mon people will any old-wife's
fable do?

A more serious fault may be found with the Church of Progress. "We are
not animated by any spirit of antagonism," they say; "and as we propose
to occupy a new field of utility, we see no reason why our assemblies
should be regarded with hostility by other bodies." "Our religion is
positive and constructive, not negative and aggressive." "Our Church is
founded upon the recognition of the primary importance of human welfare;
and its purpose will be to develop the power of philanthropy by education
in the truths of science and philosophy, and by the elevating influence
of the highest and purest art." What Protestant Church cannot say the
same? As to art, whence does the Church of Progress get its music, which
perhaps is its chief attraction, but from the Churches which it tells us
are losing their hold upon the minds of the people? It rears
philanthropy: what was Peabody? It talks of philosophy: what were such
philosophers as Sir David Brewster or Professor Faraday? Equally
delusive is its denial of antagonism. It is founded for those "whose
religious ideas find no suitable exponent in any of the existing
Churches." The existing Churches more or less appeal to the Bible, and
to Christ as Master, and place before the mind as consolation, or
warning, or allurement, the splendours and the terrors of a world to
come. In the new Church all this is set on one side. Science, not
dogma, is to be the teacher, and they sing--

"Reason and love! thy kingdom come,
Oh, Church of endless ages rise!
Till fairer shines our mortal home
Than heavens we sought beyond the skies."

Is it true to say that between this new light and the old there is no
antagonism? Is it honest to say, as they do in the address already
referred to, "we ask no one to adopt or deny any of the creeds of the
Churches. We shall endeavour to promulgate truth, and truth is always
Divine"? Is it not clear that no one can join the Church of Progress
unless he has ceased to believe in the creeds of the Churches? that it is
impossible to believe in Christ and Baxter Langley as well? When Pilate
said unto the Jews, "Whom will ye that I release unto you, Barabbas, or
Jesus which is called Christ?" none but an idiot would have said there
was no antagonism between the two. Again, it may be asked, by what right
do these "earnest, conscientious men and women" in Langham Place call
themselves a Ch