2 10 33 https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/884668c3a8669192d7da90672e43d5bb.pdf?Expires=1781740800&Signature=C4Fe6sC5FbV7c2NjmX38Oehh001zOnjg%7EPGCu5iMnHVulQL6JZktdILKPkw-OCWn7fLJFSMgA2QNe3Wm9KYz5a2OnYoD-uMATWYIjsn-p1HJJvwIP95e-%7EmCzAopAzKNTyR0OMeX-WsVWJuCxhTJwWWiJxdwo94lA-lXP%7EeiBWdQXY0Nfrfni0liSRajZ%7E0L3p2u2Wm8cFALGJzb8Ix-AXoyoLizkibGk18N1EYIhOIrMSWpqKTCpBSqhdwG9q8-fIkJLkuzA1XkVErmzN9%7Ej6AQj0qpME2gCYeQclwvlKWj1hxzS1QYH0ysal%7EWnVCw%7E%7EJ-i771O1s6EriSYAaw1g__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM c0ef8aefa89c77a729c471488e6dbb74 PDF Text Text ^88i&c--^ ' '-'' wf . 207 ,__Jfcs£j adobe, and boasting of but one story, of course; but it is not every one in Arizona who can build a house with four rooms,— if the doors do consist of old blankets, and the floor and ceiling, like me walls, of mud. A discharged soldier kept the station now—-a large yellow dog his sole companion. The man slept on the same bed that had borne Hen­ dricks’s corpse, and the cudgel, with the murdered man’s blood dried on it, was lying at the foot of it. “And where is his grave?” I asked, as we stood in front of the house. The man’s eye travelled slowly over the desolate landscape before us. There were sand, verde, and cactus on one side of us, and there were sand, verde, and cactus on the other. “Well, really now, I couldn’t tell. You see, I wasn’t here when they put him in the ground, and I have n’t thought of his grave since I come. Fact is, I ’ve got to keep my eyes open for live Greasers and PacheIndians, and do n’t get much time to hunt up dead folks’s graves! ” CADENABBIA. BY H. D. JENKINS. otel belle vue, May 22.— not that enough ? Not the whole mar­ ffllave been sitting at my win- shalling of the nightly host could give surer dow to-night, half living in the pres­ tokens of a bending over all. ent, half wandefrng in. dreams. The The mystery of misery, the burden of sin, a little mirth, two lights dimly lake stretches OU't black before me; beyond this the.'black hills shut out twinkling above, —that is the picture, the farther world; and the scarcely less and under it we will write “The KHffilmlouds hide the heavens. From World.” the opposite shore, where the few I hear the bells ringing from unseen lights of Bellagio alone relieve the bell-towers along the shore and up darkness, the music of a band is among the hills. They are calling us wafted across the waters of Como. to midnight prayers; — that is a good Now the strain is no louder than the use to make of midnight, a midnight voice of the spring in a lone pine — with two stars ! The bells have ceased, the lights now it throbs and pulsates and whirls until I feel it in all my blood. When are out, and the music is hushed at the wind is favorable I catch the faint Bellagio; but the stars shine upon the rhythm of distant feet, the sound of sleep of the world, as they shone upon “dancers dancing in tune.” So we its dancing and its praying. live and love, — the black earth and A/hy 23.—I was busy in my room waves, the hidden heaven, — in the centre an hour of music and of danc- all the fore part of the day, to-day, k jng;—a short joy that wearies and but toward evening I walked out with palls, a darkness measureless and im- a friend along the western shore. (Cadenabbia is on the west of Como, B^petrable. As I look up there are two stars that about mid-way of its entire length.) have broken through the clouds. Is We must have walked several miles H �208 CADENABBIA. -V EM ARCH-, up the lake and back. The hills on and lakes, he mistakes- every hour of the side where we were rise sharply sunshine for a summer/? The mornffrom the water’s edge to a height of a mg was so bright that we were in thousand feet. Two or three miles haste to have a row. We secured a from the hotel the road is overhung very egg-shell of a boat, and pulled by their precipitous walls. The road briskly for a little chapel on the oppo­ itself is never more than a stone’s site shore. Everything promised well throw from the lake, and frequently is on the start, but when we had reached built its own width into the water. the middle of the lake the raw chilly The eastern shore ran raggedly winds from the north spoiled all our along, clothed with fresh foliage from sport; one of our fir oars snapped off base to summit, while here and there close to the row-lock, and we returned majestic snow-peaks lifted their white to wharf in front of the hotel, feeling heads behind and above the shore somewhat crestfallen. hills. Monte Legnone, far up the Once again on shore, we deter­ lake, stood royally against the blue mined that the day wh ichj^agfelyad, sky, guarding with silent fidelity the for rowing must ■Be.-.J.u&t. gateway of the Spliigen. The ter­ climbing. We hadseen'what'^2 races, gray with olives, green with thought was a convent far up on i^e mulberries, and tremulous with vines, mountain overlooking CadenabLa^^; were vocal with the voices of children and yesterday had speculated mucli J gathering leaves for the silk-worms, upon the whys ancmVvnercfores. of its or watching the browsing of the position. It seemed a good time now goats. to investigate this matter. Our fiasco The water in the lake was clear and had only lost us an hour; there was beautiful. Looking at the pebbles time and to spare. forty feet below the surface, one Our ideas of the route to be pursued seemed only to be looking through a were grandly indefinite; but we-took?* denser atmosphere. But as the sun the only road l^ding'joff.S^d back passed westward, the shadows black­ the shore road* To 'our amazement/ ' ened and deepened the lake, until all it brought us tix /CadenaiDbia'/p.r'oper^p picturesqueness was lost in the horri­ Somewhere back of a hillock we found ble. Where there had been ripples it; — and the very antipodes of the“^ and laughter, with all the changeful Cadenabbia of the Hotel Belle Vue it hues of the sunset, there was now was, albeit within hail of the voice. only a sobbing along the foot of all We had heretofore supposed that our . the hills, and a wide, yawning dark­ hotel and its dependencies comprised ness, as the mouth of hell. the town; but back of that hillock We walked rapidly home, preceded lay the aged, squalid sire of this aris­ part of the way by four peasant girls, tocratic scion. Of all Italian villages who were singing some rustic song in it is the dirtiest, the foulest, and the a minor key. They carried all four crookedest. ^We were in its streejfeg^p parts, and wer$ admirable in harmony before we fairly knew it; and once in, and time. Undoubtedly the unknown we bade fair never to get out of'it?'■ r tongue and the gathering gloom added The whole village cannot cover moreT^ much to the weird nature of their than two or three score of acres/$®jr music. it has grown on so original a plan that each street is endless. Another May 24.—To-day we were out im­ unfortunate peculiarity of the town mediately after breakfast, by ten is that the houses are built with their o’clock at latest, upon the lake. back part before them; — at least so When one comes from the,scorching it appeared to us. After stumbling Lombardy plains to these mountains helplessly up and down and around �f»J 1 CADENABBIA. -tts, roughly cobbled alleys until about ady to sit down and wait for the wn to get sober, a Deus ex machina the person of a small boy appeared sddenly before us. Ragged, bareoted, almost bare - headed, sunirned, somewhat tattooed with varits shades of dirt,—he took us captive. y some intuition he had compremded our purpose, and motioning us to follow, he led us by a sort of rk-screw passage out of the village, to the fields overlooking it and the ke beyond. gQa,U^^uy';'jpfl~grfinage hung far above Us, like an i Q l^estiyO^ir youthful guide was C '‘j FyfAftiiliar:withthbyay. The once a time when the feet of penitent hardly < ' rustics had marked this way more without assistance. , surely. Had this day that there was We could well believe naught to tell us^b”t die same old story of the Eclipse ofJFaith£-^-r^rq 1 """ ’An hour’s steady pull brought us to the miniature plateau on which the church stood. It was of the type A common ijhjt$eb co bitty districts of Italy; —an- irregular mass of buildings with a squqrp bell-tower, built of ’ rough stones that were smoothed over with stucco. The doors stood ajar, the windows were broken and gaping. There were two or three sombre rooms, wherein some hermit priest may have drearily watched out the hours of night and day; but now the whole was tenantless and forsaken. The chapel, floored with coarse red brick, -contamedrhalf a score of hardwood benches,’-.’The altar was cov1 ered with a soiled, faded, and dusty $ cloth. Above the’ altar, and behind a I frame, stood a huge waxy doll in an elaborate blue sitk~dress, properly beflounced, and crowned with a crown of tarnished gilt. A dozen vases perched here and there held up as many bouquets of paper flowers, con' sisting chiefly of brown roses. We passed behind the screen that 209 we might examine more closely this forlorn representative of her who was Blessed among Women. And here we saw that, whatever might be the faith of to-day, it respected the veneration of yesterday; for from neck, breast, arms, and hands, depended the offer­ ings of the past. The cheap jewelry of rustics bedizened the whole front of the image. Brooches, buckles, ear-rings, and finger-rings, dangled noW'where they had first been hung. Amohg uhe Others j^^re two finger­ rings of solid gold, — who may say bow greatdfe tempwon to the half­ starved village below ? We watched our little bandit of a guide to see with what sorriof feeling he might re­ gard these, perhaps the richest trea­ sures his eyes had ever rested upon ; but although he ransacked every nook with the utmost nonchalance, he did not appear to have any more thought of coveting these sacred offerings than of coveting the stars. Perhaps a man’s life would notFhave been as safe here as the Virgin’swings. Just off from the chapel was a little sacristy, scarcely larger than a closet. No robes, ewers, chalices, or crucifiKes appeared, but then-room was multitudinously hung with votive of­ ferings that could not find place about the Vragjin. They were rough paint­ ings in oil, averaging about eight inches by ten in size of canvas, and unframed. Here was a man falling over a precipice; here one thrown from a horse; there aayoman knocked down by a run-away; and so on through the long possibilities of acci­ dents that “flesh is heir to.” Several were of little children enduring all imaginable bangin^-about, while a few represent pallid invalids lying in their beds. In some the Virgin was seen looking down from the left up­ per corner; in others a hand was warding off the impending evil; and in yet others the saved or restored were kneeling in reverential thanks­ giving before Her in whom they had put their hope. So we saw by these �210 CADENABBIA. rude memorials of gratitude and de­ votion that the old pathway to La Madonna di San Martino had not been worn wholly by the feet of sor­ rowing penitents. We lingered in the little lonely old church with a growing fondness for its “short and simple annals of the poor;” and when at last we did con­ sent to leave it, we carefully closed its one-hinged door, and even found means of stopping up one or two broken panes of glass, that the storms of the mountain might have less free access to the place made forever sa­ cred by the love and worship of past days. Then, taking a last look through the mended window at the blue eyes and dusty curls of its mute custodian, we went around before the church and sat down upon the edge of the terrace whereon the church is built. This plat, scarcely more than four rods square, has at its back a perpendicu­ lar wall of rock several hundred feet high; and so steep is the ascent to it that it almost appears to overhang the lake. But here on this miniature shelf hung between heaven and earth, Na­ ture had not forgotten to do honor to the consecrated ground; for the mountain-grass had carpeted the ter­ race with thickest velvet, and the birds had dropped here and there the seeds of those lilies that He loved. One or two horn-bells gave their mute sympathy and encouragement to the bell that had hung so long si­ lent in the weather-beaten campanile, and a columbine growing in an angle of the wall seemed as if endeavoring to hide an unsightly hole that time had eaten in the stucco of the tower. Below us the lake lay shining in the sun, its three branches distinctly visi­ ble from this height. Half-a-hundred miniature sails were scattered about on its surface; the white villas along the shore gleamed amid their groves of chestnut and olive, and the peaks, “ shelved and terraced round,” showed many a black-roofed cottage and lowly chapel. It was only when the rocks [MarcT behind the church threw over us thchill of a shadow, that we could persuade ourselves to bid good-bye to San Martino and its outlook, and to. retrace the steep and winding way that had led us thither. May 25.—To-day we took the little steamer that plies upon Como, to the north end of the lake. The pano­ rama of mountains, snow-peaks, cat­ aracts, villas, villages, and ruins, is one of surprising beauty. On our re­ turn we stopped at Rezzonico, nin® miles from Cadenabbia, and walked from there home. The road wound around crags and through vineyards! now skirting the water’s edge, now hundreds of feet above it. But with all this beauty, in Italy one must needs see something that is disgust­ ing and horrible. On the edge of one village we came upon their burying-ground, or Campo Santo. It was walled around with heavy stonig'X’M' the soil could not have covered the solid rock by more than five or six feet, possibly by less. /' To enlarge the enclosure had- perhaps never oc­ curred to the mind of any; sb the only resource when the place was once full was to dig up a skeleton every time room was needed for a corpse. The result of this process, long continued, was a double or triple row of skulls all around the foot of the wall. Some who perchance had been in special honor in their day, had a niche scooped out of the wall wherein their skulls sat grinning! a mocking commentary upon the world’s gratitude and remembrance. There was an old church near by, with cracked walls and leaning tower. We peered through its dirt-encrusted windows, and saw the last restingplace of its many priests. One side of a room, that might once have been a sacristy, was covered with rows of square pigeon-holes, and in these the disjointed skeletons were stored away, the skull to the front, and this surq mounted by the priestly cap that had �1870.] CADENABBIA. I been its owner’s badge of office. Some of these Caps had slipped jauntily over on one^side, and gave to the eyeless, tongueless crania a knowing look and the appearance of a ghastly leer. We could almost imagine that tjfey winked at us and were ready to offer a joke on their past and present. We were well content that Provi­ dence had never “cast our lines” in tjhgt place, except as tourists. ■^iy/27. — Hitherto our rambles had been mostly to the northward; but to­ day we turned southward, following the shore road for two or three miles. This is the most fashionable part of the lake, and presents nearly a continuous line of country-seats and I pleasure-gardens. We had visited the best of these in odd hours, but toht dM^haji set out for a good half-day’s tramp. So we passed on through and across the promontory of Blbianello. Perhaps three miles from Cadenabbia we found the road we were looking for, one turning off to our right and leading up the sloping and well-wooded mountain that here rises from the lake. We had heard that well up on this mountain was a church built by the neighboring districts in gratitude for delivery • from some pestilence. It of course was Predicated to the Virgin, and called, in commemoration of its inMaria del Soccorso. We had »ot been long upon this branchroad before we knew that we were to be well repaid for our walk. It led us (Erectly to the forest—a forest of grand old trees and the freshest foliage. The day was bright, cool and bracing. The chestnuts were in blossom, and wild flowers in abundance f grew on either hand. The road, though apparently built only for an approach to the church, was solidly i constructed of stone and in good repair. Presently it began to ascend; . and then we found that winding in and ,out, zigzagging upwards, it brought jus every few moments to the edge of I ’■ ’ ■ ''T 211 a picturesque ravine which cleft the mountain side. This little valley was a very gem, broad enough at the bot­ tom to give room for toy-like grassplats, filled with the music of running water and the mimic thunder of cas­ cades, and checkered with sun and shade by reason of the trees that partly shut out the day. At one point, half-way up, we were content to forget aTl else and enjoy the pros­ pect. Lying prone on a bed of moss, well sheltered by a noble chestnut, we looked across the ravine and its water-falls up the bright shining lake for miles and miles. . But when we gave our attention to the matter more immediately at hand, we found ourselves ascending one of the most curious of the many Cal­ varies of Italy. Beginning nearly at the foot of the hill was a series of fourteen chapels. They were from twelve to twenty feet square, built of stuccoed stone, surmounted by a tile roof, and lighted by grated windows. In each, life-sized figures of wood or terra-cotta (we could not surely de­ termine which), represented some scenes from the New Testament, en tableaux. Beginning with the Annun­ ciation, they carried the Wondrous Story on to its completion in the Res­ urrection. In the Annunciation there were the angel visitant in white robes, the kneeling maiden, the burst of glory above, the beauty of the white lilies below. In the Nativity no part of the humble details was lacking. There stood ox and ass and foal looking down into the manger where the Babe was lying. As we drew near the close of the scenes, the fig­ ures increased in number and in dra­ matic arrangement. In the portrayal of the Crucifixion scenes there must have been forty and fifty figures in certain of the chapels. There were men on horseback, men carrying lad­ ders, soldiers with lances, and slaves with the instruments of torture. True to the poetic instinct that is in the humblest artist, all that had a part in �212 HEROICS. the cruelties of the trial, torture, and death, were almost apish in their ugli­ ness; but contrary to the “unities” of art, the leading actor in these wickednesses had a goitred neck that must have been modelled from some poor Swiss rather than from a Syrian. On our return we had the curiosity to count the figures in all the chapels, and found the total to be no less than two hundred and fifty. The church itself was a spacious and somewhat stately building, now in charge of a family of peasants. The estates which once supported it having been confiscated by the gov­ ernment, its church mice were starved out. There appeared to have been no service in it for some time, and we judged from the words of its custo­ dian that it had somehow fallen un­ der the ban of the state. A few of its relics were displayed, one of which, an amber crucifix eight or ten inches in height, was an exquisite bit of ma­ terial and a real triumph of art. The x [March, embroidered robes, though handled by our peasant friend with much care, did not greatly impress us, remember­ ing certain pontifical garments we had seen elsewhere. But the crown­ ing glory of the Madonna del Soccorso was the Madonna herself, a short and somewhat stumpy doll in the inevitable blue silk dress, with wax cheeks, considerably darkened by thumb marks. This we were assured was “multo miracnloso" — a great miracle-worker; but not having any particular occasion for a miracle at the time, we did not test the accuracy of our friend’s information. So we gave him a liberal fee, bade him Intono giorno, and walked leisurely back to Cadenabbia, watching the sunlight creeping up the hills to the east of the lake, and reaching the Hotel, dpiner, and rest, just as the last rays^f the sunset were reddening the mouh tain-tops above the terraces of Bel­ lagio. HEROICS. UT of the darkness and into the light,— Battling with wrong and upholding the right; O Up from the depths of our mis’ry we rise, Into the realms of His joy in the skies. God gives us strength, and its use keeps us strong; Only its disuse and misuse are wrong. Up with the banner!—the struggle begin I Labor is virtue, and idleness sin. Muscle’s a blessing, and weakness a curse; Strength is a fortune, and health is the purse. Brawn is not shameful, and swarth is no ban; Brains are not colored when cheeks become tan. This is the measure of manhood in men,— Victory won with a sword, plough, or pen. J 01 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Cadenabbia Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Jenkins, H. D. Description An account of the resource Place of publication: [California] Collation: 207-212 p. ; 24 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Publication information from KVK. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available [s.n.] Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1870 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5735 Subject The topic of the resource Italy Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (Cadenabbia), identified by </span><span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk">Humanist Library and Archives</a></span><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Conway Tracts https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/89eaf79e3c2f63a625bcdcef5ca6c42f.pdf?Expires=1781740800&Signature=U0KeMA7vCB6kmkqFUNFkErDwxtaUXcnFNhqfXsJV57D4Hf2kEt7C3lhv-n52SxJwzGQczY3GzWkXprQFqpPy7MiULuQdcI2p%7EM7djIjQs5pdsbVHfki2YGue-3%7EUGpaYUTZJaPRbzuOrbVcmUvqMOG4XRpL1NhFZpnZMP4Ogy7UMbuRqLiWME2FOmIOiTTKFWS613jyaEb1JtCP8YDrFu3lK7u-mWnlnF-yj6R8FB4F5IpQFD13nR0dekf%7E%7ECvZnd5DCXXO3%7EFJHu-1wCfSYOvXNBrFM5jXWDOWoi0fPcse3eJbZQa%7E1IlSF1JOwG9rKqUSLDQdRU7gRYemrvyVwjQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 9ab5b66cec283a1cd8c7029cd8c768da PDF Text Text NOTTING HILL PHILANTHROPIC SOCIETY. I Jfiftoitlj Annual Jitjjjri. NOTTING HILL: PRINTED BY J. WAKEHAM, 4, BEDFORD TERRACE. 1870. �,: 3TTAW .-iM —i^dc'_■ ■ ■_ ■ ■ '■ .3B4 '- .'i’i �NOTTING HILL This Society is established for the purpose of afford ■ ing temporary Relief to the deserving Poor residing in the Ward of Notting Hill. The Tickets given are (except in special cases) for Meat, Bread, Coals, or Grocery, and are distributed by the Visitors of the Society only. LIST OF VISITORS* —:------- -------------- District. 1 Campden Street . , 2 Peel Street 3 Rabbit Row, and Edge Terrace . 4 Kensington Place . 5 Dartmoor Street, West of Johnson Street . 6 Dartmoor Street, East of Johnson Street . 7 Ernest Street 8 William Street and John­ son Street 9 Farm Street 10 St. James Street . ; 11 New Street 12 Uxbridge Street, West of Johnson Street . T Visitors. Mr. BOSANQUET, 8, Lansdowne Road. Mr. WAKE HAM, Bedford Terrace. Mr. BURDEN, West Mall. Mr. BAWDON, 19, Silver Street. Mr. RUSSELL, 103, High Street. Mr. SWEET, 1 Dartmoor Street. Mr. WATTS, 131, High Street. Mr. LUCAS, 10, Johnson Street. Mr. A. LANGMAN, 21, St. Ann’s Road. Mr. T. B. LANGMAN, 7a, Farm Street. Mr. GOODMAN, 28, High Street. Mr. PARKHOUSE, 20, Devonshire Terrace, �4 13 Uxbridge Street, East of Johnson. Street . 14 Bulmer Place , 15 Pelham Terrace and Mews 16 Portobello Road, South of Archer Street, and adja­ cent Mews . 17 Portobello Road, west side South of Cornwall Road, North of Archer Street . 18 Portobello Road, east side South of Cornwall Road North of Archer Street . 19 Western Terrace . 20 Bolton Road 21 Lonsdale Road 22 Ledbury Road, and mews • adjacent . 23 Portobello Road, North of Cornwall Road, and ad­ jacent Mews 24 District North of Lancas­ ter Road, East of Porto­ bello Road and West of St. Luke’s Road . 25 Prince’s Road 26 Prince’s Place 27 St. James’ Place . 28 Queen’s Place, Charles Street, Phoenix Place, and Royal Mews 29 St. Catherine’s Rd., West of Union Street . 30 Union Street 31 St. Catherine’s Road, East of Union Street . 32 William Street, Norlands . 33 Portland Road (east side) 84 Portland Road (west side) 35 Heathfield Street . 36 Thomas Street, Bird’s Cot­ tages, Warwick Place, Mary’s Place, James St. 37 St. Ann’s Road North, Green’s Row, and Cres­ cent Street Mr. BUTLER, 71, High Street. Mr. HARVEY, 92, High Street. Mr. INGLIS H, Albert Terrace. Mr. JOHNSTON, Oxford Terrace. Mr. RENDELL, Buckingham Terrace. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. MASCALL, 44, Archer Street. H. TAYLOR, 39, Ledbury Road. CANNON, 4, St. George’s Road. SELWAY, 140, Lancaster Road. Mr. BALDING, 32, Ledbury Road. Mr. SCOLES, 6, Bassett Terrace. Mr. ASHFOLD, 4, Carnarvon Terrace. Mr. WARREN, Prince’s Road. Mr. COLEMAN, 18, Prince’s Road. Mr. CORKHILL, Prince’s Road. Mr. BARLEY, Addison Road North. Mr. B. ABRAMS, St. Ann’s Road. Mr. L. ROWDEN, 89, Prince’s Road. Mr. PEGDEN, Union Street. Mr. J. H. WOOD, 16, Union Street. Mr. TIMSON, 1, Clarendon Place. Mr. ASHDOWN, 155, Portland Road. Mr. LONG, 2, Clarendon Place. Mr. HOOD, James Street, Potteries. Mr. JONES, 1, St. Ann’s Road North. �5 George Street Kenilworth Street Walmer Terrace . Canterbury Road . FoweU Street J Talbot Road and Mews adjacent 44 St. George’s Road, and St. Mark’s Terrace 45 District bounded by Brainley, Silchester, and Lan­ caster Roads 46 Testerton Street, and Hurstway Street. 47jWalmer Road and adja­ cent Streets 48 Blechynden Street 49 Manchester Street 50 Martin Street and Station Street 51 Kensal Green (such portion as lies within the Parish of Kensington) . 38 39 40 41 42 43 Mr. LEWIS, St. Ann’s Road North. Mr. BAKER, Stoneleigh Street. Mr. BOALER, 134, Clarendon Road. Mr. VOAKE, 166, Clarendon Road. Mr. SQUIRRELL, 171, Clarendon Road. Mr. WYATT, Cambridge Villa, St. Mark’s Rd. Mr. J. BENNETT, 154, Lancaster Road. Mr. W. C. BARBER, 172, Lancaster Road. Mr. WRIGHT, Hurstway Street. Mr. H. CROSSE, 170, Clarendon Road. Mr. BROWN, 268, Lancaster Road. Mr. BURROUGH, 17, Silchester Terrace. Mr. JENKINSON, Blechynden Street. Mr. BROOME, 62, Southam Street, Kensal Green. Signed Hospital and Dispensary Letters may be sent to the Treasurer, who will gratefully acknowledge them, and see that they are given with discrimination to the sick poor. The Subscribers may refer deserving cases of temporary distress and sickness to the Visitor, in whose district the person resides (a list of which is printed above.) Funds are urgently needed, in consequence of the extension of the operations of the Society into the poorest parts of Notting Hill. Donations will be thankfully received by the Treasurer, Mr. R. Harvey, 92, High Street, Notttng Hill; Mr. Timson, Secretary, 1, Clarendon Place; Mr. Parkhouse, Collector, 20, Devonshire Terrace; or by any member of the Committee, �6 COMMITTEE FOR THE ENSUING YEAR. President, J. E. GRAY, Esq., 4, Linden Grove. Treasurer, Mr. R. HARVEY, 92, High Street. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. B. ABRAMS. ASHDOWN. ASHFOLD. BAKER. BALDING. BARLEY. BAWDON. J. BENNETT. BOALER. BOOTY. BOSANQUET. BROOME. BROWN. BURDEN. BURROUGH. BUTLER. CANNON. CHAPMAN. CHURCH. COLEMAN. COLLEY. CORKHILL. H. CROSSE. GOODMAN. HOBBS. HOOD. INGLISH. JENKINSON. JOHNSTON. JONES. Mr. Mr. Mr. MrMr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. T. B. LANGMAN. A. LANGMAN. LEWIS. LIDWELL. LONG. LUCAS. MaSCALL. MINTER. PARFITT. PEGDEN. F. RADFORD. RENDELL. L. ROWDEN. RUSSELL. SCOLES. SHORT. SELWAY. SPALDING. SQUIRELL. SWEET. G. TAYLOR. H. TAYLOR. VOAKE. WAKEHAM. WARREN. WATTS. WILLIAMS. WRIGHT. WOOD. WYATT. With power to add to their number. Secretary, Mr. TIMSON, 1. Clarendon Place. Collector, Mr. PARK HOUSE, 20, Devonshire Terrace. �THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE NOTTING HILL PHILANTHROPIC SOCIETY WAS HELD AT ST. PETER’S SCHOOL ROOM, ON TUESDAY EVENING-, DECEMBER 14^, 1869. REV. J. ROBBINS, D.D., ITT THIS CHAIR. THE FOLLOWING REPORT WAS ADOPTED AT AN ADJOURNED MEETING. The number of Cases relieved during the past year is calculated at 2160. The Society has now, after a gradual development during 15 years, assumed the form of a well-organized system for the relief of temporary distress. Its operations, as shown by the Secretary’s books from year to year, have been productive of some sub­ stantial results. Far more extensive good may be anticipated from a generous support of its admitted claims. The Committee would earnestly press upon the great body of their fellow tradesmen throughout the area of the Ward of Notting Hill, the vital importance of securing a faithful band of Visitors, who, acting in harmony with them, will by personal visitation of the homes of the poor, and by using every available �means of inquiry, exercise the most careful discrim­ ination in their distribution of relief, so as to detect imposture and encourage industry. During the past year, the Meetings of the Society were, with the consent of the Incumbents, held in the School Room of St. John’s, on the 8th of January; at St. Clement’s, February 12th; St. James’s, February 26th; St. George’s, March 9th; St. Peter’s, March 23rd; All Saints’, April 13th; St. Mark’s, May 14th. This was done with a view to a closer co-operation with the clergy, and the diffusion through the several districts of the Ward of a wider knowledge of the principles, objects, and organization of the Society. The Committee trust that this plan has produced the effect desired, and that full confidence is felt in the Society, as a valuable agency for grappling with some at least of those difficulties which pauperism presents. Its future success depends, under God, upon the support it receives, the spirit in which it is worked, and the intelligence and energy with which its opera­ tions are carried on. The Committee appeal to the public, not so much upon the ground of work done, of which they acknow­ ledge the defects, as from a desire to be able to meet promptly the urgent call for renewed efforts which the fluctuating condition of the poor is increasingly making, from .want of employment and depression of trade. �9 From the displacement of the poor, the neighbour­ hood of the Potteries is densely populated by a class of persons who have to struggle hard for existence; and severe are the trials to which many are reduced, whose sufferings might at least be lightened by timely relief judiciously given through Visitors who, by close contact with them, will learn their true history and sympathize with their wants. It appears to the Committee that the ultimate object of the Philanthropic Society should be to lower the Rates by elevating the poor. The accomplishing of this end is obviously retarded by a system of relief indiscriminately administered to the dependent pauper and the industrious labourer. The first is a fit subject if hopelessly reduced for parochial relief, or emigration. The second, suffering from temporary or accidental causes, is encouraged, by timely assistance, to recover his position of manly independence and self support. The Committee are well aware that, with the best intentions on their part, and the greatest discrimina­ tion on the part of the Visitors, the immediate results of the Society’s work may disappoint the sanguine, and perhaps shake the faith of its supporters in its utility. The best answer they can give to such waverers is, redoubled exertions to stem the tide of pauperism which is flowing in so rapidly, while they remind their friends at the same time that, if their means are �10 crippled, their action must be relatively feeble and ineffectual. Since the last Annual Meeting a new Society for organising charitable relief, and repressing mendicity has been formed, the Earl of Lichfield being chairman of the Committee, a branch of which has been intro­ duced into this parish. The plan proposed is to establish a Charity Office in a central position in the Parish, at which office a Committee, consisting of the representatives of the various parochial and charitable agencies, and Metro­ politan local Relief Societies, ministers of all denomi­ nations, Poor-Law Guardians, and others, is to meet weekly. The Committee of this Society think that every information and countenance should be given to the requirements of the above Society so far as refers to the Ward of Notting Hill. �LIST OF SUBSGBIBEBS, 1869—70. £ s. d. 5 0 0 16, Mr. S. C. Kingston... 1 1 0 3, Mr. J. Chapman 1 1 0 20, Mrs. Johnson 0 10 0 10 AUBREY HOUSE. Mr. P. A. Taylor, M.P. 0 0 17, Dr. E. H. Vinen CAMPDEN HIDE ROAD. £ 3. d. THE LODGE. 0 5 0 0 5 0 CASTLE TERRACE. Mr. R. T. Swain ADDISON ROAD. ... CHEPSTOW PLACE. 80, Mr. Stroud L. Cocks ADDISON TERRACE. 2, Mrs. Chadwick 2, Miss Chadwick 0 10 0 ... CHEPSTOW VILLAS. 0 5 0 ... CLARENDON PLACE. 1, Mr. W. T. Timson ARCHER STREET. Mr. W. Hickman 0 5 0 0 1 00 0 1 2 10 1 10 5 10 0 6 0 0 6 0 0 0 CLARENDON ARUNDEL GARDENS. 9, Mr. JI R. Christie 17, Mrs. Col. Harriott ... 18, Sir E. Hilditch 20, Rev. E.K. Kendall,M. A. 31, Lt.-Gen. G. Tomkyns 33, Mr. H. Methold 34, Mr. H. Brady 0 0 1 ... 0 ROAD. 38, Mr. D. Aston ... 0 10 0 78, Mr. J. R. Faulkner 0 5 0 134, Mr. W. Boaler ...050 166, Mr. Voake ... ... 0 10 0 170, Mr. EE. Crosse ...0 5 0 170, Mrs. EE. Crosse ...0 5 0 197, Mr. J. Powter ... 0 5 0 CODRINGTON TERRACE. BATH PLACE. 3, Mr. C. Greenway 0 10 0 4, Mr. J, Boyer ...110 COLVILLE TERRACE EAST. BEDFORD GARDENS. 54, Mr. R. Phillips 66, Misses Codd ... ... 0 10 0 o 2 6 14, Mrs. Audain 0 5 0 0 10 ... 0 DARTMOOR STREET. 1, Mr. T. Sweet.............. BERESFORD TERRACE. 10, Mrs. Wright BRUNSWICK ... 0 5 0 31, Rev. G. Bennett, M.A. DAWSON PLACE. 1 0 12, Mr. W. Eade ...110 14, Capt. H. Shuttleworth 110 18, Mrs. Tucker ... 0 10 0 1 *1 0 5, GARDENS. 1 BRUNSWICK TERRACE. 4, Mr. C. B. P. Bosanquet DENBIGH TERRACE. BUCKINGHAM TERRACE. 5, Mrs. Adey ... 0 5 0 DEVONSHIRE TERRACE. 2 2 0 £17 17 Mr. J. Couzens 6 4, Mr. S. Elborn ...050 £27 5 6 �12 £ ELGIN CRESCENT. 36, Mr. S. Fowler 76, Miss Back .............. s. d. 0 5 0 0 2 6 JOHNSON STREET. £ Mr. D. Lucas *. d. 0 10 6 ... KENSINGTON PALACE GARDENS. ELGIN ROAD. 27, Mr. J. L. Bolding ... 0 10 6 5, Mr. B. E. Green ..110 26, Mr. J. Heywood, F.R.S. 110 EUSTON ROAD. KENSINGTON PARK GARDENS. 63, Mr. C. Jennings 0 5 0 FARM STREET. 7a, Mr. T. B. Langman 0 5 0 GEORGE STREET. 8, Mr. E. Draisey 0 10 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 HANOVER TERRACE. 4, Miss Seward 18, Miss Raymond 3, Mr. R; Michell 6, Mr. H. F. Letchworth 7, Gen. Hon. Sir O. Gore, G.C.B. 15, Dr. E. L. Bryan 16, Mr. P. Pittar 18, Mr. W. Clarke 23, Mr. H. W. Jewesbury 41, Mrs. Dunbar 42, Mr. J. Baillie 42, Miss Mowbray 46, Mr. J. S. Scott 1 1 0 5 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 5 1 1 1 10 10 1 5 2 HIGH STREET, KENSINGTON. 26 and 27, Mr. E. Ball... 0 10 0 HIGH STREET, NOTTING HILL. 15, Mr. J. Short 0 32, Mr. G. A. Norris 0 34, Mr. G. ¥. Sharpe ... 0 36, Mr. C. Klein 0 46, Mr. R. Spalding 0 48, Mr. H. Long 1 50, Mr. J. R. Bilton 0 60, Mr. W. Austin 0 71, Mr. G. Butler 0 77, Mr. F. W. Fricker ... 0 78, Mr. F. J. Hibbitt ... 0 92, Mr. R. Harvey 1 105 & 107, Mr. J. Minter 1 109, Mr. J. E. Horwell... 0 129 & 131, Mr. G. N. Watts 0 130, Mr. J. E. Lidwell... 0 133, Mr. J. E. Miller ... 0 136, Mr. C. B. Hammond 1 137 & 139, Mr. W. Booty 0 141 & 143, Messrs. R. H. and J. Pearson 1 10 10 5 5 10 0 10 5 5 10 10 1 0 5 10 10 5 0 10 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 1 0 2 1 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 5 1 10 10 10 2 2 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 6 6 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 5 0 LADBROKE GARDENS. 3, 10, 11, 14, Mr. H. T. Parker Mrs. Punch Mr. J. S. Torr Mr. S. Magnus - .. 0 10 6 ..0 2 6 .. 0 10 0 ..11 0 LADBROKE PLACE WEST. .. 1 1 0 ... 0 10 6 ...10 0 1, Mr. W. Bartlett 0 5 2, Mrs. Huggins 0 5 10, Mr. J. Kirkman 1 0 14, Mr. A. Maclure 0 5 1 0 20, Mrs. Rendall 26, Mr. J. D. Drakesford 0 5 1 0 29, Mr. B. Tomkins 0 5 32, Mrs. Child 33, Mr. J. Mylne 0 10 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 £48 7 0 £74 13 6 7, Miss Legrew LADBROKE SQUARE. HOLLAND PARK. Messrs. W. and F. Radford 2 1a, Mr. J. H. Browne ... 1 28, Rev. W. H. Jervis ... 0 31, Mrs. Watson 0 31, Mr. T. C. Watson ... 0 HORBURY CRESCENT. 8, Dr. C. Steggall 16, Mrs. Sconce KENSINGTON PARK ROAD. 10, Mr. J. Hobbs 12, Mr. W. Coats 36, Mr. G. E. Hicks ... 40, Mrs. Wilson 44, Mrs. Hall 52, Mr. G. N. Emmet ... 54, Miss Fox ... 66, Dr. H. Goodday 82, Miss Dyer 82, Miss Jerrard St. Peter’s Vicarage, Rev. J. Robbins, D.D. ... 152, Mr. G. Taylor 158, Mr. W. Church ... �13 34, Mr. C. S. Fowler 39, Mr. R. R. Ottley 41, Maj.-General W. White ... ’ £ s. d. ... 0 10 0 ... 2 0 0 G. ... 0 10 0 LANSDOWNE TERRACE, UPPER. 1, Mr. J. A. Mello 5, Mr. J. T. Renton ... ... 110 0 10 0 LEDBURY ROAD. LADBROKE TERRACE. 4, Mr. W. Patrick ... 6, Mrs. Farrance Wilby House „ Mrs. R. Cocks „ Mr. R. Cocks 11 Mr. A. Bourne 0 10 0 10 0 6 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 32, Mr. J. Balding ... 0 39, Mr. H. Taylor ... 0 42, Mr. J. Burrough ... 0 49, Mr. S. Caplin ...0 Ditto (2nd don.) 0 5 10 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 LINDEN GROVE. 4, Mr. J. E. Gray ...110 LANCASTER ROAD. 140, Mr. J. Selway ...0 5 0 NORLAND PLACE. 11, Mrs. Langford 0 10 0 ... LANSDOWNE CRESCENT. St. John’s Lodge, Rev. J. P. Gell, M.A. 2, Mrs. Piggott 3, Mrs. Banbury 4, Mr. E. Barnett 5, Mr. J. E. Armstrong 6, Miss Hodges 12, Mr. G. F. Cooke ... 22, Mrs. Colonel Hill ... 22, Mr. J. R. R. Godfrey 25, Mr. A. W. Langdon... 37, Mr. W. Ackland 40, Mr. R. 01 drey 43, Mr. W. H. Saltwell. . NORLAND SQUARE. 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 10 10 5 5 10 2 10 10 10 2 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 5 10 10 1 5 2 5 10 5 2 10 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22, Rev. T. P. Holdich, M.A. ... ...0 5 0 NOTTING HILL SQUARE. 8, Mrs. Fletcher ... 0 15, Mrs. Jennings ... 0 18, Mr. J. L. Boothby ...3 5 0 2 6 0 0 NOTTING HILL TERRACE. 1, Mr. W. Hine 5, Mr. O. Stephens 15, Mrs. Bescoby 19, Mr. E. C. Cosway 27, Miss Walker ... 1 1 0 ... 0 10 0 ... 1 1 o ... 0 10 0 ... 0 5 0 LANSDOWNE ROAD. 4, Mrs. Hall 4, Miss Hall 16, Mr. H. S. Tabor ... 18, Miss Markland 19, Mr. H. W. Ravenscroft 22, Mr. T. Daniel 25, Mrs. Allnutt 27, Mr. R. Green 30, Miss Shorland 36, Mr. E. C. Buckland... 41, Mrs. Robertson 42, Mr. A. J. Wright ... 49, Miss Wales 53, Mr. J. Noyes 65, Mr. H. W. Trinder ... 75, Rev. T. Wilkinson ... LANSDOWNE TERRACE. 4, 7, 9, LI, Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. J. P. Woodhouse A. Wilson J. Vigne T. Jacomb 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 5 0 1 0 £48 7 0 PALACE' GARDENS VILLAS. 18, Mrs. Williamson 1 0 0 2 6 1 ... PELHAM TERRACE. 2, Mr. W. Rawson ... PEMBRIDGE CRESCENT. 14, Miss Manfred 23, Mr. C. Johnson ... ... 0 10 0 1 . 1 0 PEMBRIDGE GARDENS. 4, Mrs. Brockell 0 10 11, Mr. H. Laver 0 10 13, Mr. H. Washbourne 0 10 14, Mr. W. Gilbert 1 0 15, Capt. W. W. Ross ... 1 0 16, Dr. W. Bruce Joy ... 0 10 19, Mr. J. Reynolds 1 0 23, Mrs. Gordon 0 5 26. Mr. G. J. Cavafy ... 1 0 1 1 30, Mrs. Macdonald 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 £74 13 6 �14 £ a. d. ... £ a. d. STANHOPE TERRACE. 0 10 0 1, Mr. J. Broadbridge... PEMBRIDGE PLACE. 14, Mr. T. Ray 0 2 6 PEMBRIDGE SQT7ARE. 23, 25, 28, 29, 30, Mr. J. W. Brown ... Mr. Churchill Mr. J. Nathan Dr. J. H. Gladstone, F.R.S. Mr. J. M. Hill Mr. M. Zarifi Mrs. Wilder Mr. A. Bonar Mr. H. G. Wolrige ... 20, 32, 38, 45, 52, Mrs. Monkhouse Mr. A. Rowlands Miss Wormaid Mrs. Evans Miss Gowring 6, 9, 11, 17, 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 10' 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 10 6 0 0 1 0 10 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 0 1 0 5 0 10 0 0 10 0 2 6 0 0 0 STANLEY TERRACE. 0 6 6 4, Mr. Blockley 0 0 0 0 10 0 5 0 10 6 2 6 TABERNACLE TERRACE. PORTOBELLO TERRACE. 5, Mr. W. Wheatley ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 5 0 5 5, Miss Coats ... 15, Mr. G. C. Bompas ... 26 & 27, Miss Jolly ... 4, Dr. Waggett 10, Mrs. Adams 11, Mr. J. S. Adams 14, Miss Erck PORTLAND ROAD. 100, Mr. W. Colley 146, Mr. R. Wells ■ — 10 10 5 1 5 10 5 5 10 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 STANLEY GARDENS. PEMBRIDGE VILLAS. ... STANLEY CRESCENT. 1, Mr. W. Mort. 2, Mr. C. H. Blake 4, Mrs. Grant 6, Mr. T. H. W. Anderson 9, Mr. W. Milliken 10, Mr. G. W. Johnson 12, Miss Lindars 13, Mrs. Knight 16, Mr. P. J. King 2 ... 0 5 0 0 5 0 THE TERRACE. st. Ann’s road. 21, Mr. A. H. Langman 0 5 0 4, Mr. W. Banting ... VERNON TERRACE. 27, Miss Rendell st. ann’s road north. 1, Mr. J. Jones ... 0 2 0 ... 0 5 0 WESTERN TERRACE. 0 5 John’s gardens. 2, Miss Slater ... 0 10 0 23, Mr. Tanner John’s road. Mr. R. Roy ... 1 0 Mr. Burden 1 Mr. B. Bosanquet 0 A Friend _______ ? x A Friend, per Miss Codd 0 A Friend, per Mrs. Gordon 1 Mr. W. Hansard 0 st. 0 WEST MALL. st. 1 0 st. Katherine’s road. Mr. G. Pegden ... 0 4 0 st. mark’s 29, Mr. W. West crescent. ... 0 10 O SILVER street. 19, Mr. W. Bawdon ... 0 10 0 £134 5 0 3 10 0 1 0 10 6 5 0 1 0 2 6 £144 16 0 �B 15 *C3 CO co o o o o CO •5 o «« o T—< 00 QJ or o I—1 o Cl Cl >o O r“l H o CO O T—* o> t 00 co 00 EH s o o CQ m o' j—< co I EH O 00 C _O ‘■+3 & ‘C o tn 42 o 02 »—< �16 RULES. 1. A Donation or Annual Subscription to constitute Mem­ bership. 2. A Committee, President, Treasurer, Secretary, Collector, and Auditors to be elected annually. 3. Visitors to be appointed by the Committee. 4. The whole Ward of Notting Hill to be the area of the Society’s operations. 5. Relief to be given only after personal inquiry, and visitation at the homes of the" applicants. 6. All Subscribers to be at liberty to recommend cases to' Visitors. 7. The Committee to meet once a fortnight during January, February, and March, and at other times once a month: three to be a Quorum. 8. The proceedings of the Committee to be regularly entered in a Minute Book. 9. Every case relieved, with particulars as to number of family, cause of distress, and any other procurable information, to be recorded in a Register Book. 10. The Visitors to make returns to the Committee at their weekly meetings of cases relieved; and to furnish information at the end of the year, as to the working of the Society from their own experience; their duty being to co-operate cordially with the Clergy, and other ministers of religion, with District Visitors, and all other existing agencies for charitable purposes. 11. The Annual Meeting to be held in December, at which the Report and Balance Sheet are to be presented, and Officers elected. 12. The Committee to bhave power to make bye-laws, but not to alter rules. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Fifteenth Annual Report Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Notting Hill Philanthropic Society Description An account of the resource Place of publication: London Collation: 16 p. ; 21 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available J. Wakeham Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1870 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5377 Subject The topic of the resource Philanthropy Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Fifteenth Annual Report), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Annual General Meetings Annual reports Conway Tracts Notting Hill Philanthropic Society https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/024ae698e7b59a5d53262064c7fb5b1e.pdf?Expires=1781740800&Signature=AZuP9eCPZ-a4GcGU-ljJfHjY793ghuKtX0BOUR1f9MF1iMzLd3bUVX8mFXy8Jo7OY5sKWSFXXyP07D63kKEqseIRVaYXTOIdqRK6wG6cDneJGnX3OjqtRO-oJEaJ49Bb9lfx3Vl0D-D39jWqntAkGeXZrb-o1ppnxEgJQkiLJzS5TexfrVmVKztMK7Cev4yjNaw1Q7Rhu4eQxa8ktSAaF%7E6drsu1HWx080gJyr3wWx15NKQNylAXZAj8EU%7E4OG%7ElKQWsJchdo9JzxtTYT7sKzVDXdrIhOqs39uMNceGqSr3J1oYNZT6NDz1DpCz14H2zk-VqWQLrjjw4uKHM3pDzTA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 38b0752411af840c9e1d4c99f9fd412e PDF Text Text 226 LEGEND OF THE CASTLE OF NUREMBERG. in some such way as Hugh Miller has done in “ My Schools and Schoolmas­ ters,” I shall have to linger about the cottage I know not how long; for feel­ ing, as I have said, how much is done by the time the boyhood is over and the youth begins — if such a distinction can be made — I can see now how [March, many things must have been imM mately at work beside that sweet, good home, and what was there. Manners and customs, traditions, stories, reli­ gion, superstition, scene, and incident, all had their place in the lad’s life, and must have their place in the man's story — if it is ever told. LEGEND OF THE CASTLE OF NUREMBERG. {From the German?) BY MRS. E. E. EVANS. MONGST the many legends and suffered terribly from the ravages of historical traditions attached to wolves, until, in desperation, the in­ the old castle of Nuremberg, is habitants assembled in force and a curious story of an event which took drove them out of their haunts, kill­ place about the middle of the thir­ ing meantime as many as possible* teenth century. The castle was at Those that escaped, to the number of that time governed by Count Frederic several hundred, retreated to the moun­ III. of Hohenzollern, who lived there tains, and from thence made frequent in princely state with his wife, the descents upon the scattered farms in Countess Elizabeth, and their six the valleys, so that scarcely a day children. It was a happy family. The elapsed without some person having wedded pair lovec[ each other tenderly, been destroyed. and took pride in the strength and The most horrible event of this bravery of their sons and the modest kind occurred three days before Mich­ beauty of their daughters. Their re­ aelmas, In the forests of St. Sebald tainers were faithful, the citizens of ’ and St. Lawrence (so named from the the already famous city of Nuremberg two cathedrals of Nuremberg) lived a held them in honor, the land was no class of peasants who made it their longer disturbed by war, and through sole business to raise bees and collect the vigilance and courage of the honey, which was in great demand, Nurembergers the once dreaded inva­ as foreign sugars had not yet begun sions of banded robbers had been to be imported. To such an extent was brought to an end. the pursuit carried, that the great forest Thus peaceful and prosperous was tract was spoken of in the legal in­ the existence of this noble family in struments of that period as “ the impe­ the year 1264. At that period, John, rial bee-garden,” and the bee-farmers the elder son, was eighteen and his were allowed to pay their government brother Sigmund sixteen years old. taxes in honey. For some reason, the They were skilled in every knightly magistrate having charge of such accomplishment, and had already won matters issued an order for the tax to distinction by their exertions in cer­ be paid three days before Michaelmas, tain fierce encounters with the rob­ instead of on the day itself, when it bers. would really become due; and in In the autumn of that year the vil­ obedience to the command, a certain lages in the vicinity of Nuremberg bee-farmer, living on the northern A �HEPl LEGEND OFTHE CASTLE OF NUREMBERG. 22] border of St. Sebald’s forest, went At this moment the parents of the with his wife to Nuremberg, distant murdered children came in sight of about seven miles, each carrying a their desolated home. A sorrowful BB*ge wooden tub of honey bound by presentiment had caused them to a strap across their shoulders. hasten their steps, so that they had As their cottage stood in a solitary accomplished the last few miles in place, they could not leave their fam- half the time usually required; but ily in the care of any neighbor; but the first glance assured them that they they expected to return in six hours at were too late, and their cries of grief furthest, and so went away without were so harrowing that the wolves ran misgiving, having repeatedly charged away in fear. their eldest child, Wolfgang, a bright As if it were impossible that the boy eight years old, to watch over still smoking bones lying before them his brother of four and his little sister could be the remains of their beloved of two years, and on no account to go children, the father and mother went outside of the house—promising, if he raving into the house, and called with should prove faithful, to reward him despairing voices: “Children, come! with a present of some gingerbread, come, children! here are your ginger­ for which it seems Nuremberg was cakes ! ” With what joy did they rush even at that early day^ as now, cele­ to the door when they heard a child’s brated. voice in reply! But it was the lament­ The three children remained hap­ ing voice of the neighbor’s boy, now pily together till about five o’clock in descending from the tree, who ex­ the afternoon, when Wolfgang saw plained to the distracted parents the from the window a little friend, the horrible circumstances of the death son of a neighboring bee-farmer, ap­ of their darlings. After many mo­ proaching the house, and was soon ments of speechless agony, the woman coaxed by this playfellow to come out broke the deathly stillness by saying on the green before the door. His to her husband, with the calmness of brother soon followed, and the little insanity: “Come, Henry, let us go to girl, not liking to be left alone, started Nuremberg and take our children in pursuit. Suddenly two wolves ap­ away from the magistrate, and if he peared. The visitor climbed quickly refuses to give them to us, we will up a large linden tree which stood be- carry off his children and throw them fore the house and called loudly to to the wolves!” “Alas! why did he Wolfgang to follow him. But the dqmand the honey-tax this year before brave boy, more anxious for his it was due! ” sighed the heart-broken brother and sister than himself, caught father; saying which, he, without tliSdittle girl in his right arm, seized knowing what he did, threw the dear Rudolf with his left hand, and remains into the tub which still hung hastened with them to the cottage upon his back, and involuntarily tot­ door. Just as he was about to cross tered after his wife toward Nurem­ the threshold, one wolf fastened upon berg. his shoulder, threw him down, and As soon as they reached the city, the immediately buried its sharp teeth in miserable pair rushed to the magis­ his vitals. The other wolf tore to trate’s house, demanding imperiously pieces the little Rudolf, who till his of the guard at the door: “Where is last breath called out incessantly: the bailiff with the children?” The “Father! mother! oh, God!’’ After man replied insolently: “At the castle that both the destroyers fell upon the with the Count. What do you want sister, who had broken out into fright­ of him at this late hour?” The ened crying, which was soon silenced woman flew to the castle, and sprang in death. up the brilliantly-lighted staircase into �228 LEGEND OF THE CASTLE OF NUREMBEttk the noble hall, where the Count and a company of his favorite frjends, among whom was the magistrate, were cele­ brating the eighteenth birthday of his elder son, John. A tender and thoughtful mood had taken possession of all minds; for just before the Watchman upon the tower had announced, with a blast of his trumpet, the beginning of the last hour before midnight, the eventful moment when, eighteen years before, the Countess, wavering between life and death, had given successful birth to her first child. It was then that the bereaved mother darted amidst the group of boys and girls playing in the hall, snatched up one child after another, and cried out, as she sought in vain for the familiar little faces: “Emma, Rudolf, Wolfgang —where are you, then?” Every one asked: “Who is she?” “Whom does she seek?” But she paid no atten­ tion to their questions, and the dread­ ful tragedy was first guessed from the words of the bee-farmer, who now came into the hall, threw the bloody bones upon the floor, and said: “There, my noble lords, take your last tax from me, a poor unhappy father! ” This event made a deep impression upon the family and their guests. The two young noblemen, moved by the purest sympathy, declared their inten­ tion to summon the whole community to go out in a body and free the poor farmers from the frightful plague of wolves. Before the company broke up, a wolf-hunt was agreed upon for the next day; and, before sunrise, the young counts rode away at the head of thirty experienced huntsmen and more than a hundred vigorous serv­ ants, who led between twenty and thirty fierce hunting-dogs in leash. The precaution had been taken to close all the forest paths; and by sun­ set eighteen wolves, besides six boaas, five deer, and ten foxes, were killed. The hunt raged fiercest around the cottage of the unfortunate bee-farmer. [March! He had himself conducted Count John to the spot, and at the sight of his children’s toys, lying scattered around the door, had burst into loud lamen­ tations. The cheeks of the Count also were moistened with manly tears; and with his eyes raised to heaven, he swore not to rest until he had sum ceeded in extirpating all dangerowl wild beasts from the forest. Just then he saw two wolves, maddened by hun­ ger, licking the spot which had yester­ day been wet with the children’s blood. Without horse or spear, for he had left both by the linden tree beyond the wolves, he rushed with the speed of an arrow upon the beasts, and with a single stroke of his drawn sword cut off the head of one of them. The other sprang .upon him, and had already fastened its eager jaws in the side of the brave youth, when one of his dogs, which had followed him slowly, flew at the throat of the wolf, so that, occupied with its own danger, it could not give the deadly bite. With a desperate effort, the monster flung off the faithful dog, and then sprang upon the Count in a rage; but as quickly was John’s sharp sword bur­ ied in the beast’s entrails. One may imagine the horror of Sig­ mund when, the sudden noise having called him out of the house, he com-l prehended his brother’s recent peril; and his joy when, on carefully exam­ ining the wounded side, he found it merely scratched and only slightly bloody. The news of the success of the ex­ pedition soon reached the city, and the Council began at once to make preparations for a worthy reception of the victors. Toward eight o’clock in the evening, the hunters passed within the walls through the Thier-* gaertner gate. At the head of the procession rode the bee-farmer upon a snow-white horse from the castle stables, and with bow and quiver shrouded in crape. Behind him fifty servants bore the slaughtered beasts upon poles on their shoulders; while �1870.] AACAAT? OF THE CASTLE OF NUREMBERG. fifty more walked on both sides with blazing torches in their hands. Next rode the young knights, John and Sigmund, upon two black horses; and be­ hind them, three abreast, came thirty noble archers. Lastly, by command of the Council, twenty-five armorers in glittering armor, and carrying torches, brought up the rear. When the procession had reached St. Sebald’s Church, the chief magis­ trate and two lords of the Council thanked the brave young men in the name of the inhabitants for deliver­ ance from trouble and danger, and invited them to supper in the great saloon of the City Hall, which had been duly adorned for the feast. As the huntsmen entered the saloon they were met by the daughters of the no­ blest houses of Nuremberg, who placed upon, the head of each a. garland of flowers, to the sound of trumpets and kettle-drums. Around the table were already seated the parents of both the crowners and the crowned, and at the Jiead were the Count and Countess. One can easily imagine the joyful astonishment of the young men. Feasting and dancing continued-till ‘midnight, and before the company separated a second wolf-hunt was arranged for the next day — Mich­ aelmas. By five o’clock the next morning the two young knights were ready to re­ pair to the rendezvous of their hunter friends, when the Countess Elizabeth came into their chamber with troubled looks and eyes red with weeping, and besought them, by their filial love, to remain that day at home and not go even outside of the castle. This request of their beloved mother greatly surprised her sons. They declared that only extraordinary reasons could justify them in breaking their promise to join the hunt, and wished to know whether such reasons existed. “A thousand reasons,” answered the Countess, “and yet all based upon a single dream.” “I thought so, dear mother,” inter­ 16 229 rupted John; “ I feared that the knowl­ edge of the wound in my side would bring you bad dreams, and therefore I wished to keep it secret.” But the Countess solemnly replied: “No, my son, so clearly and circum­ stantially did no soul ever dream through merely human causes. I saw your dead bodies, torn with many wounds, carried up the hill to the castle. I tremble when I think of that sight 1 ” The two sons pressed their mother’s hands with affectionate warmth, and assured her that, in obedient respect to the anxiety of a good mother, they would keep out of danger, so far as might be consistent with honor. "Do you see, mother,” continued Sigmund in a cheerful tone, “your dream has already fulfilled its pur­ pose, and you would not be willjjig to bear the disgrace of having your sons break their word and become a deris­ ion to their companions through over­ solicitude concerning the images of a dream 1 ” . After a moment of speechless sor­ row, the mother fell hastily upon the necks of her sons, covered their faces with kisses and tears, and cried, with a loud voice, “Farewell, my children I God protect you, — I can do nothing more! ” and hastened out of the room. But, while still upon the threshold, she’ called back to them, with apparent cheerfulness," Remember, be prudent; and, above all things, do not forget to take the two dogs with you.” AVith imploring voice, John an­ swered : “ Pray excuse us from taking the dogs; it is agreed upon that they shall be left at home.. They spoiled our sport several times yesterday, and excepting the service which one of them rendered me, and which greater vigilance on my part will henceforth make unnecessary, they were of no advantage. On that account, I left them yesterday at the tower in the suburbs.” But the Countess said: “I com­ mand you, as your mother, to take �230 LEGEND OF THE CASTLE OF NURENHhS®^ the two faithful hounds, which have twice saved your lives.” The youths, though greatly vexed, replied: “We will obey you.” After she had left them, they went thoughtfully down the castle stairs, mounted their horses in silence, bade two servants go before and release Drusus and Nero, their two watch­ dogs, and then rode slowly down the castle hill and over the river Pegnitz to the tower. On arriving there, they ordered the servants to go on with the dogs toward the gate, and charged them, with unwonted earnestness, to be very careful. While the keeper of the tower addressed a few necessary words to John, Sigmund rode to the window, took from the sill a piece of chalk, and wrote over the door: “In obedience to our dear mother, we came here against our will to-day, Michael­ mas, 1264.—Sigmund.” And John, at his brother’s request, though laugh­ ing all the while at the singular fancy, signed his name, “John,” underneath. As the young knights rode away from the tower, following their serv­ ants along the road, they heard suddenly, at some distance, a fright­ ful scream; and in a few moments more than a hundred men had gath­ ered in a crowd. The young men hurried on at a quick trot, and learned 'with horror, at the German House, that their dogs had torn to pieces the child of a scythe-smith in the neigh­ borhood. It appeared that when the servants had reached the spot, they met the child, whom his mother, in her anxiety to protect him from the cold morning air, had covered with a wolf-skin. The little boy had been to buy dainties in a shop where hiS mother had often fed him with sweets, in spite of the anxious protestations of the father. He had just emptied his pockets, when the servants, with the two fierce dogs, passed by the Ger­ man House. Scarcely had the dogs sighted the wolf-skin upon the child, when, with one strong bound, they freed themselves from the servants’ [March, hands, and rushed with their sharp teeth upon the unfortunate little one] whom they had mistaken for a wolf. As John and Sigmund passed through the crowd standing around the dead body, they met the careless servants, who now held the dogs in leash ; and springing from their horses, they drew their swords and with one blow killed both the animals^-whieM in their irrational zeal, had believed that they had done their duty, and had come whining joyfully around their enraged masters. They then took the rope from1 the dogs’ necks, tied the hands of the thoughtless servants behind their backs, and sent them to the castle prison, under the charge of a body of smiths armed with axes and ham­ mers. Afterwards, John knelt down beside the mother, who had fallen on the ground by her murdered child, took her hand, and, weeping himself, tried to comfort her. While the eyes of nearly all the by-standers testified to their sympa­ thetic emotion, a meddlesome peasants (whose neglected crops had once been trampled down by the Count’s pack* of hounds) pressed his way amidst the throng and cried out: “Did I not tell you so? Behold the wolves which killed the bee-farmer’s children!” These words, envenomed with the poison of hell, fell fruitfully upon the black soil of ignoble minds. The ear­ lier awakened discontent increased a curses filled the air ; and before the in­ famous beginnings could be checked, murderous hands laid John dead at the feet of the despairing mother. Sigmund, who had thrown himself upon his brother, in the vain hope to shield him from his fate, was snatched away by a compassionate peasant, and placed upon his horse, when he in­ stinctively rode away from the scene of danger; but he was speedily brought back, and after a few moments’ delay was murdered by his pursuers. Then the bloody weapons fell from �Legend of the castle of Nuremberg. the hands of the desperate scythesmiths, and all at once words of remorse and mutual reproach arose — loudest, indeed, from the lips of the wi^ffihed man who, through his hellish speech, had kindled the fire of tumult. Dismayed at what they had done, the people lifted up the dead bodies, laid them upon litters, and, with hypocritical lamentations, turned toward the castle, followed by a great many inhabitants of the inner city, who, through curiosity or a desire to be of some use, had hastened to the scene of horror. ■ As yet, not the slightest knowledge erf the terrible event had penetrated to the noble family whom it most concerned. Even while the mournful procession was approaching, Count Frederic sat at breakfast, making merry over the dream which his wife had related to him; and she, tillable to regard the subject in the light of a jest, walked, with the young Countess Hedwig, of Nassau, toward one of the bowgyindows to conceal her tears from her jncredulous husband. Suddenly she cried out: “Oh, heavens, what do I see! A great crowd of men are fill­ ing the market-place ! This throng, th^ymovements, mean nothing good. They are coming nearer—they are weeping! Do you not see, Hedwig, the many handkerchiefs? They are coming, with loud cries, up the castle hill! Frederic! Hedwig! Oh, my dreamt I ” The Count, startled by the cry of his wife, hastened to her help. Eut he stood still, as though turned to stone, B he saw from the window the crowd approaching, bearing two litters and leading Sigmund’s horse. Hedwig turned fearfully pale. At last Count Frederic broke the dreadful silence. “Come, Elizabeth; come, Hedwig,” he said, with a trembling voice, “let us go and see what we have loved so well; in death, also, they are dear to us! ” ' .<• Involuntarily, Elizabeth and HedESleaned upon his arms and tottered 231 down the stairs to meet the procession which had just entered the court. The bearers set down their burdens and threw back the pall. Then, first, the father exclaimed, in heart-broken tones, “It is they !" and, in despair, the mother repeated, “It is they!” Many of the spectators, those who had known the young Counts intimately, and others, strangers, whose hearts were tender in the presence of afflic­ tion, shared, sobbing, the grief of the unfortunate parents. At last a young man, son of a wealthy merchant, in whose breast compassion and the love of justice held equal sway, called out to the by-standers around the litters: “ The blood of these worthy youths shall be avenged seven-fold upon the murderers!” Upon this arose a fearful curse against the guilty ones, and more than a thousand avengers of blood started for the suburbs to exe­ cute their stern purpose without delay. As soon as the Count had aroused himself from his stupor of sorrow sufficiently to comprehend the cruel design of the departing crowd, he hastened after them at full speed, placed himself in their way upon the Pegnitz bridge, and implored them not to add to his regrets by further bloodshed. He could only restrain them, however, by solemnly promis­ ing that he himself would immedi­ ately undertake the righteous punish­ ment of the criminals. “ But, noble Count, even to-day! ” cried the leader; “otherwise we will yet hold a night trial.” Frederic, shuddering at these ominous words, promised this also; and commanded, upon the spot, that a summons should be sent to the neighboring towns requiring five hun­ dred armed knights to join him by a forced march. The generous Count gave this order purposely in a loud voice, rightly sus­ pecting that the murderers were within hearing; and they, profiting by his clemency, fled in all haste to Donau­ worth,— thus sparing the bereaved fa­ ther the painful necessity of expiating / �SAPPHO. 232 the blood of his sons by that of more' than a hundred heads of families. Nor did he revenge himself by the spoliation of their possessions, but pacified public sentiment by laying upon each man a yearly tax of seven farthings, from which charge of blood­ money the city of Nuremberg was re­ leased by Duke Frederic V., in the year 1386. The memory of this horrible tragedy haunted continually the after lives of the unhappy parents. Elizabeth died in 1272; and Frederic mourned in gloomy dejection, until, in 1273, the election of his uncle Rudolph of Hapsburg to the throne of the German Empire drew him into political life, and the sacred interests of his native land filled the heart which excessive affliction had rendered dead to domes­ tic happiness. ' The ashes of John and Sigmund are said to lie in St. James’s Church, Nu­ [March, remberg, under the altar in the chapel to the right of the main entrance ; and so late as the beginning of the present century, there was to be found in the court of the ancient “ Moonlight Inn,” a fresco painted in three compart­ ments, illustrating the events narrated ' above. The centre picture showed the two youths as they rode to the hunt, with their followers; that on the right hand, the dog which tore the smith’s child ; and that upon the left, the mur­ der of one of the brothers. But the “Moonlight Inn” of old times has been replaced by a modern hotel bearing the same name, but con­ taining no relic of ancient fresco; the • altar in St. James’s Church is bare of any inscription to the lamented youths supposed to have been buried beneath, and only in the old castle does the tra­ dition still find a local habitation for its pathetic incidents, which are “too strange not to be true.” SAPPHO. BY EDGAR FAWCETT. ILD-EYED at dawn she crouches on the cliff; Her lyre amid the myrtles flung; dank hair Blown from the pallor of a face that yearns With infinite despair. W Slow scarlet heightens in the pearly east; Foam blushes on the coiling billow’s rim; Sunward along the roseate waters, now, Fleet sea-birds waver dim. Leucadia sparkles to arisen day, A lyre among its myrtles gleaming clear, Flaunted with echoes of a farewell song Far centuries must hear. Beautiful Hope, that diest as Sappho died,—• Wofully falling to as chill a wave; Forevei- to my dark heart may there float A death-song from thy grave! � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Legend of the Castle of Nuremberg Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Evans, E. E. Description An account of the resource Place of publication: [California] Collation: 226-232 p. ; 24 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Publication information from KVK. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available [s.n.] Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1870 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5738 Subject The topic of the resource Legends Germany Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (Legend of the Castle of Nuremberg), identified by </span><span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk">Humanist Library and Archives</a></span><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Conway Tracts German History https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/104f127530b3bbe03dc2d9183699afd7.pdf?Expires=1781740800&Signature=fYiyuHUisLB9TppuS8QEd1UE7TEQ30QSYFdH4%7E%7E4z4PdVYwNhcIvEwYw2y0d2uO-lfBZbGH0-cQh25kAhE1PsgOlizhydUCQ0IQMwYOVyjVXdRWZvVfmRiOmPTmPDebS%7EnN94ZVRSb6aZ5mIZSRyyDLEjATXyrBK7dRsPCLdfdYNLYnH2bTQMGg5CWQwkScSDw2tXuzUBcly-s1x65LUMvLx-lO-RlLJkhxdLJBFxSriSdkgEs9eQJ1oh8bPm76ujuUd5SKMhHr-jvK0MJoS9k3aXA6bDFW0o1XWbSF3qEwx5Z2B03Y5ZKIvzXJcYuG2h3w9%7EXJx0QcvDL0PfJeDNw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM d4737e15aa5abde43c6919e023769afa PDF Text Text 222 TALKS ABOUT LIFE. JMar^B TALKS ABOUT LIFE. BY ROBERT COLLYER. II. REFERRING BACK. WANT in this paper to tell what one of my children used to call “a truly story.” It came to me one day when I went on a pilgrimage to a huge old factory in the valley of the Washburne, in Yorkshire, in the summer of 1865. I wandered about the place in a kind of dream. The handful of people left there then were at work among the wheels and spindles, watching me between whiles—for strangers seldom come to that remote place, and I was clearly a stranger; and then my dress was not what they were used to/ espe­ cially my American “wide-awake.” They were as strange to me as I was to them. There was not a face that I knew — not one. And yet this was where I was once as well known to everybody as the child is to its own mother, and where I knew everybody as I knew my own kinsfolk. For it was here that I began my life and lived it for a space that now seems a life-time all to itself. And that brings me to my dream. I saw, in one of the great dusty rooms of the factory, a little fellow about eight years old, but big enough to pass for ten, working away from six o’clock in the morning till eight at night, —tired sometimes almost to death, and then again not tired at all, — rushing out when work was over, and, if it was winter, home to some treasure of a book. There were “Robinson Crusoe,” and Bun­ yan’s “Pilgrim,” and Goldsmith’s Histories of England and of Rome, the first volume of Sandford and Mer­ ton, and one or two more that had something to do with theology,—but I it must have been meat for strong men, for not one of the brood of children that read the stories, and the Goldsmith that was just as good as stories, would ever touch thes$ others after one or two trials. One of these books that used to lead all boys captive in those good old days, this boy I saw in my dream would hug up close to his bowl of porridge, and eat and read; and then he would read after he had done eating, while ever the careful housemother would allow a candle or a coal. But if it was sum­ mer, the books would be neglected, and the rush would be out into the fields and lanes,—hunting in the early summer for bird’s-nests that the tender and holy home canon would never permit to be robbed, and it was always obeyed; or in the later summer, see­ ing whether the sloes were turning ever so little from green to black, or whether the crabs — of the wood, not the water—were vulnerable to a boy’s sharp and resolute teeth, and when the hazel-nuts would be out of that milky state at which it would be of any use to pluck them, and what was the prospect for hips and haws. The men who profess to know just how we are made, as a watchmaker knows a watch, tell us that once in seven years we get a brand-new body — that the old things pass away in that time, and all things become new. I wonder sometimes whether it is not so with our life. Is not that new, as well as the frame ? There I was that day — a gray-haired minister from a city that had been born and had come to its great place since that small lad began to work in the old mill, ag| I �1870.] TALKS ABOUT LIFE. saw him at the end of a vista of four jESlWiirty years. I watched him with a most pathetic interest. “Dear little chap,” I said, “ you had a hard time; but then it was a good time, too,—wasn’t it, now? How good bread-and-butter did taste, to be sure, when half a pound of butter a week had to be divided among eight of us, and the white wheaten bread saved for SunKay ! Did ever a flower in this world beside smell as good as the primrose, or prima donna sing like the sky­ lark and throstle? Money cannot buy such a Christmas pudding, or tears or prayers such a Christmas tide, as the Mother made and the Lord gave when you and the world were young! Seven years you stuck to the old mill — and then you were only fifteen ; and then, just as they were (frowning the Queen, you know you had to give it up, and to give the home up with it, to go out and never return to stay. And so I lost you out of that bad but blessed old life in and out of the factory, and have never set eyes on you until to-day,—you dear little other me, that was dead and is alive again, and was lost and is found! ” That was how I came to think of my story, and that I might tell it as a word of encouragement to many that may need such a word—about that way of life which I have travelled many miles, since I set out, not know­ ing whither I went, to the pulpit and pastorate of Unity Church. But I cannot tell the story I want to tell, if I let myself drift away just here from that boy in the mill on the Washburne, and say no more about him. I like him well enough, after all these years, to stay beside him a little longer; and, besides that, he had a good deal to do with the mak­ ing of as much of a man as is now at the other end of this pen. I notice in Bunyan’s “Pilgrim,” that all the characters that great dreamer creates are so far hard­ ened in the mould before he lets us 223 see them, that we feel all the time it is a foregone conclusion. Obstinate, Pliable, Ignorance, and the rest on that side, are bound to come to grief; while Christian, Hopeful, and Faith­ ful, are sure to reach the Shining City, no matter what may befall. Some­ thing like this is true of our common life. Before we begin to live to much purpose either way, the things are gathered and laid up that are to make or mar us. We are not aware of it, any more than the young birds, as they flutter out of the nest to do for themselves, are aware how they will be sure to find out when to go north or south, and how to build and line their own nests, and where and what to seek for their callow brood. But it is all there. Nature has taken care of that; and Nature and Providence do together for the fledgling child what Nature alone does for the bird. I have heard that the nuns who teach in convent schools say, “ Let us have the Protestant child until it is seven years old, and then we have no fear for the future; it is sure to come at last into the Church.” I imagine that as a rule this is true; and usually when Protestant parents pay for the education of their children in those schools, they pay for an item that is not in the bill—their conversion to Romanism. It has been noticed, too, that when German children come here from the Fatherland, and eagerly turn to the English tongue, giving up their native speech, it is no matter how long they live in that habit, if the old man who has not spoken a word of German since he was a child loses himself in his last moments, he then goes back to that other self—the fellow of the one I saw in the old mill—and talks German again. So the poor old knight, whose life as a man had been one great gluttonous sin, forgot for a moment on his death-bed his own awful remorse and the blasting of his hopes by the breath of the King, and babbled of green fields where he had wandered, no doubt, as an unfallen �224 TALKS AB OUS' LIFE^ child, to gather kingcups and daisies, and chase the rabbit to his burrow. That grand and hearty Englishman, Sydney Smith, used to laugh at ances­ tral pride, and to say that the Smith crest, with which all their letters were sealed, was the Smith thumb. I can­ not laugh with that lord of laughter there. I would be glad to know that I came of a great line, if it had been God’s will. About a year ago there was a para­ graph in the papers, of a murder in San Francisco, that I read, and read again, with a wonderful interest. Colonel Fairfax, so the papers said, had been stabbed in the streets of . that city, by some wretch, for a fancied injury. The murdered man had strength enough left to draw his re­ volver and cover his • assassin, who then begged abjectly for mercy; when the dying victim said, quietly: “You have killed me, and I can kill you; but I spare you, villain and coward as you are, for the sake of your wife and little children.” If I were not myself, I would love to be the Fairfax that should succeed that noble fellow, — not alone for that splendid piece of chivhlry of which there was never more need in this land than there is now, the grace I mean of forbearance unto death in the face of the worst injury one man can in­ flict on another; — not for that alone, but because that man was the last of a mighty line whose name was the pride of all the boys of my compan­ ionship, and whose great mansion once nestled on the southern and sunny side of the high land that gave1 us only its northern shoulder. We were proud of that Fairfax line. It had disappeared from the country many a year before I was born; but the tradition was strong still of the great Sir Thomas, who fought with Cromwell for the people against the King. And we preserved one tradi­ tion of him that has never appeared in print; — how his arm was so long that when he stood stretched to his [March, full height the palm of the hand rested on the cap of the knee; andjn some skirmish, also unrecordga^vh^n our hero was met alone in one of our narrow lanes by eight or ten of the enemy, and it was one down and an­ other come on, Sir Thomas, by favor of his long arm and stout heart, cut down about half the number, and thej rest galloped away. That Fairfax was a great figure in our juvenile Valhalla® He was one of a line of noble men, with a few exceptions, that had housed itself there at Denton for many hunt dreds of years. It saw good reason finally for settling in Virginia, gave a great friend to Washington, but not to the infant Republic; and so came down to that man murdered the other day on the Pacific coast. Pride in an ancestry like that, it must be good to feel. I think thafe man remembered he was a Fair®x* and must not stain his name with murder for murder, and that had something to do with his noble fora bearance. He must die like a Fair! fax. Such persons bring with them into the world a vast advantage over the common run of us. Their organ­ ism is like the organ of a great maker — something unique for its sweetness^ or strength; and their soul, like a greal organist, makes a music that is all his own. I think we would all, please God, belong to a line like that. It is something still in our life, like the, separate line of David, by which should be born in the fulness of tifflfl the greatest of all the figures in humdn history. But when that cannot be, what we may all be glad and proud of is a line! that is good as far as it goes. That is the way I feel about that little man who was to worry out of that factory I somehow into a pulpit. The line! began with the father and motherJ There was a grandfather who fought under Nelson and went overboard one black night in a storm ; he was on the father’s side. And then on the mother’s side there was another sailor who went �i87°-1 TALKS ABOUT LIFE. down the sea in a ship that never came up again. Then there were two widows who fought the wolf while they were able, and died presently of the fight. Then, as the century was Homing in, Yorkshire, with its great mills, began to be to the South of En­ gland what the West has been to the Bast here in our day—the land of promise to all who wanted to better themselves. So a bright orphan lad in London and a lass in Norwich beard of it, and were caught by that impulse to get out of the land of their kindred which caught their son many a year after and swept him over the Atlantic; and I have no doubt, from what I have heard them say, they were after that quite of the mind of the old ballad: “York, York, for my monie; Of all the places I ever did see This is the best for good companie Except the City of London.” So what the boy saw when he began to notice was a woman, tall and deep"chested, with shining flaxen hair and laughing blue eyes, a damask rose­ bloom on her cheek — as is the way with the women of her nation; — a laugh that was music, too, and a contagion of laughter you could not escape was at the heart of it; — a step like a deer for lightness, and an activ­ ity that could carry its possessor twenty miles a day over the rough northern hills, and land her safe home in the [evening, no more tired than one of our fashionable ladies in Chicago Would be in going from cellar to garret in their own house. Woman’s rights, as a natural truth, must have come to me by that mother. I believe, as I sit and think of her wonderful genius for doing whatever she took in hand, that if she had been told to do it by her sense of duty, and then the way had opened, she would have led an army like the old queens, or governed a kingdom. What she did govern was a houseful of great, growing, hungry, outbreaking bairns,—keeping us all well in hand, smiting all hinderance 225 out of our way, keeping us fed and clad bravely, and paying for school, as long as we could be spared to go, out of the eighteen shillings a week the quiet manful father made at his anvil. The kindest heart that ever beat in a man’s breast, I think,was his. It stopped beating in a moment, one hot July day; and before any hand could touch him he was in “the rest that remains.” But in those brave old days, while the first fifteen years were passing that do so much for us all, there we were, altogether, in one of the sweetest cot­ tage homes that ever nestled under green leaves in a green valley. There was a plum tree and a rose tree and wealth of ivy and a bit of greensward outside; and inside, one room on the floor and two above; a floor of flags scoured white so that you might eat your dinner on it and no harm be done except to the floor; walls white­ washed to look like driven snow, with pictures of great Bible figures hung where there was room, and in their own places kept so bright as to be so many dusky mirrors; the great ma­ hogany chest of drawers and highcased clock; polished elm chairs, and corner cupboard for the china that was only got out at high festivals; a bright open sea-coal fire always alight, winter and summer; with all sorts of common things for common use stowed snug and tight in their own corners, like the goods and chattels of Ed’ard Cuttie, mariner. That was the home in the day of small things; matched then and still by ten thousand cottages in. the good old shire, but never surpassed there or anywhere, when you count what was done and what there was to do on. This must be about all The West­ Monthly will print in this num­ ber, with wealth of better things at her command; so I must stop now, and leave the reader inside that cottage. If I have a feeling that I have got to. go on and make a clean breast of it, ern �226 LEGEND OF THE CASTLE OF NUREMBERG, in some such way as Hugh Miller has done in “ My Schools and Schoolmas­ ters,” I shall have to linger about the cottage I know not how long; for feel­ ing, as I have said, how much is done by the time the boyhood is over and the youth begins — if such a distinction can be made — I can see now how [March, many things must have been inti­ mately at work beside that sweet, good home, and what was there. Manners and customs, traditions, stories, reli­ gion, superstition, scene, and incident, all had their place in the lad’s life, and must have their place in the man’s story — if it is ever told. LEGEND OF THE CASTLE OF NUREMBERG. {From the German. ) BY MRS. E. E. EVANS. MONGST the many legends and suffered terribly from the ravages of historical traditions attached to wolves, until, in desperation, the in­ the old castle of Nuremberg, is a habitants assembled in force and curious story of an event which took drove them out of their haunts, kill-, place about the middle of the thir­ ing meantime as many as possible. teenth century. The castle was at Those that escaped, to the number of that time governed by Count Frederic several hundred, retreated to the moun­ III. of Hohenzollern, who lived there tains, and from thence made frequent in princely state with his wife, the descents upon the scattered farms in Countess Elizabeth, and their six the valleys, so that scarcely a day children. It was a happy family. The elapsed without some person having wedded pair lovecj each other tenderly, been destroyed. The most horrible event of this and took pride in the strength and bravery of their sons and the modest kind occurred three days before Mich­ beauty of their daughters. Their re­ aelmas* In the forests of St. Sebald tainers were faithful, the citizens of ’ and St. Lawrence (so named from the the already famous city of Nuremberg two cathedrals of Nuremberg) lived a held them in honor, the land was no class of peasants who made it their longer disturbed by war, and through sole business to raise bees and collect the vigilance and courage of the honey, which was in great demand, Nurembergers the once dreaded inva­ as foreign sugars had not yet begun sions of banded robbers had been to be imported. To such an extent was the pursuit carried, that the great forest brought to an end. Thus peaceful and prosperous was tract was spoken of in the legal in­ the existence of this noble family in struments of that period as “ the impe­ the year 1264. At that period, John, rial bee-garden,” and the bee-farmers the elder son, was eighteen and his were allowed to pay their government brother Sigmund sixteen years old,. taxes in honey. For some reason, the They were skilled in every knightly magistrate having charge of such accomplishment, and had already won matters issued an order for the tax to distinction by their exertions in cer­ be paid three days before Michaelmas, tain fierce encounters with the rob­ instead of on the day itself, when it would really become due; and in bers. In the autumn of that year the vil­ obedience to the command, a certain lages in the vicinity of Nuremberg bee-farmer, living on the northern � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Talks about life Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Collyer, Robert Description An account of the resource Place of publication: [California] Collation: 222-226 p. ; 24 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Publication information from KVK. