Elisha Mulford(1833-85)

Home , Elisha, Rachel, The Century Magazine

Elisha Mulford(1833-85) and His Influence: A "Fame Not Equal To His Deserts"? UESTS AT A commemorative dinner for Elisha Mulford held on December 1, 1900 were reminded of the fragile nature of G literary reputation by a disagreement between Mulford's friends T.T. Munger and H.E. Scudder. Sara Winlock (nee Mul- ford) wrote to her mother: Mr Munger told about his early life. . .and then about his books—he said at the end that his books did not sell now as they did and he doubted if 100 years from now they [sic] would be more than one sold—but no matter Father would never be forgotten. Mr Scudder got up then and said he was sorry to differ with Mr Munger but Father's books sold just as well now as they ever had since the first flush and would always sell even 100 years from now. . . .* In fact, Munger was right and Scudder wrong; today the name of Elisha Mulford is hardly known. Some standard histories of American thought mention him, especially as the author of The Nation (1870).2

#I am grateful to the staff of the Manuscript Room of the Sterling Library at Yale University, the Houghton Library at Harvard University, and the Library of the Episcopal Divinity School, Cambridge, Mass., for assistance and permission to publish from their holdings; to the American Council of Learned Societies for a fellowship which helped to make this and other projects possible; to the University of Canterbury for a research grant which made possible the purchase of books necessary for this and other researches, and to Professors Robert T. Handy (Union Theological Seminary) and William R. Hutchison (Harvard University) for their advice. Neither of them is responsible for any remaining errors of fact or interpretation. References have been checked as far as this is possible at some distance from many of the sources consulted.

1 Sara C. Winlock to Rachel P. Mulford, Dec. 23, 1900. Munger could not attend the dinner but his remarks were read to the guests. Unless otherwise indicated all references to MSS are to materials in the Mulford Family Collection at Yale University. 2 See, e.g., M. Curti, The Growth of American Thought (New York, 1964, 3rd ed.), 469; H.W. Schneider, A History of American Philosophy (New York, 1963, 2nd ed.), 168-75;C.E. Merriam, American Political Ideas; studies in the development of American Political Thought (New York, 1970), 373 and H. Kohn, American Nationalism; an interpretative essay (New York, 1957), 126. 26 COLIN BROWN January

Studies of the religious trends of the period commonly refer to Mulford in passing or in general terms. C.H. Hopkins, discussing the influences from which the Social Gospel derived some of its momentum, includes what he calls "the internal dynamics of progressive Protes- tantism." He sees as especially important the movement's protest against the "excessive individualism of orthodoxy" and its avowedly ethical interpretation of dogma and of Christianity generally. Among exponents of "progressive Protestantism" he includes Mulford along with Horace Bushnell, T.T. Munger, and Newman Smyth.3 F.W. Buckham refers only once to Mulford, listing him among those who should be discussed in any "complete account of the progress of American theology."4 Surprisingly, a review of Mulford's life and influence has not been attempted since obituaries were published.5 In his own day Mulford was regarded as of importance, especially by some closely associated with what has been called "Christocentric Liberalism." In addition to T.T. Munger, influential as an early popularizer of Protestant liberalism, A. V.G. Allen, a notable Episcopalian liberal was a close associate from late 1880 on when Mulford settled in Cambridge, Massachu- setts.6 Mulford's The Republic of God: An Institute of Theology was published in 1881: Munger's important essay on the "New Theology" appeared in 1883 in his book The Freedom of Faith.1 Considering the

3 The Rtse of the S octal GospeimAmertcan Protestantism 1865-1915 (New Haven, 1940), 61 4 Progresstve Religious Thought in America, a survey of the enlarging Ptlgrtm Faith (Boston, 1919), 290 None of the modern histories of the Protestant Episcopal Church (Manross, Addison, and Albright) mention Mulford 5 I have omitted consideration of Mulford's place in the development of American political theory For this see Mark E Neely, Jr , "The Organic Theory of the State in America 1838-1918, "Ph D diss , (Yale University, 1973), and his article "Romanticism, Nationalism and the New Economics Elisha Mulford and the Organic State," American Quarterly, XXIX (Fall, 1977), 403-21 I am glad to acknowledge Dr Neely's help 6 Both Munger and Allen provided assessments of Mulford's work, Munger in "The Works of Elisha Mulford", The Century Magazine, 13 (1887-8), 888-95, and Allen in a memorial sermon (MS in the library of the Episcopal Divinity School, Camb , Mass ), an extract from which appeared in the Christian Union, March 11, 1886, 8-9 In the Princeton Review, 9 (1882-3), Allen reviewed The Republic of God in the second part of an article entitled "The Theological Renaissance of the Nineteenth Century " 7 F H Foster, The Modern Movement in American Theology, sketches in the history of American Protestant Thought from the Civil War to the World War (New York, 1939), 61, selects 1877 as the beginning of the liberalising movement Foster calls Munger's The Freedom of Faith "the maturest and best exposition of the movement so far as it had then proceeded " 1984 ELISHA MULFORD (1833-85) AND HIS INFLUENCE 27 importance of Protestant liberalism and the Social Gospel in American history, a reassessment of Mulford's role in the development of American theological thought in the late nineteenth century is war- ranted.

Mulford, born in Montrose, Pa., in 1833 where his father had a general store, was raised an orthodox Congregationalist. With some intervals he spent the years 1846-52 at the Cortland Academy then under the rule of a relative, the Rev. Dr. J.B. Woolworth.8 Letters from this period speak of predictable interests: the charms as well as the religious welfare of certain young ladies, his own religious concerns; and perhaps some sort of conversion experience.9 He entered Yale in 1852, graduated B.A. in 1855, and, subsequently M.A. and LL.D. The prevailing Protestant orthodoxy seems to have begun to lose its hold over him during his time at Yale. Mulford was always inclined to be the victim of moods and surroundings but he does seem to have chafed more or less continuously under the yoke of the educational methods then in vogue at Yale. On his contemporaries he left an im- pression of literary brilliance, wide culture, distaste for his teachers' methods, and relative indifference to their demands.10 Added to this are some signs of specifically religious unease. On Nov. 4, 1852, his cousin H.H. Jessup wrote about Mulford:

8 Information supplied by the Librarian of the Phillips Free Library, Homer, N.Y. 9 H.H. Jessup toT.T. Munger, June 2, 1852, Munger Papers, Yale University; Mulford to F.B. Carpenter, April 7, 1852. The letters to Carpenter are typewritten copies only. Another clue to these early years is that the class obituary for S. B. Mulford (one of Elisha Mulford's older brothers) refers to Montrose as "a small country town, isolated and controlled at the time by an intense but illiterate Puritan dogmatism." This language may owe something to a desire to defend S.B. Mulford who seems to have reacted against Montrose and the family circle there. 10 See especially the obituary for Mulford in the report of the Yale class of 1855 for 1889; Mulford's remarks on education in his address on the 20th annual festival of Susquehanna County; his letter to Munger (July 7, 1871) on Porter's election as President of Yale: "I so thoroughly detest the cumbersome, useless, ill-constructed system wh I was subject to; its system of marks, formed after Paley's notion of the world and man, its rigid uniform course," and his paper, "The Object of a University," Atlantic Monthly, 58 (1886), 747-61. 28 COLIN BROWN January

I am glad to have favourable reports from my cousin Elisha. Encourage him to keep an "eye to the Lord Jesus," for he is beset with trying difficulties. I do not allude to any one thing in particular, but the almost ir- resistible tendency in college to spiritual decline.ir On Jan. 19, 1853, Mulford complained to F.B. Carpenter of a "dry doctrinal sermon" from Dr. Taylor, presumably Nathaniel Taylor, noted for his "New School" theology. On Nov. 21 of the same year Mulford read Tennyson's In Memoriam "chiefly to gather some hints as to certain theological doubts." The obituary in the 1889 report of the class of 1855 notes that: "with some consent, I think the class knew that he would not be what he started for, an orthodox Congregational minister." The dissolution of earlier beliefs continued after college; on March 29, 1856, Mulford wrote to W.T. Wilson: More than you I fancy, I this winter have been alone. It has been a solitude amid doubts and darkness, it has been the solitary struggle with uncer- tainties that oh! too often bring perplexity to the reason and remorse to the conscience. It would be pleasant indeed to go back to the simple faith of childhood—to live again in its calm twilight. But that sweet dream is broken. It will never come again.12 For about a year after graduation he lived at home absorbed in the study of law and literature. Somewhere in the years 1856-57 he seems to have studied at the Union Theological Seminary, New York. There Mul- ford was especially influenced by Henry Boynton Smith who probably stimulated Mulford's interest in Hegel.13 With the Congregational ministry presumably still in view he spent two academic years (1857-

11 Cited in B.W. Baeon, Theodore Thornton Munger: New England Minister (New Haven, 1913), 71. 12 See also Mulford to Rachel P. Carmalt, August 17,1859. 13 Union Theological Seminary has no record of Mulford's attendance but he refers to it in a letter to Munger, Dec. 11, 1856. Among the Mulford papers are notes on a lecture by R.D. Hitchcock (then teaching at Union), and the Andover-Newton Theological School archives contain a necrology with dates supplied by Mulford's widow including "studied in Union Semy with Hy S. Smith." Mulford remained warmly attached to Smith, (Mulford to Munger, Feb. 27, 1864, Feb. 19, 1866, and to—possibly—Rachel P. Mulford, March 3, 1872), who was particularly interested in Hegel's thought. See L.F. Stearns, Henry Boynton Smith (Boston, 1902), 68-92 and 96. George Sylvester Morris turned to philosophy and German thought partly under Smith's influence. See R.M. Wenley, The Life and Work of George Sylvester Morris; a chapter in the history of American thought in the nineteenth century (New York, 1917) and M.E. Jones, George Sylvester Morris; his philosophical career and theistic idealism (Philadelphia, 1948). 1984 ELISHA MULFORD (1833 85) AND HIS INFLUENCE 29

