1
10
42
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/37332d4af46d573bbdaeb3a054045b90.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=phmd-IpkHNKYm8sRNrYkDuWeCPqPIjSfGG7Y1QGT7cW%7EYJlL5HVzgGcDitZ7dvrsfSrwE3hjVSrl7IrwJMh0cDp4CliATTCorUc0tS0XC0v5ptEaAa2IN7wcqHFAyTSYbRwxKFcrplqLVYt-lWLUycaNQ2MbURPxXQJfsAIxTyul19n-XNY4nnu273GUevkPYbXXQXIgnx4IbLy0RcvFV1tidkNT-b3GmBdzfR2SM0XMnhKNk5ZMNEkk3cmJdhW19y-3aMe1U-lHnvWQGEkkq4%7EpU15uGwi4gPVrfUTZoSWYs2HzOlXoCbEyBruvsE0Vy8qeKpX6Bx9WZCopRw6N2A__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
373389a135cd68176ea445ef9473a9a0
PDF Text
Text
VERS US
CHRISTIANITY.
BY
A CANTAB.
PUBLISHED
BY
THOMAS
SCOTT,
NO. 11 THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD, UPPER NORWOOD,
LONDON, S.E.
1873.
Pi ice Sixpence.
�LONDON!
rr.INTED BY C. W. REYNELL, 16 LITTLE 1TLTENEY STREET
HAYMARKET, IV.
�JESUS versus CHRISTIANITY.
---------♦---------
HE most notable feature in the present condition
of theology is, indubitably, the rapid multipli
cation of writings designed to point the contrast
between the character, real or supposed, of Jesus,
and the religion which bears his name and of which
he is commonly regarded as the founder. The revolt,
which every day but serves to intensify, is not against
Jesus as par excellence il the genius of righteousness,”
but against the dogmatic system which theologians
have substituted for him. The church, it is alleged,
has outdone Iscariot, in that it has committed a
twofold treachery : it has accepted the murder of its
founder as a sacrifice well-pleasing to the Deity, and
it has repudiated his simple heart-religion for meta
physical subtleties of its own invention. Thus, not
content with making itself a participator in the
murder of his body, the church has dealt a fatal
outrage upon his spirit.
Among the writings to which we have referred as
advocating the displacement of the regime of dogma
and belief by the substitution of one involving
character and conduct, we propose to note especially
‘ The True History of Joshua Davidson,’ reputed to
be the work of a lady well known for the vigour of
her thought and style ; ‘ Literature and Dogma,’ by
Matthew Arnold; ‘ The Eair Haven,’ by W. B.
Owen ; ‘ By and By,’ by Edward Maitland ; ‘ A Note
of Interrogation,’ by Miss Nightingale ; and ‘ Modern
Christianity a Civilised Heathenism.’ All these writ
ings, with the exception of the last, agree in rejecting
A 2
T
�4
'Jesus versus Christianity.
as unproved, unprovable, mistaken, or pernicious, at
least much of what has always been insisted upon by
the church, and in accepting the general character
and teaching of Jesus as the most valuable moral
possession of humanity.
We except the last one for this reason, though
using it to point our argument : It gives up the
state of society which has grown up under the sway
of dogma as utterly un-Christian in character and
conduct, but it does not give up the dogma. The
work of the clergyman who gained an undesirable
notoriety during the Franco-German war by his mis
chievous brochure entitled ‘ Dame Europa’s School,’
it manifests all the confusion of thought which dis
tinguished that production. It was scarcely to be
expected that the writer who could represent England
as placed at the head of the school of Europe to keep
the other nations from quarrelling, and declare that
“ neutral is another name for coward,” would
escape committing absurd inconsistencies when he
took to writing about modern Christianity. In a
dialogue with a Hindoo resident in London, he makes
the heathen discourse in this fashion :
“ How can you soberly believe and eloquently
preach that an overwhelming majority of your fellow
creatures will be burnt alive throughout all eternity
in the flames of hell, and yet can find time or inclina
tion at any moment of your life for any other work
than the work of rescuing the souls around you from
their appalling doom ? How contemplate even so
much as the distant possibility of being yourself
tortured with agonies insupportable, for ages and.
ages and millions of ages more, and all the while
laugh and joke, and talk of politics and business and
pleasure, as if you were the happiest fellow on
earth ? You parsons do actually stand in imminent
peril of being burnt alive for ever, or else you do
not. The souls committed to your teaching, or a
�Jesus versus Christianity.
5
certain proportion of them, are destined to spend a
whole eternity in torment, or else they are destined to
nothing of the kind. If they are so destined, and if
you, unless by precept and example you have done
all in your power to save them, shall have your part
in their unutterable woe, what can you do from morn
ing to night but pray for them, and weep for them,
and implore them earnestly to escape at any cost
from the horrors of an unquenchable flame ? Yet, in
the face of your alleged persuasions that you yourself
and all your flock are standing, for all you know,
upon the very brink of an everlasting hell, you have
deliberately chosen and cheerfully maintain a course
of occupations and a position in society which no
man could possibly endure for half a day who really
believed himself and those dear to him to be placed
in any such peril. What I say is that, if you are not
leading a downright ascetic life—the life of Christ
and nothing less—you waste words upon the air when
you preach the punishment of eternal flames. Would
you believe that my dearest friend upon earth was on
trial for his life, and would very probably be hanged,
if you met me somewhere at five o’clock tea, talking
nonsense to some young lady ? Whereas the average
minister delivers his most awful message, tells his
people plainly that they will be damned, knows for a
certainty that they will go on sinning all the same, and,
under a strong impression that several of his cherished
acquaintances and kindly neighbours will be devoured
by flames unquenchable, walks home to his vicarage,
jokes with his wife, romps with his children, chaffs
his friend, sits down comfortably to his luncheon, and
thoroughly enjoys his slice of cold roast beef and his
glass of bitter beer. Will any man, in his senses,
believe that he means what he has just been saying in
his sermon ? Of course he will believe nothing of the
sort; and therefore it has come to pass that England
is full of intelligent laymen who doubt and disbelieve.
�6
Jesus versus Christianity.
No; lei me see Christians imitating, not a Christ
whom I could fashion for myself out of heathen
materials, not the pattern philosopher, not the ideal
man—but a Christ who at every point is making him
self an intolerable offence to the un-Christ-like, a
thorn and scourge to every man who does not lie
stretched at the foot of his cross ! I know for certain
how Christ would be treated if he were here; I can
see the press deriding him, the fine lady picking her
way past him in the street, the poor flocking round
him as a friend, the magistrate committing him to
prison. Let me see his witnesses treated thus, and
I shall believe that he has sent them. But while I
see them claiming the right to live as other men,
glorying in the fact that they have no peculiarities,
smiling politely on sin, and caressed by those who
would have spat upon their Lord—so long as I see
them thus, they shall teach me if they please the
principles of Christ’s philosophy, but they shall not
dare to tell me that they are priests of a crucified
Christ.”
The conclusion shows that the heathen, having
found such a witness as he requires, accepts the life
—though whether for the sake of the life or through
fear of the hell, does not appear—while the parson
retains the dogma described as above, impervious
to any sense of its hideous immorality, “ and walks
slowly and sadly home, feeling more and more dis
satisfied with his own position.”
In ‘ Joshua Davidson ’ we have an attempt to
transfer the Jesus of the gospels, poor and untaught,
but enthusiast of noble ideas, to our own day, for the
purpose of showing from the inevitable failure of his
life and work, either that modern society is not
Christian, or that Christianity as a system will not
work. The hero of the tale, a carpenter by trade,
early gives up Christianity as a dogma or collection
of dogmas, and falls back upon the character and
�Jesus versus Christianity.
7
social teaching of Jesus as the essence of the gospel,
and alone possessing any real value for us. What
would Jesus be and do were he to live now ? This is
the question essayed to be answered in ‘ Joshua David
son,’ by representing him as a plain working-man,
attacking alike banker and bishop, advocating indis
criminate almsgiving, fraternising with the poor and
discontented, unorthodox in faith, an ultra-radical in
politics, exciting the bitter hostility of the whole
respectable press, denouncing shams, clutching
eagerly at any Utopian extravagance that had a
heart of good in it, a red republican in Trance, an
itinerant lecturer on the rights of man in England,
and finally trampled to death by conservative roughs,
hounded on by dignitaries of the Established Church.
Confident that such would be the career of
Jesus among us, the author is justified in asking of
us, why, if we should thus regard him, do we persist
in calling ourselves by his name and pretending to
be his followers. Surely a question not to be left
unanswered. “We ought,” says the preface to the
third edition, “to be brave enough in this day to dare
ask ourselves how much is practicable and how much
is impracticable in the creed we profess; and to
renounce that which is even the most imperatively
enjoined if we find that it is not wise or possible.
If our religion leads us to political chimeras, let us
abjure it: if it teaches us truth, let us obey it, no
matter what social growths we tear up by the roots.
There is no mean way for men. To slaves only
should the symbols of a myth be sacred, and our very
children are forbidden the weakness of knowing the
right and doing the wrong. If such a man as Joshua
Davidson was a mistake, then acted Christianity is to
blame. In which case, what becomes of the dogma ?
and how can we worship a life as divine, the practical
imitation of which is a moral blunder and an economic
crime ? ”
�8
"Jesus versus Christianity.
It is thus that the author makes the very humanity
of Jesus the proof of his divinity. He is extrahuman, not in any metaphysico-theological sense,
but in the intensity of the sympathy which impels
him to attempt to benefit his fellows. His very
failures are more divine than the successes of other
men. It is thus, too, that having at the start repu
diated the dogmatic system attached to his name, we
are called on to re-examine his ethical and social
teaching, and to avow honestly our rejection of such
parts of it as do not coincide with our notions of the
practicable and right. In short, the appeal is to be
neither to authority nor tradition, but to our own
intelligence and moral sense.
This, too, is the import of Miss Nightingale's
recent utterance (in Fraser's Magazine for May).
Rebuking the tendency of modern reformers to ignore
the character of God, as necessarily underlying the
phenomena which form the subject of their investi
gations, this ‘ Note of Interrogation ’ calls upon us to
regard the moral laws which govern men’s motives as
the real exponents of the divine nature. While thus
adopting the inductive method of Positivism, she
blames the Positivists “ for leaving out of considera
tion all the inspiring part of life,” and stopping short
at phenomena, instead of seeking to learn that of
which phenomena are but the manifestation, and.
to which, therefore, they must be the index. In
this view, she rejects the main points of the creeds
of Roman, Protestant, and Greek alike, and utterly
ignores what is called “ revelation ” as a guide
to the nature of God, and points to the character and
teaching of Christ as among the best indications to
that which ought to be the prime object of search.
In all this it appears clearly that by the term GW
Miss Nightingale really means a human ideal of
perfection, and that she would have us perfect our
ideal for the sake of the reflex influence it would
�Jesus -versus Christianity.
9
exercise upon ourselves. It is by the adoption of the
Christ-ideal of character, and rejection of Christian
dogma, and those on the question of their intrinsic
merits as estimated by her own mind and con
science, apart from tradition or authority, that Miss
Nightingale justifies us in ranking her among the
supporters of Jesus in the great cause of Jesus versus
Christianity.
‘ The Fair Haven ’ is an ironical defence of ortho
doxy at the expense of the whole mass of church
tenet and dogma, the character of Christ only
excepted. Such, at least, is our reading of it, though
critics of the Rock, and Record order have accepted
the book as a serious defence of Christianity, and
proclaimed it as a most valuable contribution in aid
of the faith. Affecting an orthodox standpoint, it
bitterly reproaches all previous apologists for the
lack of candour with which they have ignored or
explained away insuperable difficulties, and attached
undue value to coincidences real or imagined. One
and all they have, the author declares, been at best
but zealous “liars for God,” or what to them
was more than God, their own religious system.
This must go on no longer. We, as Christians,
having a sound cause, need not feai’ to let the truth be
known. He proceeds accordingly to set forth that
truth as he finds it in the New Testament; and, in
a masterly analysis of the accounts of the resurrection,
which he selects as the principal and crucial miracle,
involving all Other miracles, he shows how slender
is the foundation on which the whole fabric of super
natural theology has been reared. Rejecting the
hypothesis of hallucination by which Strauss attempts
to account for the belief of the disciples in the
resurrection, he shows that they had no real evidence
that Jesus had died upon the cross at all. It is true
that the disciples believed him dead ; so that we
need not charge them with fraud. That charge he
�io
Jesus versus Christianity.
reserves for the Paleys and Alfords, whose disingenuousness he scathingly exposes, using the
arguments of the latter to show the absence of anv
proof that Jesus died either of the cross or of the
spear-wound. All that the evangelists knew was
that the body was deposited in the tomb apparently
dead, and that at the end of some thirty hours it had
disappeared. Rejecting the statement in Matthew
as palpably untenable, he makes that in John the
basis of the true story, this being the simplest and
manifest source of the rest.
As told by our author, the whole affords an exquisite
example of the natural growth of a legend. First,
we have Mary Magdalene, who, finding the stone
removed, investigates no further, but runs back and
declares that the body has been taken away (not that
it has come to life). Then we have John and Peter
ascertaining for themselves, by looking in, that Jesus
was no longer there, but only the linen clothes lying
in two separate parts of the tomb. Then, these
having taken their departure, we have the warm,
impulsive Magdalene remaining behind to weep. At
length, mustering courage to look into the sepul
chre for herself, she sees, as she thinks, sitting at
opposite ends, two angels in white, who merely
ask her why she weeps. She makes no answer,
but turns to the outside, where she sees Jesus
himself, but so changed that she does not at first
recognise him.
How from this simple and natural story of the
white grave clothes, in the dark sepulchre, looking
like angels to the tear-blinded eyes of a woman who
was so liable to hysteria or insanity as to have had
“ seven devils ” cast out of her, grew, step by step, the
myth so freely amplified in the gospels, the reader
must find in the book itself.
If he can once fully grasp the intention of the
style and its affectation of the tone of indignant
�Jesus versus Christianity.
11
orthodoxy, and perceive also how utterly destructive
are its “ candid admissions ” to the whole fabric of
supernaturalism, he will enjoy a rare treat. It is not,
however, for the purpose of recommending what we,
at least, regard as a piece of exquisite humour that
we call attention to ‘ The Fair Haven,’ but in order
to show how, while rejecting popular Christianity, we
may still accept the “ Christ-ideal,” to use our author’s
phrase, and this with an enhanced sense of its beauty
and use to the world.
One of the most characteristic parts of the book is
that in which he argues in favour of the providential
character of the gospel narratives, notwithstanding
their inaccuracies. After stating that no ill effects
need follow from a rejection of the immaculate con
ception, the miracles, the resurrection, or the
ascension, because “ the Christ-ideal, which, after all,
is the soul and spirit of Christianity, would remain
precisely where it is, while its recognition would be
far more general, owing to the departure on the part
of the Apologists from certain lines of defence which
are irreconcilable with the ideal itself,” he says :
“ The old theory that God desired to test our faith,
and that there would be no merit in believing if the
evidence were such as to commend itself at once to
our understanding, is one which need only be stated
to be set aside. It is blasphemy against the goodness
of God to suppose that he has thus laid, as it were, an
ambuscade for man, and will only let him escape on
condition of his consenting to violate one of the very
most precious of God’s own gifts. There is an inge
nious cruelty about such conduct which it is revolting
even to imagine. Indeed, the whole theory reduces
our heavenly Father to a level of wisdom and goodness
far below our own, and this is sufficient answer to it.”
There is, however, a reason why we should be
■required to believe in the divinity of the Christ-ideal,
and regard it as exalted beyond all human comparison;
�I2
"Jesus versus Christianity.
namely, in order to exalt our sense of the paramount
importance of following and obeying the life and
commands of Christ. And this being so, “ it is
natural, also, to suppose that whatever may have
happened to the records of that life should have been
ordained with a view to the enhancing the precious
ness of the ideal.” Thus the very obscurity and
fragmentariness of the gospel narratives have added
to the value of the ideas they present, just as the
mutilations of ancient sculptures serve to enhance
their beauty to the imagination. Or, as “the gloom
and gleam of Rembrandt, or the golden twilight of
the Venetians, the losing and finding, and the infinite
liberty of shadow,” produce an effect infinitely beyond
that which would be gained by any hardness of
definition and tightness of outline. The suggestion
of the beautiful lineaments to the imagination is far
more effective than would be any minutely detailed
portrait. “ Those who relish definition, and definition
only, are indeed kept away from Christianity by the
present condition of the records ; but even if the life
of our Lord had been so definitely rendered as to
find a place in their system, would it have greatly
served their souls ? And would it not repel hun
dreds and thousands of others, who find in the
suggestiveness of the sketch a completeness of satis
faction which no photographic reproduction could
have given ?”
The fact is “ people misunderstand the aim and
scope of religion. Religion is only intended to guide
men in those matters upon which science is silent:
God illumines us by science as by a mechanical
draughtsman’s plan; he illumines us in the gospels
as by the drawing of a great artist. We cannot build
a ‘ Great Eastern ’ from the drawings of the artist,
but what poetical feeling, what true spiritual emotion
was ever kindled by a mechanical drawing ? How
cold and dead were science, unless supplemented by
�"Jesus versus Christianity.
13
art and religion! Not joined with them, for the
merest touch of these things impairs scientific value,
which depends essentially upon accuracy, and not upon
any feeling for the beautiful and loveable. In like
manner the merest touch of science chills the warmth
of sentiment—the spiritual life. The mechanical
drawing is spoilt by being made artistic, and the work
of the artist by becoming mechanical. The aim of
the one is to teach men how to construct; of the other,
how to feel. We ought not, therefore, to have ex
pected scientific accuracy from the gospel records.
Much less should we be required to believe that such
accuracy exists.” The finest picture, approached close
enough, becomes but blotches and daubs of paint, each
one of which, taken by itself, is absolutely untrue,
yet, at proper distance, forms an impression which is
quite truthful. “No combination of minute truths
in a picture will give so faithful a representation
of nature as a wisely-arranged tissue of untruths.”
Again, “ all ideals gain by vagueness and lose by defi
nition, inasmuch as more scope is left for the imagi
nation of the beholder, who can thus fill in the missing
detail according to his own spiritual needs. This is
how it comes that nothing which is recent, whether
animate or inanimate, can serve as an ideal unless it
is adorned by more than common mystery and uncer
tainty. A new cathedral is necessarily very ugly.
There is too much found and too little lost. Much
less would an absolutely perfect Being be of the
highest value as an ideal as long as he could be clearly
seen, for it is impossible that he could be known as
perfect by imperfect men, and his very perfections
must perforce appear as blemishes to any but perfect
critics. To give, therefore, an impression of perfec
tion, to create an absolutely unsurpassable ideal, it
became essential that the actual image of the original
should become blurred and lost, whereon the beholder
now supplies from his own imagination that which is,
�14
"Jesus versus Christianity.
to him, more perfect than the original, though objec
tively it must be infinitely less so.
“ It is probably to this cause that the incredulity of
the Apostles during our Lord’s lifetime must be
assigned. The ideal was too near them, and too far
above their comprehension; for it must always be
remembered that the convincing power of miracles in
the days of the Apostles must have been greatly
weakened by the current belief in their being events
of no very unusual occurrence, and in the existence
both of good and evil spirits who could take
possession of men and compel them to do their
bidding.
“ A beneficent and truly marvellous provision for
the greater complexity of man’s spiritual needs was
thus provided by a gradual loss of detail and gain of
breadth. Enough evidence was given in the first
instance to secure authoritative sanction for the ideal.
During the first thirty or forty years after the death
of our Lord, no one could be in want of evidence,
and the guilt of unbelief is, therefore, brought promi
nently forward. Then came the loss of detail which
was necessary in order to secure the universal accept
ability of the ideal. . . But there would, of course,
be limits to the gain caused by decay. Time came
when there would be danger of too much vagueness
in the ideal, and too little distinctness in the evidences.
It became necessary, therefore, to provide against this
danger.
“ Precisely at that epoch the gospels made their appear
ance.” Not simultaneously, and not in perfect harmony
with each other, but with such divergence of aim and
difference of authorship as would secure the necessary
breadth of effect when the accounts were viewed
together. “ As the roundness of the stereoscopic
image can only be attained by the combination of two
distinct pictures, neither of them in perfect harmony
with the other, so the highest possible conception of
�Jesus versus Christianity.
15
Christ cannot otherwise be produced than through the
discrepancies of the gospels.”
Now, however, “when there is a numerous and
increasing class of persons whose habits of mind unfit
them for appreciating the value of vagueness, but
who have each of them a soul which may be lost or
saved, the evidences should be restored to something
like their former sharpness.” To do this it demands
only “the recognition of the fact that time has made
incrustations upon some parts of the evidences, and
has destroyed others.” Nevertheless, as “ it is not belief
in the facts which constitutes the essence of Clvristianity,
but rather the being so impregnated with love at the
contemplation of Christ that imitation becomes almost
instinctive,” we may probably suppose “that certain
kinds of unbelief have become less hateful in the
sight of God, inasmuch as they are less dangerous to
the universal acceptance of our Lord as the one model
for the imitation of all men.”
To advocate conduct instead of belief, experience
instead of tradition, and intuition instead of conven
tionality, and to exhibit a model for the imitation of
all men, married as well as single, is at least one pur
pose manifest in the series of novels of which ‘ By
and By ’ is announced to be the completion :—novels
differing from the ordinary kind in that, while others
treat of man only in relation to man, and are, there
fore, merely moral, these bear reference to man in
relation to the Infinite, and are, therefore, essentially
religious.
It does not come within our design to treat of the
surface aspect of Mr Edward Maitland’s ‘ Historical
Romance of the Future,’ which represents the world
as it may be when a few more centuries have passed
over it, and the problems, social, political, and
religious, which now trouble it, shall have found
their solution, and people may, without detriment or
reproach, regulate their lives in accordance with their
�16
"Jesus versus Christianity.
own preferences. It is with the deeper design of the
book that we have now to do, the design which
reveals itself in the entire series to which, with ‘ The
Pilgrim and the Shrine ’ and 1 Higher Law,’ it belongs.
This design is the rehabilitation of nature, by showing
its capacity for producing of itself, if only its best be
allowed fail* play, the highest results in religion and
morals. Seeing that to rehabilitate nature is in
effect to rehabilitate the author of nature, and replace
both worker and work in the high place from which
they have been deposed by theologians, such a design
can be no other than an eminently religious one.
In the first of the series, ‘ The Pilgrim and the
Shrine,’ the wanderer in search of a faith that will
stand the test and fulfil the requirements of a
developed mind and conscience emerges from the
wilderness of doubt, through which he has been pain
fully toiling, to find that the best that we can com
prehend must ever be the Divine for us, and this by
the very constitution of our nature, inasmuch as we
can only interpret that which is without by that
which is within. And he bears testimony to the
value of the Bible as an agent in the development of
the religious faculty by noting the subjective character
of all that really appertains to religion in both the
Old and New Testaments. “ Constantly,” he says,
“ is the inner ideal dwelt upon without any reference
to corresponding external objects. Think you it was
the law as written in the books of Moses that was a
delight to the mind and a guide to the feet of the
Psalmist ? No, it was something that appealed much
more nearly to his inmost soul, even ‘ the law of God
in his heart.’ And what else was meant by ‘ Christ
in you the hope of glory?’ The idea of a perfect
standard is all that can be in us. The question
wbethei’ it has any external personal existence in
history does not affect the efficacy of the idea in
raising us up towards itself. God, the Absolute, is
�Jesus versus Christianity.
17
altogether past finding out. Wherefore we elevate
the best we can imagine into the Divine, and worship
that:—the perfect man or perfect woman. Surely
it is no matter which, since it is the character and not
the person that is adored. . . Christianity is a
worship of the divinest character, as exemplified in a
human form. . . The very ascription to Jesus of
supernatural attributes shows the incapacity of his
disciples to appreciate the grandeur and simplicity of
his character. . . . Here, then, is my answer to
the question, 1 What was the exact work of Christ ? ’
It was to give men a law for their government, tran
scending any previously generally recognised. Ignor
ing the military ruler, the priest, and the civil
magistrate, he virtually denounced physical force,
spiritual terror, and legal penalties as the compelling
motive for virtue. The system whereby he would
make men perfect, even as their Father in heaven is
perfect, was by developing the higher moral lawimplanted in every man’s breast, and so cultivating
the idea of God in the soul. The ‘ law of God in
the heart ’ was no original conception of his. It had
been recognised by many long before, and had raised
them to the dignity of prophets, saints, and martyrs.
Its sway, though incapable of gaining in intensity, is
wider now than ever, till the poet of our day must be
one who is deeply imbued with it; no mere surface
painter like his predecessors, however renowned, but
having a spiritual insight which makes him at once
poet and prophet. The founding of an organised
society, having various grades of ecclesiastical rank,
and definite rules of faith, does not seem to me to
have formed any part of Christ’s idea. His plan was
rather to scatter broadcast the beauty of his thought,
and let it take root and spring up where it could.
Recognising intensely, as he did, the all-winning
loveliness of his idea, he felt that it would never lack
ardent disciples to propagate it, and he left it to each
B
�Jesus versus Christianity.
age to devise such means as the varying character of
the times might suggest. The ‘ Christian Church,*
therefore, for me, consists of all who follow a Christian
ideal of character, no matter whether, or in whom,
they believe that ideal to have been personified.”
Such is the teaching of a book that is, to the Pall
Mall Gazette, foolishness, and to Mudie’s a stumblingblock and an abomination; yet which, in spite of
clerical denunciation and the expurgatorial indexes
of Protestant Nonconformist circulating-librarians,
has in a short space travelled to all lands where the
English tongue is spoken, and perceptibly influenced
the course that religious thought must henceforth
take. We shall have a proof of this when we come
to the last book on our list. In the meantime it
seemed to us well to digress for a moment in order
to denounce the obstacles which still are thrown in
the way of genuine religious thought by ecclesiastic
and layman, Churchman and Dissenter, alike in this
“ Christian ” land of ours.
As the ‘ Pilgrim and the Shrine ’ exhibited the
process of thinking and feeling out a religion, so its
successor, ‘ Higher Law,’ represented the natural
growth of a morality. Repudiating all conventional
methods, as the other repudiated theological and
traditional ones, the design here is to represent the
action of persons under the sole guidance of their
own perceptions and feelings under circumstances of
supreme temptation and difficulty.
It is by the steadfast adherence to the simple rule
of unselfishness, which forbids the commission of
aught that can injure or pain those whom we are
bound to respect, that the sufficiency of the intuitions
to constitute the higher, or rather highest, law of
morality is demonstrated.
It is not necessary to the perfection of nature that
all germs should reach the highest stages of growth,
whether in the vegetable or in the spiritual kingdom.
�"Jesus versus Christianity.
T9
The capacity to produce a single perfect result is
sufficient to redeem nature from the old reproach
cast upon it by theologians, “just as one magnificent
blossom suffices to redeem the plant, that lives a
hundred years and flowers but once, from the charge
of having wasted its existence.” Nay, more. “Even
if the experience of all past ages of apparent aim
lessness and sterility affords no plea in justification of
existence, the one fact that there is room for hope in
the future may well suffice to avert the sentence men
are too apt to pronounce,—that all is vanity and
vexation, and that the tree of humanity is fit only to
be cut down, that it cumber the ground no longer.”
Erom this point of view it is evident that at least
one object of the creation of the leading character in
1 By and By ’ is to show how an ideally perfect dis
position may be produced from purely natural cir
cumstances, and if in the present or future, why not
in the past ? The “ Christmas Carol ” of ‘ By and
By’ thus becomes for us a parallel to the “Joshua
Davidson” of the book already noticed; for it is an
attempt to transfer the Jesus of the gospels from
Judaea to our own country, only a Jesus wealthy in
stead of poor, educated instead of untaught, married
instead of single, having all the advantages of a
civilisation more advanced than any yet attained,
and with his intense religious enthusiasm kept from
surpassing the limits of the practical, by science,
wedlock, and work. In his liability to personify the
products of his own vivid and spiritual imagination,
and out of his idealisations of things terrestrial to
people the skies with “angels,” we see but a repro
duction of one of the characteristics by which all
the enthusiasts of old, to which the world owes its
religions, have been distinguished. By placing such
a character in his picture of the future, we under. stand the author to indicate his conviction that man
will always, no matter how rigidly scientific his
b 2
�20
Jesus ’versus Christianity.
training, have a religious side to his nature, a side
whereby he can rise on the wings of emotion far
beyond the regions of mere Sense. Of course such
an one must at some moment of his life feel himself
impelled to use his wealth and freedom for his own
selfish gratification (he would not otherwise be
human), but resisting such promptings of his own
lower nature, will fix himself upon some great
and useful work. It is almost as much of course that
he will in his earliest love be attracted by the
character that most nearly resembles pure unso
phisticated nature. But the love that is of the sexes
will not contain half his nature. He will be the
friend and servant of all men, and so provoke to
jealousy the small, intense disposition of her to whom
he has allied himself. Striving to inoculate her with
a sense of the ideal, their relations will aptly typify
the world-old conflict of Soul and Sense. He may
suffer greatly, but if she be true and genuine, and
loves him her best, so far as is in her, he will _ be
tender and kind and endure to the end. Losing
her, and after long interval wedding again, more for
his child’s sake than his own, he will naturally be
tempted to make trial of one less unsophisticated and
untrained. But mere conventionality will disgust
him. Its hollow artifices and insincerity will be
odious, and the ideal man will find a moral jar y
fitting plea for repudiation. Should his child—his
daughter—err, he will be tender and forgiving, pro
vided her fault be prompted by love. It will ever
be in his conduct that we shall find his faith.
Recognising himself as an individualised portion of
the divine whole, his intuitions are to him as the
voice of God in his soul, and to fail to live up to his
best would be to fall short of the duty due to his
divine ancestry.
So confident is he of the divinity of his own
intuitions, and so inexorable in his requirements of
�Jesus versus Christianity.
21
perfection in conduct up to the highest point of
individual ability, that he fails to be at ease until he
has established the character of God himself for perfect
righteousness in his dealings, even with the meanest
thing in his creation. We do not know whether or
not the argument is new. It certainly has not been
Suggested by any of the theologians who have busied
themselves in seeking solutions for the problem of
tile origin of evil. It is that all things are the pro
duct of their conditions, and that all conditions have
a right to exist, so that the products have a right
to exist also; and the maker of the conditions can
not in justice refuse to be satisfied with the products
©f conditions which he has permitted. “ The poor
Soil and the arid sky are as much a part of the
universal order as the rich garden, soft rain, and
Warm sunshine. It is just that one should yield a
©rop which the other would despise. It would be
unjust were both to yield alike.” Man’s highest
ftmction is to amend the conditions of his own
■Existence. Finding himself launched into the uni
verse, he must till it and keep it and fit it to produce
better and better men and women. It is by labouring
an this direction that he works out his own salva
tion. They are poor teachers who inculcate but
the patience of resignation, or look to another life to
compensate the evils of this. The ideal man of the
future appeals to the intuitive perceptions as the
divine guides of conduct while here, and to the physical
laws of nature for the means of subduing the world
to man’s highest needs. To his intensely sympathetic
nature “ good ” is necessarily that which assimilates
and harmonises to the greatest extent its surrounding
Conditions—not the immediately surrounding merely
s-«4hat which works in truest sympathy with the
fest, While that is evil which by its very selfishness
arraigns the rest against it, good needs no power
working from without to make it triumphant. It
�22
Jesus versus Christianity.
triumphs by winning the sympathies of all to work
with it.
What Mr Maitland has done in the form of fiction
Mr Matthew Arnold has done in the form of a
treatise. We look upon his ‘Literature and Dogma ’
as clinching the blow struck at the whole fabric of
dogmatic theology, and crowning the effort to restore
the intuitions as the sole court of appeal, not only
between man and man, but between man and God.
In his view the glory of the Bible consists in its
exhibition of Israel as a people with a special
faculty for righteousness, at least in conception. As
other races have their special faculties, the Greek for
sculpture, the Italian for painting, the German for
abstract thought, the French for sensuous art, &c.,
so the genius of Israel was for the righteousness
which consists in morality touched by emotion towards
something that is not ourselves, but . which makes for
righteousness. And it was in Christ that the national
genius of his race culminated, as genius for painting
in Raphael, for science in Newton, for the drama in
Shakespeare.
It was to God, not as “ an intelligent First Cause
and Moral Governor of the Universe,” but as the
influence from whence proceed the intuitions which
constitute the basis of conscience, that the higher
writers of the Old Testament appealed. And it was
in Jesus, not as the “ Eternal Son” of a personal
father, but as the restorer of the intuitions that the
disciples believed. No doubt they had extra beliefs,
and what we should term not so much superstition as
the poetry of religion, and it is very difficult to
separate the husks of this from the grain of the
other; but it is always the appeal to the intuitive
perceptions of right that excites their enthusiasm,
and thus they preach as the sole efficient cause of
man’s regeneration.
Entitling his work ‘ An Essay towards a Better
�Jesus versus Christianity.
23
Apprehension of the Bible,’ Mr Arnold maintains
that it is through the lack of literary culture that the
Bible has been utterly misunderstood, and that it is
through such misunderstanding that difficulties and
dogmas have arisen, and that conduct has come to
be ranked below belief as the effective agent of all
good. Of the Bible itself he says that, while it can
not possibly die, and its religion is all-important,
nevertheless to restore religion as the clergy under
stand it, and re-in throne the Bible as explained by
our current theology, whether learned or popular, is
absolutely and for ever impossible. Whatever is to
stand must rest upon something which is verifiable,
not unverifiable ; and the assumption with which all
churches and sects set out, that there is “ a great
Personal First Cause, the moral and intelligent Gover
nor of the Universe, and that from him the Bible
derives its authority, can never be verified.”
There is, however, something that can be verified ;
something that, after the deposition of the magnified
and non-natural man ordinarily set up by people as
their God, will for ever remain as the basis and object
of religious thought. This something is to be found
in the Bible, not there alone, but there in a greater
degree than in any other literature. It is the influence
wholly divine which is not ourselves, and makes for
righteousness. The instant we get beyond this in our
definitions of Deity we fall into anthropomorphism
and its attendant train of dogmas, Apostolic, Nicene,
or Athanasian, all of which are but - human meta
physics, and the product of minds untrained to dis
tinguish between things and ideas. “ Learned reli
gion ” is the pseudo-science of dogmatic theology; a
separable accretion which never had any business to
be attached to Christianity, never did it any good, and
now does it great harm. In the Apostles’ Creed we
have the popular science of that day. In the Nicene
Creed, the learned science. In the Athanasian Creed,
�24
"Jesus versus Christianity.
the learned science, with a strong dash of violent and
vindictive temper. And these three creeds, and with
them the whole of our so-called orthodox theology,
are founded upon words which Jesus, in all proba
bility, never uttered, inasmuch as they are inconsis
tent with the essential spirit of his teaching, and are
ascribed to him as spoken after his death.
Of the capacity of people at that time to compose
a form of belief for us, we may judge by their ideas
on cosmogony, geography, history, and physiology.
We know what those ideas were, and their faculty for
Bible criticism was on a par with their pther faculties.
To be worth anything, literary and scientific criticism
require the finest heads and the most sure tact. They
require, besides, that the world and the world’s experi
ence shall have come some considerable way. There
must be great and wide acquaintance with the history
of the human mind, knowledge of the manner in
which men have thought, their way of using words
and what they mean by them, delicacy of perception
and quick tact, and besides all these, an appreciation
of the spirit of the time. What is called orthodox
theology is, then, no other than an immense misunder
standing of the Bible, due to the junction of a talent
for abstruse reasoning with much literary inexperi
ence. The Athanasian Creed is a notion-work based
on a chimaera. It is the application of forms of Greek
logic to a chimaera, its own notion of the Trinity, a
notion un-established, not resting on observation and
experience, but assumed to be given in Scripture, yet
not really given there. Indeed, the very expression,
the Trinity, jars with the whole idea and character of
Bible-religion, just as does the Socinian expression, a>
great personal first cause.
What, then, is Christian faith and religion, and how
are we to get at them ? Jesus was above the heads
of his reporters, and to distinguish what Jesus said
and meant, it is necessary to investigate the spirit
�Jesus versus Christianity.
25
which prompted and is involved in the words attri
buted to him. This spirit is identical with that which
made Israel (as expressing himself through his most
highly spiritual writers) the most religious of peoples.
The utterance of Malachi, Righteousness tendeth to life,
life being salvation from moral death, was identical
with the assertion of Jesus that he was the way, the
truth, and the life, inasmuch as the Messiah’s function
was to Srwiy in everlasting righteousness, by exhibiting
it in perfection in his own conduct. Thus, the religion
he taught was personal religion, which consists in
the inward feeling and disposition of the individual
himself, rather than in the performance of outward
acts towards religion or society. The great means
whereby he renewed righteousness and religion were
self-examination, self-renouncement, and mildness.
He succeeded in his mission by virtue of the sweet
reasonableness which every one could recognise, par
ticularly those unsophisticated by the metaphysics of
dogmatic theology. He was thus in advance of the
Old Testament, for while that and its Law said, attend
to conduct, he said, attend to the feelings and dispositions
whence conduct proceeds. It was thus that man came
under a new dispensation, and made a new covenant
with God, or the something not ourselves which makes
for righteousness.
Thus the idea of God, as it is given in the Bible,
rests, not on a metaphysical conception of the
necessity of certain deductions from our ideas of
cause, existence, identity, and the like ; but on a moral
perception of a rule of conduct, not of our own
making, into which we are born, and which exists,
whether we will or no ; of awe at its grandeur and
necessity, and of gratitude at its beneficence. This
is the great original revelation made to Israel, this is
his “ Eternal.” The whole mistake comes from
■ regarding the language of the Bible as scientific
instead of literary, that is, the language of poetry and
�26
Jesus versus Christianity.
emotion, approximative language thrown out at
certain great objects of consciousness which it does
not pretend to define fully.
As the Old Testament speaks about the Eternal
and bears an invaluable witness to him, without ever
yet adequately in w’ords defining and expressing him,
so, and even yet more, do the New Testament writers
speak about Jesus and give a priceless record of him,
without adequately and accurately comprehending
him. They are altogether on another plane, and
their mistakes are not his. It is not Jesus himself
who relates his own miracles to us; who tells us of
his own apparitions after death; who alleges his
crucifixion and sufferings as a fulfilment of prophecy.
It is that his reporters were intellectually men of
their nation and time, and of its current beliefs ; and
the more they were so, the more certain they were to
impute miracles to a wonderful and half-understood
person. As is remarked in ‘The Pilgrim and the
Shrine,’ the real miracle would have been if there
were no miracles in the New Testament. The book
contains all we know of a wonderful spirit, far above
the heads of his reporters, still farther above the
head of our popular theology, which has added its
own misunderstandings of the reporters to their
misunderstanding of Jesus.
The word spirit, made so mechanical by popular
religion that it has come to mean a person without a
hody, is used by Jesus to signify influence. “ Except
a man be born of a new influence he cannot see the
kingdom of God.” Instead of proclaiming what
ecclesiastics of a metaphysical turn call “ the blessed
truth that the God of the universe is a Person,”
Jesus uttered a warning for all time against this un
profitable jargon, by saying: “ God is an influence,
and those who would serve him must serve him not
by any form of words or rites, but by inward motive
and in reality.”
�J
‘ esus versus Christianity.
27
The whole centre of gravity of the Christian
religion, in the popular as well as in the so-callecl
orthodox notion of it, is placed in Christ’s having,
by his death in satisfaction for man’s sins, performed
the contract originally passed in the council of the
Trinity, and having thus enabled the magnified and
non-natural man in heaven, who is the God of
theology and of the multitude alike, to consider his
justice satisfied, and to allow his mercy to go forth on
all who heartily believe that Christ has paid their
debt for them. But the whole structure of material
ising theology, in which this conception of the Atone
ment holds the central place, drops away and dis
appears as the Bible comes to be better known. The
true centre of gravity of the Christian religion is in
the method, and secret of Jesus, approximating, in
their application, even closer to the “ sweet reason
ableness” and unerring sureness of Jesus himself.
And as the method of Jesus led up to his secret, and
his secret was dying to “ the life in this world,” and
living to “ the eternal life,” both his method and his
secret, therefore, culminated in his “ perfecting on
the cross.”
A century has passed since it was said by Lessing,
“ Christianity has failed. Let us try Christ; ” and
the interval has not proved the utterance a fallacy.
Though there never was so much so-called Christian
teaching and preaching in school and church as now,
the progress of civilisation has been little else than
another name for progress in immorality, whether in
the form of trade dishonesty, social selfishness, or
any other. The reason is plain. It is not God as
righteousness and Jesus as the way thereto that is
inculcated, but systems of impossible metaphysics and
rituals that profit nothing. The spread of intelligence
is leading the masses daily more and more to reject
what is good in religion, because their intelligence
does not go far enough, and because their teachers
�e8
Jesus versus Christianity.
insist on substituting human inventions for eternal
truth. Alike within the Established Church and
without, it is the teaching vain and foolish. Even
politics are degraded by its influence. For, as Mr
Arnold asks, “ What is to be said for men, aspiring to
deal with the cause of religion, who either cannot see
that what the people now require is a religion of the
Bible quite different from that which any of the
churches or sects supply; or who, seeing this, spend
their energies in fiercely battling as to whether the
church shall be connected with the nation in its collec
tive and corporate character, or no ? The thing is to
recast religion. If this is done, the new religion will
be the national one. If it is not done, separating the
nation in its collective and corporate character from
religion will not do it. It is as if men’s minds were
much unsettled about mineralogy, and the teachers
of it were at variance, and no teacher was convincing,
and many people, therefore, were disposed to throw
the study of mineralogy overboard altogether. What
would naturally be the first business for every friend
of the study ? Surely to establish on sure grounds
the value of the study, and to put its claims in a new
light, where they could no longer be denied. But if
he acted as our Dissenters act in religion, what would
he do ? Give himself heart and soul to a furious
crusade against keeping the Government School of
Mines ! ”
This brings us to another aspect of the allegorical
romance already referred to. Mr Maitland repre
sents the church of the ‘ By and By ’ as a church at
once national and undogmatic. That is, it is not
only the crowning division of the educational depart
ment of the State; but it is untrammelled by any
dog ma that can exclude any citizen from a share in
its conduct and advantages. For none can own him
self a dissenter in regard to a church whose teaching
is restricted to the inculcation of righteousness, and
�Jesus versus Christianity.
29
follows Christ in the work of restoring the intuitions
to their proper supremacy over convention and tra
dition, and maintaining them there.
Archdeacon Denison has already uttered a lament
over even the remote prospect of such a “creedless
and sacramentless church ” finding a footing in this
country. But what may not the man who can
reconcile the pursuit of righteousness with reason,
say of the prospect afforded now? We take the
answer from ‘ The Fair Haven.’
“ Let a man travel over England, north, south,
east, and west, and in his whole journey he will
hardly find a single spot from which he cannot see
one or several churches. There is hardly a hamlet
which is not also the centre for the celebration of our
Redemption by the death and resurrection of Christ.
Not one of these churches, not one of the clergy who
minister therein, not one single village school in all
England, but must be regarded as a fountain of error,
if not of deliberate falsehood. Look where they may,
they cannot escape from the signs of a vital belief in
the resurrection. All these signs are signs of super
stition only; it is superstition which they celebrate
and would confirm; they are founded upon sheer
fanaticism, or at the best upon sheer delusion ; they
poison the fountain-heads of moral and intellectual
well-being, by teaching men to set human experience
on the one side, and to refer their conduct to the sup
posed will of a personal anthropomorphic God who
was actually once a baby—who was born of one of his
own creatures—and who is now locally and corporeally
in heaven, “of reasonable soul and human flesh sub
sisting.” Such an one as we are supposing cannot
even see a clergyman without saying to himself,
“ There goes one whose whole trade is the promotion
of error ; whose whole life is devoted to the upholding
of the untrue.”
How different it will be when the teaching in church
�"Jesus versus Christianity.
and school alike are built upon the axiom ascribed to
them in ‘ By and By,’ that “ As in the region of
Morals, the Divine Will can never conflict with
the Moral law; so, in the region of Physics, the
Divine Will can never conflict with the Natural
law.”
It must be so some day. “ It is not for man to live
for ever in the nursery. As in the history of an indi
vidual, so in that of a people, there is a period when
larger views must prevail and greater freedom of
action be accorded; when life will have many sides,
and hold relations with a vast range of facts and
interests, of which none can be left out of the account
without detriment to all concerned. Formerly, it
may be, men were able, or content, to recognise their
relations with the infinite on but a single side of their
nature. When a strongly marked line divided the
object of their religious emotions from all other ob
jects, when that alone was deemed divine, and all
else constituted the profane or secular, there may
have been excuse for their accordance of supremacy
to the one class of emotions, and of inferior respect,
or even contempt, to the other. But we have passed
out of that stage; we know no such distinction in
kind between the various classes of our emotions.
They all are human, and therefore all divine. They
all serve to connect us with the universe of which
we are a portion, the whole of which universe must
be equally divine for us, though we may rank some
of its uses above others in reference to our own
nature. Thus, if there is nothing that is specially
sacred for us, it is because there is nothing that is
really profane; but all is sacred, from the least to
the greatest. And this is the lesson that the churches
have yet to learn. Let us complete the Reformation
by freeing our own church from its ancient limita
tions, which are of the nursery. Let us release our
teachers from the corner in which they have so long
�Jesus versus Christianity.
31
been cramped, and they will soon learn to take greater
delight in exploring the many mansions which com
pose the whole glorious house of the universe, and
unfolding in turn to their hearers whatever they can
best tell, whether of science, philosophy, religion, art,
or morality, not necessarily neglecting those spiritual
metaphysics to which they have in great measure
hitherto been restricted, and the consequence of
which restriction has been but to distort them and
all else from their due proportion. In the church
thus reformed, all subjects that tend to edification
will be fitting ones for the preacher. But whatever
the subject, the method will have to be but one,
always the scientific, never the dogmatic method.