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available [s.n.] Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1870 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5737 Subject The topic of the resource Unitarianism Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (Talks about life), identified by </span><span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk">Humanist Library and Archives</a></span><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Conway Tracts https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/566dca82e7ed492d6d9fbebc4380af01.pdf?Expires=1781740800&Signature=WE1lF8D6hxZ2n8lCvgTt2u30a0UR0sENncG%7EkoKgo5fwSj9jueGaDdb1r%7EYsWy3fGqjW2UfgTSosPL0fkQRFVk6x7FKLUxkKqC99MF7-oTBhujhCX8vXxYB5cdhJWhtLzLdZK69FeBrDhPqrAHPwhbyR3xdZU3vGUEPh86PatdS31NYCYWdhWxKPPJYp4KrYTRzeGuxGL6HadZRAqmj-v5xDUiCXbJsgjHVqLlILWa06M46JoLglW7CkUzKthD9xtEvUlHkbq13qSoibBCGuQ3nd5Dd5wOFv5h88GccGy%7EpMVJ%7EptU1GnWMsdu1bL3fcZ2X60xPoLSNhfokrnn-pMA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 9c5c6fb6afda92d2917dc75af31078ab PDF Text Text THE EXAMINER: A Monthly Review of Religious and Humane Questions, and of Literattire. Vol. I. — NOVEMBER, 1870. — No. 1. aMjicago; OR, THE BACK STAIRS TO FORTUNE. “ Thyself and thy belongings Are not thine own so proper, as to waste Thyself upon thy virtues, they on thee. Heaven doth with us as we with torches do. Not light them for themselves : for if our virtues Did not go forth of us, ’twere all alike As if we had them not. Spirits are not finely touched But to fine issues ; nor nature never lends The smallest scruple of her excellence, But, like a thrifty goddess, she determines Herself the glory of a creditor, Both thanks and use.” Measurefor Measure. CHAPTER I.—Introduction. I WILL frankly say, that my object in writing this serial is. to strike a succession of the hardest blows I can, at follies, vices, and crimes, which I find around me, in the society, religion, and types of character which are current among us. It is now nearly twenty-eight years since I was walking home one winter s night with my father, to our log cottage on the west bank of the Fox river, some thirty-five miles from Chicago, when certain questions he put to me about my soul and my future destiny,—we were returning from a “ prayer and inquiry meeting,”—led me to take the oaths, as it were, of awful fealty to God, and to set my heart upon intense seeking after the invisible path by which human feet find entrance to divine life. And for more than a quarter of a cen­ tury, from extreme youth to manhood, I have not ceased to contend with myself, and with all the forces of the world besetting me, for the attainment of that ideal of a heart right with God, which was before my young imagination when I first consecrated my powers to religion. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1870, by Edward C. Towne, in the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. VOL. I.—NO. I. �o Crazy Chicago. The lesson I have best learned is, that I am to myself, by many varieties of ignorance and short-coming, fault and transgression, the greatest hurt and hindrance; so that it were extreme stupidity and wrong in me to attempt to cudgel mankind out of my path, as if the world only stood between me and the gates of light; or to complain of my earthly condition, as if but for cloud and storm, and the inces­ sant turning of earth into her own shadow, I could get away easily enough on the wings of my own endeavor to some place of eternal, unclouded day. Out of the depths I confess that I am of the earth, earthy, born of the dust and compact of common clay, and that for me there is no problem more immediate and urgent than that of detaining the incarnate spark in my own breast, and finding other than the meanest cradle for that of God which is born into my own life. These pages will bear constant witness, I trust, to my “ personal conviction of sin,” even if I should not be found spitting out in the presence of the public the husks I have been fain to eat, and should hesitate, for decency’s sake, to do as the Pharisees, with their manners mended in the school of Christ, now do, raise, with smitten breast, the publican’s wail, to be seen and heard of men. And it will always appear in what I write, unless I come greatly short of my aim, that in no case do I propose that kind of judgment which denies excuse and knows no arrest of the severities of justice. I mean to comprehend, and to deal generous justice, even when I strike the hardest and crush the most unsparingly ; believing that so it is with the truth, and that in the final judgment of perfect wisdom and absolute power, there is complete reconciliation of the criminal and the court, and no such thing at last as the chains and prison of uupitying penalty. Very many good people on earth, appealing to God in heaven and to the Devil in hell, are, indeed, still digesting the sour wrath against wrong which comes of crudeness of faith and virtue, and are still muttering, boldly or slyly, the foul curses of heathenism, in creeds Catholic, Calvinist, and other, against the race of mortal men ; but I no more propose to deem that sort of thing Christian, or decent, or other than spiritually unclean and detestable, than I propose to accept human sacrifice and the banquets of pious cannibalism. The study of follies, faults, and crimes in men, is the study also of human nature, and no delineation of the former can be true, or even tolerable, to a just mind, which does not pick out the threads of the original fabric, and show the work of the Creator under all the marred �Crazy Chicago. 3 life of the creature. God forbid that I should forget, or fail to indicate, in speaking of what goes sadly wrong in the details of human life, that for every soul made in the divine image, there is adequate discipline, causing a final tendency of character, and of the whole course of being, to good, even the perfect and eternal good which is the aim of God and the end of the kingdom of heaven. In the end, therefore, whatever plainness and sharpness I may use, I hope to speak kindly of men and of women, and permit my readers to see, even on the back stairs to fortune, angels ascending and descending, under whatever disguise and humiliation of soiled humanity. But let it be understood that I do not mean to forbear criticism and the exposure of facts, because of my personal consciousness of deficiency and fault, and my unswerving faith in good in all and divine good will to all. I shall analyze and portray life as I find it, and shall take every suitable occasion to pierce the very core of our doubtful and difficult questions, and to depict in their naked reality the characters which swarm along the new paths of our new civilization. I have the blood of this new life in my own veins ; its great hopes throb in my heart; I have closely observed and faithfully studied its manifold, marvellous manifestations; and I feel wholly convinced of the immeasurable course it is to run, and of the absolute necessity of making haste to prepare the full success of that course, by culture such as never before was needed, and never yet has been produced. New elements of a new world are gathered in this great chaos which we call The West, and the ever enduring spirit of truth, order, beneficence, which has had so varied incarnations in human history, seems destined to attempt here a new manifestation, to the interpre­ tation of which new seers must be called. While greater masters of prophecy prepare their burden, I propose to utter my word, in a faithful picture of certain aspects of things about us, the criticism of which, and reform of which, must precede any satisfactory establish­ ment of a culture suited to our needs, which are the needs of enterprise and liberty vastly greater and more radical than were ever before ventured on. It must not be thought, as my title may suggest, that I am about to hold up the great city of the West to contempt. I use her name to designate a type, a new expansion of energy and freedom, fully believing that the event will show her to be one of the great centres of the modern world. Incident to the progress which she represents, �4 Crazy Chicago. are insanities of enterprise and liberty, the aggregate of which I may justly call Crazy Chicago. And in thus naming my picture, I leave myself at liberty to introduce features brought from far, illustrations of American insanity which I have gathered in other fields, and which I am able to use to more advantage than the particular instances nearer the scene of my tale. Crazy Chicago is an American product. Some of the elements which mingle in the aggregate designated by the term, are seen to best advantage in New York or Boston, though doubtless the natural attraction of all is to the city whose name I use. Here then, in my story, let them come, and let us behold in one view the worst and the best of our new march of American energy and freedom. CHAPTER II. It was impossible not to pity her. Only three days before a bride, and a widow before the sun went down on her wedding-day, she was journeying with her lover’s remains to lay them where the new home for the new life had been prepared; and now an inexpli­ cable event brought an additional and wholly unthought of shock. The baggage car, in which was contained the casket of precious clay, had taken fire, and was already enveloped in fierce, devouring flames. Nobody could tell how it had happened, but the car, with all its contents, was burning up. Had some careless person packed matches in his trunk, along with something readily combustible, and so fur­ nished the seed of this destruction ? Had a spark stolen in by an accidental crack, and fallen on stuff easy to ignite ? Surmises were abundant, but even the most plausible left the origin of the fire a mystery. There were two baggage cars, and this one, entirely filled with through-baggage, express matter and mails, had not been opened since the train left P------ , ten hours before. The engineer was as much at a loss as any one, as to how it had happened. He could only say that he suddenly became aware that this closed and locked car was bursting out in flames on all sides, and that to stop the train, to uncouple and drag forward the burning mass, and to himself cut loose from it, were barely possible for the tongues of flame which shot fiercely out in every direction. A sense of awe stole over every one, such as inexplicable manifestations of destroying power always excite, when it was generally known that no one could tell how the confla­ gration had originated. �Crazy Chicago. 5 The utmost exertions of all hands did not suffice to break open a door, or to get out even a single trunk, box, or mail-bag. Even the attempt to lift one side of the car, by means of poles and rails, and throw it over, and off the track, was of no avail. There was no alternative but to let the fire rage until the chief weight of the burning mass should be dissipated. It would not take a very long time to make that heavy load almost as light as nothing, tossing its elements back into the womb of air and chaos of dust whence they came. Half a ton of letters, the business and love of New York and New England written out by thousands of scribes, would become a few pounds of ashes and lost cloudlets of elemental matter, within a couple of hours. The huge pile of boxes and trunks, with the varied belongings of a crowd of persons, things mean and things precious, things gay and costly, and things cheap and vile ; the gentleman’s apparel and keepsakes; the lady’s rich collection of necessities of comfort, beauty, and pride; the student’s books, and love tokens, and single best suit; and similar treasures of different classes of travelers, were dissolving in that raging furnace, and their elements flying away to the treasuries of nature. The full light of noon-day softened the fire spectacle, extinguishing somewhat the white tips of the tongues of flame, but still an intensely raging fire was evidently doing its cruel work. And in the very heart of the fiery pile lay all that death had left of Marion White’s husband. Had there been no peculiar distress in the event, almost every one would have watched the progress of the flames with bitter regret for his or her own personal loss, but when it was known that those low wails of irrepressible anguish in the second car were because of a body burning up,— the last relic of one day of wedlock to a young bride,— the single thought which pressed upon all hearts, was of compassion for this unusual aggravation of a dreadful woe. Rough men as well as gentle, and women commonly thoughtless of either pleasure or pain not their own, as well as those not bereft by a false life of the power of womanly sympathy, moved about or looked sadly on, with that air of real compassion which always seems like a soft outbreak in human flesh of the divine tenderness. Not a soul there but sincerely pitied Marion White, for her great sorrow, and for this strange after-blow of suffering. No one knew her; but her name, which was distinctly marked on her traveling-bag, had been passed from one to another in the crowd, as tenderly and reverently as communion bread and wine are handed about when sacrament is �6 Crazy Chicago. administered. It was, indeed, one of the hours when the religion of our common sympathy, and our common awe before invisible realities, held its service of communion, and swayed all hearts with its gracious power. There were bad men standing by, to whom greed was more than grace, and women looking on who had grown sadly faithless to womanhood through pride, or passion, or harshness of virtue and heathenism in religion,— whom in this moment the kingdom of heaven baptized, so that ever after they were under one memory at least of sweet human nature, touched once at least with love towards the fellow­ creature and natural trust towards the Providence which is behind all our mysteries and all our woes. The lookers on had, indeed, been less than human, if the quick tenderness of sympathy had not flushed every face, and they had not thus tried dumbly to ease Marion White’s load of pain. But it was only as the hour wore on, and when most of the passengers were gone to watch the last work of the fire and to prepare to throw the wreck from the track, that the terrible distress of the doubly bereaved young wife began to abate a little. Could she but have thought, there was nothing really dreadful in this funeral pyre. But she did not think, not even as much as she had begun to do before the suddenness and strangeness of this experience came upon her. The religion which tradition had taught her required a gloomy contemplation of death. It barely offered its “professors” a candle of hope for a passage through this valley of terrors, and neither she nor her lover had ever consented to become “ professors.” There fell no light, therefore, on the path of her bereavement, from any knowl­ edge she had had of Christian faith. On the contrary, all her instruction, every thing she was accustomed to hear, and even the prayer in the dreary funeral service, had carefully excluded every ray of light, and forced her desolate heart upon either blank despair or desperate trust. The despair was too terrible for endurance, yet she could not have trusted, if it had been for herself alone. On either side of her way, as she strove to follow the departed spirit to which they said “God had joined” her, she saw the Jesus of Christian superstition,* clothed in blood and breathing fire, and the Devil of the same dreadful tale, only less horrible than the Judging Christ, while * A recent evangelical poem, “ Yesterday, To-day and Forever,” which has already had a very wide circulation, describes the Lord Jesus as rising from the “ Bridal Supper of the Lamb ” to say, “Now is the day of vengeance in my heart,” and going forth G Apparell’d in a vesture dipped in blood,” while his angels cry, “ Ride on and prosper! Thy right hand alone Shall teach thee deeds of vengeance, and Thy shafts Shall drink the life-blood of Thy vaunting foes,” �far before yawned bottomless perdition, and over all was that Infinite Horror, the presence of “ an angry God.” That it was a heathen mythology which had created this picture, she could not be expected to know, but she soon did know, by some better revelation than she had been taught, that the angry God, the lake of fire, the nearly infinite devil, and the Jesus of the judgment-throne, were shapes of fear known only to p ious fiction. The unreality of customary religion had strongly impressed her ever since she had first had its lessons pressed upon her attention. Without distinctly reflecting, she had gathered a strong impression, and in fact reached a profound conviction, that the usual administra­ tion of Christian dogma was formal only, and was wholly false to the real faith both of ministers and peoples. It was her nursery experi­ ence over again, only the tales of catechism, and creed, and church worship, while solemn and grim as grown men could make them, were less real than Blue Beard and Jack and the Bean Stalk,— mere mummery kept up by decent custom and vague fear,— or by the difficulty ministers found in extricating their real faith from this customary, consecrated, and said to be Divine Form. She had so clearly felt this, without distinctly expressing it even to herself, that the general idea that pious fiction is as much a rule in the religion of sects and churches, as pleasant fiction is in the nursery, was perfectly familiar to her. When, therefore, early impressions and the influences about her, conjured up the usual dreadful picture of the gods of Christian heathenism,— Jesus, Satan, and Jehovah,— it was inevitable that her brave love should recur to the thought that these shapes of terror had no sanction in any human or any Christian truth. This, her own individual thought, which had had but a timid existence in her mind, would have hardly served her needs when the shadow of utter darkness fell on her life, but for the fact that love and desperation nerved her spirit, and together drove her upon the experiment of trust. And once that she dared brave the triune Horror of her early creed, the conviction grew into dauntless vigof, that the real truth would unmask and dethrone this image of complex dread. Of Devil and angry Jehovah, in fact, she at once found the fear entirely gone. The dreadful figure of the Judge alone remained to plague her timid trust in God. Unhesitatingly, however, using this simple liturgy of Old and New Testaments, ‘The Lord is my Shepherd’ — ‘Our Father which art in Heaven,’ — she defied, for �Crazy Chicago. her lover’s sake, and trusting Love as true God and God as true Love, the Messianic Lord of Vengeance, in whom she had wholly lost the simple Christ of history. A bitter feeling that some dreadful pretension, in parable or in false report of parable, had done a most cruel thing to human hearts, in affording a basis for the fiction of damnation, entirely separated her from the thought of the teacher whose prayer she had on her lips, and whose faith towards God her heart repeated. He was less than nothing to her; he was wholly excluded from her sight; nor can one wonder, who considers the extent to which Jesus, in the existing records of his life, apparently lent himself to the idea of a Messianic avenging deliverer. “ I have hated Jesus ever since I was a little girl, and first read about giving bad people to the devil to be put in hell fire,” were actual words of a perfectly simple, perfectly just, and exceptionally Christian experience, on the part of one, a very simple, earnest woman, who could not be expected to discriminate the gross Judaism of some things in the teaching of Jesus from the pure Christian truth of other parts of his doctrine. A resolute idealist, who sets out with the assumption that all the bad words in the New Testament are to be read any way but simply, in order to get a good meaning into them, may easily enough create a Jesus all transcendent goodness and greatness, and think it very strange that the millions do not see all colors white as he does, but this is no exploit for common minds. And to many, who have been diligently instructed in that orthodoxy, which says, as Ecce Deus expresses it,— “ Christ must be more than a good man, or worse than the worst man ; if he be not God, he is the Devil,” — it is impossible to see the real teacher, as he speaks real truth, the attention is so taken with the figure which he makes, or is represented as making, in some scene which has no true revelation in it. Women are commonly the sufferers who revolt finally against the Jesus of pious fiction, and utterly, though secretly, turn away from gospel and epistles, to the simple revelation which nature, and provi­ dence, and inspiration, furnish to their own hearts. The young wife of our story was such a sufferer and recusant. Instantly that her mind became composed to reflection, she found herself a Christian without Christ, an unfaltering believer in precious truths of God, and eternal life, which had come to her under the Christian name, and with that divine quality of mercy which the word “ Christian” �Crazy Chicago. 9 seemed to most signify in the best Christian hearts, and yet a resolute, defiant disbeliever in the whole form of creed and custom on which had been enthroned so long the Judging Christ. The whole matter had become divided, and a great gulf fixed between the one part and the other, all the realities of God, and mercy, and heaven on one side, and the fictions, the forms, and the black idols on the other. Defiance of the latter was part, for the moment, of the faith with which she regarded the former. It was to this state of mind that Marion White had come, when the sudden intelligence of the burning of her husband’s body threw her from all self possession, and brought back upon her, with excess of terror, the gloomiest impressions she had ever had. It seemed almost as if the offended Judge had kindled those flames, to devour the dead form, and give her a horrible symbol of the second death, to which her lover had been received in hell torment. The event was so unexpected and so inexplicable, and so harrowing at the best, even if she could have remembered that it was no more than “ dust to dust,” that, even with a more resolute mind, she must have been made unusually susceptible, for the time, to dark impressions and depress­ ing thoughts, such as early religious associations had always tended to force upon her. Had her faith met at that moment with disastrous overthrow, and fear recovered possession of her trembling spirit, it would have been no more than usually happens. A plausible, tender appeal to her sense of helplessness, to her feeling of ill desert, to her natural terror in view of destruction, might have extinguished in her heart the pure aspiration of the child towards the Father in Heaven, and fastened on her some one of the forms of current Christian heathenism. No such advocate was at hand, however, and with the moving on of the train, and her final departure from the last relic of her past, Marion White struggled out of the depths with a sad strength of soul which she was destined never to lose. CHAPTER III. There were two persons in the car with Marion White, who each had an impulse to offer her assistance, of the sort which sympathy endeavors to render on such occasions. Both of them had the clerical title, and both were ministers of religion, but they were every way a singular contrast to each other ; they had in fact no more in �10 Crazy Chicago. common than the publican and the Pharisee in the temple. That one of the two whose presence might have been of real service, we will call, without his title, John Paul, a modest, earnest gentleman of nearly fifty, whose countenance told a plain story of very profound, and possibly very sad, experience. Him, however, we must defer introducing, because he was anticipated by the Rev. Athanasius Channing Blowman, a clergyman of national reputation, who was en route to Chicago to deliver his celebrated lecture on Napoleon Bonaparte and Modern History. The Rev. Athanasius Channing Blowman was still a young man,— thirty-three perhaps,— but he did not lack assurance, and he felt it incumbent upon him to employ his pastoral, not to say his episcopal, authority, with the sighs and tears of Marion White. Not that he was a priest of ‘ The Church,’ much less a bishop, for he belonged to a small denomination of heretics, and had only the standing which excessive self-assertion gives; but he made a large and loud claim as a “minister of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,” and he held in great esteem that prophecy, wherein the master assured the disciples, “ He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater than these shall he do.” It was from the last clause of this text that Athanasius Channing Blowman purposed to preach in the Chicago Opera House, on the Sunday evening previous to his lecture, which would be given on Monday night. Nature had used inexplicable freedom in mixing characters in this young apostle. There was a little of Pope Hildebrand, just enough to warrant the sublime assurance with which he had demanded and obtained ecclesiastical dignities, on the various boards engaged in managing the machinery of the sect. Of Tom Paine, Voltaire, and any nameless mountebank, there were about equal parts, giving a considerable dash of irreverent common sense, of egotistic wit, and of grand and lofty tumbling with figures of speech, epithets fit and unfit, and the usual weapons of sensational oratory. It was, however, in personal appearance, that Athanasius Channing Blowman believed himself indubitably in the line of prophets and apostles, and of his “ Lord and Master.” Probably he would never have been called a handsome man; and he certainly was not interesting in appearance; but he had quite unusual stature, an animated countenance, eyes that habitually flashed, or were meant to flash, and locks, abundant and dark, worthy of an Apollo. Two thoughts frequently came to him through the smoke of his cigar, that the figures of “ the Lord Jesus,” �Crazy Chicago. 11 in pictures by very old masters, strangely resembled tbe person he appeared in what he called “ my glorified moments,” and that Apollo Athanasius Channing would have been a name strikingly suitable for one who had added to the substance of Greek wisdom and orthodox inspiration, the advanced views of most reputable heresy, and whose lofty aim it was to invite Moses and Elias, Catholic and Calvinist, to abide with him on his mount of transfiguration, “ our elevated liberal views.” In the matter of actual religion, this Apollo Athanasius once naively confessed that it was the unknown quantity in his problem of life. At the very first of his ministry he had inclined wholly to the most V radical” paths, and he never had had, or could have, any other than “ radical ” private opinions. But preferment, such as it could be had in his sect, did not lie in that direction, and really the workings of his mind were not so positive as to compel him to minister one set of opinions rather than another. He went over, therefore, to the conservative side of the denominational conventicle, and shouted the shibboleths of orthodox heresy at the head of the “ right wing.” Here he thought it mighty clever to confute the “ radicals,” who said much of “ intuition ” and “ inspiration,” by confessing, as if that of course settled the matter, that his soul was as empty of “ inspiration ” as a brass horn of the Holy Ghost; and that of “ intuition” he had never known any more than a dutch cheese; propositions which nobody felt able to dispute. The single passion of his nature seemed to be, to raise his voice loudest of all among “ the chief speakers,” and to persuade himself that he led the van of the Christian religion, because he was a successful sensational preacher. In fact, however, the Christian religion, with all its sins of error and wrong upon it, would have been infinitely indebted to this fellow if he had looked up some honest employment. There undoubtedly ought to be a quasi-hell just at present, convenient to urgent mundane necessities, into which all not honest teachers of religion might be thrust, long enough to smoke out thejr pretension, and save their souls, as by fire, from the worst break-down of character to which man or woman can come. The emptying thereby of numerous pulpits, which it costs from $7,000 to $12,000 a year to keep a star performer in, would do no harm whatever to public virtue or popular interest in religion, and would rid us of a prodigious amount of humbug, besides turning over to modest and honest labor, and to good character, quite a number of persons originally capable of a �12 Crazy Chicago. career much nobler than that of careless, reckless, sensational administration of no-truths, half-truths, and lies, in the name of religion. It was a pet conceit of young Mr. Blowman, since he had taken charge of the “ conservative liberal movement of the Christian mind,” to constitute himself spokesman of the latest discovered true intent of the only original gospel of “ Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,” and invite the warring sects of Christendom to say after him this last revised and finally genuine Christian confession of faith. It was not that he really had any particular faith to confess himself, but he imagined himself competent, as conductor of a metropolitan religious theatre, drawing crowded houses every Sunday morning and evening, to give a good guess at the average religious notions afloat in the popular mind, and had no hesitation in assuming that a compend of such notions would have prodigious popular success. With his usual largeness and boldness of view, he purposed obtaining what he called a “ Consensus,” or agreed-upon statement of beliefs, endorsed by leading divines,— selected by himself from all parts of Christendom, and addressed by a circular letter under his own hand,— as an authoritative exposition of faith and practice. To his mind it was plain that large numbers of the popular clergy of various sects would welcome so good an opportunity to fall into line under one banner, and behind a leader whose star was so undeniably in the ascendant, wherever theatres and opera houses had opened their doors. The “ liberal views” of his own sect rendered the bare suggestion of a “ Creed ” dangerous, not because there was really any indisposition to have a creed, in a small and sly way, by a sort of ecclesiastical thimblerig, but from the average aversion of the sect to call the distinctly proclaimed confession by the usual name, the general impression seeming to be that clever sleight-of-hand infidelity to the boasted principle of liberty, would escape detection, and enable the body to save appearances. In this peculiar exigency, our young apostle was very lucky to hit on the Latin term, Consensus, which at once sounds neither definite nor dangerous, and has an impressive suggestion of dignity and divinity, as much as to say, reversing a scripture word, “ It seems good to US and to the Holy Ghost.” This term he almost considered a divine suggestion, only he was not sure that the assumptions of that word “ divine,” such as the existence of God. inspiration, etc., were not a little doubtful, useful but misty, while of his own cleverness he �Crazy Chicago. 13 was certain beyond a doubt, and on the whole preferred to assume that, in the absence or inattention of Divine Wisdom, and “the Lord Jesus ” having left the excelsior opportunities to future disciples, he had invented a kind of Nicholson pavement for religion, over which ark and hearse, the hope and the terror of traditional faith, might trundle, smoothly as never before, their glorious onward way. He often said to himself, and to his numerous admiring confidants, the quasi-religious clever fellows, of both sexes, who constituted the voluntary vestry of his grand metropolitan conventicle, “ The Church of Holy Enoch,” that he should never forget the hour and the moment when the scheme of a “ Consensus ” occurred to him. It was on his first visit to Chicago, when for the first time he was driven down Wabash Avenue, by the Hon. Jupiter William. His calmness of mind had been disturbed for a moment by the contrast between his own elegant patent-leather “ Oxford ties ” and the “ heavy kip ” of the Hon. Jupiter William’s unvarnished boots, resting conspicu­ ously on the front seat of the carriage, when suddenly, as the vehicle swept round into the Avenue, and rolled with soothing smoothness along the block roadway, a kind of vision brought a recurrence of his frequent thoughts on the momentous subject of a “ banner-statement of belief,” and in a moment, as if a Latin Dictionary,— a sealed book to his education,— had been let down between the scraggy and smutty trees which line this “ superb drive,” he read this word of words for his purpose, Consensus, and instantly imagined a grand turn-out of ecclesiastical vehicles, rolling in noiseless majesty in the wake of his suggestion, over the way his cleverness should lay down. From that moment “Consensus” had been his banner in the sky. Fie had had the word illuminated, and framed in velvet and gold, to stand on his study table. And straightway he had proceeded to write out fairly his compend of all known winds of doctrine, attaching thereto his own bold, decisive, oecumenical signature, Athanasius Channing Blowman, preparatory to receiving the concurrent attestation of elect fathers and brethren to whom he would vouchsafe circular epistolary application. This compend, which was meant to be to the original materials of prophecy, gospels, and epistles, what an ordered and elegantly served dinner would have been to the great sheet let down, full of things clean and unclean, of Peter’s vision, had been printed in gilt and colors, on a large, elegant broad-sheet, and also in a primer executed in the richest style of the designer’s art. It was the broad-sheet which had best pleased the eye and heart of �14 Crazy Chicago. the author, because the first words and the last, the title and the signa­ ture, stood as he deemed they should, in one view, the Alpha and the Omega of this last authoritative interpretation of revelation; and then it suggested a new Luther, nailing theses of everlasting gospel on the doors of “ Atheism, Free Religion, and Romanism,” with “ blows heard in heaven.” “Consensus” and “ Blowman I ” Would not numberless Simeons now say, “ Mine eyes have seen thy salvation, which thou hast prepared before the face of all people ? ” But the broad-sheet was less convenient than a primer to hand about, and less durable in the frowsy pockets of unctious youths who besieged the pulpit steps, at close of service on Sunday nights, for more words of everlasting bunkum; and then report had it, on too good ground, alas! that the Reverend Doctor Archangelicus Sanctus Sanctorum, had made contemptuous reference to the “Consensus” as “ Blowman’s Handbill,” and really threatened a split in the party of “ us and the Holy Ghost,” unless “ us” used somewhat more reserve in presence of the long time “ Liberal ” Vicar of the “ Lord Jesus.” The primer, therefore, had finally engaged the ardent dogmatic and aesthetic interest of the inventor of “Consensus.” and was already privately published, while the large scheme of concurrent attestation was delayed, until due attention could be afforded it. Some experi­ ence which Mr. Blowman had had, with a richly printed and orna­ mented insurance tract, which his popular pen had been engaged to write, and which the enterprising managers, with plenty of other people’s money to spend, had brought out regardless of expense, now came in play. Suffice it to say that heavy tinted paper, border lines which varied with each page through all the colors of the rainbow, a text printed in old English black letter, with illuminated initial letters in blue, scarlet, and gold, and an illuminated cover, done in chromo­ lithograph, were the main features of the “ Consensus ” primer, the striking effects of which had moved Blowman to soliloquize, “ Wonder what J. C. would say to that,” these initials being his usual, strictly private, familiar designation of the personage professionally spoken of as “ our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. It was with two or three of these gay picture books in his hand that Mr. Blowman improved an opportunity to take the seat directly in front of Marion White, soon after the train had left the scene of the fire. It was not difficult for him to introduce conversation, as it certainly would have been for John Paul, or for any other person of quick sympathies. �Crazy Chicago. f 15 “ Permit me, dear Madame, to hand you a short statement of religious beliefs,— liberal beliefs, Madame, which may afford you some suggestions.” “Thank you; you are very kind. It is not a Tract Society — thing — is it ? ” Great emotions are apt to induce extreme frankness, which Marion White had certainly used in intimating the disgust she felt for the “ blood of Jesus ” leaflets of heathenism which Tract distributors had so frequently thrust upon her. Her Quaker uncle, good Thomas White, had long ago shown her that the Tract Society had no moral character, and her own sense of religious truth had led her to consider such of its publications as had come in her way as very stupid illustra­ tions of the sentimentalism of Christian superstition. The bare thought of one of these vulgar appeals to fear, and selfishness, and gross credulity, excited in her an intense desire to cover her grief and her faith from every eye save that of the One, who was to her the Lord our Shepherd, and the Father in heaven. However, she did not wish to be impolite, and then Mr. Blowman’s primer certainly did not bear the aspect,— generally mean and smutty,— of Tract Society origin; she added therefore, with some hesitation : “ I shall be happy to look at it at some time,” and handed it to her traveling companion, a brother, a youth of eighteen perhaps, who had found himself not good for much during these last hours of his sister’s trouble. Mr. Blowman responded, “ You hold some form, I presume, Madame, of Christian faith, and are able to —;” exactly what, Mr. Blowman did not himself know, and the clear, frank eyes of Marion White so evidently spoke of knowledge, that he dared not make a random reference; so he stopped, quite at his ease, however, letting a manner of high self-assurance serve as a resting-place for his broken question, until he should see what particular hope it might be which kindled so pure a light in those saddened eyes. It was painful for Marion White to speak at all just then; it was torture almost to uncover her heart; but all the more because of the pain did she reply from her deepest feeling and her most distinct thought,— “ I suppose I do not hold any form of what is called Christian faith, but I believe very strongly indeed.” That was a distinction quite beyond the Blowman mind, which, to use a colloquial phrase, ‘took s'ock’ in certain forms and in the �16 Crazy Chicago. ‘ Lord Jesus,’ as the impersonation of these forms, but of faith apart from these knew no more than the unborn know of life. But it did not become the author of the “ Consensus ” to be puzzled, or to betray any desire for information on that to him, most remote of subjects, real faith apart from assent to forms, faith without the touch or sight of a symbol or idol. Accordingly, to set himself duly above this young woman, who evidently had something like a ‘ radical ’ conception of the nature of faith, or rather imagined herself having faith, such as ‘ radicalism ’ represented it necessary to have, Mr. Blowman, with his lofty oecumenical tone, said,— “ Ah, indeed, Free Religion ? ” The hardly veiled sneer of this question did not escape the notice of Marion White. The evident skepticism of Mr. Blowman she readily discovered. It was not the first time she had taken notice that infidels and scoffers, by any real rule of genuine faith, are to be found often enough under clerical profession of the popular creed. Indeed, it had seemed the nearly universal rule, with the class of ministers she had known, to contemptuously call in question the natural and genuine experience of spiritual things which people commonly had, in order to thrust upon everybody the orthodox tradi­ tional preconceptions, and compel human hearts to come unto the Father by the orthodox way. To her simple honesty, her fervent moral integrity, and her always quick and direct faith in the divine love and care, this clerical trick had come to seem as barefaced and unworthy as any other form of false and faithless behavior. Mr. Blowman, therefore, who apparently meant to intimate that her faith was a delusion, she looked on with sad wonder, quite unable to comprehend that any man, seeing her sorrow, and hearing her confes­ sion of strong trust, should think it fit, or other than false and wicked, to carelessly mock at her confidence, and by implication warn her of the folly of trust such as hers. Exactly what the terms Mr. Blowman had used, might mean, Marion White did not know, but she saw at once what they might in truth mean, and she understood clearly that Mr. Blowman intended to express decided disapproval of the confes­ sion she had made. Her first impulse was to say no more, but her eyes involuntarily turned directly to her questioner, with the frank, quiet honesty in them which moved her to speak at all, and once that her attention was taken by Mr. Blowman’s clerical cut and counte­ nance, and she saw the unreality, the pretension, the ecclesiastical frivolity even, of the man, a wholesome force of truth seized her, and �Crazy Chicago. W ( 17 she answered, with gentle firmness, and just enough brokenness of feeling to make every tone of her voice pathetic, — “ I do not know what you, Sir, may mean by free religion, and therefore, cannot answer your question. But I confess that I do feel entirely free to accept religion as my own experience has taught it to me, and do believe that this freedom is justified by all really religious truth. Your pamphlet has a very pretty cover, Sir, and your views are doubtless very good if you believe them, but a Father in heaven must have better ways of coming to our souls than by ministers and tracts, or books and histories. I have not seen or heard anything, since my trouble came, which did me any good, except the kind faces ( of people, and their loving words. All the religion which has come to me has come of itself, in my heart, with my feelings which only God knows; and that has kept coming almost all the time, so that I feel almost as if I were God’s only child, and could not trust him enough. I hope you do not consider such feeling wrong, because it seems to me that ministers ought not to kill such religion, merely because it is free and separate from their views. If God gives religion to his children, so that it is a new life in their souls, like an angel child born into a mother’s arms, it cannot be right for anybody to meddle with it or injure it. I think I could not believe in anything which would take away any of my faith in God’s being near to me himself, and taking care of me himself.” There was a pleading earnestness in Marion White’s concluding words, which might have led an observer to suspect that she looked on Mr. Blowman as no better than one of the servants of Herod, who were sent to slay the infant Jesus, and that she was half afraid he wished to murder the divine hope which was born in her heart, and to which she clung with more than a mother’s passion. So many ministers had seemed to her no better, towards the actual religious experiences of people, than Herod’s purpose about Jesus, that uncon­ sciously this fear did lend a tone to her manner. The Jesus of the churches had become, so long since, a jealous king, to whom knees must bend and heads bow, and his ministers had lent themselves so completely to the Jesuit office of making his kingship the chief interest, and had so unscrupulously used cruel violence against all religion, springing up in human hearts, which turned to God directly, without regard to the king-mediator’s claim, as sole keeper of access to God, that Marion White, with her unusual possession of natural and genuine direct faith in God, could not but feel distinct and strong VOL. I.—NO. I. 2 �18 Crazy Chicago. aversion, in the presence of any interference with her religious experience. For once in his life Mr. Blowman was nonplussed. He had thought himself an Apollo of ministers to young women; indeed he had, as near as his dry, wooden nature could, indulged in the spiritual concupiscence which so commonly befouls the Protestant confessional; he believed few females could remain unmoved to tender devotion under the flash of his eye, and the shake of his locks ; to the best of his belief, — and he kept a list. — not less than seventy young womeD, of tolerable charms, worshipped through him, and closely associated the bliss of heaven with his handsome person; while of unattractive feminine devotees, who had languished under his flashing eye, he imagined there must already be several meeting houses full in various parts of the country, and that his retinue of houris, in the “ fields of living green ” revealed in the hymn book, would perhaps astonish even the angels, and go far to entitle him to high rank in the kingdom of “ the Lord Jesus; ” but here was an instance quite contrary to his philos­ ophy and practice of apostleship, a young and sweet woman, in special need of consolation, who evidently saw neither charm nor help, either in the Lord Jesus or in him, and who amazed him still further by the clearness and earnestness of her direct, free confidence in God ! He did not feel quite easy as he turned away, keeping the seat in front of Marion White, but quite unable to carry on the interview, and gazing fixedly out of the window to console his wounded vanity with a pretence of important occupation for his mind. The thought really plagued him, as the train sped over the prairie. ‘ What if one might believe really in God, as he believed in himself, and feel the nearness of Infinite Spirit, as he felt the visible and tangible fact of his own person ! If that were so, what might not a man become as a minister, not of historical recollections, but of actual divine inspiration!’ The grandeur of the idea teased him, but not into faith, and he gradually composed himself to abide in the old assumptions, and to go on in the old way. �Charles Dickens and his Christian Critics. CHARLES DICKENS AND 19 HIS CHRISTIAN CRITICS. The theological heathenism which still sticks to Christianity, has few consistent, outspoken representatives. Total depravity, wrath of God, blood atonement, and damnation, are rarely taught in the orthodox pulpit, and still less rarely applied. It is commonly felt to be brutal and infamous to rigidly apply them, and worse than useless to honestly teach them. People do not want to hear of these dogmas, and they are outraged by any direct application of them. To stand over a human creature, in the presence of the loving and the weeping, and argue of depravity, wrath, atoning blood, and damnation, with intent to intimate that a soul has gone to hell, is commonly felt to show a kind of cannibal appetite. Undoubtedly “ Calvary,” as theologically understood, means human sacrifice, or worse than that, and damnation certainly means that, but average decent people want to forget it, even if they are not ready to put it out of their creed. They feel the horrible heathenism of it, although they have not yet definitely rejected it, and they no more wish to recall the “ blood of Jesus,” and all it has implied, than they wish to attempt appeasing God by drawing a butcher knife through the throat of the eldest son. The sacrifice of Isaac, so often said to be typical of Calvary, they do not more truly leave behind, than they do the sacrifice of Jesus, justly assuming that the blood of Jesus has no more to do with redemption than father Abraham’s knife. When, therefore, a minister of religion flourishes the old heathen knife over a dead man, and talks of hell and blood as if Moloch were his god, and he wanted to cut somebody’s heart out for a sacrifice, the ortho­ dox world is not less shocked than the heretic and secular world. The Tremont Temple Baptist pulpit of Boston, is occupied by a clergyman,— Fulton by name,— whose theology is that of Abraham’s knife, and of what he calls the “ reeking cross.” He reads human history, he tells us, “ in the light of burning Sodom and in the presence of a reeking cross,” and advises us that “ the mighty tidal wave of Almighty wrath approaches,” and that all of us who are not “ clothed in the blood of Christ ” will go to “ hell, the prison-house of the damned.” It would seem that this Fulton must burn brim­ �20 Charles Dickens and hìs stone, and keep a puddle of blood on his study table, and must, on special occasions, visit slaughter-houses and hangings, to derive inspiration and imagery for his gospel of Golgotha and GehennaHe has the fierce, “reeking” godliness of unadulterated heathenism, and teaches that God hates us like hell, and only restrains his vengeance a moment, to speedily roll in horrible destruction over us, and be a hell of torment to us forever. The impatience of God to drink our blood, is the striking feature of his theism; the necessity to us of being all over blood,— dipped in the blood of Jesus,— if God is to be kind to us, is the chief word of his gospel; and the certainty that, if we reject this vile gospel of blood, God will damn — damn — damn us, is his one prophetic utterance. We are not surprised, therefore, to find that his humanity is on a par with that of the pious cannibalism which enjoins the sacrificial eating of aged relatives, or that of the Mormon Danite doctrine of murder as a means of grace, killing people to save their souls. He takes a great, and loving, and beloved soul, such as he confesses Charles Dickens to have been, and “ eats him raw,” to use a Greek metaphor,— damns him to hell, to use his own choice vocabulary,— as a matter of mercy and truth to us who, vainly and villainously, as he deems it, trust that God will be kind to our great brother, and will lead him in the way of eternal life. Merely for appearance’s sake, he professes not to pronounce “ an opinion as to the home of his soul,” but he does this nevertheless, and in terms which add blasphemy to brutality. He “ leaves him with God,” and expounds “God” as meaning “hell.” And this disgusting Calcraft of preachers, with his blood-reeking gospel of pious ferocity, asks us to hear him as a minister of Christian grace and truth ! It is much as if the slaughter-house offal should be brought us in place of butcher’s meat; Mr. Fulton keeps the refuse of Christianity without its truth. The truth of Christianity teaches us to implicitly trust the paternal sovereignty of God, and to hope the best, and believe the best, and have full assurance of the best, in any and every instance of the offspring of God, simply on the ground that God’s care is perfectly adequate to secure the best. The theological heathenism, which has so long made part of Christianity, and which undoubtedly is suggested, if not found, in Jesus and Paul, as part of the heathen tradition which helped give an envelop, husk, or shell, to Christian truth, denies the fact of this care of God, chiefly on these grounds, as now explained, that God cannot consistently be a kind father to �Christian Critics. 21 unworthy children, and that, even if he could be, the nature of the freedom he ought to give his children forbids it. That is to say, if God should effectually influence us, here or hereafter, to be good, and thereby make us holy and blessed, he would violate our creature freedom, and if he should concern himself to do this while we were disobedient, he would fail to show due respect for good character, which can be fitly shown only by penalty, and that not helpful and redemptive 1 It is disgraceful, but it is true, that so-called theologians, supposed to have had at least a common education, and entrusted with the instruction of the community, unite in forbidding God Almighty to train up his children in the way in which they should go, and, with one accord, doubt whether the creatures would walk in that way, even if the Creator were permitted to use all the powers of divine paternal discipline. They assert the inconsistency of moral discipline with human freedom I To persuade, even with the utmost care and wisdom of God, is to violate the will! A human father may do this, yea, must do this; but God must not do it I The human father is derelict in duty if he do not aim to break the disobedient will, and bring to repentance and perfect obedience; but it is God’s duty to avoid doing this! Is it possible to conceive a more absurd doctrine ? Here are the moral offspring of Deity, made susceptible to moral influence, capable of due development only under moral influence, and to be brought under human good influence as much as possible, and yet we are asked to believe that God must not use good influence, or at least must avoid using this effectively, because he would thereby make his children holy and happy forever, at the dreadfid cost of violated free will! That will do to tell in Tremont Temple. Christian common sense knows better. The other point of the popular dogma about God, is no less absurd, and, besides, it is wicked, if any dogma whatever can be said to be wicked. This forbids God to make men good, lest thereby he should not seem to love goodness and hate sin. It forbids God to be kind and helpful, in divine moral and spiritual ways, lest by so doing he get the reputation in the universe of a bad moral character. The mere suspicion that the Father-Creator will deal so wisely with his creature children as to redeem them finally every one, excites an orthodox theologian as a red rag is said to do a wild bull. Universal redemption, by the perfect fatherhood of God, is the abomination of �22 * Charles Dickens and his desolation set up in the holy place of orthodoxy, because, if it is a fact, then orthodoxy is heathen folly. Dr. J. P. Thompson, of the Broadway Tabernacle Congregational church, New York, wrote a book a few years since to prove the neces­ sary damning effect of the love of God, on the ground that true love must respect right, and that right forbids God to be a Father to sinners. According to the orthodox idea, God must stand off from the sinner and deal out every possible hurt and pain, by way of proper penalty. That is the word, “penalty.” Dr. Thompson called his book “ Love and Penalty.” A more exact title would have been “ Damning Love.” By “ penalty ” the orthodox dogmatist means punishment which will hurt and will not help. This damning penalty, — hurting the sinner and taking care /wi to help him, or in any way do him any good,— this infernal, hellish, damnable infliction of unmitigated evil, — is said by orthodoxy to be the only means by which God can show proper regard for goodness and suitable dislike of sin. Orthodoxy is fiercely anxious to have God show that he hates sin. Prophesy to it of God’s showing that he loves goodness by making every soul good, and it will retort that such a God is good for nothing, a mere sentimental driv­ eller, a goody Being, whose “ throne ” is not worth an hour’s purchase. Hatred of sin, “ burning to the lowest hell,” is the orthodox charac­ teristic of Deity. Now of this conception of divine law, pure Christian truth knows nothing whatever. The justice of God is paternal and effective. Its embodiment is perfect fatherhood. Such a thing as penalty intended to do evil only, is unknown to Deity. Nothing more would be needed to make God devilish than the adoption of such penalty. Divine penalty is intended to do good only, and would not be divine if it were not redemptive. All the judgment of God looks to reform, and all divine execution of law causes repentance and obedience. It is simply by want of faith in God, that the question is, or can be, raised, whether a soul will fail of holiness and blessedness. Orthodoxy assumes that God has no more wisdom than our human law embodies, and that our miserable failure to deal with offenders is an example of justice which Deity cannot surpass. It stubbornly, blindly, wickedly almost, refuses to see that fatherhood is the better type, and that the justice of God must appear, not in harsh, ineffective judgeship, but in effective, paternal discipline. �Christian Critics. 23 The “ Our Father,” then, is the true Christian word; the Judge of the parable is a suggestion from heathenism. Away, therefore, with the abominable doubt whether a great soul is on the way to heaven. Away with the brutal and blasphemous suggestion that Charles Dickens, “ in the hands of God,” is in hell. Mr. Beecher said of Dickens, — I , / “ I think that his death produces more the feeling of personal loss than any since the death of Walter Scott. His books are books of the household — broad, tender, genial, humane. No man iu our day has so won his way to the hearts of the people; he took hold of the great middle class of feeling in human nature, Whether he was a Christian or not, in our acceptation of the term, God knows. . . One class of men we feel to be Christians — they are producers of spiritual influences ; another class produce malign influ­ ences. . . I recollect hearing my father say of Bishop Heber, after having read his life, that he doubted whether he was a Christian ; he thought he was a moral man and had ‘nateral virtoos.’ I think none of us now would share his doubts. . . All that Dickens wrote tended to brace up manhood; the generic influences of his writings were to make men stronger, and to make the household purer, and sweeter, and tenderer. . . I consider him as the benefactor of his race. Providence did not call him to the spiritual element; but it gave him no mean task, and equipped him with no mean skill for his work. . . About the question of his spiritual work we cannot decide. But we cannot help being grateful to God that he raised such a man up to do a great work ; and he did his work well. . . I thank God for the life and works of Charles Dickens.” This was said in reply to the following remark, made by a Mr. Bell, at one of Mr. Beecher’s Friday Evening Lectures,— “There are very few men whose works have a more beneficial influence in our homes, or of whom we have thought with more kindly interest. We have all loved the man; but, when I ask myself whether or not Charles Dickens was a Christian, I can’t help feeling sorry that such a man has passed away and left us in doubt about his future.” It was this doubt, whether Dickens would be found to have gone to hell or to heaven, to which Mr. Beecher attempted to reply; and his reply, after a sufficient summary of Mr. Dickens’ good and great work in the world, was “ God knows — we cannot decide.” That is to say, a good and great work in the world, is not evidence of hopeful Chris­ tian character, and does not warrant faith that the doer of that work will not be damned Assuming no more than Mr. Bell and Mr. Beecher admit, in regard to the good work of Dickens, we may say that he oW the Sermon on �24 Charles Dickens and his the Mount as thoroughly and largely as any man of his generation, and that no man living when he did, was more bound to his fellows by simple and true love than he was. Even the Tremont Temple cannibal had to say, “all men loved him; he loved all men.” Yet Mr. Beecher professes not to know whether we may believe that this great and good man, who was so bound to his fellows by the covenaut of love, a universally beloved benefactor of his race, has escaped hell, and may be expected ultimately to reach heaven ! The Brooklyn prophet thanks God for the life and works of Charles Dickens, and yet pretends to be “ in doubt about his future.” He does not even demand that his dead brother’s great and good life be considered enough to give him a start towards heaven, just enough at least so that one can feel sure that he has escaped hell! He concedes that, for all we know or may believe, Dickens is damned ! Mr. Beecher knows better than this. He has a faith which is utterly misrepresented by the doubt he here confesses. Why did not the occasion bring out his real faith, and manifest his Christian common sense ? Because he is, to use plain terms, a Time-Server. He is afraid of the orthodox public, who buy Plymouth Pulpit and The Christian Union, and are expected to buy the “ Life of Christ” which he is writing. If ever hesitation, timidity, faithlessness, ought to be lashed without mercy, it is when a minister of faith, such as Mr. Beecher is, offers a stone for bread, a doubt in place of truth, in answering, in any instance, the question under which so many hearts are pressed down to the ground and crushed almost out of life, whether a good life, without special faith in the atonement, is ground for sure hope that God will be kind. If Mr. Beecher did not trust, and could honestly say so, the case would be wholly altered. He had the trust, but gave instead a doubt. He answered the most serious and widely applicable question which could have been put to him, by an evasion, the effect of which was a falsehood. He makes us ask the question, whether to be a Christian, in his “ acceptation of the term,” includes honesty and courage. And knowing that it does, we wonder how much he lacks of being half as good a Christian as Charles Dickens was. There is a much braver man in the pulpit of Park Street Church, Boston. He is less endowed with inspiration than Mr. Beecher, but what he sees, and all that he believes, he dares to preach. We refer to Mr. Murray. He said of Dickens, — �Christian Critics. 25 “That the man loved his fellow-men, I know; that he loved his God, I hope, and have faith to believe. In thought I stand uncovered beside the tomb in which his body sleeps, in silent sadness, that so sweet and gentle a spirit is taken from the earth. In reverent gratitude I thank the Lord that he did bless mankind with the birth of such a mind. I thank him as for a blessing vouchsafed to me personally. I feel that I am a better man than I should have been had no Charles Dickens lived. . . Farewell, gentle spirit! Thou wast not perfect until now! Thou didst have thy passions, and thy share of human errors; but death has freed thee. Thou art no longer trammeled. Thou art delivered out of bondage, and thy freed spirit walks in glory.” It was in reply to this that Mr. ‘ Believe-or-be-Damned ’ Fulton said,— “It is a more than mistake for any man who takes Christ’s gospel for authority to intimate that death frees a man from human errors, delivers him from the bondage of sin, or permits him to walk the realms of light. . . He [Dickens] stands naked before God. . . With what is he clothed upon? Nothing wrought by himself will answer. The blood of Christ alone cleanseth from all sin. . . Does love won from men insure eternal life? The question confronts us. Is it or is it not a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the Living God? . . Never, since I received my commission to preach, have I seen such universal desire to push by the peril, and ignore the teach­ ings, of the gospel. Jesus says, ‘Whosoever believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved. Whosoever believeth not shall be damned’ . . . Now is the time to bring the truth home. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” If a recent criminal, with the double infamy on his soul of marital brutality and cowardly assassination, had been sentenced to be hanged, and had summoned to his side, as a sympathizer on the woman-and-marriage question, our Gehenna apostle of Tremont Temple, and we had seen the Baptist minister on the scaffold, with an execrable wretch in his hands, we should have beheld the former unhesitatingly offering salvation to the latter, and confidently urging it upon him, on the single condition of penitent faith in the atoning blood of Jesus, if, indeed, the two were not already fellow-communi­ cants. But when Charles Dickens dies without a moment’s warning, and falls instantly into the hands of God, and is found not clothed in the blood of Jesus, and a minister who preaches a gospel which pushes by ‘ Believe or be damned,’ far enough to give the Almighty a decent moral character, and to anticipate from the fatherhood of God respectable care of human creatures, intimates that the hands of God mean kindness, help, deliverance, redemption, and that a good �26 Charles Dickens and his and great soul gone to God has emerged from the valley and shadow of mortal limitation, and failure and trouble, and has entered upon a path which will grow brighter and brighter until it reach the perfect light of heaven, then, behold ! we hear that “ It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God ! ” The Baptist minister would assume to administer redemption, and to send a murderer direct to heaven, but not all the powers of the world to come, not even God himself, may meet the soul of Charles Dickens and guide it to the realms of light. We beg some one to explain to Mr. Fulton that the world to come has at least as ample an equipment for ministering to souls as this world, and that it is highly probable, considering that God, the holy angels, and the blessed saints, are neither fiends, fools, nor Fultons, that our departed who arrive in that world, as babes born into a new life, will be received with due care, and aided to find in the new sphere the blessed way of eternal life. It seems to be according to the gospel in Tremont Temple, that God’s hands in the world to come, are much as the hands of what are known as “ baby-farmers ” are in this world, and that most of us, as soon as God gets hold of us, may expect to be spiritually put out of the way, murdered, and thrown, not to the dogs, but worse, to the devils. The tribute of Dr. Bellows to the genius and character of Charles Dickens, was at once remarkably appreciative and strikingly signifi­ cant. The gist of it was in these words : “ Rarely have the genius and gifts of the individual soul been so empha­ sized as in the world-wide interest and sorrow felt in the extinction of that shining lamp suddenly dashed from the altar of literature—Charles Dickens. The burning coal at which a million hearts ignited their dull fancies is quenched. He that wrote more and better than any novelist of his time, who had the dangerous field of the comic for his peculiar sphere, yet never penned a line that dying he could wish to blot, can add nothing to the inex­ haustible store of his creations. . . His aim was always pure and generous and high ; to exalt integrity and truth, to abase falsehood, cruelty and hypocrisy ; and to do it by stealing upon universal sympathies, and leaguing all the fun-loving and pathetic sensibilities of the soul in the service of a common humanity. He enlisted ordinary universal man in his cause. Whom profound moralists, Christian preachers could not reach, he touched and ruled. His spiritual knife was so sharp and so sheathed that its edge was neither seen nor felt while it did its surgical work. He wrought, doubtless, many a substantial conversion from the purposes of crime, or folly, or cruelty, by a dose of laughter, whose tears are oftener more purifying than those of sorrow. He made hypocrisy, selfishness, and �Christian Critics. 27 sentimentality, absurd and contemptible, when it would have been of no avail simply to prove them sinful and wrong. But, after all, what I envy him most for is . . . the immeasurable sum of great, unadulterated pleasure he has given the world ; the countless hours of amused and absorbed gratification he has brought into all sorts of homes in both hemi­ spheres. Ah ! what a godlike thing it is to Bhed so much self-forgetfulness and balm into the sore and tired heart of humanity ! . . . As a vindicator of the intrinsic worth of all human souls, Dickens, not a professed moralist, has excelled all the professed moralists and preachers and teachers of his day. If he was not a Christian, he was a glorious instrument of God’s providence, and may shame, at the great account, many whose Christianity is unquestioned, but whose usefulness and worth are taken on trust. Let us be cautious how we raise questions about the Christianity of men like Washington, Lincoln, or even Charles Dickens ; lest the profane should say, ‘What is the use of a Christianity which such men could live without ? ’ The sword of bigotry has two edges, and often cuts off the bigot’s own head when aimed at the victim of his self-righteousness. We can well leave such men to Christ’s own judgment seat, while we try to emulate their usefulness and bounty of life and character.” With these words before us, we are reminded of the evident fact, that Nature, in the large, divine sense, the Substance and Soul of all this universe of men and things, has very diverse modes of mani­ festation. In other words, God speaks to us through varied special organs of his presence, a Socrates, a Paul, a Spinoza, a Wesley, a Parker, and the numerous other lights, greater and lesser, of our race. It is made quite plain by the statement above given, that Charles Dickens was, in a peculiar way, a remarkable servant of Infinite Grace. In him dwelt a power to give innocent and whole­ some pleasure which may well lead us to own that he was a true apostle. Honestly toiling, as he did, to unseal the fountain of our purer and happier sensibilities, and achieving his task, at once with unexampled fidelity and unexampled success, he is as much entitled to Christian gratitude and reverence as any master or prophet of all the ages. Undoubtedly we had this treasure in an earthen vessel, the excel­ lency of the power being of God, as it has always been, and always must be, but none the less is it evident that the God of all consolation had shined marvellously into that simple, kindly, capacious heart, with the true and blessed illumination of eternal wisdom, love, and faith. There is more pure and undefiled religion in the writings of Charles Dickens than in all that has been said by orthodox theologi­ cal speculation since Paul began confusedly to inquire into the ways �28 Charles Dickens and his of God with man. These inspired pages, from the hand of a “ god­ like ” genius, which glow with the pure light of a tender humanity, and from which has been reflected so immeasurable a sum of unadul­ terated pleasure, so vast and varied a consolation of human souls, just as truly betoken the presence of God with man, and the love of God freely shed abroad in the world, as do gospels and epistles, prophecies and psalms, or anything whatever which has been called revelation. The author was no better, perhaps, than Matthew the publican, or Paul the preaching tent-maker, or Jesus the Nazarene carpenter and Galilean enthusiast, but then God made him, and made him with what he deemed sufficient pains, and he came into his generation, and passed through it, as honest a lover of his fellow-men, as simple and true and glorious a man, as ever human heart warmed to, or eye of heaven looked upon with pleasure; and when his winning, heart­ lightening, soul-cheering words ran like a river of heaven through the common life of his fellow-men, his work was no mere human meddling and making, but one of the eminent manifestations of the divine mind. If theological scoffers say nay to this, and angrily accuse us of depreciating an old story of God with us some two thousand years ago, we beg to say with emphasis that we know of nothing more senseless and hurtful than the rank atheism which forever assumes the absence of divine inspiration in the great and good of our own, or indeed of any age, and that we should as soon think of maintaining that Charles Dickens was an automaton, as that he spoke, in his many brave and blessed words, without a flood-tide of motion in his soul from the Holy Ghost. Dr. Bellows acknowledges that Dickens touched and ruled those whom Christian preachers and moralists could not reach; that he, as a vindicator of the intrinsic worth of all human souls, excelled all the professed moralists and preachers and teachers of his day; and that he was a glorious instrument of God’s providence, and may shame many whose Christianity is unquestioned. He deems it well to be cautious about questioning the position of Dickens before God, and advises, in case he is to be condemned and cast out, that unquestioned Christians keep quiet about it, until Christ’s judgment seat shall be set, and the matter can be attended to without danger of profane interference. Such at least seems to be the implication of Dr. Bellow’s statement. He does not venture to say that Dickens was a Christian, and is sure to reach heaven. He implies that he was not �Christian Critics. 29 a Christian, as he understands Christianity. He doubtless knew that Mr. Dickens no more sympathized with dogmatic Christianity than he did with dogmatic Mahometanism, and that it would be as dis­ honest, as it was useless, to pretend that any other than natural religion had any place in his life or played any part in his writings. But he cannot avoid recognizing that such as he was, in his beneficent genius and his providential mission, he stood above the usual Christian level, and did a better than common Christian work. Thereby Dr. Bellows shows conclusively how inadequate is his separation between false and true in his appreciation of Christianity, and how much he needs to revise his interpretation, in the light of such grace and truth as he confesses to finding outside what he deems the Christian confession. The superstition which made Jesus a Lord Messiah, and erected for him a Messianic judgment seat, is found wanting in presence of an example of inspiration such as Charles Dickens was. It is in the Christianity of pure and simple faith in God our Father in heaven, and of love towards the fellow-man, that a life such as the beloved story-teller lived, finds its full explanation and its due recogni­ tion. There was no sham in that life; can as much be said of any life which still enshrines the dead superstition that Jesus was, or at least was meant to represent, God ? There was no snuffle in the simple, genuine religious experience of that man; can as much be said of any intelligent man who still pretends to append ‘ for Christ’s sake ’ to his prayers ? And when the marvellous play of Dickens’ peculiar faculties began, and the creations of his observation and in agination filled the stage, we saw no false light, no beggarly display of ecclesiastical old clothes, not a half page, not a line, devoted to popular superstition, but an honest human spectacle, under the ample natural light of infinite heaven. There was honest humanity in Charles Dickens, in degree and quality unknown to the professional confessors of religion, and very much truer to the Christian ideal than anything these official and officious Christians can show. �30 The Woman and the Trial. THE WOMAN AND THE TRIAL. When individual histories lead up to some Golgotha, where “striving against sin” ends in some dreadful death and terrible crushing of living hearts, and the conspicuous awful tragedy chal­ lenges universal attention, an observer endued by his knowledge and his faith with the power of prophetic anticipation, cannot fail to look for some large and worthy significance of the scene, although, in general, intelligence and virtue may barely keep timid watch afar off, and the great world may sweep by in an undisturbed torrent of condemnation and contempt. In such a spirit do we believe that a prophet to-day would interpret the spectacle recently made by an assassination, a marriage, a murder-trial, and the passing of one crushed woman across the stage of public observation. It was the foul assassination of as true, pure, and gallant a man as honor ever crowned. It was as just and holy a marriage as religion and law ever celebrated. It was as wicked a mockery in court as has been perpetrated since Pilate sat, Peter evaded and equivocated, and the mad rabble of Jerusalem yelled for the delivery of Barabbas and the shedding of innocent blood. And the woman, who was condemned when an assassin went out free, passed from the stage as true to holy truth, as pure of stain or sin, and as sure to draw all pure hearts to see the crime against her and to seek its remedy, as was ever holy martyr in the furnace of dreadful trial. There is one sufficient use of such scenes, to point great lessons of difficult revolution, and compel adequate attention to wrong which lies embedded in some one of the sacred traditions of mankind. The first lie, to the races which inherit the ancient Hebrew tradi­ tions, was that which charged upon woman the fault of human fall from grace and truth. The deepest wrong of Hebrew barbarism, was the law of fierce masculine assertion of prerogative, according to which the wife was made “ one flesh ” with her husband, and put under his absolute power, to be in subjection to him for things carnal and earthly, as he to God for things moral and heavenly. The religious instinct never erred more seriously and needlessly than in imagining for a divine hero a birth outside of wedlock, nor ever guided belief �The Woman and the Trial. 