1
10
198
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/7350d239f753092f2825d94edb82404f.pdf?Expires=1785369600&Signature=quO%7EPfFJJZghkED4w3gs3fs8vEZYnjhysCMrltd%7E3a3j969uQ02NDgZn0mSAGstkl-N99ZWWGGbchayNta7X-sK0%7EfxZ5IkV0Y7n83DSeVMe77HwWoH%7EPMVWSEPUNvwMV2K8HBqyGgoEXw-Z3sUzeBbTTMDR46a45vAIe1vMekXhJW8azXRgUYyUIuTU48DpUz-IqYG0wOXPHuQ5g7VfoHWDvsBliw3CBqSAbTXiXYM31K-114aeFPsQR7t4T3gnO8GQ-%7EB2FX9FAjoKW6aTsLk7YhW5O8%7EtBziZRMyR3ArRDq5p4bwxZ8Lyv%7EaOdt0gtBTlFO6WIOOVK28qv4UynA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
37f382eb8f173c1b1dc1fe8ae5668afb
PDF Text
Text
C( 2z5?
SACRED HISTORY
AS A BRANCH OF
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION.
PART I.
ITS INFLUENCE ON THE INTELLECT.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
MOUNT PLEASANT, RAMSGATE.
Price, Sixpence.
�I
�SACRED HISTORY
AS A BRANCH OF
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION.
UGHT the teaching of Sacred History, in its tra
ditional and biblical form, to be approved of or
maintained in the primary schools of a free and pro
gressive people 1
Such is the question which I propose to discuss.
Thus stated, it does not address itself exclusively to
any one nation, nor to any one Church. It is not a
criticism of one denomination, nor of one school-system
more than of another. It has no special reference to
the religious instruction of Catholics or Protestants as
such. Important and interesting for all sects and
parties alike, it is addressed alike to all, and the dis
cussion of it ought to be entirely free from party spirit
and sectarian prejudice.
To avoid misunderstanding, it may be well, here, at
the outset, clearly to define and to circumscribe the
subject proposed for consideration. The position which
I am to maintain would be utterly absurd, if it were
extended beyond the limits which are assigned to it by
the very title of this essay. There is no question, there
can be no question here, of any but the popular Sacred
History,—of Biblical History as it is commonly taught
O
�6
Sacred History :
in schools, and as we have all learned it in onr child
hood. I declare formally that I am not to treat of the
Bible, nor of Biblical History, as viewed in relation to
the science of Religion, as studied in our universities,
in our theological halls, and generally in the higher
walks of learning, by the light of comparative philology,,
of archaeology, and of all the other sciences which are
now made subservient to the science of history.
I most expressly restrict my subject to the now pre
vailing popular primary teaching of Biblical History;
and I shall accordingly take for reference, not this or
that learned work of historical, critical, or exegetical
interpretation of the Bible, but only the authorized
translation of it, which every one possesses, and which
is used in our schools.
It will be seen that this question, though bearing
closely upon the highest theological doctrines, presents
itself here in a totally different relation; for it turns, in
the first place and chiefly, upon a practical problem of
popular education. The discussion of such a question,
however various may be the opinions held regarding it,
ought to be cordially welcomed by every man in a free
country such as this, where true progress is universally
desired.
It is not difficult to discern and to state the principles
by which we ought to be guided in this discussion; and
there can scarcely be any dispute about these principles
when stated. All must agree that education, in every
stage from the lowest to the highest, ought to have a
twofold purpose—the culture of the intelligence, and that
of the moral conscience. Such ought especially to be
the design and the aim of the primary education which
addresses itself to the children of the people, among
whom, in the majority of cases, it is not likely to be
followed up by any other regular instruction. Before
these children, who can scarcely be expected to have
afterwards either the time or the means for completing
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
7
or correcting the ideas which have once been inculcated
on their minds, a teacher ought to say nothing, do
nothing, inculcate nothing, which may not have a good
effect npon the intellect or upon the heart,—nothing
but what may contribute to teach them either to think
aright or to act aright. To make men:-—\his is the
glorious task of the teacher in modern society. To
make men, is to develop, in the youths committed to
his care, enlightened intellects and upright consciences.