The appeal will be to the intellects, the hearts, and
the consciences of the living, never to mere authority,
living or dead. There will be no heresy, because no
orthodoxy; or rather, the question of heresy as against
orthodoxy will be a question of method, not of con
clusions. From the pulpits of such a church no genu
ine student or thinker will be excluded, but will find
welcome everywhere from congregations composed,
not of the women only and the weaker brethren, but
of men, men with brains and culture ! Who knows
what edifices of knowledge may be reared, what
reaches of spiritual perception may be attained, upon
a basis from which all the rubbish of ages has been
cleared away, and where all that is useful and true
in the past is built into the foundations of the future !
Who can tell how nearly we may attain to the per
fections of the blessed when, no longer strait
ened in heart and mind and spirit by a narrow
sectarianism, but with the scientific and the verifiable
everywhere substituted for the dogmatic and the
incomprehensible, the veil which has so long shrouded
the universe as with a thick mist shall be altogether
withdrawn, when the All is revealed without stint to
our gaze in such degree as each is able to bear, and
�32
Jesus versus Christianity.
Theology no longer serves but to paint and darken
the windows through which man gazes out into the
infinite!
Thus reformed, amended, and enlarged, the esta
blished churches of Great Britain will be no exclu
sive corporations, watched with jealous eyes of less
favoured sects. Nonconformity will disappear, for
there will be nothing to nonconform to : Fanaticism,
for there will be no Dogma; Intolerance and Bigotry,
for there will be no Infallibility. Comprehensive, as
all that claims to be national and human ought to be,
no conditions of membership, will be imposed to
entitle any to a share of its benefits: but every
variety of opinion will find expression and a home
precisely in the degree to which it may commend
itself to the general intelligence.
The bitterness of sectarian animosity thus extin
guished, and no place found for dogmatic assertion
or theological hatred, it will seem as if the first heaven
and the first earth had passed away, and a new heaven
and new earth had come, in which there was no more
sea of troubles or aught to set men against each other
and keep them from uniting in aid of their common
welfare. Lit by the clear light of the cultivated
intellect, and watered by the pure river of the deve
loped moral sense, the State will be free to grow
into a veritable city of God, where there shall be no
more curse of poverty or crime, no night of intole
rant stupidity, but all shall know that which is good
for all, from the least to the greatest.”*
“ What, then, becomes of the Revelation ? ” asks
one of the hero in ‘ By and By.’ “ My friend,” is
the reply, “ so long as there exist God and a Soul,
there will be a revelation ; but the sold must be a free
one.”
* ‘How to Complete the Reformation.’ By Edward Mait
land. Thomas Scott.
�
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 & 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
Jesus versus Christianity
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 32 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: "By A Cantab," Includes bibliographical references. From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed by C.W. Reynell, London.
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
1873
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT119
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
Subject
The topic of the resource
Jesus Christ
Christianity
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 (Jesus versus Christianity), 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
Jesus Christ
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/aab696647ee9fce351ee81187e1b0b48.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=rpahZZsWEgKV2xMdRlyRjiaOc6YbSVglE7qH6CTPGmRZFdPPsRF64Lj1uhjfn39-AF8uI-0vmk3YOf0GUO3b7lNrgf9zO3h33k6bUPkeg-4SfDu%7EKHKcli%7EKoRStNRwbmfEIPB08BlueALWJC37yQPqi80Ocu57JPSsmnBdqHw9waGj0RDaO-O7wO4p2%7Eedwi7%7EZGcTTpQ17hgYk2RssikuqCjJDNhBF5ZwOg2uD0sBU-YjqxWqy4NY7Mkc5EAwevsuC1I-TrS8UZvECl48KZap-NBvVK9TQnjYMa6VJ1RSDBSw0dMb9-6d8QeEWI-pXvo1rGJbx8mpdeyTrfJSlcg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
15389077c166372c5558ac126d0a7254
PDF Text
Text
CT zoo
THE
EFFICACY OF PRAYER.
A LETTER TO THOMAS SCOTT.
A
FOREIGN
PUBLISHED
BY
CHAPLAIN.
THOMAS
SCOTT,
No. 11 The Terrace, Farquhar Road, Upper Norwood,
London, S.E.
1873.
Price Threepence.
��THE EFFICACY OF PRAYER.
DEAR FRIEND,
COMPLY with your request, by attempting
a letter on
“ Efficacy
Prayer,” without
Ihowever beingtheconscious ofofmuch originality or
even “heterodoxy,” to recommend what I may
find to say on so transcendent a topic.
As to
the heterodoxy, I am pretty well persuaded that
our Biblical and Liturgical doctrines on the subject
will, in their highest and broadest acceptation, admit
a very close approach to the conclusions of nearly
every earnest, sober, and unbiassed thinker, aspiring,
irrespective of time and circumstance, to worship God
in Understanding and in Spirit.
You remember of old that our divergence of
religious views generally arose from my demanding
ampler recognition of the aspirational or emotional
claims of our complex nature, than you, from your
more realistic entrenchments, were inclined to con
cede. It was in fact the time-honoured well-worn
controversy between Realism and Idealism, or, as
some would say, Prose and Poetry, in which I main
tained, as I still do, that within the realm of Religion,
the aspirations of our Spirit, with their vague yearn
ings, prophetic forecastings, silent ponderings, and
instinctive impulses, possess a deeper power of insight
into transcendental truths than can, in this murky
.earthly medium, be assigned to any mere scientific,
dexterity of demonstration.
No doubt the two
�6
The Efficacy of Prayer.
moieties of our mental constitution are destined to
control and regulate each other, avoiding the perilous
extreme of effervescent enthusiasm on the one side,
or that of hard material positivism on the other. We
may be sure that creating Providence would not have
equipped us with two such orders of endowment, had
not the development of both been essential to our
equilibrium. A man listening exclusively to his
ideal ponderings and imaginative promptings, will
soon, like the engine without its regulator, get out of
gear by undue violence of moving power ; but what
the engine is with lack of steam, that, I apprehend,
is our semi-divine nature withont some latent-heat of
mysticism within it. If our nature be not semi
divine,—be not, that is, animated and illumined by
smouldering light and fire of Godhead,—then, of
course, Religion, with its ancillary “Prayer,” is
mere morbid delusion : we are but a higher develop
ment of animal, as animal of vegetable, and vegetable
of mineral, mere circulating dust and curious chemical
digesters, liable to be disturbed in our real business
of “ assimilation” by morbid fancies of futurity and
divinity, which practical sense of duty should stu
diously suppress. This, however, was never your
position. We both acknowledged Religion as the
birth-right of Man, not to be sold or bartered for
cold and feckless philosophic pottage ; but you looked
for it more in the head, I in the “ heart, maintaining
with King David, that there is its true temple or
tabernacle. I believed then, as I do still, that the
ablest among us, taking counsel of his brain only, is
likely enough, to land in Atheism, finding infinite
Creation as easy to conceive as an infinite Creator.
But let him look into his “ heart,” and he is a “ fool
to refuse its evidence and say, “ there is no God !
The drift, then, of all that I have to say will be
towards conciliating the “ Realism ” that would, in
its extreme logical result, shut us out from every hope
�The Efficacy of Prayer.
y
of help but that of putting our own shoulder to the
wheel, whose only Litany is “ Orare Laborare ; ” and
the Idealism which, when fairly indignant at the
ignoring of what it holds to be the more sacred half of
our nature, may, by force of re-action, be led to over
look the co-ordinate and no less imperative demands
of reasonable sense and soberness. A recent visit to
England has shown me that this and kindred ques
tions are now mooted with a boldness and publicity
which by no means so characterised public opinion
when we used to compare theologic notes, as with bated
breath, years ago, under your genial roof on the
Foreland coast. Large print and leading articles are
now at the free and full service of speculations which,
a quarter of a century since, were under a Social, no
less than Ecclesiastical, Ban ; then even the most
reverential enquirer found his head against a stream
too strong for individual stemming. Now, if he be
timid as well as reverential, he may chance to be
frightened at the ebb-tide of National Orthodoxy
sweeping away more landmarks than he likes to lose,
and alarming his nervous senses as with a roar of
Niagara in the distance. Without figure of speech,
I was startled at the general exoteric currency of
controversies that used to seek esoteric conclave;
and this remark absolves me from any further scruple
as to the expression of opinions, no longer as
formerly, of a kind to shock stereotype conclusions
resting content on traditional authority, rather than
seeking to give an answer for the hope that
is in them. You, I know, have made yourself
the centre of a circle of active and fearless investi
gators with whom my conclusions are more likely to
sin by their halfness than their boldness ; but if
you can value them as standing wear and tear, and
being consistent, without having aimed at consist
ency, you are free to give them any “ imprimatur ’’
you think proper.
B
�8
The Efficacy of Prayer.
Among other signs of the times that struck in®
was an agitation as to the “ practical ” results of
prayer, embodied in printed proposals, from no mean
quarter, to the effect that such efficacy should be put
to positive test within the walls of a hospital, one
ward of which should be solemnly commended to
faithful and righteous prayer in addition to the usual
curative ways and means within reach of them all.
This, it was argued on the Realistic side, would be a
fair and searching trial of the true value of spiritual
supplication. Nothing, it was urged, being holier in
its purpose than prayer for recovery of the sick—
should no propitious reply be vouchsafed to such
petitions, as evinced by increased per-centage of
recovery, then should we have little or no right to
expect it for any other orisons we might offer. This
strange project, betraying views, as it seemed to me,
of a crude and coarse kind, I had opportunities of
hearing referred to, even in pulpits of the Estab
lished Church, where, as may be supposed, it would
meet with no great favour or respect. Yet I could
not help thinking that such a subject, once publicly
propounded, was worthy of more precision in the way
of dealing with it than it happened to be my lot to
listen to. There is at least a superficial look of fair
play and common sense about such an abrupt chal
lenge that naturally attracts the wistful attention of
“ practical ” people, whose minds might easily be
unsettled by uncertain sounds in the trumpet replying
to it. That such sounds, as far as I heard them, were
uncertain, or at least wanting in the force and fullness
to be wished, was, and still is, my impression; and
having risked an opinion that may smack of presump
tion, I will now make it my purpose herewith to
subject my own kindred lucubrations to the proba
bility of similar criticism. Such an exordium will
no doubt prepare you for something more like a
sermon than a letter, but having proposed such a
�The Efficacy of Prayer.
9
solemn theme, you must of course tolerate a solemn
tone. I promise you, however, as little of a homily,
or at any rate as plain a one, as I can put together,
knowing of old that the “ drum ecclesiastic ” is not
the music you best love to listen to.
What I have to substantiate is the assertion that
the TwyAesi interpretation of our Biblical and Liturgical
didactics would place the efficacy of prayer, not in its
influence on external circumstance, but in its inward
and reflexive working on the soul of the petitioner.
I will try to show that neither the Bible nor the
Book of Common Prayer, in the loftiest spirit of their
teaching, ever encourage us to suppose that our sup
plications can affect the ordinary course of outward
events, as regulated by that Will and Way of God,
which manifest themselves in what we call “ Laws of
Nature.” Many on religious grounds have, I know,
an objection to this term, 11 Laws of Nature,” and one
is only too happy in these times to bow low to any
scruple of a reverential kind. Yet is it an imperative
religious duty to refer the laws of Nature to Nature’s
God, and we have no higher revelation of the divine
characteristics than their immutability—11 Without
variableness or shadow of turning.” We none of us
could contemplate as possible any change in the
moral laws, as of Truth and Justice, for example. We
all know and feel that in moral as in physical laws,
“A false balance is, and must be, 1 an abomination to
the Lord.’ ” Truth is a reality, or entity, and is part
of the all-pervading Being that alone is, and compre
hends every extant modification of subordinate Being.
Untruth, or a “ false balance,” is negative or non
existent, and therefore Atheistic, and thus no truth
can ever change or become untruth, whether we
distinguish it as physical or moral. The Hebrew tetragrammaton
(an aoristic form of the substantive
verb) expresses this in the most picturesque way, by
giving to the “ Name ” of God the value of the three
�io
"
Ehe Efficacy of Prayer.
tenses, past, present, and future—“ The same yester
day, to-day, and for ever.” Considering in this light
the “ Laws of Nature ” as not external or extrinsic to
the Deity, but absolutely intrinsic, co-ordinate, and im
manent, they lose that hard aspect of materialism which
is apt to alienate feelings and sentiments entitled to
the tenderest and most respectful treatment. It would
certainly seem, then, that we were authorised to
consider physical laws as being no less changeless
than moral, seeing that they both alike are expres
sions of the Will and Way of the same changeless
originating Power. Who in fact can conceive as
possible any physical change in the law, that a straight
line is the shortest between two points, that three angles
of a triangle equal two right angles, or that a circle
cannot touch another in more points than one ? If it be
said that a fact be not a “ law,” it at any rate belongs
to a “ law,” and such a fact as that two contiguous
mountains must have an intervening valley, may
assume the dignity of law with equal right as that
claimed by an angle of incidence equalling its angle
of reflection. The religious demur to the invariability
of Physical Laws seems to arise, first, from assuming
that they are in existence as external incidents or
accidents in the Universe, and that as such it would
be derogating from Divine Omnipotence to deny that
they could be changed or suspended. Are not,
indeed, “ all things possible with God ?” But this
dictum, like most others of a transcendent sort, is an
example of “ extremes meeting,” as it would be
equally true, and equally reverential, to say, that
with God but one thing is possible, viz., the thing
which is. Can Almighty Power be exerted in any
way but the wisest way ? and can there be two ways
of doing the same thing in the wisest, or “most wise ”
way ? Does not, in fact, the same Scriptural Authority
that enounces all things as possible with God, else
where limit such possibility in terms equally express,
�The Efficacy of Prayer.
11
** Si possibile transeat Calix sed non quod ego volo,
sed quod Tu ”—“ If it be possible, let this cup pass.”
We must guard accordingly against narrow and dero
gatory views on this mysterious Chapter of Omni
potence, united with the maximum of Wisdom and
Knowledge, inevitably limiting Almighty Government
(rather pondered in the heart than formalised in the
head)—inevitably limiting Almighty Government by
self-existent statutes totally different from the puerile
notions we may attach to the “bon plaisir ” of an
earthly Monarch or imaginary Magician! Yet it
may be objected that this doctrine of the invariability
of material Laws would involve the negation of all
11 Miracles ” as popularly understood ! To which I
would venture to observe, with the utmost respect
in presence of so momentous a topic, that how
Miracles in general are popularly understood is very
difficult to say, but that it is not very rash or heterodox
to maintain that they are probably misunderstood.
We are now, however, not concerned with the per
plexing and,in these times, distressing subjectof “ Mira
cles ” in general, nor even with the absolute possibility
or impossibility of incidental change in “ Physical
Laws.” The Miracles on which the religious faith of so
many millions has hitherto rested are presented to us as
strictly exceptional, and limited to exceptional Per
sonages, as divine vouchers for missions involving the
welfare of the Human Race. We are not now
inquiring whether these be supposed to involve real
change or suspension of Laws, or only the inter
position of inferior agents, leaving the Laws intact,
or whether, lastly, the Miracles be “subjectively,”
rather than “ objectively,” to be interpreted. These
alternatives are not for the present under con
sideration. Quite enough that we may assume so
much as excessive rareness or improbability in such
miraculous phenomena, to authorise us to impugn
them as awaiting the wish and will of mere ordinary
�12
The Efficacy of Prayer.
mortals beseeching before the throne of Omnipotence,
that the infinite should adapt itself to the finite, the
omniscience of the Creator to the ignorance of the
creature. Were, indeed, such privilege of miraculous
control or interference within reach of our own
individual fervour, miracles would become too nume
rous and too normal to be “ miraculous” or wonderful
at all, thus perishing of their own plethora.
But to return : it is indisputable that the highest
Biblical doctrine of Prayer is that contained in the
answer of our Lord to the inquiry of his disciples
how to pray. Now in the formula of the “ Pater
Noster ” there is not a single clause but that referring
to “ daily bread,” which in any degree recognises
the control of external circumstance as coming within
the province of Christian supplication. As regards
giving us our daily bread, there can be no doubt that
it implies a thankful recognition on our part of the
law that we reap tenfold or a hundredfold, according
to circumstances, the grain that we sow. It is in fact
a commemorative and eucha/ristic acknowledgment of
our dependence on such Law for our daily main
tenance, and it is on such principle of commemorative
and eucharistic sacrifice that alone are founded, as I
believe, all the petitions that we offer in the name or
spirit of Christ, touching the outward or material
conditions of existence. Nothing can be more exclu
sively inward and spiritual than all the other clauses of
the divine model of Prayer. God’s “ Name,” or
Being, is to be held holy in our hearts. His Govern
ment and His Will are to be as unquestionable with
us on Earth as we conceive them to be with Beings of
higher powers of appreciation, inhabiting higher
spheres in the hierarchy of the Universe. His Will
to be done on Earth as in Heaven, but by no means
in Heaven as on Barth. The are to discipline our
selves to forgive our earthly Brother as sole condition
of being ourselves forgiven of our Heavenly Father,
�the Efficacy of Prayer.
T3
and we implore that we may be strengthened in hours
of temptation and delivered from spiritual evil (rov
Trovripov).
That our Liturgical Services recognise Christ’s
teaching on the doctrine of Prayer, as being of
authority beyond appeal, belongs of course to the
nature of the case; but if it needed any argument,
we have it at once in the frequent reference, or
“ harking back,” as it were, to the divine standard of
our one High Spiritual Priest. That we also pray
for protection against all the various physical, as
well as moral, evils by which we are beset, is, as
already said, to be set down to commemorative exer
cise of devotion, reminding us when gathered together
of all the manifold manifestations of Power and
Wisdom by which, whether collectively or indivi
dually, we live and have our Being. When we pray
against Plague and Pestilence, does any one suppose
that such Prayer militates with our bounden duty,
Godward and Manward, to “wash and be clean?”
Is it not rather to strengthen and stimulate our faith
in the fulfilment of God’s Laws of health that we put
up such petition ? When we pray for “ the kindly
fruits of the earth, that in due time we may enjoy
them,” do we risk the inculcation of sloth and
negligence in the business of Agriculture ? Is not
the whole tone and tenor of such orisons in the
direction of “ up and be doing,” strengthening our
faith, and cheering our hope in working out our own
welfare with the sufficiency, and according to the
means 'given us of God F Would any of us neglect
the electric conductor because he had prayed against
lightning and tempest? Would such Prayer be less
blessed in its working because of the conductor, or
that of the conductor because of the Prayer ? It
would be a dim and narrow view that did not per
ceive how they supplement each other. Does any
Subject or Citizen of our United Kingdom find it
�14
The Efficacy of Prayer.
derogate from his political rights and duties to pray
that our earthly Sovereign may have affiance in our
Heavenly King of Kings ? Are the bonds of our
Social fellowship in Church and State so strongly
knit, or in danger of being so relaxed by congregational
idealism, that we should refrain from praying that
our clergy may set forth God’s Word by their preach
ing and living—that our Magistrates (Judges) may
execute justice and maintain truth—that our Nobles
may be endued with grace, wisdom, and under
standing? Would Socrates or Plato, or any other
of the Human-Catholic Church, demur to join any
Nation under Heaven in thus reverencing God,
honouring the King, and loving the Brotherhood ?
In fact, when the Service winds up, as it always does,
with the Saving Clause of St. Chrysostom, that our
Prayers should be granted only in so far as “ expe
dient ” for us, we have Christian and highest Ethnic
Piety joining hands in common confession to that
“ Fountain of all Wisdom, who knows our necessities
before we ask, and our ignorance in asking.” If you
tolerate a scrap of Greek, let me quote Socrates in
epigram on “ Efficacy of Prayer,” and see whether he
did not hold much the same doctrine as taught by
our Liturgy :
ZsiT BacriAgiT,
t« pCtv eadXa Kai evxop.&ois Kai avevKrois
Appt SlSov 'rafie Xvypa, Kai
airepvKOis,
freely but faithfully translated
Put away from us, O Lord, such, things as he hurtful,
And grant us such things as be profitable,
Whatever our ignorance in asking them.
If any one would convince himself that the spirit of
our Liturgy is that of the “ Lord’s Prayer,” namely
of inward not outward tendency, let him only turn to
the “ Collects,” the oldest and most concentrated of
all our formularies, and he will note consecutive peti
tions that “ we may so pass through things temporal
�'The Efficacy of Prayer.
as not to lose the things that are eternal; ” that
Goodness and true Religion may increase within us ;
that hurtful things may be put away from us, and
things profitable given us ; that we may have the
spirit to think and do such things as be rightful;
that in order to obtain our petitions we may ask such
things as it may please God to give us ; and that we
may have grace to run the way of God’s Laws, in order
to gain His promises and partake His treasures ! I
have merely taken a word or two out of consecutive
Collects after Trinity, and could add to them indefi
nitely to the same effect. Could any tone of prayer
be desired or imagined of larger and loftier scope, of
more “ Socratic ” or transcendent import, or in which
greater stress were laid on our adapting our human
Will to the divine, rather than vainly attempting the
converse process ?
Could any language more expressly limit our
gaining what is good for us to the condition of
“ running the way of God’s commandments ” ? One
cannot imagine any point of view from which such
spirit of prayer could be otherwise than welcome and
edifying to every mind recognising a divine sentient
Godhead as pervading the Universe, and esteeming
aspirations towards that God as the characterising
and distinguishing prerogative of our human nature.
The quotations cited go far, moreover, towards estab
lishing the position from which I ventured to set out,
namely, that our Biblical and Liturgical doctrines on
prayer and its efficacy will admit, in their highest
interpretation, of conclusions identical with those of
nearly all earnest and sober thinkers, yearning to
worship God with their spirit in unison with their
understanding.
You will perhaps think I am now dwelling less on
the efficacy of prayer than of the “ Prayer Book,”
yet is our Anglican—Parliamentary—Liturgy so
�16
The Efficacy of Prayer.
saturated with the spirit and letter of the Bible, that
it might almost claim the recognition of Universal
Christendom as a fair exponent of Scriptural teaching
on the subject. Then again, independently of different
Communions within the limits of the United King
dom, it seems to possess quite a special interest to
every British Subject and Citizen as being hitherto,
at least, the most effective extant instrument of
“National Education” among us. One can scarcely
help thinking its value even under-rated in this
respect, and that, had it not been for this Parlia
mentary boon to the Empire, our English character
would hardly have stood so high among Nations as
it in general has done for the last three centuries.
If we value the language Shakspeare spake, the
morals Milton held, and hold that education is rather
the inculcation of good principles and good manners,
than of mere intellectual accomplishments, then you
will agree with me that our “ Morning and Evening
Services,” known by heart, as they have been by
successive millions of our Countrymen, almost from
the cradle to the coffin, are entitled to some pro
minence in the consideration of Prayer at the hands
of every dweller in these Islands. I for one, at any
rate, believe that the spirit to do our work and fight
our battles has been in no small measure imbibed
from the rhythmical beauty and deep earnestness of
the teaching so dear and familiar to most of us, from
the “ Lawful and Right” of the Prophet Ezekiel to the
triune benediction of the Apostle Paul. So if I say
too much about the “ Book ” for the efficacy of
Human Prayer in general, let it pass for something
to the purpose as to that of British Prayer in parti
cular.
You will have seen at once what I mean when
bargaining for the “highest and broadest” inter
pretation of our Christian Oracles, to the effect of
�The Efficacy of Prayer.
17
excluding low and narrow notions that might easily
be propped up with single “ texts,” giving no fairei’
idea of the general scope of Christianity than would
single stones of the architecture of the Temple. You
are not the man to meet me with the argument of
££ Elias holding back the rain for three years and six
months,” even though an Apostolic text can be
quoted in its favour. You will allow that if we would
know what horizon the Christian Temple commands
we must go to the top of it, and that top is the Cross
of the Spiritual Gospel, showing us that our God is a
Universal Spirit, seeking worship only in universal
spiritual truth. If St James himself believed in the
efficacy of Elias’s prayer to such coarse material
purpose, his belief can to us have only ££ subjective ”
worth, as the critics call it, that is, only establishing
his own individual persuasion, but by no meats
substantiating such notions as an “ objective ” or
palpable fact. He may indeed have only availed
himself of such “ subjectivity,” or popular persuasion,
on the part of his countrymen; it afforded him an
illustration and he employed it. They were not likely
to question traditional noble works heard with their
ears and declared by their Fathers, as done in their
days, and in old time before them. But we measure
God’s ££ noble works ” by another standard, and know
that mortal prayer, in its fitful waywardness, can
never avail to change the Law that sends sunshine
and rain alike upon the just and the unjust. The
same reply is ready to the hand of every Christian,
when ££ beggarly elements ” and ££ old wives’ fables ”
are rudely thrust upon him by devotees of the ££ letter”
that kills, rather than of the spirit that quickens.
Did a Jew of that time and place believe it ? then we
respect his belief then and there. “ Sed credat tunc
temporis Judaeus, non ego I”
One feels, however, that the real paramount diffi
�18
’The Efficacy of Prayer.
culty of the whole subject is the deeply-rooted reluct
ance of human nature to acknowledge its own
apparent insignificance in presence of changeless
and unchangeable physical or material laws. The
weight of evidence to such effect seems indeed
crushing, yet it has not sufficed, and will not easily
suffice, to crush human faith and hope in doctrine of
a less dreary and desolate aspect. We instinctively
cling to any principle, or any persuasion, that re-estab
lishes us in our own eyes, as of more importance than
to be made the sport of earthly elements—drowned
by water, burnt by fire, starved by cold, with as little
elemental remorse as were the existence but of mice,
rather than men, at stake on the issue !
The facts, it must be confessed, are fearfully
blunt in their testimony against our higher preten
sions. That Biscayan billow rolls into the Tagus,
and sweeps away 30,000 men, women, and children, as
if the inhabitants of a European capital were no more
than the denizens of an ant-hill! Yet how Priests
and People petition Heaven’s grace for dear life, as
they crowd down to that fatal quay to escape the
shock that has levelled their proud city. How would
it have been had some Priest of Nature warned them
with his Kiipte eXerjaov to flee up hill from the reac
tionary volcanic surge of that mass of pitiless brine !
Look again into yon grand Catholic Church far away
beyond the South'Atlantic, under the shadow of the
sunny Andes. See how the lights shine, the banners
wave, and clouds of incense rise with pealing organs
and anthems to the glory of God, according to the
worship of the forefathers of those two thousand
women and children that are praying for health and
wealth, after their knowledge! Yet a gentle fresher
zephyr from without blandly waves that long muslin
streamer into the tall torch lazily lambent on its silver
sconce, and, gracious Heaven! by La/w of fire and fuel,
�The Efficacy of Prayer.
19
it flashes from beam to beam, leaps from rafter to
rafter, and the frantic, shrieking crowd rush headlong
upon those great gates that open inwards on their
hinges ! Let who will read the newspapers of no
distant date for the how and how long lasted the
agony of that holocaust of charred bones, but even
now a multitude of mostly young, beautiful, festivelyadorned, and God-adoring humanity I But why cross
the Atlantic for illustrations; cannot even middleaged men recall the Irish famine, when the potatosick soil refused longer health and strength to the
single root to which millions of human beings, con
trary to the laws of God, looked for their sole
sustenance; and did not a million or more of the
subjects of the richest empire in the world pay with
their lives for the rotten scab of that poor vege
table bulb. Had we prayed with the plough for the
“ daily bread ” of Ireland, would that million of our
countrymen have been sacrificed to the leprosy of
“ lumpers ? ” Look again, if we like to dwell on
human humiliation in presence of the divine laws
of material creation, look to that proud “ iron-clad ”
Man-of-War, equipped with all that the ways and
means of the British Empire could devise, except one
poor requirement of the law of“ central gravita
tion.” Look and see, if we can through our tears,
that leviathan reversed, and five hundred of our best
and bravest dismally drowned on the dark night off
Corunna, by behest of the stern statute that sent
them to the bottom with as little compunction as it
would have capsized a child’s toy in a pond or
puddle. Think we prayers were wanting for that
ship’s company, or that more prayers would have
given her increased stability ? There seems no
possibility of reasonably or religiously resisting
such evidence as this, and we all know it can
be indefinitely extended.
Ask medical doctors
�20
The Efficacy of Prayer.
what “ efficacy ” they assign to prayer, and they
will at once, and of course, limit it to the sooth
ing effect that Faith and Hope, or cheerfulness
and elasticity of mind, may work on the body
through the nervous system. But that any amount
or any intensity of prayer, by or for the patient, will
work materially to set a broken, or renew a lost limb,
is a proposition to which they, will not listen, and
cannot reply. Could such interposition prevail, how
gladly would they call it in to temper that inexorable
statute that visits with consumption, insanity, and the
rest, the third and fourth generation of those, that
with guilt or innocence, have transgressed a Law.
Ask commercial calculators in companies of in
surance against fire and hail, securing, through accu
rate reckoning, profit to themselves, while saving
individuals from ruin, by spreading loss over larger
surface—do they recognise the existence of an un
known, impalpable, inappreciable, influence, that
would set their tables and tariffs at nought ? To
seek ampler illustration would be useless and tedious.
Established facts are sacred revelations, and there can
scarcely be a better established fact than the utter
disrespect to human persons displayed by the execu
tive powers that preside over the physical phenomena
of the world we live in. We have only honestly and
humbly to acknowledge the truth, and seek consola
tion for its seeming harshness in our reverential faith
that whatever is is ultimately right, and that, in the
language of devotion, we are in the hands of an
Almighty Power, declaring itself most chiefly in
mercy and pity.
What that sphere of “most chief” mercy is, we
need not go far to inquire. The most chief lesson of
our religion is not to fear the powers that may indeed
kill the body, but have no might or right to meddle
with the “soul,” that alone constitutes the divine
�Phe Efficacy of Prayer.
21
and abiding life of man. The physical laws that
govern fire and water, the laws of gravitation, of
chemistry, and of electricity, do indeed evince no
respect for the corporeal life that, designedly or undesignedly, trenches on their domain. Whether it be
the life of thonsands, or the life of nnits, the life of
saints, or the life of sinners, we have no shadow of
reason for believing that such laws manifest the
slightest respect or recognition of our persons. No
man in his senses will maintain that an eruption of
Etna will respect the city of Catania on its flanks,
and Catania is no mean'city. And, were it the city of
London and Westminster to boot, a stream of lava
miles wide and deep as the height of a church-tower,
would make short work of it. But let us take courage
and be of good cheer, when we remember that all the
lava of all the volcanos in the Planetary System
could not suffice to suffocate a single human
“ soul,” and that the soul’s life is the only life
whose Salvation Religion recognises as worth the
saving. Our bodies come and go, circulating through
mineral, animal, and vegetable—great Caesar’s dust, or
dust that stops a bung-hole. It is for the spirit alone,
which for a while dwells in such dust, that Religion
will condescend to pray, or that God, who is a Spirit,
(with reverence be it spoken), will condescend to hear.
We have eaten so much of the fruit of the Tree of
Knowledge, that we become terror-stricken at the
incomprehensible ineffable Deity we have discovered;
the higher our Godhead soars viewless into the Heaven
of Heavens, the deeper the relative “Fall of Man”
in his consciousness of his nakedness and his nothingness. We grope round on every side for mediating
connecting links between the finite and the infinite.
Guardian Angels—Patron Saints—and all the mytho
logical machinery of Greek and Goth have had their
day—but every Prospero in his turn, as we grow older
�22
The Efficacy of Prayer.
and wiser, abjures his “ rough magic,” buries his wand,
and plunges his book deeper than plummet’s sound; all
Prosperos but the divine Son, that still bridges the
gaping chasm that separates Man from his God,
teaching us to serve Him with a “ Reasonable Ser
vice ” of all the mind no less than of all the heart.
This is the only Service and the only Religion
we cannot outgrow, for it is of us and within us,
growing with our growth, strengthening with our
strength, endured with powers of expansion to adapt
itself, by higher and broader interpretation, to all the
changes and chances of life’s mystery. It is the only
true and “ Catholic ” Religion, because it is the only
one that sanctifies and ennobles Sorrow, and to sorrow
we are born as the sparks fly upward. We begin
with wailing and we end with groaning, and it were
no desirable privilege to be exempt from educational
wailing and groaning as we go along ; for sweet are
the uses of adversity, and at times better is the house
of mourning than that of gladness. Against bodily
rack and ruin we have no Guardian-Angel but our
own Prudence, learning the laws of health and
strength, and living them; for the Body’s fleeting
claims,“ Nullum Numen si sit Prudentia”—but for the
Soul’s eternal health and wealth Angels in Heaven
do continually regard the light of God’s Face in our
behalf (a Christian Article of Faith that might be made
more of than it is), and by them, ascending and de
scending the patriarchal ladder, are borne the availing
prayers of such as pray in righteous prayer and spirit.
People ask why and how Christ’s Religion has so spread
and struck root; surely because it is the religion that
best knows what we are, and what we need, that best
strengthens our faith in the midst of mystery, best
consoles us in sorrow and cheers us in resignation;
a religion preached and practised by the divine Man
whose religion teaches us that the only efficacious
�The Efficacy of Prayer.
23
prayer is “ Fiat Voluntas,” not our will but “ Our
Father’s in Heaven” be done.
To sum up ;—Prayer efficacious only mentally and
reflexively;—powerless circumstantially, till translated
into Action, and then valid only in direction of, and
conformity with, changeless Laws ;—though intense
Prayer must needs be silent individual concentration,
yet does the conventional language of Public-Service
greatly strengthen us, in the sense of commemorative
and eucharistic devotion, forming the best and
steadiest basis of “ National Education.”
If I have written you more of a sermon than a
letter, put it down, as far as you can, to the solemnity
of the subject proposed ; and if my “ idealism ” does
not always meet your sympathy, remember, at any
rate, that I am real when signing myself,
Yours faithfully,
Foreign Chaplain.
Thomas Scott, Esq.
�
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 & 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 efficacy of prayer
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 23, [1] p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: "A letter to Thomas Scott by a foreign chaplain." From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. First page only of publisher's list (Abbot-Bastard) 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
1873
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT120
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
Subject
The topic of the resource
Prayer
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 efficacy of prayer), 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
Prayer
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/1a20be0df1c76c1662d41f321aa6fd77.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=fPDjAOnitCdiqGVJCK8tVAE9Xgjg6Qyvyz3zI57%7E-k4bN3VyfW-FyeWDIzXXMpt39MaxTzi8TYvLhy%7EnohCFzS7vPfLwY6WVNOoZw9-1C%7EkcWPiQQPNq7qs6LaVNn5SiYMlrk3oBEQxGBzDjbApOaaoXNanRjKZoovAoelTcsqTXHhWBiUJjWiRFW8JLpgK4m6lGZoel1ESd-LGqmh9jCae0VRXxiesVECSK8X8nKX8NU%7E0pUiVPIGd8s4rzUiKhpvnyzZywnQxiGhWA2oxAFD4Te8syHv-N28jvZWjO0PURWAfyYA6QE0IOlx10G8AxTyqt0utl%7EvnZ81I%7EO0XOLg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
d9a6de779bd03134b3a2e5a8da038ca9
PDF Text
Text
CT'f'ft
REMARKS
PALEY’S EVIDENCES.
A LETTER
TO
THE YOUNGER MEMBERS (GRADUATES AND UNDERGRADUATES)
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE.
BY
AN OLD
PUBLISHED
BY
GRADUATE.
THOMAS
SCOTT,
NO. II THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD, UPPER NORWOOD,
LONDON, S.E.
!
18 73.
Price Sixpence.
�J,
�REMARKS ON PALEY’S EVIDENCES.
TO THE YOUNGER MEMBERS
[GRADUATES AND
UNDERGRADUATES)
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE.
Gentlemen,
HATEVER may be the truth or value of that
system of doctrine and practice which is
popularly conceived to represent genuine Christianity,
it must be confessed by every candid mind that it
cannot in the long run be confirmed by defective
statement, or by the presentation of illegitimate
evidence.
A meritorious intention is not always a guarantee
of effective execution. It is not an uncommon thing
*
for an eager advocate to damage the best of causes
by his very eagerness, and by his insisting on intro
ducing as testimony that which either is no testimony,
or, in fact, invalidates his own argument. It must
not of course be asserted, without proof, that this is
the case with Paley’s famous work on ‘ The Evidences
of Christianity,’ but we may be permitted to remark
that this is not the first time that the value of the
controversial works of this author has been ques
tioned.
At the end of the last century faith in Christianity
had been reduced in many quarters to such a nebulous
W
�6
Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
state by the assaults of the English Deists and French
philosophers, that almost any production was wel
comed which seemed to restore it to a tangible con
dition, and re-establish its “ origines ” in the region
of historical fact. The particular form which Paley’s
lucubrations assumed, both on the subject of faith and
morals, is no doubt due to the influence of the philo
sophy of Locke. This philosopher and his followers
had indoctrinated a large class with a deep-rooted
distrust of all systems based on a priori considerations,
and hence, apart from the natural tendency of his own
mind, it was Paley’s desire to meet the general re
quirement by founding both ethics and religious
belief on the solid logic of facts. His views on
morality have been strongly objected to by many—
in this University by no less authorities than Dr
Whewell and the recently lamented Professor Sedg
wick ; so much so that the ‘ Moral and Political
*
Philosophy,’ which in my younger days was one of
the subjects for the B.A. Examination, has, I believe,
been removed from the list of class-books. His mode
also of presenting the Christian Evidences has met
with no little unfavourable criticism in high quarters,f
both among the fervent Evangelicals and that party
which piques itself upon its orthodoxy and respect for
Church principles. Although, therefore, I approach
the subject from a different standpoint from either of
these schools, I trust it may not be thought pre
sumptuous if I offer what appear to me some addi-
* See Whewell’s ‘Lectures on Moral Philosophy.’ Introd.
Leet. p. x., and elsewhere ; v. also his ‘ Elements of Morality,
including Polity.’ Suppt. c. III. See, also, Sedgwick’s ‘ Dis
course on the Studies of the University of Cambridge; ’ Sir
J. Mackintosh’s Works, I., 189 ; De Quincey’s ‘ Essays on
Philosophical Writers,’ I., 77.
f See Coleridge’s ‘ Aids to Reflexion,’ vol. i., p. 278 ; Arch
bishop Trench ‘ On Miracles,’ p. 31; ‘ Tracts for the Times,’
No. 85. See also Erskine’s ‘Internal Evidences of Chris
tianity,’ p. 21 and seq., and pp. 183 and 200.
�Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
7
tional objections to this production of Paley’s, on the
ground of its ambiguity and inconclusiveness.
I must appeal to your candour to weigh dispas
sionately what I wish to allege in support of these
conclusions. If what I say should wound any per
son’s prepossessions, or seem wanting in respect
for their religious feelings, it will be a matter to me of
regret. I shall endeavour, therefore, to clothe my re
marks in as respectful a form as possible, so far as it
is consistent with a due presentation of truth. The
interests of truth ought to be ample excuse for any
statement, however painful, or before any audience;
but addressing educated Englishmen, and at the same
time members of a University always distinguished
for its love of scientific accuracy and its manly tone of
thought, I feel I need not preface my remarks with
any of those rose-water qualifications or cloudy
euphuisms suited to timid women or squeamish
ascetics. Men of courage and honour will not take
offence at plain words.
Let us proceed, then, to examine a few of the
grounds on which I demur to Paley’s work on the
Evidences, for I must premise that it is only on a few
points that I shall endeavour to lay open the weakness
of his argument. To proceed seriatim through all the
topics to which he refers is beyond the compass of a
brief letter; but I venture to think that the principles
I shall point out will be capable of being applied far
more extensively.
Paley’s treatise commences, as you are aware, with
an introductory chapter, in which he prepares the
way for his argument by attempting to dispel some
antecedent objections, which might be considered to
leave it no place.
His first clause contains an assumption on the
very face of it, one, however, which probably has
much imposed on persons of uninquiring and im
pressible dispositions. He says, “ The question
�8
Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
lies between the Christian religion and none: for if
this be not credible, no one with whom we have to
do will support the pretensions of any other.” This
insinuates an “ argumentum ad odium et terrorem ”
on the threshold, and is well calculated to impart a
preliminary fright to weak and well-meaning persons,
lest they must of necessity fall into atheism if they
fail to follow the author’s conclusions.
But the invocation of such a phantom is quite
unwarranted, for the Deists or Theists, with whom
assuredly the writer’s argument largely “ had to do,”
are, in spite of frequent mendacious assertions, many
of them very religious people, although more back
ward than some in supporting their pretensions to
that character : the Jews, moreover, in all ages have
not been lacking in strenuously maintaining the
claims of their own revelation as exclusive and para
mount. Indeed, as far as argument is concerned,
they have always run Christian advocates very hard,
and not seldom have made sad inroads in Christian
*
Churches.
The professors of some other faiths,
likewise, might deem it not altogether candid on the
part of our Christian advocate to shut them alto
gether out of court in this manner, f
* See a list of works, in the controversy of the Jews against
the Christians, in Farrar’s Bampton Lectures on 1 Free
Thought,’ Appendix, Note iv. Their tenets seem at one time
to have spread considerably in the Eastern Church, and they
brought over the Archbishop of Moscow to their opinions.
See Milman’s ‘History of the Jews,’vol. iii., 394. I have
been informed that some of the clergy of Spain at the present
day are Jews, and have brought others over to their faith. In
the eighth century they appear to have converted a whole
Turcoman tribe and established an independent kingdom,
called Khazar, between the mouths of the Wolga and the
Don, ib. 129. There are other similar instances.
t See ‘ The Modern Buddhist,’ by H. Alabaster (Triibner
and Co.); and ‘ A Lecture on Buddhist Nihilism,’ delivered
before the Association of German Philologists at Kiel, by
Professor Max Muller.
�Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
9
A little further on the author introduces us to
another astounding assumption.
“In what way,”
says he, “ can a revelation be made but by miracles ?,
In none which we are able to conceive.” To revealis to unveil, to disclose. A revelation means the
imparting to anyone some truth he did not know
before, in an active sense, or it is sometimes taken in
a passive sense for the thing so imparted. So that,
if Plato or Cleanthes had instructed a Polytheist in
the doctrine of “ one living and true God,” this would
be to the latter a revelation. Is it meant to be asserted
by our author that this truth cannot be accredited
and accepted without miracles ? If so, he appears in
the latter part of his treatise to contradict himself,
for he there asserts that the religion of Mahomet was
propagated without miracles. He would probably
evade this dilemma, by replying that this of Maho
met’s was only a pretended revelation, and that his
statement referred to a true one. As between one
creed and another, however, this reply is a mere
begging of the whole question: and, moreover, in
this article of the unity of God as against Poly
theists and idolaters, I suppose he would not
deny either the verity or the value of the Creed
of Islam.
Mahometanism at least shows that
“we can conceive ” of a revelation without miracles.
But further, we may ask, what was to hinder the
Deity from so constituting the human mind that, at
*
a particular stage of its growth with a definite in
crease of knowledge, it should become intuitively
certain of the personality and unity of God, in the
same way as, when instructed in numbers, it per
ceives that two and two make four. Sight is a daily
revelation to an infant; six and seven are revelations
* Paley contradicts himself again in Part iii. c. vi., where
he concedes this very point: “ For anything we are able to
discern,” says he, “ God could have so formed man as to have
perceived the truths of religion intuitively,” &c.
�io
Remarks on Paley s Evidences.
to a savage whose mental faculties had never before
enabled him to count beyond five. To say the least,
then, it is quite as possible “ to conceive ” a revela
tion to arise from the natural law of progress, as
to suppose it ushered in by cataclysms, which one
would think must have a tendency rather to confuse
than clarify the perceptive faculties, and so interfere
with the very purpose of a revelation, if its object
is to increase light.
Further, it seems to me that Paley does not fully
comprehend the force, at any rate does not fairly repre
sent what he calls the “principle of the objection ” to
miracles, that “ it is contrary to experience that a mira
cle should be true, but not contrary to experience that
testimony should be false.” He says that the alleged
improbability of miracles does not properly arise from
the fact that they are contrary to experience, but
simply that there is a “ want of experience ” respect
ing them : he implies accordingly that the objection
is fallacious, since this “want” is inherent in their
nature; for, if they were matter of frequent expe
rience, they would cease to be miracles. This cannot
be considered a fair statement of the full meaning
of the objection, whose antithetical and somewhat
epigrammatic form Paley seems to have taken advan
tage of. What is evidently meant to be implied is an
inference similar to that which is now come to by
the majority of thoughtful and clear-headed men.
Thoughtful men do not contemplate the subject from
the negative but from the positive side. Their objec
tion is not that there is any “ want of experience ” of
miracles, for, on the contrary, in ancient and modern
times they are “ thick as leaves in Vallambrosa,” but
that there is an enormous positive experience of mira
cles (so called) founded on delusion, fraud, or hallu
cination. All history teems with miracles ; in certain
stages of human growth they spring up as sponta
neously as weeds in a fallow, and in particular states
�Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
II
of mind accounts of them are imbibed as greedily as
infants swallow sweets. The childish mind naturally
expatiates in tales of wonder, and delights to lose
itself in realms where there is an absence of limita
tion. The vast majority of persons were once but
children of a larger growth ; a large number still are.