31 more completely astray than when it brought a god-man upon earth by a way remote from the common path of ordinary human entrance to life. Christian record and tradition, in asserting, as the great law of marriage, “they twain shall be one flesh,” and doing little more than to sanction and cover up the fleshly instincts of the ruder and ruling sex, has remained at the level of barbarism only less than in the perpetuation and consecration of heathen notions of God, of human nature, and of the destiny of souls. To a faithful thinker, who joins to thought deep and disciplined emotions, such as make that rarest of gifts and most perfect of attain­ ments for a man, a complete pure heart, it cannot but be plain that marriage ought not to mean power, possession, or even opportunity and liberty, on the part of the man, but consideration, care, protec­ tion, the greatest, and tenderest and bravest possible. The vocation of the wife to maternity is so significant, so wonderfully sacred, and her part in the sacraments of a united life has so much of utter surrender in it, so much pain and sorrow too, and so beautiful a charm and blessing with it, that only as blind animals, hurried into heedless liberty, with no just reflection and no proper consideration, do men assert power, instead of affording protection. Unhappily very many enter upon wedlock with no proper knowledge of the wrong and the right of the relation. Love before marriage is forced to be considerate, and naturally takes a noble tone. Love after marriage is supposed to be quite another thing, as regards a chief feature of the union, and too commonly sinks at once to a level which is far more of the flesh than of ideal truth. Possibly one party consents as much as the other, and neither may be conscious, as the tone of mutual relations ceases to be divine, what it is which is at fault. The man perhaps contents himself with such gratification as his lower nature finds, and lets the hope of sacrament go as a dream of his days of inexperience. In some of these instances, possibly, — perhaps in many of them, — the woman also accepts the low view, though we would fain believe that in most cases of the class in point, the wife barely submits to the situation, even if she do not revolt against it. On the supposition that ignorance of the real laws of marriage is the main occasion of this failure of wedlock to be nobly happy, and that, while the woman is generally the greater sufferer, one party is no more to blame than the other, the case is yet terribly bad ; bad for the husband, who fails of true manly love and loses the blessing of �32 The Woman and the Trial. true response to such love; worse still for the wife, whose womanhood is abased and degraded, if not outraged: and most of all bad for the children, who are not born under influences of natural holiness and genuine pure happiness, but come as incidents, if not as untoward accidents, of the united life. The lazy acquiescence of social and religious sentiment in this state of things; the assumption that the animal aspects of human nature must present some such picture at the best • and the rigor and fury even with which formal marriage, the outward fact without the real, is insisted on as a fit cloak to these uncomely doings, ought to cover our civilization and our Christianity with overwhelming confusion and shame. The fact is that even decent society is but half civilized, and is very little Christianized, in this matter of marriage. But the state of things just described is by no means the worst which the student of society will find. Numbers of husbands in every community stand at a much lower level than that we have been considering; the level, we blush to say, of irresponsible brutalisin. The masculine instinct for exclusive possession of the object of affection is naturally very strong. It easily becomes fierce. And when the husband’s interest in virtue is chiefly the result of this instinct, and he erects his jealousy into absolute law, we behold a very peculiar, and often very dreadful transformation of wedlock, under which the only sacredness recognized is that of the husband’s right to possession of the woman bound to him by marriage vows. By this theory of marriage one woman is devoted to one man, made his sacred property, and placed under absolute and awful obligations to be his without reserve or remedy until death end the service. It is assumed that a man may so have one woman, if he will get her and keep her under the sanction of a marriage compact. It is even claimed that this right of the man to the woman, of the male to the female, is one of the most sacred rights of existence ; so that no fouler crime can be than to interfere with the exercise of this right. A perfectly savage virtue watches against the violation of this law of the conjugal possessor’s right. No regard for the woman, not even of a coarse and common sort, enters into it. She may be a crushed victim of the most brutal abuse, but the “ laws of marriage ” are still supposed to protect her tyrant’s right to have and to hold her as his own. The worst forms of crime against woman outside of marriage, are held of no account compared with touching a woman to the injury of the man’s right to her. Numberless sad and dreadful incidents of �The Woman and the Trial. 33 wicked undoing of woman will pass without notice, but report one deliverance of an outraged, broken-hearted wife, out of the power of a brutal master, and the whole herd of virtuous human brutes is thrilled with righteous indignation. It was this virtuous brutalism which lately delivered an assassin from the deserved penalty of manifold infamous crime. The hesita­ tion of wise and just representatives of public virtue and exponents of public opinion, to lay bare the ingrained rascality of the virtue fiercely paraded on this occasion, shows how little courage for the just comprehension of the matter has been cultivated by our civiliza­ tion. In the one man who had so cheerfully risked his life, and more than his life, his good name,— and had lost one if not both,— to render help to a helplessly outraged woman, there was more clear insight and spotless courage, with one dash of^rashness, as the bravest spirits almost always have it, than in a regiment of those who lent the countenance of their concern for the laws of marriage to the brute and assassin over whom a court of pretended justice made villainous mockery of law. It is possible to make excuses for the lamentable failure of wellmeaning members of society to be found on the side of justice, by the side of a worse than murdered woman. It is also possible to give an explanation of the mad concourse and mad clamor .of the virtuous rabble, whose fierce rage blazed so hotly around the altars of unholy brutalism, as if in real defence of some sacred right. These masters of a servitude more dreadful than any other known to human experience, with their deluded sympathizers among women, are natural enough results of the lower tendencies of human nature, or of extreme ignorance, and the prevalence of a tradition which lacks both the doctrine and the spirit of adequate justice to woman. The influence of Hebrew heathenism, coming through the channel which also brought the best lessons of religion and humanity, has made Christian society an easy refuge for the hideous wrong we are contemplating. Ample explanation of this monstrous failure of justice and departure from truth, will not be far to seek as long as accredited Christianity, in the name of a half-heathen tradition, for­ bids and resists free inquiry for the truth, and proceeds upon the twofold assumption that man is by nature base, and his lower instincts unclean at best, and that righteousness cannot come in mens’ lives and character by actual discipline and culture, but must come as a cloak of imputed merit. In like manner, excuses for timid inhumanvol. i.—no. i. 3 �34 The Woman and the Tidal. ity, for total failure of comprehension, such as were pointed at by Jesus in the priest and Levite who “ passed by on the other side,” are close at hand. It is much easier and safer not to meddle with wounded folk, of any of the classes against whom popular prejudice is virulent. A wife left half dead, under the operation of a brutal interpretation of the laws of marriage, will get little or no sympathy from the ordinary administrators of religion and guardians of social order. The instances of Mrs. Stowe and Mr. Beecher may be cited, particularly in view of their final judgments pronounced in The Christian Union of June 18. If the latter yielded to a just request and a generous sympathy, when he assisted at the death-bed mar­ riage, he evidently came to regret afterwards that he did not pass virtuously by on the other side. In “ The Meaning of the Verdict,” the leading article of The Christian Union of June 18, he disa­ vowed any Christianity he may have shown before, and summed up the case for brutalism. We omit names, in quoting Mr. Beecher’s cold, barbarous homily, because we cannot join in any unnecessary rudeness to the persons on one side of the case, and will not pollute our pages with the names on the other side. Mr. Beecher says,— “Whether------ was worse or better than the average of his journal­ istic friends—whether the unhappy woman who has assumed his name is a pattern of all wifely virtues; whether------ was in the habit of drinking to excess, and whether, being a drunkard, he was more or less an affliction to his wife than drunken husbands generally are to their wives, are questions which need not be agitated further. Higher and wider than all such debates about persons is the question, What is the Meaning of the Verdict? ... It was as clear a case of killing with deliberate intention and with no other warrant than private vengeance, as ever was submitted to a jury. But the verdict was ‘Not Guilty.’ What does that verdict mean? . . . Just what was meant by that famous verdict in another case, often quoted but not found in the books, ‘ Served him right.’ The phrase, ‘ Not Guilty,’ in this case, means not that------ did not kill------- , but that he ought not to be punished for that killing. The lesson of the verdict is that any man who has as much reason as------ had to believe that his wife has been seduced from her fidelity to him, has a right to do what------ did. . . The law is that an adulterer may be punished with death, at the discretion and by the hands of the injured husband.” We are not at a loss to characterize the assumptions and the sig­ nificance of this statement It means the sacred right of brutalism, and it assumes the indifference of all other facts in comparison with �The 'Woman and the Trial. 35 the crime of delivering a woman from a brute. No need to ask out of what hell the woman fled, or from what fiend she was protected, or with what heroism of sanctity that protection was given, the one important fact being that a brutal man was deprived of his victim, and the one sacred law being that such interference with marital brutalism may be punished by summary assassination. Mr. Beecher appears to dreadful disadvantage in this justification of horrible mani­ fold crime. Had he been a vindicator of the New York negro riots, and appealed to law in justification of Kuklux outrage, we might have been prepared for the present lapse from manly mercy, consid­ erate justice, large comprehension of principle, and fearless devotion to holiness and truth.* Mrs. Stowe went to no such extreme, in the judgment which she pronounced. In fact she condemned with as little harshness, and as much womanly sympathy and Christian charity, as possible. But she condemned. In her article mentioned above, she brought in the case under cover of an elaborate exposition of Christ’s treatment of a woman “convicted of adultery.” From that she argued to this case “of a woman not guilty of this offence,” and announced that she saw “only evidence that a much tried woman in circumstances of great hardship and perplexity has in certain respects lamentably erred in judgment.” She then instantly turned away from the woman before her, to loudly profess her concurrence with “ the sensitiveness of the community in regard to the enduring sacredness of the marriage bond,” and her opinion that the “ whole domain of marriage ought to be guarded by laws as inflexible as those of nature,” and that indi­ viduals on whom “they bear severely,” “must be content to suffer for the good of the whole.” At most she only asked that the judges of her sister consider, that under extreme tortures “principle often may become bewildered, and even religious faith may give out,” and that they temper judgment as Christ tempered the sentence of the woman “convicted of adultery.” The offensive association of her sister with the adulteress, the com­ prehensive approval of the concern about marriage, which lent so much support to an assassin, and even gave eclat to the last crime of a human brute, and the rigorous demand for inflexible protection to every species of conjugal right, suffer who may thereby, enabled Mrs. * Mr. Parker said of Mr. Beecher, in connection with the John Brown affair, “Beecher showed that part of him which is Jesuitical,—not so small a part as I could wish it was. How ridiculous of Sharpe’s-rifle Beecher to be preaching such stuff at this time; but he can’t stand up straight unless he have something as big as the Plymouth Church to lean against.”— Parker’s Life and Correspondence. London Ed., Vol. II., p. 394. �36 The Woman and the Trial. Stowe to fully save her credit with the worst expouents of brutalisni, and completely undo any purpose she may have had to speak a word of justice, mercy, and holiness on behalf of her sister. Using threefourths of her two columns to come to the point that this woman to-day was not an adulteress, and almost all the rest of her article to protest her own desire that marriage should be chains and slavery to all who find it unhappy, she barely gave a few lines to a half-plea for the outraged sister on whose behalf she purported to speak. Yet this same Mrs. Stowe lately served to two continents a nauseous tale of horrible abomination, polluting men’s and women’s thoughts, as far as our language is read, with needless mention of nameless crime, and has not to this day betrayed the smallest regret for her deed. Does it make so much difference on which side popular taste and prejudice are ? The same Mrs. Stowe, in her “ Old Town Folks,” gave the pure young girl of the story to a libertine, who had long had an unwedded but devoted wife; and when this wronged woman came upon the scene, within a few hours after her betrayer’s new mar­ riage, and all the facts of her love and surrender and fidelity were before the new bride, the latter saw no wrong whatever in taking from her outcast sister her all, and felt no hesitation in consummating wedlock with a convicted villain, because,—as Mrs. Stowe makes her say,—“7 cazí7iu¿ help loving him; it is my duty to; I promised, you know, before God, ‘for better for worse’; and what I promised I must keep; I am his wife; there is no going back from that.” The young lover of this second wife of a bigamist, took his lady’s fate patiently, and at the end of four years received her, then a widow, as his bride. Such admirable patience with bad men’s triumphs, and such con­ sent of women to outrage under decent cover of regular marriage, was the lesson with which Mrs. Stowe left us at the close of “ Old Town Folks.” Her woman’s instincts made no plea for a creature wronged as much as woman could be wronged. Testifying that this rejected woman had shown “ all the single-hearted fervor of a true wife”; that she had taken her position from “a full and conscientious belief that the choice of the individuals alone constituted a true mar­ riage”; that her betrayer had urged this view and ‘‘assumed and acted with great success the part of the moral hero during their early attachment”; that she ‘‘fell by her higher nature,” believing that ‘•she was acting heroically and virtuously in sacrificing her whole life to her lover,” and that “ her connection had all the sacredness of mar­ riage”; testifying these things, and making the new wife confess, “I �The Woman and the Trial. 37 can see in all a noble woman, gone astray from noble motives; I can see that she was grand and unselfish in her love, that she was per­ fectly self-sacrificing”; Mrs. Stowe yet permitted no one to even suggest that this woman had the smallest right to the man whom she had so given herself to for years, and to whom she had borne what was to her at least a child of pure love. Taking care to interpose a marriage ceremony, that and nothing more, Mrs. Stowe showed us the libertine of her tale, in the presence of the two wives, the one bound to him by years of “ single-hearted fervor of a true wife,” and still loving him with “full and conscientious belief” that theirs was a “true marriage,” and the other bound to him only by the ceremony of a few hours before; and made the former admit, and the other claim, that the ceremony had created a relation compared with which the relation based on actual wifehood of love and life need not be so much as considered. And the new wife gave this reason first of all for keeping the other woman’s husband, “ I cannot help loving him,” and then supported herself by: “it is my duty to; I promised, you know, before God.” We have very small respect indeed for anything Mrs. Stowe may say after choosing such a picture with which to conclude her tale of Old New England. ^And until such leaders of opinion in ethics and religion, as Henry Ward Beecher and Mrs. Stowe, learn to respect realities of truth, at least as much as they do mere forms, and are neither unable nor afraid to look at the real facts of tragic lives, and to declare for justice and holiness, at any cost whatever to decent shams, popular religion and popular ethics will be despicable. We deem it shameful in Mr. Beecher that he dared cheer the heart of a hel/ion with words of downright approval. We utterly refuse to Mrs. Stowe the privilege of making any apology for a woman whose errors of judgment do not do her a hundredth part of the discredit which the author of the Byron scandal has justly earned. The theory assumed in the closing scene of “Old Town Folks,” that wifehood is nothing compared with legal marriage, that a woman may take her sister woman’s actual husband, if that sister woman has had no legal sanction of the marriage, and she can get the man under legal sanc­ tion, is infinitely more immoral than any possible lack of respect for formal marriage. The duty of holiness and fidelity in all actual union, is the profound truth on this subject. Until Mrs. Stowe appreciates it she had as well not meddle with any important aspects of the woman question. We speak thus strongly with great regret. �38 The Woman and the Trial. because we would gladly see, and celebrate, in Mrs. Stowe, insight and courage worthy of a woman of marked ability and character. But at this juncture, we cannot forbear strong speech, remembering as we do a spotless man dead, and a spotless woman living “at the sepulchre,” while Mrs. Stowe only ventures to beg the brutalism of our time to consider that these two did not commit adultery. At present we do the persons just mentioned, one of whom is beyond reach of either praise or blame, the honor to assume as self* evident at this moment, to any decently informed person, that they stand high above any judgment which their generation may pronounce upon them, the one for heroic womanly endurance of brutalism, out of far more than just respect for the supposed “laws of marriage,” and the other for heroic manly obedience to simple dictates of mercy and honor, with a most exact and noble sense of the sacredness of woman­ hood and of the absolute sanctity of true marriage. It may be our privilege at a future time to add some contribution to the evidence which has already forced this verdict upon the purest and most thoughtful of our contemporaries. We content ourselves now with emphasizing, as fully as we can, our declaration, that brutalism ought not to find shelter under the laws of marriage; that any decent delivery of a woman from brutalism is just and right; and that the instance now awaiting the decision of our social philosophy can not possibly be brought under any other head than that of perfectly fit, and strikingly noble, delivery of an exceptionally pure and true woman from a brute. The question how far legal and conventional sup­ ports of brutalism were rashly overleaped, in the crisis and catastrophe of this drama, need not be answered, before pronouncing the actors in the scene immaculate, and cannot be answered in any such way as to raise any just doubt of their perfect purity of purpose. Further­ more, it becomes all, who seek a wise solution of our social perplexi­ ties, and hope for more truth of character and life in the most important of human relations, to distinctly advise the undisguised exponents of virtuous brutalism—the editor of the New York Sun, for example; that they can only render themselves infamous by such criticisms and reports as they were guilty of during the late trial. �Dr. J. F. Clarke against Theism. 39 DR. J. F. CLARKE AGAINST THEISM. The American Unitarian Association has recently published a small book, from the pen of Dr. James Freeman Clarke, entitled, “Steps of Belief, or, Rational Christianity maintained against Atheism, Free Religion, and Romanism.” Like the previous theological work of the same author, “Steps of Belief” is in some respects excellent, in others very unsatisfactory. We forbear criticism of many points which invite it, and merely consider Dr. Clarke’s attempt to elevate his sort of Christianity at the expense of “ pure Theism,” which is to us true Christianity. It would not be unfair to ask, in view of the title above quoted, whether Dr. Clarke objects to freedom or to religion itself, and if to neither, as he would doubtless reply, why to the combination ? But we may take him in hand quite as well from another point of view. He identifies free religion and theism. “ The second step of belief,” he says, “ is from theism to Christianity.” The advocates of free religion, he tells us, “ deny that Christianity is any advance beyond theism.” And in chapter third of this portion of his book he attempts to “ show wherein Christianity is an advance on pure theism.” Of course we may inquire what objection he makes to theism? Or to put the matter more clearly, why does he deem faith in God through Christ better than direct faith in God ? It must be because Christ is more to him as a direct object of faith, than God. But he makes Christ a mere man, at most “ a perfect man.” He must, therefore, in his theism, make very little of God, as a direct object of faith, if he goes upward from religion towards God directly, to religion towards God through Christ. And since his “rational Christianity ” is only religion towards God through a man, it must be regarded as a species of idolatry, like the Romanist’s devotion to the Virgin Mary. To show Dr. Clarke’s method of comparing theism and Christianity, we may cite the following statement: “ In all the dimensions of space [depth, height, breadth, length] we find in Christianity something in advance of theism. It is deeper in its life, higher in its aspiration, broader in its sweep, more far reaching in its per­ petual advance.” P. 166. This is arbitrary assertion. What is deeper than the life of God, or higher than the thought of God, or broader than the love of God, or more far-reaching than eternal union with God ? �40 Dr. J. F. Clarke against Theism. Another specimen of Dr. Clarke’s treatise will show from how low a theism he steps up to the level which he deems the highest Chris­ tian ground. Thus he says : “Theism reasons about God; Christianity lives from him and to him. Theism gives us speculations and probabilities ; Christianity, convictions and realities. . . Theism says light is the life of men; Christianity declares that life is the light of men.” Pp. 143, 144. If this means anything, it is, that direct faith in God is mere doubtful talk, by which a man cannot live, while faith in God through the man, Christ, is a deep and real life for the soul. All which we set down as Dr. Clarke’s opinion, and are sorry that he did not take more of a step when he undertook to rise from atheism to theism. Another bit of Dr. Clarke’s argument is as follows: “ The apostles of free religion take more pleasure in standing apart, to think; than in coming together, to live. . . If thought could ever become a fountain of life, it would have done so in the case of Socrates. . . But, though always seeking he seldom found.” Pp. 147, 148. Doubtless Dr. Clarke tells us here what he supposes true, about the thinkers and their Greek master, and believes that he has done them justice. He seems to have known Socrates and free thought only by vague heresay, and to have spoken out of the entire honesty of entire ignorance. As, however, he is arguing down “ pure theism,” or pure direct faith in God, he might have remembered, without knowing any­ thing at all about the apostles of free religion and Socrates, that the point to be made was, that simple direct faith in God makes men lonely and barren thinkers, while faith in God through the man, Christ, makes them sympathetic and fruitful believers. Will he venture to assert this ? Dr. Clarke appears to be profoundly ignorant of the true method and matter of that pure direct faith in God, which constitutes the life and power of pure theism. He gets hold of a sentence of Rev. Samuel Johnson, or an affirmation of Rev. Mr. Abbot, and deals with it as if in it he saw the necessary measure of pure theism, and limit of free religion. He catches a mere glimpse of Socrates, and talks of the master of Plato, and the most fruitful teacher of all time, as if he would have been better for some instruction in a Sunday School. Of the range, the richness, and the living power of true thought of God, or indeed of thought at all, he seems to have no conception. With him to think means to puzzle over dark enigmas; and to think of God �Dr. J. F. Clarke against Theism. 41 to chop logic with the scholastics. His idea of religion by direct faith in God, as in pure theism, is, that it is not religion, but a mere vain attempt at religion. In order to do Dr. Clarke’s Jesuism no injustice, we will now quote at length several of his statements : “ Christianity is an historic religion, with a Founder, a church or commun­ ion, with its sacred books, its rites and ceremonies, its faith and its morality. These doctrines, worship, books, church, and morals, all have the historic person of Jesus for their centre and source. Theism, or Free Religion, on the contrary, is a system of belief and method of life which grows up in the human mind, independently of any such historic source, proceeding only from the soul itself. P. 141. Christianity is essentially a stream of spiritual, moral, and intellectual life, proceeding from Jesus of Nazareth. He did not present it as an intellectual system, but it overflowed from his lips in his da’’y intercourse with men. Hed'd not speak from his speculation, but from his knowledge. He spoke what he knew, and testified what he had seen. This living knowledge created like conviction in other minds. The truth was its own evidence. Man needs this knowledge. We need to know God, not merely to think it probable that he exists. We need to live in the light of his truth and his love. We do Dot get this knowledge of God by reading books of theology, but by communion with those who have it. If we have any such faith in God, how did we first obtain it. We caught it as a blessed contagion, from the eyes and lips, the words freighted with conviction, the actions inspired by its force, of those who have been themselves filled with its power. They too usually have received it from others; though after­ wards it may have been fed by direct communion with God. It is a trans­ mitted as well as an inspired life. . . The deeper, purer, loftier they [the great modern prophets] are, the more do they love to trace back the great master-impulse to Jesus of Nazareth. ‘ Of his fullness have we all received,’ say they, ‘and grace upon grace.’ . . Abandon this current, . . and God becomes an opinion; duty, a social convenience; immortality, a perhaps. Pp. 145, 146. The doctrines of the incarnation and the atonement have always been the pivots of Christian theology. The incarnation means, God descending into the soul of one man to make all humanity divine, to unite earth with heaven, time with eternity, man with God. The elevation of the human race, so justly dear to the modern theist, is made possible by this great providential event in human history. By the law of mediated life, God is lifting humanity to himself, and penetrating the boundless variety of his creation with as pervasive a unity. . . Those who were afar off are made nigh by the blood of Jesus. His death and resurrection have set the seal on this great atoning work, which is as effective now to create love to God and to man as it was in the beginning. Pp. 154, 155. God comes near to the soul in Jesus Christ; through Jesus Christ our sense of sin is taken away; through Christ, mortal fears are replaced by an immortal hope. . To adhere to Jesus as the Christ of God, is the very root of Christian experience. Pp. �42 Dr. J. F. Clarke against 1 heism. 156, 157. Love to Christ is the method of progress, the law of freedom, the way to knowledge, and the unchecked impulse to God. P. 166. The one great outward proof that Jesus was thus the Christ of humanity, the ordained Leader of the human race to God and to each other, is found in his resurrec­ tion. . When Jesus appeared to die, he did not die; he remained alive. When he seemed to go down, he did not go down; he went up. When he seemed to go away, he did not go away ; he remained. . . The objections to this view are chiefly a priori and metaphysical. Pp. 114 and 115. Dr. Clarke appears to believe in a strict external system of tradi­ tion and belief, the only channel through which life can come from God to human souls, and that system he sums up in the “Lord Jesus Christ,” whom he yet regards as a mere man,* but “a perfect speci­ men of the human race.” Freedom dies in the presence of such a fact, if it be a fact, and religion equally sinks into nothing with no other direct object of faith than “ a perfect specimen of the human race.” And seeing the utter absurdity of taking the historic Jesus as this “ perfect specimen,” the thoughtful believer must find himself worshipping towards a very poor idol if he attempt to follow the instruction of Dr. Clarke. This conception of a historic religion, with the historic person of Jesus for its centre and source, and distinguished from religion born in the soul under influences not external and historic, logically points to an infallible church,—to Romanism in fact. Dr. Clarke puts his­ torical human transmission above providential divine instruction and inspiration, and, therefore, leaves little room to question that the most direct and largest historical human result of original Jesuism must be the true faith. Moral, intellectual and spiritual life comes to us, Dr. Clarke says, from the man, Jesus, a contagion caught from his person and life by the first disciples, and historically transmitted. The comprehensive teaching of theism, that God himself, by perfectly adequate means, instructs and inspires and disciplines his moral creatures, and so directly conveys to them the gift of his own eternal life, Dr. Clarke considers a baseless theory, the delusion of certain absurd people who “ stand apart to think,” and who “ even prefer speculation to knowl­ edge.” Instead of accepting the theistic doctrine of incarnation, the universal saving presence of God in all souls, he asserts that God descended “into the soul of one man,” and that “the elevation of the human race is made possible by this great providential event.” * “We agree with the Naturalists, that Christ was a pure man, and not superhuman.” P. 133. �Dr. J. F. Clarke against Theism. 43 And not only does he thus deny the universal providence and inspiration of God, and reduce the Almighty to dependence upon a Galilean youth for effective communication with and control of the human race, but he appears to adopt the wretched superstition that “the blood of Jesus” is the agency through which God must reach man. Neither nature, whose suggestions are so varied, so quickening, and so universal; nor the universal providence of human events, which speaks so clearly, so fully, and so powerfully to the thoughtful student of human life and human history; nor the unceasing inspi­ ration which floods the understanding and heart of man, and marvellously guides the seekers of all the world into one simple faith in God, are anything to Dr. Clarke, so absorbed is he with worship through his man-image of God. Omit to look on this image, he says, and “God becomes an opinion; duty, a social convenience; immor­ tality, a perhaps.” That it is so to him, we do not doubt. We endeavor to accept his assertion that he knows no other root of Christian experience than adherence to Jesus; that the death and resurrection of Jesus, alone or chiefly, induce him to love God and man; and that the proof to him that this is the true way, he finds in the resurrection of Jesus. Such external construction of religion, and such reference of its power to human facts, are doubtless undertaken by Dr. Clarke in good faith. He undoubtedly believes theological science need say no more than that Jesus went up when he went down, and that the objections to this view are chiefly a priori and metaphysical. The Christianity which Dr. Clarke sets up against Theism, is not Christian, but Jesuit. Christian religion knows no other object of faith than God, the “ Our Father” of the prayer of Jesus. The Jesuism which makes Jesus an object of religious faith is pseudo­ Christian. That Jesuism which makes Jesus very God, has some claims to be considered religion. But that which makes him, as Dr. Clarke’s does, a mere “ perfect specimen of a man,” is no religion at all; it is mere hero-worship. And that in fact Dr. Clarke labors to establish, the worship of Jesus as a hero. For ourselves, we decline, equally in the name of religion and of Christian teaching, to adopt the confused sentimentalism of Dr. Clarke’s method, and the feeble Jesuism of his conclusions. We believe in God. �44 The Unitarian Situation. THE UNITARIAN SITUATION. I.—Mr. Hepworth Relieves Himself. “There are times when one must relieve himself or die,” said Rev Geo. II. Hepworth, in the meeting, last May, of the American Unitarian Association. The Secretary of the Association, Rev. Charles Lowe, had presented an admirable paper, justifying the general Unitarian determination to do without a creed, and to depend on the spirit and the life as a basis of union, when Mr. Hepworth came forward, regard­ less of the general disapproval of his intention, to move for a committee to prepare an “ as-nearly-as-may-be ” representative statement of faith of the Unitarian denomination, and said, “ Your frequent applause (of Mr. Lowe’s address) did not daunt my determination to speak because there are times when one must relieve himself or die.” Of course Mr. Hepworth could not be expected to assume that the Unitarian body would prefer the other alternative ; so he proceeded to relieve himself. The gist of his demand he thus expressed,— “I want that there shall be a definite signification attached to the word ‘Unitarianism.’ . . The thing it seems to me is demanded; demanded now, or else we, 1 honestly believe, as a denomination, go under. . . The next two years will settle, I honestly believe, the fate of the Unitarian denomination. . . I want a statement of the average views of the Unitarian denomination, . . something with the endorsement of the Unitarian denomination upon it.” How this authoritative statement of faith should relieve Mr. ■ Hepworth, our readers may not quite understand. It seems, how­ ever, that be expected it to be good for his back. “Give me,” he said, “ a single Unitarian document, that I can put my back against.” How desperate he considered his need of a document to put his back against, may be judged from his concluding sentence, — “ It is a small thing to ask for, yet I cannot get L, I suppose, but I waDt to give you notice I am not exactly down, and I am going to keep this thing going until I do get it.” Theodore Parker said of Mr. Hepworth, — “ Hepworth would make a powerful preacher, if he did not drown his thought in a Dead Sea of words. What a pity ! You don’t want a drove of oxen to drag a cart-load of potatoes on a smooth road.” This criticism was provoked by the earliest failure of Mr. Hepworth’s back, when he withdrew from an engagement to speak at a meeting held in Boston to express �The Unitarian Situation. 45 sympathy with the family of John Brown, because he found it would not be considered decent for him to take ‘ the other side.’ Mr. Hepworth has needed something to put his back against ever since John A. Andrew, in that great meeting, said that he had supposed there was but one side to the question of sympathy with the family of the Harper’s Ferry martyr. It appears, from Mr. Hepworth’s speeches on the subject, that he has made “a document” himself, and has found it useful in bringing inquirers into the Unitarian fold. He tells us that a similar document, endorsed by the denomination, would double the nifmber of Unitarians in less than five years, and that without it Unitarianism will “ go under” within two years. The simple meaning of this is that Mr. Hepworth is a prodigious egotist, who is of late ambitious to appear as the maker of the denom­ inational creed. He has no idea whatever of accepting any statement other than his own. His demand is that Unitarianism endorse his document. This demand he presses with stupid insolence, imagining that he will be sustained because his document is conservative. Originally belonging to the radical wing of Unitarianism, and now a self-appointed leader of the right wing, be has but one leading aim, to push himself. This aim he follows with insane disregard of all the decencies of the matter. We regret the necessity of speaking so harshly, but feel that we ought to say more rather than less of this ecclesiastical charlatan. The recent overturning of the Liberal Chris­ tian vrds his work, done in a spirit and with a purpose which ought to exclude h,im from the confidence of every honest and honorable member of the Unitarian body. II.—Robert Collyer’s “ Amen ” to Hepworth. The concurrence of Rev. Robert Collyer with Mr. Hepworth’s demand for an authoritative statement of faith, caused a great deal of surprise. Mr. Collyer said, in support of Mr. Hepworth, — “ His feeling about some statement that we could use when we stand up and preach, has been my feeling too. . . I felt like saying, Amen, to the gist of his proposition, and wanted to feel that I stood with him. . . My reason for it is exactly the same as that which he has given as his primary reason. . . Letters and requests in person come to me continually, like this, ‘Cannot you give us something that bears the stamp of authority from your body?’ It should be no test of fellowship to bar any man out, . . and if next year �46 The Unitarian Situation. we find that it does not express the honest religious faith of our body, it shall be altered, . . and made to express then what new light may have come to us from above.” This was again explained by Mr. Collyer, in one of the meetings of the Western Conference in June, after some one had suggested that his creed should be stamped, as railroad tickets are, “ good for this day only.” Mr. Collyer then said, — “ If we can present this thing to the inquiring mind as the statement of five hundred intelligent Unitarians, it will have a good deal more weight than the statement of any single individual, that is all I ever meant.” It seems incredible that Mr. Collyer should not see that the stamp of external authority must injure rather than help the force of truth. Inquiry has developed no principle more important than this, that truth stands best on its own evidence, and always loses when made to rest on an authority outside of itself. If Mr. Collyer wants to employ, in preaching, a statement bearing the stamp of authority, he wants to use a purely and strictly orthodox method, in place of the liberal method. The latter invariably says, ‘ examine and judge for your­ selves what is true,’ and it scrupulously avoids introducing any pressure of authority. The orthodox method appeals to authority, and largely succeeds in preventing inquiry. It would be a bastard liberalism which should admit the use of this appeal to authority. Any real success in such appeal, would be an encroachment of mischief of the most serious and dangerous sort. And not merely would actual free inquiry be checked, but all freedom to inquire will be put in peril. It is a purely chimerical expectation that possessors of authority would use it for instruction of inquirers only, and not for judgment on doubt and denial. At this moment the Unitarian body, as organized in the National Conference, lends its authority to the dogma of the lordship of Jesus, as thorough a superstition and yoke of heathenism as was ever fastened upon men’s minds by religion, and this creed is used as a test, a rule of judgment, and law of condemnation. But if the idea of using authority without abusing it were not a delusion and a snare, it would be worse than useless to attempt to influence inquirers by means of an endorsed statement of faith. There may be single instances now and then of inquirers foolish enough to give weight to such a creed, but in general any such attempt to urge doctrines on the ground that they had been endorsed by “ five hundred intelligent Unitarians,” or by five hundred thousand even, would at �The Unitarian Situation. 47 once raise suspicion and provoke contempt. The evidences for important truths, apart from ordinary human endorsement, are so significant and decisive, and the fact of ordinary human endorsement is, in itself, so insignificant and inconclusive, that a religious teacher could hardly do a worse thing than to confess that he depended at all on the fact that his sect had voted the creed he urged. The power, either for good or for evil, of such a vote, is over those who are already within the connection. In general it is a power of tyranny and outrage upon dissenting members of the fellowship. At least it is not a power of persuasion with outside inquirers. Granting, however, that there would be no tyranny in voting a denominational creed, and that it might be possible to use such a creed with good effect, it still remains, and always must remain, that a Unitarian statement of faith is as impossible as a Unitarian Pope. The fact which causes so many questions as to the beliefs of Unita­ rians,— which occasions so many to ask, “What do Unitarians believe ? ” — is a fact which ought to show Mr. Collyer the utter absurdity of talking about a Unitarian statement of faith. Twenty decidedly different and distinct statements would not represent Unitarianism. Unitarianism is like our national union; it is a union of individuals, each independent and sovereign in respect to certain most important matters, while owning allegiance to the common fellowship for certain other matters. What Mr. Lowe, the Secretary of the Amer­ ican Unitarian Associatian, calls “ the spirit and the life,” is the basis of union in the Unitarian body. With reference to beliefs, the rule is liberty and diversity, “ every man fully persuaded in his own mind,” “every one of us give account of himself to God,” and “every man receive his own reward according to his own labor.” The one great principle, which has given life and honor to Unitarianism, has been this recognition of the duty of individual persuasion, and the liberty of individual difference, in the matter of beliefs. And he must be exceedingly heedless of facts which are patent to every observer, who forgets that the Unitarian body now embraces a great diversity of beliefs, and can no more be represented by one statement of special beliefs than the different states of our Union could be represented by one political creed, except as to certain very general principles. The representative statement of Unitarianism is its immortal declaration of liberty and diversity. The demand for any other representative state­ ment,— for any sort of statement of beliefs, — assumes that Unitari­ anism, founded in liberty, has been so far a comprehensive error. �48 The Unitarian Situation. It is undeniable, however, thac the votes of the National Confer­ ence, affirming the “ lordship of Jesus,” have created an official Unitarianism, a Unitarian ecclesiasticism, not founded on the principle of liberty and diversity, but based, as strictly as any sect in the world, on a creed, and that creed a contemptible superstition. The lordship of Jesus, in any Unitarian sense, is nondescript. It is anything but religious and Christian. If it can be assumed that Jesus is very God, the lordship of Jesus is religious. Deny that he is God, and the assertion of his lordship drags that grand term The Lord from its only true Christian significance, and makes it a cover for putting into offices of Deity one who confessedly is not God. Taken alone, as the one article of a creed, and the single foundation stone of an ecclesias­ ticism, the lordship of Jesus, in any or all of the Unitarian senses, is the most beggarly, the narrowest, and most barren creed ever devised. The day when this creed, which has no iota of religion in it, but is purely a partisan watchword, was adopted, and the other days on which it was re-affirmed, each time against protest as distinct and vigorous as outrage ever provoked, were days of shameful treason to the genius of the Unitarian movement. Many years since, the Rev. Dr. Eliot, of St. Louis, an excellent man in his way, but something of a pope, and an apologist for slavery during the days of Anti-Slavery excitement, seceded from the Western Unitarian Conference, because that body adopted some resolution of sympathy with the cause of the slave. Not only did he go out in wrath, but he never returned? This Dr. Eliot was unfortunately named on the original committee appointed to prepare a constitution for the National Unitarian Conference, and he it was who demanded the lordship-of-Jesus basis, against the judgment of the committee, and who compelled its insertion by threatening secession I This playing pope on the part of one man was the original occasion of giving to the conference a dogmatic basis. The wrong could not have been consummated, however, had not Dr. Bellows espoused it, and carried it through in a spirit even worse than that in which it was conceived, a spirit at once of treason and of anger. Dr. Bellows had given pledges, as distinct and full as could be asked, which required him to exclude dogma from the basis of the Conference, and to respect without qualification the principle of liberty and diversity. These pledges he disregarded, as recklessly as if honor were but a name, when he consented to meet Dr. Eliot’s demand, and to report a basis for the Conference, which asserted the �The Unitarian Situation. 49 lordship of Jesus. And when he encountered resistance to his plan, he took a high tone, the tone of a pope, and gave way to bad temper besides, as if it were but right for him to visit the anger of an offended pope on his radical brethren. These are the simple facts in regard to the creed adopted by the National Conference. Drs. Eliot and Bellows originally forced that creed upon the Conference, in a way not one whit better than that of Pope Pius at Rome. Mr. Hepworth brings forward his creed, because he thinks he can play pope. That Mr. Collyer should lend his support to so palpable an iniquity, is as sad as it is surprising, whether we consider his own good name as a teacher of religion, or the influence he can exert. It would seem as if he must have seen enough of Unitarianism to show him that wide diversities exist in it, such as will always make people ask, “What do Unitarians believe?” and will forever render it impossible to answer this inquiry by any one statement of faith. Does Mr. Collyer mean to assume that it would be either honest or honorable, or anything better than an outrage and a lie, to put forth his creed, or any creed which he could endorse, and say of it, “ This is what Unitarians believe”? The answer made him in the Western Confer­ ence, by a lawyer of high character and sound judgment, “ This proposition is a delusion and a humbug,” deservedly rebuked his assumption that a creed could be made useful. Let him join in getting one voted, and he will find that he has put his hand to a business which can only end in mischief and shame. III.—Rev. A. D. Mayo Settles the Question. Rev. A. D. Mayo sustained Mr. Hepworth’s demand for a creed, in a very characteristic way. He said: “Sooner or later we must meet the issue which brother Hepworth has presented; the whole Christian world is looking at us and expecting us to meet it. If we are found skulking, I believe the modern world will just drop us, and we shall be left a little association of independent churches to do anything we have a mind to, but the world will lose all its interest in us. and that will be the end of us ” Mr. Mayo is the most positive and most dismal of Pharisees. Why should a man skulk into a dark closet, he would say, when the universe looks for his appearing at the corner of the street ? Why should he forfeit the interest of mankind by sneaking to prayer with the publi­ can, when justification so abundant awaits broad phylacteries and VOL. I.—NO. I. 4 �50 The Unitarian Situation. pompous self-assertion ? How absurd and contemptible to content ourselves with devout doing of God’s will, when the rewards of “Lord, Lord,” are so much more immediate and certain! Blow no trumpet, and let the modern world just drop us? Do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with God, and that the end of us? Indulge the enthusiasm of humanity and the passion of free communion with God, when seventy sanhedrins of seventy sects already summon us to judgment, and the whole menagerie of inquisitors thirsts to extinguish us? Such, it would seem, is the appeal of Mr. Mayo. This appeal Mr. Mayo took occasion to vindicate in the meeting of the Western Conference, in an elaborate address on “The Vocation of The Western Unitarian Church.” The gist of that address was that Unitarianism has been governed by the rule of liberty long enough, and that it ought now to go back to the old and universal orthodox method, define and adopt an orthodoxy of its own, a fixed correct creed, and work hereafter by means of, and on the basis of, this definite and established creed, excluding further free-thinking, and attempting no further progress. “Hitherto,” he says, “we have had a creed of one article, spiritual freedom, and all our loosely-jointed organization has revolved around that. We have been rather a spiritual exploring expedition on the frontiers of the church than a well defined branch of Christendom.” “Liberal Christianity remains,” he tells us, “an undefined and diffused spirit of free-thinking, irresponsible as the wind, and vast as the mind of man.” Unitarians, again he says, are “an extended picket-line backed by no army,” in danger of being “gobbled up and left to pursue their ‘scientific religious’ investigation inside a spiritual Andersonville, with such comfort as may there be found,” which he thinks would be “a sad coming down from our dreams of illimitable and irresponsible individuality.” “The Unitarian body,” Mr. Mayo declares, “must soon decide this final question: Is it a Church and apart of Christendom, or is it a dissolving view of spiritual pioneers on the border-land of Christian civilization? We may indulge in spiritual vagrancy till we lose the confidence of the country, and expectation no longer turns our way. Our widely-roving Unitarian enterprise in the West must consolidate into a number of Christian churches that agree substantially in their understand­ ing of Christianity, their methods for its propagation, their relation to other Christian churches, and their relation to other communities outside of Christian belief. . . If we decide that we are not a Christian church ip this sense, then let us go home, each to his own city or hamlet, and pursue religion on his own account; for the Western people will no longer concern themselves with our existence.” �1 he Unitarian Situation. 51 The criticism here made upon the Unitarianism of Dr. Channing and Theodore Parker, that it was indefinite, vagrant, irresponsible, and outside Christian limits; the judgment pronounced upon the historic Unitarian principle of spritual freedom, that it served well enough to organize “spiritual vagrancy” and “general free-thinking” upon, and should now be displaced by the opposite principle, that of dogma and ecclesiasticism; the proposition to consolidate the Unita­ rian movement into a body of orthodox Unitarian churches; and the reason for doing this, to keep the confidence of the country and the interest of the Western people, and to escape “a spiritual Anderson­ ville,”— these are points of Mr. Mayo’s plea which are criticised the moment they are stated. The two great principles of pure Christian religion, loyalty to God and love to man, are sneered at by Mr. Mayo in this fashion,— “ Religion is not solely, or chiefly, an affair between one man and the Power he may choose to call his ‘ Maker.’ . . A Christian church cannot live long on the assertion, it is good to be good; it is lovely to love.” Chinese, Hebrews, Mormons, Spiritualists, and Oneida Com­ munists, he says, do as much as that. If we do no more, the Western people will no longer concern themselves with our existence, and that will be the end of us. Could there be a more lamentable infidelity than this? If Mr. Mayo represents anybody but himself, we are sorry for the communion which includes such an element. IV.—Dr. Bellows Protests. It is never possible to tell on which side of the Unitarian question Dr. Bellows will be found. In the Hepworth debate last May, he came out emphatically and eloquently for liberty and diversity. He said that he would not submit his faith to “ any statement which the Unitarian body, as such, is prepared to make, or can honestly make, or make without deceiving itself and without deceiving everybody else.” He declared that “the Christian religion at this present time needs a body which will restrain itself, and not undertake to bind itself by a positive statement which will strangle its growth. He insisted that Unitarianism must continue to occupy a position of “ absolute and perfect liberty.” He besought his brethren not to let Robert Collyer’s “seductive voice,” “incline or seduce you into any falsification of the fundamental principle of our body.” “ Let every man,” he said, “ give the best statement he can make, and send it out on its own authority.” �52 History of the Devil. Now let Dr. Bellows cdnsent to take the lordship-of-Jesus dogma out of the basis of the National Conference, and Unitarianism may again mean “ absolute and perfect liberty,” and he cease to be universally known as Mr. Facing-Both-Ways. HISTORY OF THE DEVIL. His Rise, Greatness and Downfall. [Translated from the Revue des Deux Mondes.] Among the fallen monarchs whom time, yet more than sudden revolutions, has slowly brought down from their thrones, few are there whose prestige has been as imposing and as abiding as that of the king of hell, —Satan. We can safely employ the expression fallen in speaking of him, for those of our contemporaries who yet profess to believe in his existence and power, live just as if they did not believe in them; and when faith and life no longer impress each other, we have a right to say that the former is dead. I speak, of course, of our educated cotemporaries; the others are no longer of account in the history of the human mind. It has seemed to us, too, that it would be interesting to bring together in one view, and to describe in their logical genesis, the transformations and evolutions of belief in the devil. This is almost a biography. An occasion has been furnished us by a recent and remarkable work which we owe to a professor of theology in Vienna.* Notwithstanding some tedious passages, the book of Professor Roskoff is an encyclopaedia of everything relating to the matter, and the author will not complain if we borrow freely from his rich erudition. I. The origin of belief in the devil is quite remote; and, like that of every belief more or less dualistic, that is to say, based on the radical opposition of two supreme principles, it must be sought in the human mind developing itself in the bosom of a Nature which is sometimes favorable, sometimes hostile, to it. There is a certain relative dualism, an antagonism of the I and not-I, which revealsitself from the time of man’s birth. His first breath is painful, for it makes him cry out. It is through struggles that he learns to eat, to walk, to speak. Later, the effort indispensable to his preservation will reproduce this perpetual struggle under other forms. When the religious sentiment awakens in him and seeks first its object and support in visible nature, he finds himself before phenomena which he personifies; some of which are agreeable and loved, such as the aurora, the fruits of the earth, and the refreshing and fertilizing rain; the others terrifying and dreaded, • “ History of the Devil,” by Gustave Roskoff, Professor of the Imperial Faculty of Protestant Theology in Vienna. �History of the Deoil. 53 like the storm, the thunder, and the night. Hence good and evil deities. As a general rule and by virtue of that simple egotism which characterizes children and the childhood of peoples, the dreaded gods are more worshipped than those worthy of affection, which always do good of themselves and without being entreated. Such is at least the convergent result of the observa­ tions of all the travelers who have a near view in either hemisphere of peoples living in a savage state. It is needless to add that their divinities have no moral character properly so called. They do good or evil because their nature is thus, and for no other reason. In that, they only resemble their worshippers. Indeed, man always projects his own ideal upon the divinity which he adores, and, all things considered, it is in this very manner that he comes into possession of all which he can comprehend of divine truth. He always has the feeling that his god is perfect, and that is the essential thing ; but the traits of this perfection are always more or less those of his ideal. Some one once asked of two little swine-herds in some remote prov­ ince of Austria: “ What would you do, if you were Napoleon?” “I,” said the younger, “ would put a whole pot of butter on my bread every morning.” “Andi,” said the other, “ would watch my hogs on horseback!” Thus, too, a Bushman, when invited by a missionary, who had tried to give him some notions of morality, to cite some examples showing that he knew how to distinguish good from evil, said: “Evil is other people who come and take my wives ; good is me when I take theirs.” The gods of savages are necessarily savage gods. They usually have hideous forms, as their wor­ shippers think themselves bound to become hideous to go to battle, or even simply for adornment. To them, the beautiful is the odd and grotesque ; the mysterious is the strange, and the strange is the frightful. To our European ancestors, the stranger was at the same time the guest and the enemy. With all due deference to poets, the religion of peoples of this class is tantamount to the adoration of genii or demons of a bad character. When we pass from savage peoples, who live only by hunting and fishing, to shepherds, and especially to agricultural peoples, this adoration of evil deities is no longer as exclusive. Il et we usually find among them the worship of dreaded gods predominant. For example, let us cite only that simple prayer of the Madecassians, who recognize, among many others, two creative divinities* Zamhor, the author of good things, and Nyang, of the bad : “ 0 Zamhor! we do not pray to thee. Good gods do not want prayers. But we must pray to Nyang. We must appease Nyang. Nyang, wicked and powerful spirit, do not make the thunder roll above our beads ! Bid the sea keep its limits. Spare, Nyang, the ripening fruits. Wither not the rice in its flower. Let there be no births in the evil days. Thou knowest the wicked are thine already, and the number of the wicked, Nyang, is great. Then torment no more the good.” It would be easy to multiply facts attesting this characteristic of the religion of primitive peoples, that terror has more to do with their piety than veneration or love. Hence the great number of malevolent beings of the second order which all inferior religions recognize and which are found in the popular superstitions long clinging to religions of a more elevated spiritual �51 History of the Devil. level. In the great mythologies, like those of India, Egypt, or Greece, the apparent dualism of nature is reflected in the distinction between the gods of order and production and those of destruction and disorder. The feeling that order always gains a decisive victory in the battles between the oppos­ ing forces of nature, inspires myths like those of Indra the conqueror of the storm-cloud, of Horus avenging his father Osiris, wickedly put to death by Typhon. In developed Brahminism, it is Siva, the god of destruction who concentrates and puts to work the disturbing elements of the universe. Siva is besides the most adored of the Hindoo gods. In Semitic polytheism, dualism becomes sexual, or rather, the sun being always the principal object of adoration, the supreme god is conceived under two forms, the one smiling, the other terrifying, Baal or Moloch. This double character of the divinities worshipped is not less striking when one studies the most "poetical and most serene of polytheisms, that of Greece. Like all the others, its roots go down into the worship of the visible world, but more than elsewhere, unless we should except Egypt, its gods join to their physical nature a corresponding moral physiognomy. They have conquered the agents of confusion which under the names of Titans, Giants, Typhons, threatened established order. They are then the invincible preser­ vers of the regular order of things; but, as, after all, this regular order is far from always conforming itself to the physical and moral well-being of man, the result is that the Greek gods have all, in varied proportion, their amiable and their dark side. For instance, Phoebus Apollo is a god of light, a civilizer, inspirer of arts, refiner of the soil and of souls, and yet he sends the pestilence, is pitiless in his vengeance, and not very prudent in his friendships. One may say as much of his sister Diana, or rather the moon, who is personified now under the enchanting image of a beautiful and chaste maiden, now under the gloomy physiognomy of a Hecate, a Brimo, or an Empusa. The blue mists of the horizon of the sea are at first beautiful blue­ birds, then daughters of the wave, admirably beautiful down to the waist, who bewitch navigators with their sweet love songs; but alas for those who allow themselves to be seduced! This physiognomy of mingled good and evil is a common trait of the Hellenic pantheon, and is continuously manifest, from the supreme pair, Jupiter and Hera (Juno) to the under-world couple, zEdoneus or Pluto and his wife the beautiful Proserpine, the Strangler. Latin mythology suggests the same class of reflections, and, in what is peculiarly its own, is still more dualistic than Greek polytheism. It has its Orcus, its Strigae, its Larvae, its Lemures, etc. Sclavonic mythology has its white god and its black god. Our Gallic fathers had not very attractive divinities, and the old Scandinavian-Germanic gods unite to valuable quali­ ties defects which render intercourse with them at least difficult. Wherever in our times one has kept a belief in hob-goblins, witches, fairies, sylphs, water-nymphs, we find this same mingling of good and bad qualities. These latter relics of the great army of divinities of the former times are at the same time graceful, attractive, generous when they wish to be, but also capricious, vindictive and dangerous. It is important to regard all these facts in seeking the origin of the devil, for we shall see that he is of compos­ �History of the Devil. 55 ite order, and that in several of his essential features he is connected with the dark elements of all religions which have preceded Christianity. There is nevertheless one of these religions, which, in this special point of view, calls for a little more attention to its fundamental doctrines: it is the Zend-Avesta, or, to employ the usual expression, that of the Persians. It is, in fact, in this religion that the divine hierarchy and belief appear under the influence of a systematic < ualism applying to the entire world, moral evil included. The gods of light and the gods of darkness share time and space. We do not speak here of Zerwan-Akerene, time without limit, who gave birth to Ahuramazda or Ormuzd, the God of good, and to his brother Ahriman, the God of evil. This is evidently a philosophical notion much more recent than that primitive point of view originating with the Zend religion, which recognizes only two powers equally eternal, continually at strife, meeting for combat on the surface of the earth as well as in the heart of men. Wherever Ormuzd plants the good, Ahriman sows the evil. The story of the moral fall of the first men, due to the perfidy of Ahriman, who took the form of a serpent, presents most striking analogies with the parallel account in Genesis. In regard to that, it has often been alleged that the Bible story of the fall was only borrowed from Persia. This opinion seems to me without good found­ ation, for in the Iranian myth the genius of evil is considered disguised. In the Hebrew story, on the contrary, it is plainly a serpent which speaks, acts, and brings upon all his progeny the punishment he suffers. We must then allow to this story the merit of superior antiquity, if not in its present, at least in its primitive form. The substitution of a disguised god for a reason­ ing and speaking animal, denotes reflection unknown to the ages of mythical formation. It was reflection, too, which, in later times, led the Jews to see their Satan under the traits of the serpent of Genesis, although the canon­ ical text is as contrary as possible to that conception. I prefer, then, to regard the two myths, the Hebrew and the Iranian, as two variations, differ­ ing in antiquity, of one and the same primitive theme, originating perhaps when the Iranians and the Semites were living together in the shadow of Ararat. However this may be, the fact yet remains that in the most seriously moral polytheism of the old world, one meets a religious conception which approaches very near to that which Semitic monotheism has bequeathed to us under the name of the devil or Satan. Ahriman, like Satan, has his legions of bad angels which only think of tormenting and destroying mortals. Not alone physical evils, as storms, darkness, floods, diseases and death, are attributed to them; but also evil desires and guilty acts. The good man is consequently a soldier of Ormuzd, under his orders opposing the powers of evil; the wicked is a servant of Ahriman and becomes his instrument. The Zend doctrine taught that at last Ahriman would be conquered and even transformed to good. This latter characteristic distinguishes him favorably from his Judeo-Christian brother; but one may well ask himself here how far this beautiful hope made a part of primitive religion.* Of one thing we ♦There have been also theological Christiane, like Origen, who believed in the final conversion of Satan. �56 History of the Devil. are certain, that the connection between the Jewish Satan and the Persian Ahriman is very close, and this is only very natural when we think that of all the polytheistic peoples the Persians are the only ones with whom the Jews, emancipated by them from Chaldean servitude, kept up prolonged relations of friendship. Nevertheless, we shall try to prove false the quite wide-spread opinion which sees in Satan only a transplanting of the Persian Ahriman into the religious soil of Semitism. True, the Jewish and the Christian devil owe much to Ahriman. From the moment when the Jewish Satan makes his acquaintance, he imitates him, he adopts his manners, his morals, his tactics, he establishes his infernal court on the same pattern ; in a word, he becomes transformed to his likeness; but he was already existing, though leading an obscure and ill defined life. Let us endeavor to sum up his history in the Old Testament. The Israelites, as we have shown in a previous article, believed for a long time, with other Semitic peoples, in the plurality of the gods; and the dualism which is found at the bottom of all polytheisms must consequently have assumed among them forms peculiar to the religions of the ethnical group of which they made a part. In proportion as the worship of Jehovah excluded all others, this dualism must change its forms. Believing still in the real existence of the neighboring divinities, such as Baal and Moloch, the fervent adorer of Jehovah must consider these gods immoral, cruel and hostile to the people of Israel, much as people looked upon demons of another age. We may go farther, and surmise some relic of a primitive dualism, or of an opposition between two gods formerly rivals, in that enigmatic being, the despair of exegetes, which, under the name of Azazel, haunts the wilderness, and to whom, on the day of expiation, the high-priest sends a goat on whose head he has put all the sins of the people. Only we must add that in historical times the meaning of this ceremony seems lost even to those who observe it, and there is in reality nothing more opposed to all dualism than the strictly Jehovist point of view. If we except the books of Job, of Zachariah, and of the Chronicles, all three being among the less ancient of the sacred collection, there is not one word said of Satan in the Old Testament, not even,— we repeat it because almost everybody is deceived thereupon, notwithstanding the evidence of the texts,— not even in the book of Genesis. Jehovah, once adored as the only real God, has and can have no competitor. He holds in his hand all the forces, all the energies of the world. Nothing happens, and nothing is done, on the earth, but he wills it; and more than one Hebrew author attributes to him directly, without the least reserve, the inspiring of the errors or faults which were to be attributed at a later period to Satan. Jehovah hardens those whom he wishes to harden; Jehovah strikes down those whom he wishes to strike down, and no one has a right to ask why; but, as he is also believed to be supremely just, it is admitted that, if he hardens the heart of the wicked, it is that they may dig their own graves, and that, if he distributes blessings and evils according to his will, it is to recompense the just and punish the unjust. The Hebrew could not always hold to this notion, too easy in theory, too �History of the Devil. 57 often falsified by experience; but he held to it long, as is evident from the class of ideas out of which we see Satan finally born. Hebrew monotheism did not exclude a belief in celestial spirits, in sons of God (bene Elohim), in angels, which were supposed to surround the throne of the Eternal like a Heavenly army. Subject to his orders, executors of his will, they were, so to speak, the functionaries of the divine government. The administering of the punishment or favors of God devolved directly upon them. Consequently there were some whose office inspired more fear than confidence. For instance, it is a spirit sent by God which comes to punish Saul for his misdeeds, by afflicting him with dark thoughts which the harp of David alone succeeds in dissipating. It is an angel of the Eternal that appears to Baalam, with a naked sword in his hand as if to slay him, or which destroys in one night a whole Assyrian army. After a time they distinguished especially an angel which might pass for the personification of a guilty conscience, for he filled, in the celestial court, the special office of accuser of men. Doubtless sovereign justice alone, and in the plenitude of its sovereignty, made the decision, but it was after pleadings in presence of the adverse parties. Now the one whose business it was to proceed against men before the divine tribunal, was an angel whose name of Satan signifies an adversary, in the judicial as well as the proper sense of this word. Such, indeed, is the Satan of the book of Job, still a member of the celestial court, being one of the sons of God, but having as his special office the ‘continual accusation of men,’ and having become so suspicious by his practice as public accuser that he believes in the virtue of no one, not even in that of Job the just man, and always presupposes interested motives for the purest manifestations of human piety. We see that the character of this angel is becoming marred, and the history of Job shows that, when he wishes to accomplish the humiliation of a just man, he spares nothing Satan appears, too, as the accuser of Israel in the vision of Zachariah: (iii. 1.) The result of this peculiar character, and the belief that angels intervene in human affairs, is that Satan had no need of Ahriman in order to be dreaded by the Israelites as the worst enemy of men. From that time, it was common to suspect his artifices in private and national misfortunes. Conse­ quently, the fatal inspirations which previous Jehovism had attributed directly to Jehovah, were henceforth regarded as coming from Satan. We find in the history of king David a curious example of this evolution of religious belief. King David one day conceived the unlucky idea, considered impious even from the theocratic-republican point of view of the prophets of his time, of numbering the people. In regard to this, the second book of Samuel (xxiv. 1) says that God, angry against Israel, incited David to give the orders necessary fcr this work; on the contrary, the first of Chronicles (xxi. 1), recounting the very same story, begins it in these terms: “Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.” Nothing shows better than this comparison, the change that had taken place in the interval between the preparation of the two books. Henceforth the mono­ theist attributes to the Adversary the bad thoughts and the calamities which he had formerly traced directly to God. It is even to be presumed that he A " �58 History of the Devil. finds some religious comfort in this solution of certain difficulties which must begin to weigh upon him, for, as in proportion as the idea of God becomes higher, people can no longer be contented with the simple theories which could suffice for less reflecting ages. So we see in the character of adversary of men, of an evil disposed being, of the angel Satan, the origin, properly so called, of the Jewish and Christian devil. We need not then rudely identify him with the more or less wicked divinities of the polytheistic religions. That he has with them affinities which become continually more close, we fully admit; but his appearance is quite distinct, and even had the Jews never been in contact with the Persians, we should have received from Jewish tradition a complete Satan. Satan, then, is not the son, nor even the brother, of Ahriman; but we may say that the time came when the resemblance was so great that it was possible to confound them. Indeed, in the apocryphal books of the Old Testament, which are distinguished from the canonical books of the same collection, by the Alexandrian and Persian elements in them, we see Satan increase in importance and prestige. The seventy, in translating his name by diabolos, whence comes our word devil, also define exactly his primitive character of accuser; but henceforth he is something quite different from that. He is an exciting agent of the first class. He is a very high person­ age, counted among the highest rank of angels, who, envious of a still higher position, was banished from Heaven with those other angels who were accomplices in his ambitious schemes. Now hatred of God is with him added to hatred of men. Here begins the imitation of Ahriman. Like the Persian god, Satan is at the head of an army of wicked beings, who execute his orders. We know several of them by name; among others Asmodeus, the demon of pleasure, who plays a great part in the book of Tobias, and whose Persian origin, since the learned researches of M. Michel Brtial, can no longer be doubted. In consequence of this increasing importance, and his separation from the faithful angels, Satan has his kingdom apart, and his residence in the subterranean hell. Like the Persian Ahriman, he wished to harm the work of creation and attacked men, whose innocent happiness was insupportable to him. From that time, it is represented that it was he, who, like Ahriman, addressed the first woman under the form of the serpent. Then it was he who introduced death and its horrors; conse­ quently the adversaries that he dreads the most, are men capable by their superior sanctity of fortifying their fellow men against his insidious attacks. A host of diseases, above all those which, by their strangeness and absence of exterior symptoms, defy natural explanation, such as idiocy, epilepsy, Saint Guy’s dance, dumbness, certain kinds of blindness, etc., are attributed to his agents. It is supposed that the thousands of demons who are under his orders escape continually from the vents of hell, and,— like the demons of the night in which people had always believed,— haunt from preference waste lands and deserts; but there they tire, they become thirsty, whirl giddily about without finding rest, and their great resource is to find lodg­ ment in a human body, in order to consume its substance and be refreshed by its blood. Sometimes even, they take up their abode in many. Hence, �History of the Devil. 59 the demoniacs, or possessed, spoken of so many times in evangelical history. Yet Jewish mythology wculd not carry to the extreme thi^ resemblance to Ahriman. Satan, for example, would never dare to attack God directlyOrdinarily even certain formulas, in which the name of the Most High occurred in the first line, sufficed to exorcise him, that is to say, to drive him away. His power is strictly confined to the circle which it pleased divine wisdom to trace for his dominion. Dualism, therefore, remains very incomplete. On the other hand, the Jewish Satan is never to be converted. A prince of incurable evil, knowing himself condemned by the divine deerees to a final and irremediable defeat, he will always persist in evil, and will serve as executioner to Supreme justice, to torment eternally those whom he has drawn into his terrible nets. Such was the state of mind on this point in which the first preaching of the gospel found the Jewish people. The messianic ideas, too, on their side, in developing themselves, had contributed much to this enrichment of the popular belief. If the devil, in this order of ideas, did not dare to oppose God, or even his angels of high rank, he did not fear to resist openly his servants on the earth. Now the Messiah was to be especially the servant of God. He was to appear in order to establish the kingdom of God in that humanity which was almost entirely subject to the power of demons. Consequently the devil would defend his possessions against him to the last extremity, and the work of the expected Messiah might be summed up in a bodily and victorious struggle with the “prince of this world.” This is a point of view that one should never forget in reading the gospels. Satan and the Messiah personified, each on his side, the power of evil and good engaging in a desperate combat at every point of collision. Never would Jesus, for example, have been able to pass for the Messiah in the eyes of his countrymen, had he not had the reputation of being stronger than the demons every time those possessed with them were brought to him. It is a question which has greatly interested modern theologians, to know if Jesus himself shared the beliefs of his contemporaries in regard to Satan. To treat this question as we should, we should have to stop longer on other points foreign to this history. Let us simply say that nothing authorizes us to think that Jesus would, from compliance with popular superstitions, have feigned beliefs which he did not share; but let us add that the principles of his religion were not in themselves favorable to beliefs of this kind. No where does Jesus make faith in the devil a condition of entrance into the kingdom of God, and were the devil only an idea, a symbol, these conditions would remain literally the same. Purity of heart, strong desire for justice, love of God and of men, these are all demands completely independent of the question of knowing whether Satan exists or not. Hence when Jesus speaks in an abstract, general manner, without any prepossession from circumstances of place or time, he regularly eliminates the person of Satan from his field of instruction. For example, he declares that our bad thoughts come from our heart; according to the Satanic theory, he should have attributed them to the devil. Sometimes it is plain that he makes use of popular beliefs as a form, an image, to which he attaches himself no positive �60 History of the Devil. reality; he finds material for parables in them; he addresses as Satan one of his disciples who is endeavoring to persuade him to withdraw from the sufferings which await him, and who by his very affection becomes for him a momentary Tempter One may remark the same thing in studying the theology of St. Paul, at least in his authentic epistles. St. Paul evidently believes in the devil, and yet with him moral evil is incident to the mortal nature of men, and not to the exterior and personal action of a demon. In a word, the teaching of Jesus and of Paul nowhere combats the belief in the devil, but it can do without it, and its tendency is to dispense with it. We see this tendency in our days, when so many excellent Christians have not the least anxiety about the king of hell; but it was one of those germs of which the gospel contains many, which needed a different intellectual atmos­ phere in order to grow. What I have related will explain why much more is said of the devil in the New Testament than in the Old. The belief in the devil and the expectation of the Messiah had grown up side by side. Yet let us remark that if the New Testament speaks very often of Satan, of his angels, of the spirits “who are in the air,” and of the devil seeking whom he may devour, it is more than sober in the descriptions that it gives of them. A certain spiritual reserve hovers still over all that order of conceptions; the devils are invisible; no one attributes to them palpable body, and a crowd of superstitions which arise later, from the idea that we can see and touch them, are still unknown. Yet, at the commencement of our era, we may consider the period of the origin of our Satan as concluded. He represents the union of polytheistic dualism and that relative dualism which Jewish monotheism could rigorously support. We shall see it grow still and assume new forms; but, such as it already is, we shall not fail to recognize it. It is indeed he, the old Satan, the bugbear of our fathers, in whom is concentrated all impurity, all ugliness, all falsehood, in a word the ideal of evil. II. The first centuries of Christianity, very far from developing that side of the gospel by which the new doctrine tended logically to banish the devil to regions of symbol and personal uselessness, on the contrary only increased his domain, by multiplying his interventions in human life. He served as a scape-goat to the horror of the primitive Christians for the institutions of paganism. Even in the early days, Christians did not very clearly distin­ guish the Roman empire from the empire of Satan. This too Jewish point of view did not last, but the favorite theme of most of the apologists was to attribute to the craft and pride of the devil, everything which polytheism presented, either fine or disagreeable, bad or good. The beautiful and the good which might be found mingled there, were in their eyes nothing else than small portions of truth artfully mingled by the enemy of the human race with frightful errors, in order better to retain power over men whom the absolutely false could not have captivated so long. The Alexandrian teachers alone showed themselves more reasonable, but they took no great hold on the mass of the faithful. Then especially the idea spread abroad �"53E5«eB#!Sr. History of the Devil. 