It is from this twofold point of view that we propose
to consider the study of Sacred History; it is by its
effects upon our two essential faculties, the intellect and
the conscience, that we propose to judge it.
I. The
influence of
Sacred History
upon the
DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTELLECT.
Let us put ourselves in the position of a child who
is being taught sacred history, and endeavour to
realize and explain to ourselves the ideas of Humanity,
of Nature, and of God, which will thus be conveyed
to the mind of the child, in these three great depart
ments which complete the cycle of human thought.
Let us see, first, how the modern idea of humanity
will harmonize with that of a sacred history.
What is the meaning of this expression, sacred
history ? Wherefore sacred 2 In what respect is it
more sacred than other histories ? Is it that it will
present to us the ideal of sanctity or holiness in action?
Is it a history of the purest, the best, the most virtuous
men ? This title of sacred history would be intelligi
ble, if applied to a book which should present to our
view a gallery of portraits worthy to serve as models
to humanity, a series of biographies, such as those of
Joseph and of Moses among the Hebrews, of Aristides,
and of Socrates among the Greeks, of Cakyamouni in
Hindostan, of the great Roman Stoics, of the Christian
�8
Sacred History:
martyrs and missionaries, of a Spinoza, of a Luther, of
a Vincent de Paul, of all those in short who have lived
and died for the defence of their faith, their reason,
their conscience, their earnest convictions. We might
thus have an admirable collection of the benefactors of
the human race, of men devoted to their duty, taken
impartially from all periods, from all peoples, and from
all creeds. But these exalted and noble lessons are
not what men call sacred history. This history is thus
named, not on account of the holiness of the precepts,
or of the examples which it contains, but because it is
the history of a people who were not, like others, left
to their own resources, of a people who received, from
God himself, revelations, promises, supernatural lights,
who were, in a word, the “people of God.”
What idea is the child to derive from this title
alone ?
His first impression, if left to himself, will be that
God, like men, has His favourites, His proteges; that,
by an entirely unmerited choice, He honoured with a
special affection and care one nation to the exclusion of
all others. The child, with his simple, direct, and
wholesome logic, will say exactly what Calvin said.
“ Certainly,” wrote the great Reformer in his energetic
freedom, “ in that God of old adopted the seed of
Abraham, He has given a sufficiently clear proof that
He did not love the whole human race equally.
Having rejected all other nations, He loved one
alone.
He restricted His special love to a small
number, whom He was pleased to choose from among
the rest.” It is well known that, up to our own time,
this theory has been frankly accepted by the theologians
called orthodox. In these days, however, when it is
clearly becoming impossible to maintain such a theory,
a peculiar explanation has been adopted. The doctrine
of absolute predestination, which Calvin consistently
made the chief corner stone of the orthodox system, is
now rejected by many theologians as incompatible with
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
9
morality: and it is said that all nations and all men
have an equal share in the love of God,—that the
■provisional and exceptional election of the Jews is not
a privilege,—that Israel is chosen only as an instru
ment, not for himself, but for the benefit of the whole
human race,—as a monitor whom God employs for the
general instruction of all His children. Supposing this
latter interpretation to be the true one, it would in
some degree be a reply to the moral objection of the
Divine partiality, which we shall repeatedly find again;
but it does not at all remove the historical objection,
which is that the sacred history causes the child to
conceive a thoroughly false idea of humanity, by the
very fact that it teaches him to divide human history
into two parts, the one sacred, the other profane ; the
one, in which God speaks, acts, and shows Himself
directly or personally on every page; and the other,
in which He does not thus interfere, and in which He
acts only by the operation of natural laws.
Until recently, it was considered orthodox to see in
ancient history, the reign of God in Israel, and the
reign of the devil everywhere else; but it is now more
generally thought correct to recognise a negative pre
paration among the Gentiles, as well as a positive pre
paration in Israel. It is thus assumed that there have
been two distinct kinds of divine revelation, all the
other nations having been enlightened only by the dim
and indirect rays of natural light; while the Jews, on
the contrary, were alone privileged to be in constant
and immediate communication with God himself. See
how much is implied in the mere expression—sacred
history.