59) at Andover Seminary. Much as Mulford valued his Andover years as time for reading and reflection, Andover hastened his disillusion- ment with "New England" theology, especially as expounded by Ed- wards Amasa Park, Abbot Professor of Christian theology at Andover, 1847-81. In October, 1858, he returned for his second year at the Seminary, and then left in January 1859 in poor health but happy to exchange dogmatics for history.14 Andover, I shall not see again. . . .1 have not much against the soil . . .nor against the climate. . . .But with the idea which the teachers have of the work of time, I shall wonder more and more how spring comes there, and flowers grow, and trees blossom, how babies are born, and children play in the street, and lovers whisper by the orchard wall, and humanity runs her course toward that perfect end which time shall bring.15 Soon after leaving Andover, Mulford became an Episcopalian. Three main factors seem to have brought him to this decision. Two of the authors to whom he turned for guidance were F.W. Robertson and F.D. Maurice, both members of the Church of England and the latter a strong apologist for its type of institutional Christianity. Second, Mulford, and Munger as well, felt that while the Congregational churches to which they belonged were rather inhospitable to attempts to re-state Christian truth, Episcopalianism would provide a more wel- coming environment.16 Third, Mulford seems to have had a power-

14 Mulford to G L Walker, Oct 42, 1858 On Park see, A C Cecil, The Theological Development of Edwards Amasa Park, last of the 'Consistent Calvmists\ (Missoula, Mont , 1974) 15 Mulford to S H Nichols May 29, 1859 Similar sentiments are expressed in letters to G L Walker, May 14, 1859, and to W T Wilson, Jan 24, 1858 16 See Bacon, 120ff SeeT T Munger, "The Works of Elisha Mulford", Century Magazine, 13 (1887-8), 889, for the former's comments on Mulford's decision For general comment on the influence of F W Robertson and F D Maurice in the United States see my article, "Chnstocentric Liberalism in the Episcopal Church", Historical Magazine of the Protestant Episcopal Church, v XXXVII/I (1968), esp 35-7 On Maurice and Mulford specifically see my article "Frederick Denison Maurice in the United States, 1860-1900", JournalojReligious History, X, 2 10/2 (1978), esp 55-6 and 61-2 Maurice seems to have appealed especially to those who found themselves moving out of "Protestant orthodoxy" into more "liberal" positions It is not possible to specify, as with Hegel, who, if anyone, first introduced Mulford to Maurice's writings The latter's abhorrence of "systems" in theology, his relative conservatism, and his linking of theology with social and political concerns may all have appealed to Mulford 30 COLIN BROWN January

fully developed historical feeling. H.E. Scudder remarked that "Mulford liked to read his Shakespeare in an edition which was a facsimile of the first folio; his imagination thus brought him more directly into Shakespeare's presence." Similarly he derived "rare pleasure" from reading the New Testament in the Greek of Codex Sinaiticus.17 Something of the same attitudes seem to have operated in attracting him to Anglicanism. Bacon quotes Munger as having written: "You [i.e., Mulford] speak of the reasons influencing you; of Episcopacy as meeting the demands of the age and the country, of its being that true organic expression of the organic life which makes up Christianity, and of its constructive power."18 Almost immediately on becoming an Episcopalian Mulford deter- mined to become a candidate for Holy Orders but before ordination he carried through a plan, conceived at least as early as May, 1858, of visiting Western Europe, especially Germany and England. In 1858- 59 he read extensively in Hegel's works. General interest in German thought and an increasing number of scholarly pilgrimages to Germany were features of the nineteenth-century cultural scene in the United States. S.H. Nichols, one of Mulford's friends, had already spent two years in Germany. Armed with some knowledge of German and French together with several introductions, Mulford sailed off on his "grand tour" and arrived in London on August 24, 1859. Before travelling to Germany early in September he breakfasted with Maurice and delighted in the art galleries and sites of historical interest in and around London. On the Continent Mulford visited Berlin, Halle, Munich, and Heidelberg, Rome and Florence. There are indications that, although he valued the opportunities of travel, he would have preferred to have spent longer in Germany and in England, especially at Oxford. After his return, musing over his change of plans, he variously blamed shortage of funds, his health, his desire to be ordained and begin his life's work, and his brother, Sylvanus, for sending exaggerated reports of their father's poor health. There is little doubt, too, that marriage to Rachel

17 See H.E. Scudder, Men and Letters; essays in characterization and criticism (Boston, 1887), 20; and Mulford to Munger, Feb. 3, 1867. 18 Bacon, 122. 1984 ELISHA MULFORD(1833 85) AND HIS INFLUENCE 31

Carmalt was by this time uppermost in his thoughts.19 Back in the United States Mulford was ordained deacon on April 20, 1861, served at Darien, Conn., for a few months and from 1861-4 had charge of the parish of South Orange, N.J. He was ordained priest in March 1862 and married Rachel Carmalt on September 17 of the same year. Late in 1864 he resigned from the parish and retired to Friendsville, Pa., where he remained sixteen years.20 One of the reasons for retirement was his desire to complete his politico-theological treatise The Nation (1870), which interpreted the Civil War as a struggle between those who stood for the principle of organic unity and their sacrilegious op- ponents. Almost immediately after completion of this work Mulford began work on a second book; the gestation of The Republic of God was equally prolonged and it was not published until 1881.

19 On the German tour see Mulford to Rachel P Carmalt, Sept 2, 1859, to Sylvanus Mulford, Oct , 4, 1859, to Rachel P Carmalt, Oct 12, 1859, to T T Munger, Nov 20, 1859, to Sylvanus Mulford, Jan 17,1860, May 24, 1860, and, on the aftermath Mulford to TT Munger, Aug 1, 1860, to Rachel P Carmalt, Aug 1, 1860, and to Sylvanus Mulford, Aug 7, 1860,Oct 2, 1860,Oct 20, (I860?), Jan 31, 1861andAug 1, 1861 Mulford's father died in 1864 20 The Dictionary of American Biography says that Mulford resigned from South Orange "Because of deafness," the report of the Yale class of 1855 for 1889, speaks of "increasing deafness and for family reasons " Mrs Mulford's mother was widowed in 1862, the year of her daughter's marriage, in 1863 the wife of one of her brothers died leaving two children Rachel Mulford seems to have had reservations about parochial ministry as a vocation for a would-be author In a letter, dated March 30, 1872, she urged her husband against accepting parochial duties as, she says, T T Munger has done Earlier Mulford had written to Munger, Feb 5, 1865 "My wife says it is not wise to marry in a Parish, nor bring a wife to one " Both the Class Report obituary and Munger, Century, 13 (1887-8), 889, suggest opposition from those whose business interests led them to sympathise with the South For a note on the presence of such opposition, see Mark E Neeley, Jr , "Romanticism, Nationalism and the New Economics Elisha Mulford and the Organic Theory of the State," 407-9 In 1863 there was some un- pleasantness over Mulford's absence from the parish and an undated sermon suggests a greater response from the poor than the rich and "far more irregular and infrequent attendance" of the "constant members " Mulford wrote to Munger, Feb 5, 1865 "I have left my parish when I was unanimously asked and urged to stay I left pleasantly if gladly " Finance may have presented a problem too the parish paid $1000 p a and the Mulfords had to find their own accommodation Bacon, 84-5, notes that when Munger was offered a parish at $800 a year in 1855 at least one of his friends suggested that this was quite inadequate to marry on In short, "increasing deafness and for family reasons", suggest two of the probable causes but perhaps not all Both Munger's article and Allen's memorial sermon refer to Mulford's conviction that he must write The Nation Early in the Civil War, Mulford contemplated service as a chaplain as a means of awakening others to the issues involved Mulford to Sylvanus Mulford, Aug 1, 1861 32 COLIN BROWN January

In the years between retirement and his move to Cambridge in 1880, Mulford seems to have made efforts to find an academic post. Others were active on his behalf. Mulford was acquainted with Andrew D. White, president of Cornell University, and there appears to have been discussion of Mulford's giving lectures on political science, but there is no clear evidence that the project came to fruition. Scudder and Munger made efforts to secure him the "Lowell lectures" (presumably under the auspices of the Lowell Institute, Boston), according to Scudder worth $ 1250, but this plan, too, came to nothing. By January, 1871, Mulford, despairing of a university post, was considering journalism but doubting his capacity for it. Later in the same year he seems to have contemplated applying for a chaplaincy at West Point but believed his deafness would be a distinct disadvantage in a post where social graces might be considered important. He held back and later regretted his indecision.21 On October 2, 1872, Professor Francis Lieber of the law school at Columbia College died, and the chair was not filled immediately. Mulford was among those who supplied the vacancy; in March, 1873, he gave a course of seven lectures at Columbia.22 Rachel Mulford and perhaps Elisha also hoped that a permanent appointment might result. But this did not happen.23 There is some indication that he was considered for a post at Johns Hopkins University in 1877. But this also came to nothing.24