61 that Satan was a rival really contemptible, but long powerful, of God, alone adorable. Having an eager desire for honors and dominion, he had imitated divine perfection as well as he could and had succeeded only in making an odious caricature of it, but, such as it was, that caricature had blinded the nations. Tertullian found, even on this subject, one of those characteristic words in which his mocking spirit excelled. “Satan,” said he, “is God’s ape,” and the saying was handed down to posterity. Conse­ quently the Graeco-Roman gods were, to Christians as to Jews, demons who had usurped the divine rank. The licentiousness of pagan morals, too often consecrated by the ceremonies of traditional religion, procured for this prejudiced point of view a sort of popular justification, enhanced besides by the moral superiority which the rising church was generally able to oppose to the corruptions which surrounded it. Satan was then more than ever “the prince of this world.” Yet let us not forget one very important circumstance, that other currents, outside of the Christian church, contributed to extend everywhere a belief in evil demons. Polytheism, in its decline, obeyed its internal logic, that is to say, it became continually more dualistic, its last forms, those for example which are distinguished by what they have borrowed from Platon­ ism and Pythagorism, are entirely permeated with dualism, and consequently they open a large career to the imagination to create every kind of evil spirits. At that epoch, asceticism, which consists in slowly killing the body under pretext of developing the mind, was not alone in the most exalted parts of the Christian church; it was everywhere where people practiced religious morals. The dreamB of which fasting is the physiological generator, gave to the imaginary beings which they evoked all the appearance of reality. Apollonius of Tyana does not drive off fewer demons than a Christian saint. As Prof. Roskoff very justly remarks, the doctrine of angels and demons, offered to polytheism, and to Jewish and Christian monotheism, a sort of neutral territory, on which they might meet to a certain extent. The religious movements known under the name of Gnostic sects, which represent a mingling of pagan, Jewish and Christian views in varied proportions, have, as a common feature, a belief in fallen spirits, tyrants of men and rivals of God. The great successes of Manicheism, that union of Persian dualism and Christianity, were due to the satisfaction which the popular faith took in everything which resembled a systematic struggle of the geniuB of evil with the spirit of good. The Talmud and the Cabala underwent the same influ­ ence. We need not then impute to Christianity alone the great place which Satan at that time took in the affairs of this world; it was a universal tendency of the epoch, and it would be more correct to say that Christianity suffered the influence of it, with all contemporary forms of religion. The Jewish Messiah had become to Christianity the Saviour of guilty humanity; therefore the radical antagonism of Satan and the Messiah was reflected in the first teaching of redemption. It was represented, from the end of the Becond century, in a grand drama, in which Christ and the devil were the principal actors. The multitude satisfied themselves with thinking that Christ, having descended into hell, had, in virtue of the right �62 History of the Devil. of the strongest, taken from Satan the souls that he was holding captive; but this coarse idea was refined upon. Irenaeus taught that men, since the fall, were Satan’s by right; that it would have been unjust on the part of God to take away from him violently what was his; that consequently Christ, in the character of a man perfect and independent of the devil, had offered himself to him to purchase the human race, and that the devil had accepted the bargain. Soon, however, it was perceived that the devil had made a very foolish calculation, since Christ had not remained finally in his power. Origen, whose ecclesiastical teachings we need not always take for literally exact representations of his real views, took that view which admitted without repugnance that, in the work of redemption, Christ and Satan had played their parts most artfully, the latter thinking he should keep in his power a prey which he preferred to all the human race, Christ knowing well that he would not remain in his hands. This point of view, which ended in making Satan the deceived party and Jesus the deceiving, scandalous as it appears to us, nevertheless made its way, and was long predominant in the church. We readily perceive that such a manner of looking at redemption was not likely to diminish the prestige of the devil. Nothing could increase fear of the enemy like the exaggerated descriptions given of his power and of the dangers run by those exposed to his attacks; especially when, by a singular contradiction which the old theology could never escape, the devil, declared vanquished, overthrown, reduced to power­ lessness by the victorious Christ, none the less continued to exercise his infernal power over the great majority of men. The saints alone could consider themselves protected from his snares, and even they, according to the legends, which began to be circulated, how much prudence and energy had they not used to escape them! Everything felt the influence of this continual prepossession. Baptism had become an exorcism. To become a Christian, was to declare that one renounced Satan, his pomps and his works. To be driven from the church for moral unworthiness or for heter­ odoxy, was to be “delivered over to Satan.” It was also during this period that was developed the doctrine of the fall of the lost angels. On the one hand, it was thought that demons were meant in that mythical verse in Genesis which relates that the “sons of God” married the daughters of men, whom they found beautiful; and, in this supposition, lust was considered as their own original sin and their constant prompting; on the other hand, and since this did not explain the previous presence of a bad angel in the terrestrial paradise, the fall of the rebellious spirit was carried back to the moment of creation. Augustine thought that, as an effect of the fall, their bodies previously subtile and invisible, became less etherial. This was the beginning of the belief in visible appearances of the devil. Then came that other idea that demons, in order to satisfy their lust, take advantage of the night to beguile young men and women during their sleep. Hence the succubi and incubi, which played so great a part in the middle ages. St. Victorinus, according to the legend, was conquered by the artifice of a demon which had taken the form of a seductive young girl lost in the woods in the night. The ordinances of the councils, from the fourth century, �History of the Devil. 63 enjoin on bishops to watch closely those of their diocese who are addicted to the practice of magic arts, invented by the devil; there is even talk about vicious women who run about the fields in the night in the train of heathen goddesses, Diana among others. As yet, however, there was seen in these imaginary meetings nothing but dreams suggested by Satan to those who gave him a hold on them by their guilty inclinations. But soon everything becomes real and material. There is no saint who does not see the devil appear to him at least once under human form; Saint Martin even met him so disguised as to resemble Christ. Generally, however, in his character of angel of darkness, he appears as a man eutirely black, and it is under this color that he escapes from heathen temples and idols which the zeal of neophytes has overthrown. At length the idea that one can make a compact with the devil, to obtain for himself what he most desires, in exchange for his soul, takes its rise in the sixth century, with the legend of St. Theophilus. The latter, in a moment of wounded pride, gives Satan a signed abjuration; but, devoured by remorse, he persuaded the Virgin Mary to get back the fatal writing from the bad angel. This legendary story, written especially with the design of spreading the worship of Mary, was destined to have serious consequences. The devil, in fact, saw his prestige increase much more when the conversion of the invaders of the empire, and the missions sent to countries which had never made a part of it, had intro­ duced into the bosom of the church a mass of people absolutely ignorant and still full of polytheism. The church and state, united in the time of Con­ stantine and still more in that of Charlemagne, did what they could to refine the gross spirits under their tutorship; yet, to tell the truth, the temporal and spiritual princes ought themselves to have been less under the influence of the superstitions they wished to oppose. If some able popes could allow their policy to include a certain toleration for customs and errors which it seemed impossible to uproot, the great majority of bishops and missionaries firmly believed they were fighting the devil and his host in trying to exterpate polytheism; they instilled the same belief into their converts and in that way prolonged very much the existence of pagan divinities. The good old spirits of rural nature were especially tenacious of life. The sacred legends collect many of them, and comparative mythology recognizes a great number of ancient Celtic and German gods in the patrons venerated by our ancestors. For quite a long time, and without its being regarded as a renun­ ciation of the Catholic faith, in England, France and Germany, offerings were presented, either from gratitude or fear, to spirits of the fields and forests ; the women were especially tenacious of these old customs. As, nevertheless, the church did not cease to designate as demons and devils all superhuman beings who were not saints or angels, and as the character of the ancient gods had after all nothing angelic, a division took place. The kingdom of the saints was enriched from the good part under new names ; the kingdom of the demons had the rest. The belief in the devil, which, in the first centuries, was still somewhat elevated, became decidedly coarse and stupid. It was in the beginning of the middle ages that people began to regard certain animals, such as the cat, the toad, the rat, the mouse, the �64 History of the Devil. black dog, and the wolf, as serving, in preference to all others, as symbols, auxiliaries, and even as a momentary form, for the devil and his servants. It has been recently shown that ordinarily these animals were consecrated or sacrificed to the divinities whose places the demons had taken. Recollec­ tions of human sacrifices in honor of the ancient gods must be at the base of the idea that Satan and his slaves are partial to human flesh. The wehrwolf, man-wolf, which devours children, has been succe; sively a god, a devil, and a sorcerer going to the wizard’s meeting under the form of a wolf, so as not to be recognized. We all know that there has never been a sorceress without a cat. A pest too frequent among a population destitute of all acquaintance with cleanliness, viz., vermin, was also at that time put to the account of the devil and his servants. It was also about the same time that the corporeal form of the devil became a fixed idea; it was that of the old fauns and satyrs, a horned forehead, blobber-lipped mouth, hairy skin, tail, and the cloven foot of the goat or the hoof of a horse. We might accumulate here the half-burlesque, half-tragic details ; but we prefer to note the salient points of the development of the belief. At the point we have reached, we must look at it under a new light. Among the Jews of the time directly preceding our era, Satan had become the so-called adversary of the Messiah, — among the first Christians, the direct antago­ nist of the Saviour of men; but in the middle ages Christ is in Heaven, very high and far away; the living, immediate organism which is to realize his kingdom on the earth, is the church. Consequently, it is henceforth the devil and the church which have to do with one another. The faith of the collier consists in believing what the church believes, and when one asks the collier what the church believes, the collier responds boldly: “What I believe.” So, if one asked during that period : “ What does the devil do ? ” one would have to respond : “What the church does not do.” “ And what is it that the church does not do?” “ That which the devil does.” This would tell the whole story. The nocturnal meetings of evil spirits, which the old councils, called to consider them, dismissed as imaginary, have become something very real. The Germanic idea of fealty, that is to say, the idea that fidelity to the sovereign is the first of virtues, as the treason of the vassal is the greatest of crimes, was introduced into the church, and con­ tributed not a little to give to everything which approached infidelity to Christ the colors of blackest depravity. The sorcerer, however, is as faithful to his master Satan as the good Christian to his celestial sovereign, and just as every year vassals come to render homage to their lord, so the liege-men of the devil hasten to pay him a like honor, sometimes on a fixed day, some­ times by special convocation. The flights through the air of sorcerers and witches, with hair flying wildly, hastening to the nocturnal rendezvous, are a transformation of the Celtic and German myth of the wild hunt or the great­ hunter ; but the master who appointed this rendezvous is a sort of god, and in the great assemblies of the diabolical tribe they honor him especially by celebrating the opposite of the mass. They adore the spirit of evil by changing the ceremonies which were employed to glorify the God of good. The name itself of sabbath (a term applied to their nocturnal assemblies,) came �History of the Devil. 65 from the confusion which arose between the worship of the devil and the celebration of a non-catholic worship. The church put in absolutely the same rank the Jew, the excommunicated, the heretic, and the sorcerer. One circumstance contributed greatly to that coufusion. Most of the sects which had revolted from the church, that especially which holds a grand and wonderful place in our national history, called the heresy of the Albigenses, were penetrated to a high degree with the old Gnostic and Manichean leaven. Dualism was the principle of their theology. Hence came the idea that their religious assemblies, rivals of the mass, were nothing other than the mass said in hell, and that such is the kind of worship that Satan prefers. If now we recall with what docility the state allowed itself to be persuaded by the church that its first duty was to exterminate heretics, we shall no longer find anything surprising in the rigor of the penal laws declared against the pretended sorcerers. It is important that the absorbing character of the belief in the devil during the middle ages be well understood; those who believe in Satan now-a-days would have difficulty in conceiving what a sway this belief had. It was the fixed idea of everybody, especially from the thirteenth to the fifteenth centuries, a period which may be signalized as having marked the apogee of that superstition. A fixed idea tends, among those who are possessed with it, to bring over everything to itself. When, for example, we follow somewhat closely those of our contemporaries who are devoted to spiritism, we are astonished at the fertility of their imagination in interpreting in favor of their belief events most insignificant and them­ selves indifferent. A door not well closed which half opens, a fly which describes arabesques in its flight, the falling of an object badly poised, the cracking of a piece of furniture during the night, is all that is needed to send them out of sight into space. Let us generalize such a state of mind by substituting for the innocent illusion of our spiritists the continual interven­ tions of the devil, and we shall have quite a good representation of what was passing in the middle ages. Among the numberless facts and writings which we could cite, we will mention the Revelations, quite forgotten now-a-days, but formerly widely known, of the abbé Richeaume or Richalmus, who flour­ ished about the year 1270, in Franconia, and who belonged to the order of Citeaux. The abbé Richeaume attributed to himself a particular gift of discernment for perceiving and understanding the satellites of Satan, who, moreover, according to his account, always torment in preference churchmen and good Christians. What do not these imps of hell make the poor abbé endure ! From the distractions he may have during mass to the nausea which too often troubles his digestion, from the false notes of the officiating precentor to the fits of coughing which interrupt his discourses, all the annoyances which happen to him are demoniac works. “For example,” says he to the novice who gives him his cue, “ when I sit down for spiritual reading, the devils make a desire to sleep seize me. Then it is my custom to put my hands out of my sleeves so that they may become cold ; but they bite me under the clothes like a flea, and attract my hand to the place bitten, so that it becomes warm, and my reading grows careless again.” They like to disfigure men. To one they give a wrinkled nose, to another hare-lips. VOL. i.—no. i. 5 �66 History of the Devil. If they perceive that a man likes to close his lips properly, they make his lower lip hanging. “Stop,” says he to his novice “look at this lip ; for twenty years a little ilevil has kept himself there, just to make it hang.” And he goes on in that strain. When the novice asks him if there are many demons who thus make war on men, abbé Richeaume replies that every one of us is suriounded by as many demons as a man plunged in the sea has drops of water around him. Happily the sign of the cross is generally sufficient to foil their malice, but not always, for they know well the human heart and know how to reach it through its weaknesses. One day when the abbé was making his monks pick up stones to build a wall, he heard a young devil, hidden under the wall, cry out very distinctly: “What distressing labor!” And he said that only to inspire in the monks a disposition to complain of the base service imposed on them. To the sign of the cross, it is often useful to add the effect of holy water and salt. Demons cannot bear salt. “ When I am at the table and the devil has taken away my appetite, as soon as I have tasted a little salt, my appetite returns; a little after, it disappears again, I again take salt, and I am hungry anew.” In the hundred and thirty chapters of which his Revelations consist, the abbé Richeaume does nothing but subject thus to his fixed idea the most trivial circumstances of domestic life, and especially of convent life ; but the popularity which this book, which appeared after his death, enjoyed, proves that he simply agreed in opinion with his contemporaries. One might find innumerable parallels in the literature of the time. The Golden Legend of Jacques de Voraigne, one of the books most read in the middle ages, will give a sufficient idea of it. This continual preoccupation with the devil, had two consequences equally logical, though of a very opposite character. It had at the same time its comical and its dark side. By seeing Satan everywhere, people at last became familiar with him, and by a sort of unconscious protest of mind against imaginary monsters created by traditional doctrine, they became emboldened to the point of being quite at ease with his horned majesty. The legends always showed him so miserably taken in by the sagacity of saints and good priests, that his reputation for astuteness slowly gave place to a quite contrary fame. They had even reached the point of believing that it was not impossible to speculate on the foolishness of the devil. For example, had he not had the simplicity to furnish to architects in trouble magnificent plans for the con­ struction of the cathedrals of Aix-la-Chapelle and Cologne ? It is true that at Aix he had demanded in recompense the soul of the first person who should enter t he church, and at Cologne that of the architect himself ; but he had to do with those more cunning than he. At Aix, they drove with pikes a she-wolf into the church then recently finished ; at Cologne, the architect, already in possession of the promised plan, in the place of deliver­ ing to Satan a conveyance of his soul in due form, draws suddenly from beneath his gown a bone of the eleven thousand virgins and brandishes it in the face of the devil, who decamps uttering a thousand imprecations. The high part which is assigned to him in the religious theatricals of the middle ages, is well known. Redemption, in the popular mind, still passed for a �History of the Devil. 67 divine trick, piously played at the expense of the enemy of men. It was then natural to imagine a host of other cases where Satan was taken in his own snares. What laughs these discomfitures excited among the good people ! By a thousand indications, one would be tempted to believe that he had become the character, in the mysteries, the most liked, if not the most agreeable. The others had their part entirely marked out by tradition; with him, one could anticipate something unexpected. We see him, too, represent for a long time the comic element of the religious drama. In France, where the people have always liked to subject the theatre to exact rules, there was a class of popular pieces called deviltries, coarse and often obscene masquerades in which at least four devils were to struggle together. Hence comes, it appears, the expression, “faire le diable d quatre.” In Germany, too, the devil becomes humorous on the stage. There is an old Saxon mystery of the passion where Satan repeats, like a mocking echo, the last words of Judas hanging himself; then, when, according to the sacred tradition, the entrails of the traitor are burst out, he gathers them in a basket, and, carrying them away, signs an article appropriate to the circumstances. This, however, did not prevent a general distressing fear of the devil. At the theatre, during the middle ages, one was in a certain sense at church. There, nothing hindered one from deriding at pleasure the detested being whose artifices were powerless against the actors of the holy representations ; but people could not pass their lives listening to mysteries, and the daily realities were not slow in restoring to him all his prestige. Naturally, the number of individuals suspected of some kind of intercourse with Satan must have been enormous. This was the first idea that came into the mind of any one who did not know how to explain the success of an adversary or the prosperous issue of an audacious enterprise. Enguerrand de Marigny, the templars, our poor Joan of Arc, and many other illustrious victims of polit­ ical hatred, were convicted of sorcery. Popes themselves, such as John XXII., Gregory VII., Clement V., incurred the same suspicion. At the same time, we see appear the idea that the compacts concluded with the devil are signed with the blood of the sorcerer, in order that it may be firmly cove­ nanted that his person, his entire life, belongs henceforth to the infernal master. At this time, also, an old Italian superstition was revived, the idea of causing the death of those one hates by mutilating or piercing little images of wax of the person designated, which had been bewitched. There were councils purposely to proceed rigorously against sorcery, which was thought to be spread in every direction. Pope John XXII., himself accused of sorcery, declares, in a bull of 1317, the bitter grief caused him by the compacts concluded with the devil by his physicians and courtiers, who draw other men into the same impious relation. From the thirteenth century, they proceeded against the crime of sorcery just as against the most henious offences, and popular ignorance was only too well disposed to furnish food to the zeal of the inquisitors. Toulouse saw the first sorceress burned. This was Angela de Labarbte, a noble lady, fifty-six years of age, who took part in that special character in the grand auto-da-fe in that city, in 1275. At �68 History of the Devil. Carcassone.from 1320 to 1350, more than four hundred executions for the crime of sorcery are mentioned as having taken place. Nevertheless those bloody horrors had even in the fourteenth century a local character; but in 1484 an act of Pope Innocent VIII. extended over all Christendom this terrible procedure. Then began throughout all Catholic Europe that mournful pursuit of sorcerers which marks the paroxysm of the belief in the devil, which concentrates and condenses it for more than three cent uries, and which, yielding at last under the reprobation of modern conscience, was to carry away with it the faith of which it was the issue. III. In the fifteenth century, a momentary relaxing of orthodox fanaticism rendered the task of inquisitors quite difficult in what concerned heresy properly so called. It seems that on the banks of the Rhine, as in France, people began to weary of the insatiable vampire which threatened everybody and cured none of the evils of the church, which had employed it as an heroic remedy. The faith in the church itself as a perfect and infallible institution, was in peril, and the inquisitors complained to the Holy See of the increas­ ing difficulties which the local powers and the local clergy opposed to them; but those even who questioned the church and inclined to toleration of religious opinion did not mean to give free course to the wiles of the devil and his agents. Then appeared the famous bull Summis desiderantes, by which Innocent VIII. added to the powers of the officers of the inquisition that of prosecuting the authors of sorcery, and applying to them the rules which until then had affected only depravatio heretica. Long is the list of witchcrafts enumerated by the pontificial bull, from tempests and devasta­ tion of crops to fates cast upon men and women to prevent them from perpetuating the human species. Armed with this bull which fulminated against the refractory the most severe penalties, which was strengthened by other functions of the same origin and same tendency, the inquisitors Henry Institoris and Jacob Sprenger, prepared that Hammer of sorceries, — Malleus maleficarum, — which was a long time for all Europe the classical code of procedure to be followed against individuals suspected of sorcery. This book received the pontificial sanction, the approbation of the emperor Maximilian, and that of the theological faculty of Cologne. The reading of this dull and wearisome treatise cannot fail to cause a shudder. This pro­ longed study of the false held for the true, these perpetual sophisms, the pedantic simplicity with which the authors recall everything which can give a shadow of appearance of truth to their bad dreams, the cold cruelty which dictates their proceedings and their judgments, everything would fill the modern reader with repulsion, if he had not the duty of indicting at the bar of history one of the most lamentable aberrations which have falsified the conscience of humanity. We find an answer to everything in this frightful conjuring-book. We see there why the devil gives his servants the power to change themselves reali transformatione et essentialiter to wolves and other dreadful beasts, why it is a heresy to deny sorcery, how the incubi and succubi manage to attain their ends, quomodo procreant, why one has never �History of the Devil. 69 seen so many sorcerers as at the present time, why David drove the torment­ ing demon from Saul by showing him his harp, which resembled a cross, etc. If there are more sorceresses than sorcerers, it is because women believe more in the promises of Satan than men do, it is because the fluidity of their temperament renders them more fitted to receive revelations, it is in short that women, being weaker, readily have recourse to supernatural means to satisfy their vengeance or their sensuality. Recipes of every sort arc recommended to wise persons to guard themselves from the spells that may be thrown over them. The sign of the cross, the holy water, the judicious use of salt, and of the name of the holy Trinity, constitute the principal exorcisms. The sound of church bells is also regarded as a defence of great power, and it is therefore well to have them rung during tempestuous storms, for, by driving away the demons which cannot bear this sacred sound, they prevent them from continuing their work of perturbation. This supersti­ tious custom, which has been perpetuated to our times, clearly denotes a confounding of the demons of the church and the ancient divinities of the t hunder and of tempests. What especially commands attention, is the criminal procedure developed by the authors, and which beoome law everywhere. They are exactly imi­ tated from those which the inquisition had instituted against heretics. Sorcery, arising from a compact with the devil supposing the abjuration of the baptismal vow, is a sort of apostacy, a heresy in the first degree. Denunciations without proof are admitted. . . It is even sufficient that public rumor call the attention of the judge to the matter. All who present themselves, even the infamous, even the personal enemies of the sorceress, are permitted to give evidence. The pleadings must be summary, and as much as possible relieved from useless formalities. The accused must be minutely questioned, until there are found in the details of her life some­ thing to strengthen the suspicions which press upon her. The judge is not obliged to name to her the informers against her. She can have one defender, who must know no more of the matter than she, and who must limit himself to the defence of the person incriminated, but not of her criminal acts; otherwise the defender will be in his turn suspected. The acknowledgment of the guilty person must be obtained by torture, as well as the declaration of all the circumstances relating to her heinous crime. Still one may promise her security of life, free not to keep that promise (so the text says), on condition that confession is complete and prompt. Torture is repeated every three days, and the judge is to take all suitable precautions that the effect of it may not be neutralized by some charm hidden in some secret part of the body of the accused. He must even avoid looking her in the face, for sorceresses have been seen endowed, by the devil, with a power such that the judge whose glance they were able to catch no longer felt the strength to condemn them. When at length she is well and duly convicted, she is given over to the secular arm, which is to lead her off to death without farther parley. It is easy to see from this cursory view that the unfortunate women who fell into the clutches of this terrible tribunal, had only to abandon hope at �70 History of the Devil. the door of their prison. Nothing is more afflicting than a careful review of the proceedings for sorcery. The women are always, as the inquisitors learnedly explain, in the majority. Hatreds, jealousies, desires for revenge, above all suspicions inspired by want and ignorance, could have free course and did not allow the opportunity to escape them. Often, too, unfortunate women were victims of their own imagination, over-excited by a hysterical temperament, or by the terrors of eternal torment. Those in our times who have been able to examine closely the cases of mania religiosa, know with what readiness women especially believe themselves the objects of divine reprobation, and fatally given over to the power of the devil. All those unfortunates, who to-day are treated with extreme gentleness in special institutions, then were obliged to pass for possessed or sorceresses, and what is frightful is that many seriously supposed themselves to be so. Many related that they had really been to the witches’ meeting, that they had there given themselves up to the most degrading debauches. How many like confessions aggravated afterwards the position of those who denied with the firmness of innocence the disgraceful acts of which they were accused! Torture was there to draw from them what they refused to tell, and thus the conviction became rooted in the spirit of judges even relatively humane and equitable, that besides crimes committed by natural means there was a whole catalogue of heinous offences so much the more dreadful as their origin was supernatural. How could one show too much rigor to such criminals ? In the single year 1485, and in the single district of Worms, eighty-five witches were committed to the flames. At Geneva, at Basle, at Hamburg, at Ratisbonne, at Vienna, and in a multitude of other cilies, there were executions of the same kind. At Hamburg, among others, they burned alive a physician who had saved a woman in confinement abandoned by the midwife. In 1523, in Italy, and after a new bull against sorcery issued by pope Adrian VI. the single diocese of Coma saw more than a hundred witches burn. In Spain, it was still worse: in 1527, two little girls, from nine to eleven years old, denounced a number of witches whom they pre­ tended to recognize by a sign in the left eye. In England and Scotland, government took part in the matter; Mary Stuart was particularly hostile to witches. In France, the parliament of Paris in 1390, had the fortunate idea of taking away that sort of business from the ecclesiastical tribunal, and under Louis XI., Charles VIII., and Louis XII., there was scarcely any condemnation under the head of sorcery; but from the time of Francis I., and especially of Henry II., the scourge re-appeared. A man of a real merit in other respects, but literally a madman on the subject of sorcerers, Jean Bodin, communicated his madness to all classes in the nation. His contemporary and disciple, Boguet, communicates in a lengthy article the fact that France is swarming with sorcerers and witches. “They multiply in the land, said he, like caterpillars in our gardens. I wish they were all put in one body to have them burned at once and by one single fire.” Savoy, Flanders, the mountains of the Jura, Lorraine, Bfearn, Provence, almost all our provinces witnessed frightful hecatombs. In the seventeenth �History of the Devil. 71 century, the demoniac fever abated, but not without partial returns espe­ cially among convents of hysterical nuns. Everybody is acquainted with the frightful stories of the priests Ganfridy and Urbain Grandier. In Germany, above all in the southern part, the punishment of sorcerers was still more frequent. There is a certain insignificant principality in which two hundred and forty-two persons at least were burned from the year 1640 to 1651. Tale to make one shudder! we find in the official accounts of these tortures, that there were children from one to six years old among the victims! In 1697, Nicolas Remy boasted having caused nine hundred persons to be burned in fifteen years. It appears even that it was to the proceedings against sorcerers that Germany owed the introduction of the torture as an ordinary judicial means of discovering the truth. Prof. Roskoff has reproduced a catalogue of the executions of sorcerers and witches in the episcopal city of Würzbourg, in Bavaria, until 1629, in all thirty-one execu­ tions, without counting some others that the authors of the catalogue have not regarded as sufficiently important to be mentioned. The number of victims, at each of these executions, varies from two to seven. Many are indicated only by a nick-name: ‘‘the big hunch-back,” “the Sweet-heart,” “the Bridge-keeper,” “the old Pork-Butcheress,” etc. We find there all professions and all ranks, actors, workmen, jugglers, city and country girls, rich bourgeois, nobles, students, even magistrates, as well as quite a large number of priests. Several are simply marked, “a foreigner,” “a foreign woman.” Here and there the one who prepares the list adds to the name of the person condemned his age and a short notice. Thus we notice among the victims of the twentieth execution, “Babelin, the prettiest girl in Würz­ bourg,” “a student who knew how to speak every language, who was an excellent musician vocaliter et instrumentaliter,” and “the director of the alms­ house, a very learned man.” We find also in this mournful catalogue the heart-rending account of children burned as sorcerers ; here a little girl from nine to ten years with her little sister still younger (their mother was burned soon after), boys of from ten to twelve years, a young girl of fifteen, two alms-house children, the little son of a judge. The pen refuses to recount such monstrous excesses. Will those who wish to admit the correctness of the doctrine of the infallibility of the popes, before giving in their vote, listen, in the presence of God and history to the cries of the poor innocents cast into the fire by pontifical bulls? The seventeenth century, nevertheless, saw the proceedings against sorcer­ ers and especially their punishment gradually diminish. Louis XIV., in one of his better moments, mitigated greatly, in 1675, the rigors of that special legislation. Yet for that he was obliged to endure the unanimous remon­ strance of the parliament of Rouen, which thought society would be ruined, if the sorcerers were only condemned to perpetual solitary confinement. The fact is that belief in sorcerers was still sufficiently general for single executions to take place from time to time, even throughout the eighteenth century. One of the last and most famous was that of the lady-superior of the cloister of Unterzell, near Würzbourg, Renata Soenger, (1749.) At Landshut, in Bavaria, in 1756, a young girl of thirteen years was put to �72 History of the Devil. death, having been convicted of having had impure intercourse with the devil. Seville, in 1781, Glaris, in 1783, saw the last two examples known of this fatal madness. IV. People have sometimes used as a weapon against Christianity, these bloody horrors, ulteriorly due, they say, to a belief which Christianity alone had instilled into persons who, without it, would never have entertained such a belief. This point of view is superficial and not supported by history. The blame lies primarily with the dualistic point of view, which is much anterior to Christianity and has outlived it. Pagan antiquity had its necromancers, its magicians, its old stryges, lamias et verifier, which were not dreaded less than our witches. We have shown that dualism is inherent in all the relig­ ions of nature; that, having attained their complete development, these religions end, as in Persia, in India, and even in the last evolutions of Graeco-Roman paganism, by an eminently dualistic conception of the forces or divinities which direct the course of things ; that the Jewish Satan owes, not his personal origin but his growth and entire degradation td his contact with the Persiah Ahriman; that the Christian Satan and his demons have in turn inherited the worst characteristics and most frightful symbolical formp of the conquered divinities. In reality, the devil of the middle ages is at once pagan, Jewish and Christian. He is Christian, because his peculiar domain is moral evil, the physical ills of which he is the author arising only in consequence of his passionate desire to corrupt souls, and these giving themselves up to him only with guilty intent. He is Jewish in this sense that his power, however great it might be, could not pass the limits it pleased divine omnipotence to mark out for it. Finally, it is Pagan by everything which it preserves of ancient polytheistic beliefs. We have a right to regard the faith in demons, as it came out in the middle ages, as the retribution of paganism, or, if we please, as the unabsorbed residue of the old polytheism perpetuating itself under other forms. That which prolonged the reign of Satan and his demons, was not. alone the authority of the church, it was above all the state of mind which the labors pretending to be scientific, of all the period anterior to Bacon and Descartes, reveal, even to a period approaching ours. There was no real knowledge of nature: the idea of the inviolability of its laws was yet to appear. Alchemy, astrology and medicine regularly ministered to magic; they recognized, as much as did contemporary theology, hidden forces, talismans, the power of magic words, and impossible transmutations. Even after the renaissance what a confused mystical medley the physiological doctrines of Cardan, of Paracelsus, of Van Helmont! The general state of mind, determined in great part by the church I acknowledge, but by the church itself under the influence of the ruling ideas, must have been the true cause of that long series of follies and abominations which constitute the history of the devil in the middle ages and in modern times. It is an evidence of this that, in a time and in countries where the church was still �History of the Devil. 73 very powerful and very intolerant, the belief in the devil visibly drooped, declined, suffered repeated assault.«, and fell slowly into ridicule, without any notable persecution having signaled this very serious change in the ideas of enlightened Europe. The old stories pretended that the most tumultuous witch-meetings vanished like smoke at sunrise; in truth, the old Btories did not know how far the future would show them to be right. The two great facts which, modifying profoundly the general state of mind, brought about this irremediable decline, were the indirect influence of the Reformation and the progress of rationalistic science. Some will perhaps be astonished that I mention the Reformation. The reformers of the sixteenth century did not at all combat faith in the devil. Luther himself held to it strongly, and so did most of his friends. Calvin was obliged by a certain dryness of mind, by his distrust of everything which gave too much play to the imagination, to remain always very sober in speaking of a subject which made the best heads delirious ; but he nevertheless shared the common ideas in regard to Satan and his power, and enounced them more than once. We should speak also of an indirect influence, which was nevertheless very strong. That which, among people which adopted the Reformation, gave a first and very sensible blow to his infernal majesty, was that in virtue of the principles it proclaimed, they had no longer any fear at all of him. The idea which had so much power among protestants of the sixteenth century, of the absolute sovereignty of God, that idea which they push even to the paradox of predestination, very soon led them no longer to see in Satan anything but an instrument of the divine will, in his actions only means of which it pleased God to make use in order to realize his secret plans. In pursuance of this faith, the Christian had now only to despise the rebellious angel, wholly powerless against the elect. It is known how Luther received him when he came to make him a visit at the Wai tbourg. The simplicity of worship, and the denial of the supernatural powers hitherto delegated to the clergy, also contributed much to dissipate the delusion in the minds of the simple. No more exorcisms, neither at baptism, nor in the supposed cases of demoniacal possession ; no more of those scenic displays which terrified the imagination, in which the priest, brandishing the brush for sprinkling holy water, fought with the demon, who replied with frightful blasphemies. No one henceforth believes in incubi or succubi. If there is still from time to time talk of persons being possessed, prayer and moral exhortation are the only remedies practiced, and soon nothing is more rare than to hear demoniacs spoken of among these peoples. The idea that the miracles related in the Bible are the only true ones, illogical as it may be, nevertheless made people accustomed to living without daily hoping or fear­ ing them. Now the miracles of the devil are the first to suffer from this beginning of a decline of the belief in the supernatural. Satan then becomes again purely what he was in the first century, and even less still, a tempting spirit, invisible, impalpable, whose suggestions must be repulsed, and from whom moral regeneration alone delivers, but delivers surely. They cannot even longer keep for him his old part in the drama of redemption. Every­ thing now depends on the relation between the faithful man and his God. In �74 History of the. Devil. a word, without any one thinking yet of denying the existence and the power of Satan, while even making great use of his name in popular teach­ ing and preaching, the Reformation sends him slowly back to an abstract, ideal sphere, without any very clear relation to real life. We might consider him only as a convenient personification of the power of moral evil in the world, without changing at all protestant piety. French Catholicism in its finest period, that is to say in the seventeenth century, feeling much more than is generally supposed the influence of the Reformation, presents a quite similar characteristic. With what sobriety its most illustrious representa­ tives, Bossuet, F6n61on, preachers even such as Bourdaloue, treat this part of catholic doctrine ! Good taste among them took the place of rationalism, and who is astonished in reading them, that a Louis XIV., who nevertheless ' was not tender when a question of religion was at stake, was able to show himself skeptical on the subject of sorcery and less superstitious than the gentlemen of Rouen ? Even in the times of the greatest ignorance, there were skeptics in regard to sorcerers and witches. The Lombard law, by a remarkable exception, had interdicted prosecutions against the masks (thus sorcerers were called in Italy). A king of Hungary, of theeleventh century, had declared that they need not be mentioned, for the simple reason that there were none. An archbishop of Lyons, Agobard, had ranked belief in witches’ meetings among the absurdities bequeathed by paganism to the ignorant. The Hammer of Sorceresses must certainly have had in view adversaries who denied sorcery and even the intervention of the devil in human affairs, when it demonstrated both by a grand array of scholastic arguments. At the time when condem­ nations for the crime of covenanting with the devil were most frequent, there was a worthy Jesuit by the name of Spee, with whom the feelings of human­ ity prevailed against the spirit of his order. Charged with the guidance of souls in Franconia, be had been obliged to accompany to the stake, in the space of a few years, more than two hundred alleged sorcerers. One day the archbishop of Mayence, Philip of Schoenborn, had asked him why his hair was already becoming grey, although he was scarcely thirty years old. “ From grief,” he replied, “ because of so many sorcerers that I have been obliged to prepare for death and of whom not one was guilty.” It was from him that arose a Cautio criminalis, printed without the author’s name iri 1631, which, without denying sorcery nor even the legitimacy of the legal penalties declared against it, adjures the inquisitors and magistrates to multiply precautions so as not to condemn to death so many innocent. Before him, Jean Weicar, attached to the person of William of Cleves, had written, to the same purpose, a work quite learned for the time, the fruit of distant voyages and numerous observations, in which, while fully admitting the reality of magic, he denied the so-called sorcery, and violently accused the clergy of keeping up popular superstitions by making good people believe that the evils from which they could not deliver them had their origin in sorcerers sold to the devil. There was courage in using such language in such times. To take the position of defender of sorcerers, was to expose one’s self to be accused of sorcery, and it is not rare to find in these sad annals examples of �History of the Devil. 75 judges and priests victims of their humanity or their equity, that is to say condemned and burned with those they had attempted to save. The French physician Gabriel NaudS, undertook, in the support of the same course of ideas, his Apology of the Men accused of Magic (1669) ; but the causes, of whose slow influence we have written, had not yet transformed minds so that they were capable of emancipating themselves from the devil. A radical demoli­ tion of the edifice was necessary on the one side, and on the other a religious justification of that destruction. There as elsewhere, progress could take place in a powerful manner only on condition of adding to arguments of a purely rational sort, the sanction of religious feeling. Otherwise general opinion divides itself into two camps which continually hold each other in check, and maintain a menacing attitude without accomplishing anything. That which had come through the church was to take its departure through the church. The honor of having inflicted a decisive blow on the diabolical superstition is due to the Holland pastor Balthazar Bakker, who entered the lists, no longer simply in the name of good sense or humanity, but as a theologian, and published his famous book entitled The Enchanted World (1691-1693). Four thousand copies sent forth in two months, the rapid translation of this huge work into all the languages of Europe, the ardent controversies which it aroused and which it has alone survived in the memory of posterity, all these show what an epoch this book made. Assuredly the demonstrations of the Dutch theologian would not all have the same value in our eyes. For example, not yet daring to emancipate himself from Scripture, considered by him as an infallible authority, he twists and turns the texts to eliminate from them the doctrine of a personal devil mingling in the thoughts and actions of men. Nevertheless, he calls attention to many details not remarked before him, which prove that biblical teaching about the devil is neither fixed, nor consistent, nor in conformity to the opinions of the middle ages. He submits to merciless criticism all the arguments commonly used to support the popular prejudice in regard to facts drawn from experience. His discussion of the case of Urbain Grandier, and of the Ursulines of London, which was still fresh in every mind, must have especially struck his readers. A fact like that, which one could analyze and discuss with evidences at hand, threw a clear light on a large number of other facts older and more obscure, to which the partisans of the devil constantly appealed. For the first time, too, universal history was brought into requisition to exhibit the incontestable filiation of the polythe­ istic and Christian beliefs in demons. The whole spirit of the book is expressed in these aphorisms from the latter part. “There is no sorcery except where people believe in it; do not believe in it, and there will be no more.” “Rid yourselves of all those superannuated and silly fables, but exercise yourselves in piety.” It was a true prophecy; but it was not given to the author to see it realized. To his disrespect for Satan, he added the wrong then very serious in the eyes of Dutch orthodoxy, of being a zealous Cartesian. He was accordingly removed by a synod, and died a little after; but they could not remove his book, which made its way quite alone, and with great effect. Indeed, from that time the cause of the devil may be �76 History of the Devil. considered as lost in scientific theology. The progress of the human mind in acquaintance with nature and modern philosophy did the rest. The scientific spirit, such as it has become since Bacon and Descartes, no longer admits those hasty conclusions which so readily gained the assent of the centuries when imagination ruled, when the readiness a man exhibited in expressing an opinion upon the most obscure subjects was in direct pro­ portion to his ignorance. The experimental method, which is the only true one, obtains as much strength for the theses it verifies, as it inspires mistrust of everything out of its field of examination. Doubtless there are necessary truths which we cannot make enter the crucible of experience; however, they atone for that inconvenience by their close connection wtih our nature, our life, and our conscience. If, for example, one could say that belief in the devil recommends itself by its high moral utility, that it makes those better who share it, that it elevates characters by rendering them more chaste, more courageous, more devoted, there would yet be respectable motives for trying to save it from the formidable attacks of modern reason; but quite the contrary is the case. A belief in the devil tends necessarily to blunt the feeling of individual responsibility. If I do evil, not because I am bad, but because another has forced me to it by a power superior to my own will, my culpability is certainly lessened, if not annihilated. We have just seen the deplorable superstitions, the dangerous follies, the horrible crimes of which that belief was so long the inspirer. What is evidence against sorcery, will perhaps be said, is not evidence against a personal genius of evil from whom men have to defend themselves as from an enemy continually around them to drive them to evil. Let us nevertheless reflect that sorcery is not so detached in principle from that belief whose daughter it is. The devil once admitted, the sorcerer follows quite naturally. If there really exists a personal being, in possession of superhuman powers, seeking, as is said, to ruin us morally for his private satisfaction, is it not evident that, in order better to succeed, he will try to entice weak souls by furnishing them the means of procuring for themselves what they most desire? Not without reason did the belief in the devil reach its full development in a belief in sorcerers; and the latter, having given way before experience, necessarily drew down in its ruin the belief in the devil himself. If there is truly a devil, there are sorcerers, and, since there are no sorcerers, it is clear that there is no devil; this the combined good sense of the last three centuries authorizes us to conclude, and this conclusion will forever await its refutation. The eighteenth century made the mistake of imagining that to destroy traditional beliefs it was sufficient to throw ridicule on them. When a belief which has been ridiculed for some time has deep roots in human consciousness, it easily survives the sarcasms of which it has been the object, and the time comes when these sarcasms no longer excite a laugh, because they chill the dearest feelings of religious minds, and the good taste of the refined; but, as to the devil, the laugh of the eighteenth century has remained victorious. It is in fact because the devil is ridiculous. That being whom they pretend is so cunning, so mischievous, so learnedly ego- �History of the Devil. tistic, and who strives eternally in the wearisome business of corrupting souls, ends by being very foolish. Looked at thus close at hand, brought down from the heights where poetry and mysticism have been able some­ times to place him, put face to face with the bare reality, Satan is .just simply stupid and since people have clearly felt that it has been impossible to do him the honor of admitting his real existence. We could prolong this retrospective study of works which continued through all the eighteenth century, and are still continuing in our days, a contest henceforth useless. Since the real constitution of the universe has dissipated the illusions which served as an indispensable accompaniment to the person of the old Satan, viz.: a closed heaven, subterranean hell, and the earth between; since people have been obliged to recognize the universal presence and everywhere active life of God in all things, there is no longer, in truth, any place for him in the world. There is nothing so distressing and puerile, as the efforts of some reactionary theologians, in Germany and elsewhere, to give back a shadow of reality to the old phantom, without falling into the gross superstitions which decidedly orthodox reaction itself can no longer digest. In vain one seeks to preserve for him a place, in the least honor­ able, in some doctrinal treatises or pious songs. The sane portion of the clergy and people shrug their shoulders or are annoyed. Satan is still per­ mitted to be an expression, a type, a symbol consecrated by religious language, but that is all. As to giving him any place whatever in the laws, the customs, in real life, there is no longer any question about it. Is there, nevertheless, nothing at all to draw from this long-continued error, which holds so considerable a place in the history of religions, and even goes back to their origin? Must we avow that on this subject the human mind has nourished itself for so many centuries with the absolutely false? That cannot be. There must necessarily have been something in human nature which pleaded in its favor and maintained for so many genera­ tions a faith contrary to experience. I will not say, as do some thinkers, that it was the ease with which that doctrine of the devil permitted the problem of the origin of evil to be resolved, for it resolved nothing. It carried back to heaven the problem that was thought insoluble on earth; but what was gained thereby ? That which has maintained a belief in the devil, that which, indeed, constitutes the eternal foundation of it, is rather the power of evil in us and outside of us. I admire the singular tranquility of mind with which all our French philosophers look at that question, or rather forget it, to launch out in eloquent phrases on free will. Let us then put ourselves face to face with realities. The fact is that the best among us is a hundred leagues from the ideal which he proposes to himself, that he is too weak to realize it, and that he acknowledges this when he is sincere. Another fact still is, that we are every moment determined toward evil by the social influences which surround us, and that very few have the desired energy to react victoriously against the corrupt streams which hurry them away. We need not fall into the excess of theologians who have taught the total depravity of human nature, even too, marking out for it the way of regeneration, as if miracle itself were capable of regenerating a nature �78 History of the Devil. totally corrupt. Observation attests that we are selfish, but capable of loving; naturally sensual, but not less naturally drawn by the splendor of the true and the good; very imperfect, but capable of improvement. The first condition of progress is to feel what we need. To live in harmony with conscience, one must know how to triumph over the assaults which selfish pleasures of sense, which flesh and blood, the world and its allurements, gives us into the power of at every moment. That is the diabolical power from which we should emancipate ourselves. In one sense, we might say that we are all more or less possessed. Error comes in as soon as we desire to per­ sonify this power of evil. When theists say that God is personal, they do not fail to recognize what there is defective in the idea of personality bor­ rowed from our human nature; but as it is impossible to conceive another mode of existence than personality and impersonality, as God must possess every perfection, they say, for want of something better, that he is personal because he is perfect, and that an impersonal perfection is a contradiction. Evil, on the contrary, which is the opposite of the perfect, is necessarily impersonal. It is against its pernicious seductions, against its always fatal enchantments that it is necessary to struggle in order that our true human personality, our moral personality, may disengage itself, victorious, from the vile surroundings where it must grow. It is on that condition that it attains the pure regions of liberty and of impregnable morality, where nothing which resembles Satan can longer trouble the ascent towards God. That is all that remains of the doctrine of the devil, but also all that concerns our moral health, and which we ought never to forget. Albert Reville. �Rev. Mr. Abbot at Toledo. 79 REV. MR. ABBOT AT TOLEDO. Early in the summer we heard that our friend Abbot, whom we deem not less worthy of love and honor as a Christian apostle, albeit he calls himself “outside of Christianity,” than any other man among living religious leaders, was likely to have a break down with his society at Toledo, though possibly he might be able to succeed with his weekly paper, The Index. It was also told us that originally he had crept in privily and stolen a society and a meeting-house which belonged to regular Unitarianism, and which were in honor mortgaged to the American Unitarian Association on account of money paid by it in aid of the society. Knowing that the part of this information reflecting upon Mr. Abbot must have an explanation honorable to him, we surmised that the other might also change face upon investiga­ tion, and resolved to go and see for ourselves. We went at the end of June, and spent two days in Toledo, with exceeding satisfaction. The once Unitarian, and now Independent, society to which Mr. Abbot preaches, was never aided by the American Unitarian Association. It twice came near it, and would have put its neck under the yoke, but for a single circumstance, which was the refusal of the society to accept aid on the conditions proposed by the American Unitarian Association. Twice in its history this people, before ever they had heard of Mr. Abbot, had declined to accept aid as a Unitarian society, lest at some future day they might find tlieir inde­ pendence hampered by the implicit pledge thus given. This special provi­ dence prepared Mr. Abbot’s way in Toledo. It was but one out of many which plainly enough show that the Lord is with him. When Mr. Abbot was asked to go to Toledo to preach a few Sundays, he wrote a letter stating conditions which he thought would not be accepted, inasmuch as they included a frank avowal of his most offensive heresies. This letter was read to a number of the society together, and was then passed from hand to hand, to anybody who wished to see it. The statement that it was suppressed, and people kept in ignorance of Mr. Abbot’s views, is wholly baseless. Moreover, Rev. Mr. Camp, the former pastor, meddlesomely and maliciously towards Mr. Abbot, wrote to a member of the society against him, and this immoral document circulated freely. Mr. Abbot came July 3, 18G9, and preached several Sundays with more than his usual frankness and boldness. What ground he took may be seen by turning to the masterly discourses in the early numbers of The Index. July 11, his topic was, “What is Christianity?” July 18, “What is Free Relig­ ion?” July 25, “Christianity and Free Religion contrasted as to CornerStones”; August 1, “Christianity and Free Religion contrasted as to Institutions, Terms of Fellowship, Social Ideal, Moral Ideal, and Essential Spirit”; August 8, “The Practical Work of Free Religion”; and having made this full and frank disclosure of his renunciation of Christianity, as �80 Rev. Mr. Abbot at Toledo. he deemed and proposed it, for Free Religion, he announced, in view of a nearly or quite unanimous disposition to give him a call to settle, that such a step would he of no use unless the society would adopt a preamble and resolutions offered by him (see No. 7 of The Index), and thereby leave Unitarian Christianity for Free Religion. His reasons for insisting on this, Mr. Abbot gave in his discourse of August 15, entitled “ Unitarianism versus Freedom.” A week later, by a vote of 39 to 18, the preamble and resolutions were adopted, and “The First Unitarian Society of Toledo,” by its own free act, became the “First Independent Society of Toledo,” outside of Unitarian Christianity. That the 18 nays did not represent much hostil­ ity to Mr. Abbot is shown by the significant fact that the motion immediately made to give him a call passed by a vote of 60 to 2. And had there been from that moment no unscrupulous meddling, Mr. Abbot would have carried along with him all who joined in this call. It was in consequence of outside interference that a minority which had joined in the vote to accept Mr. Abbot's ministry, finally seceded from him. This interference came from the Unitarian headquarters and from Rev. Mr. Camp, and those who took part in it have no shadow of ground for their assertion that either Mr. Abbot or his adherents acted in any but the most open and honorable manner. We preached to Mr. Abbot’s congregation, saw his Sunday School, con­ versed with members of his society, and learned all about what has been and what is the state of things there, and can gay emphatically that the local movement has been from the first and still continues to be a remarkable success. The society had just set out upon a new year, with renewed evi­ dences of their hearty devotion to Mr. Abbot. The congregation proved to be more than double what we had been told it was, and as interesting and Christian in appearance as any we ever saw. Constant labors of charity, and benefactions widely and generously bestowed, attest the practical Christian spirit which, to an unusual extent, pervades it. If any comparison is to be drawn, we should say that the entire Unitarian body is more likely to be expunged from contemporary history than Mr. Abbot to come to a break­ down in Toledo. At the moment of this writing we learn that the publica­ tion of The Index is guaranteed foi- a second year, by the parties in Mr. Abbot’s society who suggested this enterprise, and who have stood behind it thus far. The Toledo apostleship is genuine. Good men and women gather to its support, and the good Lord does not have to go out of his way to seal it with his blessing. We heartily commend it to all who value truth, of character and of teaching, and earnestly ask our more liberal contempora­ ries to lend their aid to the support of our noble friend. Send him money outright, and bid him good-speed with his work; for he is the servant of all of us, and in justice should have our sympathy and help. His attempt to “stand squarely outside of Christianity” is, in our judgment, a sort of Messianic mistake, but we no less believe in his mission and urge his support. Such truth of character we but rarely find; such pure and perfect intellec­ tual love of truth only the noblest minds of the race are capable of; and by “outside of Christianity” he means precisely what the most enlightened Christians signify by Christianity itself. He fully accepts the universal �81 Our Religious Purpose. element of Christianity, its religion, and only rejects the special element, its Christism, and calls this rejecting Christianity, which it is not, if there is any truth in the radical method of interpretation, the very point of which is that it uncovers the living truth of any system, plants itself on that, and from that rejects whatever in the special element is not consistent with the universal. In our next issue we shall show that Mr. Abbott is purely and rigorously Christian, in the true religious sense, and all the more so for his rejection of Jesuism, and might as well announce himself outside the solar system as outside true Christianity. It concerns Christian interests mightily to be reconciled with such burn­ ing and shining truth as every candid observer must see in Mr. Abbot. In intellectual interest he stands with the leaders of our generation, and does not suffer by comparison with such elder masters as Emerson, Spencer, and Mill. He is now but thirty-two years of age, and six years ago he had attracted the attention of the most distinguished philosophical inquirers and teachers in this country and abroad, as a philosophical writer of great originality and power. Men of nearly or quite twice his years, philosoph­ ical thinkers of repute on the other side of the Atlantic, have sent to him, a mere youth except in commanding intellectual power, for his judgment upon their merits as candidates for distinguished philosophical positions. The quality of Mr. Abbot’s intellect is even more remarkable than its singular force. Such pure interest in truth, such veracity of intelligence, such sincerity of mind, have belonged only to the masters of thought and the greatest leaders of reform. And in serene, uncompromising loyalty to the moral ideal, and rigorous application of principle to the conduct of life and the practice of every virtue, Mr. Abbot belongs with the most revered and endeared of this or any other time. Were he to call himself, from specula­ tive doubts, an atheist, he would yet be one of the noblest and most useful among masters of religion, from the fact that his moral ideal is the truest possible image of Deity. His intense devotion to the most exact conception he can form of right is the real explanation of his resolute rejection of the Christian name; an error which is truly glorified by the spirit which accompanies it. OUR RELIGIOUS PURPOSE. The editor of The Examiner begs his critics to state distinctly the full extent of his religious purpose, which is,— 1. To teach a Christianity of which the creed is contained in the words ‘Our Father who art in Heaven,’ and is unfolded in the doctrines of God’s perfect fatherhood over all souls, the real brotherhood of all men on earth and in the world to come, our supreme duty of filial loyalty, of trust and love, to God, and love to men and inspiration and providence the source and guarantee, author and authority, to every one of us, of knowledge, holiness and blessedness forever. vol. i.—no. i. 6 �82 How We Start. 2. To explain and prove, with sound learning and sound reasoning, the fact of error mingled with truth, from the very first, in historical Christian­ ity, and how surely, in the exercise of Christian faith and reason, to distin­ guish between Christian truth and Christian error. 3. To root up the theological heathenism,— total depravity, divine wrath, damnation, and blood atonement, which choke Christian truth in orthodox teaching. 4. To expel from true Christian religion every form of Jesuism, or regard for Jesus as more than a mere man, and all Bibliolatry, or regard for the Bible as more than a collection of mere human writings. And this to the end of plainly opening to all human feet the path of direct, obedient, and happy trust in God; and in the sincere belief that the Judaic and half-heathen Christianity of the existing sects, is doomed of God to speedy extinction. HOW WE START. In making our experiment with The Examiner, we gratefully and devoutly acknowledge the repeated striking providences by which we have been helped and guided thus far. Our earliest definite plans for such a publication date back to a period previous to the establishment of The Radical. Our imme­ diate arrangements to bring out The Examiner began with the first of May last. A single difficulty has alone remained since the last week of June, the need of $------ , the sum we thought we must add to our resources before commencing. As the end of August approached, and we still lacked this, we fixed a day on which we would make one last effort to perfect our arrange­ ments, and on that day the needed help came. The first person we met on taking the train from our residence to Chicago, a friend to whom we had some time before spoken of our plans and our need, said to us instantly, “You may draw on me after Sept. 10th, for------ dollars,” just the sum we had waited for. He had previously resolved on this, and was waiting to meet us. It came just right. We had waited none too long, and we were able to make our trial with the requisite means. Now we make our appeal to other friends, who may believe our work a good one, to give us help, not only in subscriptions, but in outright contributions, every dollar of which shall be faithfully applied to printing and distributing The Examiner, not a cent to any other use, either of the Editor or of any one else. Friends of true Christian Religion! The time is fully ripe; the hour is exceedingly oppor­ tune; our plans, long meditated and waited for, are working perfectly; and with reasonable assistance we can secure the permanence of our enterprise beyond a doubt. We are willing to fail, if so it pleases the good providence. We should but fall back to the line of hope and faith and study from which we make this forward movement, and wait for opportunity to try again. �Is There No Open Vision? 83 But there need be no such temporary failure, nor will there be, if good men and good women who want to be Christian in simple and pure love to all men and perfect trust in God, will fairly do their part towards the great work for which we establish The Examiner. If ever an enterprise was born in faith, this is, and if it goes down, faith will see it fall, and patiently expect its rise, or the rise in some better shape of the grand interest which it represents. Every subscription to The Examiner will be deposited with our banker as money belonging to our subscribers, and only one-twelfth taken by us each month. If we should fail, every subscriber will receive back as many twelfths of his $4, as he fails to get numbers of our Review. IS THERE NO OPEN VISION? All experience and study teach the wise believer to be very cautious about assuming a special providence or special inspiration. Just as far as Jesus and Paul attempted to rest in special knowledge of the secrets of heaven, they went wrong. The grand failure of Jesus to discern truly God’s will, was in respect of that anticipation which proceeded from his assumption that Deity had vouchsafed special attention to him. Paul never blundered so badly as when he most confidently claimed to be speaking by the word of the Lord. This only is legitimate, to repose absolute faith in the providence and inspiration of Infinite Mind; to work, always, at once with this faith, and with as much diligence, vigilance and earnestness as if all depended on us; to aim at success and to anticipate it, yet with a mind ready to accept fail­ ure; and ever to give thanks, as events pass, however they may turn, or whatever they may overturn, with full assurance that the Lord the Ruler doeth all things well. It is thus that we have striven to ‘wait on the Lord,’ and, never suffering ourselves beforehand to say, of either deed to be done or word to be spoken, ‘in this the Lord is with us beyond peradventure or mistake,’ we have grown more and more, taking successes and failures together, to feel that, for the large aim and long course of our life, we can depend on the gracious presence and heavenly providence of Infinite Mind, as implicitly as ever trusting child depended on a faithful parent, or wise prophet on the perfect inspira­ tion of the alone supreme and blessed God. We say this with extreme hesitation, but we venture to say it, because we want the whole class of Christian heathen and infidels, who do not believe in God here and now, and who insist that all worship shall be with knees bent and heads bowed before the idol which they have found in the person of Jesus, to understand distinctly that we believe, as earnestly and implic­ itly as if we knew that tongue and pen were moved by the unerring inspira­ tion of God, and that we so believe in Gon, perfect providence and perfect illumination, that we would no more turn from His presence, .even if a pantheon of undoubted god-men invited us, than we would turn from perfect light to utter darkness. �84 The Chicago Advance and The Examiner. If Samuel, David, and Isaiah, John, Jesus, and Paul, might trust in the Lord’s direction, so may we, in the full proportion of our diligence, fidelity, discipline, and instruction. So at least we do trust, and there remains with us none the least shadow of doubt, that with us, too, God is, and will be, for the same purposes of manifestation which in all ages lovers of God and prophets have served, and that we no more need pin our faith to what Jesus and Paul said, than we need walk at high noon to-day by the memory or the record of yesterday’s daylight. We have lived now more than a quarter of a century by this conviction o^ the direct nearness of God to soul and heart and mind in us individually, and the immediate direction of our life, study, work, and career, by the most holy divine providence, and for fourteen of these years we have eagerly, zealously, diligently, and fearlessly studied how to be a true prophet of pure Christian truth, how most wisely to believe, and most judiciously to correct belief by thought, and learning, and the blessed rules of holy living, and we think it right now to say to those who deny living truth in the name of tradition, that we challenge their idolatry and defy their idol, in the name of the living God and the authority of divine direction, believing firmly that ‘•The Love of the Lord passeth all things for Illumination,” and that “Wisdom, in all ages entering into holy souls, maketh them friends of God, and prophets.” THE CHICAGO ADVANCE AND THE EXAMINER. We have always cherished with intense satisfaction the sentiment of Christian fellowship. The illusion never forsakes us that church relations mast be at bottom fraternal, even though fallible men administer them less as brothers than as judges and executioners. The “Church of Christ in Yale College,” which was our religious home during the years when our greatest aims for life were maturing, and which at last excommunicated us for believing in God,* always rises before our imagination and love as one of our shrines of delightful communion, where we may expect, sometime if not now, to be made welcome under the immortal covenants of faith, and holi­ ness, and love. Memories of bitter injustice, of cruel contempt, of strange coldness and harshness fade away more easily than not, and we are ready to go back there as a lover goes home to the most blessed joys. It was this intense feeling of Christian communion which led us to wish to make a personal explanation, through the Chicago Advance, to the denomination under whose influences we were reared, and whose dogmatic sanctities we knew that we would be regarded as outraging by the publica­ tion of The Examiner. To expect candid and kind treatment from the editor of the Advance, was indeed a stretch of faith even to our disposition to expect the best everywhere, but we resolved to make the experiment and sent a communication, which we reproduce below. In this our point was to give evidence that we had obeyed a Christian motive, and had followed *As Father, with effective sanctifying and redeeming care of all his human children. �The Chicago Advance and The Examiner. 85 providential guidance and inspiration, in passing from orthodoxy to radical Christianity, and it included of course a frank and definite indication of what we meant by radical Christianity. Had the Advance extracted the former as a matter of fraternal kindness to us, and excluded the latter as a statement of dangerous or dreadful error unfit to lay before orthodox readers, its motives would have been defensible. Instead of this it picked out and published the most offensive part of the latter, and deliberately told a befouling and wicked falsehood about the former in the following sentence. “If a Congregationalist forsakes his faith, we cannot appreciate the ground upon which he should occupy our crowded columns with a statement of his progress in religious error; whether he become a Unitarian, a Mormon, a Free-Religionist, or a Positive Philosopher.” Our readers can judge how unscrupulous must be the anxiety about orthodoxy which led the Editor of the Advance to write that sentence with our statement before him, as a response to our request to be allowed to say to fathers and brethren with whom we have the most sacred associations, that we had reached our present faith by strictly obeying, as we believed, the purest motive and highest law of our life-long Christian faith in God Our Father! As a notice of The Examiner — 350 words at the head of “Editorial Miscellany”—probably nothing could have been better, because those of the readers of the Advance whom we care to reach understand its tricks, and are only excited to look for a fact which they see has been concealed by a fib. But we want justice and decency, as a preparation for fraternal communion, and we give notice to irreligious and unchristian editors of theological newspapers that they will find it to their interest to tell no lies about us. The following is the communication referred to above, and refused publi­ cation by the Advance: Editor Advance: Dear Sir: I send you herewith my proposal to publish The Examiner as a Monthly Review of Religious and Humane Questions, and of Literature, and an organ of what I would call Radical Christianity. And I beg leave to make in your journal a brief explanation, in view of the fact that I was reared in the Congregationalism which you represent. Some twenty years ago I was admitted to the Congregational church in St. Charles, 111., by Rev. G. S. F. Savage. Soon after I became a student in Beloit College for above two years, and went thence to Yale College, where I was graduated in 1856. I passed the next year in New York city, teaching and studying theology, and an attendant upon the ministry of Dr. Win. Adams, of the Madison Square Presbyterian church. The two following years I was again in New Haven, studying theology. In all these places I never so much as thought of going near heretical ministry. I never once saw an heretical book, tract, or journal, nor did I ever converse with an unorthodox person, until after I had become as fully settled in unorthodox conclusions as 1 am now. In New York I did not know of the existence of Drs. Osgood and Bellows, and even did not hear Henry Ward Beecher. I was wholly and absolutely under orthodox influences, sincerely and earnestly continuing my confession of hope in Christ which I had first made when I was but eight years old. In commencing theological study I set to work in the most earnest manner to put in working order the orthodox reasons for faith in the Bible as the sole and absolute rule of truth and duty, and I purposed to prepare myself in the most thorough manner possible for a strictly Biblical style of preaching, �86 The Chicago Advance and The Examiner. invariable support of every point by a text, and illustration drawn as much as possible from the sacred pages. I even selected a large octavo copy of the Bible for my life’s use and study, to be marked and made familiar in every page, so that preaching from it I could readily put my hand upon any passage, and be always able to drive home the sure nail with the very hammer of’the Lord. Such, moreover, was the deliberate ardor of my orthodoxy that I contemplated, first, taking a five years’ course of varied preparation, in view of the special demands of an unsettled state of the popular mind about Christian faith and duty, and, second, devoting myself to preaching an armed and aggressive, a confident and conquering faith, from place to place, and as nearly as possible without reward. I had earlier, I may say, meant to go as a missionary to South-west Africa, and had lost this dream under the overwhelming sense of the importance of saving the faith in our own land. My orthodoxy came to grief all at once, in the following way: I had always had an intensely real faith in God Our Father, as he was addressed in the prayer Jesus gave to his disc-iples. The desire to hallow that name ■was a passion stronger than my life, and as sober and sustained as it was strong. Filial loyalty to God, as the Heavenly Providence and Holy Spirit of our life and our eternal destiny, was the substance and soul of my inward experience, the principle on which I built all my careful devotion to Christ, the Bible, and the Christian church. This principle became the undoing of my whole structure of orthodox dogma about depravity, wrath, atonement, hell, and the divine authority and offices of Jesus and the Bible. For as soon as my observation was once arrested by the condition of that great seething and surging mass of souls which New York city presents, I believed instantly, and without hesitation or qualification, that the Heavenly Father, by the resources of Heavenly Providence and Holy Spirit, both could and would redeem all, and that every thought, no matter if found on the lips of a Jesus or a Paul, which implied doubt or disbelief of this, must be an error. It was no more possible for me to challenge this expansion of my faith in God than it would be for me to prefer the light of a candle to full sunrise, even though I had to see Jesus and Paul as erring men, who had held and taught Christian truth purely in many passages, and in some had set forth error, and that God had meant us to depend on his own providence and inspiration, and had not given us Jesus as more than a mere human teacher and providential leader. In January, 1859, after studying in New Haven Dr. Taylor’s systematic and masterly exposition of the grounds of orthodoxy, and otherwise inves­ tigating the foundations of religious belief, I found myself, as I believed, as secure of my new’ position as possible, although I did not then know that any Christian had come to any similar conclusion, and I wrote a little tract to show where I stood, the concluding sentence of which was, “Christ was a mere man, and the speculative theology which has been taught in his name, and which he partially taught himself, must pass away before the progress of that religion of good will to men and loyalty to God which he practiced.” I have found this conclusion confirmed by more than ten years of addi­ tional study, and I now purpose to ask thoughtful attention, in the pages of The Examiner, to the exposition of pure Christianity, as it is taught in the prayer of Jesus, and in the most significant spiritual passages of the Bible at large, without admixture of the errors which even Jesus did not wholly exclude, and which his followers have expanded into a system which is a veritable anti-Christ. Knowing full well that ardent faith, thorough study, and earnest looking to providence and inspiration, do not in the least entitle me to exalt myself, or claim any special authority, I do yet, declare, in the very name of God Our Father, and of the truth as it was in Christ, that the popular faith in “Lord Jesus,” “Holy Bible,” total depravity, wrath of God, devil and hell, atonement, separate communion here, and separate heaven �Free Religion not Anti-Christian. 