I do not at present inquire whether this notion can
be reconciled with that of divine equity; but I ask
whether it can be for a moment maintained in the face
of history. History now enables us to say with full
assurance, that humanity is one, in all the diversity of
its families; and that God, who is also One, has
�io
Sacred History :
spoken to man always and everywhere by the same
means, and in the same forms. He is the Father of
all men and of all nations, and has not shown himself
to some, nor concealed himself from others, any more
three thousand years ago than to-day.
The Jews, indeed, affirm that they received, from
God himself, revelations of an entirely special and
supernatural kind, which are recorded in the Bible.
But the Brahmins, the Budhists, the Parsees, and I
may say all the nations of the east, are no less positive
in affirming the same pretension. There is not a single
nation of Asia, ancient or modern, which has not its
Bible, or which does not declare that it is the holy
people—the chosen people of God; not one which, in
support of this exceptional “ calling and election,” does
not appeal to miracles, to numerous interventions of
the Deity, to the testimony of thousands of their best
men, and finally to books divinely inspired.
When among so many Bibles, among so many Words
of God, you take that of the Jews as absolutely true,
and declare those of all other nations absolutely false,
can you say, in all sincerity, that you have investi
gated, with equal attention, patience, and seriousness,
the claims of all these nations to this pretended revela
tion—to this pretended office of “ special instrument ”
of the Deity? Especially with reference to primary
instruction, is it not manifest that neither the pupils
nor the teachers are in a position to make this com
parison between the Hebrew Bible, the Veda of India,
the Avesta of Persia, the Koran of the Arabs, and the
other sacred books of the East ? They are virtually
forced to regard the Bible as an isolated monument,
without even dreaming of the possibility of tracing the
connection between the sacred codes of the various
ancient religions. The children do not know, and,
according to the present system, nine-tenths of them
will never know, that there are as many sacred histories,
and as many chosen peoples, and as many divine revela-
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
11
tions, as there have been, nations in the east, and almost
in all antiquity. By far the greater number, thanks to
this early instruction, will probably remain, all through
life, ignorant or misinformed regarding the fundamen
tal idea of human history—the natural progressive
development of all the human races, a development
which each of them attributes in the first place to a
miraculous revelation, but which the comparative his
tory of civilizations shows to be governed by law's
common to all, according to a general plan of divine
providence.
But how can the immense religious superiority of
the Jews, over all other ancient nations, be explained
on historical and natural grounds ?
In the first place, this superiority is neither so
decided nor so manifest, except to minds which are
unacquainted with the study of the ancient civiliza
tions. It is quite superfluous to say that, if we select
the most beautiful of the Psalms, or the purest and most
admirable pages of the Prophets, to be compared with
some gross form of fetichism, or of primitive idolatry,
if the Jehovah of Isaiah be opposed to the Jupiter of
Lucian, our minds may well be impressed with the
contrast. But take a wider view. Compare the moral
precepts of the Mosaic law with those of Zoroaster, or
of Manu,—the Hebrew poems with those of the Big
Veda; trace and remark the analogies of almost all the
prescriptions relating to manners, to legal defilements,
to ablutions, to the whole system of ritual, among the
Persians for example, and among the Hebrews. It
will then be found that the imaginary abyss of separa
tion has been nearly levelled up; and, instead of an
immense contrast, there will remain only inequalities
of various degrees. The Hebrews will have the advan
tage upon one point, the Persians upon another, and
upon a third the Hindoos, or the Egyptians.
Let us, however, forget for a moment that the mono
theism of Zoroaster is as real, if not as precise, as that
�12
Sacred History:
of the Hebrews; that the Persians and Parsees, no
less than the Hebrews, have had a horror of any
sensible representation of the Deity; that charity was
recognized and preached in India at an earlier date than
in Judea; that the appreciation and esteem of purity,
of holiness, and of labour, were more ancient, and pro
bably also more complete, among the Persians than
among the Jews ; and that numerous passages can be
quoted from the Vedas, or from the Yatpias, which
would sustain, in moral sublimity, a parallel with the
most admirable pages of the Bible.