21 On Cornell see Mulford to Andrew D. White, Sept. 30, 1871; Mulford to Munger Sept. 27, 1871 and Mulford to L.D. Brewster Oct. 17, 1871. Cornell University records and the White papers furnish no evidence that Mulford lectured at Cornell. For this information I am grateful to the Curator and Archivist of the Collection of Regional History and University Archives at Cornell. The Lowell lectures are referred to in Munger to Mulford, Oct. 14, 1870, and Mulford to Munger, Oct. 29, 1870; a career in journalism is mentioned in Mulford to Munger, Jan. 9, 1871. His views on the West Point post are found in Mulford to Sylvanus Mulford, Sept. 17, and Oct. 7, 1871. 22 Mulford to Munger Jan. 13, and March 9, 1873 and to Rachel P. Mulford, March 3 and 15,1873. The letters to his wife are mis-dated as "1872." For information about Mulford at Columbia I am indebted, in part, to the Curator of the Columbiana Collection, Columbia University, New York. 23 Rachel P. Mulford to Scudder Dec. 7, 1872. Also Rachel P. Mulford to Scudder, Feb. 24 (1873), Houghton Library, Harvard University. 24 Mulford to H.A. Yardley, ? 1877. 1984 ELISHA MULFORD (1833-85) AND HIS INFLUENCE 33

While these fruitless quests for an academic post were going on Mulford was working at The Republic of God and continuing his life- long interest in politics. He contributed occasional articles on political issues to the Independent and participated in local Republican politics. He attended the convention of 18 8 0 among the Pennsylvania delegation which backed Garfield against Grant, and, once the former secured nomination, Mulford wrote to him concerning some of the questions of the day.25

Mulford's concern over his children's health and education led him to move his household to Cambridge in September 1880.26 Rachel Mulford was anxious for her husband to have more company and conversation; he, on his part, seems to have been both glad of and irritated by the relative solitude of their Pennsylvannia farm. In 1876, when they were on the verge of negotiating to build a new house on the farm, she suggested New York ("the Hudson side") as a place to live but her husband demurred.27 In January, 1880, he was looking at houses in Cambridge; by October they were settled there. Mrs Mul- ford seems to have relished the change. There were invitations to garden parties and other functions; she felt that she was away from backbiting and gossip; her letters from Cambridge are often full of the delights of company and intelligent conversation. In the Mulford papers there is a manuscript, perhaps in Rachel Mulford's writing, headed "Notes on Elisha Mulford." It remarks: "The stay in Montrose was disastrous. He needed not meditation so much as contact with the world and the spur of other minds. Better when he went to Cambridge and met such men as Allen and Scudder and Gordon."28 Elisha Mulford, on the other hand, was not altogether content. Perhaps the trouble was partly financial worry, perhaps he was irritated by the fact that more of the income came from his wife's property rather

25 June 12, 1880. The letter was received by Garfield but no reply is extant. 26 Mulford to Scudder Nov. 3, 1879, Jan. 7, 1880 and July 13, 1880. 27 Rachel P. Mulford to Elisha Mulford June 3, 1876 and his reply dated June 8. 28 The writing is illegible at some points. The reference is to A.V.G. Allen of the Episcopal Theological School; H.E. Scudder, an editorial aide with Hurd and Houghton (later Houghton, Mifflin & Co.), and (presumably) George A. Gordon, the Congregationalist preacher and writer. 34 COLIN BROWN January

than his own and that, beyond the slender profits from the sale of his books, he believed that he had done little financially to provide for the family.29 In August, 1881, he was especially depressed, partly because he was hurt by Francis Peabody's review of The Republic of God; "mean", Mulford called it.30 The review began favorably enough but was critical of the book's "high priori" method, lack of argumentation, excessive dependence on Hegel and Maurice, its claim that Christianity was not a religion, and its excessively speculative approach. From the comparative solitude of the farm Mulford wrote long, reflective letters to his wife in Cambridge, letters filled with hopes and fears. Among the former was his wish that he could secure a post at the Episcopal The- ological School. The School had been founded in 1867; by 1880 it was very much a going concern although not free from financial headaches. George Zabriskie Gray had come as Dean and was to stay until 1889. P.H. Steenstra, A. V.G. Allen, and Henry Sylvester Nash were on the faculty and were all, in different ways, teachers of ability and devotion; William Lawrence (later Dean, 1889-93), joined the staff in 1884. There seems to have been some talk of appointing Mulford to a full professorship at $2,500 a year but, in the event, he was appointed to lecture part-time in Theology and Apologetics at $500 a year.31 This

29 The Mulfords were not altogether poor. The Independent Republican for Sept. 26, 1865 lists all persons in the Susquehanna County as assessed on the 'Annual List' for 1865 and having an income exceeding $600. Two hundred and four appear on the list; one each only with incomes over $5,000, $4,000-$5,000 and $3,000-$4,000; 6 between $2,000-$3,000 and 15 between $1,000 and $2,000. Mrs. Elisha Mulford is shown as having an income of $1,045 p.a. In a letter dated Jan. 7, 1880 Mulford asked Scudder, "How far an income of say $3,000 would go in the life of a frugal scholar. . . ?" On Feb. 6, 18 80 he wrote to a friend for advice on investing $2,000. Writing to Rachel Mulford, Aug. 21, 1881 her husband speaks of the "wickedness" of spending "$3,000 a year when my whole return of capital and product of labour is $2,000." See also Mulford to W.T. Wilson, July 30, 1881 and Nov. 5, 1881. On May 18, 1882 when writing to his brother Sylvanus, Elisha Mulford was contemplating buying a house in Cam- bridge at $6,000 and putting $4,000-$5,000 out on mortgage. In the same letter he enclosed two cheques totalling $2,822 for investment in shares. 30 The review appeared in The Christian Register, Aug. 11, 1881. For Mulford's comments see his letter to Rachel P. Mulford, Aug. 31,1881. Peabody's copy of The Republic of God, now in the Andover-Harvard Library at the Harvard Divinity School, has quite a few uncut pages. Was this the one used for review purposes? 31 Mulford to Wilson, Nov. 5, 1881. Bacon, 244, claims that Mulford's appointment at the Episcopal Theological School led to the move to Cambridge. The latter seems to have preceded the former by about a year. 1984 ELISHA MULFORD (1833-85) AND HIS INFLUENCE 35 appointment was renewed periodically not without anxiety on his part and some attempt to get additional work and more salary. In 1882-83 and 1883-84 he lectured the Middlers only; the calendar for the latter period indicates that his lectures were "with especial reference to theistic controversies." The Middlers of that year peti- tioned Mulford to lecture the Senior class also. He sent their petition on to the Treasurer of the Trustees, commenting that he would be happy to undertake these additional lectures, but that he would do so only if the remuneration were increased. Just what financial arrangement occurred is not clear but the catalogue for 1884-85 lists Mulford as teaching the Seniors also.32 Despite continuing anxieties about financial matters and related un- certainties about his position at the Episcopal Theological School Mulford seems to have been increasingly happy in Cambridge. His lectures were appreciated both for the material which he wrote out in advance and for the conversation and comment which flowed more easily once he had, apparently to his surprise, come to the end of his manuscript well before the end of the hour.33 Mulford's surviving notebooks containing lectures are not all dated so that it is difficult to reconstruct the content of the courses he offered. At least one course was based on The Republic of God. As time went on, he did more than re-hash his books, and his lectures, together with his own notes on books read, suggest his awareness of what was going on in the world of thought and books. His lectures, to judge from the extant examples, were not de- tailed and highly organized but tended to be, like his books, a bit aphoristic and oracular rather than closely analyzed, tightly knit argument. Two surviving notebooks kept by students suggest that Mulford spoke at dictation speed and that, usually, what he had to say was felt valuable. One student's notebook includes notes from lectures by Nash and Gray as well as from Mulford; the notes on Mulford's lectures are the fullest.34 Other work came his way. He reviewed The Literary Remains of Henry James for the Atlantic Monthly of May, 1885. He lectured oc-

32 Minutes of the Trustees' meeting of Sept. 29, 1885 and Oct. 22, 1885 in the School's archives held in the Library of the Episcopal Divinity School, Camb., Mass. 33 J.A. Muller, The Episcopal Theological School, 1867-1943, (Camb. Mass: E.T.S., 1943), 72; Scudder, 17-18, and Munger to Mulford, Nov., 1883. 34 The notebook, in the archives of the Episcopal Divinity School, was kept by C.P. Mills. 36 COLIN BROWN January casionally at Wellesley College in 1882-83, preached now and then in several places, and gave papers to various groups. One paper on "The Object of a University," was given to the "Round Table" group (a sort of men's discussion club?) and to the Massachusetts Society for the University Education of Women.35 Another paper, given to Phillips Brooks' Clerical Club in March, 1884, survives in manuscript and, although entitled "Sociology," begins with a sharp attack on the idea of ecclesiastical infallibility.36 In particular, Mulford seems to have valued his association with the Concord School of Philosophy, the brain-child of Bronson Alcott, which held its first session in the summer of 18 8 0.37 Its second session of five weeks, opened on July 12, 1880, and, included as lecturers, besides Alcott and Mulford, W.T. Harris, Frederick Hedge, and Francis Peabody.38 The prospectus for this session announced that Mulford would give two lectures, one on "The Personality of God" and the second on "Precedent Relations of Religion and Philosophy to Chris- tianity." Press reports suggest that they were closely based on The Republic of God which came out that year. For the following year it was announced that Mulford would give three lectures on "Political Phi- losophy" but judging by press reports, he gave only one, "The Phi- losophy of the State," fairly closely based on The Nation. Some of his contemporaries were unimpressed by the proceedings of the Concord School. The Independent for Aug. 25, 1881, commented editorially that it saw no reason to modify its earlier view that "the larger part of what is said there is humbug and tomfoolery." Mulford had mixed feelings and after the 1881 session he wrote: "I do not think hopefully of the school itself, but it is doing some good. It is a school of Christian philosophy

