The greatness of the book as an intellectual
achievement has not had full recognition, chiefly
because its theological surroundings have not been
understood. It is not in its essence a discovery, for
its main idea lies at the bottom of all the historic
religions. It is doubtful if Bushnell at first clearly
recognized it as a return to former methods except
in some general way. It is weU that he did not,
for a formal return was neither needed nor possible.
Nor was it a conscious prophecy of the method
of religious culture that was about to come in ; he
worked at closer hand. The book sprang out of
an imperative sense of what needed to be done;
and the fact that it turned out to be, in effect, a
semi-repudiation of the environing theology, was
an incident and not due to purpose. It was not
an attack, but it imdermined and displaced, and
prepared the way for that which was to come.
