TEACHING OF RELIGION AND MORALITY 285 



any and every change appears ominous. " If you take away 

 Jonah from the whale's belly, and Deuteronomy from the books 

 of Moses, what assurance have we that you will not, as the next 

 move, wipe out the moral law, or rob hell of its power to terrify men 

 into being good "? 



It would seem that the religious sanctions of morality, to be effec- 

 tive, must be adjusted to the individual's stage of development. 

 But not at the sacrifice of sincerity. It has sometimes been 

 thought necessary, in the supposed interests of adjustment, to 

 teach what is not believed as if it were believed to children who, if 

 the truth were known, are suspicious of the insincerity. It is not 

 enough to plead in extenuation the " culture epochs theory," for 

 that theory means that what is truth for the adult grows out of 

 what is truth for the child; it does not mean that the child must be 

 taught error as a preparation for truth. 



Finally, in view of the very human tendency to express religion in 

 language rather than in life, the unity of religion with morality must 

 take the form of practicality : that which is believed in religion must 

 l>e translatable into righteousness of life. It is difficult for most 

 persons in these days to understand how many articles of belief for 

 which men once fought and died, and to which some still hold, could 

 ever have had, or can still have, power for righteousness; or how 

 a faith that wholly centres on the world to come can be sufficient 

 for the daily needs of this present world. It is a favorable sign for 

 morality when men look to religion for help for this present moment 

 and the next, thus identifying the field of religion with the field 

 of morality. 



Assuming, now, that the unity of religion with life has been, in 

 a given case, established, what in general is the service religion may 

 be expected to give to morality ? 



Religion and morality, as we have seen, occupy common ground. 

 They both deal with conduct and character. Both build on the 

 same facts. Both apply to the same actions. Each covers nothing 

 less than the whole of life. They differ in their mode of conceiving 

 life. Morality, as Professor George Herbert Palmer shows, faces to- 

 ward the finite; religion toward the infinite. They are " inextricably 

 involved," because every object, action, and relation has both its 

 finite and its infinite aspect. It follows that while morality serves 

 religion by giving actions their concrete and finite application, and 

 translating love of God into terms of service to this brother, here 

 and now, religion serves morality by helping us to see the finite in the 

 light of the infinite, to see the infinite in the finite, to raise the petty 

 task to the level of divine cooperation, and to exalt the circumscribed 

 person to the level of a co-worker with God. In short, to endow men 

 with the firmness and the courage that inevitably comes with the 