35 Reprinted in Atlantic Monthly, 58 (1886), 747-61 36 He rejects infallibility for Jesus also and says that to ascribe infallibility to him "assumes an existence which is not subject to the conditions of history, but isolated from them " 37 A Warren, "The Concord School of Philosophy", New England Quarterly, II/2 (1929), 199-233 For a slightly facetious contemporary comment see G P Lathrop, "Philosophy and Apples", Atlantic Monthly, XLVI (Nov 1880), 652-6 38 William Torrey Harris (1835-1909), a life-long student of Hegel, resigned as superin- tendent of public schools in St Louis in 1880 and, until 1889 when he became United States Commissioner of Education, lived in Concord, Mass Frederic Henry Hedge (1805-90) was professor of German literature at Harvard College, 1872-84 Francis Peabody (1847-1936) was a lecturer at Harvard Divinity School in 1880, a professor from 1881 and dean from 1901-6 1984 ELISHA MULFORD (1833 85) AND HIS INFLUENCE 37 and Harris is very able and his work admirable."39 Jotted down on an envelope among the Mulford papers is the remark: "I think Mulford prized his relation to the Concord Lectureship. He found there a freedom that suited his nature. While he could not agree to half or more that he heard,... he gleaned from the broad and unhedged fields." He does not seem to have lectured at the School after 1881. His speeches attracted the attention of James McCosh, president of Princeton Uni- versity, who commented on them in the Princeton Review for January, 1882, adverting particularly to what McCosh regarded as ill-judged reliance on Maurice and Hegel and a shallow view of sin. "McCosh," Mulford wrote disdainfully to Harris, "is a doughty man and writes with an air of patronage—the patriarchal style, and often the worse trash. . . ."40 During these years in Cambridge Mulford began to envisage another book, this one on social issues. Scudder, a bit optimistically, observed: "I am confident that, had he lived, he would have produced books with increasing rapidity, and that he would have taken a wider range in the discussion of sociological, literary, scientific, and psycho- logical questions."41 One of Mulford's notebooks is labelled "Book on Society September 1882" and contains remarks critical of absolute rights to private property and the need to regulate the accumulation of wealth, and consequently power, by individuals, families or corporations. He cites Bismarck with approval: "That the State should care for its poorer members in a higher degree than it has formerly done is a duty demanded by humanity and Christianity—and all the institutions of the State should be penetrated through and through by Christian- ity—but it is also a measure required for the preservation of the State."

J9 Mulford to W T Wilson, July 21,1881 See also Mulford to Wilson, Aug 22, 1880 40 Jan 2, 1882 41 Men and Letters, 16-17 See Mulford to W T Wilson Sept 2, 1883 with its remark "I shall give some time to a little book on Socialism " 38 COLIN BROWN January

Industrial strife in the period affected him deeply. To a legal acquaintance, L.D. Brewster, he wrote indignantly: Do I understand that you approve of the "Lawrence" corporations? Or do you only object that they were not shrewd and sagacious—I think justice equity and courtesy were with the workmen; pride, greed, cruelty in the corporations. However the lawyers are cloaks of the monopolies in this age.42 But, even before such experiences stirred his conscience, he had begun to think about social issues. In 1881-82 at the urging of his friend Wilson, Mulford read Henry George's Progress and Poverty and was impressed by it.43 Earlier, in 1879, he remarked, "I should like to write of Communism," and spoke of the need to read on the subject with a view to publication. His interest in such issues, however, goes back further still. Munger was keenly interested in the labor/capital conflict, sent articles on the subject to Mulford for comment; they corresponded on the topic.44 Just about the same time, in 1873, in the first of his lectures at Columbia College, Mulford wrote: And the State is in identity with no party or class, and its end is not the welfare of a certain section or number, but the well-being of the whole. In The Nation Mulford insists that the State ought not to serve any one group, that the function of the law to protect rights is important and that "great monopolies. . .if not guarded may be an injury to the natural rights of the people."45 In the 1860s, from the period at South Orange, there is an undated sermon on II Cor. 9:5-6, in which Mulford refers to Christianity as forming the basis for true community uniting the "rich and the poor, in one common service, [realising]. . .the common Fatherhood of God, and the Brotherhood of Christ." In other words: while the labour disturbances of the 1870s and 1880s set Mulford reflecting on social issues, he already held ideas which defined social issues as integral to Christianity. In a memorial sermon A.V.G. Allen said.

42 ALS undated—1882? See also Mulford to W.T. Wilson March 30, 1882. 43 Mulford to Wilson, Sept. 20, 1881; Nov. 5, 1881 and July 29, 1882: also Mulford to Munger? 1884. 44 See e.g. Munger to Mulford, Nov. 20, 1872. 45 The Nation (Boston, 1883), 105. See also 118-20. 1984 ELISHA MULFORD (1833-85) AND HIS INFLUENCE 39

Society and humanity, these were uppermost in his last thoughts. . . .his thoughts rested more and more upon humanity, upon 'society as the redeemed form of man.' He was beginning to accumulate the books that bore upon sociology and political economy. He was projecting in his mind the same large treatment of the subject which his other works display 46

Unfortunately, before Mulford could publish his ideas on society, he was found to have Bright's disease; he died on Dec. 9, 1885, and was buried at Concord. Dean Gray, writing to Harcourt Amory, one of the School's trustees remarked: "His death is a great loss to us, chiefly for the value of his name and influence. His teaching was extra; additional to the usual curriculum, so that it can hardly be said to cripple us. It is the loss of a very valuable 'extra course'—which, some day, we may restore."47 It was a cruel stroke of fate that Mulford's death came so soon after his emergence from seclusion and settlement in Cambridge. It came, too, just when opportunities at the Episcopal Theological School showed signs of widening, and while he was actively putting together ideas for another book. Elisha Mulford might now be remembered as among those, whose Christian consciences stirred by the labor troubles, sought to interpret Christianity in social terms.

Mulford's literary output was comparatively small: two books, The Nation (1870) and The Republic o/G

46 This sermon exists in MS in the Episcopal Divinity School's archives 47 Dec. 12, 1885, ALS in Episcopal Divinity School archives 48 Three of his articles were on political issues "One Term," (Independent, July 11, 1872, 1), "The Puppets in American Politics," (ibid., June 21, 1887, 1-2), and "Conditions of the Civil Service of the United States", (ibid., Dec 13, 1887, p 2) Also extant are two articles on Indian affairs but I have been unable to trace their source. He contributed an article on F D Maurice to Scnbner's Monthly, (IV), 1872, another on "Henry James" to the Atlantic Monthly (May, 1885), which also published, posthumously (Dec. 1886), "The Object of a University " In the Independent for Dec. 28,1865 Mulford commented, at length and adversely, on the proceedings of a recent Congregational council. He published privately a sermon preached on Nov 22, 1874 in memory of Sarah Miller Walker. This seems to be the sum total of his published writings. 40 COLIN BROWN January

question of rights, especially the right of private property; the nature of freedom; the locus of sovereignty; the character of constitutions; the powers of government and their division; the nation's relation to its component individuals, to other nations, to the family and to the "commonwealth" (i.e., the states of the Union), the Confederacy and its political principles, and the vocation of the nation in the historical process. These topics are discussed with frequent reference to German thinkers (Hegel, Stahl, Trendelenburg, Rothe, and Bluntschli), to F.D. Maurice, and to Shakespeare, in a style which, though sometimes eloquent, is often opaque and occasionally obscure.49 The obscurity extends to some of the book's principal ideas. Throughout Mulford operates with the conception of the nation as not only an "organism" but a "moral organism," even a "moral personality." The book's central claim is that the nation is divine in origin, moral in purpose, and most adequately comprehensible under the categories of organism and personality.50 Mulford rejects theories of social contract and natural rights (including any absolute right to private property) and insists that freedom, the correlative of government and national life, is enhanced, not restricted by them. He declines to absolutize the Constitution and interprets the Civil War as a struggle for the life of the nation between those who stood for the principle of organic unity and those who, their minds bewitched by ideas of social contract and voluntary compact, set themselves up in sacrilegious opposition. Mulford went so far as to say:

49 Hegel and Maurice are well known, the others less so Bluntschli (1808-81) Swiss in origin, was a professor of law at Munich from 1848 and, from 1861, at Heidelberg Rothe (1799- 1867) was, for much of the period from 1848, a professor of theology at Heidelberg and espoused a 'mediating' theology Stahl (1802-61) was, from 1840, professor of the philosophy of law at Berlin while Trendelenburg (1802-72), a German philosopher and philologist, held a professorship at Berlin from 1833 For Maurice's influence on Mulford see my article, "F D Maurice in the United States of America," Journal of Religious History 10/1 (June 1978), 61-3 50 It is a principal merit of J Bascom's review of The Nation, Btbltotheca Sacra, 30 (1873), 465-81, that he subjected "organic" language to searching criticism, some other reviewers touched on this point e g Congregational Revtew, 12 (1870) 416-18, and North American Review 111(1870), 465-71 Mulford attempted a brief defence of such usage in the sixth of a series of lectures which he gave at Columbia Law School in 1873 and a notebook dated " 1882-3" comments on the notion 1984 ELISHA MULFORD (1833-85) AND HIS INFLUENCE 41