Let us forget for a moment all these patent facts,
and many others similar, which might be noted, and let
us suppose that, in religion, the Jews have had, over the
rest of humanity, a clear superiority, equal to that, for
example, which the Greeks have had in the domain of
aesthetics. Would it be absolutely necessary, in order
to explain such a difference, to place that nation out
side of the common conditions of humanity, or to intro
duce for them alone the supernatural into history 1 If
you can explain, without any miracle, the genius of a
Homer, or of a Phidias, as well as that of a Zoroaster,
of a Budha, or of a Confucius, why should the same
explanation not apply to the genius of a Moses or of
an Isaiah ?
Seriously, whether we consult our own common
sense, or whether we examine the past, can we believe
that this same God, who now speaks to all men in the
same language, employed a few centuries ago extra
ordinary means, to make himself known exclusively to
a small Semitic tribe dwelling in Palestine, while, over
all the rest of the globe, the thousands and millions of
human creatures, whom He had there brought into
existence, were left by Him to grope in darkness 1 If
we desire to give to our children our cherished modern
idea of the unity, equality, and fraternity of men of
every race, and of every time, of every colour, and of
every clime, is it wise or right to teach them to behold
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
13
in the past some nations abandoned by God, and others
enlightened by Him, a handful of elect specially sur
rounded with miraculous cares, and all the rest,—that
is to say almost the totality of the human generations,
—deprived by God of these exceptional favours ?
Confining ourselves to this general criticism of the
dualistic character, which sacred history introduces into
the notion of humanity ; let us now see whether it will
give to our children better instruction upon the subject
of nature, and whether it will impart to them a more
correct idea of the physical than of the human world.
I shall not here formally enter upon the question of
the supernatural. Although perfectly convinced, for
my own part, that there have never been, in any time
nor in any place, more miracles than are now to be
seen in our daily life, I respect and would not unneces
sarily offend those persons who still to some extent
believe in the supernatural. Thank God, history
shows us, with sufficient clearness, the progress of
humanity in this question. From age to age, the
supernatural steadily loses ground. At the commence
ment of civilization all is prodigy,—the thunder, the
wind, an eclipse, a comet, the smallest meteor. By
degrees, in proportion as men come to understand a
little better the causes or the nature of such phenomena,
the circle of miracle becomes narrower; until at length,
as among Christians of the present day, men feel them
selves compelled to refer miracles to a remote period of
legendary antiquity, there to wait until another step of
progress be accomplished, which shall cause them to be
entirely renounced. Let us patiently and hopefully
await, from the force of events and the development of
humanity, the final fall of the few, frail, and ruinous
refuges of supernaturalism which still survive. Hu
manity moves, and is now again stirring itself; but
God guides the movement, and, notwithstanding every
obstacle, He will assuredly cause yet another stride on
�14
Sacred History:
wards to be taken in due time. It is only a question
of time, and it is useless for us to struggle passionately
against it.
But, without pausing to inquire what degree of
belief still generally retains its hold upon the minds
of men, and judging it more useful to regard the matter
from the believers’ point of view, let us seek to ascer
tain what part ought to be assigned to miracles in
education, especially in that of the children of the
people. However much you may believe in miracles,
I would say to a believer, yet you regard them only
as exceptions. You of course acknowledge that in
general the world is guided by invariable, inflexible,
universal laws. Would it not be well to maintain the
same position in the instruction of childhood ? Is it
not necessary to insist infinitely more upon the rule
than upon the exception ? In the first place, thoroughly
impress upon the child that there are laws of nature;
and let his mind, which is so readily inclined to fantasy,
be familiarized with those laws, and accustomed to seek
everywhere and always the physical explanation of
phenomena. After this has been done, it will be soon
enough to teach him, if you think it right to do so,
that in a very small number of extraordinary cases, two
or three thousand years ago, some revocations of or de
partures from those immutable laws have taken place.
If, on the contrary, at the age when his reason is still
so tender, so pliant, and so unsteady, you speak to him
continually of miracles and of prodigies, there must be
great danger of reversing the parts, of making him take
the exception for the rule, and, worst of all, of banish
ing from his mind the idea of seeking for the rule.
It ought to be borne in mind that reflection has to
be learned by the child. His spontaneous conception
of everything is under the figure of a material image ;
and, “as he has not yet any notion of the true condi
tions of knowledge and of certainty, his faith is in
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
J5
proportion to the effect produced upon his imagination,
and not in proportion to the evidence. He believes in
what is marvellous more easily than in what is simple.
