untability. The burden of getting out of the church should be put
on the child instead of the usual responsibility of deciding to come
into it.

It is customary for leaders of the church to assume credit for
practically all the good things going on in the direction of human
improvement by assuming that, though the church does not have a large
membership, comparatively speaking, its influence has inspired the
good work being done in social progress. It is well to face frankly
the fact that, whatever may have been the situation in the past, at
the present it is questionable whether the church has been the source
of even the larger portion of this inspiration. The public schools,
including the higher institutions of learning, have been socializing
the future leaders in social progress so that their inspiration has
been drawn from a concrete knowledge of social problems and from the
belief that humanity can, by proper effort, control conditions of
living. Then pragmatic results have furthered this belief until
inspiration has come from the achievement of results themselves rather
than from any recognition of Christian influence in social life. The
Christian religion is doubtless responsible for those things most
worth while in modern life, but other sources of inspiration have
developed for which Christianity does not get the credit.

The conclusion of the whole matter is that in the past two or three
generations two marked divisions have grown up, the one a section or
wing inside the church which has placed sole emphasis upon individual
regeneration as the method of social progress; the other largely
outside the church, with emphasis upon social reform as the method of
advance. What is needed is a widening of the field so that the methods
of social improvement proved to be of value by social workers will be
adopted as valid methods of bringing about the kingdom of God. On the
other hand, social workers must give more attention to the
regeneration of the individual. When each of these groups recognizes
the value of the program of the other, then it will be difficult to
distinguish longer between churchmen and social workers. The two
groups will, in fact, join hands, and by unifying and coordinating
efforts will work more effectively in attaining a common aim. The
basis, then, for the program for the church which will touch all
phases of human interest in a vital way is that every human interest
has its effect on the welfa