It cannot be too often repeated that the War was not primarily between freedom and slavery. It was the war of the nation and the confederacy. The nation and the confederacy meet at last in mortal conflict. It is the battle of the nation for life. Confederationism, in its attack upon the nation, is in league with hell.51 The Nation had its origins in the years of the Civil War and was subjected to laborious and lengthy re-writing. A similar process re- sulted in The Republic ofGodbcgun, it seems, in 1871 and published ten years later.52 Attempting to cover the major theological themes, The Republic of God is aphoristic rather than systematic in character and abounds in obscurities. Indeed, there is some excuse for the reviewer who, baffled by Mulford's style, cited the Spanish proverb that "it is impossible to take soft cheese on a hook." But an indication of some of The Republic of God's features, if not a summary, can be provided. F.D. Maurice is a major source along with Hegel; the book is an eclectic mixing of influences somewhat diverse in character and out- look. It begins, traditionally enough, with a review of the arguments for God's existence in the course of which the Hegelian re-statement of the ontological argument is accepted. The cosmological and teleological arguments are rejected: preference is expressed for a type of "moral- historical" argument that concludes not merely that there is a God but that he is a "personal" being.53 Mulford then brings Hegel into view again in one of the more lengthy chapters that subsumes religion under philosophy, only to turn to Maurice and insist that Christianity is neither religion nor philosophy, but rather the fulfillment of both and revelation sui generis, personal rather than propositional in character. In 1880 to speak of revelation as personal was to move away from traditional language and ideas; at other points also these tendencies are evident in The Republic of God. One reviewer expressed surprise at

51 TheNatton, 321,340 52 Mulford to L D Brewster, Nov 15, 1871 Among his papers is a document labelled "Start 1 July 5 1871," it sketches topics to be dealt with and includes ideas and expressions found in The Republic of God. 53 See, esp. 19-20 Elsewhere, Mulford briefly espouses the moral argument in the accus- tomed form, (ibid., 143). There is the strongest possible emphasis on "personal" categories applied to God but one sign of the lack of close integration in the book is that emphasis on the "personality" of God is not related to discussion of the Trinity on 128ff 42 COLIN BROWN January

finding the Nicene Creed printed as a conclusion.54 The idea of God's judgment as an event, especially a far-off, terminal event, is repudiated and instead is described as "constant" and "continuous."55 Like Maurice, Mulford repudiated ideas of eternal damnation observing that to speak of irrevocable doom is "to set a finite limit to the divine redemption and its perfect realization. "56 The notion of the Kingdom of God is interpreted in moral terms, as the realization of righteousness in the life of humanity and as a present, if dawning reality.57 Eschatology is one area, then, where divergence from traditional notions was man- ifest. In addition Mulford repudiated the widely-held penal substitu- tionary theory of the atonement without, however, offering much more than a loosely-jointed mosaic of various types of theory in its place.58 In discussing sotenology Mulford downplays the role of the historical Jesus. The relation to the Christ is realized in the life of the spirit It is not a relation to Jesus of Nazareth, in the circumstantial condition which is comprised in certain contiguous relations It may be a source of weakness, as the imagination occupies itself with this circumstance The incident of this individual life is transient, as every incident of time, and subject to its conditions 59 Mulford did not neglect the institutional side of Christianity Two things are notable about his discussion of the church his heavy indebtedness to Maurice and his divergence from Tractanan views. Mulford insists that "The Church is the witness to the life of the spirit in humanity. It is not the source of the life of the spirit, but the witness of it. The Spirit is not the gift of the Church, but the church of the Spirit." In a similar way sacraments are presented not as means by which the institution dispenses grace from a depository at its command,

54 F G Peabody, The Congregattonaltst (Aug ,10, 1881), observed that, as regards atonement and eschatology, "the statements of the book can hardly satisfy Evangelical minds " (260) The Churchman (Aug 20, 1881), was more severe " the writer uses language which, if we understand its meaning, no Church theologian ever would or ever could use " (209) 55 The Republic of God, 153 Cf 244 56 Ibid y 160 57 Ibid , 168, see also 165ff 58 For this rejection see The Republic of God, 182, fn land 183 4, 186, 190, 202, and 204 On this general topic see also, 184 5, 187, 189 90 and 192 59 Ibid ,209 210 1984 ELISHA MULFORD (1833 85) AND HIS INFLUENCE 43 but as "the witness to the real presence of the Christ with humanity, which he has redeemed."60 Toward the close of The Republic of God Mulford asserts that the Spirit of God is not just an instrument of the institutional church res- cuing souls for eternal bliss but is universally active for "the realization of a perfect human society," a society excluding no one and including all. The life which the Christ makes possible and the Spirit bestows is life for humanity and for the individual as embodied in humanity. Here, as everywhere in Mulford's thought, notions of the "organic" enter in to shape and express his understanding of Christianity.

Both books, The Nation and The Republic of God9 attracted favorable reviews, although, in both cases, there were dissenters and complaints about obscurities. With a few important exceptions, reviewers regarded both books as considerable works of some importance likely to be influential in their respective fields.61 How prescient were the reviewers? The difficulties of establishing the influence of any book are well-known and the labor of tracing it is sometimes out of all proportion to the significance of the results. One can make a rough estimate by looking for instances where a author is not just cited but where his ideas are utilised and not merely adduced as asides or as supporting arguments, and where such ideas could not have been derived from any other source known to the writer concerned. Since the friendship between Mulford and Munger was close and intimate, here, if anywhere, might be a case of Mulford's influence.

60 Ibid , 216-7 and 226 61 The most severe review of The Nation that I have seen appeared in the North American haw Revtew 5,(1870-1), 117-8, the most searching by J Bascom The American Prebytenan Review, XII (Oct 1870), 749, reviewed The Nation favourably, the reviewer seems to have been Mulford's former teacher, the Rev Dr H B Smith (Mulford to L D Brewster, Oct 29, 1870) The reviewers in the North American Law Review and The Nation (July 7, 1870), both predicted little influence for the book The Penn Monthly, 12, (1881), 635, reviewing The Republic of God, and perhaps carried away by local patriotism, declared, "we look to see it do great good in making our Christian thinking more Christian, more practical, and yet broader and more human " The most explicit prediction of a brief career for The Republic of God appeared in F G Peabody's review 62 For reasons indicated in fn 5 above, I have omitted discussion of Mulford's influence on specifically political theorists In what follows I have not supplied precise information about the number of times that Mulford is quoted by others I have been unable to do this because American theologians are not too well represented in Australasian libraries 44 COLIN BROWN January

Bacon calls Mulford "the friend who of all others had closest intimacy with his [i.e., Munger's] intellectual life" and, referring to Mulford's preaching at South Orange, says that "Munger's own sermons during this period are a revelation of the closeness of his intercourse with his friend, and the revelation is confirmed by the correspondence."63 Munger thought highly of Mulford's writings and valued his counsel above that of others. "I spent last evening," Munger wrote to Mulford, "in reading The Republic of God, and feel constrained to say again that I consider it the best theology I am acquainted with. . . .1 find that at bottom our theology is the same."64 After his friend's death Munger wrote, "I would rather have his [i.e. Mulford's] approval than that of any council I have ever had to stand before."65 Munger's essay "The New Theology" reads, in parts, very like Mulford's The Republic of God; there is a distrust of theological systems, a stress on the role of intuition, an emphasis on human solidarity rather than individuality; and some of the suggestions regarding the reinterpretation of eschatology sound rather like Mulford. A good deal of this could have been derived from elsewhere and the mere recital of Maurice, Robertson, and above all Bushnell, as those who influenced Munger most, helps to bear out this claim. Moreover the quotations which Munger placed at the beginning of chapters in his books include selections from Mulford, but as one writer amongst others. What does seem to be the case is that Mulford was one of a number of influences on Munger but, of these, Bushnell should probably be regarded as the most important.66 If we turn to others among the "Christocentric Liberals"—W.J. Tucker, George A. Gordon, W.N. Clarke, and William Adams Brown—there is little clear indication of Mulford's influence and hardly any acknowledgement of his existence. Tucker's autobiography

63 Bacon, 147, 139 64 Nov 2, 1885 65 Bacon, 281 66 Both Williston Walker and George A Gordon, discussing Munger's theological heritage, link together Bushnell, Robertson and Maurice See ibid, 373 and 395 On their relative importance for Munger see ibtd , passim Munger's essay on the 'New Theology' is sometimes taken as the literary inauguration of "Christocentric Liberalism" but Newman Smyth's The Orthodox Theology of Today (1881) predated it Mulford's The Republic of God appeared in 1881 and there can, therefore, be no question of its influence on Smyth The latter cites The Nation on the source and derivation of rights in his Christian Ethics (1897) 172, and twice in a sermon preached in 1876 and published as The Religious Principle m American Politics 4,18 1984 ELISHA MULFORD (1833-85) AND HIS INFLUENCE 45 refers to Munger but not to Mulford. Gordon's autobiography likewise refers to Munger (whom Gordon remembers as one of his closest friends), although not to Mulford to whom, however, Gordon refers in a few places in his writings.67 Nor is the case much different if one turns to the writings of Mulford's fellow Episcopalians. F.J. Hall in his encyclopaedic Dogmatic Theology refers to Mulford, but it would be going beyond the evidence to see Mulford's thought as determinative for the highly eclectic Hall. In two of Hall's references to Mulford the latter is quoted only to be refuted.68 Likewise P.H. Steenstra, one of Mulford's colleagues at the Episcopal Theological School, sought to turn the edge of Mulford's criticisms of the cosmological and teleological arguments.69 More might be expected of J.M. Sterrett and A.V.G. Allen; the first seems to have become known to Mulford through Munger, the latter was a close friend during Mulford's years in Cambridge.70 Sterrett, who was professor of ethics and apologetics in the Seabury Divinity School from 1882-92, published Studies in Hegel's Philosophy of Religion in 1890. This title suggests the chief source of his inspira- tion, the limited extent of his indebtedness to Mulford, and the diffi- culty of sorting out what may be due to Hegel and what to Mulford.