Until the mind, by education and the habit of careful
and measured observation, has come to form a some
what clear notion of the order of nature and scientific
causation, it is really more inclined to credit than
to discredit everything marvellous. In the absence
of knowledge we are in a position to believe any
thing. As knowledge increases, marvel after marvel
is explained ; phantoms vanish into thin air; we begin
to see the sources of mistake, or the evidence of fraud
and delusion, as the case may be ; we are aware of the
impossibility of alleged conditions, the incongruity of
asserted relations. We perceive, too, that the ten
dency to credulity, although more general, was not
confined to ancient times, but that it is strictly de
pendent on peculiar conditions of mind and body
which physiology enables us to explain. We have a
large and daily growing experience that a certain
exaltation or excitement, or morbid action of the ner
vous system, either an enthusiastic and ardent or a
depressed state of feeling, with a low and ascetic
habit, of body, especially if there be an external cause
of dejection or triumph in national or domestic affairs,
have remarkable influence in the production of extra
vagant beliefs, and that these beliefs have a constant
tendency to become epidemic. It is not, therefore,
the limitation but the extent of our experience which
indisposes us to a belief in the miraculous. Whatever
marvels may be alleged, we have constantly found,
when we can get at them and obtain a fair opportunity of
observation, that they turn out to have originated in
fraud or mistake. The fair and inevitable inference,
therefore, is, that if we were only allowed proper
�12
Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
facilities of examination, we could show others to
have no better foundation. The real meaning, there
fore, that Paley’s objector intended to convey pro
bably was, that while it is contrary to general expe
rience that an alleged miracle, when examined, should
turn out to be true, we have a very large experience
of the falsity of that testimony which is adduced on
their behalf. There is a “ want of experience ” as to
their truth; for, if we can get sufficiently near them
as to be said in any real sense to have experience of
them, we find them untrue, so that, in strict speech,
they may be justly affirmed to be “ contrary to
experience.”
On the other hand, we have on all
sides abundant experience as to the fictitiousness
of vast numbers of miracles.
If men are to be
guided by experience at all, on which side does the
balance of probability lie ?
The author concludes his preparatory considera
tions with his famous “ simple case ” of the “ twelve
men of good sense,” whom he “undertakes to say that
not a sceptic in the world,” except Mr Hume, would
disbelieve. Whether, if twelve men were to do and say
all that these imaginary beings are supposed to do,
there might not still be sceptics I can not undertake
to say ; I should hesitate myself to commit so critical
a question to a “ common jury.” But, as far as
the actual case before us is concerned, the testi
mony of Paley’s consistent and stedfast dozen of
eye-witnesses is no more producible in Court than
the twelve signs of the Zodiac ; we may leave, there
fore, his hypothesis to stand for what it is worth,
and proceed to the consideration of his main pro
position. It is this : “ There is satisfactory evidence
that many, professing to be original witnesses of the
Christian miracles, passed their lives in labours, dangers,
and sufferings, voluntarily undergone, in attestation of
the accounts which they delivered, and solely in con
sequence of their belief of those accounts; and that they
�Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
13
also submitted, from the same motives, to new rules of
conduct.”
In a work which assumes so much the form of a
strict mathematical demonstration, we might have
expected the author to have given us a preliminary
definition of the sense in which he uses his terms;
we may, however, collect from what follows that by
“ Christian miracles ” he means those of the Gospel
history on which the main doctrines of the Christian
creed rest, and by “ original witnesses ” those who
were present when these miracles took place.
It is not quite clear what the author considers
satisfactory evidence.
Evidence may vary in its
satisfactoriness, according to the class of persons to
whom it is addressed, or the subject-matter to which
it relates. Evidence that will satisfy a village gossip
may be insufficient for a judge; and a common incident
requires less than an extraordinary phenomenon. If
we look at it in its kinds, there is, first, the evidence
of our own senses of sight and hearing, &c., which
some wise men have counselled us to be rather dis
trustful of in the case of very remarkable phenomena
untestified by general consent. Certainly the senses
are anything but infallible when uncontrolled by sound
reason. There is, secondly, the evidence of other
persons, which may be either Direct, as where the
witness testifies of himself that “ he saw it; ” or
Collateral or Indirect : and this may be in the first
degree, as where the witness says he heard a par
ticular person, A. B., say he saw it; or in the second
or lower degrees, as where the witness says he heard
A. B. say it was seen by somebody, or that he heard
that somebody had said it was a matter of general
rumour, and so on through descending grades of
indistinctness. Now, in a question like the one before
us, we must, of course, be dependent upon the
evidence of other persons, but I think that most
candid persons will confess that, in so serious a matter,
�14
Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
nothing less than the most absolutely direct testi
mony can be even moderately satisfactory. Let us
see how much the Advocate before us produces of this
description.
According to the terms of his statement, he has got
to make out, not only that he has witnesses who
can give this direct testimony, but that these same
original witnesses themselves underwent the dangers,
&c., in attestation of it. Even if our author could
make out his case, it will not easily appear to all
minds that his final conclusions would necessarily
follow. He means it to be concluded that, if he
can prove his propositions, the truth of orthodox
Christianity is established.
“ The religion,” he
says, “ must be true.” He does not define the words
“ Christianity” and “ Christian religion,” but it may
be concluded, I suppose, from his position and other
writings, that the sense in which he uses them is that
which is commonly called orthodox; though, indeed,
from certain expressions he lets fall, he seems
inclined, for the convenience of his argument, to leave
it in some places as vague as possible.
*
This is a
point, however, requiring to be alluded to, since the
loose sense in which the word Christianity is used,
and the Christian name claimed in many directions
at the present day may prevent some persons from
perceiving how much the strength of Paley’s argu
ment is disproportioned to his demand upon it, how
little calculated to support the ponderous edifice
reared upon it. If it had simply been a question that
at a certain period in past history a remarkable
person had appeared, who produced a marvellous
moral effect on his own age which has descended
to ours, however great the effect produced, or
however ardent the zeal of his followers, this would
* As, for instance,when he talks of “the substantial truth
of the Christian religion,” “the main story,” “the generals
truth of the religion,” &c.
�Remarks on Paley s Evidences.
15
not have been so much beyond what we observe
of the Providential Government of the world as to ,
demand more than fair historical evidence. Men
inspired with extraordinary genius, and with a force
and elevation of character far above their fellows,
have indisputably at certain times appeared in the
world to give a fresh impetus to the human race in
its onward course, and produce what seems almost
like a new creation. And, if there have been such
men, it is not only not improbable, but it is most
likely, that one of them will far transcend his fellows.
This, at any rate, is a matter of fair discussion, and
is maintainable by such testimony as is possible in
human affairs. But it is a very different matter that
our author undertakes to prove. When we are told
that a philanthropic carpenter, who was born of a
young Jewess 1800 years ago in an insignificant village
in the Roman Empire, was the Eternal God, the
Universal Source of All things, on whom the whole
realm of nature is dependent; or, to state the same
thing in orthodox language, was “Very God of
Very God, by whom all things were made ; ” that this
God, having excited the wrath of the rulers of his
country by declaiming against their hypocrisy and
corruption, was eventually hung as a malefactor and
perverter of the people,—but that after being dead
and buried, he nevertheless lived again in his body, and
therewith “ with flesh, bones, and all things appertain
ing to the perfection of man’s nature,”* ascended into
the heavens in the sight of his followers,—we have here
a story which makes the most tremendous demands
upon our belief, and which no man in the possession
of his senses could be expected to believe, in fact
which it would be utter unreason and madness to
believe, without evidence of the most incontrovertible
and absolutely overwhelming description. It may
* Third Article of Religion.
�16
Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
here be said that I am but reiterating, in a round
about fashion, Paley’s assertion that a revelation can
only be made by miracles. Of such a revelation this
is undoubtedly true, for it is itself the most stupendous
miracle that was ever proposed for human belief.
Its very vastness transcends all possibilities of human
evidence, and can only be accepted by some such
moral and intellectual spasm as Tertullian’s “ Credo,
quia incredibile.”* It is impossible for a less miracle
to substantiate a greater one: the belief in the most
improbable event in the world is not assisted by sur
rounding it with those minor improbabilities which
have always accompanied tales of theophany.
The Divine Creator, the ruler of infinite worlds,
becomes incarnate and walks the earth, and first
introduces his claims to his admirers by the trick of a
conjuror ! f The bathos is too terrible.
Let us now, however, examine what this supposed
satisfactory evidence is which our Advocate offers.
When we come to look into it we find that he him
self only professes to bring forward two witnesses
properly and distinctly original, viz., the first and
last evangelists; what their claims are to be con
sidered in this light we shall see presently. Our
author allows that the second and third evangelists
* Tertullian’s words are,—“ The Son of God died: it is
credible because it is absurd. When buried he rose again to
life : it is certain, because it is impossible.” De Came Christi,
sec. 5.
f Turning water into wine was a trick known to ancient
“Wizards ” of the South as well as “Wizards of the North.”
Some of the heathen deities also are asserted to have done the
same. Christian Saints performed a similar miracle on a more
extended scale. Epiphanius affirms that a fountain in Caria
and another in Arabia were turned into wine, and that he
himself had drunk of them. Another holy saint, Narcissus,
according to Eusebius, turned water into oil, and he declares
that some of the oil was preserved to his own time, about a
hundred years after the miracle. Epiphan. adv. Hser. L. 2,
cxxx. Euseb. Hist. Ecc. vi., 9.
�Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
17
composed their accounts from stories which they had
heard from others, although he implies that these
were persons of the first authority, being the apostles
Peter and Paul. But he gives no solid reason for
his assertion that St Peter had anything to do with
the gospel according to St Mark. The writer of that
gospel does not assert it on his own account, and the
whole supposition rests on the very vaguest tradition.
The connexion of St Paul with St Luke’s gospel
rests on as weak a basis. In fact, as the author of
that gospel prefaces his relation with a statement of
the sources of his information, it is not probable that
he would have omitted to mention his instruction by
so eminent a person as Paul if such a claim had been
correct. On the contrary, the author sets out with
the declaration that he intends to detail such things
as are “ surely believed among us, even as they
delivered them unto us (not me personally), which
from the beginning were eye-witnesses and ministers
of the word; ” that is to say, the rumours which were
commonly received among Christians, and which,
like all tales of similar kind, were asserted by their
propagators to have come from head-quarters, he
intended to set down for the edification of the
imaginary Theophilus.
*
This is the same kind of
allegation that Irenteus makes in support of his
stories, that he had heard them from somebody, who
had them from somebody else, who had seen some one
or other of the apostles. The introduction of Luke’s
gospel, in my mind, is a clear note of its having
been composed in the second or third stage of
Christian tradition. Let us concede, however, that
Paley’s hypothesis may be correct, that St Luke had
derived his information from St Paul, still the latter
cannot be metamorphosed into an original witness
by any ingenuity of orthodoxy. Paley in his zeal,
* Many think that Theophilus was a real person.' The
point is immaterial.
�18
Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
indeed, would make him almost a second founder of
the religion, and attaches immense importance to
him as an “independent witness.” Whether he is so
or not, he is certainly not an original witness, which
is what we are at present in search of. He certainly
allows his imagination pretty free play in developing
the Christian doctrines, for which he may have con
sidered he had obtained warrant in that third heaven
where he could not tell whether he was in or out of
his body, but for early Christian facts he must have
been dependent upon those ordinary hearsay reports
which, as St Luke says, were commonly believed
among them.
It is evident, then, that the authors of Mark’s and
Luke’s gospels were not original and direct witnesses
in the sense previously laid down. Let us see what
can be said for St Matthew.
The most direct
evidence we have concerning this gospel comes
to us from Eusebius, who wrote about three
hundred and twenty years after Christ. He states
that Papias, a writer of the first half of the
second century, said that Matthew “ wrote out
the sayings (of the Lord) in the Hebrew dialect.”
*
Eusebius also relates a tradition of one Pan top,mis,
“ who is said to have gone to the Indians ”f and found
a gospel of Matthew in Hebrew, which had been left
there by the apostle Bartholomew. There is other
early testimony to the fact that the authentic gospel
of Matthew was written in Hebrew. This work seems
to have been preserved for some time among the
Nazarenes and Ebionites, but eventually to have been
lost sight of. These last-named sects were persecuted
and denounced by other bodies of Christians as here
tics, chiefly on the ground of their denying the
miraculous conception of Jesus, and taking altogether
* I.e. Aramaic or Syro-Chaldee.
f Euseb. Hist. Ecc. v., 10.
�Remarks on Paley’s Evidences.
19
a more humanitarian view of his person. The fact
of their especially appealing to the authority of St
Matthew, and possessing the only gospel which had
any title to be considered authentic, raises a very
shrewd suspicion of what was the true original
character of Christianity. At any rate, it affords
conclusive evidence, if the fact were not otherwise
certain, that the gospel they possessed was not our
gospel of St Matthew, since the latter is very par
ticular on the fact of the miraculous birth, and puts
poor Joseph out of the question altogether. The only
document we possess bearing the name of Matthew
is written in Greek, and there is nothing worthy
of the name of evidence to determine who was its
author.
Competent modern critics have made it
clear that it could not have been written by an apostle
or an eye-witness: it is impossible to define its date
with exactness, the balance of evidence seems in
favour of the year 100 a.d. It would exceed the
limits of a letter to adduce proof of this here, for
which I must refer you to well-known works.
*
The only remaining work of a supposed original
witness is the gospel of St John. It may unhesi
tatingly be affirmed that the majority of exact and
competent critics, who have not a foregone purpose
to serve, agree that, whatever value this book may
have as a monument -of early Christian feeling, it
could not have come from the hand of the apostle
John. In thus speaking, I must be allowed to explain
that I cannot consider the work of M. Renan as an
exact criticism. His work is more like a pastoral
romance of the apostolic age thrown into a somewhat
dramatic form; his preference of the fourth, over the
* See the writers mentioned in Mackay’s ‘ Tubingen
School and its Antecedents,’ Part iii. (particularly Baur’s
‘Evangelien’), and Dr Davidson’s ‘Introduction to the New
Testament’ (ed. 1868), vol. i., p. 465, and seq. Note the
edition.
�20
Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
other gospels, is explained by the greater facility
with which it would lend itself to such a composition.
I am by no means insensible to the beauty and ability
of M. Renan’s production, but it is not criticism, if by
criticism is meant a due weighing of evidence and
historic probabilities. St John was a Galilean peasant,
and still appears in his old age to have retained so
much of his narrow-minded intolerance and fiery zeal
as to run from the bath that Cerinthus had occupied.
The author of the gospel is full of the spirit of
accommodation, has had his mind filled with the
lucubrations of Alexandrian Platonists, and uses the
words of Philo-Judaeus.
St John is said to have
been a supporter of the Oriental practice as to the
14th Nisan; the author of the gospel supports the
opposite view. Purther, from no Church writer before
160 A.D. can be produced a passage which shows any
clear knowledge of such a gospel, even inplaces where,
if such a document had existed, they must have referred
to it. Paley, indeed, asserts that Justin quotes John,
but this is an error; all that can be truly said is that
Justin makes use of some expressions sufficiently
resembling certain phrases of the fourth gospel as to
make it probable that he had come within the influence
of the same ideas which gave birth to it. But his
tone of thought is, in some respects, so similar to
that of the fourth evangelist, that he would un
doubtedly have made full use of him, and mentioned
him, if he had known of his work. Similar remarks
apply to the heretic Marcion, whose purpose of
*
spiritualising the doctrine of the synoptists the
gospel of St John would have admirably served, had
he been acquainted with it. No writer distinctly cites
the fourth gospel, and ascribes it to St John, before
Theophilus of Antioch (a.d. 176).
The internal evidence is also considered conclusive
* See Neander’s ‘Church History,’ vol. ii., p. 129, and seq. ;
and Bayle’s ‘ Dictionary,’ art. “ Marcionites.”
�Remarks on Raley's Evidences.
21
against the authorship of a native of Palestine at all,
especially from the peculiarity of certain mistakes as
to geography and ignorance of localities in Jerusalem,
and also from an absence of knowledge respecting
some national peculiarities.
*
Our Advocate finally, with great skill, labours
to produce a combined effect by massing his evi
dence in a single view. He endeavours to make
up for the defectiveness of each of his witnesses
taken by himself by rolling them into one; as if
out of four cripples you could make one stout soldier.
He insinuates that among four witnesses the truth
must lie somewhere : “ i/,” he says, “ only one of them
be genuine.” This “ i/” betrays the weakness of his
argument. Neither four nor forty doubtful witnesses
will make up one good one. It is familiar to lawyers
how easy it is to multiply a certain kind of witness,
how difficult to obtain that one thoroughly respectable
man of known character and unmistakable identity who
will come forward and swear he saw the fact himself..
Now this is what we ask; and put the evidence in asmany different points of view as you like, it is not
forthcoming. Four grey horses will never make one
white, trot them round one after another or altogether,,
in any kind of light, as often as it pleases you. In the
dark, indeed, a white may be represented by a grey
or any other colour.
Before concluding my remarks on our author’s
witnesses, I must refer to a rather remarkable fact
concerning the apostle Paul, which Paley himself
alludes to, without seeming to see the inference to
which it unavoidably leads.
Those epistles which
are by common consent attributed to St Paul are
undoubtedly the earliest authentic compositions ad-
* See, for full details, ‘An Attempt to Ascertain the Cha
racter of the Fourth Gospel,’ by J. J. Tayler; or, ‘ Introduc
tion to the New Testament,’ by S. Davidson, D.D., and the
works named in Mackay’s ‘ Tubingen School.’
�22
Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
miffed into the New Testament Canon : probably the
two latest are the gospel of St John and the second
epistle of Peter. Between the date of the earliest
epistles of Paul (commonly supposed to be those to
the Thessalonians) and these works, we have an
interval of about a century and a quarter (a.d. 55 to
170, approximate dates).
Now it is a singular circumstance that in the earlier
works we have but slight allusion to miracles, whereas
in the latter they crowd upon us, and at the same
time increase in their marvellous proportions. St
Paul, indeed, alludes to the resurrection, but of this
he does not pretend to have been an eye-witness. He
seems to ground his own belief on the fact of his
having seen the Lord in the Spirit in those visions or
revelations which he conceived himself to have of
heavenly things. But to other miracles throughout
his whole epistles, genuine and doubtful, there are
but very few references : Paley himself confessing that
there are but “ three indubitable references.”* He
accounts for this by imagining “that the miraculous
history was all along presupposed: ” does it not
equally, however, give room for the surmise, that the
farther we get away from genuine and authentic
documents the less sense of responsibility we find in
* Paley’s indubitable references are Gal. iii., 5 ; Rom. xv.,
18, 19 ; 2 Cor. xii., 12. In the first, St Paul is reproving his
converts for falling back from faith to the carnal works of the
law. He appeals to their own experience at their first conver
sion, and asks them whether he, then, that gave them the
spirit, and worked miracles in them did it by the works of
the law, or the hearing of faith ? “ Miracles in you,” not
“among you,” as in the authorised version, is here the true
rendering, and evidently has reference to those spiritual mira
cles of sudden conversion which the early Christians described
as the “Holy Ghost falling upon them.” (See Professor
Jowett’s Commentary on the Galatians in loc. and the refe
rences there.) The passages, Romans xv., 19, and 2 Cor. xii.,
12, are equally capable of being understood of “signs and
wonders” of grace, combined with those ecstatical “gifts of
�Remarks on Paley’s Evidences.
23
the writers, the more unbounded scope given to the
imagination and that love of the marvellous inherent
in all half-educated and enthusiastic minds ?
It must be conceded, I think, from what has been
said, that the testimony of Paley’s “ original wit
nesses ” cannot be produced, and that therefore his
evidence, according to what was before stated, not
being direct, is not satisfactory. But now, let it be
granted for argument’s sake that we had “ satis
factory evidence ” of the chief feature of the circum
stance stated, viz., that there was clear testimony to
the effect that certain persons, honestly professing
their belief in a remarkable story, went about preach
ing a new religion, and endured all sorts of suffering
rather than deny their profession; I do not think it
can be asserted that this fact will justify the author’s
conclusions. In the first place, he seems to have
taken it for granted that because they suffered such
things they must have really seen the miracles, for
that no one would have shown such endurance on any
other supposition. But this by no means follows:
indeed, the sequel of the story itself proves the
the Spirit” which seemed to have accompanied the sudden
conversions and the ardent religious exercises of the primitive
believers, as they do even those of modern believers who have
been worked up to a high degree of excitement. Such “gifts”
were what they called “ speaking with tongues,” “ gifts of
healing,” “interpretation of tongues,” “discerning of spirits,”
“castingout of devils;” the notion of some of which arose
from a defective diagnosis of certain diseases, others from an
ignorance of common mental and nervous phenomena, and the
remainder were the result of that high-wrought enthusiasm
which is the invariable accompaniment of all religious out
bursts in their early stages. It is a noteworthy fact that St
Paul does not specify, as within his own experience, even
when it would have been most serviceable to his argument to
have done so, a single miracle of the material and tangible sort,
so often referred to by the other writers of the New Testament.
Probably, if he had been acquainted with the true principles of
physiology, the word miracle would have dropped out of his
vocabulary. For similar manifestations in later times to
�24
Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
contrary. For, suppose the first preachers of the
religion witnessed the facts and therefore suffered, their
followers of the next or the subsequent generations
did not see them; but they still, many of them,
continued to endure persecutions with the greatest
constancy. They, at any rate, had only reports or
tradition of miracles to inspire their courage. The
story itself, therefore, shows that men may be worked
up to as high a pitch of belief, and as great a degree
of constancy and endurance, by stories related
about miracles as by those of which they have
ocular demonstration. That is to say, men’s feelings
and imaginations may be as strongly worked upon
through their ears as their eyes, and when enthusiasm
is once thoroughly roused it does not ask for evidence,
and laughs at suffering. Its own innate persuasion
is its evidence, and the answering glow of sym
pathising companions dispels every chill of doubt;
each burning believer incites and encourages the
other and adds to the general contagion; the calm
and hesitating are contemned and cast forth as coldhearted and cowardly, and thus no counteracting
principle is left to prevent the spread of the everincreasing flame. Paley covertly implies that men
those mentioned in the epistles, see ‘ The full and particular
Account of Miracles at the Tomb of the Abbe Paris,’ by
M. de Montgeron, Conseilleur au Parlement de Paris ; ‘ An
Account of the Irvingite Manifestations ’ (I have forgotten the
Publishers); Bishop Layington’s ‘Enthusiasm of Methodists
and Papists Compared,’ passim. Appendix to vol. i.; ‘ The
Miraculous Life and Conversions of Father Bennett, of Caufield, in Essex‘ The Life and Times of the Countess of
Huntingdon,’ vol. i., p. 129, 400; and Southey’s ‘Life of
Wesley.’ ‘ The Life of St Dominic,’ by the Abbe Lacordaire.
‘ Voyage a, Migne.’ ‘ Recueil de temoignages concernant l’Apparition Miraculeuse de la Croix a Migne.’ See Dean Stanley on
‘The Gift of Tongues,’ ‘Comment, on Corinth,’ p. 254, and
seq., and Coleridge on ‘ The Gift of Tongues,’ note to ‘ The
Confessions of an Enquiring Spirit,’ p. 231.
�Remarks on Paley’s Evidences.
25
must have been great fools who acted in this manner.
“Would men,” he asks, “in such circumstances”
(i. e., of suffering and persecution), “pretend to have
seen what they never saw ?” No one imagines they
“ pretended ” to have seen anything : the early
believers saw with their hearts and souls. Had the
Corinthians, for instance, seen anything, except in
those visions and revelations of the inner man which
ardent spirits have experienced in all ages ? “We
walk by faith, not by sight,” said St Paul to them,
“ though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet
henceforth know we him no more.” Neither the
Apostle nor his hearers had seen Christ after the
flesh, but the moral conviction arising from a grand
idea heartily embraced, the undying aspiration of the
human spirit towards the infinite, supplied the place
of bodily sight. The "Apostle’s frequent language
shows the kind of sight he looked for, and wished to
arouse in his followers. Because the unbelieving
Jews could not see what the Christians saw, he said
a “ veil was upon their heartsbut that when they
turned to the Lord, then the veil should be taken
away. “ The God of this world,” said he, “ hath
blinded the minds of them that believe not,” “ but
God that commanded the light to shine out of dark
ness hath shined in our hearts to give the light of the
knowledge of the glory of God,” &c. This is not the
language of one who was in the habit of appealing to
the visible works of a thaumaturgist, and points much
more clearly to the real power which first gave wings
to primitive Christianity than Paley’s notion of a
machinery of material signs and wonders. There is
no doubt that the spiritual visions of the first founders
and the higher minds of the religion became quickly
materialised in the conceptions of their followers,
and that the gathering mists of mythus soon conglo
merated themselves into solid cloudy forms; but to
suppose that those phantasmagoria were the sole or
�26
Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
main forces that so stirred the trodden-down believers
of the first age, and projected their faith across the
centuries, is to take no true measure of the human
spirit, and to vulgarise a majestic episode of the
human drama into the proportions of a tale of hobgoblinry. If we are to believe in a direct divine
agency and a providential re-awakening of the human
race at the dawn of Christianity, it seems to me much
more easy to trace it through the nebular hypotheses
of Strauss than through the wooden machinery and
string-and-wire theories of Paley.
The second assumption to which Paley’s conclusion
introduces us is that a religion founded on the story
of men who were prepared to suffer in the way de
scribed must be true. If this assumption were reliable,
how many conflicting religions in the world’s history
would have equal evidence of their verity ? The
toughness of character which induces men to endure
persecution or undergo toil in support of their opinions
is not peculiar to orthodox Christians, but has often
displayed itself among heretics, infidels, and pagans.
In Church history alone we have abundant evidence
of it; the most admirable trait in the zealous contests
which have so often taken place between rival sects
being the patience and courage with which they
endured the mutual cruelties which each by turn
inflicted on the other, and the no less marvellous
faith with which both regarded their conflict
ing nostrums.
Christians by this time ought
to know pretty well from their own annals how
persecution, instead of killing, gives life to re
ligious beliefs.
Men, somehow, seem to have
got the notion that it is a fresh evidence of
the value and divinity of an object when it is sub
jected to the fierce assaults of the powers of this
world. A race despised and hunted from the face
of the earth naturally looks to the skies for a
deliverer, and thus everything in the nature of
�Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
*7
religion becomes the centre of all its hopes, and
re-consecrated by every fresh effort and sorrow..
The principle of resistance in human nature first
leads a man to maintain his liberty of thought,
. and then that for which he has suffered becomes
every day more sacred to him.
Christians have
had experience of this over and over again in their
own history. They have attempted themselves to
crush out opinions by measures little short of absolute
extermination. But they have miserably failed. The
growth which seemed stifled has sprung up again,
and often has spread all the more luxuriantly. Let
this teach them how far the endurance of persecution
can be accepted as evidence of the truth or value of
religious beliefs.
The persecution of the Christians by the Roman
authorities, however, was very far from being of such
an exterminating character, though our Advocate, as
in duty bound, endeavours to make the most of it,
and the ecclesiastical historians and apologists have
drawn it in dark colours. But the stories themselves
show frequently that the ruling classes were singu
larly forbearing, and sometimes protected the Chris
tians from the Jews, or from their mutual violence
to one another. Such things as shipwrecks and occa
sional shortness of provisions cannot be considered as
important elements of the question, for a man must
expect to meet his share of the ordinary accidents of
travel whether he sets out to propagate a faith or
puff a commercial firm. With respect to such inter
ludes of fierce and active persecution as really did
take place, we have positive evidence that they were
extremely partial and intermittent. Sometimes they
were brought on by the quarrels oi the Christians
themselves attracting notice; sometimes they were even
sought for by zealots, who thought a crown of mar
tyrdom a sure passport to both heavenly and earthly
glory. We find St Cyprian, in the middle of the
�28
Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
third century, even lamenting that the lack of per
*
secution had impaired the faith and morals of the
Christians. “As a long-f continuance of peace and
security,”says he, “had relaxed the vigour of that
holy discipline which was delivered to us from above,
it grew necessary to awaken our sluggish faith, and
rouse up our dormant principles by some smart
dispensation of Providence.He then proceeds
to enumerate the corruptions that had grown up
during the long period of ease. It has often been
shown that, of all things in the world, nothing is
more calculated to stimulate and diffuse a religious
belief than persecution which is occasional and spo
radic ; not enough to efface and eradicate, it is just
enough to create a few heroes and examples, to stir
the compassion of some, and excite the admiration and
emulation of others. It has passed into a common
place that persecution to be in the least effective must
be sweeping and “ thorough.” But in spite of all
that has been said, men do not yet seem to have hit
upon the method of making it sufficiently “ thorough ”
to accomplish its object in the extermination of a reli
gious belief; so that persecutors, now, like the devil,
have
“ Grown wiser than of yore,
And tempt by making rich, not making poor.”
They have found that the best mode of relaxing the
zeal of objectionable religionists is not to proscribe
but to endow them.
Our Advocate endeavours to back up his case by
putting the converse of his first proposition, which
may be in brief stated thus : that there is not satis
factory evidence that other believers in a miraculous
story have endured similar sufferings sooner than
* a.d. 251.
t That is to say, about forty years.
J See St Cyprian’s works, translation by Marshall, Fol. Ed.,
�Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
29
relinquish it. I have purposely omitted his reitera
tion of the term “ original witnesses,” having already
shown that there is no evidence of the testimony of
such persons, and, if there were, the majority of those
who carried on the propagation of the religion and
endured the consequent sufferings were not original
witnesses, but persons who had accepted certain
stories on hearsay. From what has already been
stated, it must be apparent there is no foundation
whatever for Paley’s statement; but as additional
evidence of its incorrectness, let me ask whether any
people have ever endured such severity of persecution
and for so long a period as the Jews ? They believe
in the miraculous origin of their religion, the thun
ders of Sinai, the fire of Elias, the inspiration of their
prophets, the angel of the Maccabees; they have
maintained this faith in every quarter of the known
world; they have endured an amount and a per
sistency of persecution and proscription absolutely
unparalleled, not merely intermitting through a
couple of hundred years, but steadily continued
through long centuries. Verily, if our test of truth
be the devotion of its followers, here is the people
*
who challenge our comparison and are entitled to our
suffrage! If from Western we turn our eyes to
Eastern Asia, where again will you find in past time
a people more devoted or more successful than the
followers of Buddha F From the time when they were
persecuted, driven out, and actually nigh exterminated
on the plains of India, they went abroad preaching
their faith by land and sea, carried it over a world
more extensive, and subdued before it empires
more ancientf than yet bow before the banners of
* See the account of the courageous martyrdom of Eleazar,
2 Maccab. vi.
f The most ancient races that embraced Christianity fell away
to Mahometanism. The Church has been chiefly recruited from
the nations of modern Europe and their descendants.
�30
Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
the cross. It is true this religion has become much
diversified in the various countries to which it has
found its way; but not more so than Christianity.
It is true also that it has corrupted itself by many
superstitions; but has not Christianity done the
same? Some travellers have informed us that, if
you go into a Greek, a Roman, or a Buddhist church,
you could hardly tell the difference between them.
The similarity of many of their miracles, their doc
trines, their religious ideas, and their practices, will
easily appear to anyone who will be at the pains to
study them. But we need not carry our view so far
off nor to such ancient times to find how easily simple
people may be induced to undergo labours and suffer
ings in support of what they conceive to be a mira
culous revelation. We need not, in fact, go much
further than our own doors. Read the account of
how death was braved and the terrible hardships
“ voluntarily undergone ” when, their leader having
been slain, the Mormon apostles bid their followers
relinquish their homes at Nauvoo, and seek a pro
mised land across the desert and the Rocky Moun
tains ; then listen to the language of some of
the poor emigrants and their teachers leaving our
ports for what they fondly look to as a “ New Jeru
salem,” a “ Chosen Zion,” and you will see that a
faith like in kind to that of the ancient believers
has
not altogether died out of the world.
You may say all this is but a poor parody on
Christianity.
That is true; but that does not
prevent it from being a convincing illustration of
how easily a certain class of minds may be con
vinced of a miraculous revelation, and how very
slight evidence of its truth results from the fact of
their undergoing suffering in consequence of such
conviction.
I know our author attempts to consolidate his
position by drawing a distinction between “other
�Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
31
miracles, and miracles in their nature as certain as
those of the Christians ; ” so as to be able when other
instances are adduced of persons suffering for a
miraculous faith, to elude his opponent by alleging
“ your miracles are not of my sort, and therefore do
not invalidate my argument.” But this is a mere
artifice founded on a gratuitous assumption. Whether
they are in their nature certain, depends like the rest
of the question upon testimony. What the intrinsic
difference is between the asserted Christian miracles,
and others, no one is able to say. Whether anything
corresponding to such events ever took place or no,
is the point at issue. As I have already said, and
must again reiterate, we have no account of an actual
original eye-witness, and therefore can only compare
such narratives as we have with similar stories heathen
and patristic. And in so comparing we must remem
ber that we look at the Christian miracles with an
educated eye and with the reverential associations in
which we have been indoctrinated from our earliest
days, whereas the strangeness of the style in accounts
to which we have not been accustomed at first
shocks us; but if we saw them for the first
time side by side in a newly discovered book, it
would be a different matter.
A philosopher
from another planet, unacquainted with both, might
find it difficult to know to which to award the
palm for poetic feeling and moral beauty. Each
collection would seem to him to have its grander
features, the cross of the dying God would stand over
against the rock of the benevolent and long-enduring
Titan, the incarnation of Buddha parallels the incar
nation of the Saviour; while both Jesus and Osiris
rise triumphant from the tomb. On the other hand,
on either part, he would find instances of a lower type,
and would have no difficulty in finding parallels for
such grotesque or gratuitously mythical examples as
�32
Remarks on Raley's Evidences.
the possessed swine, the tribute-paying fish, the
*
angel who troubled the pool of Bethesda,f or the
numerous dead who rose out of their graves after the
crucifixion.
By the distinctions he draws, our author means to
allege that there is a perfectly unique combination in
Christianity between the sufferings and the miracles,
which exists in no other instance. But this is a mere
arbitrary method of stating the case, which has no
foundation in fact. The early Christians were not
ready to undergo martyrdom on account of some
theory as to certain miracles, but, like votaries of
other faiths, they had embraced a story miraculous
on the whole, which involved principles that stirred
all the enthusiasm of their nature. They, the poor,
the trodden down of this world, rich in faith, were
the elect favourites of heaven,—their Lord was soon
to come again, when the wrong should be righted, the
lowly exalted, and the proud abased, this impure and
sinful world should be consumed by fire, while the
* Archbishop Trench makes the fish pay tithe instead of
tribute, and evolves a wonderful amount of mystery out of
the fact. He does not seem to think it likely a miracle would
have been wrought to discharge a mere worldly tax. While
referring to this writer I must take leave to protest against the
insolent intolerance and spiritual pride of many of his remarks.
He seems to consider that differing from his opinions is a con
clusive proof of moral obliquity. He not only accuses his
opponents of want of honesty, as he does poor Dr Paulus, but
of hate, malice, and other bad passions. It is futile, however,
to complain of one more instance of the uneven “balance of
the Sanctuary; ” it will be fully justified in the eyes of the
orthodox. When they use rude language, and reiterate their
well-worn jokes at the expense of free-thinkers, it is to be
regarded as holy zeal and pious indignation; when their
opponents retaliate, it is “ coarse ribaldry,” “ stark blas
phemy,” and so forth. See Trench on The Miracles, Pre
liminary Essay, and elsewhere. Passim.
t See Hammond’s curious attempt to rationalise this account.
Comment in loc.
�Remarks on Paley s Evidences.
33
faithful should reign triumphant in the New
Jerusalem. This prospect of a certain and shortly to
be fulfilled future was the motive power that first
set the ball rolling, and similar enthusiastic beliefs
have over and over again carried crowds across
*
continents.
There was nothing astonishing in their
shaping their beliefs in the forms of a miraculous
story; the astonishment would have been had it been
otherwise, since the whole atmosphere of the time
was miraculous; the mass of the people connected
religions and miracles together as a matter of course,
and nobody thought of questioning such things but a
few critics and philosophers. When details, perhaps,
at length come to be questioned, there is never a
lack in these cases of “ credible witnesses ” to state
what in fact they honestly believe, and if their belief
is bound up with enthusiastic religious hopes they
will suffer and die for it. Read the ardent assevera
tions of some of the early fathers and some modern
divines; they were not original witnesses ; these last
most certainly had no ground of their belief
beyond the fact that they had heard it stated again
and again; but it was bound up with their dearest
hopes and all the enthusiasm of their natures,
and, I have no doubt, that whether ancient or
modern, many of them if it had come to the pinch
would have died for it too.
Thus much may suffice to show the inconclusiveness
of our author’s general propositions- Much more
might be said on many of the details of the latter
part of his work, both as to his inadequate manner of
* See the account of the “Brethren of the Cross,” “The
Flagellants,” and the Children’s Crusade in the Middle Ages.
The superstition of the approaching end of the world has
cropped up over and over again. See Milman’s Hist. Lat.
Christianity, iv. 396; do. Hist. Jews, iii. 222. Neander’s
Church Hist. ix. 595. Kingston’s Life of Emp. Frederick II.,
• c. xv. 260. Robertson’s Charles V. “Proofs and Illustra
tions,” No. 13.
�34
Remarks on Paley s Evidences.
stating the objections of opponents, and his ex parte
representation of conflicting facts. I will conclude,
however, after the manner of our author himself, by
putting a simple case. Let it be remembered, as I
have already shown, that in the earliest writings of
the New Testament, and those only which can be
supposed to be genuine and authentic, the references
to miracles are extremely slight, and such as are quite
capable of being explained by the same theory which
Paley employs to discredit those of the Abbe Paris.
Let it also be remembered that the later the date of
the productions, the more does the miraculous element
predominate, and that none of the books in which it
predominates can be proved to be earlier than the year
110 a.d., their various probable dates ranging from
about 120 to 160, during which period the floating
traditions connected with the religion were “ co-acervating ” and developing, by mutual accretion, until
they were worked up into the form in which the
fathers of the latter part of the second and third
centuries have handed them down to us.
These
fathers, therefore, are the real persons who have
guaranteed the stones to us. Now, bearing these
things in mind, let us suppose that a wondrous
tale were brought, to us from the other side of
the Atlantic, which on the face of it surpassed
the bounds of probability. If, however, it were
brought to us by several men, not merely of ££ pro
bity and good sense,” but of calm judicial minds, ac
customed to weigh evidence, historical and scientific,
who all and each declared they had witnessed the inci
dents themselves, and who had no personal feelings,
affections, or aspirations enlisted in the matter, we
might think it at any rate worthy of our candid exami
nation, and we might, under certain circumstances,
feel ourselves bound to accept their statements as
facts even if we could not explain them. If, on the
other hand, the tale was conveyed to us by persons
�Remarks on Paley s Evidences.
35
of extremely excitable and enthusiastic dispositions
who had given many previous proofs of their extra
ordinary credulity, and who came from a district
greatly addicted to the marvellous, and celebrated
for the credulous and uncritical character of the
natives ; if, moreover, they could not truly affirm that
they were personal eyewitnesses, and the tale was
bound up with many of their strongest feelings and
aspirations, and at the same time added largely
to their personal influence and importance, without
attributing any sinister motives to them, we
should be strongly inclined to say, the story is
so improbable in itself that, under any circum
stances, we should have found it extremely difficult
of belief, but its credibility is altogether out of
the question when we consider the character of the
narrators.
Now these remarks exactly apply to the circum
stances of the case before us. The miraculous Chris
tian story took form in a remarkably and increasingly
credulous age, it received nourishment from such
circumstances as were peculiarly suited to foster it,
and it is presented to us by men who have given
repeated proofs of their want of judgment and critical
discrimination, their readiness to embrace anything
that fell in with their preconceptions, and their en
thusiastic and uncontrollable feelings. This is only
a fair description of the ecclesiastical fathers of the
end of the second, the third, and the fourth centuries,
who are. our only vouchers for the miraculous records.
Here is not the place for multiplying illustrations of
this assertion. I can only say if any one doubts the
substantial truth of my allegation let him read the
fathers for himself!
This uninviting task is now facilitated by the fact
that most of them are translated, so that a sufficient
knowledge of their contents may be obtained without
having to struggle through the contorted Latin and
�36
Remarks on Paley’s Evidences.
bad Greek for -which some of them are distinguished.
I subjoin a few instances of their credulity and want
of judgment.
To draw, then, this somewhat long epistle to a
close, I submit to your candid consideration whether
a work, which grounds on ; so unsatisfactory a
basis the evidences of Christianity, which puts the
material machinery and the thaumaturgic element of
its history into so much greater prominence than the
moral (the really strong point of the Christian religion),
and which, in its critical statements, is so far below
the information and requirements of the present day,
is such a work as should occupy a place on the list of
class-books of this great University. My object in
this letter is to express a hope that members of this
University may, each as far as lies in his power, exert
their influence to obtain its removal from such a
position.
I am, Gentlemen,
Your obedient Servant,
An Old Graduate.
�Remarks on Paley’s Evidences.
37
NOTES.
Origen, for instance, informs us that in his time it was a
common thing to cure innumerable evils and drive out devils
from men and beasts by adjurations and exorcisms (Conts.
Cels. L. vii. p. 374).
Justin Martyr not only affirms the old fable about the
Septuagint translators, but declares that he had himself seen.
at Alexandria the remains of the cells in which they were shut
up. (Cohort, ad Graec. p. 14.) The same Father tells us that
the Christians often drove out devils after other enchanters
had tried and failed (Apol. ii. 116).
Minutius Felix declares that Saturn, Serapis, and Jupiter,
when adjured by the Christians, confess themselves to be
demons (Octav.).
Several Fathers have fabulous tales of angels begetting
demons on the bodies of women, and indulging in sensual
enormities with women and boys.
Lactantius and the author of the Clement. Recogn. allege,
as proof of the immortality of the soul, that any magician
could call up the souls of the dead and make them foretell
future events, and say that Simon Magus wrought his miracles
by means of the soul of a boy who had been put to death for
the purpose (Fact. Div. Inst. L. vii., c. 13 ; Clem. Rec. L. ii.,
c. 13).
Irenaeus declares that the Dead were frequently raised in his
time by the prayers of the Church, and afterwards lived many
years among them (adv. Haeres. L. ii., c. 57).
Papias alleged the same according to Eusebius (Hist. Ecc.
iii. 39).
St Augustin, that famous Father, goes beyond this, and
relates that several persons were brought back to life by means
of the reliques of St Stephen (De Civ. Dei. L. xxii., c. viii.,
§ 18-21).
St Athanasius informs us that one day, Anthony, the Monk,
going to his door was accosted by a tall meagre person who,
being asked his name, answered that he was Satan. He adds
a large number of monstrous stories, declaring that he kneio
them to be true (Athan., Life of St Anthony).
Gregory, of Nyssa, has a wonderful story of an appearance
of the Virgin Mary and St John.
But, perhaps, the most astounding of all is a story of St
Augustin’s, which he declares he had from credible witnesses,,
to the effect that the ground where St John was buried heaved
�38
Remarks on Paley's Evidences.
up and down regularly according to the motion of his bodycaused by his breathing. This they supposed a fulfilment of
the promise that St John should not die (Augustin in loc., Joh.
xxi. 23).
These are but a few specimens of the marvels testified to by
some of the early Fathers. The other Fathers, not mentioned,
share their superstition and credulity. [I particularly recom
mend to the notice of those who have not read it, ‘An Inquiry
into the Miraculous Powers supposed to have subsisted in the
Christian Church,’ &c, (by Dr Conyers Middleton, formerly
Fellow of Trim, Librarian of this University, and Woodwardian Professor), from which work the above examples are
taken.] The professed historians of the Early Church were
very little better. Refer to Socrat, B. vii., c. 4. Sozomen,
B. ii., c. 1, c. 3, c. 7; B. iii., c. 14 ; B. iv., c. 3, and many other
places. Theodoret is full of superstitious fables. See par
ticularly B. I., c. 7, c. 14, 18, 23, 24 ; B. iv., c. 21, and, in fact,
passim.
�
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 & 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
Remarks on Paley's evidences.
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 38 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: "A letter to the younger members (graduates and undergraduates) of the University of Cambridge by an Old Graduate." Includes bibliographical references. From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. The British Library catalogues this article as an appendix to Paley's View of the Evidences of Christianity.
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
1873
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT117
Subject
The topic of the resource
Theology
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
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 (Remarks on Paley's evidences.), 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
William Paley
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/6259e6a37be1ba17f47cf3de61e04718.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=GDg7oEA9l3BVAvwjIKGcHWYP3jFNdnaZocC6o077wvD863zALHBkryRE5zgilLLYr3WkWioCEn6fT7SOZ0P2cCLWbobxLqU4MDxM7L%7ECMrmcqitKWsCWKZgW3j8sH8CtGBZv5dmVPEPJdqdv%7EI8oqdPuSg2ND-jmWE0xTjQqI%7ETGLt2pbq40F5P8gJsf8O-yedocLSkjjP5UsgTeXxe2%7EwSELc9TRy3ZAT04Jh3VOBTiHWYJ2wAZyTvPkEBJXpoB--AD%7E1%7EFII68s95ji6J%7EwGGqEQzBOklEezQuFmF1zU7UCRQJqzf3oOsYc00lUub0qU0RCuw%7E-tnrRNzRf%7EO1vQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
4d60279bb388b2a71cd6a9f993f8e2d5
PDF Text
Text
THE
QUESTION OF METHOD
’AS affecting
RELIGIOUS THOU.GHT.
BY
A CLERGYMAN
of the
CHURCH
of
ENGLAND.
OiiK alcrxpbv
3i?ra ret
\eyeiv ;
Owe, et rb trcodrivai ye rb tyevtios ipepei.
To speak untruly—dost not think it shame ?
Not when we fare the better for the same.
Sophocles Philoctetes.
f
PUBLISHED BY 'THOMAS SCOTT,
NO. II THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD, UPPER NORWOOD,
LONDON, S.E. '
1873.
Price Threepence.
��THE QUESTION OF METHOD
AS AFFECTING
RELIGIOUS THOUGHT.
