hich present themselves. Religion is thus
viewed as a movement which takes place not by the side of life, but
within life itself. A power of immediacy grows within the soul; it is
now able to sift and winnow, to select and to reject; it is able to
penetrate into the difference between first and second things, and to
relegate all minor things to their lower sphere.[67]

It is of no avail to ignore this difference; and neither is it of any
avail to ignore the difference between the _old_ and the _new_
existence-forms of Christianity. The old and the new conceptions cannot
possibly flow together. One mode has to take a primary place, and the
other a secondary place. The old intellectual presentation of
Christianity has, in many ways, become inadequate. But [p.196] still it
cannot be thrown overboard in any light-hearted manner, if for no other
reason than that it has grown along with the growth of the Spiritual
Substance itself. Some kind of shock, and even loss, may be temporarily
experienced in parting with it; but this is a process that has to be
passed through; and once it is passed through, the new clothing of
Christianity cannot but help man to see a richer meaning in the Eternal.
It may not fit quite so compactly for a time; it may not merge easily
with the Spiritual Substance. We are far less comfortable in a new suit
of clothes than in an old one; but comfort is not the only criterion in
regard to the things of the body or of the soul. There may be a need for
a change, and our needs are of more significance than our comforts. The
change from old to new can be accomplished when the difference of
Substance and Form is clearly perceived, and when the Substance is
preserved in the midst of the change. This is one of the greatest tasks
set to the Christian Church to-day, and no one is competent to undertake
it if he has not experienced in the very depth of his own soul the
meaning of the Eternal as the essence of the Christian religion. Eucken
has grasped this truth in an unmistakable manner; and he sees nothing
but disaster for religion in any attempt to present a new clothing at
the expense of ejecting the Eternal kernel. But still he insists that in
[p.197] theology the claims of the new forms are overwhelmingly
necessary and just.

When we turn to Eucken's conception in connection with the place of the
personality of the Founder in the Christianity of the present, we are
treading on very difficult ground. This is