67 WJ. Tucker, My Generation, an autobiographical interpretation (Boston, 1919), 99 and G.A. Gordon, My Education and Religion; an autobiography (Boston, 1925), 312. See also Gordon's The New Epoch/or Faith (Boston, 1901), 19-20, Religion and M trade (Boston, 1910), 258. 68 The Being andAttributes of God(New York, 1909), 128, 141 and 159. See also The Doctrine of God, (Milwaukee, 1905), 49, 59 and 136-7. 69 The Being of God as Unity and Trinity (Boston, 1891), 40ff On 15 there is an incidental reference to The Nation. Some other Episcopalian writers refer to Mulford, usually briefly, e.g H. Van Dyke, The Gospel for an Age of Doubt (New York, 1896) In non-Episcopalian authors a few references occur, e.g. J. Lindsay, Recent Advances m Theistic Philosophy of Religion (Ed- inburgh, 1897) twice refers favourably to Mulford 392, 514 By contrast A.H Strong, Philosophy of Religion (New York, 1888), in a paper "The New Theology" reprinted from the Baptist Quarterly Review (Jan. 1888), criticises the "New Theology" (he refers, specifically, to Mulford, Munger and Newman Smyth), for so emphasising the immanence of God as to break down the boundary between the natural and the supernatural (see, esp 167) Current Dtscusstons of Theology, (Chicago, 1883), refers to Mulford in dealing with various views on the traditional arguments for God's existence and, more critically, in discussing religion and philosophy See esp., I, 204n, 210-1. 70 Munger to Mulford, Jan. 5, 1873. Mulford seems to have had advance knowledge of an article of Sterrett's which appeared in Bibliotheca Sacra (Mulford to W.T. Harris, Aug. 20, 1873). Sterrett seems to have boarded with the Mungers at Lawrence where T.T. Munger had a pastoral charge in the years 1871-5. 46 COLIN BROWN January

Sterrett himself describes Mulford's work as "Hegelian, but not in any merely slavish or expository way" and drew on it at several points.71 In another book, Reason and Authority in Religion (1891), Sterrett refers to Mulford but, again, the role of the latter's thought can hardly be classed as decisive for Sterrett's thinking on the subject under discussion.72 Allen certainly regarded Mulford with affection and respect. Muller cites Allen's having described Mulford as "one of the greatest spiritual thinkers whom our age or country has produced" and as "the most interesting man I ever knew."73 Slattery's biography of Allen contains similar remarks, adding the information that Mulford and Allen spent a great deal of time together discussing theology and that they went over "a great part" of The Republic of God before it came out. Slattery observes that: This friendship with Dr. Mulford was a factor in Mr. Allen's life. The old heroes had been Coleridge and Maurice; in Brooks and Mulford he now found living heroes, to whom he gave not only friendship, but intellectual respect. . . .In a way he followed them, though he was not aware that they also were following him.74 Unfortunately, efforts at establishing the extent of Mulford's influence on Allen precisely are hampered by the fact that, although Allen is thought to have left many notebooks from the 1880's, they are now lost and none of Allen's published writings pre-date The Republic of God (18 81).75 What is clear, however, is that Allen's key idea, the notion of divine immanence, which he overworked in his Princeton Review articles (1882-3) and his The Continuity of Christian Thought (1884), was clearly arrived at by 1878. In that year Bishop Huntington gave the

71 Studies m Hegel's Philosophy of Reltgton, 11,20-1, 180and266. 72 40. Sterrett referred to Mulford briefly in two articles in the (American) Church Review, 43 (1884) 131-50 esp. 148, and 45 (1885), in a review of G.S. Morris, Philosophy and Chris- tianity. Sterrett points out (469) that Morris refers favourably to The Republic of God, particularly its remarks on revelation. 73 Muller, 72. 74 C.L. Slattery, Alexander Vtets GnswoldAllen (New York, 1911), 81-82. 75 Ibid., 86. I am grateful to Professor W.J. Wolf of the Episcopal Divinity School for efforts to trace these notebooks. 1984 ELISHA MULFORD (1833-85) AND HIS INFLUENCE 47

Commencement Day sermon at the Episcopal Theological School and Allen commented on it: He (i.e., Huntington) spoke of two theories of the ministry; one that it comes from above downward; the other that is comes from below upward. I make the criticism that in spiritual things, speaking precisely, there is no such distinction: all that is good comes from God, the Indweller, the Immanent.76 Allowing then, for the difficulties facing any attempt at a precise estimate, it does seem clear that Mulford's influence on other theologians cannot be proved. There remain, however, another group of thinkers and writers to be examined—the advocates of "social Christianity" in its various forms. H.A. Durfee, discussing what he calls the "theologies of the Social Gospel" observes: In their works the writers of the Social Gospel indicated their relationship to many other figures either of the past or present and thus showed the direct historical connections of their movement with past movements. But even when this is so one cannot always be sure just what they appropriated from any particular person.77 One cannot be sure because key emphases are to be found in more than one author. To take one instance only: both Mulford and W.H. Fre- mantle stressed what Dombrowski calls, in the latter's case, "the ethical and religious significance of an organic view of society." Some, for example R.T. Ely, were influenced by both Fremantle and Mulford. Or, again, in some cases a major and a mediating author appear as sources: for instance Herron appears to have read both Maurice and Hegel, together with Mulford, who depended on both. If an idea is common to Mulford and either Hegel or Maurice there is just no way to tell from whom Herron derived it. In seeking to establish Mulford's importance for Social Gospel theorists it is appropriate to begin with Gladden, "the father of the Social

76 Cited in tbtd., 16. 77 "The Theologies of the Social Gospel, a study of the theological and philosophical pre- suppositions of the American Social Gospel," Ph.D. diss., (Columbia University, New York, 1951), 7. Quoted with Professor Durfee's permission. 48 COLIN BROWN January

Gospel." Gladden reviewed The Republic of God for The Century.1* On July 6, 1881 Munger wrote to Mulford: "Gladden rode to W with me. He tells me that he is reading your book over slowly and thoroughly and writing a review on it for Scribners Mag. . .1 gave him some points that I hope he will use." The review is generally favorable, incorporates Munger's suggestions, and complains only of Mulford's obscurity and lack of "logic"—"the book is a bundle of aphorisms," lamented Gladden. The Republic of God does not appear to have influenced Gladden's later reflections; the determinative influences on Gladden were Robertson and Bushnell, and his basic positions underwent little change. Although Gladden attempted some popularizing efforts over the years, The Republic of God was not among the works which he distilled.79 There is, however, at least one place where Gladden cites Mulford; in Tools and the Man (1893), The Nation is quoted at length. Gladden adds: The Christian doctrine of property in land depends upon the Christian doctrine of the Nation. The doctrine which has been stated with so much power by Dr Mulford, is briefly this: that the Nation is a body of men inhabiting, continuously, a certain territory, held together by certain historic relationships and sympathies, having a common spirit and purpose, organised for moral ends, and holding its charter from God himself.80 Gladden further cites Mulford as saying that "The Sovereignty of the Nation is from God and of the people", and mentions Orestes Brownson to much the same effect. Again quoting Mulford, he goes on to elab- orate the view that land is a divine gift to the nation and must be dealt with so as to benefit all.81 The influence of Brownson and George on Gladden has often been noted. Not so that of Mulford.

78 V., 23 (1881-2), 632-5. 79 R.D. Knudten, The Systematic Theology of Washington Gladden (New York, 1968), 25-6, 217-8: J.B. Dorn, Washington Gladden; prophet ofthe SoctalGospel (Columbia, 1967), 33, 43, 141 ff. In his Recollections (Boston, 1909), Gladden regarded Robertson and Bushnell as decisive for his theological development (118-9), Mulford is not mentioned. so Tools and Man, 73. 81 Ibid., 74-5. The Nation is cited from 65-71 and 6. In Ruling Ideas of the Present Age (Boston, 1895), quotations from Brownson and Mulford appear at the head of a chapter on "Religion and Politics." 1984 ELISHA MULFORD (1833-85) AND HIS INFLUENCE 49

Julius H. Ward, like Gladden, reviewed The Republic of God and Munger writing to Mulford observed: "Of course you have seen Ward's admirably done article in the Times. He has grasped the book."82 An altogether less important figure in the development of "social Christianity," Ward published The Church in Modern Society in 1889. It was, in part, an appeal for a Church united around the Episcopal Church and exerting "the organic influence in the social life which the national government exerts in the political and economic life of the people." What Ward says of the family, and the Church in relation to the family, may owe something to Mulford (although Ward was well acquainted with Maurice's thought also) but the influence becomes explicit when Ward discusses "The Church and the Nation." He begins with a lengthy quotation from The Nation asserting the character of the nation as "the sphere of a realized freedom," its "moral personality" and its divinely-given role in bringing to fulfillment "the moral order of the world."83 The book as a whole is hardly radical; it tends to view the role of the Church as that of healing and guiding the national conscience. "It [i.e., the Church] controls the nation only as it controls the individuals that constitute the nation."84 Claims that Mulford substantially influenced Ward must take account of the fact that Ward was acquainted with the writings of Hegel and Maurice directly as well as through the writings of Mulford.85 Much the same difficulties emerge when one turns to Richard T. Ely. Ely was acquainted with some areas of German thought, had studied in Germany, was indebted to T.H. Green, and, also to W.H.