HENCE comes the possibility of that strange
fact,—strange indeed, yet in the present day
by no means unfrequent,—that men having like
opportunities and abilities come to utterly diverse
conclusions on religious subjects? You may note,
say for example, two brothers, each possessed of un
usual talents, starting from the same early training,
each animated by a pure zeal for truth, one of whom,
through whatever wanderings, holds fast at least by
the great doctrines of Christianity, while the other
leaves all orthodox belief far behind him. For—
wonder at the fact if you will—we are constrained
to admit that men do doubt and disbelieve every
Christian dogma, who, whatever judgment may here
after be passed upon them, live, so far as human eye
can see, not less pure or upright lives than the most
strenuous upholders of the faith. How can these
things be ? How can two men, both sane and
sound, affirm of the same fountain, the one that its
waters are sweet, the other that they are bitter ?
Christianity is true or it is false. That is to say,
those occurrences on which all orthodox bodies
■ found their religion have historically happened
or they have not. The issue is a simple one, and one
W
�4
The Question of Method
might suppose that honest men who wished for
nothing but the truth would have little difficulty in
arriving at a similar conclusion one way or other.
Yet we find that men apparently possessed of honesty,
ability and learning, hold contrary opinions on the
subject. The object of the present paper is to point
out the broad beaten road which leads to orthodoxy,
and also the narrow thorny path which ends in un
belief.
Now if in studying the same subject inquirers
arrive at opposite conclusions, either they must start
from different premises, or they must adopt a different
method of inquiry. Obviously, starting from different
premises is a fruitful source of difference in religious
as in other matters. Thus in disputes between a
Christian and an unbeliever the former will often
base his arguments upon biblical texts, forgetting that
the other will by no means accept them as conclusive.
The one starts from the premiss that the Bible affords
an infallible source of information, the truth of which
the other denies. Such an argument often ends in
mere bitterness, as the parties do not see that there is
no common ground between them on which the argu
ment may rest. Or if they consent to go deeper, and
discuss the proposition which to one side formed
the premiss of the previous argument, yet again they
fail to find common ground, and therefore to appear
reasonable to each other. Now the source of the
difference must surely be this, that they approach the
subject in a different spirit: each adopts a different
method of inquiry. I believe the most common
method used by the orthodox party is that of assuming
some one point,—as the authority of the Church, or
of the Bible,—and then arguing from that. This
method, however, labours under the disadvantage
mentioned above. However satisfactory it may be
to the individual who accepts it, it cannot enable him
to convince unbelievers. Such a method may even to
�as Affecting Religious Thought.
5
some extent be open to the charge brought against it
by uncivil persons of being a petitio principii.
To those who endeavour to go to the root of the
Blatter, there are, as far as I can see, but two methods
which they can use as instruments of thought, between
which they must take their choice. I shall call these
the emotional method and the critical method.
These may be briefly characterised as follows :
The former method accepts an explanation simply
as satisfactory to the mind: it does not seek to compars or test further: it rests on intimate conviction.
The critical method, on the contrary, mistrusts every
hypothesis until verified ; if an explanation seem pro
bable in itself, it is not allowed to rest there: it is
brought face to face with other facts and theories, and
questioned as to its agreement with them; it is, in
short, tested in every conceivable way, and not
accepted unless it can endure the trial. The critical
method is based on verification.
I shall now endeavour to show that while the latter
method has its value—perhaps is the only one of any
value—in scientific inquiries, the emotional method
alone can lead to orthodox results in religious inves
tigations.
In ancient times the critical method was almost or
quite unknown. Whatever men wished to explain,
from the genesis of the earth and the human race
to the derivation of a word, was explained out of
hand, and evolved with child-like confidence out of
the mind of the explainer. When Pindar told of the
birth of Ajax (Aias), he derived the name from
aleros (aietos) an eagle. It was enough for him that
the first two letters corresponded in each word, and
that the explanation seemed to him a probable one.
When Eve bare her first-born she called his name
Cain, and said I have gotten (from the verb hanah,
to get) a man. There was a sufficient resemblance
between Kain and kanah ; although, according to the
�6
The Question of Method
critical method, Cain would seem to have been a
smith (pp) by name, although not in trade, and
Cain’s sons were smiths. These two examples will
suffice to show the principle on which names were
anciently derived. But a similar method was em
ployed in other and more important matters. In
order to illustrate this, perhaps the reader will allow
me to tell him a story out of Philo. An animal is
placed on the list of those allowed to be eaten in
Levit. xi. 22, which our translators, for some myste
rious reason, call “ beetle,” and which the Septuagint
version as unaccountably renders ophiomachus, ser
pent-fighter. Now Philo had already proved to his
satisfaction that the Serpent which tempted Eve was
pleasure. Therefore the reason why this ophioma
chus was recommended for the Jewish table was
plain. “For,” says he, “this ophiomachus seems to
me to be nothing else than temperance symbolically,
which wages endless war against intemperance and
pleasure.” I was charmed when I read this passage,
for nothing could more evidently set forth the advan
tages of the emotional method. See how beautifully
the old worthy works it out! The otpiopaxys, which
he lit on in his Septuagint, fitted into the theory he
was constructing, just like a long-sought, queer-cor
nered bit in a child’s puzzle-map. Then what “ uses,”
what edification, proceed from this interpretation ?
What earthly meaning could there be in bidding the
Hebrews eat a particular sort of locust ? But when
you understand how the locust represents asceticism,
what light and interest is shed on the Mosaic com
mand I And to think that Philo and we should have
lost all this had he only been cursed with the very
smallest tincture of the critical method ! Had he
had any notion of verifying his facts, he would have
compared the Septuagint with the Hebrew version,
and thus have found that the name of the creature in
the original language has nothing to do with ser-
�as Affecting Religious thought,
7
penis, but means simply a leap er (chargol), and so
his theory would have fallen to pieces at once. For
tunately he was secure in the strength of his method ;
the inward satisfaction which he felt was ample proof
of the correctness of his position ; and as the Septuagint version suited him, why should he go further to
seek another which might not suit so well ? It would
be easy to multiply instances of the use of the emo
tional method from the writings of authors of all
ages ; but I forbear to quote further from uninspired
writers. To do so would seem to be the more unne
cessary, inasmuch as this method, and no other, was
employed by the writers of the Books contained in
the New Testament.
If this be shown, it will be obvious that those who
wish to hold to the faith which those holy men pro
mulgated must walk in their steps and use their
method. If we attempt to use the critical method in
the exegesis of the Bible, we commence by placing
ourselves at a point of view utterly different from
that at which its authors contemplated their subject;
and shall therefore understand it in a sense alien
from theirs. It is by so doing that so many writers
and others, whose learning and honesty of purpose
are beyond all question, have changed that which
Christians hold to be the Word of God into a collec
tion of more or less curious myths. When the New
Testament writers found a passage of the Hebrew
Scriptures which seemed to them to bear upon the
life of Christ, they assumed at once that it was in its
origin prophetic of him. For example, Matthew re
members the words of Hosea, “ Out of Egypt have
I called my Son.” The critical inquirer remembers
that the prophet was alluding to the Exodus of
Israel. To the Evangelist it is sufficient that these
words, taken apart from their context, serve to illus
trate his narrative. So little did the Evangelists and
Apostles care for such accuracy as is required by the
�8
The Question of Method
critical method, that their quotations from the older
Scriptures are often distortions of the words and
meaning of the originals, at least as these latter have
come down to us. I am not now writing a treatise
on prophecy, and it will be sufficient to request the
reader who may doubt my assertion to compare the
quotations in the New Testament with the prophecies
themselves ; he will often be able to detect the distor
tion, even if he has no knowledge of the original lan
guages. I may observe here that what has been said
holds true of the doctrine of Types. What critical
inquirer could ever believe that the narratives of the
brazen serpent, of David, Jonah, &c., have any refer
ence to Christ ? These stories are complete in them
selves as they stand in the Old Testament, and do not
require any further fulfilment. He alone who proceeds
always on the emotional method can perceive that the
fact that an older narrative may profitably be em
ployed to illustrate the life of Christ, justifies the
assumption that it was intended to do so. So im
pressed, however, were the Apostolic writers with
the truth of this doctrine, that they seemed to have
considered the Hebrew Scriptures as of little impor
tance for any other purpose. Thus Paul cares only
for the story of Isaac and Ishmael in so far as they
typify the Christian and Jewish churches, and for
that of the passage of the Red Sea as exemplifying
the doctrine of Baptism. When he reads the words,
“To Abraham and his seed were the promises made,”
he does not understand “ seed ” to refer to the de
scendants of the patriarch, as any critical student
would, but he insists upon applying it to Christ.
Indeed Paul is perhaps the most consistent of all the
New Testament writers in his exclusion of the critical
spirit. So much so, that he rests entirely on his
emotional convictions. He is far indeed from com
paring critically the accounts of the Resurrection.
He will not confer with flesh and blood. He rejects
�as Affecting Religious ’Thought.
9
all knowledge of Christ “ after the flesh his inner
belief, apart from all comparison with the convictions
of others, or verification from external facts, is suffi
cient for him.
It is impossible within the limits of the present
paper to do more than illustrate the position here
taken up by a few examples. But I feel no doubt
that any candid person who will consider those here
brought forward, and himself search the Scriptures
for others, will be convinced that the writers of the
books composing our Bible had not the very slightest
idea of the critical method, and would, could they
have understood it, have condemned it as unsuited to
their purposes. If this be so, let those who would
continue to think as the evangelists and prophets
thought, beware how they tamper with a method so
alien from their spirit.
At the risk of being tedious I must adduce another
example of the danger of deserting the emotional
method. Many such suggest themselves ; indeed the
adoption of the opposite method breaks up the Bible
in all directions, and leaves, in place of one homoge
neous infallible book, a collection of tales, most of
them of little historical value. I cannot, however, go
into this subject any further at present. The one
instance which follows may be sufficient to serve as a
caution to those who wish to stand in the paths of
orthodoxy in these slippery days.
The apparent contradictions in the Gospel narra
tives have driven our orthodox commentators into
great straits, except when they have got over a diffi
culty by omitting to notice it. They would, however,
find no difficulty at all if they had sufficient faith in
the emotional method, and forebore the attempt to
wield the weapons of their adversaries.
They need not fear lest they should fail to be secure
against doubts and disputations if they will be care
ful to avoid the critical method. When the critical
�io
The Question of Method
inquirer compares the different narratives of the life
of Christ, he finds, among other points of a similar
nature, that Jesus is said to have ascended to heaven
both from Bethany and also from a mountain in Galilee.
According to Matthew,—who is so far confirmed by
the narrative which closes the second Gospel as we
have it,—the disciples met the risen Christ by ap-.
pointment in Galilee. There Mark further informs
us that the Ascension took place, they having first
been charged to go at once (as it appears) and
teach all nations. In Luke, on the contrary, the
Eleven do not quit the immediate neighbourhood of
Jerusalem; nay, they are expressly charged not to do
so until they should be “ endued with power from on
high.” This account agrees with that given in Acts,
while John does not mention the Ascension at all.
Here we see plainly the effect of the comparing or
critical method. To one who adopts it, it seems im
possible that the disciples could both have remained
at Jerusalem for a considerable time, and also during
part of that very time have been in Galilee ; nor less
so that one and the same Ascension should have
taken place at Bethany and on a far distant moun
tain. The emotionalist, on the other hand, feels no
difficulty. To compare the different and differing
accounts in a critical spirit would be foreign to his
nature. Each several account satisfies and edifies
him, and he cares for nothing more. Should such an
one be pressed to the point by an unbeliever, he might
reply that the sojourn of the disciples at Jerusalem is
to be understood in a spiritual sense. They were
commanded to tarry at Jerusalem, that is, not to
break with the Jews and Jewish customs, until the
descent of the Holy Ghost. Eor the double site
assigned to the Ascension I have indeed no explana
tion to suggest; yet I am confident that the holy
ingenuity of a second Philo—who would care nothing
for historic truth and everything for spiritual edifica-
�as Affecting Religious 'Thought.
11
cation—would explain this also as triumphantly as
the first turned the leaping locust into a slayer of
allegorical serpents.
If the reader has done me the honour to follow my
arguments up to this point, it is ten chances to one
that he feels somewhat disposed to quarrel with my
position.
It is likely enough that he will ask whether the
critical method be not that by which all scientific
discoveries have been made, and all our knowledge of
historic truth obtained ; whether, if that be so, it be
not the right method to use in that inquiry which is
of all others most important; and whether in fact
many eminent writers on religious subjects have not
used that method and no other. To the last question
I reply, that I am not acquainted with the works of
any theologian who has successfully used the critical
method and at the same time kept within the confines
of orthodoxy; nor can I conceive it possible that
there should be such. There are, indeed, orthodox
writers who use with more or less success the critical
method throughout the bulk of their work; but, so
far as I know, they always start with one or more
assumptions which are arrived at by the emotional,
not the critical method. They assume the authority
of the Bible or of the Church ; the necessity of a
Divine revelation, and of its miraculous character;
the authenticity of the sacred writings on which they
rely; and other such points. Having made these
assumptions, or some of them, they may proceed to
deduce their conclusions from them by the critical
method. But the propositions on which their whole
subsequent reasoning is based are assumed, not as
critically demonstrated, but as appearing natural and
necessary to the mind of the writer. The super
structure may be critical, but the foundation is
emotional; and it is from the latter, not the former,
that the entire work must take its distinguishino1
character.
°
�12
The Question of Method
With regard to the other question, viz., whether
the critical method be not the better, and therefore
the right one to employ, it should be considered that
either method is an instrument for aiding us to attain
certain ends. We must choose the one best fitted for
our purpose. The critical method is an admirable
instrument for enabling us to ascertain truth of fact.
If we wish to acquaint ourselves with the probability
of a reported occurrence having really taken place or
otherwise, with no care whether we are led to the
affirmative or the negative conclusion, the critical
method will serve our turn. But—I am addressing
myself to those who are predetermined to preserve
their orthodox faith—is this desired ? The critical
method is very exacting. If we adopt it we must
take nothing for granted : we must not say I will
believe this because it satisfies my emotional needs ;
or because it is so conducive to public morality and
the peace of the individual mind. This method
binds us to the pursuit of truth pure and simple, un
influenced by any preconceived wish as to the result.
The emotional method, on the contrary, allows a man’s
feelings to determine his belief. If we adopt it we
shall never need to trouble ourselves with disagreeable
questions, such as, Do we know when and by whom
the Gospels were written ? Do they or do they not
contain numerous contradictory statements ? Are the
accounts therein given of the doings and sayings of
Christ in all cases to be relied upon as matters of
historical certainty ? and the like. These and many
such beset the path of the critical inquirer like im
portunate beggars, who will not be shaken off until
they have their answer. He whose first object is to
continue stedfast in his religious belief should refuse
altogether to enter upon such inquiries. To deal with
them candidly implies a wish to know the truth
rather than to continue orthodox ; and such a wish,
if acted on, is apt to be fatal to orthodoxy. The
�Affecting Religious Thought.
13
importance of inquiry after truth in religious matters
Bas been much overstated. An orthodox believer
should never inquire after truth ; he should assume
that he has it. The word truth is indeed occasionally
used in the Bible, yet always in a sense widely
different from that in which it is used by the modern
critic. Thus the Apostle says : “ We can do nothing
against the truth, but for the truthbut by truth he
means his own system of religious belief, the truth of
which he assumes, and which indeed is the only truth
for which he cares. So, again, Christians are bidden
searc i the Scriptures.” ' But it is implied, as I
have attempted to show, that they are to use a method
of search,—a mode of interpretation,—which certainly
would not lead to such truth as is sought by the man
©f science or modern historian.
I say again, let your wish to know truth always
stand second to your desire to continue orthodox;
otherwise there is much danger that your truth will
not be that of the Church or of the Bible. Should
any one say in reply to this : “ What is orthodoxy to
me ? I desire to know whether or not the religion I
have been taught to profess be really founded on fact.
If it be so, it will stand the severest testing by the
most rigorous method ; if not, I will none of it: ” to
such an one the arguments used in this paper are not
addressed. Let him go on his way, if he is sure he
has strength to follow it out: taking however this
warning with him. I have known those who have
acted as he proposes to act; who, starting with a more
or less orthodox belief, have insisted on subjecting it
to the critical method without fear or favour. The
consequence has been that they have found them
selves in the end stripped of most of those garments
with which their earliest instructors had invested
their minds, and, in some cases, with their worldly
prospects blasted. Let him then count the cost first,
lest having begun he should not dare to finish.
�The Question of Method, &e.
I turn for a concluding word to those who prize
their religious faith above all things : who know that
it brings them peace, comfort, and worldly prosperity;
and are not to be ousted from these solid advantages
by a sneer about honesty. Let such be careful to
abide by the emotional method, to take the satisfaction
which religion and religious books bring to their
minds as the surest—the only—basis of their belief.
The men of science have with their critical method
“ turned the world upside down ” as effectually as did
the Apostles of old. Beware then how you allow
yourselves to inquire on their method into the truth
of sacred narratives. Consider that faith is not as
robust as it was ; it now needs hot-house treatment:
it must be glazed, and warmed artificially, and kept
from rude scientific contact. Guard it from critical
thought as you do your exotic plants from frost.
Consider, a few degrees of cold will consign it to a
grave from which no coming spring can summon it
to resurrection.
�
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 & 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 question of method as affecting religious thought
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 14 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: "By a Clergyman of the Church of England". From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
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
1873
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT114
Subject
The topic of the resource
Bible
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
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 question of method as affecting religious thought), 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
Bible-Criticism and Interpretation
Conway Tracts
Religious Thought
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/d40709288e9a1b8f79192f37124fa6f5.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=hVRJXZ4727t9V6Q4OxalL%7EqrJBOqqBH6Ys7dFJk70z-JGxYQHQ6ecYZEIThQIKNWm0Yswg1RxYWKBWmOlcsaYW%7EDLW7CwTLJ0a6dSOqj6B7NkHkYJfk61krK4jxymhMG%7E2d2VpC-afLyQPRavhqq6VyjFWV0J-Gv91qDz2zYy0kW2wepDfoNjv5eTXbhNCJg6gurH5LqjnUrYSchVDiEHD5U07uj3-q2pd6JTWImi4qiIeLSEWNdQ0l5zNXKszSw75TBZ%7EvNdfyc2zx6kbqnnRcsEzh829o9lin-fcnRqK6FNFRPbUzjXop37FGoTvgCWeMJRM687TA%7EqreoPpgzmw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
edc6798ba90ce687cfc46971744cfba7
PDF Text
Text
NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY
kJ 05^
THE
JOINT EDUCATION
OF
YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN
IN THE
AMERICAN SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES.
BEING A LECTURE DELIVERED BEFORE THE
SUNDAY LECTURE SOCIETY,
On 27th
of
April, 1873,
BY
MARY E. BEEDY, M.A.,
Graduate of Antioch College, U.S.
LONDON:PUBLISHED
by the
SUNDAY LECTURE SOCIETY.
1873.
Price Threepence.
�SUifoerttsentent.
SUNDAY LECTURE SOCIETY,
To provide for the delivery on Sundays in the Metropolis, and
to encourage the delivery elsewhere, of Lectures on Science,
—physical, intellectual, and moral,—History, Literature,
and Art; especially in their bearing upon the improve
ment and social well-being of mankind.
THE SOCIETY’S LECTURES
ARE DELIVERED AT
ST GEORGE’S HALL, LANGHAM PLACE,
On SUNDAY Afternoons, at FOUR o’clock precisely
(Annually—from November to May).
Twenty-four Lectures (in three series), ending 3rd May,
1874, will be given.
Members’ LI subscription entitles them to an annual ticket
(transferable and admitting to the reserved seats), and to eight
single reserved-seat tickets available for any lecture.
Tickets for each series (one for each lecture), or for any
eight consecutive lectures, as below :
To the Shilling Reserved Seats—5s. 6d.
To the Sixpenny Seats—2s. being at the rate of Three
pence each lecture.
For tickets apply (by letter) to the Hon. Treasurer,
Wm. Henry Domville, Esq., 15 Gloucester Crescent, Hyde
Park, W.
Payment at the door
One Penny
Sixpence ■—and
(Reserved Seats) One Shilling.
�JOINT EDUCATION
OF
YOUNG MEM AND WOMEN.
HE American colonists carried with them their
practical English tendencies.
They were
impressed with a deep sense of the advantages of
education, but it had to be got at the least expense.
In the towns and cities they could have schools
for boys and schools for girls, but in the sparselypopulated rural districts separate schools were
impossible. It was almost more than the farmp.rs
could do to pay the cost of one. All the boys and
girls within a radius of two or three miles met
together in the same school. They were companions
and rivals in their pastimes, and it probably did not
occur to any one to consider whether there could
be any danger in continuing this rivalry in their
lessons. In the rapid growth of the population
some of these rural centres gradually became vil
lages and towns, but the joint education of the
girls and boys went on.
Iwo leading principles in school economy are, to
secure the smallest number of classes, and the
greatest equality of attainment between the pupils
in each class; and these principles favour large
schools rather than numerous schools. Schools
affording a higher grade of instruction, and known
T
�4
"Joint Education of
as academies, sprang up here and there. These
were private enterprises, and the commercial aim
was to furnish the best educational advantages
for the largest number of pupils at the least ex
pense. The teacher wanted to make as much money
as he could, and the parents had in general but little
to spend for the education of their sons and daughters.
The same economical views made these joint schools :
fewer teachers were required. These academies,
with the district schools I have before mentioned,
met almost the entire educational demands of the
rural and village population. A few of the more
ambitious boys went from these academies to the
universities, and a few of the girls went to young
ladies’ boarding-schools; but these were exceptional
cases.
You probably know that we have no men of
wealth and leisure living in the country. The soil
is owned by the men who work it, and the rich
men live in the cities. And I suppose you also know
that in any generation of American men the large
majority of those who lead in commerce, in politics,
and in the professions are the sons of farmers^
who in their boyhood worked on the farms and'
went to these rural schools in the leisure season;
the wives of these men having had for the most
part the same rural training. You can readily
see from this that the peculiarities of our rural
life, the circumstances that gave these men and
women the energy to bring themselves to the front
Tank of society, were likely to mefit with approval.
However, joint education was simply looked upon
as one of the necessities of our youthful life till
about twenty years ago. Men who rose to positions
of wealth and honour upon the basis of the educa
�Young Men and Women.
5
tion received in these schools did not praise joint
education any more than they praised the other
natural and frugal habits that attended their rural
life. No one had philosophised upon this system,
and there was no occasion to think of it. It had
simply been the most natural means of meeting a
great need. In both the district schools and in the
academies the boys and girls did about the same
work. They liked. to keep together. Now and
then a boy went a little farther in mathematics
than the girls did, in the prospect of a business
career and a life in the city; or he learned more Latin
and Greek in preparation for the university. There
was no question about difference of capacity or
difference of tastes between boys and girls; there
was nothing to suggest it. They liked to do the
same things, and the one did as well as the other.
Forty years ago, in one of the academies near Bos
ton, a number of girls went with a set of their school
boy-friends through the entire preparation for Har
vard University. The girls knew mathematics and
Greek as well as the boys did, and formed a plan for
going to the university with them. I cannot say
whether the plan grew out of a keen zest forknow
ledge, or out of an unwillingness to break off the
very pleasant companionship. Probably from both.
The girls did not think there could be much objection
to admitting them at the university. They thought
the reason there were no girls at the universities
was that none had wanted to go, or had been pre
pared to go. They proposed to live at home; so there
would be no difficulty on the score of college resi
dence. However, as their request was new, it
occurred to them that a little diplomacy might be
required in presenting it; so they deputed the most
�6
J
’ oint Education of
prudent of the party to do the talking, and imposed
strict silenee upon the youngest and most impulsive
one, from whom I have the story. The girls called
upon old President Quincy ; they told him what they
had done in their studies,—that they had passed
the examinations with the boys, and wished to be
admitted to the university. He listened'to their
story, and evinced so much admiration for their
work and aims that they at first felt sure of success.
But President Quincy seemed slow in coming to the
point. He talked of the newness and difficulties of
the scheme, and proposed other opportunities of
study for them, till at length this youngest one,
forgetting in her impatience her promise to keep
silent, said, “Well, President Quincy, you feel sure
the trustees will let us come, don’t you ? ”
0, by
no means,” was the reply :“ this is a place only for
men.”' The girl of sixteen burst into tears, and
exclaimed with vehemence, “ I wish I could anni
hilate the women, and let the men have every
thing to themselves! ”
This, so far as I know, was the first effort made
by women to get into an American university, but
the incident was too trifling to make any impression,
and I narrate it only as marking the beginning of
the demand for university advantages for women.
About the same time Oberlin College was founded
in Northern Ohio. It grew out of a great practical
everyday-life demand. There was a wide-spread
desire on the part of well-to-do people for larger
educational advantages than the ordinary rural
schools provided. They could not afford the expense
of the city schools : besides, they wanted their sons
and daughters to go on together in their school work ;
they were unwilling to subject either to the dangers
�Young Men and Women.
7
of boarding-school life without the companionship
and guardianship of the other. Oberlin College was
founded on the strictest principles of economy. It
was located in a rural village in the West, where the
habits were simple and the living inexpensive. In
the third year of its existence it had 500 students,
and since the first ten years it has averaged nearly
1,200, the proportion of young women varying from
one-third to one-half. There was a university
course of study for the young men, and a shorter
ladies’ course for the young women, which omitted
all the Greek, most of the Latin, and the higher
mathematics. It was not anticipated that the
young women would desire the extended university
course, but so far as the two courses accorded the
instruction was given to the young men and the
young women in common. But the young women
were allowed to attend any of the classes they chose,
and at the end of six years a few of them had pre
pared themselves for the B.A. examination, and
were allowed upon passing it to receive the degree.
The college authorities did not seem to consider
that B.A. and M.A. were especially masculine
designations. They regarded them only as marks of
scholastic attainments, which belonged equally to
men and women when they had reached a certain
standard of scholarship. Not many Women could
stay, or cared to stay, long enough to get these
degrees. The “ ladies’ course ” required nearly two
years’ less-time, and contained a larger proportion of
the subjects that women are expected to know. The
number of women who have received the university
degrees from Oberlin is still less than a hundred,
making an average of only two or three for each
year. Oberlin sent out staunch men and women.
�"8
"Joint Education of
Wherever these men and women went it was ob
served that they worked with a will and with effect.
The eminent success of Oberlin led many parents
in different parts of the country to desire its advan
tages for their sons and daughters. But Oberlin was
a long way off from New England and from many
other parts of the country; besides some thought
it an uncomfortably religious place; negroes were
admitted, and it was altogether very democratic,
much more so than many people liked. So parents
began to say, 11 Why can’t we have other colleges
that shall provide all the advantages of Oberlin and
omit the peculiarities we dislike.” Now began the
discussion upon the real merits of this economical
system of joint education. It had sprung up like
an indigenous plant. It had met a necessity remark
ably . well, and it was only when, its advantages
becoming recognised, it began to press itself into
the cities and among people where it was not a ne
cessity, that it evoked any discussion. This was a
little more than twenty years ago. People who had
observed the working of the joint schools were alto
gether in favour of them. The wealthier people in
the towns and cities, who were accustomed to having
boys and girls educated apart, preferred separate
schools, and thought joint education would be a dan
gerous innovation ; that in the institution adopting
it the girls would lose their modesty and refinement,
and the boys would waste their time. Leading edu
cators were divided upon this question: „ those who
were familiar with the joint schools were the most
uncompromising advocates of that system; those
who had known only the schools where girls and
boys were educated apart for the most part preferred
separate education, where it could be afforded. Not
�Young Men and Women.
9
all, however, for many had developed the theory of
joint education out of an opposite experience. In
girls’ schools they had felt the want of adequate
stimulants for thorough work. They had seen the
strong tendency in girls to fit themselves for society
rather than for the severer duties of life ; they be
lieved that if girls were associated with boys and
young men in their studies, they would not only be
better scholars, but that they would remain longer
in school, that they would have less eagerness to
get out of school into society. And many who
were familiar with boys’ schools felt the dangers
attendant upon the absence of domestic influence,
and saw that it might be very largely supplied by
the presence of sisters and schoolfellows’ sisters.
They saw too that the tendencies to a coarse
physical development, which are found in an ex
clusive- society of men, might be counteracted by
the presence of women. In short, all who were
acquainted with joint education gave it their most
unqualified approval; while those who knew only
the system of separate education were for the most
part disposed to favour that, though many of these
saw the need of something in girls’ schools which the
presence of boys would introduce, and something in
boys’ schools which the presence of girls would sup
ply. The advocacy of joint education was valiantly
led by Horace Mann, the greatest American educator,
the man who stands with us where Dr Arnold
stands in the hearts of English people.
About this time Antioch College was founded in
Southern Ohio, and Mr Mann was invited to take
charge of it. Its object was to provide educational
facilities as nearly equal to those found at the best
New England universities as possible, and it
was
�io
Joint Education of
founded avowedly upon the principle that joint
education per se was a good thing; that it was
natural; that it was a great advantage to have
brothers and sisters in the same school; that girls
were both more scholarly and more womanly when
associated with boys, and boys were more gentle
manly and more moral when associated with girls ;
and that both girls and boys come out of joint
schools with juster views of life, and a larger sense
of moral obligation.
Other new colleges followed the example of
Antioch, and some of the old ones began to open their
doors to women. To-day the national free schools
and public schools in most of the cities of the North
educate boys and girls together. In some of the older
cities, particularly Boston, New York, and Phila
delphia, the schools are for the most part conducted
on the original plan of separate schools. The school
buildings are not arranged for the accommodation of
boys and girls together, and there is still a strong
sentiment against the plan, though it is gradually,
and I may say rapidly, giving way. In tire Western
cities, Cincinnati, Chicago, and St Louis, the boys
and girls study together throughout the entire
course, that is, till they are ready to go to the
universities ; though in St Louis, and perhaps in
the other two cities, there are a few of the grammar
schools where they are still apart, the buildings not
being arranged for the accommodation of both.
The system prevails in the rural schools almost
without exception, and almost as generally in the
public schools' of the towns and cities, with the
exceptions that I have mentioned ; there are now
over thirty colleges and universities that offer univer
sity degrees to women on the same conditions as
�Young Men and Women.
11
to men. On the other hand, there is still a large
number of private schools in the towns and cities
which are generally either boys’ schools or girls’
schools. They are for the most part schools esta
blished for teaching the children of some pai-ticular
religious denomination, for fitting boys for a com
mercial career, or for giving especial drill for the
universities; or, in the case of girls’ schools, for
giving especial training for society: but the public
schools are rapidly drawing into them the children
of the best educated families, for the simple reason
that they are the best schools of the country.
The oldest universities and colleges still keep
their doors shut against women. Harvard, within
the last year, has appointed a committee to consider
the demand made by women, but their report was
adverse. The committee recognised the success of
the system elsewhere, but thought it not wise to
attempt the change in Harvard.
Michigan University, a free state university,
which stands second to none in educational advan
tages, except Harvard and Yale, and has double the
number of students of either of these, admitted
women three years ago. And Cornell University,
which has as good prospects as any in the country,
has just received its first class of women.
I heard it announced with great gravity in the
British Association a year-and-a-half ago in Edin
burgh, that girls had no difficulty in learning arith
metic, and no one smiled. So completely is this
question settled with us, that I think such .an
announcement would have been received by a
public assembly in America with a derisive laugh.
Joint schools and colleges have settled the question
whether girls can learn not only arithmetic, but
�12
'Joint Education of
also the higher mathematics, logic, and metaphysics;
and have established beyond a doubt in the minds
of American educators, that in acute perception,
in the ability to grasp abstruse principles, the
feminine mind is in no wise inferior to the mascu
line. But the question is still open, whether
women have the physical strength to endure the
continuous mental work requisite for the greatest
breadth and completeness of comprehension. This
can be determined only by experiments which shall
extend through a longer series of years devoted to
study. The records at Oberlin indicate that the
young women are no more likely to break down in
health than the young men are. The records of
the city schools do not seem to be quite the same
upon this point, but the same difference would
doubtless appear if the girls were not in school; and
this failure in health cannot be attributed to the
school work, but rather to the more indoor life of the
girls. The Oberlin statistics also indicate that the
women who have taken the university degrees have
not diminished their chance of longevity by this
severe work in their youth. Women have less phy
sical strength than men have, but there seems to be
in them a tendency to a more economical expendi
ture of strength. Their energy is less driving, and
there is, in consequence, less waste from friction.
In regard to the social morality at these schools
the results are equally satisfactory. At the rural
schools boys and girls. have almost unrestricted
companionship; they have just the same freedom
in their home intercourse, but improper or even
objectionable conduct is a'thing unknown at the
schools, and almost equally unknown in the associa
tion outside the schools. Brothers and brothers’
�Young Men and Women.
13
friends guard the sister, and sisters and their friends
o-uard the brother. In cases where it is necessary
for the pupils to reside at the school there is more
love-making, but it is mostly repressed by want of
time; besides, there are few occasions for meeting,
except in the presence of the class, and where there
is an acquaintance with so many on about equal
terms an especial regard for one is less likely to be
formed. The admiration of the boys is suie to
centre upon the girls who are nearest the head
of the class; but these girls have not time to return
it and keep their position, and to lose their position
would be to lose the admiration; and the same is
true with the boys.
I am sure it would be surprising to any one who
is not familiar with these schools to observe to what
very practical and common-sense principles all these
otherwise romantic and illusory relations are sub
jected. In this mutual intellectual rivalship the
conjectural differences between the sexes, and the
fancied charms of the one over the other, are sub
mitted to very practical tests. A disagreeable boy
is not likely to be considered a hero in virtue of his
assumed bearing and physical strength; nor is a
silly girl, by* dint of her coquettish airs likely to
be thought a fairy with magical gifts. Girls know
boys as boys know each other; and boys know girls
as girls know each other. Hence the subtle charms
that evade human logic find little opportunity to
blind and mislead in the constant presence of unmistakeable facts.
In all the time I was at Antioch College no word
of disreputable scandal ever came to my ears, and
in recent years I have repeatedly heard from young
men who were there when I was, that in their whole
�14
Joint Education of
five or six years they never heard the faintest shadow
of imputation against any young woman in the
institution. And so stern was the morality, that
smoking, beer-drinking, and card-playing were
all considered crimes,, and banished from the
premises.
You have now heard my statement respecting the
effectiveness of joint education, and, though it is
made from a very extended and thorough acquaint
ance with the system, I shall not ask you to accept
it without the support of other and authoritative
testimony. Abundant confirmation of my state
ment will be found in all Official Reports and in
treatises that review this system, while no testi
mony of a contrary character is anywhere to be
found. I will first quote from the published
. Report of Mr Harris, Superintendent of the Public
Schools in St Louis. He is well known to the
leading students of German philosophy in all the
countries of Europe, and I think I may say in
his own country is recognised as standing in the
front rank of American educators. No other man
has brought so much philosophical insight to the
study of dur public school system. I quote from
Mr Harris’s Report of 1871 a condensed summary
of the results- of this system of joint education as
they have developed themselves under his observa
tion and direction. He says :—
- “ Within the last fifteen years the schools of St Louis have
been remodelled upon the plan of the joint education of the
sexes, and the results have proved so admirable that a few
remarks may be ventured on the experience which they
furnish.
. “ I-—Economy has been secured, for, unless pupils of widely
different attainments are brought together in the same classes,
�Young Men and Women.
15
the separation of the boys and girls requires a great increase
in the number of teachers.
“II.—Discipline has improved continually by the adoption
of joint schools ; our change in St Louis has been so gradual
that we have been able to weigh with great exactness every
point of comparison between the two systems. The joining
of the male and female departments of a school has always
been followed by an improvement in discipline ; not merely
on the part of the boys, but with the girls as well. The rude
ness and abandon which prevails among boys when separate
at once gives place to self-restraint in the presence of girls,
and the sentimentality engendered in girls when educated
apart from boys disappears in these joint schools, and in its
place there comes a dignified self-possession. The few schools
that have given examples of efforts to secure clandestine asso
ciation are those few where there are as yet only girls.
“ HI.—The quality of instruction is improved. Where the
boys and girls are separate, methods of instruction tend to
extremes, that may be called masculine and feminine. Each
needs the other as a counter-check. We find in these joint
schools a prevalent healthy tone which our schools on the
separate system lack—more rapid progress is the conse
quence.
“ IV.—The development of individual character is, as
already indicated, far more sound and healthy. . It has been
found that schools composed exclusively of girls or boys
require a much more strict surveillance on the part of the
teachers. Confined by themselves and shut off from inter
course with society in its normal form, morbid fancies and
interests are developed which this daily association in the
class-room prevents. Here boys and girls test themselves
with each other on an intellectual plane. Each sees the
strength and weakness of the other, and learns to esteem
those qualities that are of true value. Sudden likes, capri
cious fancies, and romantic ideas give way to sober judgments
not easily deceived by mere externals. This is the basis of
the dignified self-possession before alluded to, and it forms a
striking point of contrast between the girls and boys edu
cated in joint schools and those educated in schools exclu
sively for one sex. Our experience in St Louis has been
entirely in favour of the joint education of the sexes, in all
the respects mentioned and in many minor ones.”
�16
Joint Education of
I give Mr Harris’s statement as representative of
the sentiment of those who are engaged in public
school instruction in America. As I said before, in
some of the older cities, where the public schools
were earliest organised, the joint system has been
accepted as yet only partially, and the teachers, who
are only familiar with the separate system, gene
rally prefer it. But a very large proportion of
the public schools of the country are joint schools,
and a still larger proportion of the instructors and
managers of public schools favour the system of
joint education. Mr Harris’s testimony applies to
city schools, when the pupils reside at home.
I now quote to you from another authority, addi
tionally valuable inasmuch as it represents the
results of this system of education upon young men
and women who reside at the school and away from
the guardianship of parents.
In 1868 a meeting was called of all the College
Presidents of the country, to discuss questions
relating to college discipline and instruction. As
Oberlin was the oldest college that had adopted
the system of joint instruction, a strong desire
was felt to secure a critical and comprehensive
statement of the results of the system there. Dr
Fairchild, the present President of Oberlin, was
deputed to make the Report. He had at that
time been connected with Oberlin seven years
as a student and twenty-five years as professor,
and has long had the reputation of being the most
accomplished scholar and acute thinkei' among the
Oberlin professors. His statements may therefore
be accepted as absolute in point of fact, and as
wholly representative of the opinion of those who
have conducted the instruction and discipline at
�Young Men and Women.
!7
Oberlin. But my chief reason for selecting this out
of the accumulated published testimony is that it
.seems to me the best digest of the subject that I
have seen.
Dr Fairchild says :—
“ 1st.—On the point of economy In the higher depart
ments of instruction, where the chief expense is involved,
the. expense is no greater on account of the presence of the
ladies.
“ 2nd.—Convenience to the patrons of the school:—It is a
matter of interest to notice the number of cases where a
brother is followed by a sister, or a sister by a brother. This
is an interesting and prominent feature in our work. Each is
safer in the presence of the other.
“3rd.—The wholesome incitements to study, which the
system affords :—The social influence arising from the consti
tution of our classes operates continuously and upon all.
Each desires for himself the best standing he is capable of,
and there is no lack of motive to exertion. It will be observed,
too, that the stimulus is of the same kind as will operate in
after life. The young man going out into the world does
not leave behind him the forces that have helped him on.
They are the ordinary forces of society.
“ 4th.-—The tendency to good order that we find in the
system :—The ease with which the discipline of so large a
school is conducted has not ceased to be a matter of wonder
to ourselves. More than one thousand students are gathered
from every State in the Union, from every class in society, of
every grade of culture, the great mass of them bent on im
provement, but numbers are sent by anxious friends with the
hope that they may be saved or reclaimed from every evil
tendency. Yet the disorders incident to such gatherings are
essentially unknown among us. Our streets are as quiet
by day and by night as in any other country town. This
result we attribute greatly to the wholesome influence of the
system of joint education. College tricks lose their attrac
tiveness in a community thus constituted. They scarcely
appear among us. We have had no difficulty in reference to
the conduct and manners in the college dining-hall. There is
an entire absence of the irregularities and roughness so often
complained of in the college commons.
“ 5th.—Another manifest advantage is the relation of the
B
�18
Joint Education of
school to the community. A cordial feeling of goodwill and
the absence of that antagonism between town and college
which in general belongs to the history of universities and
colleges. The constitution of the school is so similar to that
of the community that any conflict is unnatural; the usual
provocation seems to be wanting,
“ 6th.—It can hardly be doubted that people educated
under such conditions are kept in harmony with society at
large, and are prepared to appreciate the responsibilities of
life, and to enter upon its work. If we are not utterly de
ceived in our position, our students naturally and readily find
their position in the world, because they have been trained in
sympathy with the world. These are among the advantages
of the system that have forced themselves upon our attention.
The list might be extended and expanded, but you will wish
especially to know whether'we have not encountered disad
vantages and difficulties which more than counterbalance
these advantages.
“ As to the question whether young ladies have the mental
vigour and physical health to maintain a fair standing in a
class with voung men, I must say, where there has been the
same preparatory training, we find no difference in ability to
maintain themselves in the class-room and at the examina
tions. The strong and the weak scholars are equally distri
buted between the sexes.
“ Whether ladies need a course of study especially adapted
to their nature and prospective work ?—The theory of our
school has never been that men and women are alike in
mental constitution, or that they naturally and properly
occupy the same position in their work of life. The educa
tion furnished is general, not professional, designed to fit men
and women for any position or work to which they may pro
perly be called. The womanly nature will appropriate the
material to its own necessities under its own laws.' Young
men and women sit at the same table and parta.ke of the
same food, and we have no apprehension that the vital forces
will fail to elaborate from the common material the osseous,
fibrous, and nervous tissues adapted to each frame and
constitution.
.
<£ Apprehension is felt that character will deteriorate on
the one side or the other,—that young men will become
frivolous or effeminate, and young women coarse and mas
culine.
�Toung Men and Women.
T9
“ That young men should lose their manly attributes and
character from proper association with, cultivated young
women is antecedently improbable and false in fact. It is
the natural atmosphere for the development of the higher
qualities of manhood—magnanimity, generosity, true chivalry,
and earnestness. The animal man is kept subordinate in the
prevalence of these higher qualities.
“We have found it the surest way to make men of boys
and gentlemen of rowdies.
“ On the other hand, will not the young woman, pursuing
her studies with young men, take on their manners, and
aspirations, and aims, and be turned aside from the true ideal
of womanly life and character ? The thing is scarcely con
ceivable. The natural response of woman to the exhibition
of manly traits is in the correlative qualities of gentleness,
delicacy, and grace.
“ It might better be questioned whether, the finer shadings
of woman’s character can be developed without this natural
stimulus ; but it is my duty not to reason, but to speak from
the limited historical view assigned me.
“You wish to know whether the result with us has been a
large accession to the number of coarse, strong-minded women,
in the disagreeable sense of the word; and I say, without
hesitation, that I do not know a single instance of such a
product as the result of our system of education.
“ Is there not danger that young men and young women
thus brought together in the critical period of fife, when the
distinctive social tendencies act with greatest intensity, will
fail of the necessary regulative force, and fall into undesirable
and unprofitable relations ? Will not such association result
in weak and foolish love affairs ? It is not strange that such
apprehension is felt, nor would it be easy to give an a priori
answer to such difficulties ; but if we may judge from our
experience, the difficulties are without foundation. The
danger in this direction results from excited imagination,
from the glowing exaggerations of youthful fancy, and the
best remedy is to displace these fancies by every-day facts
and realities.
“Theyoung man shut out from the society of ladies, with
the help of the high-wrought representations of life which
poets and novelists afford, with only a distant vision of the
reality, is the one who is in danger. The women whom he
sees are glorified by his fancy, and are wrought into his day
�io
Joint Education of
dreams and night dreams as beings of supernatural loveliness.
It would be different if he met them day by day in the class
room, in a common encounter with a mathematical problem,
or at a table sharing in the common want of bread and butter.
There is still room for the fancy to work, but the materials
for the picture are more reliable and enduring. Such associa
tion does not take all the romance out of life, but it gives as
favourable conditions for sensible views and actions upon
these delicate questions as can be afforded to human nature.
“ But is this method adapted to schools in general, or is the
success attained at Oberlin due to peculiar features of the
place, which can rarely be found or reproduced elsewhere,
and can it be introduced into men’s colleges with their tradi
tional customs and habits of action and thought ? Might not
the changes required occasion difficulty at the outset and
peril the experiment ? On this point I have no experience,
but I have such confidence in the inherent vitality and
adaptability of the system that I should be entirely willing to
see it subjected to this test.”
I am sorry not to give you a more lengthened
account of Dr Fairchild’s Report, but the time warns
me to hasten.
Respecting economy, school discipline, social
order, and the improved character of both young
men and young women, and the high scholar
ship attained by young women, you see that Dr
Fairchild’s statement fully corroborates my own
and that of Mr Harris. He agrees with us that
the grade of scholarship of the young men is in no
wise lowered by this joint work, but, on the con
trary, that the average is higher.
To be definite upon this point, my own opinion
is that those marvellous feats of scholarship that
sometimes occur in boys’ schools are not so likely to
occur in a joint school, where a little more of the
domestic and social element is found. On the other
hand, from a long and close observation, I feel fully
justified in saying the average scholarship is higher.
�Young Men and 'Women.
21
There is a more general stimulus for good scholar
ship. The standard of respectability is somewhat
different from what it is in a school exclusively for
boys. A boy may secure the respect of his boy
associates by being an adept on the playground or
generally a good fellow, but as he is known to the
girls only through his class work, he feels more
especially bound to make this creditable.
I should like to accumulate authority upon these
points, but I must ask you to accept my statement
that the opinions I have' given you are those held
by the very large majority of the educators of the
country.