87 i hereafter, is of human and heathen conceit, and not of the true Christian consciousness. This ground I shall take in The Examiner, and am ready to defend against all dispute. If the faculty of instruction in the Chicago Theological Seminary, or any one of them, will take up the discussion, I will undertake to prove, that they are teaching heathenism in presenting for Christian truth the doctrine of Jesus as God-Man, Divine Lord, Atoning Saviour, and Final Judge, with the related doctrines of the special divine character of the Bible, the total depravity of human nature, the consuming eternal wrath of God, and the separate destiny of souls, part to heaven and part to hell. Hoping that I may be dealt with in a fair and candid spirit, I am Yours very truly, Edward C. Towne, Winnetka, III. August 28, 1870. FREE RELIGION NOT ANTI-CHRISTIAN. It has been assumed by a portion of the public of late that free religion implies disavowal of Christianity. The Radical and the Index have been taken to represent the entire breadth of this new interpretation of religion. The course of the Executive Committee of “ The Free Religious Association,” in adopting the Index as an organ of communication with the public, has given color to this assumption. Yet nothing could be farther from the truth. The movement which the application of freedom to religion has produced is not in general unchristian, or antichristian, or other than avowedly and reso­ lutely Christian, both in fact and in name. We consider even Mr. Abbot, in all but the name and certain non-essential notions, one of the lights of recent Christianity, as new studies, new insight, and new providential indications have disclosed to devout and thoughtful minds the pure truth suggested and revealed in Christ’s word and life. And we strenuously insist that free Religion is pure religion, as it has occupied the heart of formal Christianity, and is now emancipated from errors of form, and disclosed in its real spirit and power. The history of the movement which is represented nominally by “ The Free Religious Association,” we are entitled to write if any one is. We suggested to Rev. Dr. Bartol, after Unitarianism had settled down upon a narrow Jesuism, the propriety of a conference of radicals to consider the practicability of an organization broader than the Unitarian. And when, after two such conferences, Dr. Bartol and several others decided for action without organization, we proposd to Rev. W. J. Potter and Rev. F. E. Abbot that we three unite in a pledge to secure an organization, and that we work together as a committee to form a plan. Under that pledge we together carried the movement forward until the plan devised by our little caucus was realized in “The Free Religious Association.” The other organization which has been so much spoken of, and so widely reported, “ The Radical Club,” of Boston, first met at our suggestion and upon our individual invita­ tion of the persons who organized it. The term “ Free Religious ” wras originally suggested by Mr. Potter; and the courses of lectures given in �88 A Criticism of Our Aim. Boston were also suggested by him after he had been appointed Secretary of “ The Free Religious Association.” Mr. Abbot has recently taken ground for free religion “ squarely outside of Christianity,” and Mr. Potter has appeared to concur with him. We do not regret Mr. Potter’s action; he did just right to use the Index, even at the cost of seeming to identify Free Religion with the position of Mr. Abbot; but we want it understood that we at least make Free Religion identical with true Christianity, and look for its confessors in every communion, from Catholic, Calvanist, etc., to the latest forms of heresy. A CRITICISM OF OUR AIM. One of our truest radicals, an admirably Christian scholar, thinker, and man, writes to us of our position as follows : — “ I do not assent to the fundamental proposition which you intend The Examiner shall support, that Free Religion is Christianity stripped of unessential opinion and tradition. I don’t care to keep the Christian name — would rather have it dropped, and expect it some day to be dropped. Of course I understand your meaning, that what has given to Christianity its best vitality and power is its free and universal elements, the great spiritual realities found under all forms of religion. And to this I assent. But I see no logic in calling these universal elements by the specific name ‘ Christian.’ Why go to the progressive Jew, or the Hindu, or the Confucian, and say • The essential, vital truth under your religious belief is to be called Chris­ tianity ? ’ I am content to find that it is the same with the essential and permanent in the Christian religion, and will not insist that he shall call it 4 Christianity,’ more than I would yield to his claim that I should call my religion ‘Judaism’ or ‘Hinduism.’ Why not take at once the large term that includes them all — universal Religion ? ” Our friend very seriously misapprehends our position, which is, that we, and all others, Jews, Mahometans, Hindus, and whoever has a religion which at heart is religion, should, by radical reform, strip off what is not true religion, and make, each for his own people, a true Judaism, or true Christianity, or true Hinduism, or true Mahometanism. We could easily show our friend that Jews, Arabs, Persians, Hindus, Siamese Buddhists, and other representatives of world-religions, as well as Christians, are each freeing their respective faiths of superstition, and are appealing to ther fellow believers to use each their traditional religious name as properly meaning the pure truth freed from the husk of error. We, on radical Christian ground, say to each of these faiths, hold your ground and keep your name, and let us have a world fellowship of the different religions of the earth. Our idea, when we asked our friend to join us in a resolution to secure a new organi­ zation for religious ends, and the idea we supposed the Free Religious Association was to represent, was this unity of religions with liberty and diversity both of names and of special tenets. We wanted to see all classes of Christians come together, Catholic, Calvinist, etc., etc., on a platform of generous human recognition of one another, and with them, if occasion should �A Criticism of Our Aim. 89 be found, men and women of other names than the Christian. We desired to see each accept the method of radical reform, each putting his truest truth in the front, and agreeing to hold together by that, and to hold separately other things as each felt necessary. Our Free Religion leaves the Catholic a Catholic, and the Hindu a Hindu, and the Moslem a Moslem, and the Jew a Jew, and the Christian a Chris­ tian, each to wear his providential name, and to have his individual pecul­ iarities of creed and worship, until we all come in the unity of the faith unto a perfect jian. But our friend, if he is logically consistent, as he seems to mean to be, must ask each of these to drop their providential name and take that of Free Religionist, or universal Religionist. If, to use Mr. Abbot’s language, he proposes to “stand squarely outside of Christianity,” he must also stand squarely outside of the other great religions, or else go squarely into some one of them. Assuming that he has not found any of these reli­ gions “a good place to emigrate to,” and that he sees the logic of his position, he really helps to set up, as far as his nominal relations are concerned, a very small new sect, in fact making Free Religion a Boston and Toledo notion, and doing this none the less although those engaged in it feel as broad and liberal as all out of doors. Our friend in short squares off against all the religions of the world, nominally, while we accept our Chris­ tian name and place, with all the other world-religions. He and we alike hold, and work for, the truth of pure free Religion, and sympathize with it wherever found, but he declines, or would prefer to drop out of, nominal relation to Christians, while we adhere to that relation, and do it on a prin­ ciple which warrants the Jew, the Hindu, the Moslem, and other religionists of the world in keeping each to his own name and fellowship, as God has made them to dwell on all the face of the earth. This principle is really radical and free, it makes the name a name only, and gives freedom of names and peculiarities. Our friend’s principle is neither radical nor free, for it does not allow perfect liberty as to names, and it insists, not merely on the root of pure truth, but on a correct name, thus creating a kind of Free Religious orthodoxy which is all about a name. Especially if this is carried to the extreme point made by Mr. Abbot, that none are truly and honestly Christian who do not take Jesus as Messiah, it gives Free Religion an attitude not merely of strictness but of bigotry. We have a perfect right to judge for ourselves how to be honest Christians, and our friend misses the radical mark exceedingly when he makes the ado he does about other people’s honesty. It is done with a nobly pure purpose, but it ought to be left undone nevertheless. We consider it our duty to stay under the Christian name, and make Christianity mean Free Religion. We do in this matter as Theodore Parker did in the matter of American politics. He took his part as an American citizen, and worked to make “American” mean justice to all men. Mr. Phillips was working for the same thing, but refused all citizen relations, on the ground that “American” did not mean justice. He was for breaking up the national fellowship, while Mr. Parker was for purging it. Our friend and Mr. Abbot take just the ground about Christianity which Mr. Phillips took about the Constitution �90 Matthew Arnold’s Idea of Christianity. and the Union. It turned out that Mr. Parker was the true prophet. The course of events purged the nation and left it united. Does anybody wish Mr. Phillips could have had his way, to break the country in two, one part to be free, and the other to be securely slave with no abolition fellow­ citizens to molest or make them afraid ? We are for purging Christianity, not seceding from it. Even excommunicated we claim and will hold our place. And it is as sure as fate that Christianity will be purged, as our nation was purged, and made to mean free Religion. The other religions also will be purged in like manner. Whether some of the great names will fall, we neither know nor care. Possibly they may. But if they do not, and probably they will not, we can still have religion free and pure in all the great divisions of the race. MATTHEW ARNOLD’S IDEA OF CHRISTIANITY. The acute English critic, Matthew Arnold, who certainly deserves to rank with the most thoughtful men of the present generation, lays down the following principle of Christian confession : “ The Christian Church is founded, not on a correct speculative knowledge of the ideas of Paul, but on the much surer ground, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity ; and holding this to be so, we might change the current strains of theology from one end to the other, without on that account setting up any new church, or bringing in any new religion.”—St. Paul and Protest­ antism, p. 10. It is not meant of course by this that the text quoted originally averred the sufficiency of a simply moral basis for Christian communion, but that “ Christian ” now means, above all things, good, and that this emphatic meaning we are to accept as from the inspiration and providence of God, as the fundamental sense of the word. A venerable Puritan minister, in the old town of Medford, near Boston,—Dr. David Osgood, — said fifty years and more ago, to some persons who began to suspect their pastor of heresy, “ If your minister is a good man let him alone.” In so saying he antici­ pated what must become the view of all enlightened Christian minds. Goodness is the root of the matter. There is no more significant Christian word than the injunction to be perfect, and this injunction is no less signif­ icant taken by itself, apart from the appeal to the divine character. The threshold of Christian teaching is the rule of good will, the commandment to love one another. Therefore it is necessary to begin with this, and to build upon it. And, if need be, we may come back to this for determining and regulating Christian communion, and may always insist that this is sufficient for real fellowship, and that all good men are truly Christian. This being said, however, we deem it important, because truth and fact so require, to include in complete Christian confession the faith in God, and loyalty to God, implied in the terms of the prayer “Our Father.” No more signif­ �Mr. Abbot on Following Christ. 91 icant passage could be cited from the original memorials of historical Chris­ tianity than this prayer. If Jesus had the smallest conception of his mission, he must have touched the heart of the matter in teaching his disciples to pray, and cannot have left out of that prayer the main point of religion. Happily that prayer exactly represents the ordinary frame of mind in which profoundly religious persons do actually bend in devotion. As Mr. Emerson says, speaking of Reason, the Creator, the Spirit of the Universe, “Man in all ages and countries embodies it as the Father.” And it is perhaps truest to say that Christianity has no greater claim to recognition than its distinct and emphatic utterance of the words God Our Father. MR. ABBOT ON FOLLOWING CHRIST. “There is one more way, however, to interpret the command, ‘Follow Me,’ namely, ‘I)o as the spirit of Christ would prompt you to do.' If this means simply, let the same spirit of obedience to principle, self-sacrifice, courage, and love, which controlled Jesus, also control us, —well and good. But then I must say that this is not, in any true sense, ‘following his example;’ it is following the spirit which made his example, — obeying the law which he also obeyed.” This illustrates strikingly a way which Mr. Abbot has of using, and insisting on, a method of interpretation which is to us neither free nor reli­ gious, but strangely secular and strict. The only true sense in religion, especially when we appreciate that religion must be free, of following either Jesus or the example of Jesus, is that of adopting the ideal suggested by his character and life, the spirit disclosed to us in his deeds and words. It is not even necessary, nor so much as permissible, to exactly adopt his ideal, and closely conform to his precise spirit, if we find that any part of either appears incongruous with the general purport of the same, and no longer possible to be obeyed by a soul truly obedient in general to the identical heavenly vision which caught and fixed the eye of the young Nazarene. While Mr. Abbot is insisting that the usual strict orthodox way of interpret­ ing Jesus is the true way, great numbers of liberal orthodox believers, in and out of pulpits, books, and religious papers, are finding freedom and simple pure religion in looking to Jesus precisely as they look to teachers and masters other than him ; for suggestion of how best to seek God directly without either master or mediator other than the Truth manifested to their own souls, as a true free thinker looks to Socrates, not to servilely copy him, nor to copy him at all, but to get inspiration for doing likewise, with such difference as a like effort will now be sure to find necessary. It is a great pity that Mr. Abbot should look at Christianity through orthodox spectacles, and insist that what he sees bears no aspect of Free Religion, when in fact the clear upshot of Christianity is Free Religion, and numberless persons in every quarter of Christendom see it to be so, and hail the discovery with infinite delight. �92 The Old Christian Test and the New. THE OLD CHRISTIAN TEST AND THE NEW. “We believe it is admitted by all sects, that in the first age of the church pure living was the test, the distinguishing mark, of a Christian. It was only later, after the philosophers had been at work at the faith, that doc­ trines or points of belief assumed the importance they have since held. In the first century, and second century, a man proclaimed his faith in Christ by his morals, and the principal vices of paganism were of a nature to make the line between the church and the world very broad and distinct. Those vices were cruelty and licentiousness.”—The Nation, June 16, p. 379. The distinguishing mark of a Christian of the first age was that he believed Jesus to have been the Christ. Other points of belief which emi­ nently distinguished him were, that Jesus had risen from the dead and would speedily appear as Messianic King in all the terrors and glories of super­ natural power, that he would bring a material, political, moral and spiritual regeneration of the earth, that this sudden change of all things would be destruction and horror to all enemies of the kingdom and deliverance and glory to all who looked in faith for its appearing, and that in view of these things it was but prudent and decent to live moral and pious lives, trusting God in his Christ for the sake of salvation, and loving the brethren who might be brought together by this trust. No such thing as pure living for its own sake was anywhere characteristic of the primitive Christians. A Paul, indeed, felt the power of the moral ideal, and also adored God as God, in the spirit of simple, pure religion. But even he did this only out of his occasional highest inspiration, rising far above the average level of his teaching and his practice, while his disciples were almost exclusively ruled to such decency of life as they attained, by those points of belief which we have mentioned, the doctrines of early Jesuism, which had engaged their ignorant and superstitious assent, and had wrought in them a measure of piety and brotherly love. In very many classes, and on a very wide scale, the faith of the first age was even scandalously separate from pure religion in either heart or life. It was a mere fanaticism, a detestable superstition, the faith of those who forgot God and goodness equally in looking for a King of terrors, a Jesus more Devil than either human or divine, whose mission it would be to execute indiscriminate vengeance upon the mass of men and receive a few devotees to everlasting enjoyment. Unhappily, it was possible to cite sup­ posed words of Jesus and undoubted sentences of Paul, in support of even this wretchedly heathen type of Christianity. It might be said of certain pagan teachers, previous to or contemporary with primitive Christianity, that they made pure living of chief importance. But this cannot be said of Paul, nor even Jesu3; not because either of them failed to see the intrinsic worth of goodness and power of godliness, but for the reason that both the master and the apostle put the groundless Messi­ anic expectation in the foreground. Happily Paul stands on quite other ground, on great heights of Christian inspiration and prophecy in fact, in several of the most significant passages �Some Recent Views of Jesus. 93 of his letters; and Jesus still more, led astray though he was in the pres­ ence of that Jewish world which at once promised and demanded a Messiah rather than a simple teacher of truth, must have been chiefly attracted, in his better moments of meditation and prayer, by the pure vision only of God and of good, and he certainly came in the moment of his great trial, the single purely Christian moment of his outward career, to give up the delu­ sion of Messiahship, and rest all faith in the will of God. The truth was in Jesus and Paul, and can be clearly seen in them, but the characteristic thing with them was the Jesuism which received so hard a blow in Gethsemane, and is now at last fairly dying, after a career of vast mis­ chief through eighteen centuries. Side by side with the slow progress of truth in her narrow path, has run the comprehensive error of the Nazarene carpenter and the Cilician tent-maker, so that only now does it begin to be true that “Christian” first and chiefly means pure in heart. A new Christianity, latent in that of the first age, and never lost out of the pure hearts which have kept undefiled truth under all the forms of pseudo-Christianity, is so clearly manifested within a few years, that it is now possible to speak of Christians whose sole distinguishing mark is pure living. The professors of accredited Christianity do not generally admit that this new Christianity is veritably Christian, but philosophical observers, and nearly all emancipated or rational believers, justly claim, and joyfully proclaim, this sifted and pure truth of Christ, the only Christianity worthy the name. Of course such Christianity does not take its name from the person, pre­ tension, or characteristic teaching of Jesus, nor from its affinity with what is called "The Christian Religion,” but from its fulfilment of the providen­ tial ideal of the Christianity and the Christ of history, its expression of what was suggested, and was meant of God, in Jesus, and was destined to be unfolded out of the tradition propagated in his name. In this it stands towards the teaching of Jesus as that stood toward Judaism; it is a new birth, another regeneration, leaving the form of the old to more perfectly fulfil its pure truth and vital power. SOME RECENT VIEWS OF JESUS. M. Edouard Reuss, the accomplished author of “Histoire de la Théologie Chrétienne au Siècle Apostolique,” said of Renan’s “Vie de Jésus,” that it had popularized a study hitherto confined to theologians, and made the question of who and what Jesus was one of the common topics of free discussion everywhere. He anticipated that all sorts of people would feel called to give the public the benefit of their impressions and convictions, and that thus a great movement of new inquiry would bring its powerful aid to the solution of the evangelic problem. These expectations of a thoughtful scholar, expressed in 1864, in the preface to the third edition of �94 Some Recent Views of Jesus. the “Histoire” mentioned above, have been more than realized. And, as M. Reuss intimated, every sort of advocate has entered the field. Last year Mr. Wendell Phillips undertook a kind of vindication of the Christ of popular tradition, the Messiah of whatever progress eighteen centuries can show. Rev. F. E. Abbot, who is now editing the Index at Toledo, as the organ of religion emancipated from Christian associations, has found himself impelled to disown Christian fellowship, and to rate Jesus as unworthy the name of master in any sense whatever. Mrs. Julia Ward Howe not long since lifted up her voice, to rebuke the hardy recusant of Toledo, and to certify her esthetic and pious approval of the figure presented to her imagination in connection with the name of Jesus. And about the same time Mr. D. A. Wasson, a very acute thinker, who is also not a little gifted as a poet, earnestly attempted to shelter the ideal Jesus from the rude blows of free religious discussion. The singular defect of all the pleas just mentioned is their lack of con­ formity to the best results of recent sound scholarship. In Mr. Abbot’s argument against respect of any sort for the authority of Jesus as a relig­ ious master, there occur citations of reported words of Jesus which ought never to be made again, and never will be made again by any both fair and well-informed critic. Mr. Abbot does not lack fairness, nor is he, for a writer who has devoted himself chiefly and with the highest success to philosophical speculation, without a highly creditable acquaintance with the results of New Testament criticism. But he does lack a portion of the knowledge which should have preceded his renunciation of Christian connec­ tion, a renunciation for which he will certainly find no enduring warrant in either the method or the tenets of a sound free thinker. There can be no question, we believe, that the candor and broad sympathy with noble effort which are conspicuous in Mr. Abbot, will bring him at length to give the young peasant rabbi of Nazareth a place among the prov­ idential masters of the human race. He speaks still of “the wonderful religious genius,” “the transcendant greatness,” of Jesus, terms which he may find occasion to drop as he becomes more intimately acquainted with the real man whom Pilate crucified, and whom inscrutable Provi­ dence made the standard-bearer of a great movement of mankind, but a closer knowledge of the facts of a simple and humble life, and of the incidents and accidents to which peculiar circumstances gave momen­ tous significance, can hardly fail to convince him that, without any particular greatness of either intellect or character, the child of Joseph and Mary fairly obtained, and must always hold among men on earth, one of the greatest providential places of human history. Think what we may of the powers or the qualities, of the ideas or the purposes of Jesus, it is absurd to strike out his name everywhere, or to undertake to stand outside a definite relation to him. The warm, and somewhat arrogant pleas of Mr. Phillips and Mrs. Howe can barely command respect with anyone accustomed to study, thoroughly �Some Recent Views of Jesus. 95 and without passion, all the historical aspects of the question who and what Jesus was. It was of course extremely easy for either the orator or the lady to take a high tone, sustained as they were in so doing by all the popu­ lar assumptions, and to rehearse the claims of Jesus, the one with fascinating eloquence, the other with half-angry dignity. But even Mr. Phillips errs egregiously if he supposes that any amount of confidence and of eloquence can make an utterance respectable, as thinkers and scholars count respect, which is made in nearly total ignorance of the facts elicited by the noble and fruitful labors of recent scholarship. The field is not one for brilliant generalization, but rather for a special knowledge to be had only upon thorough study and long meditation. No one could make general observa­ tions upon the appearances presented by Christianity now and formerly, to better popular purpose than Mr. Phillips, but unfortunately the particular demand of the discussion is for a true account of what took place before any of these now visible appearances had yet been seen, and for historical truth which must beyond a doubt offend the popular faith. Mr. Phillips, there­ fore, made an ill-advised and no way useful attempt to deliver a judgment where he had yet to possess himself of information. And like most persons who think they know beyond a question, because current tradition is on their side, he is probably prepared to resent the suggestion of his ignorance. He doubtless has never even heard of the books to which we should refer him as sources of knowledge. So runs the religious world, but the time of the end of this is not, we trust, far distant. The treatment which Mr. Wasson gave to the theme “Jesus and Chris­ tianity,” was that of an idealist far too little conscious of the sober facts of history. It is solely in the exercise of a generous imagination that he assures us that the Hebrew hope of a Messiah had become refined and spiritualized before Jesus came upon the scene, approaching the typical idea of history, and that this hope, thus refined, furnished the ideal elements by which the mind of Jesus was nourished, until he imagined a divine soci­ ety here on earth, made so by the unqualified sway of ethical law, and was so possessed by this holy imagination as to think himself more than an individual being, and to feel in his own exalted soul, in his “ world-great heart,” the tides of infinite and eternal life; while around him were gathered “popular imaginations large enough” to recognize and accept “a soul so amazingly magnanimous.” It would give us great pleasure to see the evidence on which Mr. Wasson pronounces Jesus “an imperial soul,” and the historical ground for his assumption that the young Nazarene enthu­ siast expected “a reign of morals pure and simple,” not the reign of an individual, nor of a nation. Still more curious are we to see in what light other than of imagination the simple folk who gathered about Jesus appear to Mr. Wasson as “large popular imaginations.” Doubtless there was imagination enough in the circle of those who handed down the report of Jesus’s life and teaching, but unhappily it wrought more in the way of invention than of recognition, and obscured, a great deal more than it dis­ closed, the truth of history. �96 The Failure of the Pulpit. THE FAILURE OF THE PULPIT. The Independent, discussing “ the wide and ever widening breach between modern preaching and modern culture,” attempts the following disposition of the question: “ A great deal of the dissatisfaction expressed by educated men with the manner and matter of modern preaching is only one form in which the revolt of the age against all theology, and indeed against all preaching whatsoever, whether good or bad, finds vent for itself. It is not the sermon, it is Chris­ tianity which is objected to. This is explicitly admitted by the writer in the Spectator of whom we have spoken [as having “ stated the prevalent indict­ ment of cultivated men against makers of sermons.”] ‘ About the sermon,’ he says, ‘ I am about to state honestly what I believe thousands of men feel secretly. I dislike good sermons just as much as bad. I do not want to be lectured, even by a great lecturer. I object to the usual basis of the very best sermon ever delivered in a Christian church.’ It is only fair, then, to a great and most laborious and devoted profession, to indicate where the trouble really lies. A great many cultivated people at present do not like to hear preaching, . . chiefly, we think, because much of the cultivated mind of this age has become alienated from the old faith, and is throwing itself forth, this way and that, in an agony of bewilderment, baffled energy and discontent. . . If every preacher of this age could preach like Paul, preaching would continue to be an impertinence and a bore to those whose minds have swung away from that system of belief which constitutes the basis of all Christian preaching, good or bad ” The truly Christian mind cannot help objecting decidedly to the assump­ tions of the pulpit. The perfect Christian attitude is that of filial conscious­ ness of Our Father, and absolute, direct trust in him. The pulpit claims, not merely a hearing, to speak of God, but authority, to speak for God. It assumes to lecture the hearer, in the name of unquestionable dogma, when religion, justly interpreted, knows nothing of such dogma, and deems the assertion of dogmatic authority an outrage upon spiritual freedom. So long, therefore, as pseudo-Christianity dictates the tone of the pulpit, and the sermon assumes the right of the preacher to proclaim dogma, instead of promote free inquiry and persuade to free faith, so long must the first assumption of the pulpit be hateful to truly religious minds. Further than this, the “system of belief” which constitutes the customary basis of preaching, has justly lost its hold upon the cultivated Christian mind of the age, to which total depravity, wrath of God, damnation, blood atonement, godhead of a young Jew, and infallibility of Hebrew and Chris­ tian books, with transmission of same by ignorant and prejudiced interpre­ ters, are superstitions as arrant as any the world ever saw. Until, therefore, preachers shall consent to be truly Christian, to believe in God and in man with some spirit and truth, and to thoroughly discriminate the husk of Christianity from its truth, and offer truth only to truth-loving souls, the providence and inspiration of our time will more and more set aside the pulpit. �The Need of a Free Divinity School. 97 We suggest to The Independent, which we believe means to find and to follow the truth, a study of Christian Conceit and Christian Superstition, as causes of the failure of the pulpit. The public ministry of religion is certain to be welcome to the cultivated classes, and to all other classes, when it shall be made even tolerably worthy of respect. We also beg to assure our contemporary that the cultivated mind of this age, which is indeed ‘alienated from the old faith,’ is not in the least unhappy in its new situaation. We have had the opportunities of a pronounced heretic, during ten or twelve years, to observe the real truth of this matter; we have besides gathered evidence out of recent literature in all directions ; and we know that nothing could be more ridiculous than the statement that new belief is in an agony of bewilderment. Orthodox writers should reflect that they learn of the exceptions only, and are not in a position to know what new believers usually may feel. THE NEED OF A FREE DIVINITY SCHOOL. One of the first and greatest needs of religious and human progress in America is a well endowed and appointed Free Religious Divinity School. We have canvassed the matter pretty thoroughly, during the past few years, and fully believe that this Free School of Truth must be, and that it will be. The great cause of spiritual emancipation has many liberal friends, who do not lack means to carry into effect any wise purpose which they may form. To secure.this, it only needs to make evident the nature of the opportunity now open, to wealth and faith and learning and zeal, to organize thinking and believing people everywhere into free societies, under free teachers and pastors; and to show the necessity to this end, and the practicability, of a well endowed ami appointed Free Religious Divinity School. We will not at this time argue the matter. Our present purpose is only to propound it, and we propound it in fervent hope and full faith. Right here perhaps on this shore of Lake Michigan, from which we write, not remote from the great city of the West, yet among scenes of pure nature eminently suitable, we may yet see a great Free School of Divinity, such as the world has not yet had. The sum of Two Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars ought to be immediately devoted to this grand purpose, and this generation ought not to pass away without increasing this endowment to One Million Dollars, to adequately provide for complete, free instruction in religion, in all its branches, and adequate aid of every sort to students seeking the sacred ministry of divine truth. In the whole of Christendom there is hardly one respectable theological school. The greatly dishonest purpose to conceal, to evade, and everyway to maintain the creed in vogue by means which equally lack veracity and courage, ought to render them in general morally disrepu­ table. There are few in which inadvertent falsification is not the art of arts. And to support it is the dark spirit whose foul words are “devil,” “hell,” “damnation,” ever ready to kill off, by ban if not by burning, any teacher VOL. I.—no. I. 7 �98 Dr. Me Cosh in Boston. or student who is led, in the sincerest and strictest development of his deepest Christian faith, to believe better of God than the current creeds allow. And these creeds are still a refuge of lies about man and about God, theological old wives’ fables begotten of the darkness of heathenism, and totally unfit to convey the grace and truth of Christianity. True Christian Religion has waited long enough; let there be one housetop from which to proclaim the pure truth which Jesus whispered in the ear of Judea more than eighteen hundred years ago. In venturing to bring to public notice a bare proposition, we yield to a sense of the extreme urgency of an interest which has no representative yet among religious organizations, or none prepared to appreciate the situation, and to take action promptly and with energy. We do not hesitate because of the possibility, or even probability, that no immediate answer will come. We more than half believe in the prophetic office, and think it in this matter at least our solemn duty to say to our generation of scattered believers in the future of free religion, A Million of Money wanted for a Free Religious Divinity School. DR. McCOSH IN BOSTON. The N. K Tribune thinks Free Religion will probably find a defender, against a late tremendous assault of Dr. McCosh, in “that deep thinker, uncommon scholar, and courageous woman, Mrs. Howe.” It is difficult to understand what the Tribune means by deep thought, uncommon scholarship, and courage in religion, when it finds these in the estimable woman named, three of whose striking characteristics are conservative timidity about departure from tradition as it has come to her, the dogmatism of very insufficient study, and opinion not obtained by profound meditation nor expressed usually with the spirit of real thought. The Tribune seems not aware that Mrs. Howe is more an exponent of traditional Christianity than of Free Religion, and that at least fifty persons might be named in New England more likely than she to undertake an effective defence of Free Religion, even if she chanced to be drawn into the controversy on that side. As for Dr. McCosh, a rude schoolman who knows no better than to assault sunlight with paving-stones, and whose utmost achievement is to darken with dust air which will clear itself as soon as his back is turned, we hold him, on his own ground, greatly inferior to such ripe scholars and sound thinkers as Rev. Samuel Johnson or Rev. W. J. Potter, though doubtless in tremendous bluster he can do more in six lectures than they in six thousand. A certain massive and portentous ignorance, a hopeless failure of perception, charac­ terize Dr. McCosh. Had he lived in America even, still more had he passed some years in Boston, and suffered himself to open his eyes occasionally, it is possible that he would know a little something about the nature and ground of Free Religion. As it is, his voice is the roar of a blind son of Anak, noticeable only as so much noise. He has no more intelligence of the spirit­ �Vicious Piety.—Secularism as Religion. 99 uality, pure fervor of soul, and richness of faith which are found in the Free Religious leaders, than a cannon has of the glory of sunlight under which nature renews her life. It is highly probable that whatsoever things are pure, whatsover things are of good report, will continue to be thought on, and to be most inspiringly discoursed of, among Free Religious believers in Boston, in spite of the lectures of Dr. McCosh. Grace and truth do not perish out of the hearts of men and women because of deafening noise in a Methodist meeting-house, any more than violets and roses fade and die because of a coluinbiad fired off at Charlestown navy yard. VICIOUS PIETY. “ The vices of our time — that is, of a commercial and scientific age — are fraud, chicane, falsehood, and over-eagerness in pusuit of material enjoy­ ment, and scepticism as to the existence of anything higher or better. Great numbers of the knaves of our time are in the church, ami even active in it, ami call themselves ‘Christians’ as a help in their business.”—The Nation, June 16, p. 379. It would be more exact to say of the pious knaves of our time, that they profess strict orthodox faith in “the blood of Jesus,” and confess a hope of redemption through “the atonement alone,” without merit of good works. And more than this, knavery finds a chance in the mind of many tempted confessors of this doctrine, to whom it seems quite easy to be rascals in trade and redeemed sinners through Christ. It is but one trick and lie at a time, and the fount of absolution is close by, always open to faith, and the more open the greater the sinner’s demerit. Life becomes a plunge into the smut of mammon by day, and a bath of absolution at night. Many practical men bear witness that a man who puts forward an “evangelical” profession, among men of the world, either as mere profes­ sion or for persuasion, is commonly either too weak to be trusted amid temptations, or is already tricky, or mean, or knavish. SECULARISM AS RELIGION. Secularism is vastly powerful [in England] among those of the working classes who do make the attempt to think on the most serious questions of life. It would appear that Secularist societies have spread a net-work of complete organization over the land,.have an effective system of tract distri­ bution, and command eloquent and persuasive lecturers, who know the working classes well, and gain the more ready access to them on the ground of this knowledge.”—The Sunday Magazine. This is called “infidelity” and a “gigantic evil,” by the editor whose statement, we quote. For our part we deem “those of the working classes who make the attempt to think on the most serious questions of life ” more faithful to their light than any of the Christian sects. Furthermore, they are truer to the Christian foundation than these sects. They begin right, �100 Dr. McLeod on Buddhism. with the religion of duty. They come nearer doing the things taught in the Sermon on the Mount than any man does who goes apart from mankind to seek his own salvation. But even if they did not, they are honest men and women, who think seriously, believe sincerely, and labor earnestly, and that, too, with the heaviest troubles of life pressing particularly upon them, and we deem it only decent to bid them good-speed, and think them well started on the right way, especially as there is a God, who made these men and women, and quite likely is looking after them at least as well as we could, and possi­ bly has lent them his inspiration and providence even for getting up a religion whose sole deity and heaven are the doing of duty in common daily life. It seems to us more important that such practical religion should flourish than that the Pharisaism of sects should survive. We do not deem Secularism a perfect form of religion, but we do think it better than any form of popular Christianity. It is to us among the cheering evidences that God Almighty has a little the start of his Grace of Canterbury, and his Holiness of Rome, and the various potentates of dogma and custom, that Secularism lies like a rock under the troubled sea of English life, a “gigan­ tic ” adherence of the common people to the doctrine that it pays to do right even if death is, as the poor old Bible so often implies, a final rest. DR. MACLEOD ON BUDDHISM. Rev. Norman Macleod, D. D., a distinguished Scotch divine whose Christianity has been for some time growing less and less dogmatic, and more and more humane, speaks as follows of Buddhism, in connection with his account of a visit to a Buddhist temple in Ceylon : “ It was interesting to see, even once, a temple with its living worshippers representing a religion which, though now extinct in India, yet still com­ mands the faith and reverence of hundreds of millions in Ceylon, Thibet, Burmah, and China. I cannot think, from the laws of the human mind, that their Aeari-belief is that they are to be so absorbed into the divine essence, or Nirvana, as practically to destroy all individual existence. . A religion which denied the immortality of a living God, or of living men, could not possibly live from age to age in the heart-convictions of a large portion of the human race, so opposed is such a negation to the instincts and cravings of human nature. Either human nature has no such moral instincts, or Buddhists have no such religion.’’ When the “New Logic,” as we have been accustomed to name it, shall be written, it will fully justify Dr. Macleod’s'assumption that Buddhism, what­ ever it may say, does not, and cannot, mean anything either foolish or bad, in its great doctrine of the final relation of all being to the divine essence. We make the quotation here, however, to call attention to Dr. Macleod’s way of looking at the matter. He speaks of these Buddhists as of human brothers, and interprets by sympathy and faith, instead of doubt and hatred. Instead of grasping the usual orthodox side-arm, the tomahawk, with an evident savage desire to hew in pieces before the Lord his pagan fellows, he extends �Sakya-Muni and Atheism.—Dr. Stebbins's Demand. 101 a Christian right hand of fellowship. There is, in'the kindness with which he speaks, no Pharisaism as of one who wishes the Buddhists well yet expects them to be damned nevertheless, but a generous charity, and com­ prehension, which hopetli all things and believeth all things. This is Christian; the other method is anti-Christian, and none the less so because commonly employed by those who claim exclusive knowledge of Christian truth. SAKYA-MUNI AND ATHEISM. “ The atheism of Sakya-Muni has been asserted by eminent scholars, whose judgment I am not entitled to controvert, though quite unable to accept it.”— D. A. Wasson. “The testimony of the most competents cholars certainly seems to us decisive in this case, as we have no knowledge of the original sources of information. But perhaps the fact does not harmonize with Mr. Wasson’s theories, and this may be the reason for discarding it. . . If Mr. Wasson has any better reasons (than “ I want to” and “ because ”) for setting aside the verdict of scholars in a question of scholarship, we fail to see them.”—F. E. Abbot in reply to Mr. Wasson. Mr. Abbot’s failure herein we are sorry for. The overwhelming presump­ tion, established by all thorough study of religions, is, that the human mind has ever sought, and never unsuccessfully, to find God. Therefore it is perfectly legitimate to suspect of insufficiency the study which reports SakyaMuni an atheist, and to decline to accept it, even while modestly confessing not knowledge enough of the studies in question to otherwise prove SakyaMuni a theist. Mr. Abbot entirely forgets the dignity of the discussion, as well as fails conspicuously to appreciate a significant point, when he accuses Mr. Wasson of holding a profound conviction with no better reasons than “ I want to” and “because,” which he (Mr. A.) quotes from a small boy of his acquaintance. DR. STEBBINS’S DEMAND. Rev. R. P. Stebbins, D. D., is energetically arguing for a conservative policy among Unitarians, on the ground that this is in harmony with the antecedents of the Unitarian body. He lamentably forgets, as conservative Christians of every school do, that regeneration, birth out of the old into the new, is the supreme law of genuine Christianity. There never has been, and never can be,—certainly was not in Jesus and Paul, and probably is not in Stebbins and Hepworth,— any form for religion except a human form. This human form is inevitably more or less imperfect, and also more or less stamped with peculiarities of time, place, and people, which make it good for that time, place and people, but not so good for another time and place, and other people. Hence the necessity of constant change, with effort at least for improvement. Dr. Stebbins has had occasion enough to know this. He some years since became disgusted with the failure of Unitarian parishes to appreciate the sullen roar of his heavy guns, and their decided preference �102 The Athauasian Creed. of light rifled cannon, which the old columbiad says take polish because they are made of brass. As Secretary of the American Unitarian Associ­ ation, after leaving his last parish, Dr. Stebbins succeeded in nothing so well as in stirring up a general determination to get rid, at all costs, of his portentious and dismal imitation of orthodoxy, and to put in his place a man who, while no less conservative in doctrine perhaps, had the sense to see that the young and agile intelligences of the new generation cannot be expected to repeat the heavy gait and severe mien of elder Puritanism. A new time must have new methods and new men. We advise grandpa Stebbins to quit roaring and storming about it. THE ATHANASIAN CREED. The Contemporary Review (Strahan & Co., London and New York) is in some respects the most interesting and valuable publication of the kind accessible to English-speaking readers. It represents the liberal element in the Church of England, than which no section of existing Christian com­ munion is more worthy of respect, whether for Christian studies or Christian graces. Dissenting of course from its continued recognition of Jesuism as essential to Christianity, we yet would be glad to see so admirable an organ of truly Christian inquiry in the hands of every clergyman in the land. We know of nothing among religious reviews equally attractive and instructive to general readers with this representative of the broader scholarship and more genial piety of the English national church. The publishers would render a great service to religion in America if they would put an American edition into our market, at a moderate price. The August issue of the Contemporary contains an article by Dean Stanley on “ The Athanasian Creed,” some points of which we wish to lay before our readers. We premise that this famous creed is peculiar for the dogmatic harshness with which it sets forth the doctrine of the Trinity, and the rigor with which it declares the sure damnation to eternal fire of all who hesitate to fully accept that fiction of theological speculation. It, as a binding creed, is substantially held still by all orthodox belief, as it must be so long as Jesus is made a God-Man and Lord and Saviour, and so long as ‘ He that believeth not shall be damned ’ (Mark xvi. 16), is read as a text of Christian truth. Originally, to use the language of “ The English Cyclopaedia,” this creed “was received by the free conviction of the churches that it contained a correct exposition of Christian doctrine;” the very way in which the authority of the Bible, and the divine truth of all orthodox dogmas, were originally set up among Christians. By the same general authority of the Christian church, this creed was ascribed to Athanasius, the great theologian of the fourth century, precisely as the fourth gospel was ascribed to the apostle John. Nobody ever pretended to really prove the ability of primitive �The Aihanasinn Creed. 103 Christians to detect godhead in Jesus and divinity in gospels and epistles ; that ability has been loosely assumed ; and how much the assumption is worth we can judge from Dean Stanley’s remarks on “ The Creed of St. Athanasius.” He says,— “ Its first reception and actual use in Christendom is one of the most remarkable instances of those literary mistakes (not in the first instance a deliberate forgery, in the vulgar sense of the word) which have exercised so great an influence over the history of the Church. It is to be classed in this respect with the works of Dionysius the Areopagite, which formed the basis of the popular notions of the Celestial Hierarchy ; with the false Decretals of the early Popes, or early Emperors, which formed the basis of the Pontifical power. Under the shadow of a great name it crept, like those other docu­ ments, into general acceptance ; and then, when that shadow was exorcised by the spell of critical inquiry, still retained the place which it had won under false pretences. Through the Middle Ages it was always quoted as his work. At the time of the Reformation, the name of the champion of Christian orthodoxy still dazzled the vision of the Reformers. In the Augs­ burg Confession, and in the Thirty-nine Articles, in the Belgic and in the Bohemian Confessions, in the ‘ Ecclesiastical Polity ’ of Hooker, it is unhes­ itatingly received as the ‘Creed of St. Athanasius.’ No one at that time entertained any doubt of its authorship. The very year of its composition was fixed; the very hole in the Abbey of S. Maximin, near the Black Gate at Treves, was pointed out as the spot where Athanasius had written it in the concealment of his western exile. Yet it is now known with absolute certainty not only that Athanasius never did write it, but never could have written it. The language in which it was composed was probably unknown to him. We shall see, as we proceed, that the terminology which it employs was condemned by him. It contains at least one doctrine which he would have repudiated. But . . the treatise of the unknown author who composed this, in some respects, anti-Athanasian Creed, has been embalmed for poster­ ity by its early ascription to the Father of orthodoxy. . . By the magic of his name this confession, of unknown and ambiguous character, found its way into the Western Church, and has been kept alive and retained a charmed existence after its real character had been discovered. . . The history of the reception of the Creed of St. Athanasius is like the parallel history of the reception of the Pope's Infallibility — ‘ gangrened with imposture ; ’ not willful imposture it may be, not conscious fraud, but still leaving it so desti­ tute of historical foundation as to render doubly imperative the duty of testing its claims to authority by its own intrinsic merits.” These last strong words are fully justified by the facts. And not only are they applicable where Dean Stanley applies them, but over the whole field of ecclesiastical and theological support of accredited Christianity. That support is gangrened with imposture, not willful it may be, not conscious and deliberate fraud, but still leaving it so destitute of honest foundation in any truth ever taught as to render absolutely imperative the duty of testing all claims of Christianity to authority by the intrinsic merits of its teaching, as reason and faith can take cognizance of these. �104 Duty Without Heaven. AN EVANGELICAL INSTANCE. In the article from which we have quoted above, Dean Stanley says that “it was expected, almost wished (by certain orthodox leaders in England), that a frightful, sudden death, such as that which befel Arius in the streets of Constantinople [who was believed by one party to have been killed by God in answer to orthodox prayers], would be inflicted on an eminent scholar who had come to take his part in making better understood the Holy Scrip­ tures, and in kneeling with his brethren around the table of their common Lord. . . Sentiments like these . . . are the natural fruits of the ancient damnatory spirit of the age whence those clauses originated. The meaning of the clauses is now reduced, by ‘considerable intellectual caution’ to something much more like the spirit of the Gospel. But, to anyone who accepts them in their full sense, or who is influenced by their intention, it is only natural that the persons against whom they are believed to be directed should be viewed with unspeakable horror. A man, of whom we are unhes­ itatingly able to say that, ‘he shall, without doubt, perish everlastingly,’ must be the most miserable of human beings—to be avoided, not only in sacred, but in common intercourse, as something too awful to be approached or spoken of.” DUTY WITHOUT HEAVEN. “The doing of duty without any hope of a future is a daring but a dreary faith,” says the editor of The Sunday Magazine, in commenting on the Secu­ larist confession of faith. Let each speak for himself. We can testify that there is an inexpressible, heavenly blessedness in giving up all hope of reward, future as well as present, to do present duty, and that the gloomier the outlook from the post of duty has seemed, the more would the irrepres­ sible sense of heaven in the heart assert itself. We have frequently found in men and women this perfectly serene, joyous satisfaction in mere doing duty. It accords with all our study of the human mind, that the best attainment of man leaves him where he can find perfect delight in duty, wholly apart from a future, while our observation of human experience has repeatedly shown us that doing of duty can be profoundly joyous even where disbelief of a future exists. Those who have never tried a religion which forbids eagerness about one’s own redemption, and commands the cultivation of spiritual courage to share all hope with all souls, ought to remember that their cowardice in the battle of life cannot be a measure of the courage of soldiers of humanity, who are perfectly willing to do their duty here and take the result. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Examiner: a monthly review of religious and humane questions, and of literature. Vol. 1, November,1870, no. 1 Description An account of the resource Place of publication: [Winnetka, IL.] Collation: 104 p. ; 25 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Contents: Crazy Chicago; or the back stairs to fortune -- Charles Dickens and his Christian Critics -- The Women and the trial --Dr. J.F. Clarke against theism --The Unitarian situation -- History of the devil, his rise, greatness and downfall / Albert Reville --Rev. Mr. Abbot at Toledos. 'The woman and the trial' concerns Harriet Beecher Stowe and the Beecher-Tilton trial. Reville's article was possibly the reason why Conway kept this item - a review of Gustave Roskoff's 'History of the Devil' translated from 'Revus des deux mondes'; his own 'Demonology and devil lore' would be published in 1879. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available [s.n.] Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1870 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5448 Subject The topic of the resource Periodicals Religion Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The Examiner: a monthly review of religious and humane questions, and of literature. Vol. 1, November,1870, no. 1), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Conway Tracts Devil Religion https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/bcad92d069ddb5a14aeab252d0023608.pdf?Expires=1781740800&Signature=BPQFJk6dp%7Erok9pLZEIN05LoEVQDdxSN0UsEK6MyUZnKQbWnzTVCJoZq54Fv3SXN06hVic1twc7JhfESBxiQHvajSym5wR%7Emo10Mk-nvVb2DHUgnq09sxBjCYIhPpf750O-nXebC4c8QOPyZqTqth6mHwDLP5b%7Ebs95Leb%7E43BhWElSO6isHeB1PoI6yIiqWzYUdCj2-d6s5%7EwPOly-70XKPwyqzcoaKKVS6Ec91vQk3b70H8Y0GPjvi6Id%7ET5xox1xeC96bv8EntBEVyIV%7E0FYODN0oqOqLRZXITXgNHxoWZZTHpxEPU91KMQ2%7E2B6kzPVrxwIBGGSIOqRbDIoEcg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 5b06b86b506c63906067ad43bfe4dc60 PDF Text Text ����� Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The tragedy at Mohawk Station Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Clifford, Josephine Description An account of the resource Place of publication: [California] Collation: 203-207 p. ; 24 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Publication information from KVK. Marks from adhesive tape on p.3. Please note that this pamphlet contains language and ideas that may be upsetting to readers. These reflect the time in which the pamphlet was written and the ideologies of the author. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available [s.n.] Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1870 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5734 Subject The topic of the resource Literature USA Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The tragedy at Mohawk Station), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Conway Tracts United States-History https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/ae7e522409f4cdce3048660eeeae7fa4.pdf?Expires=1781740800&Signature=fIbpULy0IC4iWnFhNS1F6beahY2kVKaL93egXRs1a6PeDa4WWtdoswnPPVuBd8o5mF2UXgPaaD%7Eyz%7EoGyZgyb1HynRjRLVLMmPUJUxqCn%7ES9f15N8jkCkxG-Bnkmqv%7EoX17nqgof2YQLU0J8C-WZvZwFr2qJuB8it1%7EG-uZUYaNLC6zzcuOzAtCBZGmGgKo-AS0ScNB1sgo2QqiyiwzMWk1OBxLcPfXtVOaubHVu1WAp86p96IAqKbq4wll7%7Ef1hxMXQj%7EAjgb%7EZm9G2DBdKJBXAI-5iSIxxTtIg2spd8AHWiQA%7EU-nVNFsETVeySF4H6uO%7EvbWAijEyCK5PJpKWMA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 5bd9e03a55f1c808a4f0139339787c5b PDF Text Text EFFICACY OF OPINION IN MATTERS OF RELIGION BY THE REV. W. R. WORTHINGTON, M.A. , “ Est genus hominum, qui esse primos se omnium rerum volunt Nee sunt.” Terence. --------- • r •>_ PUBLISHED BY THOMAS. SCOT£, MOUNT PLEASANT, RAMSGATE. 1870. Price Sixpence. «' a �LONDON: PRINTED BY C. W, REYN ELL, LITTLE PULTENEY STREET, HAYMARKET, W. �ON THE EFFICACY OF OPINION IN MATTERS OF RELIGION. NCE upon a time there was a great controversy as to the comparative merits of knowledge and opinion. That controversy has been stirred again in onr own day ; or rather it has not been stirred at all, but judgment has been given upon it with but scanty regard to the arguments. The “ religious world ” has declared in favour of opinion. Theory rides in its coach, and Fact trudges on foot. This venerable error which so long discredited philosophy, and which it is the crowning glory of philosophy to have got rid of, is the besetting sin of the science (falsely so called) of theology, and is doubtless the chief reason why, with modern thinkers, the profession of theology has fallen somewhat into disrepute. Generally speaking, we profess to esteem truth above everything. If a man is on his trial for murder, the witnesses are sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, to the best of their know­ ledge. But if the question is as to the sanity of the murderer, skilled witnesses are summoned to give their opinions upon the state of his mind. The value of their opinions is measured by their capacity to. form O �4 On the Efficacy of Opinion an. opinion, and their capacity is measured by their knowledge of cases in point. But often their opinions are opinions only ; they cannot be implicitly relied on; they are mere makeshifts which the court is compelled to put up with, so long as perfect knowledge is not to be had. This is an unsatisfactory state of things • and in this and similar instances (which are plentiful), opinion, compared with knowledge, appears to disad­ vantage. Its inferiority may be inferred in other ways. In some things, e.g., political questions, truth is evolved from the conflict of opinions ; and, beyond all contra­ diction, the end is more precious than the means. Further, when truth is known and established, all controversy upon it is at an end; there is no room for disputing ; men are of one mind about it who were at odds so long as it was a matter of opinion. The har­ monising power of knowledge is a circumstance greatly in its favour. Passing into the region of theology, we are sur­ prised to find a totally different set of principles at work. We find opinion to be the ‘ be-all and the end‘ all ’ there,—dissent from the reigning opinion counted for a crime—knowledge studiedly depreciated or valued only as it is subservient to opinion—reason, as it is absurdly cried down on the side where it is strongest, as absurdly cried up on the side where it is weakest— the oracle of society not the well-informed scholar, the shrewd observer, the original thinker, the candid reasoner (a kind of men who have a strong aversion to hazarding opinions), but the voluble man of ortho­ doxy, who for anything anybody knows belongs to no school, But that where blind and naked Ignorance Delivers brawling judgments, unashamed, On all things all day long : and we naturally ask, “ How can such things be, and �in Matters of Religion. $ « what can orthodoxy have to say for itself? ” Its de­ fence will take some such line as this : That Revela­ tion is not like other things, and not to be judged ot by ordinary rules. That religious opinions, not being capable of demonstration, belong to the province not of knowledge, but of faith. That right faith and con­ sequently right opinions, are essential to holiness ot living. We will take these propositions in order. I From the position that Revelation, being a thing sui generis, is not subject to ordinary laws to the posi­ tion that it is subject towhatever laws orthodoxy may please to impose upon it, is but a step. Fruits of this doctrine we see every day. Who has ever attended to a controversial sermon or perused a controversial trea­ tise, and not been completely bewildered with the amazing arbitrariness that characterises them. t e violent associations of ideas, the axioms that are axio­ matic in nothing but their insusceptibility of proof, the foregone conclusions wrung from worse than doubtful premisses, the fallacious demonstrations of the truth of “the Gospel,” the imaginary exposures of the folly or the knavery of the captious objector r' Leaving such absurdities, let us ask these questions : Given that Revelation is a thing sui generisin what does its distinctive character consist, and how does that distinctive character affect the value of opinion as such ? . T The knowledge of divine things differs, I presume, from the knowledge of all other things either (a) in the method of acquiring it, or (/3) in the nature of the knowledge acquired—or both. . . (a). The way in which a thing is communicated to our knowledge has nothing whatever to do with the character, utility or importance of the thing itself. Knowledge is knowledge, however we come by it. Had the law of gravitation been revealed to Moses �6 On the Efficacy of Opinion instead of being reserved for the observation of Newton, it would have played the same part in the universe, and have afforded the same exercise for men’s faculties that it does now. Had gunpowder been a supernatural and not a natural invention, it would still have been subject to the same conditions, and have answered the same purposes for good and evil as^ at this very moment. Opinion gains nothing on this ground. . (/3). What is really distinctive in the knowledge of divine things is the transcendent importance of divine t mgs. Their interest is universal and everlasting. Moses was inspired and Newton was inspired; but whereas Newton was inspired to teach science, Moses was inspired to teach religion. The source of their teaching* was the same ; the channel by which it came to them may or may not have been the same too ; it is in the subject-matter of their teaching that we are conscious of so momentous a difference. Now, in every concern of life we observe that the value’ of knowledge rises, the value of opinion sinks, in direct proportion to the importance of the subject-matter. In proportion, therefore, as God is supremely great, so the knowledge of God, which in the intellectual signi­ fication of the words is theology, in their moral signi­ fication, religion, is not only of infinitely more impor­ tance than knowledge of any other subject, but of infinitely more importance than any opinion on the same subject. We find then, that, far from annihi­ lating the rule I contend for, the peculiar character of Revelation only intensifies its force. The New Testa­ ment speaks clearly enough to the same effect. As re­ gards opinion : “ Whosoever killeth you will 77m7>; he “ doeth God service.” “ I verily thought with myself that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth ”—things for which we read that the Apostle obtained mercy only because they �in Matters of Religion. 7 were done “ ignorantly in unbelief.” As regards knowledge : “ This is life eternal, that they know (1) “ thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.” 44 Grod will have all men to be saved, and. “ come to the knowledge of the truth.” The reason why the unlearned and ignorant men who had been with Jesus were enabled to smite so effectively the philoso­ phies of heathendom was that their conflict was not between so many sets of opinions, in which they would possibly have been worsted, but between sets of opinions on the one hand and a set of facts on the other. The superior weapon won. II. The incurable uncertainty of so many religious opinions, which in the eyes of the philosopher is their weak point, constitutes, in the eyes of those who are not philosophers, their principal attraction. . The phi­ losopher would argue that an opinion being, as it were, a temporary implement, an endeavouring after truth, is good for nothing when it ends in itself, serves no ulterior purpose, does not further the discovery of the truth which it relates to, inasmuch as that truth is beyond the grasp of the human intellect. To the authority of the Church, in such a case, he would pay little regard, knowing that all the heads in the world put together are as incapable as one head of solving a problem which has been proved to be inso­ luble. No amount of gazing will avail to bring the invisible into sight, and why strain our eyes in vain, or, what were worse, shut them and pretend to see ? The religious world will reply, as one man, that these uncertainties and difficulties and impossibilities were intended to try our faith; that there is no room for faith where there is no room for doubt. Which, in the first place, is a begging of the question; for while (1) ^lyvdxTKovfft is the preferable reading in John xvii. 3. �8 On the Efficacy of Opinion allowing that there is something to be said in my favour, it supposes the question already decided in yours: in the second place, the founder of a religion who designedly leaves difficulties in the way of its being received must in all reason share the blame of its being rejected; as the master who leaves money about to try his servants’ honesty may thank himself to . some extent if they steal it: and, lastly, about the things which are really necessary to salvation, there is no doubt whatever. For religion in general is based upon certain fundamental principles which are beyond the reach of dispute; to which the Christian religion in particular adds certain historical events, the proof of which is to be looked for not in faith, but in history. HI. It will be alleged that much of what we have called the knowledge of God really is resolvable into opinion; and that so far we must admit opinion to be conducive to righteousness of life. Thus we have said that religion is based upon certain indisputable principles; e.g., that God is true. Supposing, then, a man to be of opinion that God is not true, he will, in all probability, either be a liar or be in a fairway of becoming one. But that God is true, I contend, is no more a matter of opinion than that things which are equal to the same thing are equal to one another is a matter of opinion. Truth is an attribute of God, which may have been for any number of ages unknown, butwhich being declared is instantly accepted ; it is seen at once to be an essential part of his being, an insepa­ rable concomitant of his name. To deny it, as to deny the axiom about equal things above mentioned, is not heresy but insanity, not to be argued either with or about. The same may be said in regard of any other of the divine attributes, justice, mercy, omnipo­ tence, omniscience. The same cannot be said in �in Matters of Religion. 9 regard of speculative opinions, Arian, Afhanasian, Sabellian, or what not, about the composition of the godhead. That which commends itself to the con­ science of mankind stands on a distinctly higher level than that which commends itself only to the intellects of particular men. In the first chapter of the epistle to the Romans the apostle denounces those heathen whose immoral practices had so blunted their moral sense as to render them indifferent to what by nature they knew of God. But of their theological opinions, if any they had, he takes no notice whatever. For opinions are not faith; “ Believe on the Lord Jesus “ Christ and thou shalt be saved,” does not and cannot mean, “ Hold my doctrine of the atonement, or you shall “ not be saved.” Not in this sense is practice founded upon doctrine: is it not nearer the truth to say that all human righteousness is founded upon, in other words, is a following of, the divine righteousness, by his con­ formity or non-conformity to which every child of man shall be judged ? Hitherto we have considered what may be called respectable arguments in favour of opinion. There are one or two more of a different character behind, unavowed indeed, but which, in practice, I believe carry considerable weight. It is curious to observe how the man who has made up his mind on a point invariably deems himself entitled to set at naught the man who keeps his judg­ ment in suspense. It is true the hesitation of the latter may be due to his knowing both sides of the question, the positiveness of the former to his knowing only one; but your thorough-going dogmatist does not care for that. He has his opinion, and with him opinion is a royal road to moral and intellectual superiority. All he wants to make him perfectly happy is to get a number of people about him to share his ideas, confirm one another’s convictions, �io On the Efficacy of Opinion and enhance one another’s conceit. The conceit of such cliques—the portrait of them in 1 Corinthians iv. 6-10 is unmistakable—is as unlimited as it is ridiculous. Now, the “ religious world ” is simply a big clique. How it hugs itself in its self-complacency ! how coolly, almost innocently, it passes its censures on those who are not of it I with what a thrill of pleasure it welcomes a stranger who unexpectedly speaks its language ! with what terror and disgust it listens to arguments tending to a conclusion it has rejected ! All the while “ understanding what it says “ and whereof it affirms ” as much as animalcules in a drop of water understand about the gulf-stream. A' little sound knowledge would abate its infatuation; what reason, then, it has to be in love with opinion, when opinion responds so heartily to its self-love ! There is yet another reason. Dethrone opinion, and what becomes of the privilege of persecuting ? The exercise of this blessed privilege is two-fold : as it pertains to persons in authority and to persons not in authority. Whenever the State has persecuted, it has done so for reasons of State. It is an error to suppose that in the good old times the State kept a conscience, and in that conscience believed it to be its duty to punish all who dissented from its religion. Thus in England, Romanists and Dissenters were persecuted simply because the State thought it impossible for Romanists and Dissenters to be loyal and peaceable citizens. As soon as it began to perceive that they both might be and were as good citizens as any English churchmen the persecuting laws were doomed, notwithstanding the efforts, the too-successful efforts, of ignorance and bigotry to prolong their sinful and despicable existence. Now in mental as in bodily concerns, individuals, like States, obey the same in­ stinct of self-preservation. Opinions, existing upon sufferance, are endangered by the presence of opposite �in Matters of Religion. 11 opinions. Hence the impulse to persecute opposite opinions. Persecution and dogma have ever been brethren in arms. For three centuries, during which the Church itself was the victim of persecution, the Christian conscience was satisfied with the apostolic regvda fidei, which, avoiding abstract dogmas, recited just such facts connected with the past, and such con­ victions respecting the present and the future, as were profitable for personal holiness. Heretics con­ travening the rule were fought with their own weapons. But in after-days, when the Church had won its way to empire, and was in a position not only to teach, but to enforce its teaching by the arm of the law, then heterodoxy was dealt with in another spirit, and orthodoxy regulated by other standards. Inevitable controversy conceived and brought forth councils, and councils being finished brought forth definitions of doctrine. These definitions were nothing else than encroachments upon common land, which, once enclosed, could never again be thrown open. And so, by degrees, the vast system of dog­ matic theology grew up, not so much by develop­ ment as by accretion, out of which it was as hard for the inquirer to disentangle the simple truths of the Gospel of Jesus, as it would be for a Yorkshire villager of the last century, if suddenly resuscitated in this, to identify the site of his cottage home in the stupendous manufacturing borough that has swallowed up the neighbourhood. Failing to find what he wanted, he must go where the authorities sent him. Failing to obey his orders he was speedily taught what prayers for magistrates, that they might have “ grace “ to execute justice and maintain truth,” meant. The Reformation, while it purged our Church of much that was Popish in detail, did not purge away what was worst in Popery, viz., that Popish spirit which speaks thus: “ Believe as I do, or take the conse- �12 On the Efficacy of Opinion “ queuecs.” In the place of one Pope it only set up a multitude. The result is, that while the State has abandoned the practice of persecuting, individuals, with rare exceptions, have not. True they have not such scope for their energies as they could wish, but they go manfully to work, considering “ the diversity “ of times and men’s manners.” If they cannot kill their brethren by way of doing God service, they can pick their pockets for the same pious object. If they cannot hang, they can give bad names. If they can­ not visit you with a sentence of the “ greater excom“ munication,” they can send you to Coventry, which does nearly as well. Now, that a clique, which would be nothing if not numerous and noisy, should have the power of subjecting its victims to so much unmerited annoyance, sometimes to the extent of ruining them in purse and prospects, is intolerable enough; but infinitely more intolerable, because so deadly in its effects, is the tyranny thus exercised over men’s minds. Right dear in the sight of the clique is the stifling of inquiry. The intellectual light of the world is put out in the blaze of its brightness. The intellectual salt of the earth, in all the freshness of its savour, is trodden under foot of the vulgar. The branch of original and independent and healthy and vigorous thought is by rude hands cut down and cast into the fire. Everywhere we are confronted with the miser­ able spectable of— art made tongue-tied by authority, And folly, doctor-like, controlling skill, which made the soul of Shakespeare weary of his life. Why ? as Caesar says of the “ great observer ” who “ thinks too much,” such men are dangerous. Danger I danger I is the monotonous cry of the bigot who, in the same breath in which he professes �in Matters of Religion. 13 an unbounded confidence in his convictions, unwit­ tingly gives his profession the lie. To conclude. The pre-eminence popularly assigned to opinion, as it is false in principle, is detrimental in practice : detrimental to knowledge—for, to take but one instance, there is no more stubborn impediment to a right understanding of the Scriptures than a pre-conceived theory of inspiration; detrimental to charity—for while opinions are cherished for their own sake, opinions destined never to become certain­ ties, so long on their account will people bite and devour one another, until they are at length con­ sumed one of another. Thus do religious opinions defeat the purpose of religion 5 which is to lead us to the “ knowledge of the truth,” and to promote “peace “ on earth, good-will towards men.” �The following Pamphlets and Papers may be had on ad* dressing a letter enclosing the price in postage stamps to Mr Thomas Scott, Mount Pleasant, Ramsgate. A Lay Sermon, for the Benefit of Clergy. Price 6d. Eternal Punishment.' An Examination of the Doctrines held by the Clergy of the Church of England. By “Presbyter Anglicanus.” Price fid. Letter and Spirit. By a Clergyman of the Church of England. Price fid. Science and Theology'. By Richard Davies Hanson, Esq., Chief Justice of South Australia. Price 4d. A Few Words on the Trinity, the Holy Spirit, and the Divinity and Incarnation of Jesus. Price Cd. Questions to which the Orthodox are Earnestly Requested to Give Answers. Thoughts on Religion and the Bible. By a Layman and M.A. of Trin. Coll., Dublin. Price 6d. The Opinions of Professor David F. Strauss. Price 6d. A Few Self-Contradictions of the Bible. Price Is., free by post. English Life of Jf.sus, or Historical and Critical Analysis of the Gospels; complete in Six Parts, containing about 500 pages. Price 7s. 6d., free by post. Against Hero-Making in Religion. By Professor Francis W. Newman. Price 6d. The Religious Weakness of Protestantism. By Professor Francis W. Newman. Price 7d., post free. The Difficulties and Discouragements which Attend the Study of the Scriptures. By the Right Rev. Francis Hare, D.D., formerly Lord Bishop of Chichester. Price fid. The Chronological Weakness of Prophetic Interpretation. By a Beneficed Clergyman of the Church of England. Price Is. Id., post free. On the Defective Morality of the Neyv Testament. By Professor Francis W. Newman. Price 6d. The “Church and its Reform.” A Reprint. Price Is. “The Church of England Catechism Examined.” By Jeremy Bentham, Esq. A Reprint. Price Is. Original Sin. Price fid. Redemption, Imputation, Substitution, Forgiveness of Sins, and Grace. Price fid. Basis of a New Reformation. Price 9d. Miracles and Prophecies. Price fid. Babylon. By the Rev. P. S. Desprez, B.D. Price fid. The “Sling and the Stone.” Four Series of Sermons preached by the Rev. Charles Voysey, Incumbent of Healaugh, Tadcaster. Price 6s. each Series of Twenty-four Sermons. The Nicbne and Athanasian Creeds: a Portion of a Speech by Bishop Clayton. Price fid. Thoughts on a Free and Comprehensive Christianity. By Professor I. VV. Newman. Price fid. The Church : the Pillar and Ground of the Truth. Price 6d. Modern Orthodoxy and Modern Liberalism. Price fid. Errors, Discrepancies, and Contradictions of the Gospel Records; with special reference to the irreconcilable Contradictions between the Synoptics and the Fourth Gospel. Price Is. • TnE Gospel of the Kingdom. By a Beneficed Clergyman of the Church of England. Price fid. . “The Meaning of the Age.” By the Author of “The Pilgrim and the Shrine.” Price 6d. . “ James and Paul.” A Tract by Emer. Prof. F. W. Newman. Price fid. Layv and the Creeds. Price fid. Genesis Critically Analysed, and continuously arranged; ivith Introduc­ tory Remarks. By Edward Vansittart Neale, M.A. and M.R.I. Price Is. A Confutation of the Diabolarchy. By Rev. John Oxlee. Price 6d. The Bigot and the Sceptic. By Emer. Professor F. W. Newman. Price 6d. Church Cursing and Atheism. By the Rev. Thomas P. Kirkman M.A., F.R.S., &c., Rector of Croft, Warrington. Price ?s. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource On the efficacy of opinion in matters of religion Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Worthington, William Robert Description An account of the resource Place of publication: Ramsgate Collation: 13, [1] p. 18 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed by C.W. Reynell, Little Pulteney Street, London. Publisher's list on unnumbered page at the end. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Thomas Scott Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1870 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5496 Subject The topic of the resource Theology Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (On the efficacy of opinion in matters of religion), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Christianity-Controversial Literature Conway Tracts Doctrinal Theology https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/f68f7bd91a8bee3c3afda1f34be1465c.pdf?Expires=1781740800&Signature=DINMWAf9XK75r6dtUFC%7E%7ElQJ9v0TWMcIKfX0Zrz0iuo2VT34FUKbSo9cSvUF%7Ebo8YVwdDQ3cuOecgHij8akQTXvlVpvRn3GGw-blsqL90hKH0RfPrgboYpkZHW5H2YSEwhBOrA6jVOQGHvXLE1Wijp9Xh0m0v9JurFZHPZLj8cFF-5qta3bRZ2v19vE77%7EiOfVpdCijKYeFY1sid%7EqlcQW7o8MTbB8vlBMr1D9deJMLJUY-1bmzGEjDoDhYQbE4qd8SKrcBz9sb6sS75feu2o1bkUuQQCHXsNiu12vgvFLArZCbNxIWle-Ez65EiGcMAkKgt3AXUUEuteaBZGWqjcA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM f9738db889ac80f92cf72cce3f6029d4 PDF Text Text �������������������������������������������������������������������������� Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Revealed religion: its claims on the intellect and on the heart impartially discussed in a series of letters from a father to his son Description An account of the resource Place of publication: London Collation: 62, [4] p. ; 19 cm. Notes: Covers and edges of most pages stained with red ink. Annotations in pencil and ink. Indecipherable writing in pencil on front cover. By "A Wrangler and ex-member of the University of Cambridge". Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available E. Truelove Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1870 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5781 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource [Unknown] Subject The topic of the resource Religion Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Revealed religion: its claims on the intellect and on the heart impartially discussed in a series of letters from a father to his son), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Christianity-Controversial Literature Religion-Controversial Literature https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/2b42f56333c4e7d735a8d036aad339a3.pdf?Expires=1781740800&Signature=R4qiE6oeQOsC1VJVR46Rb-WcXA3KrZXvGVlVpJgQjyiE01ex1PUZ-Q06FWrSkQyfv4YVG6X2rPCkcQVqWKcFP76t2DROKgJti33bzCH8bZVprr%7ETmjPomBpKZBALFVRhK4PmBgt3Xs0FiH0KdrNdlZ2sHYy08lQELfVkVl1XLwu3rZ0rjkjQrmJP5jLWMyRFEDf7MiDwijI44YhOGEu2Xk6GSq8PgGDvOWZje1KG6EwLzmPEFJS%7EVdroi3ATfOiaZ20l-pXXh49OK4mQfYcBFzz3UQhpd6H5r8bBXqCQUoWasaksih16SL271bQ8nZOq5XS7HJbxUWonjF9u-oaNXw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 2eedebd4b55ef471925d202983cedc17 PDF Text Text ■ THE EXAMINER: A Monthly Review of Religious and Humane Questions, and of Literature. Vol. I. —FEBRUARY, 1871. —No. 3. Article I.— Unitarian Leaders. [These sketches were written while watching the pro­ ceedings of the recent meeting of the Unitarian National Conference. Though slight, and hastily set down, they aim to be just. They refer in part to persons who were not present in the meeting alluded to.] REV. DR. BELLOWS Is well known to the general public. In the Conference he appeared as the President of the Council of Ten, which is the executive committee of the organization! His report in this capacity opened the work of the conference! In several respects Dr. Bellows stands in a position almost pontifical. His abundant energy, his large and broad intelligence in ethical and religious matters, his usual cath­ olicity of spirit, the exceptional warmth and vigor of his fraternal sympathies, and his great gifts as a writer and preacher, have justly entitled him to a position not accorded to any other among the leaders of Unitarianism. It is at the same time to be said, that a somewhat pontifical temper is thought by many of Dr. Bellows’s brethren to detract unhappily from his usefulness as unofficial primate of the denomination, while his long-time habit of giving way to LIBRARY South Place Ethical Society Kgsjx indiyidu^i....... xosKac.articles______ uot...indexe.d....... Class ..................................... Congress, in the year 1871, by Edward C. Towne, in the OfT.ce of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. I �202 Unitarian Leaders. extreme inspirations, now in the direction of unrestricted liberty, and now as entirely in the opposite direction, gives great uneasiness to the less eminent but more consistent managers of denominational affairs. The more radical repress with difficulty their dissatisfaction with the conces­ sions which Dr. Bellows has made to extreme conservatism. On the other hand, the more conservative entertain un­ feigned disgust at the equal concessions which their primate has made to radicalism. It cannot be denied by any, how­ ever, that in the report made by Dr. Bellows he stood between the two extreme which divide his brethren, and * even stood above them, both in the gentleness and firmness of his entirely Christian spirit, and in his sincere effort to state the common ground occupied by the widely separated elements pf the caflamunion, that of faith in God, whether through the Christ off God or the Spirit of God, Christian union justly frecogjiized between all who believe in “the God behind both Christ and Spirit.” REV. E. E. HALE, , The popular preacher and magazinist of Boston, represents the onljheecognized denominational publication, “ Old and New,” of which Mr. Hale is the editor. Five thousand dollars was given by the American Unitarian Association towards establishing “ Old and New,” and some benevolent individuals gave the venerable “ Christian Examiner ” thirty-five hundred dollars to “ go up higher,” and it went, leaving the field.to Mr. Hale’s enterprise. In the opinion of some of the more thoughtful and scholarly of the Unita­ rian divines, Mr. Hale has not met just expectations. Not a few—Rev, Dr. Hedge for example—deem “ Old and New” of little off no account to any serious religious work, its notes of really religious utterance are so few and feeble. Some go so far as to energetically stigmatize the publica­ tion as unpardonably superficial, a sugared mush of pleasant words which can be liked once, can be endured a few times, but cannot be accepted for a moment as the latest literary �Unitarian Leaders. 203 legacy of Unitarianism to the American people. These would gladly give a handsome sum to induce “ Old and New ” to follow the “ Christian Examiner ” “ up higher.” Even Dr. Bellows, in his calm, judicious report to the Con­ ference, did not hesitate to mingle with kindly praise of his beloved friend’s labors, an earnest intimation that Mr. Hale had not yet done what he was supposed to be under a pledge to do, and decided warning that further disappointment on the part of the denomination would hardly be borne with patience. It is but just to say for Mr. Hale, that he has both consulted the market, which makes but a limited demand for any other than cheap work in popular maga­ zines, and his own genius, which is essentially genial rather than thoughtfull and interested more in strewing pleasure in the everyday path of common people, than in leading the march of the saints and thinkers, or heading the fray of zealous faith. REV. CHARLES LOWE, The popular secretary of the American Unitarian Associa­ tion, is a remarkable illustration of modest powers used with a wisdom hardly ever associated with a more striking and more daring order of genius. Of delicate physical constitution, of a peculiar sweetness of spirit and gentle­ ness of manner, cautious in thought and unambitious in action, he yet goes so directly to the point of every matter with which he has to deal, and takes his stand so conscien­ tiously and firmly, with such breadth of spirit and such profound sympathy with all things lovely and of good report, as to find himself recognized as one at least of the pillars of the Gate Beautiful of the Urratarian communion, if not in fact, in himself alone, the most exact contempo­ rary expression of the Christian Liberty through which Channing taught his disciples to seek entrance to the king­ dom of God. JWES FREEMAN CLARKE, As he likes to be called, without his titles, was the Secretary �204 Unitarian Leaders. of the Association, now represented by Mr. Lowe, during a p^iod ten years ago, when the seeds of present agitation were being sown; and at that time no one could have more nobly held up the Unitarian standard of spiritual freedom. As an earnest friend of Theodore Parker, and a sufferer from insisting upon Christian recognition of that great heresiarch, before Unitarianism had begun to build his monument,—when in fact it was still stoning him,—Mr. Clarke earned a most honorable fame among the earliest friends of the progress which has now become intensely radical, and this he did not in any respect forfeit during the period of his secretaryship in the American Unitarian Association. It was, however, always the case that Mr. Clarke belonged by his most cherished beliefs to orthodox Unitarianism. Few of Theodore Parker’s critics have appreciated his theology less than Mr. Clarke, or have more positively questioned that radical reformer’s success as a seeker for Christian truth. The recent eminence of Mr. Clarke,—now Dr. Clarke,—as a preacher and denomi­ national writer, has brought his theological conservatism into particular prominence, and has given the impression that age is cooling the more liberal sympathies of his earlier career. It can be pretty confidently said, neverthe­ less, that any wanderer from the stricter churches, or any fugitive from the darker faiths of the modern world, who may come to the Gate Beautiful alluded to above, will find himself passing very close to the ever-warm heart of one of the purest and noblest men now living, James Freeman Clarke. REV. F. H. HEDGE, D.D., Rarely presses to the front in any assemblage of liberal Christians, though he should be recognized as the finest thinker and ablest writer the denomination has had since Mr. Emerson withdrew to an exclusively literary position. Like Dr. Clarke, Dr. Hedge is in one direction conserva­ tive—that of a strenuous demand for close connection with the Christianity of the past; yet he is essentially a trans- �Unitarian Leaders. 20.5 cendentalist by the greatness of his intellect, a calm seer who looks out with clear eyes over the highest summits of human thought, and views both discussions and conclusions in the purest light of unclouded heavenly reason. Not even Mr. Emerson has more deeply penetrated the mystic secrets of divine reason, nor more happily separated in the spectrum of his thought the elements of the uncreated light which is to all religious minds the essence of revelation. If any man now living is competent to report to the ear of this generation the best echoes of eighteen Christian centu­ ries, and in fact the utterances of the “still small voice” in all ages and places of human faith, Dr. Hedge is entitled to such rank. REV. C. A. BARTOL, D.D., The successor of Dr. Lowell, in that watch-tower of spirit­ ual edification, the pulpit of the West Church, Boston, is one of the beloved and distinguished leaders of Unitarianism, in spite of his life-long determination to abstain from all sectarian connection. He is a rare example of the spir­ itual insight which makes a. successful preacher, the power to look through forms to sympathies, and touch the deeper chords of feeling, in the vibration of which the Christian heart most readily recognizes the visitation of the divine compassion. Had he so chosen, Dr. Bartol might have cul­ tivated, with eminent success, the difficult field of theologi­ cal speculation, and he does not, with all his simplicity and gentleness, lack the robust qualities necessary to the high controversy of religious opinion. It was his deliberate choice to entirely devote himself to edification through pulpit ministry and pastoral labor, and here he stands second to none among his brethren. REV. WM. H. FURNESS, D.D., Of Philadelphia, is in the same category as Dr. Bartol: he 1 is a Unitarian leader, without ever meddling with the con­ duct of denominational affairs. The most genial of natures is in him matured by thorough and varied culture in litera- �206 Unitarian Leaders. ture, art, and social graces, until he justly ranks among the most charming masters of the interpretation and illustra­ tion of Christian grace and truth. It has been the single study of Dr. Furness, through all his active life, and by many successive efforts, to reproduce the true likeness of ideal humanity, as he reads it in the person of Christ. The consummate art of the painter appears in every stroke of his work, but, with most readers, it is less easy to be sure of the historical fidelity of the picture. The latest, and probably the final attempt of Dr. Furness to interpret the person and career of Christ to the modern world, will be found in a new book from his pen, bearing the simple title “ Jesus,” which has just issued from the press of J. B. Lippincott & Co. REV. W. P. TILDEN, Who conducted the opening service of the Conference, and gave to that service a tone of profound faith in the broadest communion,—through the presence of the indwelling Father, in the children now, as in the Master eighteen cen­ turies ago, “ God in us as in him,”—deservedly ranks with the leaders of the denomination, for his single-hearted fer­ vor of faith, and hope, and charity, and his zealous labors for the promotion of practical Christianity. Originally a New England ship-carpenter, his largeness of spiritual nature and irrepressible enthusiasm for humanitarian and religious work, pointed him out to Rev. Caleb Stetson, one of the eminent Unitarian leaders of the last generation, as peculiarly qualified for effective service in the liberal pulpit; and this anticipation has been fully justified by all the events of Mr. Tilden’s career. Without attempting to share the special labors of Unitarian learning and thought, Mr. Tilden, who is now among the elder men of the body, has established a just claim to be considered one of the practi­ cal apostles of the work and fellowship of Unitarianism. And in the same category should be set that worthiest of good men, and most excellent and earnest of fathers in the church, �Definitions from Carlyle. 207 REV. SAMUEL J. MAY, "Whose long life has beautifully exemplified the power of zealous goodness, and the charm which always attaches to a character of which simplicity, sincerity, and the fervor of unmixed kindness are the chief elements. Mr. May was magna pars of the great anti-slavery conflict, and has lately embodied in an interesting and valuable volume, his “ Rec­ ollections” of that holy war. In ripe old age, he is as fresh in fervor as if youth still kept the fountain of his life, and almost promises to stay here indefinitely, unless the powers up higher repeat in full, as they have in great part, the experiment of the patriarch who walked with God, and was not, for God took him. Article II.—Definitions, from Carlyle, of Religion, of Pa­ ganism, and of Christianity. “ Religion. . m The thing a man does practically believe (and this is often without asserting it even to himself, much less to others); the thing a man does practically lay tc heart, and know for certain, concerning his vital relations to this mysterious Universe, and his duty and destiny there.” “ Recognition of the divineness of nature 1 sincere com­ munion of man with the mysterious invisible Powers visi­ bly seen at work in the world around him, . . is the essence of all Pagan mythology, H. . sincerity the great character­ istic of it, . . . looking into nature with open eye and soul: most earnest, honest!childlike, and yet manlike; with a great-hearted simplicity and depth and freshness, in a true, loving, admiring, unfearing way. . . . Such recognition of Nature one finds to be the chief element of Paganism : rec­ ognition of man, and his moral Duty, comes to be the chief element only in purer forms of religion ; . . here indeed is a great distinction and epoch in Human Beliefs; a great landmark in the religious development of Mankind. Man �208 “ Jesus Christ an Inferior Man.” first puts himself in relation with Nature and her Powers; not till a later epoch does he discern that all Power is Moral, that the grand point is the distinction for him of Good and Evil, of Thou shalt and Thou shalt not.” “ Pagan Religion is indeed an Allegory, a symbol of what men felt and knew about the Universe; and all relig­ ions are symbols of that, altering always as that alters.” “ Christianism; faith in an Invisible, not as real only, but as the only reality; Time, through every moment of it, resting on Eternity; Pagan empire of Force displayed by a nobler supremacy, that of Holiness.” “ The germ of Christianity, . . is hero-worship, heartfelt prostrate admiration, submission, burning, boundless, for a noblest, godlike Form of Man, . . for the great man, with his free force direct out of God’s own hand, as the indis­ pensable saviour of his epoch . . Christianity is the highest instance of Hero-Worship.” Article III. — “Jesus Christ an Inferior Man.” — Inde­ pendent. The Independent of November 24 devoted its leading editorial to the topic, Jesus Christ an Inferior Man. It placarded this sentiment where it met the eyes of we know not how many scores of thousands of persons. It rung the changes upon it until it had repeated the epithet of contempt twenty-one times, through a column and a half of feeble rhetoric or feebler snuffle. Appealing to pi pus fiction, to sacred myth, to goody incident, and goodish anecdote, and to various historical characters, reputable and disreputable, it frantically cried shame on the shame­ less Examiner for calling Jesus “an inferior man.” The old pagan, Constantine, and “another emperor, immortal for infamy,” with that modern master of selfishness, whose imperial line reached the finale of its infamy at Sedan the other day, it grouped effectively round Dr. Kane, while the latter planted a toy cross on “ the northernmost iceberg of �‘‘ Jesus Christ gin Inferior Man.” 209 the frozen sea,” a “ beautiful, dreary, and perilous cere­ mony,” which we, forsooth, could not look on with even “ a faint pulse of sympathy,” because of our “little criti­ cism ” about the “ inferior man 1 ” This representation of what we were said to have said about the popular man-image of God has gone the rounds of the religious press, in editorials and paragraphs, and probably reached an audience a hundred times as large as we could reach, or even a thousand times as large, and with an effect towards breaking down faith in the Christian idol very much greater than The Examiner, by any circulation whatever, could have produced. The Independent conspicu­ ously posted the intelligence that Jesus Christ had been thrust ignominiously out of Christianity, had been tumbled like a heathen idol out of the temple of religion, by a man who professes Christian faith ! It was very stupid if it supposed that such an announcement could fail to have a most disastrous effect upon common faith in Jesus as a supposed express image of God. For it is not calm argu­ ment, nor labored appeal, which have most effect on the average mind, but sharp, strong assertion, pithy catchwords, keen epithets,—-just like this which the Independent has placarded, Jesus Christ an inferior man. Bold to rudeness or profanity though it be, it is all the more a blow the force of which cannot be parried. In passing it round, the reli­ gious weeklies offer themselves to their enemy as the ass’s colt offered his back to the Lord Christ. It is particularly interesting to an iconoclast to see his work done for him, when the echo of his own word is the only clear, strong point of the utterance. What do we care for Kane on an iceberg, or Napoleon arrogantly pre­ tending that he knew men, or Constantine guessing or feigning he saw a cross in the sky, or t’other heathen, con­ fessedly “ immortal for infamy,” who, perhaps, did finally tremble before the “ Galilean,” as many a. wretch certainly has? Theology is not the science of accidental confessions of great scamps. Napoleon “knew men,” did he? Knew �210 “Jesus Christ an Inferior Man.” the divine side of man, did he? Was just the man to say, “ I know men, and Jesus Christ was not a man?” Why not consult the present Napoleon, and get his certificate that Jesus was not a man ? These “ immortal-for-infamy ” fellows have such an eye for deity, and can give such sure, testimony to the godhead of a young Jew of eighteen centuries since 1 It is really touching, isn’t it, to find how handsomely they make out their useful certificates that Jesus was not a man at alf and of course was not“ an inferior man.” But here we must say that the words placarded by the Independent, in the article to which we have alluded, were never used by The Examiner, nor any words like them. The expression was copied by the Independent from a con­ temptuous sentence of D. A. Wasson, whom we had asked tor evidence of the “ imperial” greatness of Jesus, and who eked out the meagreness and feebleness of his reply by sar­ casm and sneers, intended to confute us by bringing us into contempt. He professed to find in what we had said, the theory that ‘‘Jesus was an inferior man, whom Providence selected for the express purpose of showing what might be made of an inferior man,” although in fact we said that u the child of Joseph and Mary fairly obtained, and must always hold among men on earth, one of the greatest prov­ idential places of human history.” If we also said that his life was “ simple and humble,” and that he was “ without any particular greatness of intellect or character,” we said this in the course of a protest against Mr. Abbot’s attempt to stand outside a definite relation to him ” as “ the stand­ ard bearer of a great movement of mankind.” The words which Mr. Wasson used were worse than contemptuous, therefore; they told one of those half truths which are worse than downright falsehoods. We had not intended to say this, and should not have done so had not the Indepen­ dent given so wide a circulation to Mr. Wasson’s gibe. To the Independent we beg to say, Beware of second-hand learn­ ing, for, from the day that there began to be stories afloat �Mr. Wasson’s “Medicines.” 211 about the young rabbi of Nazareth, to this present time, second-hand knowledge has made the current Christianity a fabric more of fiction than of fact. For instance, Jesus was not the original author of anything contained in the Sermon on the Mount. As a distinguished Hebraist of our time has said, that discourse was perfectly familiar in the streets of Jerusalem before it was delivered by Jesus; and both the truths of it and its spirit may be referred to the truly great Hillel much more justly than to the young master who was but a pupil and a child, when a rash ambi­ tion cost him his life. Article IV.—Mr. Wasson’s “ Medicines” or IIow to “ See Jesus.” In one of the shorter articles of our first issue, we said that “ it would give us great pleasure to seethe evidence on which Mr. Wasson pronounces Jesus ‘ an imperial soul,’ and the historical ground for his assumption that the young Nazarene enthusiast expected ‘ a reign of morals pure and simple,’ not the reign of an individual, nor of a nation. ” Mr. Wasson has made a reply to this demand, in the Liberal Christian. In this reply he first alleges, That we are in the condition of De Quincey, when he pronounced Socrates and Plato a pair of charlatans, “ betraying the extent to which his judgments might be dictated by his humors,” and presenting a case of “ disease, to be contro­ verted with medicines; not with logic and testimony. ” But what medicines will suffice to prove that Jesus is “ an imperial soul ?” Is it by calomel or ipecac, by vomit or by purge, that we may arrive at Mr. Wasson’s view? It is truly very unkind in our friend to refer us to promiscuous drugs. We might retire on a dose of blue pill for example, and wake up Calvinist, as fierce as Fulton, who glories in having “preached hell in Boston ” to so much purpose ; or’ having distressed our stomach with an emetic, we might bring ourselves to a condition requiring the small beer and �212 Mr. Wasson’s “ Medicines ’’ water-gruel Christology of brother Tilton. To proof num­ ber one, therefore, alleged by Mr. Wasson, we beg to ask the particular medicines he would recommend. In the second place, Mr. Wasson, in reply to our demand for proof of the “ imperial ” greatness of Jesus, alleges this: “I see in Jesus an amazing elevation of soul; Mr. Towne looks on the same picture, and beholds only a daub, or, at best, a work of little merit. The question, accord­ ingly, what Jesus was in character and quality of spirit, is one which I cannot discuss with him.” Which is, in other words, “I am right, evidence or no evidence.” Mr. Was­ son says, we “ do not entertain the question, which of us two sees more truly.” But that is exactly the question we do entertain, and the settlement of which we hoped to reach, by hearing Mr. Wasson’s evidence, and by contro­ verting it with other and weightier proof. We asserted our belief that Mr. Wasson depended more on imagination than on historical proof, and here we convict him of it. lie avows that Jesus is an amazing picture to him, and that we do not see it as he does, simply because we have not the eye for it. Very well, but Mr. Wasson’s eye is not histori­ cal evidence. He glorified the first disciples, as “ large popular imaginations,” expressly ascribing their recognition of Jesus to the largeness and the popular quality of their imagination. And now he confesses that it is all in his eye. Medicines and imagination, then, are, so far, what Mr. Wasson recommends to us, if we would “ see Jesus.” But Mr. Wasson goes a step further. He names Nicolas and Colani. He avows that he makes certain “ discrimina­ tions,” and we look with care to see what they are. He rejects the Fourth Gospel. So far, good. The Fourth Gospel is a theological story, and a poor one at that, though some of the finest things are preserved in it. Again, he rejects “ the most extended and explicit of the Messianic passages in the Synoptical Gospels,” “ upon the showing of M. Colani.” If he means that he clears Jesus of the charge of Messianic pretension in a Jewish sense, merely on the �Or “ How io See Jesus.” ' 213 showing of Colani, he rests, as we feared he did, on the very narrow basis of insufficient investigation. Not a tithe of the weight of modern scholarship is on that side. The one fact most surely proven in regard to Jesus is, that he under­ took to be the king of the Jews, and lost his life in conse­ quence. To cite. Colani as evidence of the contrary, is to cite the opinion of a worthy preacher—not the indorsement of a real scholar; much like quoting Dr. J. F. Clarke. Mr. Wasson disposes of this point in five lines. He merely states that Colani has satisfied him. But this is the key of the controversy, the question whether Jesus entertained a false Messianic ambition. If Colani has satisfied Mr. Was­ son that he did not, either potent drugs or a “ large popular imagination’'’ must have assisted the effect of Colani’s superficial and unsatisfactory handling of the subject. In/the third place, Mr. Wasson feels sure that oral tradi­ tion, assuming that the Christ must have put forth claims, ascribed to him pretension of which he was not guilty. In fact, however, the evidence still existing, that Jesus put forth these claims, cannot be set aside by this or any other imagination of what may or must have been ; while, if Jesus did undertake and failed, every motive to drop out of sight the evidence of the abortive undertaking, must have worked during the years through which the tradition was oral, thus making it almost certain, that whatever evidence of this has survived, is to be regarded as peculiarly significant and weighty. So far, therefore, from throwing out the evidence that Jesus was a pretender to Messiahship, we ought to regard it as more strictly historical than anything else in the record. It is by imagination here, also, not by sound scholarship, that Mr. Wasson reaches his conclusion. And, finally, Mr. Wasson thinks it certain, that Jesus was greater than his immediate followers knew him to be, and that we must assume, on the one hand, that the best things reported were not lent him by the disciples, who had nothing to give, and that other things not so good, were due to their failure to comprehend. But the fact is, that �214 Mr. Wasson's “ Medicines.” the story of Jesus was worked over by oral report, after a supposed resurrection was thought to have proved him to have been the Messiah. “Large popular imaginations” had charge of it, and made what they chose of it. And the good things of the story (the ethical and spiritual truths') were current, just as much before. Jesus and apart from him, as they could be after him. Or if he brought them together, he did not originate them. Hillel was as much greater than Jesus as Channing than Chadwick, or Theodore Parker than Mr. Morse. We intend to speak exactly. And Hillel’s spirit was, as that of Jesus was not, fully and invariably that of the best things in the Sermon on the Mount. He gave to Christianity the Golden RuleHis school of teaching and influence was as much more important than that of Jesus, as his years, and learning, and character surpassed those of the young enthusiast whose dreams interrupted the course of human progress, from Judaism onward, with eighteen centuries of worship of a man, and untold inhumanities wrought in the propaga­ tion of his pretension. On the one hand then, the belief that Jesus had been proved the Messiah, moved his disciples to make the best story they could, and, on the other hand, they could copy fine truths from current teaching, just as easily as to repeat them from Jesus, who had but copied them at the best, so that we are bound to assume, not that Jesus lost in the story of him, but that he gained in it immensely, so much so as to be more the creature of it) than a fact of history. Thus, briefly, do we dispose of Mr. Wasson’s “ discriminations,” on the basis of which he says he has made up a critical judgment. We find every one of these, except the first, unscholarly to a lamentable degree. But if we had not done this, it would be easy to show the vice of Mr. Wasson’s conclusion. Por he says that he proceeds “ to make up a critical judgment,” by “ endeavor­ ing first to catch the tune of his mind, his action and char­ acter, by meditating upon those sayings of his, and those incidents of his life which are of such a quality as to carry �John Brown on the Scaffold. 215 their own credentials.” Imagination, again ! Sayings and incidents which carry their own credentials ! The Qolden Rule, for example, or other fine truths, proof of the charac­ ter of Jesus, because they are so fine, when, to a certainty Jesus did not originate either the terms or the tone of the purest Christian teaching, and did originate the baleful pretension of his own claim to divine position ! Mr. Was­ son must try again. He has not given us a scrap of evi­ dence that Jesus was eminently great, either in thought or in principle. We do not wonder that he began with recom­ mending drugs, and then offered the use of his eye, for cer­ tainly his “ discriminations” are of no weight whatever, nor is his “ critical judgment ” entitled to any authority. It is very well to have read Nicolas, and what there is of Colani may be looked at with profit, especially if one looks and passes on, but neither Mr. Wasson nor any other advo­ cate of an exploded superstition can afford to be contemptu­ ous in a matter of scholarship, on so meagre a support. We ask Mr. Wasson again for evidence, and hope he will give us more on the main point than he does when he says, “I am satisfied on the showing of M. Colani.” Article V.—John Brown on the Scaffold and Jesus on the Cross. Before secession, civil war, and emancipation, had shown the leader of the Harper’s Ferry enterprise to have been the providential herald of the greatest overturning of modern times, there were few persons who would not have been shocked at the mere suggestion of comparing John Brown with the most remarkable prophet-judges and prophet­ chieftains of familiar Hebrew story. The most plausible view at first was that he was a crack-brained fanatic, who might even escape the penalty of his mad crime under the plea of insanity. It soon became evident, however, that this madness had more method and character than the sanity of ordinary men] Two bitterly prejudiced witnesses said of the hero of Harper’s Ferry : �216 ; ; , I I I , John Brown on the Scaffold “It is vain to underrate either the man or the conspiracy. Captain John Brown is as brave and resolute a man as ever headed an insurrection, and, in a good cause, and with a sufficient force, would have been a consummate partisan commander. He has coolness, daring, persistency, the stoic faith and patience, and a firmness of will and purpose unconquerable. He is the farthest possible remove from the ordinary ruffian, fanatic, or madman. Certainly it was one of the best planned and best executed conspiracies that ever * failed. “ They are themselves mistaken who take him to be a madman. He is a bundle of the best nerves I ever saw, cut, and thrust, and bleeding, and in bonds. He is a man of clear head, of courage, fortitude, and simple ingenuousness. He is cool, collected, and indomitable. . . . lie inspired me with great trust in his integrity, as a man of truth. . . . Colonel Washington says that he was the cool­ est and firmest man he ever saw in defying danger and death. With one son dead by his side, and another shot through, he felt the pulse of his dying son with one hand and held his rifle with the other, and commanded his men with the utmost composure, encouraging them to be firm, and to sell their lives as dearly as they could.”f The opinion of the martyr himself upon the proposal to put in the plea of insanity on his behalf was unequivocal and indignant. In addressing the court before his trial he said : “I look upon it (the plea in question) as a miserable artifice and pretext of those who ought to take a different course in regard to me, if they took any at all, and I view it with contempt more than otherwise. ... I am perfectly unconscious of insanity, and I reject, as far as I am capable, any attempts to interfere on my behalf on that score.” To this we may add the convincing allusion of one of his latest letters : “I may be very insane, and I am so if insane at all. But, if that be so, insanity is like a pleasant dream to me. * C. L. Vallandigliam. f Henry A. Wise. �And Jesus on the Cross. 217 I am not in the least degree conscious of my ravings, of my fears, or of any terrible visions whatever; but fancy my­ self entirely composed ; and that my sleep, in particular, is as sweet as that of a healthy, joyous little infant. I pray G od that he will grant me a continuance of the same calm but de­ lightful dream, until I come to know of those realities which eyes have not seen, and ears have not heard.” Mary Brown, who had always been the sharer of her husband’s plans, said emphatically : “I couldn’t say, if I were called upon, that my husband was insane—even to save his life; because he wasn’t.] She declared that if her husband were . insane he had been consistent in his insanity from the first moment she knew him. But more than all else the perfectly grand manifestation of character, made to the whole world during John Brown’s forty-two days before the gallows, settled the question of his mental condition. The conversations, speeches in court and letters from prison, of John Brown, convict him of any­ thing but mental weakness. Beginning with the precious • fragment of autobiography written for the young son of Mr. George L. Stearns, the recorded utterances of this uncul­ tured man of the people have a fine literary quality which indicates remarkable purity of intellectual tone. Their style alone speaks a man of clear head and pure taste. And x their moral elevation is so complete, the sentiments which they report are so good and so great, that we are forced to confess ourselves in presence of a miracle of character. There seems to us no doubt that John Brown, shepherd, tanner, wool merchant,farmer, Kansas chieftain, provisional constitution maker, and Harper’s Ferry commander, must be classed with the greatest characters of history, because of his remarkable union of clear vision, pure conscience, and perfect courage,—the insight of a prophet, the most un­ compromising love of right, and absolute intrepidity in action. In amount of quality he stands with the very few supreme men of the race, the founders for mankind of civil­ ity and religion. And for combination of the grand types VOL. I.—NO. 3. 2 �218 John Brown on the Scaffold of character, is it too much to say that, as we see him in his transfiguration before the scaffold, his figure is nobler than that of any earlier hero of our race — the wisest, purest, bravest of mankind ? Standing on this latest stage of time, instructed, chastened and inspired by a situation quite beyond any hitherto arranged in history, it was in the order of Providence that the mount of this martyr should plant the standard of our march above Calvary, as Calvary planted it above Sinai. Not that we compare, in respect to nature, the now deified Christ of Galilee and the’ just now despised fanatic of Harper’s Ferry. They were equally common men. We compare only the Jewish figure with the American figure, the man on the cross with the man on the scaffold, and say confidently that in John Brown on his scaffold, Eternal God has lifted the standard of human advancement higher than it was lifted in the Christ of Cal­ vary. Or to put it in other words, and words justified by that which Jesus himself said, the true Christ-Son of God, Heaven-anointed soul, which was manifested in Jesus, and was to be manifested in his humblest disciple, the least of these his brethren, is manifested to-day in the American martyr as it was not, and could not be manifested in the Messiah. The eindmce is close at hand. At this moment let it suf­ fice to present one point of this, the point which is most important and most conclusive. The world knows the story of the trial of Jesus—not the trial before Pilate, but the trial in his own soul. Theological ingenuity has been exhausted in the attempt to explain this without damage to the orthodox theory that Jesus was a person of the deity; but in vain. Give Jesus no more benefit of ingenious hypothesis and pious prepossession than we give Socrates, Paul, Giordano Bruno, and John Brown, and we are com­ pelled to say that either one had a courage which Jesus did not possess. Estimate fairly the mental anguish of Savon­ arola and of Edward Irving, who died unvisited by the super­ natural intervention they had with absolute faith looked �And Jesus on the Cross. 219 for, the one hung up in chains in the flames after forty-two days of torture, the other wasted by distressing disease through days and months of unanswered agonizing prayer, and it cannot be denied that their trial was far heavier than that of Jesus. It is idle to ascribe to the Jewish martyr a superhuman sensibility to evil; for if superhuman at all, he was superhuman in courage and endurance not less than in sensibility. If he were not equal to perfect endurance, as he plainly was not, we but make his weakness the greater the more we lift him above humanity. The anguish of his prayer and the wail of the cross, on the lips of a mere child of Galilee, wrung from the heart of a peasant-Messiah, when he had really looked for intervention by miracle which did not come, can be readily explained, without denying the spiritual elevation of Jesus. We say, then, that in forecast­ ing events, and in meeting the turns of fate, he fell short of the perfection possible to human nature. We recognize that it was not his mission to do all the things which man in his most heroic mood can perform, that he represents a stage in the elevation of our race, by no means our final attainment. And we confidently compare facts to show that the American martyr was, in respect to courage under the heavy blows of fate, superior to the man of Nazareth. In the garden of Gethsemane we see Jesus “ in distress and anguish,”—as Mark puts it, “ in great consternation and anguish,”—and hear him say to his disciples, “ I am in ex­ ceeding distress, ready to die.” The bare existence of this fact is significant; the communication of it, especially to disciples who could not help himkif they would, marks a mind utterly shaken out of self-possession. And how con­ clusive to the same effect is the prayer, thrice repeated, of Jesus: He fell upon his face and prayed, saying, “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me. But net as I will, but as thou wilt.” A second time he prayed, sav­ ing, “My Father, if this cup cannot pass from me, but I must drink it, thy will be done.” Still again he prayed a third time, saying the same words. r �220 John Brown on the Scaffold, Etc. Setting aside the theory that Jesus was not what he seemed to be, we have here a man engaged in an almost desperate effort to meet his fate. The effort of submission is sincere and grand; it lifts Jesus into the position of a leader of mankind; considering especially his Jewish limi­ tations, how naturally he had looked for supernatural inter­ vention, how purely and nobly too he had desired this as the true coming of God to man, and how really to his eyes the power of healing the body, with inspiration which enabled him to instruct and control the mind, had seemed to him the beginning of miracle, we may'justly see in this effort, so distinctly conceived and so resolutely attempted, a manifestation of the very divinity of human nature; but it is vain to deny that effort is a stage behind attainment. Not only does the consternation of an experience like that of Jesus argue a failure to foresee possible duty, but still more the agonizing effort to accept the situation shows a decided deficiency of heroic equipment. This deficiency, we repeat, admits of an explanation, in the case of Jesus, whose em­ inence was of purity more than of force, which does not pluck him from his lofty position of anointed master of the Christian ages. By the usage of his people Jesus had barely come of age; he was contemplative rather than executive in his temperament, more spiritual than practical, and al­ most without other education than that of meditation and prayer. He was in fact an inspired child of Nazareth; more than that, he had the heart of a pure girl in the breast of a Galilean peasant. Thus he naturally enough failed to meet his fate with the serenity of prepared courage, but the ex­ planation of the failure does not explain it away. He failed conspicuously, and as conspicuously John Brown, bringing back the great example of Socrates, did not fail. �Theodore Parker’s Antagonism, Etc. 221 Article VI. — Theodore Parker’s Character and Ideas. ■ Chap. III.—His Antagonism with the Religious World. We come now to the question of Theodore Parker’s “ antagonism with the religious world.” The reviewer, whose judgment our discussion starts from, regrets that Mr. Parker was not “ thrown into intimate relations with Evan­ gelical scholars,” and says “ it is singular how rarely he met such, and how kindly he spoke of them, as of Professors Stuart, Porter and Woolsey.” That Theodore Parker found but three or four evangeli­ cal scholars who gave him occasion to speak kindly of them, is doubtless a singular fact, considering the fundamental principles of Christian religion. Perhaps it is not so sin­ gular a fact that Theodore Parker spoke kindly, very kindly, of these exceptions to the rule. I wish the reviewer had given a list of the evangelical scholars with whom Mr. Parker might have had relations of intimate Christian broth­ erhood. He mentions Stuart, Woolsey, and Porter, neither of whom ever pretended to consider Parker a Christian man and brother. The little intercourse which took place between Theodore Parker and Stuart, Woolsey, Porter,and the chief of the New Haven school of theology, Dr. Taylor, was marked by a manly effort of good will on their part, and by generous appreciation on his part; but it would be a great mistake to suppose that these men, the best of their class, ever felt at liberty to do justice to Theodore Parker. Their honest principles forbade it. They could suppress, in his presence, the unbrotherly severity of their judgment upon him, but they could not offer him Christian brother­ hood. And it was not merely that they assumed that he did not want fellowship. If he had wanted it ever so much,— and no man has borne the cross of lonely service with a deeper sense of the value of brotherly fellowship,—they must in conscience have dropped the mask of generous courtesy, and shown him all the resolute hardness of their hearts. Prof. Porter discussed Mr. Parker’s opinions with �222 Theodore Parker’s Antagonism charity, and reviewed him with kindness. But even he, so exceptionally gentle and just, must have resisted, to the last degree of bitterness even, any attempt to remove the limits of communion, and make Christian fellowship broad enough to include the great heretic. President Woolsey could not fail to act the Christian gentleman in any intercourse with such a man as Theodore Parker, for by nature and by cul­ ture, he is very noble, but even he can feel and show con­ tempt for unorthodox struggles in a sincere soul. As to Dr. N. W. Taylor, who was at once the ablest divine and the noblest gentleman of all that New Haven circle, I have heard him tell of his interview with Parker, and how they crossed broad-swords, and whose head came off. It was in the spirit of Prof. Park, in the great Boston Council, wnen he said, “ A man who has studied theology three years, and has read the Bible in the original languages, and is not a Calvinist, is not a respectable man.” I know-what the orthodox spirit in the best men is capa­ ble of attempting. I know how the conscience of a solitary thinker, without help in men or books, may be set upon and tormented by evangelical surroundings. I have had said to me, “as a heathen man and a publican”—a hard word for which there is supposed to be pretty good evangelical authority. No doubt the souls in whom there is great out­ break of new faith and radical thought do sometimes sin grievously against the pure fitness of things in their demon­ strations, but that is not all of their hard case; they not only become obnoxious in that way, by their own fault, but they almost invariably become criminals and outlaws, in the view of the evangelical world, from the hardness and bitterness of the evangelical spirit. Not only are they dealt with very harshly for errors which are treated tenderly where no heresy exists, but they are terribly punished for that innocent and pure faith which is in them the profound necessity of a sincere conscience. It is plain to me that Theodore Parker’s critic does not consider how infinite is the bitterness of the cup which �With the Religious World. K 223 evangelicalism, in all its common forms^ presses to the lips of one who has stripped himself of precious dogmatic beliefs to undertake a more daring, more heroic exercise of faith in God and labor of love than the current Christianity per­ mits. Therefore I beg to assure him, upon abundant expe­ rience, that a man confessing heresy heartily, must have a face of brass to presume on “ intimate relations with evan­ gelical scholars,” except as a relic of very close youthful friendship. And if he had the shining qualities of an arch­ angel on earth, and withal bore his cross honestly in the world, doing with his might the work given him to do, he could not but seem, to evangelical scholars of strict convic­ tion, of “ no form nor comeliness—no beauty that they should desire him.” No worse men than President Wool­ sey have thought the dungeon and the fagot needful in the discipline of demonstrative departure from orthodoxy. The spirit of the age has, indeed, reduced marvelously the tem­ per of orthodox defence of the faith, but the time has hardly come, certainly had not come in the day of Mr. Parker’s encounter with the religious world, when liberality could be consistently practiced by evangelical scholars. It is, I trust, one result of the appearance of Mr. Parker, to disclose to some of the wiser defenders of correct tradi­ tional faith, the necessity of adjusting their position once more, to conform more closely to the demand of the Chris­ tian spirit. Possibly the day is not far off when the scholars our critic wishes Mr. Parker might have met, will be able to accept, within evangelical limits, absolute liberality. That is to say, holding firmly to the evangelical doctrine of redemption, its necessity, plan, and operation, they will relax the severity of their dogmatic convictions upon minor points, so far as to make character the ground of human fellowship, and to leave to God alone, the searcher of hearts, all judgment as to the amount and style of creed necessary to start either a soul on the road to heaven, or a teacher of Truth on the way of the knowledge of God. It is easy for me to think of liberality thus carried to perfection, within �224 Theodore Parker's Antagonism evangelical limits. Let our vain decisions as to the times and seasons of God’s grace and power, be wholly set aside. Say, if we must, that God hath appointed this way and no other, the literal gospel of Christ, but leave the administra­ tion of this way to Him with whom a thousand years are as one day. There is no Biblical evidence to compel acceptance of the dogma of limited probation. Insist on the possibility of the worst with the evil and the disobedient, but with the honest, earnest and faithful seeker for Truth and lover of God, insist as strongly on the certainty of the best. Go down to deep below deep, in the experience of true men, until you find for them a saving tie to God’s administration of true redemption, rather than suffer our human judgment to pronounce that there is little or no hope for an honest soul misguided by an erring intellect. The possibility of final loss may be, indeed, urged, and the whole terror of absolute peril brought to bear, to persuade to deeper hon­ esty, more serious inquiry, and more humble crying unto the spirit of Truth, b,ut let it be in love, in hope, in firm faith, so that the Christian spirit may bind all in one, and the Holy Spirit, if it may possibly be, bind all to that mercy­ seat before which we are all one in absolute need. It is possible for this to be. It only requires to believe, as humanity and divinity, even within the strictest evangeli­ cal limits, require, that for those who seek there is no closing of the chances, no limit of opportunity, no inadequacy of eternal divine providence. Grant that the path is beset with perils; grant that the abyss of final loss may receive us at the next step; but say this of all, because of sins and unworthiness of a moral sort; never say it with a lim­ itation to the case of “ that publican,” who is such only by reason of intellectual error. I heard the New Haven Dr. Taylor say, very near the close of his life, that he knew he might fail of heaven. Let this be the form in wlfich we doubt as to human chances of acceptance with God. Let this humility penetrate and bind in one all who feel the �'With the Religious World. 225 burden of moral evil. Then it will be easy to feel that the grace which is extended to sinners, will not need to be fur­ ther extended to embrace all who try to come unto the God and Saviour of squIs, whatever may be the fault, or, as our critic says, the “vice” of their conception and confession of the things of God. It would be a noble enterprise if eminent evangelical scholars would unite in, we will say, an Academy of Chris­ tian Studies, the aim and use of which should be to vindi­ cate the principle of liberality, to throw the shield of Chris­ tian charity and Christian encouragement over all honest and capable pursuits of divine Truth. In two ways espe­ cially would this improve exceedingly the position of the evangelical school. It would provide Christian discipline for radicalism; and it would show to the world that evan­ gelical faith is not afraid of inquiry. Radicalism is forced to exaggerate the individualism of its method, because the hand of every man is against it. Give it a place, its due place, in the school of Christian studies, and at once its temper must become more moderate, and its demonstra­ tions less dangerous to the order of the religious world. Had Mr. Parker been treated in this way from the begin­ ning, there is every reason to believe that his mind would have acted, upon questions of dogma, with none of that vol­ canic energy which made him seem to the evangelical world a tremendous engine of destruction! And instead of becoming the leader and hero, not only of elect believers in whom the spirit and the life had wrought profound convic­ tion, but of the throng of deniers in whom serious convic­ tion was less developed, he would have stood forth the exponent of the modern tendency of the Christian faith. I anticipate the reply to this, that at his best Mr. Parker would have been an enemy. But I think the assumption of this reply a mistake. Grant that the best of Mr? Parker’s belief was erroneous. I go back of his dogmatic convic­ tions, then, to his moral and spiritual tendencies, and un­ hesitatingly affirm the necessity of accepting these as suffi­ �226 Theodore Parker’s Antagonism, Etc. cient, under the ample providence of the power and grace of God, for cordial Christian fellowship. Let Professor Park and President Woolsey have said to Mr. Parker, “ Brother, we differ with you entirely in doctrinal method and convictions, but in allegiance to the law of love and to the spirit of Truth and of Holiness we agree; the soul, and the soul’s union with God in moral loyalty and spiritual yearning and devotion, are the foundation,—the Christian foundation ; in that we meet, alike putting on the new man; now let us reason together, and labor in one spirit of love to God and love to man, with good hope in the eternal providence of God with us, until we all come in the unity of the faith unto a perfect man,”—let this have been said, and realized in the attitude of the evangelical school, and the modern world would have lost its great heresiarch, the Christian world, so-called, would have gained a great apos­ tle of natural religion. Mr. Parker’s great work in Boston, and in America, had never been undertaken if even his own sect, the Unitarian, had had the liberality it ought to have had. In his letter to his first parish, upon leaving them for Boston, to which he was called solely to vindicate freedom of religious teaching, Mr. Parker said: “ If my brethren of the Christian ministry had stood by me, nay, if they had not themselves refused the usual min­ isterial fellowship with me, then I should have been spared this painful separation, and my life might have flowed on in the channel we have both wished for it.”—Life, vol. I, p. 26L In a letter to Rev. Mr. Niles, written the year before his removal to Boston, Mr. Parker states what no one can rea­ sonably doubt, that he had no choice but to accept individ­ ualism or abdicate his own manhood. He says: “I must of course have committed errors in reasoning and in conclusion. I hoped once that philosophical men would point out both; then I would confess my mistake and start anew. But they have only raised a storm about my head; and in a general way a man wraps his cloak �A Letter of Theodore Parker. 227 about him in a storm and holds on the tighter.”—Life, vol. Z, p. JfhO. Now I ask, is it not evident that a divine design, work­ ing through the robust nature of this Socratic Samson of truth and righteousness, wrought deliberately and wisely the rough antagonism of Theodore Parker to the popular churches, in order to convict them, one and all, of want of the Christian spirit, and to utter, in tones that should ring round the world, the demand of that spirit, in this new time, for a liberality in religion adequate to sustain, with all honest believers and teachers, a true Christian fellow­ ship ? Theodore Parker, nailing the new theses of human­ ity on the doors of recognized Christian communion, though he made the very walls of the temple tremble to their foundation, was no lawless destructive, no mad troubler of communion, but the providential sign of a new reforma­ tion in Christendom, the Luther of emancipated faith, the angel of a new resurrection of that holy spirit which was the truth in .Tesus, and has been the truth in the Christian ages, and shall be, in redeemed humanity, sole author and authority of pure and undefiled religion. Article VII.—A Letter of Theodore Parker. Rev. John T. Sargent, who was intimately associated with Theodore Parker, writes to us as follows : I welcome your articles just opening in The Examiner on Theodore Parker. It may interest you to know that I have large files of letters from him, which have a value so far as they might illustrate your main topics, bis “ charac­ ter and ideas.” Most of them, it is true, are of that pri­ vate and social character not intended for the public, 'and were occasioned by that peculiar relation into which I was thrown in consequence of my exchange of pulpits with him, when such an expression of fellowship was looked upon with distrust, even by the so called “ Liberal” Unitarians. But there are others so expressive of his well known sympa- �228 A Leiter of Theodore Parker. thics for all the great interests of humanity, that portions of them at least ought to be seen. Take, for instance, the following extracts which I copy from one under date of September 18th, 1859, when he was abroad in Montreux, Canton de Vaud, Switzerland : “It is Sunday, to-day, and my thoughts turn homeward with even a stronger flight than on any other days of the week, so I shall write a little to one of my dear old friends — ‘ a friend indeed,’ also a brother in the same ministry. It is the day when the services at the Music Hall are to begin again I believe, but where I shall no more stand; for I sent in my letter of resignation some days ago, as duty and necessity compelled. But my affection will always go with the dear old friends who gather there, and on Sundays, when the Music Hall is open, I always come as a silent minister to look at the congregation, and have ‘ sweet com­ munion together,’ though we no longer ‘walk to the house of God in company.’ It is a tender bond which gets thus knit by years of spiritual communion :—I think not to be broken in this life. But here, as you know, Sunday is quite different from what it is in New England; devoted more to gaiety and to social festivity of a harmless character. But to-day is the Annual Fast all over Switzerland, and the land is as still as with us in the most quiet town in New England. I like these Swiss people. They are industrious, thrifty and economical to an extraordinary degree,—intelli­ gent, and happy. I sometimes think them the happiest people in Europe, perhaps happier than even we in Massa­ chusetts, for they are not so devoured by either pecuniary or political ambition. * * * What a condition the Unitarians are in just now I They put Huntington in the place of Dr. Henry Ware, and he turns out to be orthodox,— and, as I understand, won’t go into the Unitarian pulpit of Brooklyn, N. Y., but officiates in the great orthodox Plymouth church hard by. Then brother Bellows comes out with his ‘ Broad (T) church,’ and, while talking of the ‘ Suspense of Faith,’ represents the little sect in no very �A Letter of Theodore Parker. 229 pleasant light. Meantime, The Examiner—(certainly the ablest journal in America,) reports to the denomination the most revolutionary theologic opinions, and this, too, with manifest approbation thereof. Witness the half-dozen articles within so many years, by Frothingham, Jr., some of Alger’s, that of Scherb’s on the Devil, and the three on India, China, and Asiatic Religions, by an orthodox mis­ sionary, now living in Middletown, Conn.; a noble fellow too. What is to become of us ? To me it is pretty clear the Progressive party will continue to go ahead in a circu­ itous course, for Progress is never in a straight line. No progressive party will go back describing a line with analo­ gous curves. “ It is beautiful to see the gradual development of religion in the world, especially among su h a people as our own, where the government puts no yoke on men’s shoulders. Little by little they shake off the old traditionary fetters, get rid of their false ideas of man and God, and come to clear, beautiful views and forms of religion. No where in the world is this progress so rapid as in America, because, in our Northern States, the whole mass of the people is educated and capable of appreciating the best thoughts of the highest minds. Of course, foolish things will be done, and foolish words spoken, but on the whole the good work goes on, not slowly and yet surely. I am glad the Catho­ lics have the same rights as the Protestants;—if they had not I should contend for the Catholics as I now do for the negroes. But I think that, after Slavery, Catholicism is the worst and most dangerous institution in America; and I deplore the growth of its churches. I know the power of an embodied class of men with unity of sentiment, unity of idea, and unity of aim, and when the aim, the idea, and the sentiment are what we see and know, and the men are governed by such rules, I think there is danger. Still, it is to be met, not by Bigotry and Persecution, but by Wisdom and Philanthropy. I don’t believe Catholicism thrives very well even in a Republic, but it loves the soil a despot sticks �230 ' A Letter of Theodore Parlier. his bayonet into. Since Louis Napoleon has been on the throne of France, the worst class of Catholic priests have come more and more into power ; that miserable order, the Capauchins, has been revived and spreads rapidly. More than 300 new Convents have been established since the ‘ Coup d’ Etat,’ and are filled with more than 30,000 devo­ tees already. But in liberally governed Switzerland, Cathol­ icism does not increase, but falls back little by little. No Jesuits are allowed to actin the land. In a few generations we shall overcome the ignorance, stupidity, and superstition of the Irish Catholics in America, at least in the North, but before that is done, we shall have a deal of trouble. Soon Boston will be a Catholic city if the custom continues of business men living in the country; and we know what use a few demagogues can make of the Catholic voters. It only requires that another capitalist offer the Bishop $1,500 or so if he will tell his subjects to vote against a special person or a special measure. All the Catholics may be expected to be on the side of Slavery, Fillibustering, and Intemperance. I mean, all in a body; this Romanism will lead them to support Slavery;—the Irishmen to encourage Fillibustering and Drunkenness. But good comes out of evil. I think the Irish Catholics with their descendants, could not so soon be emancipated in any country as in our own dear blessed land. So, we need not complain, but only fall to and do our duty,—clean, educate and emancipate the ‘gintieman from Corrk.’ “ How goes it with the ‘ Poor ?’ and with the ‘ Boston Provident Association,’ with which you are officially con­ nected ? All well, I hope. I am not quite sorry the ‘ Reform School’ at Westboro is burnt down. The immediate loss to the State is, to be sure, a great one, but the ultimate loss would have been far more, for it was a school for crime, and must graduate villains. I wonder men don’t see that they can never safely depart from the natural order which God has appointed. Boys are born in families ; they grow up in families, a few in each household, mixed with girls �The Index on Christianity Again. 231 and with their elders. How unnatural to put 500 or 600 boys into a great barn and keep them there till they are one and twenty years of age, and then expect them to turn out well and become natural men, after such unnatural treat­ ment ! At the beginning, Dr. Howe, really one of the most enlightened philanthropists I ever met in America or Europe, proposed a ‘ Central Bureau,’ with a house of tem­ porary deposit for boys, and that an agent should place them in families throughout the country. A quarter of the money thus spent, would have done a deal of good. I wonder if you have ever been up to the ‘ Industrial School for Girls,’ at Lancaster. To me this is one of the most interesting institutions in the good old State. If I were Governor of Massachusetts, I think I shouldn’t often dine with the 1 Lancers,’ or the 1 Tigers,’ or even the ‘Ancients and Honorables,’ but I should know exactly the condition of every jail, and ‘ House of Correction,’ in the State, and of all the institutions for preventing crime and ignorance. If Horace Mann had been Governor, I think he would have done so. Here in Europe my life is dull, and would be intolerable were it not introductory to renewed work on earth or another existence in Heaven. I am necessarily idle here, or busy only with trifles which seem only a stren­ uous idleness. Such is the state of my voice that I aril constrained to silence, and so fail to profit by the admirable opportunity of intercourse with French, German, and Rus­ sian people who now fill up the house. I do not complain of this, but think myself fortunate to be free from pain.” Article VIII.—'The Index on Christianity Again. In the Index of January 7th, Mr. Abbot prints a “ synop­ sis of Free Religion,” which commences with a criticism of “ Christianity as a System,” some of the points of which surprise us more than anything Mr. Abbot has previously said. What, for example, is he thinking about when he says, “ Regarded as to its universal element, Christianity is �232 The Index on Christianity Again. a beautiful but imperfect presentation of natural morality ?” His own opinion may separate morality from faith in God, and make the former only the universal element of religion, • but no Christianity that ever was, has separated these two universal elements, or thought of presenting religion, in its general aspect, as other than the two-fold passion of the soul of man, towards man and duty on the one hand, and towards God and heaven on the other. But this is not the worst of what we deem our friend’s misrepresentation of “ Christianity as a System.” Having, as we have seen, made Christianity to consist, as to its uni­ versal element, in a “ presentation of natural morality,” he then states that, “ Regarded as to its special element, Chris­ tianity is a great completed system of faith and life,” and that “ the chief features of this system are the doctrines of the Fall of Adam, the Total Depravity of the human race, the Everlasting Punishment of the wicked, and Salvation by Christ alone,” and that “ it is the worst enemy of liberty, science, and civilization, because it is organized Despair of Man.” He then goes on to define “Free Religion as a System,” and finds it to be “ organized Faith in Man.” Between the two there exists, he asserts, “ an absolute con­ flict of principles, aims, and methods.” He declares that “ the one ruled the world in the Dark Ages of the past,” and that “ the other will rule the world in the Light Ages of the future,” while “ their battle-ground is the Twilight Age of the present.” To us this is scandalously unfair. It is no more true that Christianity is despair of man than it is that free religion is faith in man. But granting Mr. Abbot his definition of free religion,—which to us, and to the majority at least of free religionists, leaves out the religion of Free Religion,— it is an amazing disregard of the simplest and plainest facts which permits the statement just quoted, of the sum and substance of Christianity. Christianity is not organized despair, but the contrary. One of the means generally adopted by Christian propagandists to rouse men to “ come �The Index on Christianity Again. 233 to Christ,” is the preaching of despair, but our friend knows perfectly well that this is a means only, employed by teachers of a religion whose chief word is hope, and that this means is not employed except to induce mankind to accept the “ hope” which Christianity teaches as her great lesson. Christianity has never been preached as simple despair of man, and Mr. Abbot owes it to his honorable devotion to truth to withdraw the conspicuous assertion that it consists in so dark and dreadful a thing. “ The worst enemy of liberty, science, and civilization !” It connot be said with a particle of justice. Of 79sei«7o-Christianity, the darker human side of historical Christianity, Mr. Abbot can speak as harshly as he chooses, without provoking our chal­ lenge, but of “ the great completed system of faith and life,” which, in his own words, Christianity is, he ought never, it seems to us, to speak as he now speaks in his “Synopsis of Free Religion.” We beg him to tell us why he omits from his view of Christianity as a “ great completed system of faith and life” everything which constitutes it, in the general opinion of mankind, except the four dogmas named by him as its “ chief features.” And in particular, why does he remove from their universally admitted place, as features of Chris­ tianity chief above all others, the two supreme Christian tenets that God is and that he is Our Father, and that man is the offspring of God and all men members one of another in human brotherhood? Even the false side of historical Christianity contains other chief features than the four doctrines named by Mr. Abbot, such, for example, as the doctrines of a special revelation of redemption made through the Bible, and of the Godhead of Jesus as the agent of this redemption, and of the administration of this re­ demption' by special divine influences, and these doctrines, however false they may be, cannot be summed up in despair of man, but intend rather great hope for man; and in all fair judgment they stand above the darker dogmas of Fall, Depravity, Punishment, and Limitation of redemption, and vol. i.—no. 3. 3 �234 The Index on Christianity Again. are more entitled than these to give distinctive character to Christianity, as Mr. Emerson recognizes when he sums up Christianity in “ faith in the infinitude of man.” The deplorable fact is that Mr. Abbot, in this instance, defines Christianity by the darker half of its darker side, not only leaving out of sight its great and glorious prin­ ciples of God’s Fatherhood and man’s brotherhood, its two supreme rules of love to God and love to man, which make its bright side, but also leaving out entirely .the more humane and hopeful of its false dogmas. There would be nothing at all of Free Religion if it were defined thus by the worst aspects of its worse side. Nothing that ever was on earth can bear judgment so grossly unjust. The con­ trasts drawn by Mr. Abbot are not legitimate. The past has not been given up to “ the worst enemy of liberty, science, and civilization,” nor will the future be ruled by “the best friend of progress of every kind.” There has been a vast deal of human freedom in religion before now, and there will be a vast deal of bondage to authority in the religion of the future. Not all men have been deceived in the past, and not all escape delusion now. We heartily approve vigorous, positive assertion of convictions, but we must regard some of our friend Abbot’s dogmatizing as not one whit more respectful towards human freedom than the least warranted assertions of the popular creeds, inasmuch as it is not based in evident truth, but in very serious neglect and disregard of true facts, and does not stop a moment to consider that its assumptions are generally denied, but lays down the law of individual opinion precisely as if it were the law of divine authority. We trust we speak with mod­ eration, and with due respect for our friend’s eminence as a religious teacher, but really we know of nothing in the movements of religion at the present time more to be regretted, than Mr. Abbot’s attempt to prove that Christi­ anity is all blank despair, and Free Religion all pure faith. Neither one nor the other is true. �Why does Mr. Abbot Object, Etc. 235 Article X.— Why Does Mr. Abbot Object to Mr. Sen’s Faith in God? We could hardly name two more genuine religious believ­ ers and teachers than Keshub Chunder Sen, the Indian reformer and prophet, and our friend Abbot, at Toledo, the editor of The Index. The latter has as deep, as pure, as earnest faith in God as can be anywhere found. Such sentences as the following are gems of spiritual truth: “ My whole religion centres in the fact of this perennial, this unutterable revelation of Eternal Being in the soul of man;”—“Life is lifted into heaven, in proportion as we repose in this embrace of the All-Encompassing Soul;”— “ It is the conception of Nature as the living self-manifes­ tation of God, that keeps trie fires of faith still burning in the inward temple of the soul;” “Pure Religion is itself the presence of the Infinite Spirit, making itself felt in the soul of man;”—“The great task of Free Religion is to prove the ability of each soul to draw its nutriment from its native soil, dispensing with mediation, and coming into primary relations with the All-Permeating Deity;’-—“ That which calls out all high and pure affection is the divine element, the God in man ;”—“ The lofty and tender senti­ ment, the divine sympathy in eternal things, which marks the completest unity of allied natures, is rooted in the con­ sciousness of God;”—“That consciousness of the One Divine which makes possible to us our loftiest intercourse with congenial minds, lies also at the root of the sentiment of the universal brotherhood of man ;”—“ The same repose in the universal life of God which enables two friends to enjoy the pure delight of spiritual fellowship, enables, nay, compels them, to recognize the fundamental unity of their race, and to cherish that inner consciousness of it which is the true love of man ;”—“ In the love of God we become friends to each other, and, in a large sense, friends of man­ kind as well; and in this broadening out of the private into the public, of the individual into the universal, friendship �236 Why does Mr. Abbot Object to achieves its highest perfection, and crowns, itself with wor­ ship of the Divine.” To every word of this Mr. Sen would say a hearty amen, and it would seem as if the two men, being so agreed, i could walk together in the closest brotherhood. The dis­ position of the pious and eloquent leader of the Brahmo Somaj, of India, was expressed quite recently in a letter to the Free Religious Association, printed in The Index of November 24. In that letter Mr. Sen said, “I am sure that in the fulness of time all the great nations in the East and in the West will unite and form a vast Theistic Brother­ hood, and I am sure that America will occupy a prominent place in that grand confederation. Let us then no longer keep aloof from each other, but co-work with unity of heart, that we may supply each other’s deficiencies, strengthen each other’s hands, and with mutual aid build up the house of God. Please take this subject into consideration, and let me know if you have any suggestions to make whereby a closer union may be brought about between the Brahmo Somaj and the Free Religious Association,—between India and America,—and a definite system of mutual intercourse and co-operation may be established between our brethren here and those in the New World. Such union is desirable, and daily we feel the need of it more and more. Let us sincerely pray and earnestly labor in order that it may be realized under God’s blessing in due time.” To this brotherly word of one who “ crowns friendship with worship of the Divine,” Mr. Abbot called attention in the following editorial, printed in the same number of The Index, under the head, “ A Vital Difference.” “ An interresting letter, addressed to Mr. Potter by Keshub Chunder Sen, of India, will be found in the ‘ Department of the Free Religious Association ? This native reformer, whose late visit to England attracted so much attention, is desirous of ‘mutual intercourse and co-operation ’ between the Association and the Brahmo Somaj. While most cordially reciprocating his brotherly �Mr. Sen's Faith in G-od? 237 sentiments, we feel constrained to point out an important difference in their bases of organization. The Brahmo Somaj, as its name implies, has a Theistic creed as its bond of union ; the F. R. A. has its bond of union in the simple principle of Freedom, in Fellowship. Theism, as a creed, is, in our judgment, little, better than Tritheism. . . . The friendliest and most brotherly relations should subsist between the F. R. A. and the Brahmo Somaj; but we must keep clearly before the public the all-important distinction between creeded and creedless organization, and forbear, out of sentiment or sentimentality, to swamp Free Religion in a ‘ mush of concessions.’ ” Imagine Mr. Sen receiving the Index, with his letter printed in the department officially occupied by the Free Religious Association, and finding that the same number contained an editorial, warning the public against equal recognition of him, as a swamping of Free Religion in a mush of concessions I And that simply because he and his companions have earnest faith in God! It is mere words when Mr. Abbot objects to a creed. No man living has more distinctly laid down, insisted on, and fought for a creed, than Mr. Abbot. He made a creed in fifty articles a year ago, and he has just made another in thirty-two articles, which he calls a “ Synopsis of Free Religion.” As long as he believes anything, which he can state in articles, he will have a creed. As long as * he devises systems of assertions, and lays them down nakedly and without qualification, he will have a creed of the most positive character. We do not object to our friend’s annual experiment of a downright creed, a set of positive articles, bold and bald assertions, putting forward * Creed.—“A definite summary of what is believed; a brief exposition of important points, as in religion, science, politics, etc.; especially a summary of Christian belief; a religious symbol.” “ Symbol.—(Theol.) An abstract or compendium of faith or doctrine; the creed, or a summary of the articles of religion.”—Webster. Where does Mr. Abbot get the word “creeded?” �238 Why does Mr. Abbot Object to his individual opinion as absolute truth. It is one very proper way of working on the human mind. But for a man, who has made two creeds within thirteen months, to object to Mr. Sen’s equal standing, because the former believes in God, will not answer. It happens that Mr. Abbot thinks religion possible with­ out faith in God, while Mr. Sen finds the deepest truth of religion in filial trust in God, and that the latter thinks quite well of Christianity while the former does not think well of it at all. But Mr. Abbot’s opinions here are just as much part of a creed as Mr. Sen’s. Indeed the former holds his notions on the subject far more rigidly, and asserts them far more dogmatically than the latter holds and asserts his views. We do not blame or bewail our friend’s dogma­ tism ; let him drive ahead with all his might; but it is absurd for him to accuse Mr. Sen of having a creed in regard to God. We could not name a position recently taken in the religious world which more emphatically merits what­ ever stigma should attach to the most positive of creeds, than our good friend’s position about God and Christianity as neither of them essential to religion. And this position not merely has the form and tone of a creed, or articles of a creed, but it has the tenor, to us, of a very bad creed. It is a sad enough thing to “ stand squarely outside of Christianity,” because it involves so general a refusal of good fellowship, but of thinking of religion with express exclusion of faith in God, and trying to organize the law and gospel, the rule and consolation of faith, with­ out including the sentiment of the “ Our Father,” is to us the most terrible of mistakes, not because we have any aversion to honest atheism, or any wish to put a brand upon candid infidelity (so called), but for the simple reason that, in general, faith in God Our Father is the central and fruit­ ful principle of blessed religion, and he who dissuades men, or deters them, or debars them, as Mr. Abbot is doing, from the exercise of unquestioning filial trust in the Divine Pater­ �Mr. Sen’s Faith in God ? 