It is the peculiar distinction of Steven Runciman to have directed our attention to the importance of the twelfth century in the “hardening” of the schism between the Greek and Latin Churches. In the main, Runciman attributes this unhappy development to those tensions which arose between East and West as a result of the crusades and the establishment of the Latin States in Syria-Palestine. While it is not our intention to question Runciman's arguments, it may be suggested that there are other fruitful approaches to the problem of relations between Rome and Constantinople in the twelfth century which Runciman has touched on only in passing. In general terms, it is the purpose of this article to suggest that the development of the schism must also be understood within the context of a complex political drama, centred on southern Italy, in which the Papacy, the Normans, the Germans and the Greeks were the chief protagonists. Our investigation will be confined to the period extending from the signing of the Concordat of Worms in 1122 to the death of Pope Eugene III in 1153. The purpose of the opening section which follows is: 1) to describe the genesis of this web of conflicting aims and objectives; 2) to indicate in what ways the problem of church union had become woven into the fabric of these political developments; 3) to delineate the various responses, both ecclesiastical and political, which the Papacy made to these new developments in her relations with the Greeks prior to the Second Crusade.

In the Reformation the phrase “The Word of God” was mighty and prevailed. It was pronounced with assurance and heard with acceptance. To use it was to invoke in one's behalf a divine utterance of incontestible authority, that was documented of old in the canonical scriptures but now freshly reverenced and understood after long centuries of disregard. The Reformation was, or at any rate aimed to be, a reform of the visible church by applying to it the superior authority of the Word of God, so that the Word may be said to be the panoply of the Reformation, its all-sufficient armor and resource. This appears from Luther's early writings through Calvin's whole work, and that of Protestant writers to a much later era, and is a familiar note in our day.

Historians who have been concerned with Christian missions to the Indians of Oregon have generally limited their writings to denominational histories or to biographies glorifying the missionaries. Little has been done to correlate the efforts of the various individuals and denominations involved, in the light of the economic and political situation, so necessary for the presentation of a complete picture of the total missionary enterprise in the proper perspective. In this brief paper an attempt will be made to do just this.

There are growing evidences of a sense of concern with respect to the interpretation accorded Adolf Harnack and his liberal colleagues in the three decades since his death. As a result, appeals have been made for a re-evaluation of liberal theology, and of Harnack in particular. Certainly one of the tasks which is pre-requisite to such a reassessment is a consideration of the historical situation which shaped Harnack's thought and in some measure, at least, determined the options for his own position. Perhaps this article may contribute to this preliminary discussion, and nothing more ambitious than a consideration of Harnack's background and cultural environment, with a concluding characterization of his position, will be attempted here.

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries progressivism and social Christianity were two answers to the need of that day for social action and reform. A study of the social philosophy of Josiah Strong, a leader in the movement for applied Christianity, provides an interesting illustration of the harmony of the social ideas of these two movements.