Eucken shows in general extreme reluctance to make a historical event a
foundation of belief, and this no doubt accounts to some extent for his
attitude with regard to miracles. He points out that "the founders of
religion have themselves protested against a craving after sensuous
signs," and that this protest "is no other than the sign of spiritual
power and of a Divine message and greatness." He considers that the
belief in, and craving for, sensuous miracle is an outcome of a
"mid-level of religion," where belief is waning and spirituality
declining. While, thus, he does not believe in sensuous miracle, he
acknowledges and lays the greatest stress on one miracle--the presence
of the Spiritual Life in man. It is, indeed, this miracle that renders
others unnecessary.

In discussing the doctrine of the _Incarnation_, Eucken attempts to get
at the inner meaning--the truth which the doctrine endeavours to
express, and he finds this to consist in the fact of the ultimate union
of the human and Divine, and this truth is one that we dare not
renounce. He criticises the attempt that is made in Christianity to show
that such union only obtained once in the course of history. Incarnation
is not one historical event, but a spiritual process; not an article of
belief, but a living experience of each spiritual personality.

He considers as injurious to religion in general the Christian
conception of the _Atonement_. He believes that the idea that is to be
expressed is that of the nearness of God to man in guilt and in
suffering. In endeavouring to express this close intimacy the idea of
suffering was transferred to God himself. The anthropomorphic idea of
reconciliation and substitution thus arose, and this Eucken considers to
have done harm. "The notion that God does not help us through His own