82 ALS, July 6, 1881. According to Appleton's Cyclopedia of American Biography Ward (b 1837), graduated from Yale in 1860 and from Berkeley Divinity School in 1862, was ordained in the Episcopal Church and held various parochial appointments until 1878 "since which time he has engaged in literary work." He seems to have assisted with the editing of the North American Review, contributed articles on religious subjects to newspapers and journals, and wrote several books including lives of James Gates Percival (1866) and Bishop White (1892) and edited a collection of Phillips Brooks' addresses as well as The Church tn Modern Society (Boston. 1889). In Monograph X of W.S. Perry's The History of the American Episcopal Church 1587-1883, (Boston, 1885), II, 630, Ward provided a laudatory account of Mulford's work 83 Ward, The Church m Modern Society, 154-5 citing The Nation, 21-2. Mulford is cited again on 160-1 on the topic of the nation as a "moral personality " 84 Ward, The Church m Modern Society, 170. 85 In his The Church in Modern Society Ward cites from Hegel's Philosophie der Religion, he contributed a lengthy article on Maurice to the Andover Review, 1 (1884), 612-31 50 COLIN BROWN January

Fremantle's The World as the Subject of Redemption and The Gospel of the Secular Life. Fremantle, apparently without any reference whatever to Mulford, arrived at somewhat similar views. Fremantle insisted that the Church exists to save the world rather than individuals out of the world; and develops themes such as the immanence of God, the world of humanity as an organism, Christianity as a "life" and not a system, the divine ordinance of the family, nation and church, and the religious character of the nation's role. These themes in Fremantle appear in Mulford—and in Ely also.86 Ely does, however, cite Mulford occasionally. In Ely's influential and often republished An Introduction to Political Economy (1889), The Nation is cited at two points. At the conclusion of chapter 3 of Part I, Ely defines the State as "the union of a stationary people, occupying a defined territory, under a supreme power and a definite constitution. It is a continuous conscious organism and a moral personality which has its purpose is the welfare of the people."87 In a footnote Ely adds: "This definition is chiefly taken from Mulford's work, The Nation.'9 Again, Ely seeks to show that freedom is relative, and that law realizes and protects freedom. "It is only in this state," he says, "that freedom can be realized, as has been shown by a distinguished American writer, Dr. Mulford, in his work, The Na- tion.9' Once again, however, it must be emphasized that, important as such ideas were to Ely, it would be hazardous to pronounce Mulford's The Nation to be their exclusive source. Ely was heavily influenced by the "historical" school of German economists, some of whom "stressed the ethical element in economic study, and many of them looked to the

86 Ely called Fremantle's book "as suggestive a work as I ever read" and wrote an introduction to the second edition of Fremantle's book, Social Aspects of Christianity and other essays, (London, n.d.), 5 1. In the preface to his first edition Fremantle acknowledges his indebtedness to Rothe's Theological Ethics which Mulford also utilised in The Nation. 87 An Introduction to Political Economy. (New York, 1891), 30. In The Social Law of Service (New York, 1896), Ely discusses the state in language reminiscent of Mulford although no reference is made to him. See esp. 167. For Ely's views on the State, see Neely, "Romanticism, Nationalism and the New Economics Elisha Mulford and the Organic Theory of the State," 420-1. 88/**/., 71. 1984 ELISHA MULFORD (1833 85) AND HIS INFLUENCE 51 state as a means of solidifying national feeling and of promoting social justice."89 Herron stood further to the left than Ely. In his writings overtones of Mulford can be detected but Herron also read Hegel and Maurice, along with a wide range of other authors.90 W.H. Dennison, both student and friend of Herron, said of the latter's reading: With a deep distrust of authority he resolved to go to the original sources of his intellectual supports. Accordingly he read Mulford, Maurice, Hegel, and Lotze. . . . Among the intellectual forces that made him what he is the Professor counts Hegel the most important. . . .91 Herron was not a close student of Hegelian thought; he gleaned a few ideas, fitted them somewhat loosely to others, but made no systematic appropriation of Hegelian thought nor, for that matter, of the thought of Maurice or Mulford. Mulford is, like some other writers of Her- ron's choice, cited occasionally, and phrases reminiscent of Mulford do occur.92 It was with Mulford as with other writers consulted by Her- ron; he utilised certain ideas in a highly selective manner omitting whole tracts of the thought of others in favor of a few notions which he wove together into a system and with a power very much his own.

89 S. Fine, "Richard T. Ely, Forerunner of Progressivism, 1880-1901," Mtsstsstppt Valley Historical Review, 37(1950-51), 604. See also the article by A. Mann, "British Social Thought and American Reformers of the Progressive Era", Mississippi Valley Historical Review, 42 (1955-56), 672-92, especially 675. Fine in Laissez Faire and the General Welfare State (Ann Arbor, 1956), points out that, although most of the important figures in the Social Gospel movement called in question the premises of laissez-faire economics they did not, generally speaking, advocate anything like massive state intervention. Ely was among those who urged the possibility and potentialities of state action "God works through the State in carrying out His purposes more universally than through any other institution " (Cited in ibid., p. 180). 90 "An omnivorous reader, he (Herron) studied widely in economics and philosophy, especially Hegel and Lot^e, and contemporary German theology, and was also influenced by Maurice, Edwards, Calvin, Newman and Mazzini." (Hopkins, 185.) 91 Cited in R.T. Handy, "George D. Herron and the Social Gospel in American Protes- tantism, 1890-1901," Ph.D. diss., (Univ. of Chicago, 1949). Handy suggests that Herron "found the works of the American Episcopalian theologian Elisha Mulford very attractive, especially The Republic of God. . . ." (11) It seems to me that The Nation was at least as important to Herron. 92 e.g. The first address in Herron's The Larger Christ (New York, 1891) is prefaced with several quotations including one from Mulford as is chapter 4 of The New Redemption, a call to the Church to reconstruct society according to the Gospel of Christ (New York, 1893) and Mulford is cited again at 120. 52 COLIN BROWN January

What is the sum total of Mulford's influence on "religious" thinkers?93 He was a close friend of two notable "liberal" theologians, Munger and Allen, who may be presumed to have been influenced by him in a general way as one is by the counsel of friends whose judgement one respects highly. Some other theologians, of varying degrees of importance, were aware of Mulford and his writings although, sometimes, he is quoted only to be criticized. Among proponents of a "social Christianity," Gladden, Ward, Ely, and Herron all show traces of Mulford's influence. Any rounded account of that influence should take account, too, of the significance of his social and political thought outside theological circles altogether and of traces of his influence beyond the United States.94 It is important, as well as charitable, to re- member that, had Mulford not died relatively early, a third book might have marked him as an early apologist for the Social Gospel. By way of conclusion it will be worthwhile to ask why it was that, especially as regards his theological ideas, Mulford was not more influential. There is a sense in which The Republic of 'Godcame both too early and too late. Mulford insisted on the legitimacy of applying criticism to the Bible yet like Maurice, he was, in practice, little influenced by biblical criticism and suspicious of it. From South Orange, N.J., Mulford wrote to Munger: "I have been reading but little. The Colenso controversy has not brought out that phase of thought on the Old Testament in which I have most sympathy."95 In an undated sermon, on 1 John

93 R.E. Thompson (1840-1924) who occupied various teaching posts at the University of Pennsylvania from 1869-91 and edited the Penn Monthly (1870-81) and The Amertcan (1880-91), deserves a footnote, his De CivitateDei; theDwtne Order of Human Society (the L.P. Stone lectures for 1891 at Princeton Theological Seminary) shows Mulford's influence especially in the chapter on "The Nation" where near-quotations occur. Thompson describes The Nation as "the greatest book of our political literature." Allowance must be made for the fact that Thompson was acquainted with the works of Maurice directly. Thompson's Political Economy (Philadelphia, 1882), does not cite The Nation but has phrases reminiscent of it, e.g. the nation is referred to as an "organism" and a "moral personality." See esp. 34-6. 94 On the first see Neely, and for an instance of the influence of Mulford's theological ideas abroad see, F. Olofsson, Chrtstus Redemptor et Consummator, a study in the theology of B.F. Westcott (Uppsala, 1979), 314. 95 ALS. March 10 (1864). The date '1864' is pencilled in J.W Colenso, a mathematician, Fellow of S. John's College, Cambridge, and Anglican bishop of Natal from 1853, published a controversial commentary on the Epistle to the Romans in 1861. Greater ire was aroused by his "The Pentateuch and the Book of Joshua critically examined" (1862-70) which challenged traditional views of authorship and historical accuracy. 1984 ELISHA MULFORD (1833-85) AND HIS INFLUENCE 53

5:20, Mulford insists: Let not the superficial questions of criticism, the strife upon inquiries which in no way affect the great and universal truths of revelation, let none of these keep you from the Christ,—these questions at the most are slight. They affect rather historical or chronological data, or mere detail of science, while the great purpose of the Bible is religious,—They stand mostly upon a mistaken premiss. The Bible has stood the battle of 18 centuries, and conflicts heavier than this of these days—and these will only bring us to a clearer and truer conception of it. It is revelant to observe, as F.H. Foster does of Munger, that Mulford thought and wrote "too early for the full results of such study to be known"96 and yet to wonder whether Mulford, for all his avowal of the legitimacy of criticism, could have taken advantage of it so long as he remained heavily committed to Hegelian Idealism. G.B. Smith, discussing the influence of German Idealism on American theology, says: "Here was a way of arriving at a conception of God by the fascinating process of analyzing human experience. The full unfoldment of the meaning of consciousness seemed to lead the thinker into the very presence of the all-inclusive Absolute who was readily identified with the God of Christian theology." Smith suggests that German Idealism provided "a way of theologizing which did not depend on the com- plicated processes of biblical criticism, and which vitalized religious thinking by the conception of God as the ever-active immanent Power, organizing and rationalizing the universe."97 In this connection it is interesting to note that Munger wrote to Mulford: I suggested to him [Gladden] that your book was in the world of theology—complementary to [Robertson] Smith's. I do not know that you have ever thought of this, but I see very clearly the state of things brought about by the semi-destruction and re-constructive criticism now going on in the Old Testament literature. Let this criticism have what effect it may, here is a statement of theology not dependent upon any special view of the Old Testament.98