In this system of joint education you see that
the difficulty of getting funds to establish schools
scarcely appears as an obstacle to the higher edu
cation of women. It requires so little more to edu
cate girls along with boys than it does to educate
boys alone, and lack of the masculine incentive to
study is largely supplied to the girls by class
rivalry. The girls like to remain at school, and
they like to do as much work and as good work as
the boys do; and the boys are equally eager to keep
the companionship of the girls, and to keep up the
competition in all the departments of the work.
There is a mutual rivalry which both enjoy, and
the girls work with zest, without thinking whether
there is to be any reward beyond the simple enjoy
ment of their work, without considering whether it
will ever bring them any farther returns.
The work of the girls in the joint schools has
done much to force up the standard in the exclu
sively girls’ schools. These schools could not afford
the disparaging comparison. So the teachers intro
duce the same studies as are found in the joint
�22
Joint Education of
schools, and do the best they can to get as good
work from their girls. But in most of the girls’
schools I have ever visited, the work will not com
pare with the work of girls in the joint schools.
When Dr Fairchild says he does not know a '
single instance in which a coarse, strong-minded
woman, in the disagreeable sense, has been the pro
duct of the Oberlin system of education, it must not
be understood that there have been no women of that
type at Oberlin, for there have been, and Oberlin
lias done much to soften them and refine them,
but it could not wholly change their natures and
previously-acquired habits. Upon this point there
is a pernicious popular delusion, and I am at a loss
to account for its origin. It is not association with
men that developes this type of character. The
reverse of this is the case, as Dr Fairchild has
indicated. It is true that many highly-intellectual
and highly-educated women have been peculiar,
have developed peculiarities or idiosyncrasies of
character or habit which lessened their companion
able and womanly attractiveness, but these women
have generally worked by themselves, away from
society, apart from the companionship of men.
Joint schools are the most complete corrective of
these tendencies. Whatever elevates women in the
eyes of men they are disposed to cultivate in the
presence of men, and whatever elevates men in the
eyes of women they cultivate in the presence of
women. There is little danger of careless toilet
with young women who are constantly meeting
young men; little danger of angular movement, of
unamiable sharpness, of egotism, and pronounced
self-assertion.
The disagreeable women, the women contemp-
�Toung Men and Women.
23
tuously called strong-minded, are women who have
not known a genial social atmosphere. Crotchety
men and crotchety women are the product of isola
tion from society, and formerly women could not
mount the heights of knowledge except in isolation.
The attractive women, the women who seem to have
a genius for womanliness, are the women who have
been much in the society of men,—women at court,
women in political and diplomatic circles, women
who are familiar with the thought and’ experience
of men, women who talk with men and work with
men.
Social intercourse at these joint schools is not of
course left to chance. Girls and boys need and get
as careful attention at school as in their homes.
Usually they enter and leave the school building
by different doors, and indeed meet only when they
are receiving instruction from the teachers, where
they occupy separate forms on different sides of the
room. Among the older pupils, at all times, except
at the lecture hours, the girls usually have their own
rooms and the boys theirs,'and no communication
between them is possible, except as the teachers
choose to grant permission, which is not asked with
out explaining the occasion. The boys do not
appear to care very much to talk to the girls, at
least they would not be willing to have it seen that
they did. At the boarding-schools the young men
and young women usually have their private apart
ments in different buildings, but meet in a common
dining-hall in the building occupied by the young
■ women. Here they arrange themselves as they
like, the size of the company and the presence of
teachers being quite sufficient to exclude objection
able manners. At the times allowed for recreation
�24
.•
Joint Education of
the arrangements are such as to preclude for the
most part opportunities for young men and young
women to meet, though there are very frequent
receptions at .the homes of the professors or at the
general parlours, when they meet as they would at
any ordinary social party. At a few of the smaller
boarding-schools much more freedom, of intercourse
has been allowed, and with very admirable results ;
but this requires great wisdom and care on the part
of the teachers, more than they are generally able
to give in a large school. Where the pupils live at
home no very especial care is required on the part
of the teachers, further than would under any
circumstances be necessary to secure general good
order.
This system of education developes self-reliance
and a sense of responsibility, to such a degree that,
as I quoted from Dr Fairchild, it is a constant sur
prise to see how little direction they need. A good
many times while I was at Antioch College, young
men who had got into disgrace, or had been dis
missed from young men’s colleges, were sent there
to be reclaimed from their bad habits, and it is
surprising what effect this home-like association
had upon them.
I have already mentioned Michigan University
as the best institution that has as yet opened its
doors to women. This was done three years ago.
For ten years the question had been pending before
the trustees. A letter was addressed to Horace
Mann, asking for minute information concerning
the working of Antioch, and seeking counsel in
reference to the advisability of attempting the
tame plan at the Michigan University. Mr Mann
replied, that though he was an ardent advocate
�Toung Men and Women. '
25
of joint education and was satisfied with the
results achieved at Antioch, he should be afraid
to attempt the plan in a large town, where college
residence was not required. This ‘letter settled
the matter for the time. The trustees said:—
“ We cannot, endanger the morality of our students,
and the reputation of our institution, to accommo
date the few women who wish to come. We give
them our sympathy, but can at present do nothing
more.” But every now and then, with the change
of trustees, the question was revived. The men of
this new rich State felt ashamed to do so much less
for their daughters than for their sons, and they
were particularly sensitive to the argument that the
privileges of the institution could be extended to
the young women with almost no increase in the
expenses. Three years ago the opposition found
itself in the minority, and a resolution was passed
admitting women to all the classes of the university.
The dangers Horace Mann feared have not, and
in all probability will not come. Even the young
men, who in anticipation dreaded an invasion of
women into their realm of free-and-easy habits,
now unite in the most cordial approval of the plan.
They find a genial element added to their college
life in place of a chafing restraint.
The first year only one woman came into the
Arts-classes. This bold venturer was the daughter
of a deceased professor, by whom she had been
trained up to a point a good deal in advance of the
requisites for entrance. This enabled her to step at
once into the front rank of the class of two hundred
young men, who had been in the university a year
before her. No sooner was she there than the
dread and anticipated restraint on the part of the
�26
*
'Joint Education of
young men were forgotten, and the most chivalric
feeling sprang up in its place.
For a whole year Miss Stockwell was alone in
the Arts-classes among seven or eight hundred young
men, yet nothing ever occurred to make her feel in
the slightest degree uncomfortable. She took her
B.A. degree last summer as the first Greek scholar
in the university. There are now a hundred young
women or more in the various departments of
the university. The Professor of Civil Engineer
ing has been in the habit of giving to his class
every year a particular mathematical problem,
a sort of pons asinorum, as a test of their
ability. Not once during fifteen years had any
member of the class solved it, though the professor
states that during that time he has propounded it
to fifteen hundred young men. Last year, as usual,
the old problem was again presented to the class.
A Miss White alone, of all the class, brought in the
solution. The best student in the Law school last
year was a woman.
I could tell you many other stories of the suc
cesses of women in these joint schools, but it would
not be safe to conclude from these accounts that the
young women in America are superior to the young
men ; for, as you would naturally suppose, the few
women who at present avail themselves of university
training, in opposition to the popular notion of what
is wise and becoming, are for the most part above
the average of the women of the country. I think
I may say, however, that girls are a little more
likely to lead the classes in the schools than boys
are. They are, perhaps, a little more conscientious
in doing the work assigned them, and have a little
more school ambition.
�Toung Men and Women.
27
I quote the following from the Annual Report of
the Michigan University for the year ending 1872 :—
■ “ In the Medical Department the women receive instruc
tion by themselves. In the other departments all instruction
is given to both sexes in common.
“ It is manifestly not wise to leap to hasty generalisations
from our short experience in furnishing education to both
sexes in our university. But I think all w’ho have been
familiar with the inner life of the university for the past
three years will admit that, thus far, no reason for doubting
the wisdom of the action of the trustees in opening the uni
versity to women has appeared.
“Hardly one of the many embarrassments which some
have feared have confronted us. The young women have
addressed themselves to their work with great zeal, and have
shown themselves quite capable of meeting the demands of
severe studies as successfully as their classmates of the other
sex. Their work, so far, does not evince less variety of apti
tude or less power of grappling even with the higher mathe
matics than we find in the young men. They receive no
favour, and desire none. They are subjected to precisely the
same tests as the men. Nor does their work seem to put a
dangerous strain upon their physical powers. Their absences
by reason of illness do not proportionably exceed those of the
men. Their presence has not called for the enactment of a
single new law, nor for the slightest change in our methods of
government or grade of work.
“If we are asked still to regard the reception of women
into our classes as an experiment, it must certainly be deemed
a most hopeful experiment. The numerous inquiries that
have been sent to us from various parts of this country, and
even from England, concerning the results of their admission
to the university, show that a profound and wide-spread
interest in the subject has been awakened.”
I can say for myself, that I have never known
any one who has spent a few days at one of these
colleges who has not become a convert to the
scheme.
There is in America a strong and constantly
growing conviction, that the best plan for educating
.
�28
"Joint Education of
both boys and girls is for them to reside at home
and attend day schools; that this avoids the defects
attendant upon the system of governesses and
tutors, and also the dangers that are inherent in
the congregated life of boarding-schools; and as
American families seldom leave home for, at most,
more than a few weeks in midsummer, this plan is
easily carried out. In accordance with this con
viction, the citizens of Boston have recently erected
and endowed a large university in the centre of
their city, although the time-honoured Harvard
stands scarcely two miles beyond their precincts.
The Boston University, which starts with larger
available funds than those of Harvard, will be
opened this autumn, and as a second step in the
direction of the popular educational sentiment, the
trustees have decided to offer its advantages and
honours to young women on the same conditions as
to young men.
There is evidently a disposition in America to
open all lines of study to women, and a few women
have entered each of the three learned professions,
but the time is too short and the number too small
for us to be able as yet to generalise upon the fitness
of women for professions, or their inclination to
choose them.
Most of our women—I think I may almost say
all of our women—expect to marry, and most of
them do marry. We have not that redundancy of
women to trouble and puzzle the advocates of
domesticity that you have here; and as fortunes are
more easily made, men are not timid in incurring
domestic responsibilities. As a consequence of this,
the industrial occupations that women seek, other
than domestic, are expected to be only temporary,
�Young Men and Women.
ig
and are such as may be entered upon without
much especial professional training, and may be
given up without involving much sacrifice of pre
vious study or discipline. I think I may say there
is a very general disposition to seek those that will
especially contribute to their fitness for domestic
life.
This brings me to a peculiar feature of American
education—the prevalence of women teachers. In
the public schools of St Louis there are forty men
teachers and over four hundred women teachers;
only about one-twelfth of the whole number are
men, and this I think would be about the general
average for the cities of the north. The primary
schools are taught exclusively by women—most of
the grammar schools have only a man at the head of
them, and in the high schools there is about an
equal number of men and women.
In two of the most successful grammar schools in
St Louis there are only women teachers. Recent
experiments in placing women at the head of several
of the grammar schools in Cleveland, Ohio, give
still stronger confirmation of the marked governing
power of women as contrasted with men.
Women teachers have been employed in the
schools in preference to men as a matter of economy,
but underneath this cloak of economy an unex
pected virtue has been found. It is now pretty
well settled that with equal experience and scholarly
attainments women teach better than men do, and
that they manage the pupils with more tact; that
is, they succeed in getting from the pupils what
they want, with more ease and less disturbance of
temper.
Where women do precisely the, same work as
�jo
Joint Education of
men in teaching, they get less pay. Wages have
followed the law of supply and demand. The guar
dians of the public school treasures have generally
not felt at liberty to offer more than the regular
market prices for work. But I am glad to say the
more enlightened public feeling is beginning to make
a change in this respect. A few women are paid
men’s wages—are paid what they ought to have,
rather than what they could command in an open
market.
Teaching in America, as I have indicated, is for
the most part a temporary occupation ; it is chiefly
done by young people between the ages of eighteen
and thirty who have no intention of making it a
profession. The women marry and the men enter
other occupations. How much the schools lose by
the immaturity and inexperience of the teachers it
is difficult to estimate accurately; but that they
gain much by the freshness and enthusiasm of these
young minds is unquestionable. Young teachers
get into closer sympathy with pupils, and can more
readily understand the movements of their minds
and apprehend their difficulties.
The plan of teaching for a few years is very
popular among young people, from the general
belief that it furnishes the best possible discipline
for a successful life. This experience in teaching is
considered valuable for young men, but still more
valuable for young women, and many young women
who have no need to earn money teach for a few
years .after leaving school, sometimes from their
own choice, but much oftener from the choice of
their parents, who wish to supplement the daughter’s
education with the more varied discipline that
teaching affords.
�Toung Men and Women.
31
Thus the teaching of women is encouraged from
four considerations :—
First. According to the present arrangement of
wages it is economical.
Second. Women seem to have an especial natural
aptitude for the work as compared with men.
Third. The general welfare of society demands
that wage-giving industries shall be provided for
women.
Fourth. Of all the employments offered to women,
teaching seems the best suited to fit them for
domestic life, the life that lies before the most of
them, and so positive are its claims in this direction
that it is being sought as an employment with that
single end in view.
A few years of teaching forms so prominent a
feature in the education of leading American
women, that I could not omit it in any general
consideration of this subject.
Note.—The Times of' January 3rd, 1874, gives the following
extracts from “Circulars of Information,” just published by the
United States Bureau of Education:—The total number of
degrees conferred in 1873 by the Higher Colleges was 4,493, and
376 honorary. One hundred and ninety-one ladies received
degrees. Illinois has thirteen Colleges, in which women have
the same or equal facilities with men ; Wisconsin has four, Iowa
three, Missouri four, Ohio ten, and Indiana nine; New York has
seven, and Pennsylvania, seven.
PRINTED BY C. W. REYNELL, LITTLE PULTENEY STREET, HAYMARKET.
��
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 & 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 joint education of young men and women in the American schools and colleges : being a lecture delivered before the Sunday Lecture Society, on 27th of April, 1873
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Beedy, Mary E.
Sunday Lecture Society
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 31 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Advertisement for Sunday Lecture Society on p.[2], delivered at St George's Hall, Langham Place. Printed by C.W. Reynell, Haymarket, London. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Sunday Lecture Society
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1873
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N058
Subject
The topic of the resource
Education
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 joint education of young men and women in the American schools and colleges : being a lecture delivered before the Sunday Lecture Society, on 27th of April, 1873), 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
Coeducation-United States
Education
NSS
Women
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/f21a96a178808c6ef0d11b3df437b455.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=ob9YnH3afzX%7EtuzAOZ-Jlb3%7ExsBeJWrOy4ICfX7S1zkuMN%7EVtx7jBGpUnz-MiEPHz984InNduTLIVatKOts3PSgFFzCgl00ordb32vN6sbhJcT0iUTNtI%7EgsFk9K6X8rVVDbWVLA0yh6-aU5cUEg%7ERWgWTYYaRj-BJ4GbGo6D5QquS5mJUhLgU7AWMjfqoFQIW7U-Tz02Ue8vUT9mVXZXlhaiM08WRuACB7%7EHRYCbIHOW-ZJZUBVF46ZXuKZa%7EogWSUHjCA74OIocSGoTw6uVf12MzlJL1F6VZg2inV4NhU73nc2nXzvbnCIwxmaTjYWEaXh4SUeu3tMLiS1SwWcig__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
5010f96cfb759495ce92b18d4f2aa166
PDF Text
Text
ON THE
DEITY OF JESUS OF NAZARETH.
AN ENQUIRY
INTO THE NATURE OF JESUS
BY AN EXAMINATION OF THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS.
BY
THE WIFE OF A BENEFICED CLERGYMAN.
EDITED AND PREFACED BY
REV. CHARLES VOrSEY, R.A.
PUBLISHED
BY THOMAS
SCOTT,
NO. 11 THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD, UPPER NORWOOD,
LONDON, S.E.
1873.
�LO N DO N :
PRINTED BY C.
W. REYNELL, LITTLE PULTENEY
HAYMARKET,
W.
STREET,
�EDITOR’S PREFACE.
HE following pages were put into my hands
—
beneficed clergyman.
T by a ladyto the wife of a her husband, she has
Not wishing
compromise
withheld hei' name from publication, and deserves
all honour for the concession. But the fact led me
to write a few words as a Preface, in which I
would remind the Bishops and dignitaries of our
Church that this is no uncommon case. Ortho
doxy is riddled through and through with heresy.
Every family has its heretic. And although but
few clergymen or their wives could be found to
write such an Essay as the following with equally
felicitous logic and simplicity, there are many
quite capable of relishing arguments so lucidly
stated and so ably drawn. If most of Mr Scott’s
regular readers are familiar with the line of argu
ment, there are many outside the circle whom this
pamphlet may reach to whom it will be new,
and whom it may powerfully affect.
The position which the person of Jesus occu
pies in modern Christendom is the very citadel
of Christianity, and on the settlement of his
claims will turn the future of the Churches.
We, who have been all our lives sceptics, are
growing weary of the very name ; but we must
not forget that we have a great duty to perform
towards those who are yet orthodox, or are
clinging, like some Unitarians, to the skirts of a
fading system.
�iv
Editor's Preface.
When I first knew this lady, she had given up
all points of disputed orthodoxy except this one
of the nature of Jesus, whom she still regarded
as perfect and divine. Careful and independent
study of the whole question, however, led her at
length to see the facts clearly—to own them to
herself in spite of strong predilections the other
way—and to write them down here for the
benefit of others.
In the course of this change I was appealed to
for an authoritative opinion. I absolutely refused
to give one. I refused to be made the means of
shovelling second-hand opinions into any one’s
mind. All I said was— “ If you believe Christ to
be God, stick to it: you are not obliged to
believe as I do. Only make up your mind for
yourself.” This was no case of converting or
proselytising. It was one of independent growth
and natural conviction.
There are hundreds of clergymen, and clergy
men’s wives too, who are fast treading the same
road, if they have not yet reached the same goal.
The alarmists are quite right. Christianity is in
terrible danger. We wish we could add—in ex
tremis ; but when the break up of a faith has
begun with its teachers, with those most in
terested in its being maintained, the days of that
faith are numbered.
Such little works as this Essay, if well placed
and well digested, will do more to open people’s
eyes than many a more pretentious and elaborate
treatise.
CHARLES VOYSEY.
Camden House, Dulwich, S.E., March, 1873.
�ON THE
DEITY OF JESUS OF NAZARETH.
----- *----64
think ye of Christ, whose son is
he ? ” Human child of human parents, or
divine Son of the Almighty God ? When we con
sider his purity, his faith in the Father, his forgiving
patience, his devoted work among the offscourings of
society, his brotherly love to sinners and outcasts—
when our minds dwell on these alone, we all feel the
marvellous fascination which has drawn millions to
the feet of this “ son of man,” and the needle of our
faith begins to tremble towards the Christian pole.
If we would keep unsullied the purity of our faith in
God alone, we are obliged to turn our eyes some
times—however unwillingly—towards the other side
of the picture and to mark the human weaknesses
which remind us that he is but one of our race. His
harshness to his mother, his bitterness towards some
of his opponents, the marked failure of one or two of
his rare prophecies, the palpable limitation of his
knowledge—little enough, indeed, when all are told,
—are more than enough to show us that, however
great as man, he is not the A11-righteous, the Allseeing, the All-knowing, God.
No one, however, whom Christian exaggeration has
not goaded into unfair detraction, or who is not
blinded by theological hostility, can fail to revere
portions of the character sketched out in the three
synoptic gospels. I shall not dwell here on the Christ
of the fourth Evangelist: we can scarcely trace in
that figure the lineaments of the Jesus of Nazareth
whom we have learnt to love.
VV
�6
On the Deity of
I propose, in this essay, to examine the claims of
Jesus to be more than the man he appeared to be
during his life-time : claims—be it noted—which are
put forward on his behalf by others rather than by
himself. His own assertions of his divinity are to be
found only in the unreliable fourth gospel, and in it
they are destroyed by the sentence there put into his
mouth with strange inconsistency : “ If I bear witness
of myself, my witness is not true.”
It is evident that by his contemporaries Jesus was
not regarded as God incarnate. The people in general
appear to have looked upon him as a great prophet,
and to have often debated among themselves whether
he were their expected Messiah or not. The band of
men who accepted him as their teacher were as far
from worshipping him as God as were their fellowcountrymen : their prompt desertion of him when
attacked by his enemies, their complete hopelessness
when they saw him overcome and put to death, are
sufficient proofs that though they regarded him—to
quote their own words—as “ a prophet mighty in
word and deed,” they never guessed that the teacher
they followed, and the friend they lived with in the inti
macy of social life, was Almighty God Himself. As
has been well pointed out, if they believed their Master
to be God, surely when they were attacked they would
have fled to him for protection, instead of endeavour
ing to save themselves by deserting him : we may
add that this would have been their natural instinct,
since they could never have imagined beforehand that
the Creator Himself could really be taken captive by
His creatures and suffer death at their hands. The
third class of his contemporaries, the learned Pha
risees and Scribes, were as far from regarding him as
divine as were the people or his disciples. They seem
to have viewed the new teacher somewhat con
temptuously at first, as one who unwisely persisted in
expounding the highest doctrines to the many, instead
�Jesus of Nazareth.
7
of—a second Hillel—adding to the stores of their own
learned circle. As his influence spread and appeared
to be undermining their own,—still more, when he
placed himself in direct opposition, warning the
people against them,—they were roused to a course of
active hostility, and at length determined to save
themselves by destroying him. But all through their
passive contempt and direct antagonism, there, is
never a trace of their dreaming him to be anything
more than a religious enthusiast who finally became
dangerous : we never for a moment see them assuming
the manifestly absurd position, of men knowingly
measuring their strength against God, and endea
vouring to silence and destroy their Maker. So much
for the opinions of those who had the best oppor
tunities of observing his ordinary life. A “ good man,
a “deceiver,” a “mighty prophet,” such are the
recorded opinions of his contemporaries: not one is
found to step forward and proclaim him to be
Jehovah, the God of Israel.
One of the most trusted strongholds of Christians,
in defending their Lord’s Divinity, is the evidence of
prophecy. They gather’ from the sacred books of
the Jewish nation the predictions of the longed-for
Messiah, and claim them as prophecies fulfilled in
Jesus of Nazareth. But there is one stubborn fact
which destroys the force of this argument: the Jews,
to whom these writings belong, and who from tradi
tion and national peculiarities, may reasonably be
supposed to be the best exponents of their own
prophets, emphatically deny that these prophecies are
fulfilled in Jesus at all. Indeed, one main reason for
their rejection of Jesus is precisely this, that he does
not resemble in any way the predicted Messiah. There
is no doubt that the Jewish nation were eagerly
looking for their Deliverer when Jesus was born;
these very longings produced several pseudo-Messiahs,
who each gained in turn a considerable following,
�8
On the Deity of
because each bore some resemblance to the expected
Prince. Much of the popular rage which swept
Jesus to bis death was the re-action of disappoint
ment after the hopes raised by the position of autho
rity he assumed. The sudden burst of anger against
one so benevolent and inoffensive can only be ex
plained by the intense hopes excited by his regal
entry into Jerusalem, and the utter destruction of
those hopes by his failing to ascend the throne of
David. Proclaimed as David’s son, he came riding
on an ass as king of Zion, and allowed himself to be
welcomed as the king of Israel : there his short
fulfilling of the prophecies ended, and the people,
furious at his failing them, rose and clamoured for his
death. Because he did not fulfil the ancient Jewish
oracles, he died: he was too noble for the role laid
down in them for the Messiah, his ideal was far other
than that of a conqueror, with “ garments rolled in
blood.” But even if, against all evidence, Jesus was
one with the Messiah of the prophets, this would
destroy, instead of implying, his Divine claims. For
the Jews were pure monotheists; their Messiah was
a prince of David’s line, the favoured servant, the
anointed of Jehovah, the king who should rule in
His name : a Jew would shrink with horror from the
blasphemy of seating Messiah on Jehovah’s throne,
remembering how their prophets had taught them
that their God “ would not give His honour to
another.” So that, as to prophecy, the case stands
thus : If Jesus be the Messiah prophesied of in the
old Jewish books, then he is not God: if he be not
the Messiah, Jewish prophecy is silent as regards
him altogether, and an appeal to prophecy is abso
lutely useless.
After the evidence of prophecy Christians generally
rely on that furnished by miracles. It is remarkable
that Jesus himself laid but little stress on his mira
cles; in fact, he refused to appeal to them as credentials
�Jesus of Nazareth.
9
of his authority, and either could not or would not
work them when met with determined unbelief. We
must notice also that the people, while “ glorifying
God, who had given such power unto men,” were not
inclined to admit his miracles as proofs of his right to
claim absolute obedience: his miracles did not even
invest him with such sacredness as to protect him
from arrest and death. Herod, on his trial, was
simply anxious to see him work a miracle, as a matter
of curiosity. This stolid indifference to marvels as
attestations of authority, is natural enough, when we
remember that Jewish history was crowded with
miracles, wrought for and against the favoured people,
and also that they had been specially warned against
being misled by signs and wonders. Without entering
into the question whether miracles are possible, let us,
for argument’s sake, take them for granted, and see
what they are worth as proofs of Divinity. If Jesus
fed a multitude with a few loaves, so did Elisha:
if he raised the dead, so did Elijah and Elisha; if
he healed lepers, so did Moses and Elisha; if he
opened the eyes of the blind, Elisha smote a whole
army with blindness and afterward restored their
sight: if he cast out devils, his contemporaries, by
his own testimony, did the same. If miracles prove
Deity, what miracle of Jesus can stand comparison
with the divided Red Sea of Moses, the stoppage of
the earth’s motion by Joshua, the check of the rushing
waters of the Jordan by Elijah’s cloak ? If we are
told that these men worked by conferred power and
Jesus by inherent, we can only answer that this is a
gratuitous assumption and begs the whole question.
The Bible records the miracles in equivalent terms :
no difference is drawn between the manner of working
of Elisha or Jesus ; of each it is sometimes said they
prayed; of each it is sometimes said they spake.
Miracles indeed must not be relied on as proofs of
divinity, unless believers in them are prepared to pay
�IO
On the Deity of
divine honours not to Jesus only, but also to a crowd
of others, and to build a Christian Pantheon to the
new found gods.
So far we. have only seen the insufficiency of the
usual Christian arguments to establish a doctrine so
stupendous and so prima facie improbable, as the in
carnation of the Divine Being: this kind of negative
testimony, this insufficient evidence, is not however
the principal reason which compels Theists to protest
against the central dogma of Christianity. The
stronger proofs of the simple manhood of Jesus re
main, and we now proceed to positive evidence of his
not being God. I propose to draw attention to the
traces of human infirmity in his noble character, to
his absolute mistakes in prophecy, and to his evidently
limited knowledge. In accepting as substantially true
the account of Jesus given by the evangelists, we are
taking his character as it appeared to his devoted
followers. We have not to do with slight blemishes,
inserted by envious detractors of his greatness ; the
history of Jesus was written when his disciples wor
shipped him as God, and his manhood, in their eyes,
reached ideal perfection. We are then forced to
believe that, in the Gospels, the life of Jesus is given
at its highest, and that he was, at least, not more
spotless than he appears in these records of his friends.
But here again, in order not to do a gross injustice,
we must put aside the fourth Gospel: to study his
character “ according to S. John ” would need a
separate essay, so different is it from that drawn by
the three ; and by all rules of history we should judge
him by the earlier records, more especially as they
corroborate each other in the main.
The first thing which jars upon an attentive reader
of the Gospels is the want of affection and respect
shown by Jesus to his mother. When only a child
of twelve he lets his parents leave Jerusalem to return
home, while he repairs alone to the temple. The
�Jesus of Nazareth.
11
fascination of the ancient city and the gorgeous temple
services was doubtless almost overpowering to a
thoughtful Jewish boy, more especially on his first
visit: but the careless forgetfulness of his parents’
anxiety must be considered as a grave childish fault,
the more so as its character is darkened by the in
difference shown by his answer to his mother’s
grieved reproof. That no high, though mistaken,
sense of duty kept him in Jerusalem is evident from
his return home with his parents ; for had he felt that
“his Father’s business ” detained him in Jerusalem
at all, it is evident that this sense of duty would
not have been satisfied by a three days’ delay. But
the Christian advocate would bar criticism by an
appeal to the Deity of Jesus: he asks us therefore
to believe, that Jesus, being God, saw with indiffer
ence his parents’ anguish at discovering his absence ;
knew all about that three-days’ agonised search (for
they, ignorant of his divinity, felt the terrible anxiety
as to his safety, natural to country people losing a
child in a crowded city) ; did not, in spite of the
tremendous powers at his command, take any steps
to re-assure them ; and, finally, met them again with
no words of sympathy, only with a mysterious allu
sion, incomprehensible to them, to some higher claim
than theirs, which, however, he promptly set aside to
obey them. If God was incarnate in a boy, we may
trust that example as a model of childhood: yet, are
Christians prepared to set this “ early piety and desire
for religious instruction ” before their young children
as an example they are to follow ? Are boys and
girls of twelve to be free to absent themselves for
days from their parents’ guardianship under the plea
that a higher business claims their attention ? This
episode of the childhood of Jesus should be relegated
to those “gospels of the infancy ” full of most un
childlike acts, which the wise discretion of Christendom
has stamped with disapproval. The same want of
�I2
On the Deity of
filial reverence appears later in his life : on one occa
sion he was teaching, and his mother sent in, desiring
to speak to him : the sole reply recorded to the
message is the harsh remark : “Who is my mother?”
The most practical proof that Christian morality has,
on this head, outstripped the example of Jesus, is
the prompt disapproval which similar conduct would
meet with in the present day. By the strange warping
of morality often caused by controversial exigencies,
this want of filial reverence has been triumphantly
pointed out by Christian divines; the indifference shown
by Jesus to family ties is accepted as a proof that he was
more than man! Thus, conduct which they implicitly
acknowledge to be unseemly in a son to his mother,
they claim as natural and right in the Son of God, to
His! In the present day if a person is driven by
conscience to a course painful to those who have
claims on his respect, his recognised duty, as well as
his natural instinct, is to try and make up by added
affection and more courteous deference for the pain he
is forced to inflict: above all, he would not wantonly
add to that pain by public and uncalled-for disrespect.
The attitude of Jesus towards his opponents in
high places was marked with unwarrantable bitterness.
Here also the lofty and gentle spirit of his whole life
has moulded Christian opinion in favour of a course
different on this head to his own, so that abuse of an
opponent is now commonly called m- Christian.
Wearied with three years’ calumny and contempt,
sore at the little apparent success which rewarded his
labour, full of a sad foreboding that his enemies would
shortly crush him, Jesus was goaded into passionate
denunciations: “Woe unto you, Scribes and Pha
risees, hypocrites ... ye fools and blind ... ye make
a proselyte twofold more the child of hell than your
selves ... ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how
can ye escape the damnation of hell! ” Surely this is
not the spirit which breathed in, “If ye love them
�Jesus of Nazareth.
13
which love you, what thanks have ye ? . . . Love your
enemies, bless them that curse you, pray for them
that persecute you.” Had he not even specially for
bidden the very expression, “Thou fool!” Was not
this rendering “ evil for evil, railing for railing ? ”
It is painful to point out these blemishes : reverence
for the great leaders of humanity is a duty deal’ to all
human hearts ; but when homage turns into idolatry,
then men must rise up to point out faults which
otherwise they would pass over in respectful silence,
mindful only of the work so nobly done.
I turn then, with a sense of glad relief, to the
evidence of the limited knowledge of Jesus, for
here no blame attaches to him, although one proved
mistake is fatal to belief in his Godhead. First
as to prophecy: “ The Son of man shall come
in the glory of his Father with his angels : and then
shall he reward every man according to his works.
Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here
which shall not taste of death till they see the Son of
man coming in his kingdom.” Later, he amplifies
the same idea: he speaks of a coming tribulation,
succeeded by his own return, and then adds the
emphatic declaration : “ Verily I say unto you, This
generation shall not pass till all these things be done.”
The non-fulfilment of these prophecies is simply a
question of fact: let men explain away the words
now as they may, yet, if the record is true, Jesus did
believe in his own speedy return, and impressed the
same belief on his followers. It is plain, indeed, that
he succeeded in impressing it on them, from the
references to his return scattered through the epistles.
The latest writings show an anxiety to remove the
doubts which were disturbing the converts consequent
on the non-appearance of Jesus, and the fourth
Gospel omits any reference to his coming. It is
worth remarking in the latter, the spiritual sense
which is hinted at—either purposely or unintention
�14-
0# the Deity of
ally—in the words, “ The hour . . . now is when the
dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, they
that hear shall live.” These words may be the popular
feeling on the advent and resurrection, forced on the
Christians by the failure of their Lord’s prophecies
in any literal sense. He could not be mistaken, ergo
they must spiritualise his words. The limited know
ledge of Jesus is further evident from his confusing
Zacharias the son of Jehoiada with Zacharias the
son of Barachias : the former, a priest, was slain in
the temple court, as Jesus states; but the son of
Barachias was Zacharias, or Zechariah, the prophet.*
He himself owned a limitation of his knowledge, when
he confessed his ignorance of the day of his own
return, and said it was known to the “ Father only.”
Of the same class of sayings is his answer to the
mother of James and John, that the high seats of the
coming kingdom “are not mine to give.” That Jesus
believed in the fearful doctrine of eternal punishment
is evident, in spite of the ingenious attempts to prove
that the doctrine is not scriptural: that he, in common
with his countrymen, ascribed many diseases to the
immediate power of Satan, which we should now
probably refer to natural causes, as epilepsy, mania,
and the like, is also self-evident. But on such points
as these it is useless to dwell, for the Christian believes
them on the authority of Jesus, and the subjects,
from their nature, cannot be brought to the test of
ascertained facts. Of the same character are some
of his sayings : his discouraging “ Strive to enter in
at the strait gate,/or many,” etc.; his using in defence
of partiality Isaiah’s awful prophecy, “ that seeing
theymaysee and not perceive,” etc.; his using Scripture
at one time as binding, while he, at another, depre
ciates it; his fondness for silencing an opponent by
an ingenious retort: all these things are blameworthy
to those who regard him as man, while they are
* See Appendix, page 20.
�Jesus of Nazareth.
i5
shielded from criticism by his divinity to those who
worship him as God. Their morality is a question of
opinion, and it is wasted time to dwell on them when
arguing with Christians, whose moral sense is for the
time held in check by their mental prostration at his
feet. But the truth of the quoted prophecies, and
the historical fact of the parentage of Zachariah, can
be tested, and on these Jesus made palpable mistakes.
The obvious corollary is, that being mistaken—as he
was—his knowledge was limited, and was therefore
human, not divine.
In turning to the teaching of Jesus (I still confine
myself to the three Gospels), we find no support of
the Christian theory. If we take his didactic teaching,
we can discover no trace of his offering himself as an
object of either faith or worship. His life’s work, as
teacher, was to speak of the Father. In the sermon
on the Mount he is always striking the keynote,
“your heavenly Father; ” in teaching his disciples
to pray, it is to “ Our Father,” and the Christian idea
of ending a prayer “through Jesus Christ” is quite
foreign to the simple filial spirit of their master.
Indeed, when we think of the position Jesus holds in
Christian theology, it seems strange to notice the
utter absence of any suggestion of duty to himself
throughout this whole code of so-called Christian
morality. In strict accordance with his more formal
teaching is his treatment of inquirers : when a young
man comes kneeling, and, addressing him as “ Good
Master,” asks what he shall do to inherit eternal life,
the loyal heart of Jesus first rejects the homage,
before he proceeds to answer the all-important ques
tion : “ Why callest thou me good : there is none good
but one, that is, God.” He then directs the youth on
the way to eternal life, and he sends that young
man home without one word of the doctrine on which,
according to Christians, his salvation rested. If the
“ Gospel ” came to that man later, he would
�16
On the Deity of
reject it on the authority of Jesus who had told
him a different “ way of salvation
and if Chris
tianity is true, the perdition of that young man’s
soul is owing to the defective teaching of Jesus him
self. Another time, he tells a Scribe that the first
commandment is that God is one, and that all a man’s
love is due to Him; then adding the duty of neigh
bourly love, he says; “ There is none other command
ment greater than these:” so that belief in Jesus,
if incumbent at all, must come after love to God and
man, and is not necessary, by his own testimony, to
“ entering into life.” On Jesus himself then rests the
primary responsibility of affirming that belief in him
is a matter of secondary importance, at most, letting
alone the fact that he never inculcated belief in his
Deity as an article of faith at all. In the same spirit
of frank loyalty to God, are his words on the unpar
donable sin : in answer to a gross personal affront, he
tells his insuiters that they shall be forgiven for
speaking against him, a simple son of man, but warns
them of the danger of confounding the work of God’s
Spirit with that of Satan, “because they said” that
works done by God, using Jesus as His instrument,
were done by Beelzebub.
There remains yet one argument of tremendous
force, which can only be appreciated by personal
meditation. We find Jesus praying to God, relying
on God, in his greatest need crying in agony to God
for deliverance, in his last struggle, deserted by his
friends, asking why God, his God, had also forsaken
him. We feel how natural, how true to life, this
whole account is : in our heart’s reverence for that
noble life, that “ faithfulness unto death,” we can
scarcely bear to think of the insult offered to it by
Christian lips : they take every beauty out of it by
telling us that through all that struggle Jesus was the
Eternal, the Almighty, God: it is all apparent, not
real: in his temptation he could not fall: in his
�Jesus of Nazareth.
\"j
prayers lie needed no support: in his cry that the cup
might pass away he foresaw it was inevitable : in his
agony of desertion and loneliness he was present
everywhere with God. In all that life, then, there is
no hope for man, no pledge of man’s victory, no
promise for humanity. This is no man's life at all, it
is only a wonderful drama enacted on earth. What
God could do is no measure of man’s powers : what
have we in common with this “ God-man ?” This
Jesus, whom we had thought our brother, is, after all,
removed from us by the immeasurable distance which
separates the feebleness of man from the omnipotence
of God. Nothing can compensate us for such a loss
as this. We had rejoiced in that many-sided noble
ness, and its very blemishes were dear, because they
assured us of his brotherhood to ourselves : we are
given an ideal picture where we had studied a history,
another Deity where we had hoped to emulate a life.
Instead of the encouragement we had found, what
does Christianity offer us ?—a perfect life ? But we
knew before that God was perfect: an example ? it
starts from a different level: a Saviour ? we cannot
be safer than we are with God: an Advocate ? we
need none with our Father: a Substitute to endure
God’s wrath for us ? we had rather trust God’s
justice to punish us as we deserve, and His wisdom to
do what is best for us. As God, Jesus can give us
nothing that we have not already in his Father and
ours : as man, he gives us all the encouragement and
support which we derive from every noble soul which
God sends into this world, “ a burning and a shining
light ” :
“ Through such souls alone
God stooping shows sufficient of His light
For us in the dark to rise by.”
As God, he confuses our perceptions of God’s unity,
bewilders our reason with endless contradictions, and
turns away from the Supreme all those emotions of
�i8
On the Deity of
love and adoration which can only flow towards a
single object, and which are the due of our Creator
alone : as man, he gives us an example to strive after,
a beacon to steer by; he is one more leader for
humanity, one more star in our darkness. As God,
all his words would be truth, and but few would enter
into heaven, while hell would overflow with victims:
as man, we may refuse to believe such a slander on
our Father, and take all the comfort pledged to us by
that name. Thank God, then, that Jesus is only man,
human child of human parents : that we need not
dwarf our conceptions of God to fit human faculties,
or envelope the illimitable spirit in a baby’s feeble
frame. But though only man, he has reached a
standard of human greatness which no other man, so
far as we know, has touched: the very height of his
character is almost a pledge of the truthfulness of
the records in the main: his life had to be lived
before its conception became possible, at that period
and among such a people. They could recognise his
greatness when it was before their eyes : they would
scarcely have imagined it for themselves, more espe
cially that, as we have seen, he was so different from
the Jewish ideal. His code of morality stands un
rivalled, and he was the first who taught the universal
Fatherhood of God publicly and to the common
people. Many of his loftiest precepts may be found
in the books of the Rabbis, but it is the glorious
prerogative of Jesus that he spread abroad among
the many the wise and holy maxims that had hitherto
been the sacred treasures of the few. With him none
were too degraded to be called the children of the
Father: none too simple to be worthy of the highest
teaching. By example, as well as by precept, he
taught that all men were brothers, and all the good
he had he showered at their feet. “ Pure in heart,”
he saw God, and what he saw he called all to see : he
longed that all might share in his own joyous trust in
�Jesus of Nazareth.
19
the Father, and seemed to be always seeking for
fresh images to describe the freedom and fulness of
the universal love of God. In his unwavering love of
truth, but his patience with doubters—in his personal
purity, but his tenderness to the fallen—in his hatred
of evil, but his friendliness to the sinner—we see
splendid virtues rarely met in combination. His
brotherliness, his yearning to raise the degraded, his
lofty piety, his unswerving morality, his perfect self
sacrifice, are his indefeasible titles to human love and
reverence. Of the world’s benefactors he is the chief,
not only by his own life, but by the enthusiasm he
has known to inspire in others : “ Our plummet has
not sounded his depth
words fail to tell what
humanity owes to the Prophet of Nazareth. On his
example the great Christian heroes have based their
lives: from the foundation laid by his teaching the
world is slowly rising to a purer faith in God. We
need now such a leader as he was, one who would
dare to follow the Father’s will as he did, casting a
long-prized revelation aside when it conflicts with the
higher voice of conscience. It is the teaching of
Jesus that Theism gladly makes its own, purifying
it from the inconsistencies which mar its perfection.
It is the example of Jesus which Theists are following,
though they correct that example in some points by
his loftiest sayings. It is the work of Jesus which
Theists are carrying on, by worshipping, as he did,
the Father, and the Father alone, and by endeavour
ing to turn all men’s love, all men’s hopes, and all
men’s adoration, to that “ God and Father of all,
who is above all, and through all, and,” not in Jesus
only, but “ in us all.”
�20
On the Deity of Jesus of Nazareth.
APPENDIX.
“Josephus mentions a Zacharias, son of Baruch
(‘Wars of the Jews,’ Book iv., sec. 4), who was
slain under the circumstances described by Jesus.
His name would be more suitable at the close of the
long list of Jewish crimes, as it occurred just before
the destruction of Jerusalem. But, as it took place
about thirty-four years after the death of Jesus, it is
clear that he could not have referred to it; therefore,
if we admit that he made no mistake, we strike
a serious blow at the credibility of his historian, who
then puts into his mouth a remark he never uttered.”
�
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 & 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 deity of Jesus of Nazareth: an enquiry into the nature of Jesus by an examination of the synoptic gospels
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Besant, Annie Wood
Voysey, Charles [1828-1912] (ed)
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 20 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Appendix on the last page. "by the Wife of a Beneficed Clergyman edited and prefaced by Rev. Charles Voysey". [Title page]. The author is Annie Besant, an attribution from Dr Williams Library Catalogue and Besant's biographer G.M. Williams. Williams believes this to be her 'literary debut'. Printed by C.W. Reynell, London. From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
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
1873
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT121
Subject
The topic of the resource
Bible
Jesus Christ
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 deity of Jesus of Nazareth: an enquiry into the nature of Jesus by an examination of the synoptic gospels), 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
Bible-Criticism
Conway Tracts
Jesus Christ
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/e4c17cd8bc7f7904ead379efab1f7721.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=EeNilxj6IBggem-EUVLuq5ViUIRCpFzSi-p%7EL%7EK6maMwghq4sRG1%7E6g3bpkdrb1ifO3gxzefgWq75exPkXXsNgP3ai4LfCVi0HGZJzNuKkjm8FyUwn6ZKQ6zwOCJUiWeUeawQHKyYXooWkjlePEaKEDWr3cId8tHDWpjYokZTFTWYZAyLoiGwVsqObaUH2e2Blb3nUcMkYdRZm8vfR2OIPNHnOtKsrzaOW%7EZNOc7788AEOU4mS9yvu82tAQkKoaZwVULRNcok9oFIvlinGGPE497yygDMBVNvq4Nv6WCgcDe7HCjVVJuo2kGEYkOlxpLQ-QLxcgTC9n3UuyR6heyLA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
1fbae01cd789ada4a71128fb01268b0a
PDF Text
Text
RATIONAL PIETY
AND
PRAYERS FOR FAIR WEATHER.
BY
A CLERGYMAN OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
NO. 11, THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD,
UPPER NORWOOD, LONDON, S.E.
Price Threepence.
�TURNBULL AND SPEARS PRINTERS, EDINBURGH.
�RATIONAL PIETY AND PRAYERS
FOR FAIR WEATHER.
Dear Mr Scott,
You told me, the other day, that some Papers
on Prayer, which you intended soon to publish, were
in your hands. The few remarks I send, may, perhaps,
seem to you too poor and scanty to appear in good com
pany, but if you should think them worth printing, they
are at your service.
The unusually large rainfall of last year caused some
serious inconveniences, though there are good reasons
for believing that its entire results will be far more
beneficial than injurious. But many Christian people
recognized chastisement, and suspected angry dealing,
and so, after traditional precedent, displayed their faith
in God’s wisdom and goodness by calling for the use of
that modest expostulation and entreaty wherein the
Anglican Church deprecates “ a worthily deserved
plague of rain and waters.”
If the distribution and intensity of wet and dry
seasons were, in any conceivable manner or degree,
affected by the wills and actings of mankind, such
prayers as the Church was urged to offer might have
received an answer somewhere within the inscrutable
province of human intelligence, energy, and free will,
and, at any rate, would have gratified devout instincts
without crossing the dictates of reason and reverential
faith. But no relationship of physical cause and effect
can be imagined to exist between human power and
changes of weather.
