his ca- of its phases. In 1871 Sir George right to assume that his country's heroic wood's the first account of an imaginary reer in the French navy, and we have a Tomkyns Chesney published in Blackstruggle counted for something in his invasion of England by the Germans, own intellectual development. And what shall we say of the score or more of "The Battle of Dorking." Its author younger novelists, from Bourget and Rod wrote as a veteran of 1925, telling his to Barrès and Prévost, who as young grandchildren of the humiliation of his lads must have caught the echoes of the country in 1875, when Germany, after conflict and repined, some of them, that conquering the French, captured Lonthey were not mature enough to do their don and overturned the British Emshare? It would be idle to pretend that pire. In spite of the interest aroused one and all of these talents were the direct product of France's downfall; yet by Chesney's dismal prophecy few acobviously her literature for the past four counts of this nature seem to have decades is the richer for it." been published in English for the next twenty years, but since then, Mr. Edmund Lester Pearson assures us in the New York Evening Post, a small library of them have appeared. A The Effect of the Civil War N analogous result on a smaller scale is shown by our own Civil War. There is a paucity of great names among Northern writers between the years of 1860 and 1880. Bret Harte is an isolated exception. Neither Howells nor Henry James could be accused of showing any very bellicose tendencies in their themes. But when we come to the South, the writer in The Bookman declares, the contrast is striking. "Mr. H. G. Wells has pictured various frightful cataclysms, in which some draper's assistant or Cockney greengrocer is displayed in the center of earthshaking events. The world's peace has been menaced from Mars, and Europe has been overwhelmed by the Yellow Peril. Our Pacific Coast has fallen into the grip of little men from across the sea, and our navy has more than once been saved from destruction by some obscure inventor. Within a year, Mr. H. H. Munro, in 'When William Came,' established the Germans once more in London, and turned upwards the moustaches of all England. "None of the followers of the veteran of Dorking, however, were more painstaking than Mr. William Le Queux. "The Invasion of 1910, published in 1906, is a long and exceedingly interesting book. 267 Rear Admiral Colomb, Col. J. F. Maurice, R.A., Captain F. N. Maude, Archibald Forbes, Charles Lowe, David Christie Murray, and F. Scudamore, The authors did not foresee some of the developments of international politics, notably the Triple Entente, but many of the incidents, especially in the opening chapters, come astonishingly close to the events of the sumThe war spark is emitted in the powder magazine of the Balkans. It should be remembered that since 1893. the storm-center has shifted twice, once mer. titious war has for its immediate cause to the far East and once to Morocco. the attempted assassination of a prince, Ferdinand of Bulgaria. His would-be assassins are urged on by "Russian intrigue," whereupon some "editorial Another coincidence is that the fic-. comments" are made in an unnamed paper. "It is impossible to overrate the grave significance of the attempted assassination at Samakoff, which in the light of our correspondent's telegrams would seem to. be the prelude to very serious complica-. tions in the East. . . The dramatic incident may prove to have endangered the peace of Europe. We have long familiarized ourselves with the thought that the Great War of which the world has been: in constant dread for some years back, and which is to readjust the balance of the Continent, is much more likely to break out in the region of the Danube. than on the banks of the Rhine, and the incident at Samakoff may well precipi-. tate the catastrophe." Servia and Bulgaria are soon at war. Here the facts refuse to follow fiction. "Austria invades Servia, and occupies Belgrade. There is an illustration'Here at Last!'-the Austrian officers comfortably drinking beer and toasting one another at the outdoor cafés of the Servian capital. The facts of 1914, in this case, seem submissive to the fiction of 1893. "In the imaginary war Russia and Germany are soon fighting, and France. loses little time in declaring hostilities against her old enemy. England fights. France by sea, and Russia by land. There is a general mêlée, by which, in the end, nobody is much benefited-a prophecy rational enough." "Sidney Lanier served with credit throughout the strife, and his first appearance in print, after the close of the war, was not in the form of a poem, but a novel, 'Tiger Lilies,' embodying his experiences in service. George W. Cable joined the Fourth Mississippi Cavalry, and brought back from the service that strong unwavering vein of loyalty to the old South that found its expression in 'Old Creole Days' and 'The Grandissimes.' George Cary Eggleston saw service in the First Regiment of Virginia Cavalry, was in the first battle of Manassas and fought until the surrender at Appomattox Court House-and we must remember that it was he who gave us 'A Rebel's Recollections,' 'A Daughter of the South,' and 'A Carolina Cavalier.' James Lane Allen was only twelve years old when the storm cloud burst, but, says one of his critics, 'he was old enough to realize all its horrors and see the suffering that war entailed.' Maurice Thompson saw tive service, as did a goodly list of minor writers, a catalog of whose names would overcrowd our space and add nothing to the strength of the argument. We do not remember for the moment whether Thomas Nelson Page, Joel Chandler Harris and F. Hopkinson Smith saw active service or not; but they belong to that same generation of published in 1893. Its authors were the sources of his information: "Kings. ac The author claims to have traveled ten T The Most Remarkable HE most remarkable of these fore- Illyria Enters the WE KNOW that Montenegro. has declared war on Germany. We know that Switzerland, Denmark, Holland, and a host of little countries are completing their mobilization in self-defense. But what of Graustark, Illyria and Grünewald, the kingdoms of the literary imagination? Mr. Francis Edwards, in a de-. licious fancy, tells us of the war footing of all these states. He carefully reveals to his readers in The Bookman SEA CORINTHIA BALKAN STATES CAR NAVIA KINGDOMS OF FICTION IN ARMS This map, roughly drawn for the Bookman, gives a local habitation to the soldiers and statesmen who people the novels of Daudet, George Barr McCutcheon and Anthony Hope. in Exile," by Alphonse Daudet; "Prince Otto," by Robert Louis Stevenson; Beverly of Graustark" and "The Prince of Graustark," by George Barr McCutcheon, and "The Prisoner of Zenda" and "Rupert of Hentzau," by Anthony Hope. He even appends a map of these states of fiction, all of which are situated between Russia, Austria-Hungary and the Balkan States. Illyria, he tells us, is one of the countries which has a seaport, Gravosa, at the head of an obscure bay, hardly more than an inlet, and so shut in by cliffs that one might easily travel up and down the coast a hundred times and not discover it. He recapitulates the history of the little kingdom, and reminds us that its historian, the late M. Alphonse Daudet, was an obvious partisan of its Queen Frederica as against its ruler King Christian. The regular army of Illyria, we are told, numbers only thirty thousand men, but every Illyrian is a natural-born fighter and it would be easy to call out the whole male population if Austria should violate its neutrality. The northern and eastern boundaries of Illyria touch upon Grünewald, Gerolstein and Graustark. O The Mobilization of Grünewald and Graustark. UR chief source of information concerning Grünewald, Mr. Edward goes on to say, is a biography of "Prince Otto," by Robert Louis Stevenson, a Scotsman, who has made so many blunders that his book has little historical value. For example, he speaks of Grünewald as now absorbed, along with Gerolstein, in the German Empire. "I defy any one," Mr. Edward asserts, "to find in German history the record of such a transaction." "As a matter of fact, Grünewald has absorbed Gerolstein, tho it keeps the name and boundaries of the Grand Duchy which had the honor of producing General Boum. The present Grand Duchess the hearts of his people. The country remains as Stevenson describes it-in part a shaggy and trackless region, in part a highly cultivated and fertile plain." Graustark, our chronicler, Mr. EdBut for the strategic position of wards, goes on to say, Grünewald would join with Axphain and Corinthia in crushing Illyria and Ruritania in turn. The history of Graustark, down to the end of the nineteenth cen His tury, has been written by an American, Mr. George Barr McCutcheon. book reads like romance, as histories sometimes do. Careful observation lead the writer to believe that Ruritania, whose late King was seized and imprisoned in the Castle of Zenda by his treacherous half-brother, is the strongest state of the entire group. "The Ruritanians have some grave defects; but, like the pirates in the opera, 'with all their faults, they love their Queen.' They could in all probability preserve Ruritania from invasion; even Austria or Russia would find it a hard morsel to swallow; and if the nation should ever be drawn into war with Axphain, the cession of Dawsbergen might be the price of peace. Whatever happens-and in the present disturbed state of Europe prophecy would be especially dangerous-Ruritania is bound to play a leading and not ignoble part." T Galsworthy's Anti-War Play. In HERE is an uncanny note of timeliness in Mr. Galsworthy's four-act play, "The Mob," just published by Scribner's. The hero, Stephen More, a member of Parliament, is utterly opposed to war. outline the play is simple to the extent of baldness, but the author's characterization and dialog, as Llewellyn Jones remarks in the Chicago Evening Post, grip as no mere piling of incident and suspense could do. "England proposes to wipe out of national existence a 'hill tribe' which she cannot civilize through missionary or mercantile effort. More's father-in-law and his brother-in-law are soldiers and, of course, think him a quixoticallyminded fool. The Dean of Stour-whom we feared when we began to read the play was going to turn out a life-size portrait of Dean Inge, known throughout England as 'The Gloomy Dean'-also assures More that he is quite impracticable. More is about to voice his sentiments in the House of Commons, and his two soldier relatives by marriage urge Katharine, his wife, to prevent his 'ruining his career' by such an act. It is only after a spiritual struggle with his love for Katharine that More brings himself up to scratch, and by bad luck he makes his speech against the war after it has actually started. "First his constituents protest and he resigns his seat; then his friends cut him, and family reprobation is severe and continuous. Having taken his stand, and cheered by the support of a few 'antipatriot stop-the-war ones,' he starts a campaign of public speaking against the war. He is stoned for his pains. Then his brother-in-law is killed at the front, and his wife leaves him, and at last More is killed by a mob. “But there is an epilog to the play. An aftermath, Mr. Galsworthy calls it, and he indicates that between Act IV and this aftermath there is 'an indefinite period.' In the aftermath the curtain rises on a statue of More, with his name inscribed beneath it, followed by the words, 'Faithful to His Ideal.'" We wonder if Galsworthy has foretold here the fate of those members of the English Cabinet who resigned |