239 nity, is doing the average soul more harm than all other religious teaching can do him good. We have given our friend’s new creed, in the Index of January 7, a respectful study, and see how he arrives at “ E PLURIBUS UNUM ” as “ the great watchword of the ages/’ but to us, and we think to mankind generally, “E PluHus Unum” will not displace “ Our Father,fl nor any sense of what we are, in onrselves, and to one another, take the place of the Con­ sciousness of God, and the consolation derived from remem­ bering HIM in whom we live, Mdflmove, and have our being. To keep a lively sense of the being, and goodness, and perfect power of the alone supreme and blessed God, is not to swamp religion in a mush of concessions. Mr. Sen’s wish for a Theistic Brottflrhood of all the great nations, merited sympathy and respect from Mr. Abbot, and these only. It was no more legitimate to object to it than it would be to require the mass of childifln to limit their interest in home pleasuBs to such as orphan asylums can offer. And in the name of all that is sacred and consol­ ing to the heart of man, we beg MiflAbbot to abate the rigor with which he insists upomkccommodatwg religion to atheism and to materialism. We will deal respectfully and fraternally with these honest restrictions of human hope and faith, but we cannot see wl®any man who has faith in God and the blessed world of spirit should think it neces­ sary to hide that faith, and to base a creed upon suspense of natural happy trust. In general the atheists, materialists, and professed “infidels,” are exceedingly positive in their views, as well as frank and outspokenly Let them be so. But on the other hand, let those who have firm faith in a Living Soul of all things, and in Eternal blessed Life, stand as frankly and firmly for their trust and their thought. If Mr. Abbot does not care toflhus stand for his best thought and faith, let him at least cease to insist upon suspense of faith in our brotherly Bllowship, since the demand is wholly �240 The Old and the New Christianity. unreasonable and extremely hurtful. A “ Theistic Brother­ hood” does not imply the exclusion of anybody, and not to show what faith we have in God is to do great hurt to our fel­ lows, as well as to be unfaithful to our own vision. Article XI.— The Old and the New Christianity (Concluded). Translated from the French of N. Vacherot. * After the first ecumenical councils, dogma having received its constitution almost complete, it would seem that its history must be finished, and it only remained to pursue that of organization and church discipline. How­ ever, the history of dogma still continues, if not for estab­ lishing, at least for the teaching of doctrines. The great theologians whose discussions prepared the way for the council of Nicoea, had, with all their subtle distinctions, preserved, with their Platonic learning, the consciousness of the highest religious verities. It was rather the teaching of John which inspired them than that of Paul: but it was still the vivifying breath of Christian thought. When that thought fell upon the barbarism of the middle ages, it found no method of exposition or instruction other than the philosophy of Aristotle. We know what this became in the hands of his interpreters of the Sorbonne and of the universities of the middle ages. The name Schoolman tells the whole story of distinctions, divisions and ver­ bal discussions. If doctors, such as St. Anselm and St. Thomas, were able to maintain Christian thought in its high import, it was because both had a spirit sufficiently high and sufficiently deep to comprehend whatever in the genius of Plato and Aristotle is most like that thought. Yet we may question if the extremely Aristotelian philosophy of St. Thomas would have been to the liking of Paul, of John, and of the fathers of the church. We will not speak of * In the last line of Art. VI. (p. 181), of last number, strike out the word “not,” and read “ could easily accommodate itself.” �The Old and the New Christianity. 241 Christ himself, who never let slip an occasion to show his antipathy to every kind of scholasticism. If he would not have driven from his church the respectable doctors of the Sorbonne, as he did the traffickers of the temple, we may believe that the author of the Sermon on the Mount would not have set foot in schools of this sort, where the spirit of his teaching was scarcely better kept than the letter. There is surely a great difference between the teaching of the gospels and epistles and scholastic theology ; but per­ haps a still greater between the primitive church and the Catholic church governed by the court of Rome. While reading the historians of Christianity, and particularly M. Renan, we naturally picture to ourselves those happy and charming little Christian societies, with such free manners, such active faith, such simple practice, in comparisonOth the strong and minute discipline, the mute and passive obe­ dience, which characterize the government of our great Catholic societies of the middle ages. The truth is that the rising Christianity had no more an organized church than it had a fixed set of doctrines. It is subject to the same law as all things which are of this world, or exist in it: it was obliged to be formed before developing, and to be developed before organizing. The blessed anarchy of the first Chris­ tian societies may be envied by liberal believers as the ideal of religious societies in the largest acceptation of the word; but at that time this religious condition was rather the effect of a provisional historic necessity, than of a welldetermined theory upon the free action of the religious conscience. As soon as Christian society had attained some little degree of development and multiplied the number of its churches, it experienced the need of a more exact disci­ pline and of some kind of central government. When Christianity became under Constantine the religion of the empire, the bishops were already exercising an actual authority over the consciences of the faithful. It is to be observed that the councils, save that at Jerusalem, which was little more than a name, began to assemble from this �242 The Old and the New Christianity. time, under the more or less imperious patronage of the Ceesars of Byzantium—a circumstance very perilous to thb independence of the church. Religious monarchy was a necessity of the times. If it had not had as a head a pope at Rome, it would have had one in the emperors at Con­ stantinople. We see this clearly later in the examples of the Eastern and of the Russian church, the one being sub­ ject to the Caesars of the Lower Empire, the other to the czars of Moscow and St. Petersburg. All the emperors of Constantinople, from Constantine down, set about dogma­ tising. He allows himself to condemn Arius, although later he embraced his doctrines ; and in what terms does he condemn him? “ Constantine, the conqueror, the great, the august, to the bishops and people of Judea: Arius must be branded with infamy.” There is nothing more curious than his letter to the two great opponents in the Council of Nicoea. “ I know what your dispute is. You, patriarch, question your priests in regard to what each thinks about some test of the law or other trifling question. You, priest, proclaim what you never ought to have thoughtjor rather what you should have been silent upon. The inquiry and response are equally useless: All that is well enough to pass the time or exercise the ingenuity, but should never reach the ears of the common people. Pardon each other then the impru­ dence of the question and the unsuitableness of the reply.” Does not this suggest a Romish priest shutting the mouth of two complaining parties ? His son, Constantins, speaks even more freely : “ What part of the universe are you,” writes he to Liberius,. bishop of Rome, “ you who alone take the part of an unprincipled wretch (Atha­ nasius), and break the peace of the world and of the empire ?” The establishment of the discipline and organization of the church were the work of the councils presided over by the popes, while the government of Christendom was the peculiar function of papacy. The adversaries of that insti­ �The Old and the New Christianity. 243 tution have seen in it only the advent of a monarchial gov­ ernment succeeding a sort of democratic and republican organization of the primitive church. They have not suffi­ ciently comprehended that it was also a necessary and urgent guarantee of the independence of the Christian church, which, to triumph more easily and quickly over paganism, had placed itself under the hand of imperial despotism. If religious liberty of conscience was to suffer later from the autocracy of the court of Rome, inspired more by traditional policy and diplomacy than by the thoughts and feelings of the true religion of Christ, the lib­ erty of the church was then and always that of an establish­ ment which, in raising the bishop of Rome above all the others and giving to him for a see the ancient capital of the known world, freed the management of spiritual affairs from the yoke of political powers, whatever they might be, mon­ archical, aristocratic or democratic. However, the trans­ formation of the Christian church was complete. If any one wishes to judge what ground has been gone over from primitive Christianity down to present Catholicism, let him compare the council of Jerusalem with the council of 1869, where, they say, is at length to be proclaimed the dogma of the personal infallibility of the sovereign pontiff in the per­ son of Pius IX, and consequently the principle of absolute monarchy applied to the government of a spiritual society is to be fully realized: an admirable completion to the edi­ fice, of which the founder could hardly have dreamed, nor indeed his first apostles ! Such, in substance, is the history of Christianity from its advent down to the middle ages. It is very difficult to see only the word, the hand and the spirit of God in the devel­ opment of an institution where error, darkness, superstition, and persecution have too large a part to prevent traces of human infirmity being manifest even in dogma. But, in whatever manner one explains this history, whether he only considers human causes according to the philosophic method, or brings in supernatural causes according to the �244 The, Old and the New Christianity. theological method, it is a constant fact that Christianity has obeyed, in its development on the theatre of time and space, the law of all human institutions, that it has passed, in doctrine and government, through all the phases of things which spring up, grow, become organized and defi­ nitely established. After having followed it in the move­ ment of expansion which takes it continually farther from its origin, it remains for us to follow it in the movement of return, which is constantly bringing it back under the influence of modern times. HI. We are about the middle of the fifteenth century, after the taking of Constantinople. The Roman church no longer finds in its peculiar world either heresy or resistance. Doc­ trine has been for a long time fixed. The teaching of doctrine is regulated in its least details in accordance with the scholastic method. Discipline itself is organized and regulated in its most minute prescriptions. The Catholic communion resembles an immense army .which moves or stops, fights or rests, on the orders of its commanders. Woe to him who speaks, thinks or prays other than as the formulary directs. Silence even is suspected among those of whom the church expects a complete confession or a pro­ fession of faith. Nothing is more imposing than this silent, absolute, infallible, government of consciences, where the word of command as soon as uttered by the mouth of one man is reechoed in the most remote parts of the Christian world, without a single voice being able to protest. And as if that discipline were not sufficient, the court of Rome has its indefatigable police of the inquisition, to seek out and denounce the crimes of heresy and sorcery to pitiless judges, who condemned to the stake thousands of victims. Suddenly the star of the renaissance rises upon this world, and driving away the last traces of the darkness of the mid­ dle ages, floods with light the dawn of modern societies. Before the arts and sciences of antiquity, Gothic art and �The Old and the New Christianity. 245 scholastic science fall into disrepute. And it 19 not the learned and lettered world alone which receives, admires, yea, gazes with unbounded delight upon these marvelous works of classic accuracy, of material grace, of strong thought, of exquisite taste, of incomparable language, whose secret the human mind seemed to have lost; it is also the religious world, it is especially the court of Rome and its foremost Italian dignitaries. We cannot positively say that the renaissance caused the reform. Protestantism, we must not forgetlwas born of a simple administrative question, the granting of indulgences : confining itself to a change of discipline, it kept the doc­ trines almost without alteration. The great reform which it accomplished was, to free the religious conscience from the tutelage which weighed so heavily upon it, and which left it no initiative, either of thought or of sentiment, before the word of God interpreted and formally uttered by the authority of the church. Now every thing was there, at least in principle. What matter that the new religion did not touch the credo, if all doctrine was henceforth wholly subject to a free interpretation of the Scriptures by the reason and conscience of believers ? Doubtless, as there is no church without authority, the reformed church had, also on its part, a council and creed in the Augsburg con­ fession; but the principle of individual initiative had been so affirmed before the contrary principle of official author­ ity, that no effort of Protestant orthodoxy, if this expression may be applied to the reformation, could arrest its course, even in the lifetime of the great reformers. The door was open to liberty in matters of faith. The future was to show that no necessity of discipline could close it: but for the moment, if we only consider its doctrinal bearing, the reform was confined to a very slight simplification of dogma. The worship of saints, worship of the Virgin, adoration of relics, in fine, the most serious of all, the eucharist, were the principal objects of reform in what con­ cerned dogma, purely so called. Luther was not only a fer­ �246 I The Old and the New Christianity. vent Christian, he was a consummate theologian, who would not hear to any one’s touching the holy ark of doc­ trine. He was more convinced than Leo X. and the gay wits of his court of the justice of eternal punishment, of the efficacy of grace, of the predestination of the elect and the damned, of the existence and puissance of the devil, of the wily power of sorcerers, of the real presence of Jesus Christ in the host. The boldest thing the reform did in the way of doctrine, was the substitution of consubstantiation for transubstantiation in the sacrament of the eucharist, attempting thus to reconcile the preservation of the mate­ rial substance with the presence of the divine person. The court of Rome did not take fire, as Calvin did, on the ques­ tion of heresies, and if it still allowed heretics, like Bruno and Vanini, to be burned by the tribunals of the inexora­ ble inquisition, we cannot think it was done with as much zeal as Calvin manifested in the trial of Michse’. Servetus. In religious matters, it no longer showed much wrath or en­ thusiasm; its passion was elsewhere. The leading thought of the reform was quite other than that ofencroaching upon dogma. The spirit which gave rise to it was too Christian to touch any thing but the organization of the church. The religious faith of the people whom the voice of Luther had won over, demanded nothing more. The natural sciences were not yet born, and philosophy was still given over to scholastic disputes, or engaged in the subtle commentaries of the: learned upon the books of antiquity. Christian dogma, such as the Old and New Testament had made it,—Alexandrian theology and scholastic theology,—had not yet been positively contra­ dicted, either by the revelations of the natural and the his­ toric sciences, or by the interior revelations of the modern conscience. Beside, in emancipating the conscience, the reformation reanimated and strengthened Christian thought, stifled by scholasticism or enervated by the renaissance. The faith of the new believers went back to the doctrines of Paul, which the wholly practical sense of the Roman church �The Old and the New Christianity. 247 had modified, and even to the Old Testament theology. Luther and Calvin took up again with a vigor and a harsh­ ness which the Catholic church seemed to have forgotten, the doctrines of necessity, of omnipotent grace, of the stern justice of a powerful God, mild toward the just, terrible to his enemies. But when light had begun to be thrown upon philosophy by the progress of the material sciences, upon conscience by the progress of moral science, the spirit of reform in the Christian world was obliged to attack dogma itself, and it cut off from it as useless every thing which hindered it from accommodating itself to modern science and con­ science. How could they indeed preserve that barbarous theology of the Old Testament, which confounds in its'' cruel justice, the Bible says in its vengeance, children with fathers, the innocent with the guilty ? How keep that psy­ chology and those moral principles of Paul which make of sin a question of species and not of individuals, and which take away from man all the merit of his works by attribut­ ing it to God ? How take literally the miracles and other facts of Biblical history before the scientific revelation of the immutable laws of nature? And was it not becoming very difficult to preserve that mysterious theology of the Nicsean creed when already all high metaphysical specula­ tion was falling into discredit ? Was it possible to this heavy ship of scholastic Christianity to sail in the new waters of a sea as strong as the modern world, if a way was not found of lightening its weight and simplifying its means of locomotion ? The new Christianity was then obliged to abandon all the cosmogony and a considerable part of the theology of the old Bible, the fundamental dog­ mas of Paul s teaching, and, at last, the great mysteries of the divine nature, which it found, if not in opposition, at least useless to a healthy religious life. Let us render jus­ tice to the clear and resolute spirit of the eighteenth cen­ tury. It attempted little subtilizing or equivocating with texts : it loyally made the sacrifice of every part of Chris- �248 The Old and the New Christianity. tian dogma which was found in contradiction with experi­ ence, history, reason, conscience, preserving scarcely any­ thing of it except that which constitutes its truth and worth. When Kant, Lessing, and later, Schleiermacher, and all that great school of German theology speak of Christianity, it is almost always in that sense. Their Christianity is that which sustains, fortifies, purifies and consoles the soul, much rather than that which engages the intellect in the mysterious depths of its metaphysics, or fetters the will in the bonds of its discipline. In that, this school has largely opened the way to the Christianity which later was to push forward the reform movement to the entire suppression of dogma, by preserving only morality, and morality, too, reduced to the ideal of the life and the teaching of Christ. Such seems also to have been the spirit, if not the explicit teaching of the generous part of the French clergy who embraced the principles and hopes of the revolution. It was by attaching themselves to the moral and purely evangelical side of doctrine, that priests like Faucher and Gregory wished to reconcile Christianity with the principle^ of reason, of liberty, of justice, of fra­ ternity, which that revolution had inscribed upon its pro­ gramme. In this sense, it is just to say that the eighteenth century remained Christian while ceasing to be Catholic, and that over that part of society which was won by philoso­ phy, religion still preserved a certain sway. This work of simplification which was already bringing back dogma to its source, was arrested, at the opening of the nineteenth century, by a wholly opposite movement, whose aim, on the contrary, was the complete reinstatement of Christian thought in modern science and philosophy. The eclecticism of that epoch exerted itself everywhere, in England, and in France, as well as in Germany, to show, by an ingenious method of interpretations and explanations, that all science and all philosophy were at least in germ in Christianity; all was, to rightly interpret the texts. So Genesis was harmonized with the geology of certain Eng- �The Old and the New Christianity. 249 lish savang, the Kicene creed had a place in the metaphysics of Schelling and Hegel, and the hard doctrines of Saint Paul themselves, found their explanation and fortification in the mystic philosophy of certain contemporary schools. The learned world was quite astonished to learn that there was a Christian astronomy, geology and history, just as there was a theology and a morality with this name. Indeed all the sciences took a peculiar aspect from the new point of view in which the eclectics of those times placed themselves. This method had at first great success, thanks to the genius of the men and the disposition of the times; but this suc­ cess could be only ephemeral, because such a manner of procedure was contrary to the true spirit of the nineteenth century, a critical spirit, if any ever were so. Besides, the method was not new: it has a well known name in the philosophic and religious history of the human mind. Neoplatism had attempted it for paganism with an ardor, a per­ severance, a brilliancy, a positive failure, which we need not recall. For a century like ours, so severe in its methods, so well informed in natural and historical facts, this kind of speculation was not science, it was something which savored now of mystic dreaming, now of political compromise, or again of Alexandrian exegesis. This eclecticism was a pure accident, in spite of all the appearances of reality ! The law which governs the mod­ ern history of Christianity, soon resumed its sway I the progress of purification and simplification grew more and more pronounced; criticism breathed upon these scaffoldings so laboriously and sometimes so artistically constructed. Sober science would no longer lendlitself to that which it must regard as a play of wits, if not the illusion of a liberal faith desiring to be of its century at the same time as of its church. The spirit of reform which fashions the ChrisWn societies of to-day no longer loses its time and its genius in reconciling contradictions or confounding differences. With a firm and bold hand, the doctors which itlnspires separate, in Christianity, morality from dogma; that is, in their VOL. I.—NO. 3. 4 �250 ' The Old and the New Christianity. understanding, the true from the actual, the essential from the accidental, the eternal and immutable from the tempo­ rary and variable. To the history of the past, they refer all the details of dogma properly so called, from Paulinian and Alexandrian theology to scholastic theology, keeping only what in their eyes constitutes the basis, the essence, the very spirit of Christianity, the mild and lofty teaching of Jesus. And yet, as it is difficult not to find in that teach­ ing, so pure and perfect, some indications which recall the narrow genius of the people to whom the Christ belongs, the doctors of liberal Christianity refer their religion to the ideal rather than to the evangelical reality, and, without denying the latter, preserve of the legend only the figure of a Christ truly divine, in that he has no longer anything in common with the sufferings of humanity. Suppose that Christ really was the man of whom the gospels tell us, the school, or, if you please, the church of which we speak, does not make of this an essential point of its religion. The ideal suffices for it, and, not finding a richer and higher one in the modern conscience, it proposes it to the faith of the present, to the faith of the future, as the ideal itself of the human conscience. Jfo one has better defined this Christianity than Mr. F. Pecaut, one of its most noble and most serious doctors. “ It is not,” he says, “ that we attach to this name of Chris­ tians a superstitious value or a sort of magic virtue ; but, whether we will it or not, our moral and religious ideal is in its essential features the same as the ideal of Jesus, and we are his posterity. . . . The ineffaceable glory of the gospel, its immortal attraction, is always its being the good news, the news of grace, of the spirit of life which assures us of the love of God, and frees us from the servitude of remorse and evil. That is a revelation appealed to by the human soul, and consequently written on its inmost tablets: the seers attempt to read it in themselves, and from age to age they are learning among various peoples to decipher the name of the Father, until Jesus, by pronouncing it loudly, �The Old and the New Christianity. 251 makes the old earth, weary of long efforts, leap with exceed, ing j°y« Hence, as from a generous spring, escape in rivu­ lets of living water the best sentiments which are henceforth to render fruitful Christian civilization, humility, confi­ dence, unwavering hope, innate dignity, devotion towards even the wicked. Does any one to-day conceive of a relig­ ious idea superior to that ? Who would wish to repudiate it? who would dare to deprive his brothers of it, and to deprive himself of it ? It is the very depth of ourselves so humane, so natural, but so deep and so uncomfortable for the profane eye to read, that men in their exuberant delight have believed it supernatural and superhuman.” This is why the liberal Christian takes his place in the school of Jesus: not of Jesus the Messiah, the eternal Word, the second person of the Trinity, but of Jesus, the Son of man, the gentle and humble-hearted master who gives repose to the soul, the master whom love of the Father and tenderness for the least of his brothers raised to such a moral height that he felt himself the beloved son of whom the heavenly Father had no secrets in pure, good and holy things. Such is the true, the eternal Jesus, he who founded religion upon conscience and opened to humanity the gates of the celestial city. Is it the spirit of God which speaks by that mouth, or the spirit of Satan, as the Roman Church has it? If Christian sentiment is not there, where then is it ? If this is not the language of the true children of God, where shall we find it ? As to us, whom people accuse, it is true, of having a somewhat large measure in this sort of things, we believe that there are many ways of being Christian. One may be so according to the spirit or according to the letter. He may be so with Jesus, with Paul, with John, with the Alexandrian theo­ logians, with the doctors in the Sorbonne, with all tradition, as the Catholic Ghurch directs. Does it not seem that to be Christian with Christ alone, receiving inspiration only from his spirit and his example, is to be it in the best, the most Christian manner? If any one says that it is only chosen �252 The Old and the New Christianity. souls essentially religious for whom such an inspiration can suffice for living in Christianity, and that, as 1o the rest, all the formality of dogma and traditional discipline is neces­ sary, we do not deny it. Upon this ground, many ways of looking at the matter may be reconciled. What appears to us harsh and almost odious, is the intolerance of the friends of the letter towards the friends of the spirit, so that it is pos­ sible to say that in drawing near the hearth of every relig­ ious faith, the soul of Christ, in order to receive more and more warmth, life and purification, we get farther away from the religion of Christ. Like doctrine, like church: absolute liberty under the law, or rather under the spirit of Christ. Where there is no longer dogma, to speak strictly, there can no longer be discipline and government. Every believer is his own priest, as his true Bible is his own conscience enlightened by the light of the gospel ideal. In fact, it is not a church, but a society of the believers who instruct, guide and help each other; it is indeed the communion of brothers of the free spirit in the most modern acceptation of the phrase. From whatever source the spirit breathes, it is always wel­ come; they receive it and become penetrated with it with­ out demanding of those inspired any other title to the confi­ dence of all than the excellence of their nature or the supe­ riority of their wisdom. As to the Scriptures, for this new church, every grand or fine book is a bible; it is sufficient if it answers to what is most pure and holy in the conscience of each one. It is indeed always the soul of Christ which makes the religious life of the new Christians; but between it and them there is no intermediate agent, no traditional teaching, no authority which imposes its decisions. It is not enough to say, no more pope; no more councils, they say, no more synods, no more creeds, even if agreed upon by all. It is the reign of that divine anarchy of which the primitive church had been only a very feeble image, and wThich is the ideal itse f of every truly spiritual communion. �The Old and the New Christianity. 253 IV. We see what Christianity becomes by simplification after simplification, from the reformation down to our time, just as we saw what it become by complication after complica­ tion, from its advent to the reformation. This double spec­ tacle gives rise to quite difibrent reflexions, according as one contemplates it as an orthodox Christian, a liberal Chris­ tian, or a historian. Where the orthodox Christian finds only subject for admiration in the ancient period of the his­ tory of that religion, and for regret in the second period, where the liberal Christian, on the contrary, has only regrets for the one and hopes for the other, the philosophical histo­ rian undertakes to comprehend and explain whatever is necessary in the double movement, in a sense contrary to religious thought. With the orthodox Christian, he accepts the entire dogma, no longer as one single and same revela­ tion of which all the parts are equally in conformity to the ideal itself of Christianity, but as a succession of doctrines corresponding each to a historical fatality of its existence. Leaving to the liberal believer the ideal point of view, and himself, in his quality of historian, holding to the point of view of actual fact, he finds that Christianity, in respect to the condition of the society it was to conquer, could do it only by accommodating itself to the instincts, needs, habits and necessities of human nature, at any particular moment of its history. Thus he comprehends how, to become a relig­ ion in the positive sense of the word, it was necessary that Christianity pass from the morality of Jesus to the theology of Paul; how, to become the religion of the most metaphys­ ical and most mystical part of ancient society, it was neces­ sary for it to pass from the teaching of Paul to the high the­ ology of the gospel of John and of the Nicene Creed. So, at length, he comprehends that, to become the religion of the middle ages, it has been obliged to descend from these speculative heights to the practical necessities of a disci­ pline as minute as rigorous. Like all the institutions whose development history shows, Christianity did not have the �254 The Old and the New Christianity. choice of means in extending, establishing and preserving itself. Whatever were its origin and its peculiar genius, it had no more freedom of conduct than any other human institution. It could not escape the law which regulates the development of everything in time and space; the ideal is realized only on conditions which do not always permit it to maintain the purity of its principle or of its origin. Thus the philosophic historian finds himself in harmony with the orthodox Christian upon the legitimacy of the dogmas and institutions with which primitive Christianity enriched itself or complicated itself, as one may choose to call it. But he is in harmony with the liberal Christian in quite a different way. Here it is no more historical necessity that he has in view, it is the light itself of the idea which makes him know where he is in the quite opposite religious move­ ment which has been in progress since the end of the middle ages down to our time. The necessity, if this word may be employed, of the progress which is elevating the religion of Christ, fallen in the darkness and barbarity of the middle ages, is no longer an exterior and material law of reality ; it is an interior and wholly spiritual law of the idea, which, finding a nature better and better prepared, whether in individuals or in societies of modern times, develops itself more and more freely, realizes itself more and more completely, in proportion as-it feels itself better sustained by the state of civilization which corresponds to its expansion. Consequently, without sharing the regrets of the liberal Christian in all that concerns the past, the philosophic historian comprehends and judges as a continual progress, in the literal sense of the word, the work of puri­ fication and simplification which is going on in Christian souls and churches since the renaissance, which restores liberty to religious faith by the reformation of Luther, and which is freeing the teaching of Christ from either the subtilties of the Alexandrian creed, or the severity of Paulinian dogma, to show it to the modern world in all the purity of its light and in all the power of its worth. If he cannot be �The Old and the New Christianity. 255 hostile or even indifferent to the history of dogmas and institutions which have served in the establishment of Christianity, how much more will he be in sympathy with the history of the struggles maintained aud efforts attempted in order to free it from the fett'ers that weigh upon it to-day, and to bring it back to this high ideal of every truly Chris­ tian conscience, which, in certain quarters, is confounded with the ideal itself of the modern conscience ! What will be the future of liberal Christianity in the pres­ ent societies ? If the question were only concerning some particular reform, attempted by certain men, at some given time, in view of creating a certain church, all foresight would be rash. What have become of all the reforms so ardently preached by the reverend Catholics of our country who wished to shake off the yoke of Roman discipline or of scholastic theology ? We know the fruitless efforts attempted with this intent by Lamennais, Buchez, BordasDumoulin, and Huet. What will become of the movement of which the apostles of liberal Protestantism have consti­ tuted themselves the promoters ? It seems as if everything concurs for the success of such an enterprise, the devotion of the men, the favor of circumstances, the essentially popu­ lar simplicity of the teaching. Is not this the religion of those simple in heart and spirit, as Jesus taught it to the people of Galilee ? In it, appeal is not made to theology, to metaphysics, to erudition, or to criticism ; it is made only to conscience, which alone must respond. In perceiving and loving, all the new Christianity lies; feeling the inner truths, the heart truths, that is, the beautiful, the just and the good, and loving them in the person of Christ. We are not of those whom the passion for pure philos­ ophy would render indifferent to such a progress of the religious life. It is a beautiful idea to make the name of Christ-the symbol of human conscience, and to surround the popular teaching of morality with the aureole of such a tradition. We shall not make so soon a philosophic human­ ity. If we could produce such a religious humanity, does �TC- 256 The Old and the New Christianity. it not seem as if philosophy might patiently await the day of its complete triumph, if it is ever to come? What a dream is that of the liberal Christians ! Christianity appears to them like the tree which was to cover the world and can yet do so. This tree, planted at Golgotha for the punish­ ment of Jesus, watered with his blood, enveloped with the divine benediction as with a vivifying atmosphere, left to natural growth and grace from above, would have first touched the heavens, and soon embraced the .world in the universal expansion of its branches. The strong and learned culture of a Paul, a John, of the Alexandrian fathers and the scholastic doctors, makes of it the sturdy tree which history gives us for contemplation, with roots taking deep hold of the soil, a short and massive trunk, boughs clasped and interlacing, a rough bark, an-d foliage so thick as to intercept the rays of light. And as, with such a constitu­ tion, the sap could not rise, it was obliged to betake itself to the ends'of the branches, instead of concentrating itself at the heart of the tree, to force it to its highest development. And then, after the brilliant Alexandrian vegetation, after the solid scholastic organization, either from lack of cir­ culation or from a wrong direction of the sap, the tree grows weak and bends under the weight of the branches which pull it earthward; it covers the world of the middle ages with a thick shadow under which everything grows benumbed or sleeps. What did the reformation have to do towards righting the tree and making it resume its growth towards heaven ? To recall the sap to the trunk by lop­ ping the dead branches and those too low. It is this work begun by the first reformers, which liberal Christianity con­ tinues, by disengaging the tree more and more from every­ thing which prevents it from shooting heavenward. Thus will it become the tree of life under which the religious faith of humanity will find again the air, light and fragrance which strengthen without intoxicating, which calm without stupifying. Will the dream become a reality? Only God and his �The Old and the New Christianity. 257 prophets know; but there is one thing which three centu­ ries of progress teach us with certainty; it is that the relig­ ious world is on the way to the ideal dreamed of by its freest children. Because some see it still in large majority attached to dogma and its most minute details, they con­ clude that it has not changed and will'not change, that the orthodoxy of Rome, of Augsburg or of Geneva, holds it con­ strained by its narrow formulas. It is an error. To any one who looks into the matter closelySt is manifest that the spirit is gaining light more and more in the Christian con­ sciences of our times through the letter which so long pressed it down. If any one wishes to judge of the im­ portance of the religious movement which is going on in the midst of modern societies, he must not form his opinion from the bold enterprises which suddeily burst forth and come to nothing; he must follow the slow and sure evolu­ tion taking place in the souls in appearance the most in bondage to the letter. Everything has kept its position, everything appears equally firm in Christian dogma as authority imposes it on its believers; but there is only one place, even in the Catholiq world, where one does not see that it has its dead and its living partsk that these latter alone constitute its worth and can assure its future. Alas for him, especially in these times, who forgets that the let­ ter kills and the spirit gives life! It seems that the true genius of the new times equally escapes the conservatives who cling to the past and the men who would revolution­ ize the future, to see the illusion of the former and the dis­ couragements in store for the latter. Our age has, at the same time, a liking for tradition and for progress. It remains faithful to the one by'keeping the letter; it serves the other by being inspired with the spirit. It is plain that it is more and more out of conceit with and mistrusts theat­ rical strokes and the sudden changes of scene called revolu­ tions in the history of human societies. Evolution is what it would appear is to be the preferred form of modern pro­ gress. We do not know what the future reserves for the �258 The Old and the New Christianity. religious world. We see indeed liberal Christianity redouble its efforts and extend its conquests ; we see it in America, with Channing, Parker and their disciples, draw crowds and found new churches; we see it in Europe radi­ ate in all the great centres of religious life, at Paris, at Strasburg, at Geneva, the city of Calvin, at London, at Berlin, at Florence. We should not be surprised, neverthe­ less, if this movement did not descend from the high and free society of the sons of the spirit into the depths of the religious world, and if the immense majority of Catholic or Protestant Christians kept the formulas of orthodoxy, while gaining light from science and becoming penetrated by the sentiments of modern conscience. It would be rash in us to pry into the Catholic and Christian consciences of our times, and pretend to see into them more clearly than the believers themselves; but it seems to us that their faith is no longer all of one kind as in the past. The faith of our fathers in the middle ages, and even in the first centuries of modern times, embraced all its articles of dogma in one single affirmation, invincible and absolute; nothing in it then either wounded the con­ science or revolted against reason. To-day there is taking place, asfit were without its knowledge, a distinction, if not a separation, in the depth of the religious conscience. Everything is accepted which the authority of the church imposes; but people make really two parts of the subject­ matter of tradition, one comprehending everything which no longer answers to the reason, science, or conscience of ourBime; the other, one whose eternal and universal truth will never be behind the progress of modern civilization. Surely no one can call himself Catholic if he does not sin­ cerely profess a belief in eternal punishment, in the resur­ rection of the body, in original sin, in the mystery of a God three in one, and even in many other dogmas of less importance; but how many believers attach to these things true faith, the faith of the feeling? They believe in them because it is the law of the church; but the heart of the �The Old aud the New Christianity. 259 Christian is elsewhere, it is in those ideas of purity, of justice, of fraternity, of love, which the evangelical teaching breathes, and which the believer finds in the newest inspi­ rations of the modern conscience. This is, if not the only faith., at least the living one of the religious souls of our time; the other is only a traditional faith which people affirm, and will perhaps always affirm, but which they do not feel alive in their hearts. Such are those revolutions, which are no more understood at Rome to-diy than they were in the time of Luther, which indeed cannot be understood there, because Rome is the seat of Romanism, rather than of Christianity. The saying is from the duke of Orleans, and has a yet wider applica­ tion than he who let it escape in a moment of discourage­ ment intended. “ Ta regere imperio populos, Romane, memento.” The verse of the poet is still true. Christian Rome has always left theology to the doctors of the universities and of the religious orders, keeping for herself the science of canonical law and the art of governing. Unfortunately for her, neither that deep science nor that consummate art are suffi­ cient to direct the Christian world in present circumstances. It is with the religious democracy as with political democ­ racy; in order to live they both want more and more freedom and light, less and less discipline and government. At the very moment when civilized society aspires to govern itself, the Romish church reaches the most absolute formula of personal government. One need not be a pro­ phet to predict that such a regime will no more be the law of the religious than of the political societies of the future. The spiri-t of liberal Christianity will prevail over the wholly political genius of Roman Catholicism, not by a schism, which is not created in a time of so little zeal for questions of dogma, but by a slow and continued trans­ formation of the religious conscience, tending more and more to conformity with the moral conscience of modern society. When Protestants like M. de Pressense, when �I i ■I J I 260 I The Old and the New Christianity. Catholics like MM. Dupanloup and Gratry, come to take for their own church the name even of liberal Chris­ tianity, which -is the symbol of the boldest reforms of the day, we feel that the court of Rome cannot stop the course of religious thought. In freedom and by freedom was the great battle of Christianity fought and won in its heroic age, even in spite of oppression and persecution from with­ out. I know no other means of reconquering the world to-day.” (De Pressense, Hist, des Trois Siecles de l’Eg. Ch.) Rome is not of this opinion. There are indeed many degrees in liberal Christianity; the liberty of the Catholics cannot have such a career as that of Protestants; but Rome, which understands discipline, comprehends them all in that universal malady called the spirit of the age, not perceiving that the true danger which threatens its church to-day, is the lethargic sleep of a passive and servile faith. It is said that it is not the freethinkers that cause it the most discom­ fort at this time; we readily believe it, and so much the more as it has never had a taste either for the mystic the­ ology or for the scholastic science of these barbarians of the AVest, for the Germans or the Gauls of any times, which seem to it to continually wish to go up to the assault of the Capitol. When Italian finesse does not smile at it, it is uneasy about it, knowing by a long experience how much the erudition of the former and the eloqence of the latter interfere with or trouble her in the manceuvers of her skill­ ful diplomacy. They are as children to that great mistress in the art of governing, but terrible children whose too violent love for the church of Christ has more than once agitated and shaken the church of Rome. Such is its mistrust ot discussion, that, from the advent of modern times, it has not felt the need of rallying around it the highest lights and the best forces it found in its own bosom, and that, for its great combat against the modern spirit, it has counted on the Inquisition, on the Jesuits, on the favor of princes, on the adroitness and patience of its diplomacy, on everything, in short, except the councils. Trusting only to her own �The Story of a Damned Soul. 261 wisdom, for more than three centuries Rome has governed and administered her empire without their co-operation, and now that she has just assembled one, it is to have a dogma proclaimed which henceforth strikes the institution with impotence. Then, hearing no longer those disagree­ able contradictions which are to have their last echo in the present assembly, she will be able to live or to sleep in peace, like the bird which hides its head under its wing at the approach of the enemy. The fact is, Rome does not like noisy outbursts, even from the writers and orators which defend its cause. What it likes, is neither the great heart of a Lamennais, nor the generous soul of a Lacordaire, nor the noble and liberal spirit of a Montalembert, nor the broad and high preaching of a Father Hyacinthe, nor the fiery polemics of a Gratry, nor the calm dialectics of a Maret, nor the beautiful and strong eloquence of a Dupanloup, nor, above all, the somewhat worldly wisdom of a Darboy, nor even the acrimonious temper and satirical spirit of a Veuillot; it is mute obedience among all its subjects, without any distinction of character or talent. But, if the great satisfaction of being mistress of her own house costs her the dominion of the Catholic world, Rome will have met the fate of all powers which do not comprehend that henceforth in liberty alone is the security of all authority. E. Vacherot. Article XI.—The Story of'a Damned Soul. The Examiner and Chronicle, the leading Baptist journal of the country, calls us to account for the interpretation put by us upon a passage of Bickersteth’s “Yesterday, To-day, and Forever,” which we took to refer to Theodore Parker. Our critic is quite right. The “ Theodore ” of Mr. Bickersteth’s epic is a Roman youth, the son of a Christian mother, who, for the love of a pagan girl, goes over to his father’s paganism, and is soon after killed in battle, and as particularly and painfully damned, as if the �262 The Story of a Damned Soul. existence of God Almighty depended on it. We confess to having misinterpreted Mr. Bickersteth, and now propose to make amends by giving him, and our critic above named, the benefit, first, of our explanation and apology, and second, of a reproduction of the story of Theodore’s eternal dam­ nation. The intense anxiety of orthodoxy to get Theodore Parker fast and sure in hell, was so great, even before Mr. Parker’s death, as to break out in a prayer-meeting devoted to the purpose of stirring up Jehovah to give instant attention to the business. The recollection of this, suggested to us that Mr. Bickersteth, whose whole work shows him entirely capable of such a thing, had taken occasion to give assurance that orthodox desires had been attended to. We had read his horrible poem all the way from the account of creation to the end, and could neither recall, nor discover upon examination, any clue to the meaning of the “ Theodore ” passage. We had missed the story of Theodore by not reading one of the preliminary books, in which it comes in as an episode, where Oriel tells how his first experience of escorting a soul to hell was in the case of a youth by the name of “ Theodore,” a youth of “ noble birth,” and “ high and generous bearing,” whom he had “ fondly loved,” and whom, nevertheless, he “ bore to his own place in yonder realms of wrath.” We retract, therefore, the charge that Mr. Bickersteth particularly and personally damned a mighty enemy of orthodoxy. It was a generous youth, son of a pagan father, and drawn, by fond human love of a pagan girl, to depart from the faith his mother had educated him in, whom the magnanimous singer of hell and damna­ tion singled out for particular horrible mention. We guessed wrong. Mr. Bickersteth did not strike at a great heresiarch, to warn daring heretics; he struck at the unconverted son of a pious mother, to warn a Mrs. Stowe, and whoever thinks God may be pitiful to Christian mothers, that inexorable hell cannot be so escaped, in any instance whatever. We particularly beg pardon of the Examiner �The Story of a Damned Soul. 263 and Chronicle for robbing its client of a portion of his elab­ orately fiendish devotion to orthodoxy. It occurred to us, when we found the poet saying, “Thus passed the centu­ ries,” and then mentioning a name as having startled him, because it was “ so familiar,” that he must refer to one of his contemporaries, and we had no doubt that the intense anxiety of the orthodox world to make sure of Theodore Parker’s defeat on earth and damnation in hell, had found convenient, disguised expression in Mr. Bickersteth’s vision. Our secondary inference, that the mother was damned with the son, is fully justified by the context of the passage. “ Theodore is represented as stealing a hurried glance “ upon a form us,” with the thought, “ could it be his mother ?” The Examiner and Chronicle says of our mistake about the passage, “ All this comes of mistaking below us (below Oriel and the poet-seer) for below him.” But in fact the poem had described the damnation of the rebel angels e o as going on below Oriel and the seer, so that “ As their cry of piercing misery “ From out that yawning gulf went up to heaven, Standing upon its rugged edge, we gazed, Intently and long, down after them;” and immediately upon this, the lost of earth had been sum­ moned to take their turn, whereupon Oriel, says the poet, “ Spake, “ With tears, of that which passed beneath, our feet” The very next local allusion is the “ below us,” which tells where Theodore saw his mother; and if “below us” is not equivalent to “ beneath our feet,” which referred, two pages before, to the damned, we do not understand plain language. However, going back some seven thousand lines, to the actual story of Theodore, it becomes plain that the poet intended to show us how the son was damned to everlasting hell, but the mother to everlasting heaven, and “ no breath of useless prayer escaped his lips,” or her’s either. Will �264 The Story of a Damned, Sold. the Examiner and Chronicle face the honest fact here, and permit its readers to see that its poet’s lesson, in the dam­ nation of Theodore, is blacker, a thousand fold, than the one we mistakenly pointed out? Meanwhile we invite our readers, who can stomach as blasphemous heathenism as superstition ever fathered, to trace with us, in Mr. Bicker­ steth’s sulphurous pages, the story of a pious mother’s son particularly damned, for a sign to maternal love that for the impenitent dead there is possible no other doom than “ Gehenna’s burning, sulphurous waves.” The angel attendant of the seer who tells the vast story of Mr. Bickersteth’s poem, is called Oriel. He points out to the seer the road to hell, and is asked whether he has ever been there. “ Oriel replied, with calm, unfaltering lip, And with his words his countenance benign Grew more and more severely beautiful; The. beauty of triumphant holiness, The calm, severity of burning love.” Is not this exquisitely satanic in conception ? Oriel had been to hell “ thrice,” and the recollection brings to his countenance the calm severity of love, “burning to. the lowest hell,” as the full phrase is. The occasion which particularly comes to his mind was this : “ The first Of disembodied human souls I bore To his own place in yonder realms of wrath, Was one I fondly loved, of noble birth, Of high and generous bearing.” He was “ born of Christian mother,” the wife of a Roman consul, who himself kept the old faith of his pagan fathers. 5 “ An aged priest baptized him Theodore, God's <71/% his mother whispered. And thenceforth She poured upon him, him her only child, The priceless treasures of a mother’s heart.” �The Story of a Damned Soul. 1 265 Oriel was his guardian angel, and relates that the boy’s home, 9 “ Unlike The moated fortress of a faithful house, Was ever open to the spirits malign.” That is to say, the father not being a saint, devils had con­ stant access to the young Theodore! Nevertheless, if the “ severely beautiful ” Oriel tells the truth, “ not an arrow reached him.” Innate depravity alone was his ruin, says the explicitely theological angel. And yet he seems to ascribe to the father a malign influence;— 11 The mother teaching prayers the father mocked! And yet her spell was earliest on her child, And strongest. And the fearless Theodore Was called by other men, and called himself, A Christian. Love, emotion, gratitude, All that was tenderest in a tender heart, All most heroic in a hero’s soul, Pleaded on Christ’s behalf.” Theodore was trained to arms, and joined the army of Constantine, in the struggle against Maxentius, “ When it chanced, In sack of a beleagured city, he saved A Grecian maiden and her sire from death; Her name Irene, his Iconocles; Among the princes he a prince, of all Fair women she the fairest of her race, Not only for her symmetry of form, But for the music and the love which breathed In every motion and in every word.” Theodore loved her, but his suit was met with the answer, from Irene’s father, “ Never shall my child be his Who kneels before a malefactor’s cross,” vol. i.—no. 3. 5 �266 The Story of a Damned Soul. A determination approved by Irene, who was pagan enough to abhor the idea of worshipping an undoubted man. The­ odore struggled hard,“ now cleaving to his mother’s faith,’’ and “now driven from his anchorage.” “God’s Spirit strove with him,” and unsuccessfully, says the accurately Calvanistic Oriel, although he—Oriel —was good enough to “ ward the powers of darkness off,” while “ the awful fight was foughten, ’ and give God a fair chance with the young man. The poet is determined to clearly reveal the inability of the Heavenly Father (and the human mother) to save this fine youth, even when Oriel vigilantly and successfully warded off hellish fraud and violence.” The bad heart of the youth brought him to this decision: “ 11 cannot leave that spirit Angelic in a human form enshrined. She must be mine forever. Life were death Without her.’ And straight entering, where she leaned Upon her father, as white jasmine leans On a dark pine, slowly, resolutely, As measuring every word with fate, he said, ‘ Irene, if the choice be endless woe, For thy sake I renounce my mother’s faith: I cannot, will not leave thee. I am thine.’ ” That night the three escaped to the army of Maxentius; a “soldier’s spousal” was celebrated; and the morning brought the fatal battle. Mr. Oriel relates, with calm severity of damning love, that Theodore rose, a desperate, maddened, hell-inspired blasphemer, “in his eye a wild, disastrous fire,” and “ the tempest raging in his heart, and went Impetuously into the thickest fight, And prodigies of valor wrought that day, Felling beneath his fratricidal blade Whole ranks, his comrades and his brethren, late Brethren in faith and arms.” We suspect Mr. Oriel here of being an arrant liar, and �The Story of a Damned Soul. 267 wonder that the poet-seer did not bid him go “ squat like a toad ” at the ear of Rev. J. D. Fulton, with this part of his tale. But we will hear from him Theodore’s end: £< An unknown arrow, not unfledged with prayer, Transpierced his eye and brain. Sudden he fell; One short, sharp cry; one strong, convulsive throe, And in a moment his unhappy spirit Was from its quivering tabernacle loosed.” The first cry of the disembodied soul, says Oriel, was,— “ Mother, where art thou, mother ? where am I ?” a cry which Oriel answered by seizing his “ fondly loved ” charge, with a stern announcement of orders from Almighty Power to convey him to hell. Theodore was “ submissive,” without “ lamentations,” and without “ proud reluctances and vain despite,” as Oriel led him hellward. But as they advanced on the dreadfully darkening way, and “the hope­ less captive gazed a long, last gaze” upon sun and stars, “ A groan brake from him, and he sobbed aloud— 4 My mother, oh 1 my mother, from thy love I learned to love those silent orbs of light, God’s watchers thou didst call them, as they peered, Evening by evening, on my infant sleep, And mingled with my every boyish dream: Are they now shining on thy misery ? Who, now that I am gone, will wipe thine eyes ? Who, mother, bind thy bruised and broken heart ?’ ” Oriel now states to Theodors that his mother, will think he was slain a Christian and has gone to heaven, whereat the doomed young man expresses feelings of which Oriel says, 44 Never will this heart forget The impress of the look he cast on me. He had not wept before; but now a tear Hung on his trembling lids, through which he looked �268 The Story of a Damned Soul. Such gratitude as utter hopelessness May render, .... a look which said ‘ I thank thee as the damned alone can thank; Lost as I am, hell will not be such hell, The while my mother thinks of me in heaven.’ ” At last “ the iron gates of hell ” are reached, after a march of interminable horror, through a desolate ravine, in the palpable darkness of which the radiance of Oriel’s form, as we can readily believe, was but “ a faint and feeble torch.” The “ adamantine doors ” receive their victim and his escort; Oriel conducts Theodore to a barren mountain, and “ God looked upon him,” with his “ dreadful eye,”— not with its full hell power, but “ half eclipsed,” yet with such severely loving effect that to the doomed man, “ The very air he breathed Seemed to his sense one universal flame Of wrath, . . . H . . and a low wail Ere long brake from those miserable lips— ‘ 0 God, and is this hell ? and must this last Forever ? would I never had been born I Why was I born ! I did not choose my birth. 0 Thou, who did’st create me, uncreate, I pray Thee. By Thine own omnipotence Quench Thou this feeble spark of life in me. 0 God destroy me. Grant this latest boon Thy wretched, ruined child will ever ask, And suffer me to be no more at all.’ ” To this “ aimless, bootless prayer,” the quite contented Oriel replies, “ Thou cravest what Omnipotence can do,” but wont do, because “ Omniscient Love decrees ” damna­ tion, “ And therefore vainly dost thou now invoke Almighty Power to thwart All-Seeing Love.” �✓ The Story of a Damned Soul. 269 Even the “free service” of God, “justice interdicts,” that being “heaven’s perennial joy.” “ Hades knows no other law ” than “ passive submission ” to damnation, “And here there is no sentinel but Glod; His Eye alone is jailer; and His Hand The only executioner of wrath.” With this pungent doctrine of Moloch, Oriel proposes to leave Theodore, while he catches a glimpse, “permitted him by God,” of Paradise, and is moved thereby to indulge “ idle phantasies of hope,” which Oriel, mindful of Calvinistic problems, turns back to extinguish, “ in mere pity.” Convinced thus that there is no hope for himself, Theodore cries out, , ' “ But is there not a hope For one I briefly, passionately loved ? ******* Tell her, in mercy tell her where I am, What suffering—what must suffer evermore : It may be she will turn and live. And if, Whene’er my mother’s pilgrimage is passed, And she, entering the gates of bliss, shall search Through every field of yonder Paradise, To find her only son, and search in vain, If then thou wilt but try and comfort her—■ What way I know not, but thou know’st—and should Her restless eye intuitively glance Towards this valley, instantly divert Its gaze else wither, thou wilt have done all I ask for, and far more than I deserve.” To which the insensate, pitiless, damnation-contriving Oriel replies, “Thy prayers to thine own bosom must return.” ******* “ I leave thee in thy just Creator’s hands.” Fifteen centuries now passed, and Oriel received orders �The Story of a Damned Soul. 270 from the Almighty to join an embassy sent forth to “ traverse hell in all its length and breadth,” and announce the near approach of the judgment day. Of this Oriel says, “First to that mountain valley, where I left Lost Theodore, I bent my course. 0 God ! The solemn change which fifteen centuries In hell had written on his fearful brow.” The further description, and the elaborate speeches ex­ changed, represent Theodore as entirely converted to high Calvinism, and quite convinced that hell-fire,—the “ veilless blaze” of the “Dreadful Eye,” which is to come after the judgment, will be after all the greatest possible boon, “repressing with flame the fertility ” of “ the ineradicable germs of sin,” though never able to extinguish them. And to this extraordinary exposition of the divine imbecility, or indisposition, to eradicate sin, the judicious angel gave Theodore no opportunity to reply, but sped on his way to advise the hellions of the speedy Second Advent of the Messiah, making expository remarks, as he went, vindicative of hell in general, and of particular hell for the generous youth to whom he had been guardian angel. To follow the story we must turn now to the ninth book of the poem, which is called “ The Bridal of the Lamb.” Here we hear Messiah say, “ Now is the day of vengeance in my heart, And now the year of my redeemed is come; ” and we behold “ Messiah seated on a snow-white horse Of fiery brightness, as the Lord of hosts, Apparelled in a vesture dipped in blood.” In due time the Last Judgment is at. hand, and the hosts of darkness gather in one final conspiracy, �The Story of a Damned Soul. 271 “ When from the frowning heavens again that sound, Which shook the first fell council of the damned, More terrible than thunder, vibrated Through every heart Jehovaffls awful laugh / ” And now “ Messiah spake again, His voice Resounding from the jasper walls of heaven To hell’s profoundest caves. * * * * * * * and' Death and Hell, With dreadful throes and agonizing groans, Disgorged their dead, the lost of every age, In myriads, small and great confusedly.” These are all brought back to earth to resume their bodies, which were to be “ made fit to endure the terrors of the wrath to come.” Then the book of life is read, and the redeemed deceived to the right hand of the Judge. The rebel angels are damned in order, ending with the Arch-fiend, whose head Messiah crushes with “ his burning heel.” “ And for a space no sound was heard. But then It seemed the crystal anpyr^m clave Beneath them, and the horrid vacuum sucked The devil and his armies down . . . To bottomless perdition.” After this the lost of mankind are summoned, and among them is specially observed Theodore. Then “ The Judge arising from his throne, Bent on the countless multitudes convict His vision of eternaBwrath, and spake In tones which more than thousand thunders shook The crumbling citadel of every heart,— ‘ Depart from Me, ye cursed, into fire, For the devil and his hosts prepared, Fire everlasting, fire unquenchable; Myself have said it: let it be : Amen.’ * * * * Again the floor �272 The Story of a Damned Soul. Of solid crystal where the damned stood Opened its mouth, immeasurable leagues; And with a cry whose piercing echoes yet Beat through the void of shoreless space, the lost Helplessly, hopelessly, resistlessly, Adown the inevitable fissure sank, As sank before the ruined hosts of hell, Still down, still ever down, from deep to deep, Into the outer darkness, till at last The fiery gulf received them, and they plunged Beneath Gehenna’s burning sulphurous waves In the abyss of ever-during woe. " “ All shook except the Throne of Judgment. * * The Hand that held the scales of destiny Swerved not a hair’s breadth: and the Voice which spake Those utterances quailed not, faltered not. But when the fiery gulf was shut, and all Looked with one instinct on the judgment-seat, To read his countenance who sate thereon, He was in tears—the Judge was weeping—tears Of grief and pity inexpressible. And in full sympathy of grief the springs Gushed forth within us; and the angels wept: Till stooping from the throne with His own hand He wiped the tears from every eye, and said, 1 My Father’s will be done: His will is mine; And mine is yours: but mercy is his delight, And judgment is his strange and dreadful work. Now it is done forever. Come with me Ye blessed children of my Father, come; And in the many mansions of His love Enjoy the beams of His unclouded smil<£f So saying, as once from Olivet, he rose Majestically toward the heaven of heavens In the serenity of perfect peace: And we arose^with him. But what of those Who from the place of final judgment hurled, Had each his portion in the lake of fire ? �The Story of a Damned Soul. 273 No Lethe rolled its dark oblivious waves, As some have feigned, betwixt that world of woe And ours of bliss. But rather, as of old Foreshadowed in the prescient oracles, The smoke of their great torment rose to heaven In presence of the holy seraphim, And in the presence of the Lamb of God, For ever and for ever. At the first Nothing was heard ascending from the deep Save wailings and unutterable groans, Wrung from them by o’ermastering agony; But as His Eye, who is consuming fire, Unintermittingly abode on them,— Silence assumed her adamantine throne.” The One-Eyed Dread having thus attended to his ene­ mies, snivelled a pretence of grief to accommodate a passage in the New Testament, and got his red-hot look so fixed on the damned that they burned horribly without useless wail or groan, there roll away “ages of a measureless eternity,” and at last the voice of “ hell’s dethroned monarch ” breaks the silence with an elaborate confession of the dogmas and arguments of Calvinism, ending with “ Lost, lost: our doom is irreversible: Power, justice, mercy, love have sealed us here; Glory to God who sitteth on the throne, And to the Lamb for ever and for ever.” < The voice was hushed a moment; then a deep Low murmur, like a hoarse resounding surge, Rose from the universal lake of fire: No tongue was mute, no damned spirit but swelled That multitudinous tide of awful praise, ‘ Glory to God who sitteth on the throne, And to the Lamb, for ever and for ever.’ ” H The reader who has not made himself familiar with the severities of damning love may imagine that the One-Eyed �274 z The Story of a Damned Soul. Horror called a Lamb took off now his eye of consuming fire, and'permitted the hellions to cool a trifle. Not he, if he knew the catechism. On the contrary, he held on the hotter, as the only sure thing for his glory, and the devil is made to say pensively and submissively, at the Lamb’s hellhot look, “ I see far off the glory of thy kingdom Basking in peace, uninterrupted peace: But were I free, and were my comrades free, Sin mightier than myself and them would drag Our armies to perplex those fields with war. Only thus fettered can we safely gaze; Thus only to the prisoners of despair Can Mercy, which is infinite, vouchsafe Far glimpses of the beauty of holiness. Woe, woe, immedicable woe for those Whose hopeless ruin is their only hope, And hell their solitary resting-place,”— / which makes it plain that if the Fount of Hell, the Lamb’s Dreadful Eye, should cool ever so little, to all eternity, it would be very bad for the damned, whose only hope is in sizzling patierroly under the merciful vengeance of the Moloch Eye. There is bug one more point to be made, that of the advantage to the saints of having the damned always in view, the happiness a redeemed mother, for example, will feel from gazing occasionally on her Theodore—her God’s gift—smoking in the frying-pan of the Lamb’s “ infinite mercy,” and kept from unconverted pranks of human love by the “ immedicable woe ” of “ hopeless ruin.” In his closing pages Mr. Bickersteth labors to make this evident. He seems to be of opinion that the saints would be too happy in heaven, or on the redeemed and restored earth, but for interesting reminiscences of damnation and occa­ sional contemplation of the woes of the lost. �275 The Story of a Damned Soul. “ Haply such perfectness of earthly bliss, And such far vistas of celestial light, Had overcharged their hearts. But not in vain The awful chronicles of time. And oft When dazzled with the glory and the glow That streamed from Zion’s everlasting hills, Messiah or his ministers would tell Rapt auditors how Satan fell from bliss, The story of a ruined Paradise, The foughten fight, the victory achieved, But only with the endless banishment Of damned spirits innumerable and men From heaven and heavenly favor, which is life. Nor seldom he, who strengthened human sight, As with angelic telescope, to read The wonders of the highest firmament, Would bid them gaze into the awful Deep Couching beneath; and there they saw the lost - ... For ever bound under his dreadful Eye, Who is eternal and consuming fire, There in the outer darkness. * * * That which men witnessed of the damned in hell, By unction of the Spirit at God’s command, Was in our gaze at will, whene’er the smoke In mighty volumes rising from the Deep, Blown devious by God’s breath athwart the void, Dispersed. Nor turned we always from the sight; ( Should not the children share their Father’s thoughts ? Should not the Wife her husband’s counsels learn? * * * * * * And in the cloudless joys of heaven and earth Haply this sight and knowledge were, to us The needful undertones of sympathy With Him.” So ends the tale. The mother of our Roman youth is with the redeemed; her husband and only child in hell. To keep her from a surfeit of happiness the Lamb gossips with her about the fall and damnation of spirits and men; �276 Prospects and Purposes. strengthens her vision so that she can distinctly see what is going on in hell; and so brings her into sympathy with the effects of his red-hot Dreadful Eye. Who says Amen to this heathenism ? The Examiner and Chronicle. Mr. Beecher's Christian Union. The Chicago Advance. The Independent. The Congregationalist and Recorder. The Watchman and deflector, etc., etc. Article XI.—Prospects and Purposes. We believe we may now say, with confidence, that the permanence of The Examiner is fully assured. We have had to make a month’s delay, to consider difficulties and provide resources, and for this reason, date our third issue February, instead of January. Our enterprise is a difficult one, but we lack neither faith nor courage, and we find willing and strong friends. The Examiner will not die. It is gaining noble support, and much ampler than we expected. Our position in a field already occupied by The Rad­ ical and The Index, has a two-fold explanation. We undertook to interpret religion and kindred themes, under the Christian name, which The Index rejects, and with the purpose of earnestly and definitely controverting the pseudo­ Christianity of existing sects, much more than The Radical has chosen to do this. Our views of the error and mischief of Jesuism, either as orthodox theology or as liberal heroworship, are much more distinct and decisive than those of contemporary liberalism. Neither The Radical nor The Index seem to us to have illustrated full emancipation from the current sentimentalism and unscholarly prepossession, which have made Jesus more than a common man, and better, for help and comfort, than the natural dependence of �Prospects and Purposes. 277 man, the God and Father of all souls. We propose to have the exact truth of history told about this young Jew­ ish aspirant to earthly Messiahship, and the plain truth of theology taught in regard to the absolute insignificance of him, or any other man, where the question is of the eternal life, the destiny and the blessedness, of the creatures of GOD. It is time to cry Great Pan is dead, and perempto­ rily to remand Jesus, the God-man, Lord and Saviour, mas­ ter and hero, to his proper humble place, as in himself a quite common and erring man, and in his providential posi­ tion a standard-bearer for similar quite common and erring men, of faith in God’s presence, without mediator or mes­ senger, with every soul of man. On the other hand we desire to resist, with all the force of what we deem just thought and sound learning, the theory of The Index that Christianity is to be separated from, and that the new movement of faith is to disavow the pre­ vious steps of our common humanity. Not only is there vast power to be kept in the just weight of what has been best in Christianity, but the connection is one absolutely essential to the consolation, by religious teaching, of the suffering millions. We had rather a thousand fold silence our private opinions, and study and practice the simpler, more universal, and always most heavenly truths of practi­ cal Christianity, as a lay member, a novice or penitent, in the Catholic church, than to join our friend Abbot in his stupendous misrepresentation of Christianity. Not that we shrink from any surgery of truth, lor would hesitate a moment to give Mr. Abbot a place with us in The Exam­ iner, for fair consideration of his views, and full defence of them, but simply because, when all has been said, his con­ clusion is, to us, the most unwarranted and lamentable which an honest thinker and earnest scholar ever arrived at. We profoundly honor our friend, whose position we thus criticise; he has on every ground as much right to his opin­ ion as we to ours; we cherish no aversion towards him as a religious teacher, and will gladly stand anywhere with �278 Prospects and Purposes. him, but of what 13 to us the utterly unfit expedient of seething the kid in his mother’s blood we will unmistaka­ bly speak our mind to the end of the chapter. And we have abundant evidence that in so doing we can render important service to the emancipation of the public miud from superstition, and the healthy development of free reli­ gion. In general, with many exceptions of course, the purification of faith results in a free and large comprehen­ sion of Christianity, not in rejection of the connection or the name. With Mr. Abbot’s organ (much more than with Mr. Abbot himself), it results in a singular stringency ot speculative doubt and reserve, which flatly forbids us to be Christian, and hardly permits us to cherish a comfortable thought of God. Our special hope and desire, on the contrary, is to cultivate a very great, and fervent, and fruitful thought of God, and to make clear that this, as it is emphasized in “Our Father,” is the ever-enduring truth of Christiani ty. The lament, or the complaint, of some of our critics, that The Examiner is the organ of one man, bespeaks a mi-understanding of our editorial plans. To such as take a friendly interest in our effort to conduct a monthly review such as The Examiner is, we need say but a word in explanation of our purpose, which is to editorially bring together the ample testimonies of literature, and make the greatest and best minds of this and other times help to fill our pages. To us literature is the true scripture, and it is a neglected scripture. Lessons far richer and greater than the current divinity knows, are scattered through the better writings of mankind, from the time of Socrates to the present day. To edit and publish these lessons of neglected inspiration, to gather and set forth to the public of common readers these contributions of unrecognized prophets, marking their force and fairly interpreting their significance, is a legitimate work. And in this work we can also have the aid of many of the best living writers, the leaders of thought and faith and I I f 1 I ; I : I l I I 1 | | I { I | | I | I I | | �Prospects and Purposes. 279 science in all parts of the world, whose best selected words we can properly and acceptably reproduce in our pages. Two distinguished French writers have already instructed our readers, and Emerson, Parker, Max Miiller, Mr. Abbot, and others have been heard in the numbers already issued. We shall make this feature of our plan more distinct as we go on, and have no doubt that our readers will be satisfied of the wisdom of our aim. And in addition to this, we * shall secure, as our plans develop, the very best aid which contemporary thought and learning, at home or abroad, can furnish, in the form of original contributions prepared expressly for The Examiner, English, French, German, and other voices, as well as American, speaking through a publication in the heart of our new world, to the audience of earnest inquirers which we are gathering. It is not too much, we trust, to ask our friends to work earnestly for us now, with the full expectation of permanent and complete success. To give more time for this, and to enable us to put our regular publication-day back to the middle of the month, we shall bring out our next number for April, and have it ready March 15. This will make ©ur first year of the publication (12 numbers) end with the current year. * There is variety enough, and richness enough, in the current expres­ sion of the human race to give us more than we can possibly use. Our work will be, as near as possible, to gather out of this unrolling scrip­ ture of mankind the fact, thought, principle, life, which are the voice of man and the voice of God in the world to-day; sometimes citing exact words of contemporary utterances, as in our translated article, and the numerous extracts scattered through other articles; sometimes reporting the substance of a new or fresh page of revelation; and sometimes entering upon a critical examination of the book, the man, the life which merits attention. �280 Wanted, a Moralist for Dr. Clarke’s Statesman. Article XIII.— Wanted, a Moralist for Dr. J. F. Clarke’s Statesman. The title under which Dr. J. F. Clarke discoursed of political matters, in a recent number of Old and New— “Wanted, a Statesman,”—assumed enough in itself to warrant us in looking for superior wisdom in the essay, whether it dealt only with the failure of our politics, or also went on to lay down a policy of its own. To our great surprisel we found, under this title, some remarks as ill-considered as'the worst parts of Dr. Clarke’s theological treatises, not the sound wisdom of a cautious thinker, nor even the correct views of a careful observer; but crude observations of a deplorably careless sentimentalist, such as we so commonly find in second-rate sermons. Take, for example, Dr. Clarke’s solution of the Alabama question, gravely proposed by him in an exposition of what he con­ siders the statesmanship wanted by us :— “ Great Britain either did right or did wrong. Leave it to herself to decide which. Let Gen. Grant request our minister to request the British Government to decide that question, and inform it beforehand that we are ready to accept its conclusion. If Great Britain, through her govern­ ment, says that she did right, we will accept that solution, and drop the subject; only in that case, we shall, of course, have the right to do the same. Whenever she has a rebel­ lion in her empire, or is engaged in a foreign war, we shall have a right to do to Great Britain exactly what she did to us. We shall take just as much pains as she did, and no more, to keep pirates from going out of our ports, to prey upon her commerce. If she likes this programme, let her say so.” This may be astute statesmanship, to leave to Great Britain to say whether those who lost by the rebel cruisers fitted out in British ports have any just claim upon her, and also to leave to her prejudiced decision to settle the future law of the matter, but at least we may deny the morality, in case Great Britain refuses what we are sure is justice, of �'Wanted, a Moralist for Dr. Clarke’s Statesman. 281 determining to imitate such refusal of justice the first chance we have. As a sentimentalist, Dr. Clarke might have said, “ If Great Britain thinks she did right, let us sayno more about it, and when our chance comes, we will shame her neglect and treachery by scrupulous justice and fidelity.” He would then lie open only to the charge of unjustly sacrificing the claims of our citizens, and of yield­ ing needlessly a grave point of law, merely for a burst of sentiment. But when he advises that we yield now, and make it up in hard hits by and by, he proposes the policy of the cowardly savage, a statesmanship which would soon carry the world back to the settlement of all questions by stealthy blows of the strong hand and the wily craft of aboriginal passion. We introduced in our last issue, on p. 184, a barbarism, anti Christum, etc^intending to indicate by a note that we used it as a barbarism. Our meaning was, that if the Uni­ tarians were to forget their culture and take a position in the spirit of the expression in question, it would be better than to dawdle disreputably about Zion waiting for the Lord to come and claim the contents of the Unitarian napkin. VOL. I.—NO. 3. 6 �BOOKS'. Plutarch's Morals—A Bible of Greek “ Grace and Truth.’'