The extraordinary is not only most interesting, but
also most convincing to the mind of a child. Miracle
is the thing which he most readily comprehends. It is
sufficient to make a strong impression upon his imagina
tion in order to convince him. The more brilliant the
colours, the more readily will his young genius be
captivated therewith. Nurses know this instinctively,
and hence their incredible stories often remain graven
in the memories of children, while reasonable and
probable narratives make little or no impression.
Phantoms have a much stronger hold than realities
upon the minds of children; ghosts are to them much
more formidable than living men; and fantastic pic
tures make a far stronger impression than the clear and
distinct reality.” These reflections of a great modern
philosopher explain how very difficult it is for a child
to acquire the idea of a Nature governed by regular
laws, and not by miraculous caprice.
Such being the instinctive propensity of a child,
must it not be injurious to the development of his
reason to implant in his mind at first, as the basis of
intelligence, a thick stratum of the marvellous, which
cannot but tend strongly to stifle the faculty of
rational reflection, of which the culture and the growth
are already so difficult and so slow 1 This is precisely
the danger which, in my opinion, is presented by
sacred history. Taking possession, as it does, before
any other history, of the still vacant mind, it widely
diffuses and plants therein a taste for the miraculous,
instead of furnishing an antidote to that taste already
by nature so strong.
Recall to mind the impressions of your childhood,—
your first lessons of sacred history. You will find that
these fall into two great classes, both belonging to the
�i6
Sacred History:
marvellous ; on the one hand legends, and on the other
miracles properly so called.
By legends, I mean narratives which believers them
selves can no longer take in the literal sense, but are
now constrained to regard as allegorical, while attribut
ing to them a symbolism as profound as they may wish.
Bor example, Adam and Eve are placed naked and
innocent, in a delightful garden, at the centre of which
two mysterious trees spread their boughs. Do you
remember their magical peculiarities ? The one is the
tree of life, the other gives the knowledge of good and
evil. All at once a reptile, the serpent (for, do not
forget, Genesis does not say that this serpent was the
devil,—a personage who does not make his appearance
in the Jewish religion until a very much later time;—
it says merely that it was “more subtile than any
of the field,” Gen. iii. 1),—the serpent, then, caused
our first parents to eat the fruit of one of these trees.
It was the tree of knowledge ; and you know that, as
soon as they had eaten that fruit, it had indeed the
effect of making them know what they had till then
been ignorant of. Then, says the Bible :—
Gen. iii. 22-24.—“ The Lord God said, Behold, the man
is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now,
lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life,
and eat, and live for ever; therefore the Lord God sent
him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from
whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he
placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and
a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way
of the tree of life.”
Surely it cannot wound the religious feelings of my
readers to enquire simply, whether any of them can
here believe the Bible in the literal sense. Who can
now be found to maintain that there really did exist
two trees of which the magical fruits had these virtues,
the one to make man think, and the other to render
him immortal ? Who ever imagines now that the
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
17
knowledge of good and evil, which we all in some
degree possess, is actually derived, as Genesis says it is,
from a certain fruit eaten by our first parents 1 Who
can believe that God drove man out of Eden, for fear
that he should steal for himself immortality, as he had
already stolen knowledge ?—No one, assuredly. It is
so little believed, that, among modern theologians, it
is now generally thought necessary to apply a fanciful
interpretation to the whole of this primitive legend.
It has also been argued by some that it is impossible
to determine clearly what portion of this picture ought
to be taken literally, and what in a figurative sense.
Perhaps so; but that is precisely the character of a
myth. The phrase magical fruit, as here employed,
may be objected to, because there is no such expression
in the Bible; but then is not this one tree called the
tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and that other
the tree of life ? These words must either signify
nothing, or else they suppose qualities very different
from those of ordinary trees. Doubtless you may
spiritualize all this •, but then, who hinders you from
doing the same with all the analogous myths of the
Vedas and of the Avesta? If you were to give this
story to the children, as you in reality take it your
selves,—as a beautiful myth,—as an ancient and
simple legend, enveloping a great moral truth, it might
then be all right and proper. But was it necessary
that God should intervene to dictate only myths ? If
so, what difference, of any value, can you establish
between the Word of God and mythology1? Among
two neighbouring nations you find the same cosmogonic
allegory under different forms more or less poetic : in
the one case it shall be only an imposture, while in
the other case it is celestial truth ! Is this reasonable?
