copies. Today they have more than a dozen.

How does Stephen Crisp's theology differ from that of Bunyan's? In
the first place, while Crisp's pilgrim starts off with a pack on his
back of luggage for his journey, Bunyan's pilgrim had as his pack the
burden of guilt which is original sin. Second, Crisp's pilgrim soon
gives up confidence in human leadership having discovered a measure of
the Light. Third, he crosses the river early on his journey, whereas
for Bunyan's pilgrim the river is at the end, the river of death.
Fourth, Crisp's pilgrim reaches the House of God in this life. He
finds a satisfied multitude in the outer court. They invite him to
stay with them in easy circumstances but catching sight of his guide,
the Light, as it passes through a narrow door (compare Bunyan's wicket
gate) he presses on, divests himself of his travel-worn garments and
enters the House of God. Here, like the Friends with whom Stephen
Crisp had found Peace after his own period of seeking, he first rests
from struggle, then finds his calling which is to supply the needs
of the young, and finally aspires to bring his good tidings to the
Babylon from which he had set out.

"The Pilgrim's Progress" is incomparably more exciting with raging
beasts, Giant Despair, and Apollyon with all his hosts. The people
Bunyan's pilgrim meets are more vivid, portrayed with cruel detail and
lusty humor. Theologically the Quaker tract is of a different age,
not less exacting, but less pictorial. The medieval detail is gone but
intense inwardness, devotion, and obedience are still required of the
seeker to enable him to become a finder.

In his "Varieties of Religious Experience," which I heard William
James deliver as a series of lectures at Stanford University when I