divisive has become a unifying force. The lines of cleavage at the present time are not primarily religious but ethical or philosophical. There is no doubt then that religion plays a part in promoting social unity today which it has never been able to play before. Communication has increased mutual knowledge of those belonging to different bodies. Knowledge has lessened antagonism and increased toleration. Social unity is now being aided rather than hindered by religious beliefs. CECIL C. NORTH, DE PAUW UNIVERSITY A statistical inquiry is always open to the danger of giving impressions not in accordance with the facts of the subject investigated. This seems to me particularly possible in a study of this bulletin on religious denominations, and I think that one of Professor Coe's remarks indicates a possibly erroneous interpretation. His statement was that the figures indicated a very considerable increase in the heterogeneity of our religious beliefs in America, basing that conclusion on the increase in the number of denominations enumerated. These figures, however, express only the formal side of the matter, and do not at all touch the equally important fact that in a large number of respects we have grown more homogeneous in our beliefs. While, of course, the fact is not amenable to a statistical inquiry, we are all quite conscious that the people of all denominations have had a tendency to accept a considerable number of common elements of belief. For example, the differences between the Calvinists and the Arminians are much less acute, and there is a decided tendency on the part of churches holding these different theological tenets to unite on certain fundamentals and neglect or minimize their differences. In fact the differences between the various denominations seem to be resolving themselves into a difference between the conservatives and the radicals, just as there seems to be a realignment in the membership of the two dominant political parties. Any complete account of the religious beliefs of a community must consider these harmonizing processes as well as the mere increase of denominations. This same fact seems to have been neglected in Professor Gidding's excellent paper yesterday in which he reached the conclusion that in respect to religion we were becoming more heterogeneous in America. error. Another of Professor Coe's statements seems to contain a possible On the basis of an increase in church membership relatively greater than the increase in population during the sixteen years under consideration, he concludes that religion is not losing its hold on the people of the United States. Here again there are some facts which the figures do not indicate, namely, the meaning of church membership to the individual. A rather definite impression prevails that joining a church is a much less serious matter for us than it was for our fathers. It is a well-known fact, of course, that many churches have considerably changed the requirements for membership. It would be extremely interesting to know what part of this great increase in church membership is due to a serious consideration of religion, and what part is due to a desire for formal connection with the respectable element of the community. EDWIN C. WALKER, NEW YORK CITY The increase in church membership, as indicated by the figures quoted, in all likelihood is real in the numerical sense. That it means a relatively widening acceptance of the ancient creeds, is more than doubtful. It must be remembered that the standards of membership in most of, if not all, the Protestant bodies have greatly changed in recent years. The alteration has been going on for fifty years; it has been proceeding at an accelerated velocity during the later decades of the half-century. Formerly, orthodoxy of belief was the final test of fitness for membership, rigidly insisted on, no matter how exemplary the conduct of the candidate. But theological doctrines largely have lost their power to bar; the general good character of the applicant for membership, coupled with his or her social desirability and willingness to help in practically unsectarian enterprises, has opened the way for the increase found by Mr. Coe. Even as long as twenty-five or more years ago, I know of instances in the West where men who rejected every fundamental tenet of Christianity were occupying positions of trust and responsibility in evangelical churches. The lowering of the doctrinal fences has operated in two ways: On the one hand, the inquiry into the beliefs of otherwise acceptable candidates for membership has grown more and more lax, and, on the other, men who could not have affirmatively answered certain questions touching various dogmas of the creeds as formerly interpreted, and who, furthermore, could not have gained their own consent to affiliate themselves with churches standing actually on the narrow doctrinal platforms of a hundred years ago, now find little or no difficulty in working within one or another of these churches for what they regard as human betterment here and in this day. In a word, the Protestant church is in a state of evolution from other-worldliness to this-worldliness, insisting less and less on belief and more and more on social usefulness, thus making it easier year by year for the non-orthodox to come into its fold. T. J. RILEY, WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Can Professor Coe tell whether the church is maintaining itself and gaining in both the cities and the rural districts, and if not what are the facts in the case? I would also like to know whether the excess