It is the object of these papers neither to find differences nor to apologise for them, but to pause for a while to consider how far they really exist. We wish to learn to appreciate something of another’s point of view without sacrificing anything we treasure as true ourselves. Is truth different for different men? Or is it vital to some men and a matter of little concern to others? Or are our differences questions purely of emotion or feeling or of the company we like to keep? If we answer negatively to these questions, then differences between sincere people must be mainly questions of misunderstanding. We cannot hope here to heal a schism, but something will be gained if we can help to remove one stumbling-block. This is worth while, even if the stumbling-block be small or mainly a legacy of the past.

I am confining myself to a doctrine which was at one time considered vital, especially among Methodists. And, though it may be less considered today, it has its intrinsic interest as well as being a doctrine that might be revived in any back-to-the-Reformation movement. I refer to the Lutheran doctrine of assurance of grace, referred to usually by Wesley in Pauline terms as the Inward Witness of the Spirit. I do not know whether the Wesleyans used to regard this as a peculiar Protestant doctrine, but it is certain that Luther himself looked upon it as such. It was to him part of his justification of his big step in rejecting the external authority of the Catholic Church and was further dictated by his desire to gain an interior feeling of peace with God more vividly felt than any assurance such as Catholics normally seek and find in their sacraments. They all felt confirmed in their appeal to assurance by such Pauline passages as the one, ‘The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God.’ They made it part and parcel of their doctrine of justification by faith or confidence that Christ had washed away their individual personal sins.