The subject of prayer generally, regarded from an
�4
National Piety and
intellectual point of view, is profoundly difficult, if not
utterly inexplicable, and I shall not presume to enter
Upon it. But, believing firmly that, in God we live,
and move, and have our being, and that our spirits are
in contact with, and inspired by, Him, I can detect
nothing unreasonable in praying for spiritual blessings
—for moral strength, mental enlightenment, practical
wisdom. All things which are, or can be, influenced
by human knowledge, zeal, and aptitude, belong to
that mixed domain of created and Creative power, in
relation to which, prayer may rationally find a place,
and the intercourse of pleading want and dependence,
legitimate and profitable exercise. Such intercourse
can cite widely accumulated experience, in evidence
that it is a means of opening the soul to receive ac
cessions of light, and vigour, and love, and is thus a
powerful auxiliary for the conquest of difficulties, the
endurance of trial, and the more fully realized participa
tion of the Divine Nature. But when, quitting the
domain wherein finite co-operation and instrumentality
blend with Infinite Might, we pass into the higher
region occupied solely by superhuman wisdom and.
power, prayer has no defensible ground; it loses
its reasonable and pious features ; it asks for changes,
not in ourselves, but in God, and expresses only lack
of faith, of contentment, and of resignation.
To say that the aim of prayers for fine weather was
‘ to bend our will to God’s, not His to ours,’ is to mis
represent and evade the question really at issue.
Prayers for resignation imply no wish that God’s mode
of acting should be altered, but rather, a confession
that we are tempted to doubt and murmur, when we
ought humbly to submit and confide. Complaints of
excessive rain, and entreaties for different weather,
must not be confounded with supplications for enlarged
trust and readier submission. The fancy that God
punishes human sins by adjustments of physical ad
ministration within a sphere into which human actions
and their consequences do not penetrate, is too absurd
�Prayers for Fair Weather.
5
to merit attention. It is nnspiritual as well as puerile,
and suggests predominant vindictiveness too thirsty
to be satiated in the line of natural connection and
results. It draws no warrant from reason and ob
servation, and does nothing but arbitrarily multiply
difficulties, and undermine faith.
To acknowledge transgressions, and ill-desert, is well,
but the acknowledgment ceases to be devout, when
coupled with petitions that God will treat us more
kindly, by amending those general methods of His action
which we call laws of Nature. Can we not pray without
implying indictments against Him ? Piety should teach
us that He always does what is best, whatever our state
may be. Let us seek His presence to cleanse our con
sciences, to aid us in the work of self-reformation, and
in meeting the calls of duty, but let us shun thoughts
and words which impeach His government by craving
that rain and sunshine may be dispensed with greater
amiability, and a more tender consideration for our
needs. The rule of His dealings may be read in the
declaration : He maketli His sun to rise on the evil, and
on the good, and sendeth rain on the just, and on the
unjust, (St Matt. v. 45.)
Among the letters published in the Times newspaper,
on what was jocosely termed The Dilemma of the
Clergy, was one which illustrates the mingled credulity
and carelessness so frequently associated with Evan
gelical views. The Vicar of St. Mary’s, Islington, a
man respected and venerable, and (his theology ex
cepted) not deficient in shrewdness and common sense,
adduced in support of prayers for fine weather, a re
markable statement from St. James’s Epistle: Elias
was a man subject to like passions as toe are, and he
prayed earnestly that it might not rain ; and it rained
not on the earth by the space of three years and six
months. And he prayed again, and the lieaoen gave
rain, and the earth brought forth her fruit, (v. 17, 18.)
Now, there can be no dispute what the writer of
these words meant. He meant to affirm that three and
�6
Rational Piety and
a half years of drought, said to have been inflicted on
• the land of Israel, were begun, and ended, at Elijah’s
* - request. The case is cited as a clinching confirmation of
verse 16. The prayer of a righteous man availeth much
in its working, as the great prophet’s successful sup
plication proved. Before rashly quoting a passage of
this nature, Mr. D. Wilson ought, surely, to have
turned to the pages of the Old Testament, to see what
ground exists there for so startling an announcement.
The narrative of the drought and famine in Elijah’s
days is the same both in the Hebrew and Septuagint
Texts, and conveys no sort of intimation that prayer on
the prophet’s part either obtained, or removed, the heavy
visitation. On the contrary, the statement made in St
James’s Epistle seems to be not merely baseless, but
forbidden. The prophet declares,—As Jehovah the
God of Israel Liveth, before Whom I stand, there shall
not be dew nor rain these years, but according to my
word,—the sense quite plainly being, that he had re
ceived a revelation, and was commissioned to proclaim,
first the withholding, and then the granting of rain.
In the third year, the word of Jehovah came to Elijah,
saying, go shew thyself to Ahab, and I will send rain
upon the earth. Soon afterwards, Elijah said unto
Ahab ; get thee up, eat and drink, for there is a sound of
abundance of rain, (1 Kings xvii. 1 j xviii. 1 and 41.)
How the idea of much-availing prayer, averting and
procuring rain, can be grafted upon, or reconciled with,
these records, no rational mind can discover.
After the prophet knew, by the word of Jehovah,
that rain was at hand, he went up to the top of Mount
Carmel, and pending himself toward the earth, put his
face between his knees, and desired his servant to go
seven times and look towards the sea, and when he
heard that a little cloud was rising, he sent to Ahab
the message, prepare thy chariot, and get thee doivn,
that the rain stop thee not. (1 Kings xviii. 43, 44.)
The inaccuracy of haste, or imperfect memory, might
confuse this proceeding on the top of Carmel, with
�Prayers for Fair Weather.
7
prayer, and, aided by a lively imagination, might give
birth to such a representation as that which stands in
St James’s Epistle. But defects and blunders of this * •
kind must not be ascribed to a plenarily inspired ‘
Apostle. If he, while contributing to the second great
division of God’s Infallible Word, could make erroneous
inferences from the first, we cannot be sure that other
New Testament writers enjoyed absolute freedom from
error, and so are deprived of what is at once the
greatest bulwark to our faith, and the greatest barrier
to our thought.
In the judgment of the Vicar of St Mary’s, Islington,
the infallibly guided (and we must also presume in
fallibly preserved) words of St James, are an end of
all controversy; ‘The Holy Ghost has spoken,’ and
therefore, no matter what has been said, the saying must
be true. And the assumption that no single line of the
Canonical Books can be unfaithful or untrustworthy, is
not confined to dogmatists of the Evangelical School.
An Anglo-Catholic Divine of the straitest sect, dis
tinguished for his learning, modesty, and Christian
courtesy, Mr. J. W. Burgon, Fellow of Oriel College,
has assured all ‘who have ears to hear,’ that the Holy
Spirit has inspired every sentence, word, and syllable
of the Bible. And yet,—since the Sacred'Writings
nowhere claim for themselves an universal Inspiration
covering every statement, and exempting particular pas
sages from criticism,—this unreserved, easy confidence,
when indulged by Protestants, betrays a faculty of be
lieving without evidence, and requires, in order to
rational consistency, the intrusion of assumptions and
theories hardly compatible with Mr. D. Wilson’s wellknown opinions. Not to go beyond the instance under
consideration :—the existence of a third and finally
authoritative Inspiration, within the Church, is mani
festly needed to harmonize the inspired record of the
Old Testament Scriptures, with the inspired deductions
of St James. Rational interpretation must be shut out,
�8 Rational Piety and Prayers for Fair Weather.
and how can it be shut out otherwise than by the voice
of the Holy Ghost speaking decisively in, and through,
the organization of the Church 1
Rationalizing critics, at the suggestion of the
Devil, or of their own depraved hearts, would get rid
of difficulty, by the plausible supposition that St
James made a mistake, or that the obnoxious paragraph
is not his writing at all, but the interpolation of an early
transcriber. If against this view, the absolute truth
and genuineness of the verses should be maintained,
the innate corruption of intelligent but ‘unregenerate’
minds will probably (for is not Satan himself trans
formed into an angel of light ?) assume the garb of
reverence for the All-wise Ruler of Heaven and earth,
and protest that He is debased and slandered, when
He is said to have sent forth and recalled frightful
national calamity, at the instigation of one of His own
creatures, a man of like passions with ourselves. And,
if still the marvellous assertion of St James’s Epistle
should be upheld as among the veritable words of God,
and utterances of His Spirit, then, reflecting men
in their perverse malignity and self-reliant rebellion,
will say, “ so much the worse for faith in the Bible,
and in the God the Bible thus exhibits.”
Had some notorious sceptic written in the Times, as
the Rev. Daniel Wilson did, on the 4th of January
1873, the design of drawing attention to a weak point
in the Sacred Volume would have been obvious. But
no one will imagine that Mr Wilson acted in guile.
Is there not room to suspect, notwithstanding our
eager professions, that Christian trust in the Great
Creator and Preserver of all mankind, falls short of
the standard attained by the Frenchman who remarked,
that ‘ he did not believe he could himself manage the
universe better than God does ? ’
I am, dear Mr. Scott,
Yours, &c., &c.
A CLERGYMAN OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
�
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 & 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
Rational piety and prayers for fair weather
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Clergyman of the Church of England
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 8 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed by Turnbull and Spears, Edinburgh. Date of publication from British Library.
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
1873
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT164
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 (Rational piety and prayers for fair weather), 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
Subject
The topic of the resource
Prayer
Conway Tracts
Prayer
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/98e290544b55a5f9790d43d04cd1ef93.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=GryHgVnapRVJ5HIfi9Fz1ysmxYM51jrZTV4bTmOgLKWO6LStCQGDVb9Pz7juJs51i452-Gqog1isTZQVUtWj8g6TVnex0pBnkaAl3fkS2NvD4GFoFeAaCnxv2WyeiEo4jeyewkYdOMhfL6tEJRp%7E8ux6da3bxTsBHXa4dNf9jqJ1szHzHZc0kMnhU2DjAGGMLaM2C9KBKhDacNUNgp%7E4N8SMjW8EtKCSRJuI4ql4fdeY%7E9JqZf4D-ecGvpgvnee6CmvnMEIsM%7EZxqXQ3U9SZkMlyHFQyvnypomfR5GUzscoscb5EhFAS3tbQPbLvXVZMnqHGPq5NXnVXHfd2jDYxDQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
fc433494be46b3d19d24d6b0aa20cbef
PDF Text
Text
DEDICATORY SERVICES
OF THE
, PARKER MEMORIAL 2
E ETING
HOUS
BY THE
TWENTY-EIGHTH CONGREGATIONAL SOCIETY,
OF BOSTON,
Sunday, Sept. 81, 187’3.
BOSTON:
COCHRANE & SAMPSON, PRINTERS,
—
9 BROMFIELD STREET.
1873.
��SERVICES.
I. DEDICATION HYMN.
BY SAMUEL JOHNSON.
(SungMuiChoir^
To Light, that shines in stars and souls ;
To Law, that round* the world with calm ;
To Love, whose equal triumph rolls
Through martyr’s prayer and angel’s psalm, —
We wed these walls with unseen bands,
In holier shrines not built with hands.
May purer sacrament be here
Than ever dwelt in rite or creed, —
Hallowed the hour with vow sincere
To serve the time’s all-pressing need,
And rear, its heaving sea&above,
Strongholds of Freedom, folds of Love.
Here be the wanderer homeward led ;
Here living streams in fullness "flow;
And every hungering soul be fed,
That yearns the Eternal Will to know;
Here conscience hurl her stern reply
To mammon’s lust and slavery’s lie.
Speak, Living God, thy full command
Through prayer of faith and word of power,
That we with girded loins may stand
To do thy work and wait thine hour,
And sow, ’mid patient toils and tears,
For harvests in serener years.
�4
II. REMARKS OF JOHN C. HAYNES,
CHAIRMAN OF THE STANDING COMMITTEE OF THE TWENTY-EIGHTH CON
GREGATIONAL SOCIETY, OF BOSTON.
As your representative here to-day in the dedicatory services
of this Memorial to Theodore Parker, the first minister and
founder of our Society, what I have to say will consist mainly
of a brief review of the history of the Society.
On January 22d, 1845, a meeting was held at Marlboro’ Chapel
by several friends of free thought, at which the following reso
lution was passed: —
'•'•Resolved, That the Rev. Theodore Parker shall have a chance to be
heard in Boston.”
At that time he was preaching at West Roxbury. The
Melodeon was hired for Sunday mornings, and Mr. Parker
preached his first sermon there February 16th, 1845, on “The
Importance of Religion.” In November of that year the Society
was regularly organized as a “ body for religious worship ” under
the laws of Massachusetts, the name “Twenty-eighth Congre
gational Society of Boston ” was adopted, and Mr Parker, on
January 4th, 1846, was regularly installed as its minister. The
Society remained at the Melodeon until the fall of 1852, when,
for the sake of a larger audience-room for the great number
who flocked to hear Mr. Parker, it removed to the Music Hall,
then recently erected. There Mr. Parker preached from Sun
day to Sunday until his illness on January 9th, 1859. His last
discourse was on the Sunday previous. He continued, however,
to be the minister of the Society untill his death, which oc
curred May 10th, i860. From the time of the illness of Mr.
Parker to bis death, the Society continued its meetings, in the
hope at least of his partial recovery. After his death, the
Society, seeing the continued need of an unfettered platform
for free thought, and for the maintenance and diffusion of just
ideas in regard to theology, morality and religion, and whatever
else concerns the public welfare, of course maintained its organ
ization and continued its meetings, engaging as preachers the
best expounders of religious thought and feeling within its
reach, laymen as well as clergymen, women as well as men..
�The meetings have been held, without any interruptions except
those of the usual summer vacations, up to the present time,
a period of more than thirteen years since Mr. Parker’s death.
We have had financial and other discouragements, but the
enthusiasm of the Society for the cause of “ absolute religion,”
— the feeling that a pulpit like ours was needed, in which earnest
men'and women could freely express their views upon religious,
social and political questions, — have kept us united and in
action.
Our first serious misfortune, after the death of Mr. Parker,
occurred in April, 1863, when, in consequence of the several
months needful for the putting up of the Great Organ, we were
obliged to vacate the Music Hall and go back to the Melodeon.
Our second principal misfortune took plpce in September,
1866, when, in consequence of the Melodeon being required for
business purposes, we were compelled to remove to the Parker
Fraternity Rooms, No 5 54/Washington Street.
In each case, the removal from a larger to a smaller hall re
duced our numbers.
In May, 1865, ’Rev. David A. Wasson was settled as the
minister of the Society, which position he held until his resigna
tion in July, 1866. Previous to Mr. Wasson’s settlement, Rev.
Samuel R. Calthrop, now of Syracuse, N.Y., occupied the pul
pit continuously for several months.
During 1867 and 1868, for more than a year, Rev. Samuel
Longfellow preached for the Society on successive Sundays.
Mr. Longfellow has continued to preach for us occasionally
ever since.
On December 13th, 1868, Rev. James Vila Blake was installed
by the Society as its minister, and remained our pastor nearly
three years, until his resignation in November, 1871.
Aside from these, we have had the occasional pulpit service of
many men and women, noble in character, and eminent in abil
ity. Among them are Ralph Waldo Emerson, William Lloyd
Garrison, Wendell Phillips, William R. Alger, John Weiss,
Samuel Johnson, O. B. Frothingham, John W. Chadwick,
Francis E. Abbot, Ednah D. Cheney, William J. Potter, Celia
Burleigh, William H. Spencer, and W. C. Gannett.
�6
The Parker Fraternity, which is an offshoot of the Twenty
eight Congregational Society, representing particularly its social
element, was organized in 1858, and has been a valuable adjunct
to the Society. Through its public lectures it has largely in
fluenced public opinion, particularly in the days of the anti
slavery reform and the momentous years of the rebellion. It
naturally recognized the rights of woman, and year after year
placed women among its lecturers.
The Twenty-eighth Congregational Society has always, from
the start, had its seats free. All who chose to come to its meet
ings have been welcome. The contributions for payment of
expenses have always been voluntary. The Society has never
had a creed, and has never used those observances with water,
bread and wine which the sects call “ sacraments.” Through
the twenty-eight years of its existence, the feeling against these
has been constant and universal, so that no question in regard
to them has ever arisen.
Now, for the first time, we have a building we can call our
own. We have erected it as a memorial to our first great
teacher and standard-bearer, Theodore Parker. We dedicate it
to the ideas he represented: namely, to truth, to humanity, to
the free expression of free thought, to duty, to mental, moral
and social progress, and to the diffusion of-religion without
superstition.
III.
SCRIPTURE READING.
[A part of the following selection from the Scriptures of different nations was read.]
Let us meditate on the adorable light of the Divine Creator; may He
quicken our minds.
What .1 may now utter, longing for Thee, do Thou accept it: make me
possessed of God !
Preserver, Refuge 1 leave us not in the power of the evil: be with us when
afar, be with us when near; so sustained, we shall not fear. We have no
other Friend but Thee, no other blessedness, no other Father. There is
none like Thee in heaven or earth, O Mighty One: give us understanding
as a father his sons. Thine we are ; we go on our way upheld by Thee.
Day after day we approach Thee with reverence : take us into Thy pro- l
tection as a father his sons. Thou art as water in the desert to him who I
longs for Thee.
�f
7
. •
Presence us by knowledge from sin, and lift us up, for our work and for
' oumife. Deliver us from evil!
Spirit alone is this All. Him know ye as the One Soul alone; dismiss
all other words.
The Eternal One is without form, without beginning, self-existent Spirit.
The Supreme Spirit, whose creation is the universe, always dwelling in
the heart of all beings, is revealed by the heart. They who know Him
become immortal. With the eye can no man see Him. They who know
him as dwelling within become immortal.
He is the Soul in all beings, the best in each, the inmost nature of
all; their beginning, middle, end: the all-watching Preserver, Father and
Mother of the universe; Supporter, Witness, Habitation, Refuge, Friend:
the knowledge of the wise, the silence of mystery, the splendor of light.
He, the One, moveth not, yet is swifter than thought. He is far, he is
near. He is within all, he is beyond all. He it is who giveth to his crea
tures according to their needs. He is the Eternal among things transitory,
the Life of all that lives, and being One fumlleth we desires of many. The
wise who see Him within themselves, theirs is everlasting peace.
Dearer than son, dearer than wealth, dearer than all* other beings, is He
who dwelleth deepest within.
. They who worship me, He saith, dwell in me and I in them. They who
worship me shall never die. By him who seeks me, I am easily found. To
such as seek me with constant love, I give the power to come to me. I will
deliver thee from all thy transgressions.
He who seeth all in God, and God in all, despiseth not any.
Hear the secret of the wise. Be not anxious ’ for Subsistence : it is pro
vided by the Maker. He who hath clothed the birds with their bright plu
mage will also feed thee. How should riches bring thee joy. He has all
good things whose soul is constant.
If one considers the whole universe as' existing in the Supreme Spirit,
how can he give his soul to sin ?
He leadeth men to righteousness that they may find unsullied peace.
. Who can be glorious without virtue ?
He who lives'pure in thought, free from malice, holy in life, feeling ten
derness toward all creatures, humble and sincere, has God ever in his heart.
The Eternal makes not his abode within the heart of that man who covets
another’s wealth, who injures any living thing, who speaks harshness or
untruth.
. The good have mercy on all as on themselves. He who is kind to those
who are kind to him does nothing great. To be good to the evil-doer is
what the wise call good. It is the duty of the good man, even in the mo
ment of his destruction, not only to forgive, but to seek to bless his de
stroyer.
By truth is the universe upheld.
Speak the truth : he drieth to the very roots who speaketh falsehood.
�8
Do righteousness : than righteousness there is nothing greater.
Honor thy father and thy mother. Live in peace with others. Speak ill
of none. Deceive not even thy enemy. Forgiveness is sweeter than
revenge. Speak kindly to the poor.
Whatever thou.dost, do as offering to the Supreme.
Lead me forth, O God, from unrighteousness into righteousness; from
darkness into light; from death into immortality 1
There is an invisible, eternal existence beyond this visible, which does
not perish when all things perish, even when all that exists in form returns
unto God from whom it came.
—Hindu {Brahminic) Scriptures*
O Thou in whom all creatures trust, perfect amidst the revolutions of
worlds, compassionate toward all, and their eternal salvation, bend down
into this our sphere, with all thy society of perfected ones. Thou Law of
all creatures, brighter than the sun, in faith we humble ourselves before
Thee. Thou, who dwellest in the world of rest, before whom all is but tran
sient, descend by thine almighty power and bless us !
Forsake ail evil, bring forth goo4, rule thy own thought: such is the path
to end all .pain.
My law is a law of mercy for all.
As a mother, so long as she lives, watches over her child, so among all
beings let boundless good-will prevail.
Overcome the evil with good, the avaricious with generosity, the false with
truth.
Earnestness is the way of immortality.
Be true and thou ahalt be free*. Ta be true belongs to thee, thy success,
to the Creator.
Not by meditation can the truth be reached, though I keep up continual
devotion. The. wall of error, is. broken by walking in the commandments of
God.
—Buddhist Scriptures.
In the name of God, the Giver, the Forgiver, the Rich in Love 1 Praise
be to the God, whose name is He who always was, always is, always shall be.
He is the Ruler, the Mighty, the Wise : Creator, Sustainer, Refuge, De
fender.
May Thy kingdom, come, O'Lord, wherein Thou makest good to the right
eous poor.
He through whose deed the world increaseth in purity shall come into Thy
kingdom.
This I ask of Thee, tell me the right, O Lord, teach me : Thou Ruler over
all, the Heavenly, the Friend for both worlds!
I pray Thee, the Best, for the best.
1 Teach Thou me out of Thyself.
The Lord has the decision: may it happen to us as He wills.
�9
“Which is the one prayer,” asked Zarathrusta, “that in greatness, good
ness and beauty is worth all that is between heaven and earth ? ” And the
Lord answered him, That one wherein one renounces all evil thoughts, evil
words, and evil works.
Praise to the Lord, who rewards those who perform good deeds accord
ing to His wijl, who purifies the obedient at last, and redeems even the
wicked out of hell.
—- Parsee Scriptures.
Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one.
What doth the Lord thy God require of thee, but to reverence the Lord
thy God, to walk in all his ways: to love him and to serve him with all thy
heart and with all thy soul 1
For the Lord your God is a great God, a mighty and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, neither taketh gifts. He executeth justice for the
fatherless and the widow and loveth the stranger.* Love ye therefore the
stranger. Ye are the children of the Lord your God.
Ye shall not steal, neither deal falsely, neither lie one to another. Neither
shall thou profane the name of thy God. Thou shalt no,t defraud thy neigh
bor, but in righteousness shalt thou judge him,
Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart.
But thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
If thine enemy hunger feed him, iMie thirst give him drink. So shalt
thou heap coals of fire upon his head.
Bring no more vain oblations. Wash you, make you clean; cease to do
evil, learn to do good ; seek justice, relieve the oppressed.
Though your sins be as scarlet they shall be white as snow, though they
be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
Justice will I lay to the line and righteousness to the plummet.
When Thy justice is in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn
righteousness.
The Lord will teach us his ways and we will walk in his paths. And he
shall judge the nations. And they shall beat their swords into plough
shares, and their spears into pruning-hooks : nation shall not lift up sword
against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.
For behold, I create a new heavens and a new earth. The wilderness and
the solitary place shall be glad, and the desert shall blossom as the rose.
The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want. He maketh me to lie down
in green pastures, he leadeth me beside the still waters. He restoreth my
life, He leadeth me in the right paths. Yea, though I walkthrough the val
ley of the deadly shadow, I will fear no evil, for Thou art with me: Thy
rod and thy staff they comfort me. Surely goodness and mercy shall follow
me all the days of my life.
—Jewish ^Canonical) Scriptures.
2
�IO
Wisdom is glorious, and never fadeth away. And love is the keeping of
her laws : and the giving heed unto her laws is the assurance of incorruptionj
And incorruption maketh us near unto God.
For wisdom, which is the worker of all things, taught me. In her is an
understanding spirit: holy, one only, yet manifold ; subtle, living, undefiled,
loving the thing that is good, ready to do good; kind to man, steadfast,
sure, having all power ; overseeing all things, and going through all mind ;
pure and most subtle spirit. For wisdom is more moving than any motion,
She passeth and goeth through all things by reason of her pureness. For
she is the breath of the power of God, and a pure influence flowing from the
glory of the Almighty. She is the brightness of the everlasting light, the. un
spotted mirror of the power of God and the image of his goodness. And be
ing one, she can do all things: and remaining in herself, she maketh all
things new; and in all ages entering into holy souls, she maketh them friends
of God and prophets.
Thou lovest all things that are ; thou savest all: for they are Thine, O
Lord, thou lover of souls. For Thine incorruptible spirit is in all things.
To know Thee is perfect righteousness ; yea, to know Thy power is the
root of immortality.
For righteousness is immortal.
— Jewish (Apocryphal} Scriptures.
Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed
are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for
they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they who do hunger and thirst af
ter righteousness, for they shall be filled. Blessed are the merciful, for they
shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.
Blessed are they who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is
the kingdom of heaven.
Love your enemies ; bless them who curse you; pray for them who despitefully use you and persecute you, that ye may be the children of your
Father who is in heaven. Be ye therefore perfect as your Father in heaven
is perfect.
God is Spirit, and they who worship him must worship him in spirit.
The Father who dwelleth in me doeth the works. My Father worketh
hitherto and I work.
God is Love ; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in
him.
If we love one another, God dwelleth in us. And he that keepeth his
commandments dwelleth in Him, and He in him.
Behold what manner of love the Father has bestowed upon us that we
should be called the sons of God.
And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself as He is pure.
As many as are led by the spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
�11
Unto us there is but one God, the Father.
One God, and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you
all.
He hath made us ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter, but of
the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
Now the Lord is that spirit: and where the spirit of the Lord is there is
liberty.
For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty. Only use not your liberty
as an occasion for the flesh, but that by love ye may serve one another.
And now abide faith, hope, love : but the greatest of these is love.
Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are
honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever
things are lovely: if there be any virtue *and any praise, think on these
things. The things which ye have learned and received and heard, do :
and the God of peace shall be with you.
— Christian Scriptures.
IV.
PRAYER.
BY SAMUEL LONGFELLOW.
V.
DEDICATION HYMN.
WRITTEN FOR THE OCCASION BY W. C. GANNETT.
(Sung by Choir and Congregation?)
O Heart-of all the shining day,
The green earth’s still Delight,
Thou Freshness in the morning wind,
Thou Silence of the night;
Thou Beauty of our temple-walls,
Thou Strength within the stone, —
What is it we can offer thee
Save what is first thine own ?
Old memories throng: we think of one —
Awhile with us he trod —
Whose gospel words yet bloom and burn;
We called him, — Gift of God.
Thy gift again; we bring thine own,
This memory, this hope;
This faith that still one Temple holds
Him, us, within its cope.
-•
�12
Not that we see, but sureness comes
When such as he have passed ;
The freshness thrills, the silence fills,
Life lives then in the vast;
They pour their goodness into it,
It reaches to the star;
The Gift of God becomes himself,
More real, more near, so far !
VI. DISCOURSE.
BY SAMUEL LONGFELLOW.
I greet you upon your gathering in this new and fair home.
It is but a change of place, — not of mind or purpose. You lay
no new foundations of the .spirit. What foundation can any man
lay deeper, broader, more eternal than those you have always
had, — faith in man and faith in God, whom man reveals ? You
build no new walls of spiritual shelter: what other can you ever
need than you have always had, — the sense of the encompass
ing, protecting, and perfect laws, the encircling God ? What
better roof could overarch your souls than the reverential, trust
ful sense of the Heavenly Power and Love; the Truth, Justice,
and Beauty that are above us all; the Perfect which lifts us to
heaven, and opens heaven to us and in us, even as in Rome’s
Pantheon — temple of all the Gods, or of the All-God — the
arching dome leaves in its centre an open circle, through
which the infinite depths of sky are seen that tempt the spirit
to soar and soar, without a bound, farther than any bird hath
ever lifted wing or floating air-ship of man’s building can ever
rise! What spires and pinnacles could you raise that would
point upward better than that ideal within us, that haunting
sense of Perfection which forever calls us to a better manhood,
and toward which in all our best moments we long and aspire ?
What breadth of enlarged space could you open, with hospita
ble welcome of free place for all who would come, beyond that
entire freedom of thinking, of speaking, of hearing, which have
been yours, and your offering to others, for so many years ?
Eyer since, indeed, you gathered together, resolved that “ Theo-
�13
dore Parker should have a chance to be heard in Boston,” and
forrwsd the Twenty-eighth Congregational Society. Founded
in the ecclesiastical independence of that name, you, in coming
here, have not to break away from any ecclesiastical organization. Nor do you need now or ever to ask leave of bishop, or
approbation of consistory or council, — or fear the censure of
either, — for anything that you may do here, for any one whom
Bou may invite here, for anything that may be said here, for any
rite or form or ceremonial that you here may establish or may
omit. Springing from such root of sympathy with fair play and
freedom of speech, — and especially of thought and speech that
were under some ban. of heresy, — you have not in coming here
had to break away from any traditions of orthodoxy or spiritual
constraint. The traditions you bring here, are all the other way.
It is to no experiment of liberty that you \bpen this place of
meeting; to no untried ideas and principles, but to well-tested
ones, which you see no ground to give up or to abate. For
ideas and principles you have, — though you are bound by no
Breed. Bound by no creed, I. say, — refusing to proclaim any.
Not, however, without individual beliefs, and doubtless with
Substantial agreement amid your varieties of opinion ; but not
imposing your beliefs upon each other, as conditions of fellow
ship, still less upon any as condition® of salvation. You do not
impose them upon yourselves as fiscal; but hope that they will
grow out into something larger, fuller, deeper. You may be
afloat; but you are not adrift. You may not know what new
worlds of Truth lie before you ; but you know where you are,
and in what direction you are going. Beneath you is the deep
of God; over you, his eternal stars; within you, the magnet
which, with all its variations, is yet a trustworthy guide. Your
hand is on the helm. The sacred forces and laws of nature
encompass you. While you obey them you will not be lost.
“If your bark sink, ’tis to another sea.” You cannot go beyond
God.
This great principle of Freedom of Inquiry, Liberty of
^Thought, you bring with you. And may I not say for you
that you re-affirm it here ? In using it, it has not failed you or
betrayed you or harmed you. You have not found it fatal or
�14
'
dangerous. It has not led you into indifference, or into license
or moral delinquency. It may have led you to deny some old
beliefs, but it has not left you in denial or unbelief. Its free
atmosphere has been a tonic to your faith. It has brought you
to convictions, —the more trustworthy and precious because
freely reached by your own thought,, and tested by your own
experience, and fitted to your own state of mind. No longer a
report, but something you have seen for yourselves. The story
is told of a well-known hater of shams, that, a new minister
coming into his neighborhood, he sought an opportunity of talk
with him : he wanted to learn, he said, whether this man knew]
himself, anything of God, or only believed that eighteen hunj
dred years ago there lived one who knew something of him. Is
not our faith that in which we have settled confidence, — what
we trust our wills to in action ? It is that to which we gravi
tate, and in which we rest when all disturbing influences are
withdrawn. It is that to which we find ourselves recurring
from all aberrations of questioning and doubt, as to a practical
certainty. We may not be able to answer all arguments against
it, but nevertheless it commends itself to us as true. There is
to us more reason for holding to it than there are reasons for
rejecting it. So, while belief may be called an act of the
understanding, faith is rather a consent of the whole natureJ
It is, therefore, more instinctive than argumentative, though
reasoning forms an element in it. And it is the mighty power
which it is, removing mountains, and the secret of victory,
because it is this consensus of thought, feeling, and will, —• a
deposit of their long experiences, an act of the whole man. It
is structural and organic. But it need not be blind or irrational.
If we must differentiate it from knowledge, I would say that,
while we may define knowledge to be assurance upon outward
grounds, faith is assurance upon real but interior grounds. I
repeat this because many people seem to think that faith is
assurance without any ground. Now that our faith may be
really such as I have described, it must be a personal convic
tion, from our own thought and experience. And that it may
be this, we must have liberty of thinking without external con
straint.
�You do not find that this liberty of yours isolates you. Others,
who count it dangerous, or who dislike the use you make of it,
may cut you off from their fellowship. But the liberty which
frees you from artificial restraints leaves you open to the natural
attractions, and over and through all walls and lines you find a
large fellowship of sympathy in thought and feeling. The elec
tric instincts of spiritual brotherhood overleap all barriers of
-,creed and organization, even of excommunication. Above all
are you bound by such invisible, deep ties with all the noble
company of the heretics and pioneers of thought: and a noble
company it is. For the line of so-called heresy is nearly as
ancient, and quite as honorable, i J that of orthodoxy. Think
of the names that belong to it!
Let me say further thatfthis liberty of yours — your birth
right and sacred charge — is not lawlessn<Ss. You have never
felt it to be so. In a universe of law no true liberty can be
that. It is not that which has made the soul of man thrill as
when a trumpet sounds ; not that to which the noblest men and
women have sacrificed popularity, fortuneBand life. How fool
ishly Mr. Ruskin talks about liberty, misusing his eloquent pen ;
saying that we need none of it; and taking for its symbol the
capricious vagaries of a house-fly ! Is it a Bouse-fl^baprice that
has made the hearts of true menOleap high and willingly bleed
into stillness ; which has been dearer than friend or lover, than
ease or life ? Your liberty, I say, is not lawlessness, — it is not
whim and caprice. It is simply thelthrowing off all bondage of
tradition and conformity and prescription and ecclesiasticism,—
every external compulsion and imposition in behalf of the free,
natural action of the mind and heart. It rejects outward rule
in behalf of inward law. It refuses obedience to outward dicta
tion in behalf of its allegiance to the Truth which is within.
Thus it rejects bonds, but accepts bounds ; for all law is force
acting within bounds, — that is, under fixed and orderly condi
tions. Your liberty is order, not disorder.
Your liberty, again, is not rude or defiant. You do not flout
authority: you give due weight to the natural authority of supe
rior knowledge, wisdom, conscientiousness, holiness. But you
acknowledge no human authority which claims to be infallible, or
�i6
to impose itself upon you as absolute; none which would deny to
you the right — or seek to release you from the duty — of thinking
for yourself what is true to you, of judging for yourself what is
right for you. The opinion of the wisest you will not accept,
in any matter that interests you, unless it commends itself to
your thought, to your conscience, is justified by your experi
ence. You will not take your religious opinions ready made
from pope or synod or apostle. God has given you power—•
and therefore laid upon you the duty — of forming your own.
In that work you will gladly accept all help, willingly listen to
the words of the wise and good ; but their real authority is in
their power to convince your mind ; and the final appeal is to
your own soul. Is inspiration claimed for any, its proof must
be in its power to inspire you. Till it does it is no word of God
to you.
Yet once more, this liberty — won by pain of those gone
before, and by your own fidelity—-is yours not for its own sake
chiefly, not as an end. It is yours as opportunity. It will be a
barren liberty if it be not used. What good will the right of
free inquiry do to a man who never inquires ? Of what advan
tage freedom of thought to one who never thinks ? Of what
value the right of private judgment to. one who never exercises
it ? Freedom, I say, is but opportunity. It is an atmosphere in
which the 'mind should expand unhindered in its inbreathing of
Truth; in which all virtues should grow in strength, all sweet
and loving and devout feelings flower into beauty and fra
grance ; in which the character, unconstrained by artificial
bondages, should grow into the full statue of manhood, the full
possession and free play of faculty. It is in vain that you have
put away infallible church and infallible Bible and official media
tor, and priesthood and ritual, from between you and God, if
you never avail yourself of that immediate access ; if your soul
never springs into the arms of the Eternal Love, nor rests itself
trustfully on the Eternal Strength, nor listens reverently to the
whispers of the Eternal Word, nor enters into the peace of
communion with the Immutable.
Our freedom is founded in faith, not in denial. It springs from
faith in man. The popular theology is founded upon the idea
�i7
of human incapacity : ours upon faith in human capacity. We
believe, not in the Fall of Man, but in the Rise of Man. We
believe, not in a chasm between man and God to be bridged
over only by the atoning death of a God, but in a chasm
between man’s attainment and his possibility, between his
lower and his higher nature, to be bridged over by growth,
government, and culture. We believe that there is more good
in man generally than evil. And the evil we believe to be, not
a native disability, but an imperfection or a misuse, an excess
or perversion, of faculties and instincts whose natural or right
use is good. We believe sin is not an infinite evil, but a finite
one, — incidental, not structural. Man is not helpless in its
toils ; but every man has the fiements of good in him which
may overcome it, and all 'fidefled helps. It is a disease, — some
times a dreadful one, — but notfebsolutely fatal, since there is a
healing power in his nature, and in the universe around and
above him; and the excess or ‘mlsmrection may be overcome by
the inward effort and outward influences which shall strengthen
into supremacy the higher faculties which rightfully control and
direct the lower. We believe iff! the existence of these higher
faculties as original in man’s constitution, — reason, conscience,
ideality, unselfish love. These are as much a part of his nature
as the senses and the animal mind. When rightly used they
are as valid, — not infallible, but trustworthy. They will not
necessarily lead, astray, as the popular theology teaches, but
probably lead aright. That theology, not having faith in human
nature, cannot believe that freedom of thinking is safe for men.
Protestantism proclaims indeed the “ right of private judgment,”
but it is merely the right to read the Jewish and Christian
Bible, and to accept unquestioning its declarations, bowing nat
ural reason, heart, and conscience to its texts, believed to be the
miraculously inspired and infallible Word of God, the “ perfect
rule of faith and practice.” The Roman Catholic Church, far
more logical, seeing that private judgment gets such a variety
of meaning out of this “ perfect rule,” declares that an infallible
Bible, to be such a rule, needs an infallible interpreter,—namely,
the church, or, latterly, the Pope speaking for the church. It,
therefore, logically denies freedom of individual thinking as
�18
dangerous. Father Newman, indeed, with amusing simplicity,
declares that nowhere is liberty of thought more encouraged
than in the Roman Church, since, he says, she allows a long
discussion of every tenet and dogma before it is definitely
defined and proclaimed. Yes: but after? We can only smile
at such a pretension. In London, a friend said to me, “ I do
not see but these Broad Churchmen have freedom to say every
thing that they want to say in their pulpits.” I answered, “ Per
haps so, but then they do not want to say all that you and I
should want to say.” But of what they wish to say or think
much must require an immense stretching of the articles to
which they have subscribed : I do not speak of conscience, for I
will not judge another’s. But what a trap to conscience, what
a temptation to at least mental dishonesty, must such subscrip
tion be! And the Liturgy, from which no word may be omitted,
though many a priest must say officially what he does not indi
vidually believe, — can that be good for a man ? I know what
may be said on the other side, but to us it will seem that all
advantages are dearly purchased at such cost. The Unitarians,
the Protestants of Protestants, in their revolt from Calvinism,
proclaimed the right of free inquiry. And, let it be remembered
to their credit, they have refused to announce an authoritative
creed. But they have not had full faith in their own principles
and ideas. They have hesitated and been timid in their appli
cation. They have been suspicious and unfriendly toward those
who went farther than they in the use of their freedom of think
ing. They have written up, “No Thoroughfare” and “Danger
ous Passing” on their own road. They have now organized
round the dogma of the Lordship and Leadership of Jesus ; and
invite to their fellowship, not all who would be “ followers of
God, as dear children,” but only those who “ wish to be follow
ers of Christ.”
I do not forget that in all churches, Romanist and Protestant,
there is a spirit of liberty, a leaven of free thought, which is
creating a movement in them all,—■ an inner fire which is break
ing the crust of tradition and creed and ecclesiasticism. It
shows itself in the Old Catholic movement in Romanism ; the
Broad Church in Anglicanism ; the Liberal wing in Orthodoxy ;
the Radicalism in “ Liberal Christianity.”
�19
But the freedom which in these is inconsistent, imperfect, or
rmwelcome, with you is organic and thorough. Our faith in it,
I said, springs out of our faith in man and God, to which indeed
our freedom has led us. We think that man can be trusted to
search for the truth without constraint or hindrance, because
we think that his mind was made for truth, as his eye for light;
and that to his mind, fairly used, the truth will reveal itself as
the light does to his eye. And we believe that in his sincere
search he is never unassisted by the Spirit of Truth. We do
not say that he will make no mistakes, or that he will know all
truth all at once. But if a man be earnest and sincere, his mis
takes will be his teachers : his errors wilHbi but his imperfect
apprehension of some truth. We believe that all truth that has
ever come to man, including religious truth, has come through
the use of his native faculties'^ that this is the condition of all
revelation, and ample to account for all revelations. We, therefore, utterly discard all distinction between natural and revealed
religion. We should as soon speak of natural and revealed
astronomy, or establish separate professorships for teaching
them. Newton revealed to men the facnfof the universe which
his natural faculties discovered, and which thequniverse revealed
to him using his faculties. Some of these facts were Unknown
before to the wisest men ; some were only dimly guessed. Did
that prove his knowledge superhuman ? Would it be a sensi
ble question to ask, Why, if human reason were Capable of dis
covering them, were they not 'known before ? Yet such ques
tions are asked in religion, as if unanswerable I We .believe
that the human faculties are adequate for their end. Among
them we recognize spiritual faculties, framed for the perception
of spiritual truths, — a religious capacity adequate to its end.
We find religion — a sense of deity — as universal and as natu
ral to man as society, government, language, science. You
know how the latest and completest investigations into the
ancient religions of the world confirm this belief. They show
that the great religious ideas and sentiments — of God, of Vir
tue, of Love, of Immortality — have been taught with remarka
ble unanimity in all these religions. These are mingled in all
with much that is mythological, unscientific, local, personal,
�20
temporary. But they have all contained that which elevated,
consoled, and redeemed the souls of men. Under all of them,
men have lived the truth they professed, and have suffered and
died in its behalf. Most of them have had their prophet, be
lieved to have been the chosen friend of God, sent to communi
cate His word to the world. He has been worshiped by his
followers, glorified with miracle, deified. In view of these facts,
it is impossible to regard any one of them as the only, the uni
versal, or the perfect religion. Christianity, therefore, cannot
any longer be regarded as other than one of the religions of the
world, sharing the qualities of them all. It has its bright cen
tral truths, eternal as the soul of man, elevating, comforting,
redeeming. It has its elements of mythology, its personal and
local traits, peculiar to itself. What is peculiar in it can never
become universal: what is universal in it cannot be claimed as
its peculiar property. The Christianity of the New Testament
centres in the idea that Jesus was the miraculously attested
Messiah, the King, long expected, of the Jews. “If ye believe
not that I am he ye shall perish in your sins.” “ Every spirit
that confesseth that Jesus, the Messiah, is come in the flesh, is
of God ; every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus is the Mes
siah come in the flesh, is not of God.” “ Whosoever shall con
fess that Jesus is the Son of God [that is, the Messiah], God
dwelleth in him.” “Whosoever believes that Jesus is the Mes
siah, is born of God.” This was the primitive Christian confes
sion,— the test of belief or unbelief, the test of discipleship,
the condition of salvation. Paul enlargecl the domain of the
Messiah’s kingdom to include all of the Gentiles who would
acknowledge him; declared that in his own life-time he should
see Jesus returning to take the Messianic throne, and looked to
see the time when “ every knee should bow, and every tongue
confess that Jesus was the Christ;” “whom God had raised
from the dead, and set at his own right hand, far above all prin
cipality and might and dominion and every name that is named.”
This was the primitive Christian confession. Seeing that it has
never come to pass, that it was a mistaken idea, some modern
Christians idealize the thought, and say that Jesus is morally
and. spiritually King among men. But that is not the New
/
�21
Testament idea, which is literal, not figurative. This Messianic
idea, in its most literal sense, colors the Christian scriptures
BRfrough and through. And with it, its correlative idea of an
immediately impending destruction and renovation of the wor Id,
vThich was to accompany the Messianic appearance. A great
many of the precepts of the New Testament have their ground
in this erroneous notion of the writers, and have no significance
or application apart from it. It is such things as these that
make it impossible for Christianity,- as it stands in the records,
to be the universal or absolute religion. Just as like things in
Brahminism, Buddhism, Judaism, prevent any one of these, as
it stands in its scriptures, from becoming the Religion of the
World. What is local, personal, peculiar, special in each, is of
its nature transient, — the temporary environment and wrappage
of the truth. What is universal in each, — the central spiritual
and moral ideas which re-appear in them all, — these cannot be
■called by the name of any one of them. These, it seems me,
are neither Judaism, Buddhism, nor Christianity,— they are
Religion.
Religion, — a name how often taken in vain, how often perKrerted ! but in its . true essence what a joy, what an emancipation, what a consolation, what an inspiration ! What a life it
has been in the world! Corrupted and betrayed, made the
cloak of iniquity, ambition, selfishness, uncharitableness, and
tyranny, it has never perished out of the human soul. A prod
uct of that soul, an original and ineradicable impulse, percep
tion, and sentiment, it has shared the fate of that soul in its
upward progress out of ignorance into knowledge, out of super
stition into rational faith, out of selfishness into humanity, out
of all imperfection on toward perfection. In every age, and in
every soul, it has been the saving salt. For by Religion, I need
not say, I do not mean any form or ceremonial whatever, any
organization or ecclesiasticism. I mean the Ideal in man, and
devotion to that Ideal. The sense of a Perfect above him, yet
akin to him, forever drawing him upward to union with itself.
The Moral Ideal, —or sense of a perfect Righteousness,— how
it has summoned men away from injustice and wrong-doing,
awakened them to a contest with evil within them, and led
�22
them on to victory of the conscience over passion and greed !
How it has nerved them to do battle with injustice in the
world, and kept them true to some cause of righting wrong,
patient and brave through indifference, opposition, suffering!