of churches is to be found chiefly in the country districts, including the villages, or in the larger cities and towns. J. E. CUTLER, WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY I should like to ask Dr. Coe a question. It has been generally understood, I think, that the census of churches and church membership taken in 1890 was extremely defective and on the whole rather unreliable. Presumably the statistics given in Census Bulletin 103 are more complete and much more reliable. I should like to ask Dr. Coe, if, in using these two sources as a basis for his paper, he gave any consideration to the fact that one was possibly more complete and more trustworthy than the other. GEORGE A. COE In reply to a question whether the apparent increase in church members may not be due in part to improved methods in securing census returns, Professor Coe said in substance: "It is difficult to say exactly what effect upon membership statistics these improved methods have had. Even if the tendency of such improvement in the methods of government were to enumerate members heretofore not enumerated, corresponding improvement by the churches in their own methods of keeping membership lists would tend to reduce the apparent membership by dropping the names of members who have been lost track of. As a matter of fact, the churches, or some of them, have been pruning their membership lists during these sixteen years. One of the large denominations dropped from its rolls in a single year, if my memory serves me, something like 50,000 names-the number was certainly very large. Such pruning of membership lists is likely to offset any apparent increase that may result from changes in the methods of the census. But it is not clear that improved census methods tend to increase the apparent number of members. On the contrary, the universal desire of the denominations to make a large showing might be favored by the looser methods and checked by the more cautious ones. Whether the improvement in census methods has, in fact, had any influence, I cannot say from any data in my possession. But, on the whole, in view of the known pruning of membership lists within denominations, I am inclined to think that the apparent membership increase shown by the new census is a real one." In reply to a question whether the increase in membership appears in the cities as well as the country at large, Professor Coe said in substance: "Separate statistics for cities are not given in Bulletin 103. But we can secure an approximate answer to the question by considering the distribution by states. Thus, the increase of membership in proportion to population is high in the North Atlantic states, with their great aggregations of laborers in manufacturing centers, but low in the South Atlantic states, in which the population is more scattered. But there is increase in both. In general, the Catholic membership has increased with the greatest rapidity in predominantly manufacturing states, while the relative losses of the Catholics have been greatest in New Mexico, District of Columbia, Oregon, Minnesota, Wyoming, and Florida. On the other hand, the relative gains of the Protestants have been in Nebraska, Washington, Colorado, Idaho, District of Columbia, Iowa, Oregon, Virginia, Georgia, and California, and their relative losses have been altogether in New England, the Middle States, and North Carolina (specifically, in order, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode Island, New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, Vermont). I am not able, with the data at hand, to say how much of the membership gain in the eastern manufacturing states is due to foreign immigration." THE TEACHING OF SOCIOLOGY JAMES QUAYLE DEALEY Brown University The methodology of sociology has so often been set forth in formal volumes and in elaborated articles, that nothing more on this subject for the present needs to be said. But, given these formal discussions, there still may be occasion for statements in respect to methods of application, so as to show how in actual teaching the content of sociology may be built up in quantity and quality. The writer in attempting such an exposition disclaims any desire to depict a model procedure, and, admitting that one's "personal equation" always includes a fraction of error, he craves pardon for his sins of omission and commission and for the intrusion of personal methods, pleading in extenuation orders from the honorable President of this association. Under the name of social science sociology has been taught at Brown University for nearly twenty years. In 1906 the growing importance of the subject resulted in the establishment within the department of a chair of sociology and this has been ably filled since that date by Dr. Lester F. Ward. Professor Ward now has charge of the advanced classes in sociology, using his own methods and system, so that the following remarks apply only to courses formerly or at present given by other members of the department. In social studies proper we have about three hundred students a year, receiving them into our classes from the beginning of the sophomore year. In these courses the practical problem of teaching a difficult subject to large classes with the utmost economy of expense and energy has compelled us to limit ourselves in the main to the presentation of the fundamental aspects of sociology, and hence we were under the necessity of deciding what these fundamentals are. In the early years of the department it seemed rather necessary occasionally to dogmatize, arguing that there really was |