96 The Modern Movement tn American Theology, 69. 97 "Theological Thinking in America," Religious Thought in the Last Quarter Century, ed G.B. Smith (Chicago, 1927), 97. 98 It would also be possible to argue that Mulford's type of theological position might have helped him towards a more frank and creative assessment of the impact of Biblical criticism than he did offer. 54 COLIN BROWN January

The fact that, for whatever reason, Mulford scarcely came to terms with biblical criticism limited his long-term influence. For all his claims that his reconstruction was on essentially biblical lines, his con- clusions were vulnerable at precisely this point. The desire for a more obviously biblical and concrete re-statement was clearly a factor in the popularity and influence of Liberal Protestantism (as derived particularly from Ritschl), and of W. Newton Clarke's work. These theologies provided more attractive bridges from the older orthodoxies to the newer ideas. Moreover, where Mulford did diverge from received orthodoxy, he did not defend his positions in any detail; he offered, therefore, little help to those who would cross over because it was not at all clear that his kind of bridge was firmly anchored at either end. A further cause for Mulford's relative lack of influence may have been the largely undiluted character of his Hegelianism. Since much of his thought was a distillation from the works of Hegel (and Maurice), some may well have preferred to go to these authors directly. In certain philosophical and theological circles there was, anyway, long-standing antipathy to Hegelianism; McCosh's criticism of Mulford shows this clearly." Most important, the type of idealism adumbrated by the German philosopher Lotze (1817-81) and propagated by Bowne as "Personalism," appeared more attractive than speculative Idealism as a vehicle for Christian thought in the American context.100 Bowne, moreover, was a more lucid writer, a better philosopher, a more ef- fective teacher than Mulford and highly visible in American Method- ism. He was head of the department of philosophy at Boston University from 1876-1910 and also dean of the graduate school there. Mulford did not occupy an important post academically or within his own de- nomination nor play a major public role there. Munger, who may have been over-sensitive on the issue, says that Anglicans suspected Mulford of unorthodoxy and that, as a result, the only teaching post offered to him was a minor position at the Episcopal Theological School. Munger adds that "the recognition of a theological degree was carefully with- held" and conjectures that Mulford's undisguised preference for Maurice and habitual questioning gave offence. Munger speaks of Mulford as having been conscious of this suspicion although never

99 Princeton Review, Jan., 1882. 100 I am grateful to Professor William R. Hutchison for suggestions on this point. 1984 ELISHA MULFORD (1833-85) AND HIS INFLUENCE 55 anxious to defend himself directly.101 But, it has finally to be admitted, one of the causes for Mulford's relative lack of influence lies in the books themselves. Certainly there are passages in both books where eloquence and clarity come together with fine force. Still, even the kindliest of reviewers lamented Mul- ford's obscurities. Bascom called the style of The Nation "stilted and technical" adding that many words were given unusual usages so that "the newness of the expressions lends to it a deceitful freshness."102 Reviewers were, perhaps, kinder to The Republic ofGodznd Mulford's occasional articles, above all his conversation, were freer in style and clearer than his books. Scudder writes: His books suffered from the restraint of his thought, and because their very completeness and finality of statement conspired to shut up the thought in them within certain definite limits. But in the freedom of conversation these limits were not suggested. . . .Let him get rid of the restrictions of a hard and fast systematic presentation, and he was himself again. . . .It was not that he was now vague where before he had been precise; he was free where before he had been fettered.103 There is, however, more than the constrictions of writing as compared with the ampler conditions of conversation, underlying Mulford's literary techniques. Mulford approached the task of writing in a highly self-conscious manner that was almost certain to affect his style for the worse.104 Conversation, correspondence, and occasional articles, quickly written on issues concerning which he felt deeply—to these Mulford brought vigour and color of style and, much of the time, clarity. Not so with his books. Seized with a strong conviction of their importance, he toiled away, writing, revising, re-writing and revising again. Scudder, who as editorial aide to Mulford's publishers, saw a good deal of the otherwise hidden processes of authorship, relates that the manuscript of The Nation was complete in 1867; it was finally

101 Century, 13, 892 102 Bascom, 479. 103 Scudder, 17-18. 104 Mulford is not, of course, alone in this. A.C. Benson has some interesting comments on Bishop B.F. Westcott and on his own father, Archbishop Benson, and claims that their head- master's (Prince Lee) stress on the "nuances" of words was disastrous for their style. "Writing in their hands became a task of portentous compression and almost frenzied tension." The Leaves of the Tree; studies tn biography, (London, 1911), 27. 56 COLIN BROWN January

published in 1870 after having undergone almost constant revision during the intervening years. "Seven times, Mulford told me, had he written the book over, and he certainly wrote it once more when he corrected his proofs."105 Somewhat similar was the case with The Re- public of God on which Mulford began work in 1871; by 1879 it had been subjected to three-re-writings and was then on its fourth.106 Such lengthy refining did produce some pure gold but, combined with Mulford's intense seriousness, also produced some opaque prose. Mulford solicited criticism from friends. At various stages, The Nation was read by Munger, L.D. Brewster, S.H. Nichols, and W.T. Wilson to learn their comments. While staying with Munger for the purpose of obtaining his advice, Mulford wrote to his wife, "Munger, too, likes it, but his criticism which has the highest value is very severe of the style."107 But Mulford did not always expect much of his critics: of Brewster's criticisms he wrote, in advance of a visit to him: "I hardly think it will serve me much."108 Although criticism was sought and offered, it is legitimate to wonder whether Mulford was willing to take full account of it. At times he reveled in a geographical isolation in which, removed from the arena of controversy, he lived while his books were being shaped. Mulford himself remarked: "I am glad I am away from universities, and American Dons and Doctors. The strife of sects is distant from me. And with my time of thought I can look with un- vexed mind on their most arrogant and confident assumptions."109 Such

105 Scudder, 15. G.L. Blackman comments on the writings of H.S. Nash who, like Mulford late in life, taught at the Episcopal Theological School, Cambridge, Mass "Nash's contemporaries found his books difficult. . .Nash, like Elisha Mulford, subjected his ideas to a long process of refining before he set them down on paper, and when he finally did so, he would express as it were the perfected thought, but with little reference to the intermediate stages through which it had passed, and almost no mention at all of the informational material which had nourished it on its way." Fatth and Freedom, a study of theological education and the Episcopal TheologicalSchool(NewYork, 1967), 328. 106 Mulford to L.D. Brewster Dec. 4 1872 and to Scudder, Nov 3 1879 See also fn 52, above. 107 Mulford to Rachel P Mulford, Nov. 3, 1869 108 ALS dated Feb. 9 1868 and Jan. 13 1870. 109 ALS to Scudder, Dec. 21,1877. On the other hand he could also write "But I want to see you, and want some long talk together. I miss a few men. I have too (sic) dwell perhaps too much in a Library." (ALS to W.T. Wilson, Jan. 10, 1865.) Commenting on Mulford's style Bascom observes "This method of expression would seem to have grown up from an intensely private thought—a mental growth which has suffered little contradiction or modification from other persons." (Op. at., 479) 1984 ELISHA MULFORD (1833-85) AND HIS INFLUENCE 57 isolation, allied with his intense seriousness about his ideas and their expression may well have inhibited receptivity to criticism. This im- perviousness was probably reinforced by deafness. From at least the Yale years onwards, Mulford did not so much converse as deliver oracular pronouncements, delightful and profound as these apparently were. The Yale obituary refers to "his familiar conversations, when he was wont almost to lecture." A.V.G. Allen's biographer relates that Mulford would drop into Mr. Allen's study generally about eleven at night, and there he would sit in silence for a moment. Then Mr. Allen would throw into the speaking-trumpet a word that would stir him up. Thereupon Mulford would launch forth on high talk, not at all concerned because no one troubled to talk back.n0 In any case, it is questionable whether any of his friends, with the possible exception of A.V.G. Allen (apparently an acquaintance only from late 1880 on), were Mulford's equal in learning; they tended, on the whole, to be admirers first and critics second. The absence of ef- fective critics was all the more serious because Mulford was utilizing the ideas and to some extent the terminology, too, of German idealistic philosophy. None of Mulford's friends (again Allen is probably an exception) seem to have known German. This was a serious disadvantage to their exercising effectively the role which Mulford implored them to fulfil. It is possible, then, to suggest why Mulford did not write more lucidly; that he did not do so was probably one factor in limiting his influence. A.P. Stokes claimed that uDr. Mulford's fame is not equal to his deserts."111 Phillips Brooks was nearer the truth when he said of The Republic of God: Dr Mulford was a most interesting man, and his book is one of the most inspiring and exasperating things that anybody ever wrote. It is as bright and deep and vague as the sky. It will never be much read, but a few men will get out of it what they will interpret to the world. He was not a man for the ecclesiasticism of the Church to make much out of, but he was felt, and his loss nobody can make good.112

110Slattery, 81-2. 111 Memorials of'Eminent Yale Men (New Haven, 1914), 107 112 A.V G. Allen, Life and Letter of Phillips Brooks (London, 1900), II, 309 58 COLIN BROWN January

But there is, perhaps, more to be said than Brooks' attempt to save Mulford from oblivion. Mulford's importance is not merely in what he wrote and its rather limited influence on others. His personal contacts with prominent theological liberals—Munger and Allen being the most important—played a role in the history of what has been called "Christocentric liberalism." Mulford's early death robbed the Episco- pal Theological School of one of its more interesting teachers and probably deprived the Social Gospel movement of another literary apologist who would have been an avowed critic of individualism whether in religion or politics. Mulford remains a minor figure but he was a valued friend of more prominent theologians, and was part of movements which brought important changes in religious, social, and political thought in the closing decades of the nineteenth century.

University of Canterbury New Zealand COLIN BROWN