And it has always been a sense of a power and a law of right
eousness above themselves, which they did not create and dared
not disobey, and which, while it seemed to compel them, yet
exalted and freed them. The Intellectual Ideal, — the sense of
a Supreme Truth, a Reality in things, with the thirst to know it,
— how it has led men to “scorn delights and live laborious
days,” to outwatch the night, to traverse land and sea, in its
study and pursuit, to sacrifice for it fortune and society; this
al^o felt to be something above them, yet belonging to them ;
something worth living and dying for, and giving to its sharers
a sense of endless life! And the Ideal of Beauty, haunting,
quickening, exalting the imagination to feel, to see, to create, in
marble, on canvass, in tones, in words : itself its own great
reward. The Ideal of Use, leading to the creation and perfect
ing of the arts and instruments of human need and comfort and
luxury: every one of them at first only a. dream in the brain of
the inventor, a vision of a something better than existed haunt
ing his toilsome days and years of self-denial and poverty. The
Ideal of Patriotism or of Loyalty, the sense of social order, of a
rightful sovereignty, or of popular freedom, — how has it made
men into heroes and martyrs, giving up ease and facing death
with exulting hearts. The Ideal of Love or Benevolence, that
makes men devote themselves and consecrate their possessions
to the relieving of human suffering, and discovering and remov
ing its sources. The Ideal of Sanctity, of Holiness, the vision
and the consecration of the saint, the aspiration after goodness,
that by its inspiration gives power to overcome passion and con
trol desire and purify every thought of the mind and every feel
ing of the heart, and mold the spirit into the likeness of the
All-Holy.
All these ideals, differing so much in their manifestation and
direction, are alike in this, — that they all look to an unseen
Better, a Best, a Perfect; that this seems always above the
man who seeks it, yet at the same time within him, not of
�23
his own creation, but governing him by a law superior to his
own will, while attracting and invigorating it; that they all
demand a self-surrender and self-devotion, and sacrifice of
lower to higher, and give the power to make that sacrifice;
and that they are their own reward.
All these ideals — and if there be any others — I include in
the idea of Religion. Is my definition too broad ? I cannot
make it narrower. It will not seem too broad to you who are
accustomed to regard religion as covering all human life. What
ever in that life is an expression of^deal aspiration, is done in
unselfish devotion, and in obedience to the highest law we
know, is a religious act, is a worship and a prayer. It is a ser
vice of God ; for.it is a use of our faculties to their highest end,
which must be His will for us. It is a ^onitact «®fith things in
visible and eternal. For these ideals are of the mind, not of the
body : they are of the soulfland must go with it into all worlds.
They are thus an element, and a puoof, of immortality.
O friends, is there anything the world needs, is there any
thing every one of us needs, more than some high ideal, to be
kept bright and clear within
by sincere devotion ? Is there
anything we need more than a high standardKn character, in
aim, in spirit, in work ? We have it in our bestJwnoments. But
.How easily we let it get clouded in the press of cares. How
easily we yield to the temptation to lower it for immediate
Results I Is there anything we need more than the elevation
of spirit such an ideal gives, the power to rise above annoyance
and fret, above low and selfish thought, above unworthy deeds ?
How ashamed we stand before that, ideal when, because we have
not bee« obedient to its celestial vision, but have too easily let
it go, we are betrayed into the temp#?, the word, the act we had
Resolved should never betray us again ! What is needed in our
politics, in our business — do not daily events teach it to us
most impressively ? — but a higher ideal; a higher standard of
integrity; a high-minded sense of right, which would take no
Questionable dollar from the public purse ; a sensitive con
science, scrupulous of the rights of others given to its trust ?
[Then the haste to be rich would cease to be the root of evil
that it is, and embezzlements, defalcations, political jobs, and
�24
mercantile frauds no longer shock and grieve us with every
paper we take up. Oh, the anguish and self-reproach of the
man who has involved himself, little by little, in the toils and
excitements of temptation, and, accepting a lowering standard
of honesty, sinks, till he is startled to find himself fallen into
the pit!
What is more needed in all our work than a higher ideal of
excellence, a higher standard of truth and conscientiousness ?
How hard to get anything done thoroughly well, — precisely as
agreed upon, and at the time promised ! Most earnestly would
I insist that every right which the “ working-man ” can justly
claim should be secured to him ; his full share of the product
he helps create, and every opportunity for health, recreation,
and culture which he will use. But he should remember that
faithful performance of ditties on his part will be the best ground
for any claim of rights: he must be careful of the right of oth
ers to honest work and honest time in return for fair pay.
How great is our indebtedness to those great and true souls
who have kindled or kept alive within us a loftier ideal! What
an influence in that way has the image of Jesus been in the
Christian world! Many have not seen that what they wor
shiped or looked up to in him was often simply their own ideal
of human excellence, — really not so much derived from him as
projected upon him, with little regard to historic fact. But this
shows us, still, the power of a lofty ideal within us to lift up,
sustain, and redeem. Many, if they were willing to speak
frankly, would say that the human excellence of some noble,
pure-hearted, spiritually-winded friend, with whom they had
walked in the flesh, has been more to them than thenmage of
Jesus. And when we remember that these high ideals have
inspired millions who never heard his name, it is plain that he
cannot be regarded as their origin. There is one Supreme Ideal
of Goodness. “ Likeness to God ” was the aim of the Pythago
rean teaching. “ Be ye perfect, as your Father in heaven is per
fect.”
All these ideals of Truth, Righteousness, Beauty, Use, Love,
Holiness, of which I have spoken as constituting, in our devo
tion to them, true Religion, unite in the Idea of God. For He
�25
is the Perfect of them all, the Spirit or Essence of them all,—•
the Perfect Truth, the Perfect Righteousness, the Perfect Beau
ty, the Perfect Love, the Perfect Power, the Perfect Holiness.
That is what we mean by saying “ God,” — surely nothing less
than that. This sublime idea has always, in some shape, haunt
ed and possessed the mind of man. The moment the spiritual
faculties begin to germinate in a man or a race, at that moment
the thought of God springs up. From our far-off Aryan ances
tor, who, on those high plains of Central Asia, looked up to
the clear, transparent sky, and said thankfully and reverently,
“ Dyaus-pitar,” Heaven-father, — for he knew that the blessing
of sunshine and rain came thenc^to him, and must have felt a
mysterious sense of some being invisible in that visible, — down
to the child who to-day makes his prayer, “ Our Father, who art
in heaven,” all over the world the reverence of men’s hearts,
/and their sense of blessing and dependence, have uttered the
name of God, and joined with ^t the thought of Father. The
1 conceptions in which men’s thought and language have clothed
that idea have varied with knowledge and culture. But the
central idea of a Power and Beneficence superior to man, in
Nature and above Nature, has been ever present. Delusions
may have gathered about it: but is it a delusion ? Supersti
tions may have distorted it: but can you count it a supersti
tion ? I count it the greatest of realities. I accept the
well-nigh universal verdict of the soul of man. I accept the
experiences of my own soul. I accept the faith which, whether
it be original or an inheritance of accumulated thought, is now
an instinct and intuition within me. I accept the confirmation
of science to the divination of the soul, in its more and more
clear affirmation of a unity and perpetuity of Force in Nature,
and an omnipresence of Law. I accept the testimony of saints
who, through purity of heart, have seen God and felt him near,
— and more than near. Their highest statement is, “ God is
Spirit.” A distinguished preacher has said,— justifying his
declaration that Jesus Christ is his God, — that he believes
it impossible to form the conception of pure spirit. Of course
we cannot form any image or picture of it. But we ’can think
it, surely. For we know thought and feeling and will in our
4
�26
selves, and these have no shape, nor do we confound them with
the bodies in which they are manifested. Thought, feeling,
will, — these are our spirit, our essential life. God is the infi
nite Thought, Feeling, Will, — the infinite Spirit or essential
Life of the universe of matter and of soul. Our conception of
him must depend,’ I .said, upon our spiritual condition. But I
think with every advance in spiritual life and perception, we put
off more and more of physical and human limitation. Said one
to me, the other day, “ I think it will be no service* to men to
undermine their belief in a personal God.” Now, thought, feel
ing, and will are qualities of person, and not of thing, and there
fore we may speak of God as the infinite Person. But he
meant, as is usually meant, by personality, individuality. For
myself, I think it a great-gain to give up the conception of God
as an individual being, however majestic, sitting apart from the
universe, overseeing and governing it, and from time to time
intervening by special act. I count it a great gain to have
reached a conception of him as pure Spirit, the all-pervading
Life of the Universe, the present Power and present Love and
present Justice at every point of that universe, — perpetually
creating it by his present Energy of good. Present perpetually
in the affairs of men, invisibly, restraining evil, righting wrong,
leading on to the perfect society. Present really in the hearts
and minds and consciences and wills of men, not displacing
them, but re-enforcing them. “ If we love one another, God
dwelleth in us,” said the inspired writer of old, — surely inspired
when he said that. “If a man is at heart just,” said the inspired
modern, “ by so much he is God. The power of God and the
eternity of God do enter into that man with Justice.” How
could this be if God be a separate, individual being ? But con
ceive of him as Being, and the difficulty vanishes. It is no fig
ure of speech, but literally true, that He dwells in holy souls,
inspiring and working through him. “The Father who dwell
eth in me,” said Jesus. Yes, but in no special or miraculous
way: in the way of the universal law of spiritual action ; as he
dwells in all souls that aspire and obey. “Above all and
through all and in us all.”
Does this conception of God as Essential Life seem to any
�27
vague and unreal ? Oh, think again, how substantial are
thought, feeling, and will! The moving powers of the human
world setting all the material into action ! How many perplexi
ties of thought, which beset the common view of God as an in
dividual being, disappear under this conception of him as spirit!
How does it make possible the thought of his omniscience and
omnipresence and providence ! No longer the all-seeing eye,
watching us from afar, but the present spirit, knowing us from
within, involved in our thought and our thinking, — the law or
order by which we think and feel, the present power by which
we act. Spirit can thus encompass us, and flow through us,
without oppressing us, or hindering our freedom. Do the forces
of nature — of attraction, of gravitation, of chemical affinity —
oppress us ? We cannot get away from them, but do we not
move freely among them ? The air is around us and within us,
a mighty pressure, — do we feel the weight of it? In such
sweet, familiar, unconscious ways does God, the Spirit, encom
pass and dwell within our spirits. How can we flee from that
Spirit, or go where it will not uphold and keep us ? Our God
besets us behind and before. Our Father never leaves us alone.
Modern science, we are told, is rejecting all notion of volition
from the material world. The conception of God as Spirit has
already done that. For God’s will, in that conception, is no
separate jets of choice, but an all-filling, steadfast Energy, a Power living at every point. His will is no series of finite
volitions, but an infinite purpose in the constitution of things, —
the unchanging element in them which we call their law. God’s
will, therefore, is not in any sense 'arbitrary. A permanent
force, with its permanent laws, from constant conditions it pro
duces constant results. Wrought into the constitution of things
arid beings, it is there to be studied, known, and obeyed.
Friends of the Twenty-eighth Congregational Society: Com
ing at your call to speak to you on this occasion of the dedica
tion of your new house, I have not thought it unfitting to the
occasion, instead of trying to open to you some new topic,
rather to offer you this outline and review of principles and
ideas already somewhat familiar to you. We glance over what
�28
has been gained before beginning anew our quest. You build
here no House of God, but a house for men. A “ meeting
house” you call it,—.the good old New England name, — not a
church : for is not the church the men and women, not the
walls? You have most fittingly made it a memorial of your
first minister. And this in no slavish adulation, and in no slav
ish following of him. You are not bound to his thoughts. But
you can never forget or cease to be grateful to him, many of
you, for the emancipation of thought you owe to him ; for the
moral invigoration, for the quickening of devout feeling, always
to him so precious.
He was a thorough believer in the Liberty of which I have
spoken. He believed that it should have no bounds save such
as love of truth and good sense and feeling might set to it.
And he used the freedom he believed in. And when, in the use
of it, he was led to judge and reject some things around which
the reverence of the denomination to which he belonged clung,
they who had taught him the liberty which he used, with some
noble exceptions,— I am sorry to recall it,— to save their credit,
proved false to their principle. They lost a noble opportunity.
They had always insisted that the essential in Christianity was not
belief, but character and life : now they turned round, and asserted
that it was not a spirit and a life, but a belief in supernatural his
tory. He did not spare them, and hurled at them the arrows of
his wit and the smooth stones of his keen logic. He did battle for
the freedom which was denied. Men mistook his wit for malig
nity, and his moral indignation.for bitterness. But, though he
was capable of sarcasm, his heart was sweet and kind, and full
of genial sympathies, as those who knew him best best knew.
His services to Theology in this country were very great.
His work was partly destructive, clearing away errors and
superstitions, but mainly constructive. He built up a complete
system of theology, founded upon the native spiritual instincts
in man and the infinite perfection of God. Though a vigorous
practical understanding was the characteristic of his mind, he
accepted this ideal or transcendental theory of religion, and,
with his clear common sense and terse sentences, interpreted it
to the general mind. Though no mystic, he had much devout.
�2^
feeling, and loved to speak of Piety, and the soul’s normal de
light in God. You will never forget the deeply reverential tone
of his public prayers to the “Father and Mother of us all.” But
even more than in Piety he believed in and loved and enforced
Righteousness in every form ; and his great power was ethical.
.How clear and sure was his sense of right; .a conscience for the
nation : its guidance sought by how many, in public and private
duty ! Before its keen glance how many an idol fell! He liked
to be called a Teacher of Religion: and he made it cover all of
life. He applied its ideal to the nation, and, finding human slav
ery there, he threw all his energies into rousing the conscience
of the country to feel its falseness and ?ts iniquity, and to work
for its removal. In this cause he rendered you know what noble
and devoted service, gaining the sympathies of many who least
liked his theology. He gave the weight of his advocacy to every
cause of humane reform, pleading for the poor and the perishing
classes, for the rights of woman, for temperance and purity and
peace.
He has left you a powerful influence, and a heritage of prin
ciples and ideas, to whose charge you show yourselves faithful
in building this house, that the work he begun may be carried
on and fulfilled. The men and the women whom you call tospeak to you know that they will have full freedom of speech
and hospitable hearing to their most advanced thought. You
will expect them to speak to you,wot upon theological questions
alone, or on the experiences of devout feeling, or personal du-’
ties, but on all that deeply concerns the welfare of the commu
nity ; upon the vital questions of the da/, and its present needs ;
upon political and social topics; upon questions of moral reform
and humane effort, and rights of man and woman ; upon all the
practical applications of ideal thought. All these you will wish
discussed, in the utmost freedom, and from the highest point of
view.
But not for speech alone is this house to be used. I cannot
but hope that your enlarged space will be used as opportunity
for work .in various directions of help and good will. Why
should not this be a headquarters of action as well as thought ?
�30
And now, may I say for you, that you devote and dedicate
this house to Freedom and to Religion ; to Truth and to Vir
tue ; to Piety, to Righteousness, and to Humanity; to Knowl»
edge and to Culture ; to Duty, to Beauty, and to Joy ; to Faith
and Hope and Charity; to the memory of Saints, Reformers,
Heretics, and Martyrs ; to the Love and Service of God, in the
Love and Service of Man.
VII.
GOD IN HUMANITY.
BY JOHN G. WHITTIER.
{Sung by Choir and Congregation?)
O Beauty, old yet ever new,
Eternal Voice and Inward Word,
The Wisdom of the Greek and Jew,
Sphere-music which the Samian heard I
Truth which the sage and prophet saw,
Long sou®t without, but found within:
The Law of Love, beyond all law,
The Life o’erflooding death and sin !
O Love Divine, whose constant beam
Shines on the eyes that will not see,
And waits to bless us, while we dream
Thou leav’st us when we turn from thee !
All souls that struggle and aspire,
All hearts of prayer, by Thee are lit;
And, dim or clear, Thy tongues of fire
On dusky tribes and centuries sit.
Nor bounds, nor clime, nor creed Thou know’st,
Wide as our need Thy favors fall;
The white wings of the Holy Ghost
Stoop, unseen, o’er the heads of all.
�31
VIII. ADDRESS BY EDNAH D. CHENEY.
In looking over the congregation here assembled, and seeing some
of the old faces which greeted Mr. Parker on those first stormy Sun
days at the Melodeon, I have asked myself what it is which has kept
this society together through so many changes when friends advised
its dissolution, and enemies hoped for its failure. It seems to me it
was no doctrine of Mr. Parker’s, not even a sentiment; but, if I may
so call it, his method of trust in the truth. He never feared to utter
the whole truth, and never doubted that what was good food to his
soul was fit nourishment for others who hungered for it. This has
made the pulpit truly free, so that those who spoke here, and those who
listened, felt that they could speak and hear honest convictions. While
this society is true to this tradition, it will have a place to fill, and, I
trust, this new building is to give it a fresh lease of life, and greater
opportunity of usefulness.
This still seems to me the great need of the time, — loyalty to truth,
not attachment to a dogma. If we feel thftf any truth is dangerous to
our well-being as a society, it is time that Age disbanded, but as long as
we dare to trust the truth, we need not fear that any blast of a trumpet
can blow down our walls.
In a country town, where an independent society met in a hall, when
it was asked of what religion is such a man, it was answered, His is
the Hall Religion. I think there is some value in the phrase, and I
rejoice that this society has not builded a church to be open only on
Sunday, but a hall which on every day of the week may be consecrated
Blithe psalm of life, and dedicated to use or beauty. The echo of the
dancing feet of the children who gather at the festivals will not disturb our devotion, nor the remembrance of the good words of the lecturer mar our enjoyment of prayer or sermon. It is an emblem of the
Religion of Life, no longer divorced from every-day work and pleasure,
bw elevating and sanctifying it. It is said that the great Church of
St. Peter’s at Rome has never been ventilated since Michael Angelo
reared its lofty dome, Snd that the worshipers now breathe the foul and
lifeless air which has not been renewed for nearly four centuries. But
as I hope the physical ventilation of this hall will never be neglected,
but the pure air of heaven will be freely brought in, so we can never live
a true and vigorous spiritual life unless we keep our souls ever open to
the broad, free air and light of heaven, not confined by any creed or
dogma, but perpetually renewing itself by fresh inspiration.
�32
Such seems to me the great principle' of this society, which it is
bound to cherish and carry out, and to which in the worship of God
and the service of humanity we would dedicate this hall to-day.
IX.
ADDRESS BY JOHN WEISS.
Whenever a liberal thinker expresses his belief that the popular the
ologies are honeycombed by the climate of science and information,
and are falling apart beneath the surface, he is asked to observe that
there never was such a time for the laying of corner-stones for church
extension; never such an enthusiasm of temple-building; never before
so many seats filled by worshipers. It is undoubtedly a fact. The
competition between the sects is so great, and the national temper of
extravagance so confirmed, that church extension has become another
vice of the times; and people will run hopelessly in debt rather than
be without their sumptuous building, thus setting an example, to a
country which does not need it, of speculative immorality. For I can
see no difference between extending a railroad over illusory capital and
watering its stock, and watering a congregation with a meeting-house
too large and fine, watering it with a large per cent of empty pews,
which require in the pulpit a man with some of the virtues of an auc
tioneer.
But there is a real decay of the popular theology in spite of these
costly elegancies which seem to announce a revival of religion. Before
every dissolution a period of renaissance, or superficial revival, has
always set in, substituting sentiment for the old impetuous earnestness,
imitating faith by pretty form. We may safely predict extensive decay
when it has become such an important object to secure paying sitters
for the various sects. The old sincerity will be soon crushed beneath
their ornamental expenses.
Then let us have a new sincerity, to be nursed in humbler places,
and supported by honester means. Here let it be, for one place. Wel
come the plainness and freedom of these walls, sb solidly built, so sim
ply colored in their warm, brown tints. Here a real memorial to
Parker is yet to be erected by successive Sundays of free speech, and
week-days of fraternity. To-day you are only laying the corner-stone
of a structure of thought and feeling which will throw its door wide
open to the common, people, to every wayfaring fact and cause against
which so many churches shut their gates.
�33
It pleases my fancy to notice that you have put up this building next
to a grain elevator, for it constantly reminds me of Parker, of his frame,
even, of his manner and his mental style. Solidly laid, robustly built,
not excessively addicted to beauty; but framed for the sole purpose of
receiving aud distributing, with convenience and the least of waste, the
cereals of a thousand fields for which millions of hungers are waiting.
Such was the abundance and nutrition of his genius. He explored
many fields to collect his staples and the simple corn-flowers of his
fancy-: his keel furrowed many seas, but not to gather and bring home
luxuries, nor to hunt up a place where he might enjoy intellectual seclu
sion. .The delights of scholarship were subordinate to his humanity.
He was constantly tearing himself away from those books, the darlings
of his spirit, as if they imposed upon him, and were defrauding people
of his service. He let the exigency of the hour break without cere
mony into the sacred study, and he rose to meet the pauper and the
slave, to perform the great symbolic action of marrying two fugitives
with a Bible and a sword. The perishing classes, the neglected, the
unfortunate, always held a mortgage on his precious time. But life
never seemed so precious to him as when he was killing himself to help
emancipate America. What a homely sublimity there was in this giv
ing of bread to mouths that had munched the old political and sectarian
chaff and had swallowed indigestion 1
Now it is for you to honor him by imitating this action: not so
much to prolong a memory as to resuscitate, a life that was laid down
in the service of mankind; yes, to revivify that bust, poor, passionless
’ and rigid remembrancer of the nature you knew, that was so manifold,
so profuse, so virile with anger, love and friendship: to bid that white
ness mantle again with his florid cheek; to make those eyeballs beam
with a blessing or a threat, so that Theodore Parker shall be heard
again in Boston.
This shall be your service in this place, to reproduce his manliness;
if not with the same fertile and sturdy vitality, or with the same
warmth which lifted up so many beacons of indignation and warning,
which compelled the East to look at him, and the West to listen, and
the South to dread, still, at least, with the old sincerity, the old persis
tent purpose to be dedicated to the rights and wants of man.
5
�34
X.
ADDRESS BY FRANCIS E. ABBOT.
When, nearly thirty years ago, the founders of the Twenty-eighth
Congregational Society' rallied around the unpopular and ostracised
minister of West Roxbury, and, with a laconic brevity worthy of Sparta
in her best days, voted that “ Theodore Parker should have a chance to
be heard in Boston,” what was the real meaning of their act ? Did
they intend to rally about Parker as the disciples of old rallied about
Jesus, in order to proclaim a new personal gospel, to glorify a new per
sonal leader, and to sink their own individualities in that of a new “ Lord
and Master”? James Freeman Clark has said that, when the radicals
give up Jesus of Nazareth, it is only to attach themselves to some other
leader; that they only abandon Jesus in order to take up with Socrates,
or Emerson, or Parker. Was this the real purport of that now famous
and historic vote ?
If this had been your aim and spirit, we should not be here to-day.
When the eloquent voice was stilled, the stalwart form laid in its far
Florentine resting-place, and the man whose words had electrified two
hemispheres had passed away forever from human sight and hearing,
in vain would you have voted that “ Theodore Parker should have a
chance to be heard in Boston.” Small respect would Death have paid
to your resolutions. No ! If your vote had meant only that the pow
erful personality which had so impressed itself upon the times as to be
henceforth a part of American history should still utter itself from your
platform to a listening world, you would have disbanded; you would
have broken ranks, and scattered sadly and silently to your homes;
you would have discontinued your meetings, and surrendered your or
ganization. Parker had been heard; his message had been delivered.
Henceforth the book of revelation that all men read in his speech and
life was sealed forever, and no man could either add to or take away
from its fullness.
But you did not disband. Your meetings were continued. Your
platform was maintained. Other prophets were summoned to speak
in Music Hall, now chiefly known abroad for the work done there by
you and your great minister. They were summoned, not to echo Par
ker, but to speak themselves. They were no servile followers of a dead
leader, no blinded apostles of a vanished Christ. Far from it. They
were called by you to proclaim independently and fearlessly the secret
thought of their own hearts ; for this alone did they come before you.
And still your platform means this, and this only. True, in one sense
�35
Parker is still heard from it; for his ideas are not dead, but living. But
you have perpetuated your organization and your platform for a higher
object than to secure endless reverberations of any one voice, however
piercing, eloquent, or potent. You meant, and mean, that Truth shall
here speak for herself, not that Parker alone shall be heard, magnifi
cent spokesman of Truth though he was. And Truth has infinitely
more to say than has yet been said.
No, it was not so much Parker’s individual voice that you voted should
“ have a chance to be heard in Boston,” as it was the great, heroic, burn
ing purpose to which he had dedicated his all —the purpose to make hu
man life genuinely religious in spite of the churches. I repeat it—to make
human life genuinely religious in spite of the churches. Not ecclesi
astical, not theological, not formal or ritualistic; but religious in the
high sense in which he used the word, as signifying devotion to right
eousness, to noble service, to devout aspiration. This purpose of Par
ker’s soul was even grander than his thought. Thought must change;
it must move j it must advance. |£ven since Parker’s death we all
know that there has been a great onward movement of thought; and to
the best thought of the times, be it what it may, you mean always to
keep open ear and heart. But the purpose to make human life genu
inely religious must abide as the best and purest that can inspire a hu
man soul. This was Parker’s inspiration and power, obeyed under the
frown of all the churches of the land. To this sublime purpose of his
you first voted a hearing, and now ^dedicate these walls. That mar
ble bust before you, perpetuating Parker’s visible features to your sight,
is changeless, immobile, ungrowing; it will be the same a hundred
years hence as it is to-day. But Parker’s mind, could it still have
manifested itself to us, would have been in the very foremost ranks of
thought. This you will remember, and know that, in the best sense,
you hear Parker still in the noblest utterances of ever-developing
knoweledge and ever-deepening aspiration. His mighty purpose shall
still be ours; and all the churches of the land shall lack the power to
quench or cool it. This stately hall, built as a grateful memorial to
the singleness and power with which he put it into deed and word, shall
be a home for all who cherish it,— a place of comfort, enlightenment,
and inspiration to all who love it, a place of mutual spmpathy and en
couragement for all who would pursue it. You could have raised no
fitter monument to Parker, and rendered no better service to those
who would further Parker’s cause.
�36
XI. ADDRESS. BY CHARLES W. SLACK.
Mr. Chairman : The spirit that has erected this handsome build
ing was latent in the community, and needed only to be called into
activity to have ensured the same result before as now. I congratu
late you, and all this large and interested audience, at the splendid
conclusion of our labors in this direction.
You will remember, sir, that it was at the annual meeting of the
Twenty-eighth Congregational Society, on the first Sunday in April,
1871, — only two years and a half ago, — that I had the honor to sug
gest that it seemed to me that we, as a Society, were not doing our full
duty, either to the memory of our great teacher, or to the community
in which we dwelt; that we held great truths in matters of religion
which should have a more conspicuous enunciation; that if we were
willing to adopt the forms of worship in which we were educated,
erect a church edifice, and, in good time, as judgment should approve,
select a permanent minister, who should not only be a guide in thought,
but a visitor and counsellor in our families in the alternating incidents
of life and death; I should be only too happy to lend what energy and
influence I possessed to the consummation of that purpose. You will
remember, too, sir, that the suggestion was kindly received, and it was
felt that the plan of a meeting-house of our own was practicable, if
one-half of the amount of money deemed necessary for its ■ erection
could be secured before operations should commence. It was our
great pleasure, you will also remember, Mr. Chairman, to announce at
the next annual meeting, in April, 1872, that fully fifty thousand dol
lars, in money and work, had been pledged by our small band for the
new enterprise. Thence everything moved with alacrity ; friends were
found on every hand; plans were considered and adopted; and now,
in a little more than fifteen months from the commencement of opera
tions, we find ourselves in this completed and central edifice, with
every convenience and many elegances, ready to proceed to our neces
sary work and demonstrate our need in the community i» which we
dwell.
And there is reason that we should make this demonstration. We
had a leader who, while he lived, was acknowledged to be a power in
thought and personal influence. He uplifted every pulpit in the land,
giving freedom to the voice and thought of their occupants; he bade
the young men of his day accept independence of character and action ;
he taught the liberalizing of opinion, and urged resistance to those often
�brutal episodes of public clamor when the dominant majority sought to
crush out the honest, thinking minority; in a word, he made every man
with a soul within feel the better and the nobler for his ministration in
religion, politics, and morals. If his high aim and earnest endeavor
be not so potent and perceptible to-day as fifteen years ago, possibly it
is because we have not improved our opportunities in presenting his
example and teaching to the world. There is indeed need that we
dedicate ourselves anew to his service when we read, as we may in
the latest “ Biographical Dictionary ” published, bearing the imprint
of the great house of Macmillan & Co., London and New York, and
compiled by Thompson Cooper. F.S.A., this estimate of his public
position': —
“ He became a popular lecturer, and discussed the questions of slavery,
war, and social and moral reforms, with much acute analysis and occasional
effective satire ; but as a practical Teacher he was in the unfortunate posi
tion of a priest without a church and a politician without a state.”
And this is the best judgment of I® intelligent Englishman, so many
years remote from Theodore Parker’s activity among us 1 Surely the
editor is too far away to discern the influence of this great man on
the thought of the times. Possibly he may have been “ a priest ” with
out “ a church,” but he was a minister who made every denomination
in the land envious of his scholarship and eloquence, and more than
half the churches jealous of the throngs of his weekly disciples.
But why be surprised at the judgment of the Englishman, three thou
sand miles away, when we have on our own soil, near-by, a more depre
ciatory estimate by one belonging to the generally large-hearted and
catholic Methodist denomination ? The Reverend Professor George
Prentice, of the Wesleyan University, Middletown, Conn., can afford to
say in “The Methodist Quarterly Review,” for July, 1873, of Theodore
Parker, this: —
£< I am amazed at the daring of a man who never had fine culture and
high philosophic talent; whose chief gift was the gift of exaggeration ;
whose life was largely that of a peripatetic stump-orator, hot with perpetual
lecturing, agitating, denouncing and misrepresenting, when he tries to
mould the thought of the world on a matter profound and difficult.”
And this is the verdict of the Methodist collegiate instructor, and
of his denomination, fitfeen years after the death of Theodore Parker,
of that man’s transcendent abilities — is it? Let me, as the humblest
of the humble followers of Theodore Parker, fling back to its obscure
�38
utterer his flippant, his impudent, detraction of a man whose courage
of opinion has made it possible for his defamer to utter even his slan
der without public rebuke— whose claims to culture and scholarship
will live long after the occupant of the professor’s chair who now belit
tles him will be utterly forgotten, if not despised! The scholarship
of Theodore Parker questioned! — as soon ask if mind and character
are formative elements in New England character 1 Go to the scholars
of twenty-five years ago who measured weapons with Theodore Parker,
and this forward stripling will learn that he had a reputation for cul
ture and humanity that no later-day controversialist can question, anx
ious however he may be that the students under his charge shall never
hear to the contrary, and thus be led to examine for themselves into
his opinions and services.
Without “fine culture ”!•—a “peripatetic stump-orator”! — a “priest
without a church and a politician without a state” ! — this the conjoint
testimony to-day of England and America! Surely there is something
for us to do, friends, to show that there is at least one congegation,
still abiding at the home of this great man, which does not accept this
estimate. Nor are we alone in this. It was but yesterday I was con
versing with Vice-President Wilson in relation to the exercises of this
day, when he surprised as well as gratified me. by incidentally mention
ing that when he first entered the Senate Mr. Seward, the great Sena
tor of New York, a statesman as well as legislator, came to him one
day and said, “You have a wonderful man in Boston — Theodore
Parker. I know of no man in the country who so thoroughly appreci
ates the political situation, has such a comprehensive grasp of the
issues involved, and applies so faithfully the moral teachings that will
safely land us on solid ground.” Surely, friends, we can safely leave
the influence of Mr. Parker in morals and politics, letting alone schol
arship and religion, to those who knew him best and were brought
within the range of his acquaintance and co-operation!
Standing here to-day, then, in the capacity of representative of the
proprietors of this beautiful edifice, it remains only for me to bid all
welcome who find themselves drawn by sympathy or love to worship
with this congregation. May it be the home of helpful teaching and
quickening influence 1 May good-will and all sweet charities abound-!
Spacious in area and soft in coloring, may it typify breadth of affection
and the repose of settled conviction ! Thus used, and thus influencing
us, we shall come to believe that we have made a wise investment, and
�39
take satisfaction in the thought that the good work of the generation
now on the stage of affairs shall descend, developed and multiplied, to
their children for long years to follow.
XII.
GOD IN THE HUMAN SOUL.
BY SARAH F. ADAMS.
(Sung by Choir and Congregation?)
Nearer, my God, to Thee,
Nearer to Thee 1
E’en though it be a cross
That raiseth me ;
Still all my song shall be, —
Nearer, my God, to Thee,
Nearer to Thee 1
Though like the wanderer,
The sun gone down,
Darkness be over me,
My rest a stone ;
Yet.in my dreams I’d be
Nearer, my God, to Thee,
Nearer to Thee!
There let the way appear,
Steps unto heaven;
All that Thou sendest me,
In mercy given ;
Angels to beckon me
Nearer, my God, to Thee,.
Nearer to Thee !
Then, with my walking thoughts
Bright with Thy praise,
Out of my stony griefs
Bethel I’ll raise;
So by my woes to be
Nearer, my God, to Thee,
Nearer to Thee 1
�40
Or if, on joyful wing
Cleaving the sky,
Sun, moon, and stars forgot,
Upward I fly:
Still all my song shall be, —
Nearer, my God, to Thee,
Nearer to Thee 1
XIII. BENEDICTION.
BY SAMUEL LONGFELLOW.
�LETTERS.
The following letters were received, addressed to John C. Haynes,
Chairman of the Standing Committee of the Twenty-eighth Congrega
tional Society, in answer to invitations to be present at the dedication
of the Parker Memorial Meeting-House: —
Salem, Sept. 14, 1873.
I have been quite ill for a month, and, though now gradually gaining
strength, am too weak as yet for any effort; so that I shall hardly be able
to attend, even as a hearer only, the Memorial Hall services, next Sunday.
I need not say that my best sympathies will be with the occasion, and that
I am sorry to lose the opportunity to hear what will be so quickening to the
higher life as the word it promises to bring with it.
What omens can you ask, better than the house itself, and the secret
forces that impel Its whole movement, and its grand ideal duties, as inevi
table as the rights we claim ?
Sincerely yours,
Samuel Johnson.
New York, Sept. 17, 1873.
The completion of your new hall is an event to be congratulated on, an
achievement worthy of the Old Guard that bears the glorious banner and
preserves the glorious tradition of Theodore Parker. The thing that should
be done in New York, that must be done here before long, and in other
cities, too, you have done in Boston. There Radicalism has a rallying place
and a home. Here it is dependent on the good, must I say, rather, the ill
will, of proprietors who are so jealous for the reputation of their halls that
good, honest infidels cannot use them. With you now, the Young Men’s
Christian Association have not all the fine audience rooms. The devil has
not all the good tunes.
I wish I could be present at your dedication to the Spirit of Truth, the
Comforter. Your'speaker will say the right word. But many right words
need be said on such an occasion, and no speaker can say them all. May
the spirit of the great and good Theodore be with him and you !
You say your hall is commodious. I hope it is handsome, fair in propordon, beautiful in decoration, cheerful, airy, good for voice and ear; attrac-
6
�42
tive and inviting to strangers ; like the new faith itself, which would glorify
every spot it touches. Spare no pains to make it and keep it a centre of
happy influences; crowd into it as much intellect, sentiment, earnestness,
and aspiration as it will hold; and as these angels take up no room, a mill
ion of them standing on the point of a needle, you will have space enough ,
for a good many. Use the room for good purposes. If you have a preacher,
let him have a multitudinous voice, in the persons of truest spirit wherever
found, that a line of prophets may pass before you and deliver their word.
In this way you will best make a worthy succession, for the man who has,
and is likely to have, no successor.
To write these hurried lines, I turn my pen off the task of writing his
biography, which has been the refreshment of my summer. As it draws
near completion, I am conscious of a new indebtedness to the great soul I
admired and loved so deeply. If the readers of the book find what I have
tried to put there, they will confess that not one Memorial Hall, but many,
should be erected to the honor of that great leader.
Thanking you for your kind invitation to be present on Sunday next, re
gretting my inability to be present, because my own services are resumed on
that day, and wishing you the brightest of days and the sweetest of omens,
believe me,
x
Heartily yours,
O. B. Frothingham.
West Manchester, Sept. 20, 1873.
I have just got your note. It is impossible for me to be, as I gladly would,
at your Dedication, having to go -to Salem to-morrow. Were it my privilege
to speak, I should certainly say in what honor I hold Theodore Parker for
his honesty, courage, piety, and philanthropy ; and for the application he
made, beyond any other theologian or scholar of his day, of moral truth and
the results of study to the social condition and want. No such hero wore the
clerical gown. While poets and essayists were willing to leave their views and
visions in their treatises or musical lines, he insisted in putting every prin
ciple as a power in gear ; and, if any error or iniquity were hid beneath, he
would rend the veil of the temple in twain. But if he destroyed, it was to
rebuild, whatever hands beside his own might be required.
I may be allowed to express the early affection I had for him, and to re
member the friendly regard he cherished for me beyond my deserts, so that
I have a debt of gratitude to pay, should we meet again where the warrior’s
armor is laid aside. It was his wish that I should give him the Right Hand
of Fellowship in West Roxbury, but I was away in another State at the
time of his settlement in that town.
As so long indeed he has had it, may he, with you, accept it, in the spirit,
now!
Cordially yours,
C. A. Bartol.
�43
New York City, Sept. 17, 1873.
I have received your invitation to be with you at the dedication of your
new hall, next Sunday. I sympathize very deeply with the Society in this
new opening, but my obligations here make it impossible for me to be pres
ent.
•
After many years of doubt and trouble and hard efforts, you enter at last
upon cheering prospects. The climb has been difficult, but the hill-top is glorious. You will enter now and possess the land, spread out before all with
invitation, but to be possessed only by those who will work in it for the good
of man. No heart among you beats for you more exultingly or more hope
fully than mine.
*
I wish I could figure to my mind the interior of this goodly home which
you have erected. Sometime I shall see it. Meantime I shall think of it as
a worthy body for the soul of the Twenty-eighth Society; neat, clean, lovely,
and simple. It will be a place where the best may be uplifted, and the
worst be not repulsed.
I think I can imagine the joy and enthusiasm with which you take pos
session of your abode. An exquisite composition by William Blake depicts
the union, or reunion, of the soul and the body at “ the last great day,” as it
is called by those who forget that every day is great and is a judgment-day.
The body arises from the tomb, and the soul bursts rapturously from a cloud,
and with inconceivable force descends headlong upon the body, whose neck
it clasps, whose lips it seizes, in the ecstasy of reinvesting the animal frame
with life and joy from heaven. This has been in my mind as an image of
your advent to new life, when you, the soul, enter into your newly arisen
house, the body. I think it is your just reward for a past which has cer
tainly been very steadfast under many discouragements ; and I believe it in
volves for you the prophecy for the future which is so radiantly given in the
above-mentioned poet’s picture.
,
I am sincerely yours,
J. V. Blake.
Monday, Sept. 15, 1873.
We are still in the country, and this, with Mrs. Phillips’s health considered,
renders it impossible for me to be with you Sunday. I am very sorry. Ac
cept my heartiest wishes for your full success.
Wendell Phillips.
New Bedford, Sept. 15, 1873.
I am happy to learn that the “Parker Memorial Meeting-House ” is so
soon to be dedicated. It would give me great pleasure to accept your invi
tation to be present on the occasion; but as I have just resumed my pulpit
duties at home, after several months’ absence, I do not think that I ought to
be away so early as Sunday, the 21st, and must therefore deny myself the
gratification of joining with you in the interesting services. The name, “ Par
�44
ker Memorial Meeting-House,” has a pleasant sound, — not only as holding
the memory of Theodore Parker, but as recalling the primitive days of the
Puritans, of whom Mr. Parker was a genuine descendant, both by the pro
gressiveness of his thought and the robust heroism of his character.
Long may the new meeting-house stand to help keep alive in Bbston the
elements of such character, and so to promote the interests of pure and ra
tional religion.
Very truly yours,
Wm. J. Potter.
Brooklyn, Sept. 15, 1873.
It would give me sincere pleasure to be present at the dedication of your
new “Meeting-House.” I am glad you have named it as you have. I like
the sound of “ Meeting-House” much better than the sound of “Church.”
It is homely and solid, and so joins on well with Parker’s name — he was so
homely and solid. If it has a savor of Quakerism, that will not hurt. I
cannot be with you, because I am just back from my long vacation. I am
sure Longfellow will speak the right word to you,, and then you will have it
printed so that the poor fellows who cannot come to the feast will have a
sort of “ second table ” spread for them.
It seems to me much better that Parker should have a memorial hall
built for him thirteen years after his death than at any time before. A
great many men, who get imposing monuments soon after their death, would
go unmonumented if the world paused a little and considered. But every
year since Parker’s death has made him seem more worthy of remem
brance. In calling your building by his name, I know you do not mean to
make it any citadel of his opinions, but a home for his spirit, which was the
spirit of truth and love and righteousness. And I trust the new “ MeetingHouse ” will justify its name by being not merely a meeting-place for differ
ent people, but also a meeting-place for different opinions and ideas. Radi
calism is good, but still better is Liberality, and the faith that wrong opinions
may somehow represent a truth to those who cherish them. And so, “ with
malice towards none, and charity for all,” may you go forward, and may the
dear God prosper you, and comfort you, and build you up forever.
Yours faithfully,
J. W Chadwick.
Dansville, N.Y., Sept. 18th, 1873.
I thank you for the invitation to be present at the dedication of your new
“ Meeting-House,” and heartily wish it was in my power to accept it. But
I have been debarred from work by illness for some months past, and am
still an invalid, though I trust on the road to health.
I congratulate you on the completion of the Society’s new home, and shall
have pleasure in thinking of you in your commodious quarters. While I
�45
wish you all material prosperty, my desire is a thousand-fold greater that
you may be imbued with the spirit of him whose name you commemorate ;
that you may emulate his courage, his fidelity to the truth however unpopu
lar, his grand catholicity, that could be satisfied with nothing less than the
salvation, temporal and eternal, of a whole humanity. As he recognized the
motherly element in God, and made his religion vital with love as well as
luminous with thought, so may you. May you accord to women in the pul
pit, in the society, in all the walks of life, full equality with man; equal lib
erty to use the powers with which God has endowed her. May you consti
tute such a fraternity'of true-hearted men and women as the world has never
seen ; untramelled by any creed, limited by no boundaries of sect, the world
your field, the sorrowing and sinful your especial care ; may you go on from
strength to strength; and with no doubtful sound proclaim the dawning of
“ the near new day.”
Hoping sometime to be able to accept the invitation to preach for you
again, I am, with all best wishes,
Cordially yours,
Celia Burleigh.
Syracuse, N.Y., Sept. 19th, 1873.
I am glad to be able to congratulate you all on the completion of your
enterprise, which once more gives you a local habitation. The name you
have always had. It is a noble one, and binds you all by many grand mem
ories to the steady and persistent pursuit of Truth in Thought and Righteousmess in Life.
_ The bitter days when the prophets prophesied clothed in sackcloth are
over, thanks to God and their God-directed labors. It is the task of our
generation to help to bring in that Coming Time, which they foresaw and for
which they gave themselves, body and soul. May you all be inspired to do
your full share of the great work.
With kindest remembrances to all your Society, I remain,
Yours fraternally,
S. R. Calthrop.
Marshfield, Sept. 19, 1873.
I received to-day your kind invitation to attend the dedicatory services of
your Parker Memorial Hall, on Sunday. I should be glad to comply with it
and participate briefly in the exercises as you request. It is not easy for me
to leave home for two nights, as would be necessary in order to be in Boston
on that day of the week, and I see no way to do it.
The construction of your hall I look upon as a most auspicious event, as
well as an evidence of the faith and courage of those who, through doubt
and discouragement of no common magnitude, have held aloft the standard
of free thought and speech since your great hero was summoned from earth,
and his body laid to sleep in the Soil of the beautiful Italian city made fa-
�46
mous in history by the genius of Dante and the sublime piety and martyrdom
of Savonarola.
In this marvelous dream which we call life, there is nothing more won
derful and inspiring than the great moral and political revolution which has
been accomplished in this country since Mr. Parker came upon the stage of
manhood. I remember seeing him at the series of reform meetings, held
mostly in Chardon St. Chapel, in i839~4°> t° discuss the character and use
of “ the Sabbath, the Church, and the Ministry.” He was a young, modest,
and unassuming man ; but even then giving signs of the mighty force which
afterwards in the Melodeon and Music Hall exposed the rottenness of Church
and State, and gave such an impetus to the cause of freedom, both of body
and mind.
From him largely proceeded the impulse that has given new life to a na
tion, and emancipated the mind of the age from the thralldom of priestly rule.
His mantle rests upon you. His spirit and purpose are nourished by the
Society which bears his name. You do well to inscribe that name on the
building you have erected. Long may it continue, and be an instrument in
the hands of the Parker Fraternity for the more perfect education, eman
cipation, and elevation of the human race.
Yours, in the everlasting life,
N. H. Whiting.
I
�I
I
I
J
■ ■
i
I'
V
I
��
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 & 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
Dedicatory services of the Parker Memorial Meeting House by the twenty-eighth Congregational Society, of Boston, Sunday, Sept,21, 1873
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway, Moncure Daniel [1832-1907.]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Boston
Collation: 46 p. ; 24 cm.