* —What mean these five goodly octavos, with their more than twenty-five hundred pages of the writings of a pagan of the last half of the first Christian century? They are published under auspices the very best which America could afford. No house in the country, or indeed anywhere, would be less likely than Little, Brown & Co., Boston, whose imprint these volumes bear, to make either a com­ mercial or a literary mistake, in a matter so serious as this evidently is. So, also, the name of Prof. Goodwin argues not less certainly that so large and difficult a task was not attempted except for most weighty reasons. And when we learn that the revision carried through by him has been beset at every step with unusual perplexities, yet has been accomplished with the utmost pains, and is evidently a signal success, we conclude, unhesitatingly, that Plutarch’s Morals must have merits rarely found in the productions of any age. To confirm this conclusion, if confirmation were needed, what witness more competent than Mr. Emerson ? lie is the acknowledged master of the best school of American literature, and the man of all men now living to pass judgment on, and to authenticate to the thoughtful and working world of to-day, any studies, ancient or modern, in the important field of ethical science and prac­ tical wisdom. If, therefore, he gives unstinted praise, we need not wait to turn over these twenty-five hundred pages to be convinced that something rich and rare is set before us. * Translated from the Greek, by several hands. Corrected and revised by William W. Goodwin, Ph.D., Professor of Greek Literature in Harvard University. With an Introduction by Ralph Waldo Emerson. 5 vols., 8vo., $15. Little, Brown & Co., Boston. �Plutarch’s Morals. 2E3 As a matter of fact, however, we had known for some years that a certain old translation of Plutarch’s Morals,— an extensive collection of essays by the author of the famous “Lives,”—was esteemed by Mr. Emerson, both from the Greek wit and wisdom garnered in it, and for the singular vigor, freshness, and breadth of its English style, one of the most precious bibles of mankind. We had had the use of a copy of this translation — it is a very rare book — and had made a selection of its richest texts; and from Mr. Emerson himself we had learned, some time since, of the plan for its revision and reproducEon, and of the hope which he cherished that it would introduce to the studious and earnest believers and workers of our day “some good paganism.” The labors of some forty or fifty English university men produced the version now re-presentedftnd made it, in Mr. Emerson’s judgment, “a monument of the English language at a period of singular vigor and freedom of style.” Still, the old book was “ careless and vicious in parts,” as a transla­ tion, and sadly needed the improvement which ProflGoodwin’s accomplished hand has given it. And happily,Ehe thorough revision which has made the translation faithful to the Greek original, has proved throughout a vindication of Plutarch, a restoratibn of clear and accurate statements where the old version gave something absurd and unintel­ ligible. Plutarch belonged to the generation second after that of Jesus. He was just coming to manhood when Paul ceased from apostolic labors. The essays which are called his “ Morals,” were written at the moment when Christian teaching was fairly in the world, but before it had made any appreciable impression upon paganism. If they contain lessons of rare and gracious wTisdom, these lessons show what paganism was capable of at the very hour when Christianity, as popularly interpreted, claims to have found the light of ethical and religious teaching Blean gone out. �284 Plutarch's Morals. The “ Lives” and the “ Morals” of Plutarch, taken together, form a large body of history and instruction, of chronicle, character and catechism, retold and retaught, newly narrated and freshly expounded and enforced, at just the moment when our popular Christianity pretends that the world of ancient life and faith was without form and void, and dark­ ness brooded over a chaos which waited the creating breath of Divine interference through Christ. As Mr. Emerson says, “ Plutarch occupies a unique place in literature, as an encyclopaedia of Greek and Roman antiquity.” He is a kind of bible of ancient faith and practice, an evangelist of the best, in ideas and in examples, which the old pagan world had to offer. It is worth while, therefore, to know what his gospel is, and to compareBits truths and errors with the truths and errors of the system which has so long put all other systems aside, with the claim that they all failed of grace and truth, and that it alone had the word of lifeH Mr. Emerson says of the “ Morals,” the sermons of Plutarch, “ I know not where to find a book — to borrow a phrase of Ben Jonson’s—1 so rammed with life.’ ” Plutarch in general he pronounces “ a chief example of the illumina­ tion of the intellect by the force of morals.” Other points of the explanation and vindication of the Greek essayist by the American, appear in the following sentences, which we cull from the Introduction to the edition of the “ Morals ” now before us : “ Whatever is eminent in fact, or in fiction, in opinion, in character, in institutions, in science — natural, moral, or metaphysical, or in memorable sayings, drew his attention and came to his pen with more or less fullness of record.” —(The reason of Plutarch’s vast popularity is his humanity. Nothing touches man but he feels it to be his. He has preserved for us a multitude of precious sentences, in prose or verse, of authors whose books are lost; and these embalmed fragments, through his loving selection alone, have come to be proverbs of later mankind.”—“Now and then there are hints of superior science. You may cull �Plutarch’s Morals. 285 from his record of barbarous guesses of shepherds and travelers statements that are predictions of facts established in modern science.”—“ His extreme interest in every trait of character, and his broad humanity, lead him constantly to Morals, to the study of the Beautiful and Good. Hence his love of heroes, his rule of life, and his clear convictions of the high destiny of the soul. La Harpe said ‘ that Plutarch is the genius the most naturally moral that ever exist­ ed.’ ”—“Plutarch is genial, with an endless interest in all human and divine things.” — “ Plutarch thought ‘ truth to be the greatest good that man can receive, and the good­ liest blessing that God can give.’ ”—“ His faith in the immortality of the soul is another measure of his deep humanity. He believes that the doctrine of the divine Providence, and that of the immortality of the soul, rest on one and the same basis.”—“lean easily believe that an anxious soul may find in Plutarch’s chapter called ‘Pleasure not attainable by Epicurus,’ and his ‘Letter to his Wife Tiihoxena,’ a more sweet and reassuring argument on the immortality than in the Phaedo of Plato; for Plutarch always addresses the question on the human side, and not on the metaphysical; as Walter Scott took hold of boys and young men, in England and America, and through them of their fathers. His grand perceptions of duty lead him to his stern delight in heroism; a stoic resistance to low indulgence; to a fight with fortune; a regard for truth ; his love of Sparta and of heroes like Aristides, Phocion, and Cato.”—“But this stoic, in his fight with fortune,with vices, effeminacy and indolence, is gentle as a woman when other strings are touched. He is the most amiable of men. He has a tenderness almost to tears, when he writes on ‘Friendship,’ on ‘Benefitsflon ‘The Training of Children,’ and on ‘The Love of Brothers.’ All his judgments are noble. He thought, with Epicurus, that it is more delight­ ful to do than to receive a kindness. . . . His excessive and fanciful humanity reminds one of Charles Lamb, whiist it much exceeds him. . . . His delight in magnanimity and self-sacrifice has made his books, like Homer’s Iliad, a bible for heroes.” We cannot here go at length into proof from Plutarch’s own pages, of the existence in him of a veritable revelation, worthy to be compared, in many great and noble respects, with anything ever indited for the instruction of mankind. �286 Plutarch’s Morals. In brief, we declare our unhesitating judgment that Plutarch, pagan chronicler and moralist though he be, is as well worth earnest and reverent study as that Bible which has been so long thrust upon us as the only and the infallible rule of divine truth. In our opinion, the revelation which is contained in Socrates, Plato, Philo Judaeus, Plutarch, and the other representatives or inheritors of Greek wisdom, is much richer than that which we have accepted from the Hebrews and Hebrew-Christian mind. As the words Christ and Christianity are Greek, so the best part of our truest Christianity is from Greek teaching rather than Hebrew, and far the largest, and deepest, and purest fountain of divine truth, is in the scriptures which commence with Socrates and Plato, and which have their fourth gospel in the “Morals” of Plutarch, as they have their Acts of the Apostles in his “ Lives.” ’ It may seem a rude judgment in the face of current Christian opinion, but we cannot help it. We feel no call to respect the crass ignorance and gross superstition which still make accredited Christian judgment, in the matter of divine revelation, a baseless prepossession, no more just than Hindoo, Chinese, or Mohammedan prepossession. If the world of Christendom had spent as much pains in the free study of Greek chronicle and exposition as have been given to the law and gospel derived from Jewish sources, we have no doubt that the average enlightenment and ele­ vation of mankind would be very much greater than at present. The simpler and more superstitious books have commanded attention, and the world meanwhile has lost fifteen hundred years, and only now begins to walk with the best masters of paganism. It did not surprise us when Mr. Emerson said to us, speaking of Plutarch, “ We want some good paganism.” The study of divinity will take a step as important as any ‘ revival of learning ’ that ever was, when Greek Socrates shall displace Hebrew Samuel, Plato Paul, and Plutarch John and Matthew’, aud study shall seek �Plutarch's Morals. 287 for great thoughts, humane principles,, and manly examples rather than waste itself on the®uperstition that one young Jew and certain Jewish books shut up both God and God’s truth in themselves, and that the first and last labor of investigation is to vindicate this pretension. We will un­ hesitatingly compare Plutarch alone with the whole Bible, not to show that he avoids error, but to prove that he more fully and more profoundly grasps essential truth, and that on the grand points of ethical and theological teaching he is infinitely wiser than the popular Christian interpretation of so-called holy writ. We shall make it our duty to bring forward proof of this from time to time, as our space and plans will permit. In conclusion now we merely cite a few specimens taken from the first pages of Vol. I. of the “ Morals.” 0S'<3hr,a'tes, ^t^as be’perceived "anyfierceness of spifiT h *s to rise within him towards any of his friends, setting him­ self like a promontory to break the waves, would speak with A lower voice, bear a smiling PowntenancS,, and look with a more * yentie'eye $ andtehusl by bending thexother way and moving contrary to the passion, he kept himself from falling or being worst®d^S| “Observing that many have begun their change to virtue more from being pardoned than being punished, I became per­ suaded of this: that reason was fitter to govern with than anger,” JI “Good temper doth remedy some things, put an orna­ ment upon others, ^udgweete^^thermiU “ If every one would al way s rep eat th e question of Plato to himself, But am not I perhaps sum aone and turn his reason from abroad to loofei into himself, and put restraint upon his reprehension of others, he would not make so much use of his hatred of evil in reproving other men, seeing himsaH: in need fgrgat. indulgonc^^jg “ J^rnTve affl vnlwest, 1 Jimpedoelelp.as a divine thing, ‘ To fast from evil.’ ” — From Concerning the Cure of �288 The Invitation Heeded. “Atheism, which is a false persuasion that there are no blessed and incorruptible beings, . . is very lamentable and sad. For to be blind or to see amiss in matters of this con­ sequence cannot but be a fatal unhappiness to the mind, it being then deplved of the fairest and brightest of its many eyes, the knowledge of God.” “ Atheism hath no hand at all in causing superstition ; bull superstition not only gave atheism its first birth, but serves it ever since by giving it its best apology for existing, whgh, although it be neither a good nor a fair one, is yet the most specious and colorable.” “There is certainly no infirmiB belonging to us that contains such a multipllity of errors and fond"passions, or that consists of such incongruous and incoherent opinions, as this of superstition dotl3f It behooves us, therefore to * do our utmost to escape it; but withal, we must see we do it safely and prudmtly, and not rashly and inconsiderately, as people run from the incursions of robbers or from fire, and fall into bewildered and untrodden paths, full of pits and precipices. For so some, while they would avoid supersti­ tion,Rea® over the golden mean of true piety into the harsh and coarse extreme of atheism.”—From Of Superstition or Indiscreet Devotion. The Invitation Heeded—Reasons for a Return to Catholic Unity.—By James Kent Stone. * The activity of the Catholic Publication Society has been for some time one of the signs of theKimes. It represents an earnest school of American Catholics, whose gifts and graceJcannot be denied. We have a shelf of the books which have come from this school within a few years, which we highly prize as one of the genuine fruits of contempo­ rary religious activity, although much which these volumes contain must be winowed out as mere chaff of tradition. In our judgment the new school of Catholicism is much more humane, sensible and religious in its literature, both books and tracts, than the Protestant orthodoxy ^represented by * The Catholic Publication Society, New York, 1870. �The Invitation Heeded. 289 the Tract Societies and Publication Houses which flood the country with cheap superstition; superstition, too, which is absurd and cruel. This school finds a new recruit, and a valuable one, in the author of The Invitation Heeded. Dr. Stone appears to great advantage in his deeply sincere, earnest and able argu­ ment and appeal, which he does not confidently urge with­ out having profoundly felt. We can lend a hearty sympa­ thy to the deep, spiritual tones of such a man’s plea, and challenge for him the respectful attention of his religious contemporaries, although the opinion within the limits of which he now attempts religion has no more practical value, weight, or interest to us than any other hallucination of misguided sentiment] Dr. Stone treats first of the Church considered in certain historical aspects, such as the attitude of the world towards it, its perpetuity, its guardianship of morals, the failure of its great foe Protestanism, its relation to civilization, and its asserted complicity with persecution. In the second part of his work he deals with the Church as a Divine Creation, under the heads of incarnation and in­ spiration, infallibility, scripture, antiquity, and the signs of the true church. The third, and concluding part, considers the Church as an organization, or the relations of the Pri­ macy to Christianity; to prophecy, to antiquity, to unity, to authority, and to infallibility. Into the merits of the argu­ ment we cannot here enter, but we can assure our readers that they can see in these pages just how pious and earnest men are obeying certain sentiments taught them by Chris­ tianity, by going over to Romanism. And we think no man engaged with religion can sympathetically follow Dr. Stone’s plea through to the end without being wiser and better for noting the aspects of experience which it discloses. Pew readers accustomed to the assumptions of faith which are dictated by sound reason will have ary difficulty in see­ ing where Dr. Stone’s illusion is, or how it is that his logic has constrained him to join himself to the largest historical �290 Mommsen’s Rome. result of the primitive Christian movement. If we did not believe in the universality of inspiration and incarnation, and had to assume that the creature can return to the Crea­ tor only through creature mediation by Christ and the church, we should make haste to follow Dr. Stone. As it is, we bid him good speed into the Roman fold, but propose, ourselves, to stay outside and take the chance of their being God enough for all creation. We have a shrewdy guess that the supply of Divine grace is not materially lessened, much less exhausted, by what the Primacy has shut up in Roman limits. Mommsen’s History of Rome, the American edition of which, published by Charles Scribner & Co., New York, is now completed by the appearance of the fourth volume, merits recognition by both critics and readers, as without exception the finest existing account of the course of events from the origin of Rome, and the earliest political life of Italy, to the time when Caesar put an end to the Roman Republic!in the year 46 B. C. The scholar finds in the fruits of Mommsen’s labors much more than learned study in this field has ever before achieved; fuller discovery of facts, more just appreciation of causes, more faithful and more complete reproduction of real features of Roman life, and a method and style of the highest and noblest art. But none the less does the mere reader, who wishes to be carried along by a trustworthy and attractive recital, find in Momm­ sen a guide whom it is a profound pleasure to follow. The secret of this two-fold success of the work is in the author’s union of learning and masterly intelligence with simplicity, earnestness and vigor. It is one of the most satisfactory peculiarities of study, as the best scholars undertake it, that it demands real facts and actual truths, and counts no cost great which adds to veri- . tableBcnMledge. We are able now to come at a great deal of historical truth, where heretofore we have had to put up with traditions W’hich were in large part misrepresentations �Froude’s England. 291 of fact, even when they were not pure inventions of igno­ rance, or fictions of imagination. We rejoice in this new fidelity of study to truth, both for its results in such resto­ ration of the picture of humanity as we have an illustration of in Mommsen’s Rome, and for what must come from the inevitable application of it to the history of religion, which has been with Christians a mass of misrepresentation in the case of all other religions than their ownland for their own a tissue of fiction and false tradition, persisted in with a bravery of unveracity fcr which the whole history of man­ kind besides affords no parallel. Dr.Mommsen tells the story of conquering Rome down to a period very near the era of Christianity. He is expected to go on with the nar­ rative through the period of the empire, and mil thus give us important aid in comprehending the world into which Christian teaching penetrated. At present, however, the work is complete. The English translation was made from the fourth German edition, and the reprint is in Scribner’s excellent library style, four handsome volumesBwith com­ plete index, and sold at the very low price of $2 a volume. Scribner’s edition is decidedly preferable to the English. Froude’s History of England has extended to twelve vol­ umes, covering the events from the Fall of Wolsey to the Defeat of the Spanish Armada, and is now brought to a close, because the author deems that he has already tres­ passed too much upon the patience of his readers, and because, although he has not reached the end of the reign of Elizabeth, where he at first proposed to stop, he has gone far enough to accomplish his main purpose, which was “to describe the transition from the Catholic England with which the century opened, the England of a dominant Church and monasteries and pilgrimages, into the England of progressive intelligence.” It is not our purpose to attempt even a brief criticism of the work which Mr. Froude thus brings to a close. Its �292 Eroude’s England. fascination as one of the grand stories of the world, told with singular eloquence, need not be celebrated here. But one remark in particular we wish to make, in justification of the unstinted praise which we deem it but right to bestow upon Mr. Froude’s work. It is not yet time to write the final history of an epoch so closely connected with our own as that in which “ the England of progressive intelli­ gence” had its birth. Dr. Mommsen can write of Rome, and Mr. Lea can write of early and mediaeval Christian pretension, with the confidence of judicial decision, because the one and the other have been sufficiently investigated to be thoroughly known, and readily comprehended and judged. The turns and problems of Roman historv are simple, as soon as they are seen in the light of actual facts, and even Christianity, as it took outward form in an organ­ ized church, only needed to be fairly seen as it was to be conclusively judged as the most woful defeat of the Chris­ tian spirit, and most heinous outrage upon human rights. If Christians generally do not admit this, it is only because their prejudice loves ignorance rather than knowledge, and deliberately excludes the light, that in complete dark­ ness it may continue a pretension which every candid scholar in Christendom knows to have no warrant whatever, nor even the shadow of an honest excuse. But no such judicial certainty is possible in the case which comes before us in Mr. Froude’s volumes. We are hearing the pleas of great advocates, and must continue so to do for a long time to come. Mr. Froude is an advocate worthy of the field into which he has entered, in thoroughness of learned study, in penetration and vigor of thought, in profound and glowing sympathies, and in earnest eloquence. The course of his great story commands our deepest interest at every step, and if we cannot feel on all points that historv utters through him her conclusive word, we nevertheless are con­ scious that no such plea in her court has been made before, touching this matter of the transition from Catholic England to the England of progressive intelligence, and that very �The Library of Wonders. 293 much which Mr. Froude so eloquently urges will appear in the final verdict of the tribunal of coming time. The story is a long one, but we can hardly wish that there were less. In fact we hope that Mr. Froude may yet carry out his original purpose, and go on to the end of Elizabeth’s reign. The twelve volumes which now complete the work are brought out in three styles by its American publishers, Charles Scribner & Co.; a large paper edition at $5 a volume, a library edition at $3 a volume, and a capital popular edition at $1.25 a volume. The Illustrated Library of Wonders, a translation of which is in course of publication by Charles Scribner & Co., was immediately successful on its first appearance in Paris, and seems hardly less popular in America. Eighteen volumes of Scribner’s edition are already out, and eleven more are to appear shortly. One of the last published volumes, however, Lighthouses and Lightships, is chiefly an English work, and the entire series has been edited by English hands. These volumes, in their proper place, as stories of science told for the entertainment and instruction of un­ learned and uncritical readers, fully deserve the welcome they have received, and one much wider still which we cannot doubt they will‘obtain. They are just the sort of books which are needed in the popular library and on the household book-shelf, attractive with their numerous illus­ trations, entertaining and readable in matter and style, and full of information, suggestion, and intellectual stimulus. The titles of the volumes already published are, Thunder and Lightning; Wonders of Optics; Wonders of Heat; Intelligence of Animals; Great Hunts; Egypt 3,300 Years Ago; Wonders of Pompeii; The Sun; The Sublime in Nature; Wonders of Glassmaking; Wonders of Italian Art; Wonders of the Human Body; Wonders of Architec­ ture; The Bottom of the Ocean; Winders of Acoustics; Lighthouses and Lightships; Wonderful Balloon Ascents; and Wonders of Bodily Strength and Skill. Price per vol., in scarlet cloth, gilt backs, and printed on very nice paper, $1.50. �264 The Geology and Physical Geography of Brazil. The Geology and Physical Geography of Brazil, by Ch. Fred. Hartt, which Fields, Osgood & Co. have just published, forms an elegant octavo of above 600 pages, enriched with 73 illustrations and a large and valuable map, and completed by an excellent index (price $5). In form, therefore, it is worthy of the place which its author and publishers propose for it, as one volume of the “ Scientific Results of a Journey in Brazil, by Louis Agassiz and his travelling companions.” It seems to us still more worthy of its ,place among the fruits of the “Thayer Expedition” to Brazil, in the scien­ tific excellence, and in the great interest, of its matter. It was at first the intention of Prof. Hartt to make the work embr|pe merely the results of his explorations as geologist of the expedition under Prof. Agassiz, together with those of a second journey made by himself, independently; but, happily for the public, the studies incidental to the prepa­ ration of the matter for the press, led to a considerable expansion of this plan, and we now have a general work which incorporates with the results of recent investigation all that is most valuable in previous works on the geology and Physi°al geography of Brazil. We note with special satisfactions also, the strong terms in which Prof. Hartt announces his indebtedness to the people of Brazil, and his “ sincerest wish in acknowledgment of so much kindness to be to some humble degree instrumental in removing false Jmpressions so current about Brazil, and to make the tesourcegof the empire better known in America.” It would be of no avail to attempt, in a brief notice, to give a just idea of the store of facts about Brazil which this rich volume contains. Prof. Hartt takes us from prov­ ince to province, over the great field of his explorations, along the extensive coasts, up rivers and through forests, over plains and mountains, until he has shown us the whole face of the land, has pointed out to us its striking features and its most remarkable objects of interest, when we feel almost as if we had ourselves probed the soils, hammered the rocks, inspected the corals, brought to light the treasures ■ �Margaret, a Tale of the Real, Etc. 295 of caves, threaded the forests, and otherwise gathered the elements of a complete sketch of that great region which Brazil is. Not only will students of science receive this volume with particular satisfaction, but whoever is practi­ cally interested in the resources of South America, and its opportunities for enterprise, will find in it a trustworthy guide to an extensive knowledge of important facts, while to all who acknc wledge the duty of acquainting themselves with the great regions of. the earth as. the seats of human life, it will render a great and grateful service. Margaret, A Tale of the Real and the Ideal, Blight and Bloom, by Sylvester Judd, is a New England classic, a true picture out of the quaint, sweet, homely life which a gentle parson such as Sylvester Judd was loved to move in and portray. Time but adds to its value. If it were not a picture which the press can multiply, it would speedily become a work of price, as one of the choicest remaining illustrations of manners and men of the genuine New England which is passing rapidly away. Happily a new edition can reproduce for a new gene ( * ration of readers every line of Judd’s masterpiece, as undoubtedly future editions will transmit the wise and beautiful tale to future gen­ erations interested to study, and able to take delight in, the by-gone New England. Mr. Judd was one of the earlier apostles of sweetness and light, a very true and pure soul emancipated by graces of charac­ ter and clearness of intelligence from the old dark creed of the Puri­ tans. He became-a saintly teacher of charity, justice, and faith, as he found these impersonated in him to whom he looked, without worship, but with reverence, as his guide, friend, and Master, and the helpful and friendly Master of all the sons® of men. One aim of hi® tale was to bring back to his readers the simple, natural humanity of the ideal Christ, which was to him the actual leader of life, and so to give to whoever could accept it a gentle,Hiving guide and Reacher in place of the half awful, half absurd Jesus of Puritan theology. In this aspect the book is twenty-fold more available now than it was when Mr. Judd first gave it to the world, twenty years ago, because the popular con^i ception of the Christ has come round very largely to the view which is so admirably illustrated in Margaret# But Mr. Judd was more an artist than a theologian, and made a capital tale of real life rathe© < * than a religions treatise. He will be increasingly honored and loved �296 Immortality. by all readers who know how precious a thing is a true, simple' impressive picture of wholesome realities, as they were seen by him, and were portrayed with photographic accuracy. The present edition is in a very neat volume from the pre'-s of Roberts Brothers, Boston. Price $1.50. We shall take a future occasion for criticising Mr. Judd’s view of the ideal, “ self-wrought,” perfection of Jesus, which we deem as far from radical truth lying before it as it is in advance of the Puritan idea which it had displaced. Meanwhile we can promise our readers a rich repast in Mr. Judd’s beautiful pages, and trust many of them will place Margaret among their choicest books. Immortality. Four Sermons preached before the University of Cam­ bridge. Being the Hulsean Lectures for 1868. By J. J. Perowne, B. D. Published by A. D. F. Randolph, New York. These lectures, which only profess to be “ a fragmentary contribution to the literature of a great subject,” may be profitably consulted as an able recent evangelical attempt to prove that life and immortality are revealed through the Christ of orthodoxy alone. The first discusses the theories of materialism, of pantheism, and of spiritism. The second treats of Egyptian, Greek, and Oriental faith, and failure of faith, in immor­ tality. In the third we are shown the hope of the Jew, which is found on a cursory examination to be “ no advance whatever upon the pagan system,” yet is finally thought to have been “ brighter and truer than that of the wisest of the heathen,” because so clearly implied in the doctrine of a near relation of the soul to God. In the concluding chapter, the hope of the Christian is set forth as resting on two facts, the resurrection of Christ, and the inner life of the Spirit. The general fairness, sincerity and thoughtfulness of the work are worthy of praise. It opens a great subject, the critical examination of which, as handled by Mr. Perowne, we shall return to at a suitable future time. If our readers are acquainted with the little books entitled Arne, and The Happy Boy, they will eagerly accept a third from the same source, a little volume of stories of Norwegian and Danish origin, with the title The Flying Mail, Old Olaf, and Railroad and Churchyard, published in very tasteful style by Sever and Francis, Boston. Arne, and The Happy Boy, which the same publishers introduced to us in an English translation, were delightful specimens of the current fiction of Norway, stories by Bjornstjerne Bjornson, a simple, pure, and touching painter of human life and passion in the land of the northmen. They were a real addition to our treasures, at once works of real art, and transcripts of pure nature, from a field in which nature, human and other, possesses an unique interest. In the little volume before us the third of the stories is by Bjornsen. The first is by Goldschmidt, a Danish writer famous in his own country, and the second by Mrs. Thoresen, a countrywoman of Bjornson. They all have the same fine flavor of simple nature, and make together a charming little book. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Examiner: a monthly review of religious and humane questions, and of literature. Vol. 1, February,1871, no. 3 Description An account of the resource Place of publication: [Winnetka, IL.] Collation: [201]-296 p. ; 25 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Contents include: Unitarian leaders -- Theodore Parker's character and ideas. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available [s.n.] Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1870 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5449 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource [Unknown] Subject The topic of the resource Periodicals Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (The Examiner: a monthly review of religious and humane questions, and of literature. Vol. 1, February,1871, no. 3</span><span>), identified by </span><span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk">Humanist Library and Archives</a></span><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Religion Unitarianism https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/5887122ed607c86ed8b1d53a525736e2.pdf?Expires=1781740800&Signature=Y1q%7EQtiuOMft3Pd6d4EDdhNFffwTeKWbenC9R%7E%7EPXeWOHMeAeisejeBWkdlqOQjB%7E4AbDehonT97Up2vsZSVAIRRpnANfqTMkkANm-%7E0VaJzpVNi4jykgIfSIGQSgiiDlh68eMlZtoSAyn3dA-YW7w3eWT%7EIT%7EGgBq1yehig%7EoSwXDKxGOzkhu39i8%7EryhVcSc83LqfH5AVS4z1vgsH6tGZLkscGRnd9Mi1DSUZP47VYhqRRGzXXwqRqVXcZyzqKiryhUWtMT8DTjvFT4I-MKmB-0IrK27gvqvkMDVvsCZ4vuC8y1dybC6LmoOwW2EC4VsZBQPvn7N3-0J-lbJMQZw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM c0df575ed5d1e4f9629abe3a8bfe506e PDF Text Text (Siitige SBorte über bte Unfci)((iartcitSrtïircf fe unb: £)ie neue ♦♦ ùes bondis 010002010201 unb tijre tijeofogtfdje QSebeufung. 3 h) e i @ u t a dj t e n üon 3. b. Tôffinger. IMündjen 1870. 3tubolpfy Olbenbourg. ��ftnige Pforte üfier bte ^Infef^ßarfmteabreffe. ) * (Sie haben bte merkwürbige Stbrcffe gebraut, welche aus bem «Sc&oofje bcS 23aticanifchen ©oncils IjcrauS ben ^ßa'pft bittet: baff er bie erforberlichen (Stritte tfyun möge um feine eigene Unfehlbarkeit burctj bie gegenwärtige 23er= fammlung jum ©laubenSartifcl erheben ¿u laffen. 180 Millionen Wnfchen — baS verlangen bie Xöifd)öfe welche biefe 5lbreffe unterzeichnet haben — folien künftig burd) bie ©rohung ber ?luSfdilicjfung aus ber 5tird)e, ber ©nt= jiehung ber (Sacramente unb ber ewigen 23erbammniff gc= gwungen werben baS zu glauben unb zu bekennen was bie ^irclje bisher nicht geglaubt, nicht gelehrt hat. Seicht ge= glaubt hat — benn auch biejenigen welche biefe ¡päpftlidje Unfehlbarkeit bisher für wal;r gehalten haben, konnten fic bodf nidft glauben, bicfeS SBort im dfriftlidjen ©inne genommen. Bwifchcn ©tauben (fide divina) unb zwifdjen ber vcrftanbeSmäfzigcn Einnahme einer für wahrfdfcinlid) gehaltenen Meinung ift ein unermeßlicher Uttterftfueb. ©tauben kann unb barf ber Katholik nur baSjenige was ihm als göttlich geoffenbarte, zur ©ubftanz ber ^eilslchre gehörige, über jeben Bweifct erhabene SBahrljeít von ber *) 2Iu$ ber SlitgSfmrger SlHgemeinen ¿dtung, 1870 5¡r. 21. j Stimmen auö b. fatlj.Äirdje üb. b. Äirdjenfr. b. (Segenm. 7 ©Bllinger, jtvet ©utadjten. �88 ©ödinger, (2) Jlirc^c felbft mitgetljcilt unb vorgcjcidjnct wirb, nur ba8= fettige, an beffcn tBetcnntnifj bie ^ugeljörigteit jur Jtirdße gcfnüpft ift, babfenige beffcn ©egentlfeil bic 5tircf»c fd)le^t= fyin nidjt biilbct, als offenbare 3»rrlcl)re verwirft. $n 2öat;r(}cit Ijat alfo fein -Dicnfd) von Anfang ber ^ird;c bis junt heutigen Jage bic Unfehlbarkeit bcS ^ßa^fteö geglaubt, b. I). fo geglaubt wie er an ©ott, an ©tjriftus, an bie Dreieinigkeit beS SSaterS, «SoIfneS unb ©eiftcS u. f. w. glaubt, fonbern viele Ijabcit cS nur vermutet, ljaben eS für waljrfdjeinlidj ober IfödfftenS für mcitf^Iid; gewifj (fide humana) gehalten bafj biefe Prärogative bem pa^ft jufomntc. ©emnadj Wäre bie SScränbcrung in bem ©tauben unb ber Scljrc ber Jlirdje Wcldje bic 2lbrejj=33ifd;öfc burd^= geführt Wiffcn Wollen ein in ber @efc^id;te ber Jtiräßc cinjig baftcljcnbcS ©reigniff; in acfitjclm ^aljrfyunberten ift nidjtS WjnlidfcS vorgcfommeit. ©S ift eine firdjlidje ERe= Volution, welche fic begehren, um fo bur^greifenber als eS fid; Ijier um baS fyunbament ljanbclt Welches beit reli= giöfen ©tauben fcbeS Witfdfen künftig tragen unb galten foll, als an bic «Stelle ber ganjcit, in 3cit unb 9tanm univcrfalcn ätirefje ein einzelner ^Qienfd;, ber Pa'pft, gefegt werben foH. «isljcr fagte ber Katholik: 3d; glaube biefe ober jene ßcljre auf baS 3cugnij3 ber gaitjcn J?ird;e aller 3eitcit, weil fie bic Scrljcijjung l;at, bafj fic immerbar be= fielen, ftctö im Scfifc ber 2öai>ri?eit bleiben foH. künftig aber müfjte ber Jtatl;olit fagen: idj glaube weil ber für unfehlbar erklärte patft cS ju teuren unb ju glauben befiehlt. ©afj er aber unfehlbar fei, baS glaube itf;, weil er cS von fid; behauptet. ©enn 400 ober 600 5Bifd;öfe �(3) bie llnfefylbarfeitöabrefie. 89 haben ¿war im 3ahre 1870 3U ^om befchloffen, baß ber ißapft unfehlbar fei; allein alle Bifdjöfe unb jebeS Goncil aljne ben ^b'apft finb bet Wglicljtcit beS ^rrthumS untere ivorfen; Untrüglichfeit ift baS auSfchließenbe Borrecht unb Befifcthum beb Sßapfteö, fein ¿eugniß können bie Bifd;öfe, viele ober wenige, webet verftärken noch abfcfywacfyen; jener Befchluß ljat alfo nur fo viel ¿traft unb Slutorität, als oer 5ßapft ihm, inbem er fiel; benfclben ancignet, verliefen hat. Unb fo löft fic^ beim SllleS julefet in baS Selbfh jeugniß beS ^ßapftcö auf, was freilich fcljr einfach ift. £abei fei nur erinnert, baff vor 1840 3ahren e*n uiu enblicp Roherer einmal gefagt Ijat: „SBenn ich mir felber ßeugniß gebe, fo ift mein 3eugniß nicht glaubwürbig." (M 5, 31.) SDie Slbrcffe gibt inSbefonbere ju folgenben Siebenten Einlaß: ©rftenS: fie befdjräntt bie Unfehlbarkeit beS ißapfteS auf biejenigen 5luSfprüd;e unb ©ecrete, welche berfelbe an bie ®efammtl)eit aller ©laubigen richtet, alfo ¿ur Belehr­ ung ber gangen fatholifdjen ¿tirdje erläßt. daraus würbe alfo folgen, baß, wenn ein ^ßapft nur an einzelne Sßerfonen, ¿törperf¿haften, ^articularkirchen fiep wenbete, er ftets bem ^rrthum preisgegeben war. 9lun haben aber bie ißäpfte gwölf ober brei^n 3ahr^un^cUe lang bie Bebingung, an welche bie ^rrthumölofigkeit ihrer ©ntfeheibungen ober Belehrungen geknüpft fein foU, nie verwirklicht: alle ¿tunbgebuiigen ber ißäpfte über fragen ber Sehre vor bem Gnbe bcS 13. 3ahrhunbertS finb nur an beftimmte ^ßerfonen ober an bie Bifcpöfe eines ßanbeS �90 SöUirtßer, (4) u. f. w. gerichtet. £)er ganzen orientalifchcn Jtirc^e ift niemals in bem ^ahrtaufenb bet Bereinigung ein att= gemein lautcnbeS Secret eines papfteS mitgetfyeilt worben, nur — nnb in langen 3^^i^cnräumen — an einzelne Patriarchen ober an äbaifer haben bie päpfte bogmatifcfje Schreiben gerichtet. @S ift alfo flar, baff bie päpfte felbcr von biefer Bebingung, von welcher bie Sicherheit nnb Unfehlbarfeit ihrer (Sntfd;eibnngen abhängen foll, minbeftenS taufenb 3ahre lang feine Slhnuitg gehabt haben, wie benn biefe Behauptung auch crft fehr fpät erfonnen nnb ber Jtirche vor 1562 unbefannt gewefen ift. 3n tiefem $ahre Xjat fie nämlich ber Söwencr ^hcologc Johann ^effels ¿um erften« mal vorgetragen, von bem fie BeHarmin entlehnte, nnb mit Stellen aus beit falfchcn 3fiborifchcn ©ccretalcn nnb mit ben erbidhtetcii ^cugniffen bcS heiligen GpriHuS ftüt^te. Biit einem einzigen vorgefetjten SBorte, burch bie blofje 2luffchrift hätten bie päpftc ihren bogmatif^en Jtunb= gebungen nach biefer SSheorie bie hWte Prärogative ber ¿rrthumSlofigfeit verleihen fönnen. Sic haben eS nicht gethan, haben perfonen nnb ©emeinben in bie ©cfahr verfemt, burch Einnahme ihrer, ohne bie Bürgfchaft gött= lieber Gewißheit gegebenen Gntfcheibungen in ^rrthümer ¿u verfallen. 3weitens. (5s ift unwahr, baß „gemäjf ber aH= gemeinen nnb conftantcn Srabition ber Kirche bie bogmati= fehen Urteile ber päpftc irrcformabcl finb." ®aS @egen= theil liegt vor aller Singen, ©ic Jtirclje hat bie bogmatifchen Schreiben ber päpftc ftets erft geprüft, nnb ihnen in {yolge �(5) bie Unfefjlbarfeitöabreffe. 91 tiefer Prüfung cntweber ¿ugeftimmt, wie baS Goncil von Gtjalcebon mit bcm Schreiben £eo’S getljan, ober fie als irrig verworfen, wie baS fünfte Goncil (553) mit bem Gonftitutum beS 33igiliuö, baS fctfgte Goncil (6S1) mit bem Schreiben beS ^onoriitS getljan Ijat. Srittens. ©3 ift nidjt richtig, bafj auf bem ¿weiten Goncil von Sijon (1274) burcf) bie ^uftimmung ber ©riedjen fowofyl als ber Lateiner ein ©laubcnSbefenntniß angenom= men worben fei, in wcldjem erflärt wirb: baß „Streitig; feiten über ben ©tauben burcf) baS Urtljeil beS ^ßaipfteö entfliehen werben müßten." SESeber bie ©riedjen nodj bie Lateiner, baS Reifst, bie ¿u Sijon verfammcltcn abenbfänbi; fefjen 33ifd)öfe, eigneten fid) biefeS ©laubenSbefenntnifj an, fonbern ber verdorbene ^ßapft GlemenS IV. fjatte es bem Äaifer 2)lid)acl ipaläologuS als ißebingung feiner 3u(affung ¿ur Jtirdjengemcinfdjaft gefdjidt. SDUdjael, im unfidjeren SSeftis ber erft für^lid) wieber eroberten jpaniptftabt, fdjwer betrogt von bem lateinifdjen ^gifer Salbuin unb bem Äönig «Karl von Sicilien, beburfte bringenb beS fßa^fteS, ber allein feinen «fpauptfeinb ¿ur 9iuf;e nötigen fonntc, unb verftanb fid^ baljer ¿u ben iBebingungen firdjfidjcr Unterwerfung, welche bie Sßäpfte iljm Vorfdwieben, wiewofjl unter bem beharrlichen Sßiberfprudje ber gried)ifd;cit Eßifdjöfe unb ber Nation. Gr rüefte alfo bie il;m auferlegte formet in baS Schreiben ein, welches auf bcm Goncil vorgefefen unb von feinem ©efanbten bem Sogotljeten beftätigt würbe. Gr felber erffarte ¿u «fpaufe, in «Konftantinopel, bie brei 3U= geftanbniffe, bie er bcm ißapft gemadjt habe, für itluforifdj. (Pachymeres de Michaele Palaeol. 5, 22.) Sie Ver= �92 ©öHtnger, (6) fammelten 53ifchöfe aber haben fich gar nicht in ber Sage befunben, über tiefe formet eine Meinung abgugeben. Viertens. ©a§ ©ccret ber glorentinifchen Stynobe wirb tyier verftümmelt angeführt; gcrabe ber ^paitptfats, beffen ftormulirung in $olge tanger iBerljanblungen ¿wifc^cn ben ©riechen unb ben Italienern gu Staube tarn, unb auf ben baS größte ©cwicht gelegt würbe, weil baS SSorauägehenbe nur gemäfj ber barin enthaltenen tBefdgänfung verftanben werben follte, ift weggelaffen, ber Satj nämlich: juxta eum modum, quo et in gestis et in sacria canonibus oecumenicorum conciliorum continetur. ©er £ßa£ft unb bie ©arbinäle verlangten nämlich beharrlich, baff als nähere iöeftimmung, wie ber Primat beö ißapfteS gu verfielen fei, beigefefct werbe: juxta dicta Sanctorum. ©aS wiefen bie ©riechen mit gleicher ¿Beharrlichkeit gurüct. Sie wußten wohl, baff unter biefen „$eugniffen ber ^eiligen" fich eine beträchtliche SIngahl fel)r weitgehenber erbichteter ober ge= fälfchtcr Stellen befinbe. <£»atte hoch ber latcinifche ©rg= bifci;of Slnbreaö, einer ber Otebncr, fich f<hon *n ber 7. Sifcung auf bie berüchtigten (üjrilluö ^cugniffe berufen, bie, feitbem ©homaö von Slquin unb ißapft Urban IV. guerft baburch htatergangen worben waren, im ©ccibent eine gewaltige unb nachhaltige SBirtung hervorgebracht hat= ten, feist aber von ben ©riechen gurüefgewiefen würben, ©er Äaifer bemerkte noch: wenn einer ber Sßäter in einem ¿Briefe an ben ißapft fich l,n ©omplimenten=Sti)l geäußert habe, fo bürfe man barauo nicht gleich ¿Rechte unb ißrivi= legien ableiten wollen, ©ie Lateiner gaben enblich nach, bie dicta Sanctorum verfchwanben au3 bem ©ntwurf, unb �7) bie Unfe^lbarfeitöabreffe. 93 rafür würben alé DJia^ftab unb ©dorante beé ípctpfttnfyen primaté bie 2)erl;anbíungcn ber ofumeitifchen Goncilien anb bie {»eiligen Ganoneé gefegt. ©amit war jeber ©ebanle an ¡papftlidje Unfehlbarkeit auégefchloffen, ba in ben alten (Toncilien unb in ben, beiben Äircfyen gemeinjc^aftlidjen, vor=ifiborifchen (Sanoned fid^ nicht nur nichts finbet, waé auf ein berartigeé SSorredjt fyinwiefe, fonbern bie ganje alte (SJefefjgebnng ber Äircfye, fowie baS Verfahren unb bie ®e= idjidjtc ber fieben ötumenifdjen Goncilicn (biefe waren ge= meint) gan¿ cvibent einen 3uftanb vorauéfeijt, in weldjem bie hoffte Autorität ber fiebre nur ber gefammten Kirche, nicfjt aber einem einzelnen ber fünf Patriarchen (baS war oer Papft in ben Äugen ber ©rieten) jufteljt. Ueberbiefj oatte @r¿bifcí;of Sßeffarion im tarnen fämmtlidjer ©riechen crft turj vorder erklärt: bafc ber Papft geringer alé baé 'Soncil (alfo aud) nicht unfehlbar) fei. (Sess. IX, Concil. Labbei XIII, 150.) @3 ift alfo eine SSerftümmelung, welche einer 23erfälfd)uug gleidj kommt, wenn man aué bem ©ecret ber Florentiner Spnobe gerabe beit £>auptfa£, auf weldjen bie, für welche baS ©ecret gemacht würbe, ben wchfteu Söcrtl) legten, wegftreidjt ©er Sah war in ben Äugen ber ©riechen fo unentbehrlich, baft fie unverrichteter ©inge abreifen ju wollen erklärten, wenn man iljn nid)t einrüde. Äudj barauf beftanben fie, unb festen eö burch, oaf) alle ntcd)te unb Privilegien ber übrigen Patriarchen im ©ccret Vorbehalten würben; bafs aber baé Dtedjt felbft= ftänbig an ber ^eftftellung ber gcmeinfdjaftlidjcn lirdjlicpen ¿ehre theil¿unehmen, unb nicht etwa blofj ben Änfprüdjen eines unfehlbaren ÜRcifteré fidj unterwerfen ¿u müffen, �94 ©ödinger, (8) ben Patriarchen guftefye, Ratten bic Spd^pfte früher fetber erflärt. (S3 liegt freilich noch ein anberer ®runb ¿u ber von beut (Joncipientcn ber Slbreffe begangenen SBerftümmelung be3 {ytorentinifeijen Secreta vor; follie er nämlich ben la= teinifc^en Sext in feiner urfprünglicfyen, bem (55riecf)ifdjen entfprecljenbcn Raffung geben, ivie fie §(aviu§ 23lonbu3, «Secretar be£ ^?apfteö (Sagen IV. unb bie älteren Geologen haben: quemadmodum et in actis Conciliorum et in sacris canonibus continetur? Ober füllte er bie (¿uerft von Abraham 23arti)oloinäw3 angebrachte) ^älfcljung, wo ) * ftatt be£ et gefegt ift: etiam, fidj aneignen? ©urei; biefeö etiam wirb ber Sinn beö ©ccretö völlig geänbert, uitb bie 5lbfid;t bc3 BufaijeS vernichtet; eö ift aber, obgleich eö eine hanbgrcifliche fyälfchung ift, in bie (Soncilicn = Sammlungen nnb bogmatifdjen Sehrbücher übergegangen, unb e$ wäre hohe $eit, biefen Stein bc3 SlnftoffeS für bie Orientalen wegjuräumen unb ben echten Sext, nämlich ben bem grie= *) Stuf bie Slutorität beb päpftiidjen «Sefietärb ^-laüio 23ionbo bin, welcher ben griedfifchen ©ert richtig überfefjt Ijat, nahm ich an, bafj bie unrichtige unb ben Sinn beb ©riedjifdjen unüerfennbar alte= rirenbe «ßerfion beb quemadmodum etiam eine (patere «öeränberung fei. (jdj habe mich aber feitbem fowohl auö Jriebniann’ß ©arlegung in ber Sllig. Leitung, alö auö beni Mbbrutf beö ©riginab©ofumentö in bem Archivio Storico Italiano 1857, II. p. 219 iiberjeugt, baff biefe «Sorte aderbingb gleich int erften lateinifdjeii ©erte fdjon (tauben, (o bafj vom erften Slnfang an griedjifdjer unb lateinifdjer ©ept Don einanber abwidjen. ©afj bie ©riedjen ben ©ert, wie er im Vateinifdjen lautet, nidjt angenommen tjaben würben, wenn fie iljn gefannt unb oerftanben hatten, beweifen bie DorauSgegangenen Skrhanblungen (29. Mpril). �(9) bie UnfeljIbarfeitSabrefje. 95 djifcben SSortlaut entfpredjenben, fyerjuftellen. Sann aber wäre freilid) baö Secret für bie 3we(^c ^er Sfnfallibiliften nic^t meljr brauchbar, wie ber G-rjbifdjof von iparis, Se SRarca, fdjon vor 200 ^aljrcn nadjgewiefcn ljat. (Concord. Sacerd. et imperii 3, 8.) Gr bemerft richtig: Verba 41 Graeca in sincero sensu accepta modum exercitio >5 potestatis pontificiae imponunt ei similem quem ecclesia Gallicana tuetur. At e contextus latini depravata lectione eruitur plenum esse Papae potestatem, idque probari actis Conciliorum et canonibus. I Sie Slbreffe ertlärt fit mit befonberer ^nbignation (acerbissimi catholicae doctrinae impugnatores — blaterare non erubescunt) gegen bie, weiche bie flöten= tinifdje Si)nobe nidjt für öfumenifd) galten. Sie Sl)atfad;en mögen fpredjen. Sie Sijnobe würbe betanntlid) berufen, um ba£ Goncil jn 23afc( ¿u @runbe 511 ridjten, als biefeS wi mehrere bcr römifdjen Gurie läftige [Reformen ju befdjliefjen I begonnen ljatte. 2lm 9. 5lpri( 1438 würbe fie 311 gerrara eröffnet, unb nun muffte fcd;S Wnatc lang gewartet wer= ben, oljne bafj irgenbetwaS gefefjab, fo gering war bie 3af)l I ber Ijerbeigcfommcncn 23ifdjöfe. Sius bem ganzen nörblidjen, bamald nod; völlig fatlfolifdjen Guropa, aus Scutfdjlanb, ben ffanbinavifdjen Säubern, ißolen, Söljmen, bem bama= ligen ^rantreidj, Gaftilien, Portugal u. f. w. tarn' üRie= manb; man tann fagen: neun 3el)iitl)cile bcr bamaligen fatl)olifd;en Sßclt beteiligten fidj grunbfä^lid; nid;t an bcr <5t)itobe, Weil fie bicfelbc ber iöafclcr 23er[ammlung gegeiv über für illegitim Igelten, unb Dobermann wuftte, bafs für ■ bie bringenbfte 3lngclegen()eit, bie [Reform ber JHrd)e, bort �96 SJöüinger, (10) nichts gefd)el)cn werbe. So brachte enblicp Gugen mit äRüpe eine Schaar italienifcper iBifcijöfe, gegen 50, ju= fammen, wo^u bann ltocp einige vom 5?er$og von 53urgunb gefepitfte IBifcpöfe, einige Provenzalen unb ein paar Spanier famen — in allem waren eS 62 23ifcpöfe, welcpe unters ¿eigneten. Sie grieepifepen Prälaten mit iprern Jtaifer waren in ber äufcerften ©efapr beS Untergangs burep bie SSerpeifjung von ©elb, Scpiffen unb Solbaten bapin ge= ¿ogen worben; ber Papft patte jubem verfproepen, bie Jtoften ipreö 3lufentpaltS in $errara unb Florenz unb iprer Rücfreife $u tragen. 2llS fie fiel) unnaepgiebig geigten, entzog er ipnen bie Subfibien, fo bafj fie in bittere Rotp gerietpen, unb enbiiep, gezwungen burep ben «ftaifer unb burep junger gebrängt, Singe unterjeiepneten, bie fie fpäter faft alle wiberriefen. SaS Urtpeil eines grieepifepen $eit= genoffen, beS SlmprutiuS, welcpeS ber römifepe ©eleprte 2IHatiuS (de perp. censens. 3, 1, 4) anfüprt, ift bamalS baS perrfepenbe Urtpeil unter ben ©rieepen gewefen: „Söirb wopl", fagte er, „^emanb im (Srnft biefe Spnobe für eine otumenifepe auSgebcn, welcpe ©laubenSartitel mit ©elb ertaufte, welcpe fimoniftifcp ipre SSefcplüffe nur burep 2luS= fiept auf finanzielle unb militarifepe ^ülfeleiftung burcp= Zufefjen vermoepte?" ^n fyraulreicp ift vor ber Revolution bie Tylorenttnifcfie Spnobe als uneept verworfen worben; baS pat ber Garbinal ©uife, opne irgenbeinen Söiberfprucp ju erfapren, auf bem Xribentinifcpen Qoncil ertlart. Ser portugiefifepe Speologe ißapva be 2lnbraba fagt barüber: Florentinam (Synodum) sola Gallia — pro oecumenica nunquam habuit, quippe quam neque adire dum agita- �11) bie UnfefyfôarfeitSabreffe. 97 etur, neque admittere jam perfectam atque absoluam voluerit. (Defens. fid. Trident, pag. 431, ed. olon. 1580.) ©er übrige ©ert ber dlbreffe befcbâftigt fich mit ber Ausführung, bajg bie dlufftettung beS neuen ®laitbcnS= rtifeïS gcrabe jcfjt geitgemâfj, ja bringcub notfymenbig fei, eil einige iÇerfoncn, bie fid) für jtatholifcn auSgcben, ■’mgft biefe Meinung von ber pâpftlichen Untrüglichfeit ~ eftritten fyaben. 20aS bie dtbreffe Îjicr thcilS fagt, theils IS (in iRom) befannt vorauôfetjt, ift mcfcntlidh ^olgcnbeê. in unb für fich, meint fie, mare es nicht gerabc abfoïut otijmenbig gemcfcn, bie ber ©laubenSlehren burdj n neues ©ogma gu vermehren, aber bie Sage fjabe fich o geftaltct, baf? bicS jctjt unausmeichtich fei. (Seit mehreren fahren Ijat nâmïidj ber ^cfuitcn-Drben, unterftüfct von nem dlnhang ©leidjgefinnter, eine digitation gu ©unften ?S gu macfycnben ©ogmaS gugleidh in Station, ^ranfreich, : deutfdjtanb unb ©nglanb begonnen, ©inc eigene religiôfe ' ^efeÏÏfctjaft, gu bem 3mccfc für bie ©rlangung beS neuen ä Dogmas gu beten unb gu mirfcn, ift von beu Sefuiten ~ egrünbet unb öffentlich angcfünbigt morbcn; iijr ^aupt= : rgan, bie in Hlorn crfcf;einenbc ©iviltà, Ijat eS gum voraus 'S bie Hauptaufgabe beS ©onciïs bcgcicfjnet, ber parrenbcn _ Seit bas ©cfdienf beS. feptcnben ©taubenSartifelS entgegen t a bringen ; iïjre „Saazer «Stimmen" unb Wiener ^3ubti= r. itionen Ijaben baffelbe ©hema breit unb in unermüblid^er *. Siebert»olung erörtert. Sei biefer digitation marc es nun bie Pflicht aller ' InberSbenfenbcn gcmefen, in ehrfurchtsvollem «Schmeigen t �98 ©ödinger, bie UnfeljIbarfeitSabreffe. (12) ¿u bcrfyarren, bie ^efuitcn unb ityrcn Slnfjang rutyig ge= waljrcn ¿u laffen, bie von irrten in ¿atylreidjen Schriften toorgebradjtcn Argumente feiner Prüfung unterbieten. Seiber ift bicö nic^t gefetzten; einige Ticnf^cn t^ben bie unerhörte ^rccljteit gehabt, ba§ tc^9c ©feigen ¿u brechen unb eine abtx>eidpenbe Meinung funb 311 geben, tiefes Slergernifj fann nur burdj eine SSermctrung beS @Iaubcn§= bcfenntniffeS, eine JBeranberung ber 5tated)i§men unb aller ^etigionäbü^er gefüllt werben. �¿)ie neue ^e^äfisorbnuitg be$ goncifc unb ißre tfjeofoaifdje gdebeutung. $)ie neue ® efchaftSorbnung, voeXc^e bem Zoncil burcl) i bie fünf Zarbinal^ßegatcn auferlegt worben, 'ift völlig ver| fliehen von allem, wa§ fonft auf Zoncilien gebräuchlich <war, unb guglcidj maf^gebenb unb entfdScibcnb für bcn I ferneren Verlauf biefer SSerfammlung unb für bie gal)t= I reichen betrete, welche burdj fie gu (Staube gebracht werben | foUen. <Sie verbient baljer bie forgfältigfte Sßeadjtung. Bur gefdjici)tlid)cn ©rientirung mag nur in ber ^ürje erwähnt * werben, bafj für bie allgemeinen Zoitcilien ber alten Äirdje i; im erften 3afjrtauienb eine beftimmtc ©efdjaftSorbnung it nidjt eyiftirte. Br für römifc^e unb fpanifdje $rovingial= i Zoncilien gab e§ ein liturgifcljeS Zeremoniell. SlllcS mürbe ) * | in voller 53erfammlung vorgetragen; jeber 23ifdjof tonnte j Einträge fteUen, welche er wollte, unb bie ißrafibenten, bie tj weltlichen fowoljl, welche bie ^taifcr faubten, al§ bie geift= I liehen, forgten für Orbnung unb leiteten bie Serhanblungen ii in einfacher Söeife. ©ie großen Zoncilien gu Äonftang i unb 23afcl machten fich eine eigene £>rbnung, ba bie ^heil= 3 ung unb Slbftimmung nach Nationen eingeführt würbe. *) 2Iufßenonunen von (pfeubotfibor, unb abgebrutft bet Mansi Concil. Coll. I, 10. �100 ©öUinger, bie neue ©efdjäftSorbnung. (14) 3n Orient würbe biefe Einrichtung wieber verlaffen, aber bie ßegaten, Welche präfibirten, vereinbarten bie <55efc^äft^= orbnung mit ben æifcbôfen, ber Earbinal be ÏÏRonte tief? barüber abftimmcn unb alte genehmigten fie. 3Son feiner ) * Seite erfolgte ein SSBibcrfpruc^. So ift benn bie heutige romifche Stynobe bie erfte in ber Ecfchidüe ber J^irdße, in Welcher ben verfammelten Tätern ohne febe Spcilnahme von ihrer Seite bie procebur borgefchriebeit worben ift. ©aS erfte Regolamento erwies fiel; fo hemmenb unb urtpraftifh, bajg wieberhoite Oefndße um Slbänberung unb Eeftattung freierer ^Bewegung von vertriebenen $raftionen bcS EpiSfo= pats an ben Sßa^ft gerichtet würben. ©icjj war vergeblich; aber nach britthalb Monaten fanben bie fünf Segaten cnb= lieh felber, bafj, wenn bas Eoncil nicht ins Stocfen geraden foHe, eine îlenberung unb Ergänzung bringenb nothwenbig fei. 5luf bie Petitionen ber SBifdjöfe ift inbefj in ber neuen Einrichtung feine Dlücfficht babei genommen worben. 3wei $üge treten barin vor allem hcrvor. Einmal ift alle ÜRadht unb aller Einfluß auf ben (Sang beS EoncilS in bie 5pänbe ber prafibirenben ßegaten unb ber ©cputa= tionen gelegt, fo bafj baS Eoncil felbft ihnen gegenüber machtlos unb willenlos erfefjeint. Sobann follen bie ge= Wicfjtigften fragen beS (Staubens unb ber Sehre burch ein= fadhe Mehrheit ber ^opfjahl, burd) îlufftehen unb Si^en« bleiben, entfliehen werben. $Ran hat befanntlich in ben ¿Wei fahren, welche ber / *) Le Plat, Monumenta, III. 418: Dicant Patres, utrum hic modus procedendi eis placeat. SQorauf abge[ìimmt tuurbe. �(15) 101 bii neue @ef(^aftöorbnung. Eröffnung beS EoncilS vorpergegangen, eine HJiengc von 3lbpanblungen mit baju gehörigen Decreten nnb EaitoneS ausarbeiten laffen, biefe follen nun von bem Eoncil ange= nommen unb bann vom ^ßapft „approbante Concitio“ als ®efet3c, als Sepr= unb (SlaubenSnormen für bie ganje tatpolifepe Epriftenpcit vertünbigt werben. Es finb im ganzen einnubfünfjig foldper Scpemate, von welcpen bis jefct erft fünf biScutirt finb. Das ©erfapren, wclcpeS bet ber iBeratpung unb 3lb= ftimmung ftattfinben foli, ift nun folgenbeS: 1. ©aS (Scpema wirb mehrere (jepn) ©age vor ber iBeratpung ben Tätern beS (SoncilS auSgettjeilt, welche bann fcpriftlicpc Erinnerungen, $IuSftettungen, ©erbefferungSantrage machen tonnen. 2. $n biefem §aU rnüffen fie fogleicfj eine neue formet ober Raffung beS betreffenben SIrtitelS ftatt beS von ipnen beanftanbeten in 23orfcf)(ag bringen. 3. Solcpe Einträge werben burep ben Secretär ber einfeplägigen Deputation (eS finb bereu vier) übergeben, welche bann nacp iprem Ermeffen bavon (Sebraucp maept, inbem fie bas Scperna, wenn fie es für gwetfmä^ig palt, reformirt, unb bann in einem, aber nur fummarifcp ge= paltenen, Sericptc bem Eoncil von ben gefteUten Anträgen eine D^otij gibt. 4. Die ißräfibenten tonnen jebeS Scpema entweber blos im @an$en ober auep in Slbfbpnitte getpeilt ber 53e= ratpung unterftellen. 5. 23ei ber iBeratpung tonnen bie Sßräfibenten jeben SDBllinger, jtoei Sutac^ten. 2 Stimmen auöb.fati). jtirdje üb. b.Äirdjenfr. b.@egenm. 8 �102 Töttingev, (16) 9tebner unterbrechen, wenn eS ihnen fheint, bap er nicht bei bet (Sache bleibe. G. SicSifchöfeher Deputation tonnen in jebem Moment baS SSort ergreifen, um beit Sifhßfcn, welche ben 2öort= taut beS (Schema beanftanben, ju erwiberit. 7. „ßcpn Säter reichen hin, um ben Schluß ber Dis * cuffion ju beantragen, worüber bann mit einfacher TOeljr« heit burch Slnfftehcn ober Sitzenbleiben cntfchicben wirb. 8. Sei ber Slbftimmung über bic einzelnen Shcite beS (Schema wirb juerft über bic vorgcfchlagcnen Seränbcrungen, bann über ben von ber Deputation vorgelcgteu Sert burch ‘ülufftehen ober Sitzenbleiben abgeftimmt, fo bajj bie einfache ■IRehrheit entfeheibet. 9. hierauf wirb über baS ganje (Schema mit 9lamenS= aufruf abgeftimmt, wobei jeber ber Sätcr mit placet ober non placet antwortet. Cb auch I^cr blojjc Mehrheit ber Äopßahl entfeheiben folie, ift nicht angegeben. (FS fcpcint aber nach ber ülualogic bejaht werben ¿u muffen, benn baS ganje (Schema ift ja hoch nur wieber ein Stücf ober ein Chcil von einem gröpern ©anjen, unb eS liegt burchauS fein ©runb vor, mit bem gröpern Stücf anberS ¿u verfahren als mit bem fleinern. SBürbe baS Sßrincip ber fdßtedßthinigen Tíeprpcit h^r verlaffen, fo würben Wopl gerabe bie wichtigem, tiefer einfhncibenben, Schemate verloren gehen. 2ftan ficht nun wohl, bafj einige parlamentarifche formen in biefe ©efchäftborbnung Iwibergenommen finb. Slber wenn in politifhen Serfammlungcn gewiffe ben pi<w gegebenen ähnliche (Einrichtungen beftepen, fo folien fie ge= wohnlich ¿um Schutze ber ÜRinberheit gegen ÜJíajorifirung �(17) 103 bie neue @e[d)aftgorbnung. bienen, Wäljrcnb fie I)ier umgeteljrt gu bem 3wccfe gegeben ju fein fdjeinen, bic 9)iel;rt)tit nodj mächtiger unb nnwiber= Widj ju machen, wie fidj bie3 befonberö in bem ifyr ein= geräumten 3ied)te ¿eigt, bie ©iScuffion, fobalb es iljr gefällt, abjufcfntcibcn unb alfo ber ^cinber^eit bad SSort §u ent= Sieben; bied Wirb um fo peinlicher wirten, als befanntli^ and) bie DJtbglicbteit, fiel) in gebrutften ©utadrten ober 3luf= tlärungen ben übrigen Wiitgliebcrn bed (Foncild mitjutljeilen, Weber für einzelne, nodj für ganje ©ruppen von Vifdjöfen gegeben ift. 3n Politiken Vcrfammlungen tonnen Vcfdjlüffe gefaxt, felbft ©efe^e gegeben werben burep einfache Wfjrljeit, ba feine ber folgeubcn Parlamente ober Kammern burdj bie Vefcblüffc unb ©efe^e ber frühem gebunben ift. $ebe tarnt gu jeber .Seit eine Satzung ihrer Vorgängerinnen äitbern ober abrogiren. 5lber bie bogmatifdjen Vefdjlüffe eines ©oncilS follen, wenn cS wirflid) ein bfumcnifcheS ift, für alle $eiten unantaftbar unb unwiberruflidj gelten. VorauSfichtlid) wirb bei ben nun folgeubcn 2lbftimmungen bic Wjrljcit bicfcS Sonetts nidjt etwa eine flüffige, aufunb abwogenbe fein, fie wirb nidjt wcdjfcln mit ben ^u faffenben Vcfdtfüffen, fonbern fie wirb fidj, mit geringen Schwankungen ber 3al?i, in ihrer ¿ufammenfe^ung Wcfcnt= lid) glcid; bleiben, ©enn cd ift bekannt, bay bic ©Teilung ber Vifdjöfe in eine Wjrhcit unb eine Vänberheit fidj . gleich von Anfang an fdjon bei ber 2öal;t ber ©cputationen, unb el;c nod) eine einzige Slbftimmung ftattgefunben, fdjarf unb entfliehen l)erauSgeftcllt l;at. So mufjte eS kommen, Weil in ber ftrage von ber päpstlichen Unfehlbarkeit fid) 2* �104 Döllinger, (18) atsbatb ein burcpgrcifenber unb principictler ©egenfa^ ergab, I unb man fofort erfannte, baff biefe §rage bie £auptan= gelegenpeit ber Serfammlung bilbe, nnb alle anbcrn von ipr beijerrfdjt würben. @g ftept ¿u erwarten, baff bie Ülnpänger ber Unfeplbarfeitgtpeorie bie Sorlagcn, fowic fie aub ben Rauben ber Deputationen pervorgepeu, auep un= bebenfiief) votiren werben; benn für fie ift gang folge * rieptig 9llleg maffgebenb, wag vom romifcpcit Stuple aubgept, unb bafür ift aubreiepenb geforgt, baff in ben Deputationen, welchen jept über alte auf bie Serbe ffcrung ber Scpcmate begügtietjen Anträge bie umfaffcnbfte unb in * appcllable (Gewalt übertragen ift, nur eine Slnficpt fiep geltenb maepen fann. (Sin Slict auf bab ^erfonal ber wieptigften Deputation, de fide, genügt. Sor allein finbet fiep ba ber Utömcr (iarboni, ber fepon in ber Sorbcrcit * ( *Sommiffion ungb bag Dogma ber pdpftlicpcn Unfeplbartcit in einer eigenen Dent'fcprift empfoplen unb in feiner (Som * miffion pat anncpmen taffen. Sieben ipm ber ^cfuit Steinb, fobann bie berebten Slawen Dccpampb von SJccepeln, Spal * biitg von Saltimore, ißie von Ißoiticrg, Scbocpowbfi, «fpaffun ber Slrmcnier, be ipreuv bon Sitten; von Dcutfcpcn SJiar * tin, Seneftrcp, ©affer von Sri,reu, ¿wei Spanier, brei Sübanierifauer, brei Italiener, ein ^rlänbcr, enblicp Simor Qicgnicr unb Scparpman. Seit 1800 ^apreu pat eg in ber jtirepe alb ©runb * gegolten, baff Decrete über beit ©tauben unb bie ßepre nur mit einer, wenigfteng moralifepen, Stimmencinpcllig * feit votirt werben foUten. Diefcr ©runbfap ftept mit bem ganzen Spftem ber tatpolifepeu Svircpc im engften 3u= �(19) bie neue ©cfdjäftöorbnung. 105 fammeuhaitg. ES ift fein IBeifpicl eines Oognta Mannt, welches bürd; eine einfache Stimmenmehrheit unter bem SBiberfpruche einer Wuberheit befchloffen unb barauf hin cingcführt worben wäre. Um bieS flar 311 machen, mufi ich mir Dtaurn für eine furje theologifche, aber hoffentlich allgemein i?erftänb= liehe, Erörterung erbitten. Sie Kirche Ij^t ein ihr 13011 Slufang an übergebenes Oepofitum geoffenbartcr Sehre 311 bewahren unb ju ver= walten. * Sie empfängt feine neuen Offenbarungen, unb ) fie macht feine neuen ElaubenSartifel. Unb wie mit ber Kirche felbft, fo ift cS auch mit bem allgemeinen Eoncil.* ) ** *') Sie ©ijeologie bat fidj in ber Gnttvicfluiig tiefer fragen an= gefcbloffen an bie allgemein als claffifdj unb völlig correct angenom­ mene Sdjrift beö SSincentiuö von Serins, baS Gommonitorium, baS fdjon um baö 3aljr 434 erfdjien. Stuf biefe bejiefye id) mid) baber in bem folgenben. **) So fagt ber Sifdjof gif t) er von Dtodjefter, ber für ben ißrimat bes? Zapfte« fein geben opferte, in feiner Streitfdjrift gegen i'utber (Opera, ed. Wirceburg. 1597, p. 592) mit Berufung auf ben gleiten Slubfprud) be¡3 ©uns ScotuS: In eorum (beS Goncils mit bem Zapfte) arbitrio non est situm, ut quiequam tale vel non tale faciant, sed spiritu potius veritatis edocti, id quod revera prídem de substantia fidei fuerat jam declarant, esse de substantia fidei. Hub ber 9Jii= norit ©a ven port, Svstema fidei, p. 140: secundum receptam, tam veterum, quam modernorum doctorum sententiam ecclesia non potest agere ultra revelationes antiquas, nihil potest hodie decla­ ran de fide, quod non habet talem identitatem cum prius revelatis.------------ Unde semper docet Scotus: Quod illae con­ clusiones solum possunt infallibiliter declarari et determinan per ecclesiam, quae sunt necessario inclusae in articulis cre­ dit is. Si igitur per accidens conjunguntur, vel si solum proba- �106 S? cUinger, (20) Das ©oncil ift bie IRepräfcntatioii, bie 3ufammciifaffung bcr gangen Äircbe; bic Sifcpöfc auf bcmfclbcn finb bie ©efanbten unb ©efcpäftSträger aller Äircpcn bcr fat^oii= fepen SSelt; fic paben im tarnen bcr ©efammtpeit 311 erklären, waS biefe ©efammtpeit bcr ©laubigen über eine rcligiöfe §ragc bentt unb glaubt, was fic als Ucbcrlicferung empfangen pat. Die finb alfo als tßrocuratoren angufepen, Welcpe bic ipnen gegebene ©ollmacpt burepanS niept überfepreiten bürfen. ) * Späten fie cS, fo würbe bic Jtircfjc, bereu Übertreter fie finb, bic von ipnen aufgcftellte Sepre unb Definition niefjt bestätigen, viclinepr als etwas iprem gläubigen Dewu^tfein $rembcS jurüefweifeu. Die ÜSifepöfe auf bem (Soncil finb alfo vor allem 3engen, fie fagen aus unb conftatiren, was fie unb ipre ©emeinben als ©laubcnSlepre empfangen unb bisper be= ' fannt paben; fie finb aber auep Dlicptcr, nur bafj ipre biliter sequuntur ex articulis, fidem non attingent per quascumque (leterminationes, quia Concilia non possunt identificare, quae sunt ex objecto diversa, nec necessario inferre ea, quae solum appa­ renter, seu probabiliter sunt inclusa in articulis creditis. •) Concilium non est ipsamet ecclesia, sed ipsam tantum repraesentat ; — — id est episcopi illi qui concilio adsunt, legati mittuntur ab omnibus omnium gentium catholicarum ecclesiis, qui, ex nomine totius universitatis, déclarent, quid ipsa universitas sentiat et quid traditum acceperit. Itaque ejusmodi legati omnium ecclesiarum sunt veluti procuratore«, quibus nefas esset procura­ tionem sibi crcditam tantillum excedere. Unde constat, quod si quingenti episcopi, ut videre est in exemplis Ariminensis, et Constantinopolitanae contra imagines coactae synodi, suam de fide communi declaranda procurationem tantillum excederent, universa ecclesia, cujus sunt tantummodo procuratores et simplex reprae- �(21) bie neue (ScfdjäftSorbnung. 107 richterliche ©cwalt über ben ©tauben nicht über ben 23e= reich ihrcö ^cugenthumS ijinau^efyeit barf, vielmehr burefj biefeS forttvährenb bebingt unb umfehrieben ift 91(3 (Ritter haben fie baS ©efefc (bie ©laubcnSlchre) nicht erftgu machen, fonbern nur gn interpretiren unb anjuwcitbeii. Sie flehen unter bem öffentlichen (Rechte ber Äirche, an irelchcrrt fie nichts ju äitbcrn vermögen. Sie üben ihr (Richtcramt, crftenS: inbem fie bie von ihnen abgetegten $cugniffe unter einanber prüfen unb vergleichen unb bereu Tragweite erwägen; jweitenS, inbem fie nach gewiffenhafter Prüfung: ob an einer Sehre bie brei unentbehrlichen (öebingungen ber Univcrfalität ber (perpetuität unb beS ©onfenfuS (ubique, semper, ab ómnibus) ¿utreffen; ob alfo bie Sehre als bie allgemeine Sehre ber ganzen Äirche, als wirtlicher (öe= ftanbthcil beS göttlichen ©epofitumS, allen gegeigt unb ihr (Betenntnifj jebein (griffen aufcrlegt Werben fönne.* $hre ) sentatio, definitionem factam ab illis ratam non haberet, imo re­ pudiarci. Oeuvres de Fénélon, Versailles 1820, II, 361. *) ©o ber ^efuit 23 a g o t in feiner Institutio Theologica de vera religione. Paris 1645, p. 395: Universitas sine duabus aliis, nimirum antiquitate et consensione stare non potest. Quod autem triplici illa probatione confirmatur, est haud dubie ecclesiasticum et catholicum. Quod si universitatis nota deficit et nova aliqua quaestio exoritur, novaque contagio ecclesiam commaculare incipit, tunc hac universitate praesentium ecclesiarum deficiente recurrendem est ad antiquitatem. Notai enim Vincent, posse aliquam haereseos contagionem occupare multas ecclesias sicut constat de Ariana ; adeo ut aliquando plures ecclesiae et episcopi diversarum nationum Ariani quam Catholici reperirentur. Et quantumvis doc rina aliqua latissime pateat, sitamen novam esse constat, haud dubie erronea est, nec enim est apostolica, nec per successionem �108 ©ötttnger, (22) Prüfung I;at fid) bemnacf; fowol)l über bie Vergangenheit als bie Gegenwart 311 erftrecfen. <5o ift toon bcm SImte ber Vifcßöfc auf Goncilien jebe SöiUtür, jebcS blofj fubjective Gutbünten auSgefcljtoffen. GS würbe ba frevelhaft unb verberblich fein, benn ba bie itirc^c feine neuen Dffenbarungen empfangt, feine neuen Glaubenöartifcl macht, fo bann unb barf auch ein Goncil bie Subftan^ beS Glaubens nicht aitbern, nichts bavon Wegnchmen unb nichts hin8uFll9en‘ Gin Goncilium macht alfo bogmatifchc Decrete nur über Dinge, welche fchon in ber Kirche, als burch Schrift unb Drabition bezeugt, allgemein geglaubt würben, ober welche ) * als eoibente unb flarc Folgerungen in beit bereits geglaubten unb gelehrten Grunbfätjen enthalten finb. SBenit aber et traditionem ad nos usque pervenit. Deinde, ut notat idem Vincentius, antiquitas non potest jam seduci. Verum enimvero quia et ipse error antiquus esse potest: idcirco cum consulitur vetustas, in ea quaerenda est consensio. *) So S^incentiuS: Hoc semper nec quidquam dliud Conciliorum decretis catholica perfecit ecclesia, nisi ut quod a majoribus sola traditione susceperat, hoc deinde posteris per scripturae chirographum consignaret. Commonit. cap. 32. ©er ©ribentirtifdje ©Ijeologe 23 eg a, ap. Davenport p.9: Concilia generalia hoc tantum habent, ut veritates jam alias, vel in seipsis, vel in suis principiò a Deo, ecclesiae vel SS. Patribus revelatas vel per scripturas vel traditionem prophetarum et apostolorum turn declarent, turn confirment et sua autoritate claras et apertas et absque ulla ambigu.tate ab omnibus Catholicis tenendas tradant. Addit: et ad hoc dico: praesentia Spiritus sancii illustrantur, primo ut infallibiles declarent veritates ecclesiae revelatas, et secundo, ut ad terminando dubia in ecclesia suborta, extirpandosque errores et abusus infab libiliter etiam ex revelatis colligant populo Christiano credenda et usurpanda in fide et moribus. �(23) bie neue Oefdiäftborbnung. 109 eine Meinung Ba^unbcrte lang ftetS auf Sßiberfpritd) gefloßen unb mit allen tl)eoiogifd)en SBaffen beftritten Worben, alfo ftetS minbeftens unfid)er gewefen ift, fo tarnt fie nie, and; burd; ein ©oncilium nidjt, sur ©ewif^eit, baö Ijeifjt jur ©ignitat einer göttlich geoffenbarten £efyre erhoben werben, ©aljer ber gewöbnlid)c 9luf ber SSäter auf ben ©oncilien nad) ber Einnahme unb 3)erfüitbigung eines bogmatifd)cn ©ecretS: haec fides Patrum. Soll alfo j. 33. att bie Stelle ber früher geglaubten unb gelehrten Srrtijumsfrciljeit ber gaitjen ftirdje bie Uit= fehlbarfeit eines ©injigen gefeilt werben, fo ift baS feine ©ntwidlung, feine ©rplication beó vorher implicit @eglaub= ten, feine mit logifdjer ^olgeridjtigteit fid) ergebenbe ©on= fequenj, fonbern einfach baS gerabe ©cgcntljeii ber früheren fiebre, bie bamit auf ben Jiopf gcftellt würbe, ©erabe wie es im politifd)en ßebeit feine fyortbiibung ober ©ntwicflung, fonbern einfad) ein Umfturj, eine Revolution wäre, wenn ein bisher freies ©emeinwefen b^id) unter baS 3od) eines abfolut I)errfd)enben Wlonard)cn gebracht würbe. ©ie Beit, in welcher ein ofumenifdjeó ©oncit über ben ©laubeit ber (griffen beräth, ift alfo fletó eine $eit ber lebhafteren ©rweefung beS religiöfen SßewufjtfeinS, eine „ßeit ber abjulegenben Beugniffe unb ber offenen ©rflarungen für alle treuen Söhne ber Jtird)e, ©eiftlicfw wie Saien, gewefen. Rian glaubte, wie bie ©efdjidjte ber Ytirc^e be= weist, allgemein, bafj man gerabe burd; folcfje Äunbgebungen bent ©oitcil feine Rufgabe erleichtere, unb nicf)t bie 33äter baburd) ftöre ober hemme. Beugnifj ablegeu, 2Dünfd;e �110 SöHinger, (24) auófpredfcn, auf bie 23cbürfniffe ber 5tir(f)c fyinwcifen, tann unb barf jcbcr, aucf) ber £aie. ) * @anj bcfonbcrS wenn cS fid) um bie (Sinfüíjrung eines neuen £)ogma íjanbelt, welkes etwa, von einer Seite fycr gcforbcrt, bcm SSewujjtfcin ber (Staubigen fremb ift unb ifjneit ais cinc Neuerung crfcfjciut, bann ift ber fidj cr^cbenbe ißroteft ber ßaicn ein ebenfo gerechter als not^= wenbiger, unb unvermciblidjcS 3eu9u^ ^cr ^Inlfäuglitfjteit an ben ifyncu überlieferten (Stauben, uub fie erfüllen bamit cine lßflid;t gegen bie J^ircfje2luf bcm (íoncil fclbft aber beweist bcr SBibcrfprudj ben cinc Slnjaljl bcr ¡Sifdwfc gegen eine als Dogma ¿u vertunbcnbe Meinung ergebt, bafj in ben von ifyncn rcpra= fentirtcn Xíjciífirdjen biefe Meinung nidft für waljr, nicfjt für göttlid) geoffenbart gehalten worben ift, unb aud) je|t nidjt bafür gehalten wirb. ¡Damit ift aber fetjon cnt= fdfieben baf$ biefer Veljre ober Meinung bie brei wefent= licken ©rforberniffe bcr Univcrfalität, bcr ißetpetuitat unb *) (So fagt ber Carbinol dieginalb Sßole, einer ber ißräfibeitten beé Xribentinifcfjen Concité, in feinem 23ud>e De Concilio, 1562, fol. 11: Patet quidem locus omnibus et singulis exponendi, si quid vel sibi vel ecclesiae opus esse censeant, sed decernendi non om­ nibus patet, verum iis tantum, quibus rectionem animarum ipse unicus pastor et rector dedit. — ¡papft DHfotauö I. bemerft, baf? bie Äaifer an ben Concilien tlfeiigenommen haben, roenn oom G5lau= ben getjanbett loorben fei. Ubinam legistis, imperatores anteces­ sores vestros synodalibus conventibus interfuisse? nisi forsitan in quibus de fide tractatum est, quae universitatis est, quae omnium communis est, quae non solum ad clericos, verum etiam ad Laicos et ad omnes omnino pertinet Christianos. -¡Diefe Stelle fanb auch in (Sratianö Secret Aufnahme. �(25) bie neue (^efcf)äftöorbnung. 111 beg (Sonfcnfng abgeben, baß fic alfo auch nicht ber ganzen Mrebe alb göttliche ^Offenbarung aufgebrungen werben barf. ©arum fyat man eg in ber Äirdje ftctg für notl^ wenbig eraclßet baff, fobalb eine nur einigermaßen beträcht­ liche Slnjahl von Sifchöfen einem von ber Mehrheit etwa vorgcfchlagencn ober beabsichtigten ©ecret wiberfpracb, biefeg ©ecret beifeite gelegt warb, bie ©efinition unterblieb, ©ie wahrhafte Äatholicität einer Sehre foll evibent unb un= Zweifelhaft fein, fie ift eg aber nicht, fobalb bag ^eugniß wenn auch einer Wnbcrzahl ben löewcig liefert, baß ganje 3l6thcilungcn ber ätirebe biefe Sehre nicht glauben unb nicht betennen. ©arum war bei jebem (Soncil bie Hauptfrage: „Sinb bieOlaubengbecrete von allen -Dlitgliebcrn genehmigt worben?" Sogleich auf bem crften allgemeinen Goncil 311 Dlicaa, wo unter 318 IBifcböfen julcßt nur ¿wei fiep ber Unterfchrift weigerten. $u (Sbatcebon zögerte man fo lange mit ben ©ntfeheibungen, ließ fiep immer wicber auf neue (5rörter= ungen ein, big eiiblid; alle 23cbcnfcn, welche befonberg bie illvrifchcn unb bie paläftinenfifchen Sifcböfe gegen bag Schreiben Seo’g anfänglich hc9tcn, gehoben waren. 9iod) ehe Ä'aifer Jarcian bie Sßnobe entließ, brang er auf eine (ntlärung: ob wirtlich alíe SBifcfwfc (eg waren über 600) ber (Slaubcngbefinition guftimmten, wag beim auch alle bcrcitwilligft bejahten, unb worauf ^oapft Seo felbft (Sott banfte baß fein Schreiben „nach allen 3rüCifeIR unb ®c= benten bod) cnblicß burcf) bie unwibcrlegliche 3uf^nnnun9 beg gefammten Gpiffopatg" beftätigt worben fei. So ver= fieberten and) auf bem felgten allgemeinen Goncil bie �112 S?óliin<jer, (26) iöifc^öfc auf bie Jyrage beb Äaiferb: baß bie bogmatifc^e (Sntfd)eibuug unter Zuftimmung aller aufgcftcllt worben fei. Sabfelbe gefchal) auf bem fiebenten im Zaljre 787. Unb wicberum mclbcte Ä'arl ber ©roße von bem (Sondi ju ^ranffurt 794 ben fpanifd)cn 53ifd)öfen: alleb fei gefdjel)en,quatenusSancta omnium unanimitas decornerete. 3n Srient gab ^ßapft Sßiub IV ben Legaten bic 2Bei= fungi nicl)tb entfcljeiben ju laffen wab nid)t allen Tätern genehm fei. (Siner ber bort bcfiitblicfycn Sinologen, ^la^ba bc dlnbraba, berichtet: mehrmals Ijabe man ein Secret Söocbcn, SDÌonate lang uneiitfcbicben gclaffcn, weil einige wenige 23ifd)öfe wiberftrebten ober IBcbentcn äußerten; erft bann, wenn enblid) nach laugen unb forgfältigen 2?eratt)= ungen (Sinftimmigfeit ber Später erhielt worben, ljabe man bab Secret publicirt. $ai)Va führt mehrere 23cifpiele ba= von an. ) * Hub Soffnct bemerft über bic 33orfc()rift ^ius’ IV : bieß fei eine treffliche dìegei um bab Söaljre vom Zweifelhaften 311 fd)eibcn. idlle Sheologen machen cb jur 53cbingung ber Detu= mcuicität eineb (Soncilb baß völlige À reib eit auf bem= felbcit hctrfdje. Freiheit beb diebenb, Freiheit beb Stimmens, diiemaub, fagt Sonimeli), barf jurüefgewiefen werben ber ♦) Defensio fidei Tridentinae, f. 17 : Cum quindecim fere aut viginti dubitare se ajebant, ne vero quiequam praeter Conciliorum vetustum morem concluderetur, horum paucorum dubitatio plurimoruni impetum retardavit, atque effecit, ut res in aliam sessionem dilata, omnium fere calculis tandem definiretur. 9Jian vergi. bort baö Weitere. ‘Ulan fielet, bafe ju Orient bie Uebeineugung l^evrfc^te, es muffe alleò in ber QBeife ber alten doncilien bel;anbelt unb ent= fdjieben — menigliene bie mefentlidie {\orm berfelben bcibetjalten werben. �(27) bie neue $c|d)äftöorbmin3. 113 gehört werben will. ^id;t bloß phVÍWr $wang würbe bie 23efd)lüffe eines ßoncils fraftloS unb wertlos machen. £)ie Freiheit, biefe LebcnSluft eines wahren (Solicits, wirt» and; burdj bie gar mannigfaltigen formen in benen mo= ralifSer^wang cintritt, ober bcrWnfd; fidj willig fiiedjtcn lä£t (3. 25. burd) bie bcrfdjiebcnen Strten ber Simonie), jerftört, unb bie Legitimität beS (Soncils baburd) aufgehoben. £ouruelp nennt als bie auf Spnoben wirffamen unb bie conciliarifdje Freiheit aufhebenben LeibenfSaften fynrdjt, Stellengier, ®clbgci¿ unb äpabfudjt. * ) 2llS ber grofje Slbfall 311 Seleucia unb Bimini gleis­ zeitig ftattfanb, als au fed)Shunbert 23ifchöfc baS gemcin= fame Wenntnif) bcrläugiieteii unb Preisgaben, ba war es „©eifteSfSwädje unb Sd)cu vor einer mühfeligen dicife" (partim imbecillitate ingenii, partim taedio peregrinationis evicti, Sulp. Sever. 2, 43), was fic überwanb. ©ic blofic £l)atfad)e einer wenn and) noch fo ¿al)l= reifen, bifdjöflidjcn 23erfannulling ift alfo noch lange fein beweis ber wirtlichen Dcfumcnicität eines (Soncils; ober, Wie bie Theologen, 3. 23. Sournclp, fid) auSbrüdcn, cS fanu wohl öfumenifd) ber ^Berufung nad) fein, ob es biejs aber and) bem Verlauf unb 2luSgang nach fei, baruber fann baS (Soncil felbft nidjt eutfcpciben, faun nidjt fetber fid; 3eugnifz geben; ba muff erft bie bod) and) nod) über jebem (Soncil ftepcube Autorität, ober baS 3eugnifj ber gaumen Ä'ircpc, als cntfcfjeibeiib unb beftätigenb pinjutreten. Sie (Soncilien als fold;c haben feine SScrheifgung — aueb J De ecclesia I, 384. �114 Töüingcr, (28) in bcn gewöhnlich angeführten SSorten be§ äperrn von ben „jwei ober brei" femmt eben alles auf baS „in feinem tarnen Sßerfammeltfein" an, unb bieff enthält, wie alle Geologen annehmen, mehrere. Skbingnngen, bie 3. 5). Stournelt) aufführt. ) * ?(ber bie Äirchc hat 2?erhei§= ungen, unb fie liutfz erft fiel) überzeugen, ober bie @ewif^ beit befi^cn, baf) V^Vfifchcr ober moralifefter 3wang, fvurebt, ßeibenfehafteu, SJerführungötünftc — Singe wie fie ¿u Diimini unb noch gar oft gewirtt h^n — nicht auf bem (Soncil übermächtig geworben finb, baf) alfo bie wahre Freiheit bort gcljerrfcht bube. $n biefem (Sinn fagt 23of= fuet von einem ötumenif^en (Soncit: ber 23ifcböfc auf bemfclben müßten fo viele unb aus fo verfeiuebenen Säubern, unb bie 3iiftimmung ber übrigen fo evibent fein, *) Quaeres: quibus conditionibus promisit Christus se conciliis adfuturum? Resp. Ista generali: Si in nomine suo congre­ gata fuerint; hoc est servata suft'ragiorum liberiate; invocato coelesti auxilio; adhibita humana industria et diligentia in conquirenda ventate.------- Deus scilicet, qui omnia suaviter disponit ac mo­ derato, via supernaturali aperta et manifesta non adest conciliis, sed occulta Spiritus subministratione. (Deus) permittit, episcopos omnibus humanae infirmitatis periculis subjacere et aliquando succumbere: ncque enim unquam promisit, se a conciliis ejusmodi pericula certo semper pro pulsaturum; sed hoc unum, se’iis semper adfuturum, qui in suo nomine congrcgarentur. Congregari autem in suo nomine censentur, quoties eas observant leges et condi­ tions, quas voluit observari. Tournely, praelectiones theologicae deDeo et divinis attributis, I, 165. Journet») fiitjrt benfelben (Bebauten in feinen praelectiones theologicae de ecclesia Christi, I, 384 nod) weiter aus: (Deus) episcopos permittit omnibus hu­ manae infirmitatis periculis obnoxios esse, metus scilicet, ambitionis, avaritiae, cupiditatis etc. �(29) bie neue ©efcbâftêorbnung. 115 baff man tlar fclje, e§ fei nidjtä aiibcreö ba gefdjeljeu, afe baff bie Slufidft bet ganjeu SSelt jufammengetrageu ) * worben. (Sollte fid; alfo geigen, baff auf bern Goucil feineoweg« „bie fXufidjt bei ganzen tatljolifcfjcn SBelt jufammengetragen" worben, baff vielmehr TMjrijeitebcfdüiiffc gefafft worben feien welche mit bent ©tauben eines beträchtlichen Sfjeilö ber Äirchc im SSibevfprud) fielen, bann würben gewifc in ber tatlfolifdjcn SSclt bie fragen aufgeworfen werben: £>aben nufere SSifdwfe richtig Bcuguiff gegeben bon bem (Glauben ihrer ©iocefen? unb wenn nicht, finb fie waljr= I;aft frei gewefen? über wie fommt es baff il;r 3cu9niB nicht beamtet worben ift? bafc fie majorifirt worben finb? 3?on ben Antworten bie auf biefe fragen erteilt werben, Werben bann bie ferneren Greigniffe in ber 5bird;e bebingt ♦) Et que les autres consentent si évidemment à leur assem­ blée, qu’il sera clair, qu’on n’y ait fait qu’apporter le sentiment de toute la terre. (Histoire des variations, 1. 15, n. 1OOO.) Unb barum forbert ber WÜ ©elafiu« ju einer bene gesta synodus nidfct nur, baß fie nad) Sdfrift unb îrabition unb nad) ben firdflidjen «Regeln ißre Gntfdjeibungen gefaßt habe, fonbern and), baß fie von ber ganzen ^irdje angenommen fei : quam cuncta recepit ecclesia (Epist. 13 bei £'abbé ConcilIV, 1200 unb 1203). Unb «Rico te be^ merft gegen bie GaWiniften: Ils ont une marque évidente que le Concile, qui se dit Universel doit être reçu pour tel, dans l’accep­ tation qu’en fait l’Église. (Prétendus Réformés convaincus de schisme. 2,7. p. 289.) ©ieftirdje gibt ben Goncilien Beugniß (nicht etfl Autorität), fotvie fie burd) ihren biblifdjen Ganoit ben einjelnen æüdjern ber Sibel Beugniß gibt, roäfyrenb natürlich bie innere Au­ torität berfelben nicht von ber itirdje ausfließt. Sie ift auch batestis, non autor fidei. �116 SDöUinger, bic neue @ef<$äft$orbnung. (30) fein. Unb barum ift au cf) in ber ganzen Äirdjc bic bollftc fßublicität ftetö als ju einem (Soncit gehörig gewährt worben; benn cS liegt ber gefammten djriftlidjen SBelt ijodjlicf» baran nidjt nur ju wiffen bafj etwas bort befdjloffen wirb, fonbernaudj ¿u wiffen wie eS befdjloffen wirb. 2ln biefem Hßic hängt gulefct atieS, wie bie benfwürbigen ^a^re 359, 449, 754 u. f. w. beweifen. Stuf baS ßoncil »on Orient hätte man fid) be^üglidj beS jwangSweife auf erlegten <Sdjwei= genS nidjt berufen follen; benn erftenS würbe bort blofc eine ^Dialjnung gegeben, unb ¿weitend betraf bie <5rinner= ung nur bie 23etanntmadjung oon (Entwürfen, welche, was heutzutage bei bem <5tanb ber ißreffe nidjt meljr möglich wäre, bamals in ber $erne mit wirtlichen ^ecreten oer= wedjfelt würben. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Einige worte uber die unjehlbarfeitsadresse und geschaftsordnung des concils und ihre theologische bedeutung zwei gutachtung von J. V. Dollinger Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Dollinger, J. V. Description An account of the resource Place of publication: Munchen Collation: p. 87-116 ; 19 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Text in German. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Rudolph Oldenbourg Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1870 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5722 Subject The topic of the resource Theology Germany Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Einige worte uber die unjehlbarfeitsadresse und geschaftsordnung des concils und ihre theologische bedeutung zwei gutachtung von J. V. Dollinger), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource German Conway Tracts