In the same way, there will be progress in Christian knowledge only as long as we accept the challenge of the difficult or repellent doctrines.
A “liberal” Christianity which considers itself free to alter the faith whenever the faith looks perplexing or repellent must be completely stagnant, Progress is made only into a resisting material.
What we deny is that he can honestly continue to be a Conservative agent and to receive money from one party while he supports the policy of another.
Even when we have thus ruled out teaching which is in direct contradiction to our profession, we must define our task still further.
Each of us has his individual emphasis: each holds, in addition to the faith, many opinions which seem to him to be consistent with it and true and important. But as apologists it is not our business to defend them. 25: on a certain point the has “no commandment of the Lord” but gives “his judgment.” No one is left in doubt as to the difference in status implied.
We are defending Christianity; not “my religion.” When we mention our personal opinions we must always make quite clear the difference between them and the faith itself. This distinction, which is demanded by honesty, also gives the apologist a great tactical advantage.
The great difficulty is to get modern audiences to realize that you are preaching Christianity solely and simply because you happen to think it true; they always suppose you are preaching it because you like it or think it good for society or something of that sort.
Now a clearly maintained distinction between what the faith actually says and what you would like it to have said or what you understand or what you personally find helpful or think probable, forces your audience to realize that you are tied to your data just as the scientist is tied by the results of the experiments; that you are not just saying what you like.
Men who have passed beyond these boundary lines in either direction are apt to protest that they have come by their unorthodox opinions honestly.
In defense of these opinions they are prepared to suffer obloquy and to forfeit professional advancement. But this simply misses the point which so gravely scandalizes the layman.