Notes: Dedication hymn / Samuel Johnson -- Remarks of John C. Haynes -- Scripture reading -- Prayer -- Dedication hymn / W.C. Gannett -- Discourse / Samuel Longfellow -- God in humanity (hymn) / John G. Whittier -- Address by Ednah D. Cheney -- Address by John Weiss -- Address by Francis E. Abbot-- Address by Charles W. Slack -- God in the human soul (hymn) / Sarah F. Adams - benediction / Samuel Longfellow. Contains letters (p.39-46) received by John C. Haynes, Chairman, in answer to invitations to be present at the dedication of the Parker Memorial Meeting House. From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Cochrane & Sampson, printers
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1873
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5365
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 (Dedicatory services of the Parker Memorial Meeting House by the twenty-eighth Congregational Society, of Boston, Sunday, Sept,21, 1873), 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
Subject
The topic of the resource
Sermons
Conway Tracts
Parker Memorial Meeting House (Boston)
Sermons
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/4692dedf896cb0210862294e3e56a083.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=FWjFsFTLgXHSjzxbD6%7EomFulu4ZUg%7E48sjqS1%7EXIRs1x4%7EmMFUaGyku8eR9YCZkW73chNYoViKIWcLoXn%7ENJGJvGOHrfETH0SOOFgJsFXaHMRjjQ6XZSdF9YD941gzetBBmZeWQC-gJlR7yMa7RDiLwg3JLuOplZpjMUCnTO8dYNPgTJD8deVLQTaI6F61XJgxWmiV4OLLfdkr-OWX9pXq73zUP2B8FSt7mo5%7ESMqB3UG83iUBiTuRcpQog1gdqSqtLLOLMzx70n6-Hg34-oFCqF9rTzFtvnm10WI9cyydhg4sMd-l8yJOBmKKk3F2UWlmO6yxgO7gAFAyZVi7OokA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
95719a07d2702718c80b54a109149463
PDF Text
Text
ON
THE PAST AND PEESENT
OF
IRON
SMELTING.
BY
ST. JOHN VINCENT DAY, C.E., F.R.S.E.,
FELLOW OF THE ROYAL SCOTTISH SOCIETY OF ARTS, MEMBER OF THE INSTITUTION OF MECHANICAL
ENGINEERS, MEMBER OF THE INSTITUTION OF ENGINEERS IN SCOTLAND, MEMBER OF THE IRON
AND STEEL INSTITUTE, HON. LIBRARIAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY OF GLASGOW.
From the “Proceedings'” of the Philosophical Society of Glasgow,
Communicated April 23, 1873.
EDINBURGH:
EDMONSTON AND
1873.
DOUGLAS.
��ON THE
PAST AND PRESENT OF IRON SMELTING.
Part I.
(a.) Preliminary Remarks.
As to the importance of the position which pig iron occupies in
the list of our manufactures, it were idle to urge anything in expla
nation to a society located in Glasgow. When we consider that
in 1871 no less than 16,859,063 tons of iron ores were smelted in
Great Britain alone, from which was produced 6,627,179 tons of
pig iron, representing a money value at the works of £16,667,947,
*
and which for the corresponding period we have just passed through,
must by reason of an unprecedented demand for the material itself,
and at unprecedented prices, be greatly increased; it will, I venture
to hope, be readily admitted that our time may be profitably spent
in considering the steps by which a manufacture, in former years
carried on very much in the dark, has at length been reduced by
the conjoint labour of many to almost a scientific exactitude. To
say that iron smelting has yet been completely reduced to a science
would be nothing other than pretence; nevertheless, that with a
given furnace, ore, fuel, flux, and blast, we can estimate within
tolerably narrow limits the quality and quantity of the product.
Yet there are numerous points in the true understanding of what
takes place in the blast furnace which are still enshrined in the
region of uncertainty.
Within the last forty years, it may be said that iron smelting has
been becoming by slow degrees to be scientifically understood, since
Mushet and Clark in our own country, as well as several French
and German physicists, have devoted their energies to the solution
of various inquiries wherewith the subject is entangled; but since
1846, when the first furnace was built at the Walker Works, by
Mineral Statistics, 1871.
�4
Preliminary Remarks.
Mr. I. Lowthian Bell, for smelting the Cleveland iron-stone, and
*
several more iron-making districts, with furnaces of colossal dimen
sions, have sprung up, the most important investigations, so far at
least as our own country is concerned, have been canned out, the
general results of which have led to improvements in practice,
whereby the fuel required for smelting has been reduced by about
30 per cent.—this being directly due to operating with a larger
bulk a,nd higher column of materials at a time; utilizing the waste
gases for heating the blast and generating steam for the blowing
engines; and to a greatly elevated blast temperature.
No argument can be necessary to shew why it is important, in
dealing with the subject of this investigation, to attack it at the
very foundation; for that must be self-evident to any one whom it
may concern to understand it, and as certain special reasons which,
I trust, will clearly appear in the sequel, seem to render it desirable
to consider briefly some information which comes to us from remote
past ages, it may not, I hope, be considered tedious nor out of
place if, at the commencement of this record, I dwell somewhat
briefly on a few features in the history of the subject.
Any attempt at elucidating the course through which the modern
gigantic operations of iron-smelting have been reached involves at
once the history of the manufacture of cast iron—and it is not too
much to say that recent investigations into that subject, if they
prove anything at all, prove, amongst other things, that the true
history of cast-iron still remains an unwritten chapter. How
ever interesting, as well as useful it might prove, to probe the
ultimate depths of that history, yet it is not proposed as a feature
of this paper to attempt what must at present be so unfathom
able a task.
Before entering into the deeper points to which the subject before
us will probably be found to reach, I may remark that, whereas by
some researches,! made a few years since, I was enabled toprove,
from a variety of consentaneous evidence, that malleable iron was
well known and used at least as far back as 4,000 years ago, and
almost certainly much earlier still, I was thereby, and of necessity,
led to doubt whether the usually accepted assertion as to cast iron
having been invented within the last three or four hundred years
only, rested on an entirely stable and reliable basis. The sequel will
shew the results of the doubt so raised in my own mind.
* Chemical Phenomena of Iron Smelting, Preface.
+ Vide Proc. Phil. Soc., Glasgow, Vol. vii., p. 476.
�The Beginning of Iron Smelting.
5
(&.) The Origin of the Blast Furnace.
Not unlike many other discoveries made at periods remote from
the present age, and which have had in varied degrees incalculable
influence upon the condition and destinies of mankind, does it at a
first view appear out of keeping with an almost constant order, that
the place and date, no less than the names, of the first makers of
cast iron are not absolutely known.
When, however, we reflect upon that which we really do know,
as being reliably ascertained concerning early methods of making
iron and steel, weigh carefully the precise nature of the conditions
involved under those methods, and seek out the results inevitably
accruing through them, as explained by the guiding light of modern
chemistry, it would appear that the blast furnace as a distinct
apparatus could scarcely at any time have consisted in a definite or
sudden departure from an existing order of things; by saying which,
I mean to explain, that in all probability, there never was in the
development of iron smelting an immediate complete change made
from the method of reducing ore at once to malleable metal (the
direct method) to that of first making pig or sow metal (or the
indirect method of the blast furnace as we practise it to-day); rather,
on the contrary, the evidence which has been collected goes to shew
that the blast furnace was ultimately reached as a definite and
distinct apparatus for reducing iron ore quickly, and producing an
easily fusible compound of iron, partly by its accidental production
occasionally when reducing easily fusible ores in the air or blast
bloomeries, or other formerly used types of low furnaces, in which
the product sought to be obtained was malleable iron or steel
This probability, indeed, appears to rest on conclusive grounds; and
the tendency of the evidence is further to shew that the blast
furnace, as an apparatus having as a distinct object the production
of cast iron, was at last arrived at through very gradual accessions
to the height of the ancient types of low furnaces.
Where we are to look for the earliest traces of the practice of
reducing iron to the form of a carburet or as cast iron, I cannot
suppose that at the present time any one would venture to assert;
*
but as the employment of steel in fashioning the stones used in the
monuments of Proto-Egypt, India, Greece, and elsewhere, has been
shewn, that almost seems to imply the acquaintance of those ancient
nations with the fusion of iron, and leads us to expect that to the
East and not the West must we look for the beginnings of the art.
In so far as our own country has yet given testimony, the oldest
�6
The Oldest British Blast Furnaces.
blast furnaces yet recorded are those of which the ruins formerly
existed, and may, for aught I know, still exist, in the Forest of
Dean, and the age of which Mr. Mushet has computed as belonging
to the commencement of the seventeenth century.
*
* In his “Papers on Iron and Steel,” Mr. Mushet supplies us with the follow
ing instructive remarksI have examined the sites of many old charcoal blast
furnaces, with a view of determining their age, by the quantity of slags with
which they were surrounded. Here, however, another difficulty has been, in
every case but one, interposed. The manufacture of black bottles has, I think,
been traced as far back as the fifteenth century. At what time the manu
facture was introduced into this country, I am uncertain; but it is not
improbable that in early times, as in the last century, the slags or cinders of
the charcoal blast furnace have entered into the composition of black bottles,
and created a consumption of that sort of waste which otherwise would have
remained in the vicinity of the furnaces. The superior quality of the Bristol
black bottles has been attributed to the immemorial use of a portion of the
slags of the charcoal furnaces from the neighbourhood of Dean Forest. The
consequence of this long-standing practice has been to carry from the furnaces
not only the old slags, but those currently made. In one instance only have
I found from this source data for calculation. Before the civil commotions of
the seventeenth century, the Kings of England were possessed of two blast
furnaces in the Forest of Dean, when the cord-wood of the Forest and the
king’s share of the mines were used for the purpose of iron-making. Soon after
the commencement of the struggle between Charles the First and his Parlia
ment, these furnaces ceased working, and at no period since have they been in
blast. About fourteen years ago, I first saw the ruins of one of these
furnaces situated below York Lodge, and surrounded by a large heap of the
slag or scoria that is produced in making pig iron. As the situation of this
furnace was remote from roads, and must at one time have been deemed
nearly inaccessible, it had all the appearance, at the time of my survey, of
having remained in the same state for nearly two centuries. There existed
no trace of any sort of machinery, which rendered it highly probable that
no part of the slags had been ground (the usual practice) and carried off, but
that the entire produce of the furnace in slags remained undisturbed.
“The quantity I computed at from 8,000 to 10,000 tons; a quantity which,
however great it may appear for the minor operations of an early period, would
yet in our times be produced from a coke furnace in less than two years. If it
is assumed that the furnace made annually 200 tons of pig iron; and further,
assuming the result which has been obtained with ores richer than the Boman
cinders, and ores used at that time in Dean Forest, that the quantity of slag run
from the furnace was equal to one-half of the quantity of iron made (in modem
times the quantity of cinder from the coke furnace is double the weight of the
iron), we shall have 100 tons annually for a period of from 80 to 100 years. If
the abandonment of this furnace took place about the year 1640, the nommenoe.
ment of its smeltings must be assigned to a period between the years 1540 and
1560.
Mushet, from this computation, assigns the mean period or 1550 as the
most probable period for the commencement of smelting operations with this
furnace. In a note, however, at the end of the paper from which the previous
�The Oldest British Blast Furnaces.
7
It is desirable, ere proceeding too far in the paths of research
which for the present occupy our attention, in order to avoid any
extract is taken, he says, “the calculation of age, which proceeded on the
assumption of a certain weight of cinder being obtained in the production of a
given weight of iron, and which with so rich ore may be correct; yet, on
further consideration of the subject, and taking into account the calcareous
nature of the iron ores of Dean Forest requiring a considerable portion of
argillaceous schist to neutralize the lime, it is more than probable that the
furnace would necessarily, from this circumstance, and from the inferior pro
duce of the ores, produce fully as much cinder as pig iron, and that in place of
only being one-half the weight, it would probably be of equal weight with the
iron. Taking the calculation in this way, we should not reach an older period
than the commencement of the 17th century for the introduction of the blast
furnace into Dean Forest.’ . . . The local history of Tintern Abbey
assigns a later period (the early years of James the First) for the erection of
that furnace. The opportunity afforded of examining both the slags and the iron
produced in that early period abundantly proves that the furnace in Dean
Forest above mentioned was one of the earliest efforts in the art of making pig
iron. Small masses or shots of iron are found enveloped in the slags, specimens
of iron in a malleable state, though rarely, more frequently rough nodules of
large grained steel, resembling blistered steel, and others of a more dense
fracture, but of a similar quality. The more fusible reguli of white, mottled
and grey iron are found' in great abundance, all of them possessing forms and
appearances of fusion more or less perfect, according to the quantities of carbon
with which they are united; and it is but justice to the memory of the fathers
of this art to add, that the specimens of grey cast iron are more abundant than
those of the other sorts.
“This furnace seems to have been erected upon the spoils of former ages of
iron-making; and probably the situation was in the first instance determined by
the numerous bloomeries that existed in the neighbourhood—the scoria of which
has in after ages been worked to so much advantage in the blast furnace; and
though, as a blast furnace, possessed of no great antiquity, yet, as the site of
the ancient bloomery, entitled to be considered as the remains of an extensive
manufactory of iron in ages more remote.
“ Upon the whole, several circumstances incline me to the opinion, that the
blast furnace must have been known in some of the then iron-making districts
of England before it was introduced into Dean Forest. The oldest casting
I have met with in Dean Forest is dated 1620.
“ The great infusibility and difficulty attending the management of calcareous
ores, such as those belonging to Dean Forest, is another circumstance that
inclines me to think that the art of making pig iron did not originate in that
quarter, and probably did not succeed entirely till the practice of increasing
their fusibility by the addition of the bloomery cinder became known and
established. These conjectures are confirmed by reference to a paper in my
possession, professing to be an account of all the blast furnaces in England
previous to the manufacture of pig iron from pit-coal—probably about the year
1720 or 1730; in which, however, the blast furnace of Tintern Abbey is omitted,
and possibly others. At that period there were in all England 59 furnaces,
�8
High Furnace not Essential to Produce Cast Iron.
necessity for raising the question hereafter, once and for all to
point out, that, it is not a consequence, because we are unable to
assign an earlier positive date for the blast furnace than that above
given, that cast iron was unknown before that period; indeed,
from what we do glean from the historical records, they assure us
that it was in considerable use at a much more remote age. And
whereas this knowledge might lead some persons to conclude that as
the blast furnace constitutes the first step taken in the manufacture
of cast iron to-day, it was necessarily the first step taken in ages long
past; still, a candid consideration of certain features of history,
coupled with a consideration of what chemistry now teaches, are
more than sufficient to convince us that the high or blast furnace
is not indispensable to the production of that carburet, however
much it is essential, under our. current knowledge at the present
period, in order to comply with modern demands for the metal at
paying prices.
To but briefly, indeed, indicate how much more ancient cast iron
may really be than, so far as I have ascertained, has been noticed
during the last quarter of a century,—a period unprecedented in
the issue from the press of a metallurgical literature of extreme
value,—I may mention a process of making steel- used by the
making annually 17,350 tons, or little more than 5 tons of pig iron a week for
each furnace.
“ Should it appear that there have been since the invention of blast furnaces
iron-making districts in England in which a greater number of furnaces have
been established than in Dean Forest, then to that quarter I should be inclined
to look for information on the history, rise, and progress of the blast furnace.
Brecon,
Glamorgan,.
Carmarthen,
Cheshire, .
Denbigh,
Derby,
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
2
1
3
2
4
Gloucester,
Hereford, .
Hampshire,
Kent, .
Monmouth,
Nottingham,
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
3
1
4
2
1
Salop, .
Stafford,
Worcester, .
Sussex,
Warwick, .
York, .
. 6
. 2
. 2
. 10
. 2
. 6
“It would appear from this account, that the counties of Sussex and Kent
alone contained, in the early part of the eighteenth century, 14 blast furnaces;
and as it is probable that the woodlands in the vicinity of the metropolis would
sooner disappear than in the more distant counties, it is equally probable that
a century before the number of blast furnaces might have been considerably
greater in that district. The only other iron-making district that will at the
time now spoken of bear a comparison with Sussex and Kent, is that of Dean
Forest, in which I include the Furnace of Tintern Abbey, in Monmouthshire,
not included in the list; Gloucestershire 6, and Herefordshire 3,—making in
all 10 blast furnaces.”
�Molten Iron known to the Greeks.
9
Greeks, and recorded in the writings of no less an authority than
Aristotle, and to which I have, on a previous occasion, directed
*
attention. Where it is stated:—
“ Wrought iron itself may be cast so as to be made liquid, and to
harden again."
Somewhat obscure as the Aristotleian account of Greek-steel
manufacture unquestionably is, nevertheless, when the terms of the
fragment are analyzed, and it is placed in juxta-position with other
accounts of steel-making appertaining to times long subsequent,
it is even sufficient to assure us that such iron, although it may not
have been specially employed in the art of making castings, but
produced for the purpose of converting bars of wrought iron into
steel, by a process of cementation in a bath of metal surcharged
with carbon, was known to and practised by the Greeks at least
as early as 400 years before our era.
Indeed, we may venture further still—for recent discoveries in
India, and the impossibility of explaining Egyptian sculpture in
granite, porphyry, diorite, &c., without the use of steel tools, hold
out much to hope for towards the increasing of our acquaintance
with the metallurgy of the ancient eastern world, by further special
researches into the storehouses of information yet waiting there
to be opened up. For, after the discovery of the Kutub Minar
Laht,t near Delhi, as well as the -huge iron beams in the Temple of
- Kanaruc,J and the coming to light of numerous other testimonies,
proving beyond doubt the extremely high acquaintance with manu
facturing art, which some persons at least possessed in the East in
ages long past, the cautious observer is compelled to pause ere risk
ing to pronounce, whether, as it even yet is generally asserted,
Western civilization has in all respects exceeded all previous civil
ization, or questioning, whether we have attained in some respects
the position in certain of the manufactures most important to
man at one time reached in the old world; for, whilst the rate of
production has increased as a necessary sequence of the growth
of population, and novel as well as wider fields of application, yet
it is notorious that in many instances high quality is not main
tained. There is much to be met with in the remains of the
Proto-Egyptian, Assyrian, Greek, and Chinese nations to assure
us that we have not—while to Central Asia, Asia Minor, and
Persia we must look hopefully for further light in this respect.
* Vide Proc. Phil. Soc., Glasgow, vol. viii., p. 244.
+ Trans. Asiatic Soc., Bengal, 1864.
J Illust. Ancient Architecture of Hindustan, p. 28, Pl. iii., 1848.
�10
Early Accounts of Molten Iron.
With this much of digression from the immediate subject in
hand, purposely introduced too as a forewarning signal to us that at
this time we have no sufficient facts to warrant us in assigning any
approximate period even for the origin of the indirect method of
reducing iron ores (the prevalent system of this age), we may with
advantage return to the question of producing cast iron without the
blast furnace; in order to satisfy ourselves that, whilst all the very
old examples of iron which we do find are malleable, and appear
from more than one point of view to have been produced from ores
reduced without fusion; and when inquiring still further into the
most ancient practice of reduction, no country so far affords con
clusive evidence of cast iron having been an established man nfa.ctured product—in the sense we find malleable iron to have been
therein—yet the collateral evidence as to an extremely early
method of making steel, in the production of which cast iron was a
sine qua non, convinces us of the necessity for exercising extreme
caution ere drawing a conclusion.
The next early intelligible account that we have of steel-making
throws equal light over cast iron making, and this is to be found
in a work entitled “De la Pirotechniaf published at Venice in 1540,
by Vanoccio Biringuccio; and in the somewhat later, but better
known writings of Agricola—« De re Metallica ”—published about
1561. Both these authors describe a process of converting bars of
malleable iron into steel by keeping the bars immersed for a con
siderable time in molten cast iron.
The process as described by the earlier author has been translated
by Mr. Panizzi, of the British Museum; and I here quote an
*
extract from that translation, shewing how the cast iron was
produced.
“ Steel is nothing but iron well purified by means of art, and
through much liquefaction by fire brought to a more perfect ad
mixture and quality than it had before. By the attraction of some
suitable substances in the things which are added to it, its natural
aridity is mollified by somewhat of moisture, and it is made whiter
and denser, so that it seems to be almost removed from its original
nature; and at last, when its pores are well dilated and mollified
with much fire, and when the heat is driven out of them by the
extreme coldness of the water, they contract, and so the iron is
converted into a hard substance, which from its hardness becomes
brittle. This may be done with every kind of iron, and so steel
* Metallurgy, Iron and Steel. By John Percy, M.D., F.R.S., London, 1864
Murray, p. 807, et seq.
�Early Accounts of Molten Iron.
11
may be made of all kinds of iron. It is true, indeed, that it is
made better from one kind than from another, and with one sort of
charcoal than another, and it is also made better according to the
skill of the masters. The best iron to make it good is, however,
that which, being by its nature free from the corruption of any
other metal, is more easy to melt, and which is to a certain extent
harder than other kinds. With this iron is put some pounded
marble or other fusible stones, in order to melt them together.
By these it is purged, and they have, as it were, the power of
taking away its ferruginosity, of constricting its porosity, and of
making it dense and free from cleavage. Now, to conclude, when
the masters wish to do this work, they take of that iron passed
through the furnace or otherwise as much as they wish to convert
into steel, and they break it into little bits; then they prepare
before the aperture of the forge a circular receptacle, about a foot or
more in diameter, made of one-third clay and two-thirds small coal
(carbonigia), well beaten together with a hammer, well mixed, and
moistened with so much water as will make them keep together
when squeezed in the hand; and when this receptacle is thus made
in the same way as they make a hearth (ceneraccio), but deeper, the
aperture is prepared in the midst, which should have a little of the
nose turned down, so that the wind may strike in the midst of the
receptacle. Then, when all the space is filled with charcoal, they,
moreover, make round about it a circle of stones or soft rock to keep
in the broken iron and the additional charcoal which they put
upon it, and so they fill it up and make a heap of charcoal over it.
Then, when they see that the whole is on fire, and well kindled,
especially the receptacle, the masters begin to set the bellows to
work, and to put on some of that crushed iron mingled with saliup
marble and with pounded slag, or with other fusible and not earthy
stones; and so melting this composition by little and little, they
fill up the receptacle so far as they think fit; and having first
formed with the hammer three or four lumps of the same iron, each
weighing 30 or 40 lbs., they put them hot into that bath of melted
iron, which bath is called by the masters of this art the art of iron;
and they keep them thus in the midst of this melted matter with a
great fire about four or six hours, often turning them about with a
rod as cooks do victuals, and so they keep them there, turning
them again and again, in order that all that solid iron may receive
through its porosity those subtle substances which are found to be
within that melted iron, by virtue of which the gross substances
which are in the lumps are consumed and dilated, and the lumps
�12
Early Accounts of Molten Iron.
become softened, and like a paste. When they are seen thus by the
experienced masters, they judge that that subtle virtue of which
we have spoken has thoroughly penetrated; and taking out one of
the lumps which appears best from their experience in testing, and
bringing it under the hammer, they beat it out, and then throwing
it suddenly as hot as they can into the water, they temper it, and
being tempered, they break it, and look to see if the whole of it
has in every particle so changed its nature as to have no small
layer of iron within it; and finding that it has arrived at that point
of perfection which they desire, they take out the lumps with a
large pair of pincers, or by the ends left on them, and cut them
into small pieces of seven or eight each, and they return them to the
same bath to get hot again, adding to it some pounded marble and
iron for melting to refresh the bath and increase it, and also to
restore to it what the fire may have consumed, and also that that
which [is to become steel may, by being immersed in that bath, be
the better refined; and so at last, when these are well heated, they go
and take them out piece by piece with a pair of pincers, and they
carry them to the hammer to be beaten out, and they make rods of
them as you see. And when this is done, being very hot, and
almost of a white colour from the heat, they cast them all at once
into a stream of water as cold as possibly can be had, of which a
reservoir has been made, in order that the rods may be suddenly
cooled, and by this means get the hardness which the common
people call temper, and thus it is changed into a material which
hardly resembles that which it was before it was tempered. For'
then it was only like a lump of lead or wax, and by tempering it, it
is made.so very hard as almost to surpass all other hard things; and
it is also made very white, much more so than is the nature of its
iron, even almost like silver, and that which has its grain white,
and most minute and fixed, is of the best sort. Among those kinds
which I know of, that of Flanders, and in Italy that of Valcamonica,
in the territory of Brescia, are very much praised; and out of
Christendom, that of Damascus, that of Caramenia and Lazzimino (?),
as well as that of the Agiambi (?).”
The same process is described by Agricola; but it is worthy of
remark, as stated on the authority of the elder Mushet, that “ no
where does he describe a process by which cast iron was obtained
and applied to foundry purposes.” *
In India, near Trincomalee, steel (wootz) is still made in the same
manner, its manufacture being confined to a few families in that
* Papers on Iron and Steel, London, 1840, p. 380.
�Early English Gast Iron.
13
neighbourhood, and altogether unknown to the common steelmakers
of Salem, a distance of only 70 miles. The cast iron used in this case
is obtained from “ a small blast furnace, about 8 feet high, and
tapering from 18 inches diameter at the bottom to 9 inches at the
top. The iron flows out of a grey quality, but without perfect
separation, as the cinders produced contain a good deal of iron.
With regard, then, to the production of cast iron in the most
ancient low furnaces, that was practicable with ores not difficult to
fuse when in presence of large quantities of flux and a great excess of
charcoal—the former of which would preserve the metal from
oxidation, whilst it was allowed to remain a sufficient time in con
tact, to take up a maximum quantity of carbon from the latter; but
as the temperature in such furnaces was low, the slag of necessity
contained a large proportion of the iron, and, except with the most
easily fusible ores, the process was very slow; indeed, with the
more difficult fusible ores, almost impossible. With this certainty
before us, however, of the possibility of producing cast iron even
in the oldest known types of furnaces, coupled also with the
well-ascertained fact of the use of iron and steel by Greeks,
Indians, ancient Egyptians, and Assyrians, f it is impossible
to say how far back we may carry the date of the discovery of cast
iron. But it is not, as I have already pointed out, to be inferred
that the blast furnace has any claim at all to antiquity; on the
contrary, I have collected together the foregoing evidence with the
one object, amongst others, of avoiding any misapprehension on
that point.
Percy, J remarking on a quotation from Lower’s Contributions to
Literature, &c., says,—
“ The date of the discovery of cast iron has not, so far as I am
aware, been precisely ascertained, though it is a point of great
archaeological interest. Lower has published the following remark
able statement, which would lead to the conclusion that cast iron
was made and applied in England 500 years ago. A curious
specimen of the iron manufacture of the fourteenth century, and,
as far as my own observation extends, the oldest existing article
produced by our foundries, occurs in Burwash church (Sussex).
It is a cast iron slab, with an ornamental cross, and an inscription
in relief. In the opinion of several eminent antiquaries, it may be
* Papers on Iron and Steel, London, 1840, p. 673.
t Proceedings Phil. Soc., Glasgow, vol. vi., 1871; also Trans. Devon. Assocn.,
1868.
+ Percy’s Metal; Iron and Steel, p. 878.
�14
Early Dutch Cast Iron.
regarded as unique for the style and period. The inscription is
much injured by long exposure to the attrition of human feet.
The letters are Longobardic, and the legend appears, on a careful
examination, to be,—
‘ Obate P. Annema Jhone Coline, (or Colins).
‘ Pray for the soul of Joan Collins.’
Of the identity of the individual thus commemorated I have been
unable to glean any particulars. In all probability she was a
member of the ancient Sussex family of Collins, subsequently seated
at Locknersh, in the adjacent parish of Brightling, where, in com
pany with many of the neighbouring gentry, they carried on the
manufacture of iron at a place still known as Locknersh Furnace.”
M. Verlit says that cast iron was known in Holland in the
thirteenth century, and that stoves were made from it at Elass, in
1400, a.d. ; and, according to Lower, the first cannon of cast iron
*
were manufactured at Buxteed, in Sussex, by Ralphe Hogge, in 1543.
It is recorded, however, by others that the first iron guns cast in
England were made in London, in 1547, by Owen; and in 1595 the
art of iron casting was so well understood that John Johnson and
his son Thomas had by that time “ made forty-two cast pieces of great
ordnance of iron for the Earl of Cumberland, weighing 6,000 pounds,
or three tons a-piece.” Agricola, too, who died in 1494 a.d., seems
to have been acquainted with cast iron; for he Writes,—“ Iron
melted from ironstone is easily fusible, and can be tapped off; ” so
that although he does not appear to say anything as to the method
by which such cast iron was produced, it nevertheless is evident,
when we consider the large extent to which cast iron was probably
then employed for guns, and doubtless other purposes, that the
blast furnace was at that time in existence, though on a very small
scale, grown out of the Catalan, and through the Blaseofen, or
Osmund, f to the German Stiickofen, in which cast or malleable iron
* Mushet’s Papers on Iron and Steel, p. 391.
+ Percy says {Iron and Steel, pi 320),—“ Between the Luppenfeuer, or Catalan
furnace, and the Stiickofen, German metallurgists place a furnace of inter
mediate height, which they designate Blaseofen and Bauernofen. This furnace
was formerly employed in Norway, Sweden, and other parts of Europe; and
although a century may have elapsed since it became extinct in the first two
countries mentioned, yet to this day it continues in operation in Finland.”
“ Osmund” is the Swedish word for the bloom produced in this particular kind
of furnace, of which the annexed woodcuts (Figs. 1 and 2) are a plan and vertical
section, respectively, shewing the outside as consisting of a timber casing,
�The Osmund Furnace.
15
was produced as required, by varying the proportions of the materials
constituting the charge.
“ Osmund” Furnace.
Fig. 1.—Plan.
As the Stiickofen would appear to be the last stage of transition
from the low to the high furnace, into which it ultimately became
‘ ‘ Osmund ” Furnace.
Fig. 2.—Section.
merged altogether, when the discovery was made that the ore was
more completely reduced, and the variety of purposes to which
and the inner part a lining of refractory stone, the space between them being
filled with earth.
The Osmund furnace is used for reducing the hydrated sesquinoxide ores (lake
or bog iron ores) found in the lakes and rivers of some parts of Northern Europe,
and in Finland is stated at the present day to be working side by side with the
modern blast furnace.
�16
The “ Stuck ” or “ Wulf ” Oven.
the pig or sow metal could be applied increased the demand for
cast iron to such an extent as to induce the indirect ^method of
reduction to be carried out on a large scale, it will be unnecessaryin this paper, which deals with cast iron and the blast furnace
as its principal subjects, to refer further to the pre-existing low
furnaces.
Regarding the Stiickofen, then, or high bloomery furnace, it has
been correctly described by writers on metallurgy as a Catalan
or low furnace, extended upwards in the form of either a circular
or quadrangular shaft. In Germany this furnace is also known
as Wulfsofen, the reduced metallic mass resulting from the opera
tions being designated “ Stuck ” or “ Wulfhence the Stiick or
Wulf oven—Salamander furnace—for the following particulars of
*
which I am indebted to Professor Osborne’s treatise,f and who, in a
paragraph preceding the extract, significantly terms this the
“ transition furnace,” which might be used for the production of
cast iron or malleable iron at will, by varying the constituents of
the charge and the intensity of the blast.
Osborne says,—
“ This kind of furnace is at present very little in use. A few are
still in operation in Hungary and
The “Stiickofen. ’
Spain. At one time they were
very common in Europe. The
iron produced in the Stuck oven
has always been of a superior
kind favourable for the manu
facture of steel; but the manipu
lation which this oven requires
is so expensive that it has been
superseded. Fig. 3 shews a cross
section of a Stuck oven; its inside
has the form of a double crucible.
This furnace is generally from 10
to 16 feet high, 24 inches wide
at bottom and top, and measures
Fig. 3.—Section.
at its widest part about 5 feet.
• “ Salamander is the term now given to the mass of half-pure iron, which
results when the molten mass of a furnace chills before it can be regularly
tapped off into pigs. It is difficult to melt, and is sometimes largely malleable
iron. The present may have originated from the earlier use of the word as
applied to this furnace.
+ The Metallurgy of Iron and Steel, Theoretical and Practical, in all its branches,
�The “Stuck ” or “ Wulf" Oven.
17
There are generally two tuyeres [tw^-er, allied to tuyaw, a pipe],
*
a a, and at least two bellows and nozzles, both on the same side.
The breast, &, is open, but during the smelting operation it is shut
by bricks; this opening is generally 2 feet square. The furnace
must be heated before the breast is closed; after which charcoal
and ore are thrown in. The blast is then turned into the furnace.
As soon as the ore passes the tuyere, iron is deposited at the
bottom of the hearth; when the cinder rises to the tuyere, a por
tion is suffered to escape through a hole in the dam, 6. The tuyeres
are generally kept low upon the surface of the melted iron, which
thus becomes whitened. As the iron rises the tuyeres are raised.
In about 24 hours one ton of iron is deposited at the bottom of
the furnace. This may be ascertained by the ore put in the furnace.
If a quantity of ore is charged sufficient to make the necessary
amount of iron for one cast, a few dead or coal charges may then
be thrown in. The blast is then stopped, the breast wall removed,
and the iron, which is in a solid mass, in the form of a salamander
or “stuck-wulff as the Germans call it, is lifted loose from the
bottom by crowbars, taken by a pair of strong tongs, which are
fastened on chains suspended on a swing-crane, and then removed
to an anvil, where it is flattened by a tilt hammer into 4-inch thick
slabs, cut into blooms, and finally stretched into bar iron by small
hammers. Meanwhile the furnace is charged anew with ore and
coal, and the same process is renewed.
“ By this method good iron as well as steel may be furnished.
In fact, the salamander consists of a mixture of iron and steel—
of the latter, skilful workmen may save a considerable amount.
The blooms are a mixture of fibrous iron, steel, and cast iron. The
latter flows into the bottom of the forge fire, in which the blooms
are re-heated, and is then converted into bar iron by the same
method adopted to convert common pig iron. If the steel is not
sufficiently separated, it is worked along with the iron. This would
be a very desirable process, on account of the good quality of iron
which it furnishes, if the loss of ore and waste of fuel it occasions
were compensated by the price of bar iron. Poor ores, coke, or
anthracite coal, cannot be employed in this process. Charcoal
made from hardwood, and the rich magnetic, specular, and sparry
ores are almost exclusively used.”
It is obvious that the conditions necessary to the production of
edited by H. S. Osborne, LL.D., Professor of Mining and Metallurgy in Lafayette
College, Easton, Pennsylvania. Triibner & Co., London, 1869.
* One tuyere, however, is frequently used.—S. J.V.D.
�18
The, “Blauofen.
cast iron—viz., a column of materials which gradually become
increased in temperature during their descent, exposed to reducing
gases, and latterly, prolonged contact in the reduced state to carbon
izing matter, obtained in this furnace; and the result frequently
was that, when intending to produce malleable iron at once, the
lump was so much carbonized, owing to excess of carbonizing
materials, that it had to be submitted to a decarbonizing process
before it could be hammered. Experience in working the Stiickofen
proved it to be extremely wasteful of fuel; and about 1840 it was
to a great extent abandoned in Carniola, Carnithia, and Styria,
although still worked in Germany and Hungary to a limited
extent (Karsten). In some cases a throat was added to the furnace,
of a gradually widening form: this gave facility in charging. The
tuyere was placed about a foot above the hearth bottom; but
as the furnace continued in operation this distance became
increased, by reason of the disintegration or wear of the hearth
(silicious conglomerate), which we learn influenced the yield and
quality of the iron as well as the quantity of charcoal consumed.
Besides being made of the form shewn at fig. 3, the Stiickofen
sometimes increased with a regular taper throughout' the entire
height of the shaft, being broadest at the bottom, and both
rectangular as well as circular in horizontal section.
The
tuyeres were sometimes made of clay, at others of copper,
situated at different parts of the furnace; and when in the
breast, the bellows had to be removed before the lump of reduced
iron could be withdrawn. As the demand for cast iron increased,
the Stiickofen was gradually replaced by the Blauofen, in which
*
cast iron was produced alone; but it still retained its place for the
direct production of malleable iron—and indeed malleable iron was
also produced in the Blauofen, which at first, it would appear,
was simply a tall Stiickofen, eventually becoming increased in
height to from 20 to 25 feet, in which case it was capable
of producing cast iron only. In working these furnaces for
the production of malleable iron, the slag was allowed a constant
escape, so that the lump of metal in the hearth might be
exposed to the action of the blast, which prevented it from becom
ing carbonized to excess; at other times the slag was allowed to .
accumulate, thus protecting the metal from the decarbonizing
action of the blast, after it had become carbonized in passing
through the lower part of the furnace, and therefore producing
•By some authors termed “blue furnace.” Fr. “ Fournean blue,” “blue
oven.
�The “Blauofen.
19
carbonized or cast iron. The Blauofen, as in common use on
the continent, is represented in vertical section at fig. 4, wherein
a is the breast, b the tuyere. This furnace may be kept in blast for
three to six months, or even longer, when the hearth widens and
interferes with successful operations. In working with this furnace,
the practice is to heat it by a fire,
The “ Blauofen.”
after which the breast previously
open is closed; it is then filled
to the top with coal and iron ore,
which are renewed as the charge
sinks. The tuyeres are about
14 inches above the hearth, which
slopes towards the breast. This
furnace requires rich ores and a
plentiful supply of charcoal, and
produces good pig iron, as well
as a metal specially suitable for
steel, sometimes called “ steel
metal,”* and said to be that from
Fig. 4. Section.
which German steel (shear steel) is made. The management of the
Blauofen is simple—generally and where sparry carbonates are
plentiful—and the furnace is cheaply constructed.
From the preceding remarks we have become familiar with the
earliest known form of the blast furnace, which originating in the
Stuckofen, or high bloomery, of some’95 cubic feet capacity, passed
into the Blauofen of some 500 to 600 cubic feet; and without
following its progressive development minutely through the fur
naces in the Hartz, Silesia, Prussia, Sweden, Great Britain, and
America—all of which has been already done, and so excellently in
the Treatises of Percy, Osborne, and others—we may at once come
down to our own age, and now find furnaces in the Cleveland
district of the enormous capacity of 20,000 to 30,000 cubic feet, or
about 280 times that of an early Blauofen.
* Osborne’s Metallurgy, p. 294.
��
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 & 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 past and present of iron smelting.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Day, John Vincent
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Edinburgh
Collation: 19 p. ill. (figs.) ; 24 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. From the 'proceedings' of the Philosophical Society of Glasgow, communicated April 23, 1873. Inscription on front cover: From the Author. Includes bibliographical references.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Edmonston and Douglas
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1873
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5273
Subject
The topic of the resource
Engineering
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 past and present of iron smelting.), 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
Engineering
Iron
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/69200886f67b65a20103d6471089bb9a.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=v0hNuvhLRaRALPb72pH6dJAd4QBBaMkwA1-iPKqh4ps%7EhCu2QdVVU%7EYVjU4VGir4hMI8nFKdc9%7EHW9D-4%7Esp2uTWrhaCJDBGhpE8tGFJgwAZyO0E-2WgNHaYtFF3Yz-8I0bgDz3E30wz27Zz8Z-NtpWCaBREmvgFitdSZ7r%7EIvBKzao4rpt3RbRzsIMHWlwTZDS%7ERwZ0GLSmMc3qtvCLOrXlk%7EqImfJvtw0U7ZVT%7E5ozA8Bq7Yzw-hDOuItmARqioNJNc38l8iO9PONDubc2-UEuK-C69Rl7krsq8hNTn0aoxMVbGj2wtAdQWrIeL0E0GLkwv1%7EoORXK5wNLVqpG0g__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
ea0471f22507dae191aaeaf5f40bb792
PDF Text
Text
NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY
' CW-H*
11 •
THE FREETHINKER’S
BURIAL
Reprinted from The Examiner of February 22, 1873.
Sir,—A recent pamphlet, one of Mr. Thomas Scott’s
series, entitled ‘ The Book of Common Prayer Examined in
the Light of the Present Age,’ by Mr. William .Jevons, and
in which the varying views of St. Paul on a future life are
pointed out, has turned my thoughts to the position ’which
Freethinkers of the present and future generations are
likely to take with reference to the burial service of
the Church of England, and to the question of burials in
general.
It will be well known to many of your readers that both
in France and Italy Societies of Freethinkers have been
established for the express purpose of preventing the
clergy from obtruding themselves unsolicited into the
presence of dying members of the Society. In this
country Freethinkers at present need not much fear beinginterfered with on their death-beds against their will by
the clergy; but still kind or officious friends may try to
make the world believe that those who have in their mature
years rejected the creeds and fables taught them in their
childhood, did at the last hour see the error of their way,
give up their deliberate convictions, and accept the orthodox
belief that their only chance of a future life of happiness
depends upon the merits of a crucified man. Under these
circumstances, and even independently of them, many a
Freethinker may, if he turns his attention to the subject at
all, be desirous of putting on record, as solemnly as
possible, his opinions and his wishes, and to such as do so
it may occur that, following the fashion of our ancestors,
but in an opposite direction, they may, instead of
invoking the Holy Trinity and professing to commit
their bodies and souls to the keeping of the Almighty,
and declaring their belief in the certainty of their
resurrection to a future life, or in any other speculative
matter, make their will as far as regards their burial
somewhat in the following form :—-
�With respect to my burial, although ! have no objection to being
buried in what is commonly called consecrated ground, I should
prefer non-consecrated ground, being not only fully convinced that t he
act of no man, be he pope, bishop, or priest of any kind, can make
any portion of this earth more holy or sacred than another, but
also wishing to enter my protest against the superstitious reverence
generally paid to this act of consecration.
Not believing in the dogmas of original sin, the fall of man, the
atonement or redemption, and not believing that the man Jesus
of Nazareth was born of a virgin, nor in his resurrection after
death by crucifixion, nor that he descended into a place called hell,
nor that, he ascended into a place called- heaven, and then sat on
the right hand of God, and as I shall not die “in the Lord’
according to the views of those who style themselves Orthodox
Christians, I express my desire that neither the burial service of
the Church of England nor any other religious service shall be
performed on the occasion of my remains being consigned to the
earth, as it would, in my case, be merely a farce and mockery.
I desire that as little funeral ceremony shall be allowed as
possible—a plain coffin [single, and of perishable wood or wicker], a
hearse with not more than a pair of horses, no trappings of any
kind and no mourning coaches. I request those of my friends who
may be present on the occasion will go in their own clothes, and not
allow themselves to be dressed like mutes or undertakers’ men in
grotesque hatbands or scarves.”
The above will probably express the real views of a
great number among us, and even if surviving friends
and relatives differ from those views and would gladly
think matters were otherwise, they ought to bear in mind
that concealment is not honest, and that the allowing what
they will consider a very solemn service of the Church to
be performed on such an occasion would simply be acting
a lie, and ought to be far more abhorrent to them than
their acknowledgment of facts that cannot be altered.
I am. &c.,
W. H. D.
P.S. — The following extract from the Musee de&
Monumens Francais, by Alexandre Lenoir (Paris, 1806),
may interest your readers: “ The refusal of the Clergy
to bury Moliere caused a great scandal in Paris. The
king Louis XIV., being informed of this abuse of the
�3
ecclesiastical power, sent for the priest of St. ■ Eustache
(to which parish Moliere belonged), and ordered him
to bury the poet. This he declined to do, on account of
his being an actor, saying that such a man could not be
buried in consecrated ground. ‘ To what depth is the
ground consecrated?’ inquired the king of the narrow
minded priest. ‘To the depth of four feet, sire.’ Then
bury him six feet deep, and let there be an end of it,’
replied the king, turning his back on the priest of St.
Eustache.”
THE
FREETHINKER’S
MOURNING.
Reprinted from The Examiner of March 8, 1873.
Sir,—As you have kindly favoured me by inserting my
letter on “ The Freethinker’s Burial,” I now venture to
trouble you with one on possibly a more delicate subject
“ The Freethinker’s Mourning.”
In these days, when men and women allow and encourage
their stationers to go on increasing their depth of mourning
borders till space is scarcely left for any writing, a few
words on the exaggeration of mourning, internal as well as
external, may perhaps be permitted. That the Orthodox,
full of their “certain hope” that the departed has at once
been translated to realms of eternal bliss, where they
themselves will (after an interval of the briefest as
compared with eternity) in the due course of nature join
them, should give way to weeping and wailing—that
grown-up children, themselves old enough to be parents, or
even grandparents, should be completely unnerved at death
laying its hands on their parents, who simply appear to fall
asleep, their bodily frames having gradually given way and
decayed like the leaf on the tree that has performed its
allotted task and drops in its autumn season, is a
psychological phase in human nature singularly puzzling to
an outsider; but as the ways of the Orthodox are not my
ways, I pass them by. My letter is addressed to those who may
�4
be, like myself, Freethinkers; and to them I would say,
ought we not always to be prepared for death ourselves,
and therefore equally prepared for it in the case of our
friends and relatives ? Shocks are disagreeable to all; but
constant contemplation of what is happening around us
will, in every respect, prevent the shock otherwise caused
by sudden bereavement. As we learn to look upon our own
deaths as the result of laws partly hidden and partly known
but never varying, so exactly shall we learn to look upon
the deaths of those most dear to us. This uncertainty of
life, so far from being an evil, ought to be one of the
strongest inducements to all good work. To an earnest
Freethinker it should never be possible to grieve over lost
opportunities of making those around him better and
happier. As I have lived so shall 1 die. Let my daily '
thoughts be—This is possibly my last day here ; how ought
I to act for the best towards myself and others ?
So when even the young are cut off from us, let our true
regret be lightened by the feeling that, while in no way
wasting our time and energies in the study of dogmas on
subjects beyond human knowledge, or troubling ourselves
about creeds and articles of faith, we have to the very best
of our abilities made ourselves masters of the laws of nature,
have done all in our power by obedience to these laws to
preserve the life of that dear one. When life is cut short
by our self-willed ignorance of, or our carelessness about
these laws—then, indeed, is there true cause for mourning
over an untimely death.
I am, &c.,
|
j
’
W. H. D.
1
1
4
�
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 & 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 freethinker's burial [and, The freethinker's mourning]
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Domville, William Henry
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [s.l.]
Collation: 4 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Reprinted from The Examiner of February 22, 1873 and March 8, 1873. Letters to the editor, signed W.H.D. Author's name handwritten in pencil on title page. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
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
1873
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N196
Subject
The topic of the resource
Death
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 freethinker's burial [and, The freethinker's mourning]), 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
Death
Freethinkers
Mourning
NSS