Without insisting upon a crowd of other myths, to
which the same or similar reflections would apply, let
us come to the miracles properly so called.
May it not be said that the most important function
B
�18
Sacred History:
and aim of instruction ought to be, to make children
early practise the habit of putting to themselves always
these two questions,—WHY ? and HOW ? It is only
thus that they can acquire the knowledge that the things
which they learn from their teachers or from their
books, are truths and realities; and this alone is true
knowledge. It is only thus that they can be educa
tionally inspired with that thirst for the knowledge of
all things real and true, which is the mainspring of
human progress. It is only thus that their reasoning
powers, the highest faculties of their minds, can be
exercised, disciplined, trained, and developed.
But will a history composed of miracles, that is to
say, of things which cannot be explained—of which it
is impossible to know the why and the how ;—will such
a history tend to encourage or to extinguish the scien
tific curiosity of a child ? It has, to all his questions,
a stereotyped reply, which cuts short the spirit of
investigation:— Why.?—Because God willed it. How?
—As God willed it.
It is the peculiar character of the Semitic peoples,
and especially of the Jewish race, to disdain secondary
causes, and to prefer always, overleaping all intermedi
ate steps, to ascend at once to first principles, or to the
great First Cause. The necessary consequence of this is
a general want of relish for the detailed study of facts,
for the scientific observation of nature, for comparative
criticism and analysis. Ask an Arab how the grass
grows, how the stream flows, what produces earth
quakes, famines, or epidemics,-—a thousand similar
questions; and he will reply to you, astonished at your
ignorant curiosity,—Allah is Allah. Is not the reason
and cause of everything a decree of God ? What is the
use of climbing step by step in the series of secondary
causes ? Why not accept the will of God as a univer
sally sufficient explanation ?
This is exactly the effect which sacred history inevi
tably produces upon the intellect of childhood. It
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
J9
accustoms the mind to dispense with the laborious
investigation of the how and the why, causing it to
refer things directly to God without any other explana
tion. Instead of being trained to see God in all those
secondary causes and natural laws, by which He con
stantly manifests himself to us,—instead of being made
to perceive that every pathway of science leads straight
up to the Author of all, the child is led, through the
irregular eross-roads and by-ways of miracle, to seek
God chiefly by imagination, and is hindered from
learning that He is rather to be found by reason on the
one hand, and by conscience on the other.
Suppose that a pupil were to ask the question,—
Why and how could there be a universal deluge 1—■
Instead of having imparted to him a few scientific
notions as to the natural character and physical causes
of the great changes and revolutions of the globe, his
legitimate and wholesome curiosity will be snubbed and
repulsed, and he will be instructed to behold and to
wonder at the act of God, whereby “the fountains of the
great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven
were opened,” (Gen. vii. 11). Will not that child be
very much enlightened ?
When the account of the appearance of the rainbow
after the deluge is the Bible-lesson for the day; this
might be a favourable opportunity for making the chil
dren understand, in opposition to their natural propen
sity for seeing miracles everywhere, that there is
absolutely nothing at all supernatural about the rain
bow, and that it was quite in the nature of things that
a rainbow should be produced at the time, for example,
when the rains of the deluge ceased. But listen to the
explanation of the matter which they will be required
to accept:—
Gen. viii. 13.—“ And it came to pass in the six hundredth
and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month,
the waters were dried up from off the earth.”
Gen. ix. 8-17.—“ And God spake unto Noah, and to his
�20
Sacred History:
sons with him, saying, And I, behold, I establish my cove
nant with you, and with your seed after you; and with
every living creature that is with you: . . . neither shall
there any more be a flood to destroy the earth. And God
said, This is the token of the covenant. ... I do set my bow
in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant be
tween me and the earth : and it shall come to pass, when I
bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in
the cloud; . . . and I will look upon it that I may remem
ber the everlasting covenant between God and every living
creature of all flesh that is upon the earth.”
I do not insist upon the significance of this latter
clause, which, taken in its literal sense, as it must be
taken by children, will represent to them God looking
upon His bow in order that He may remember His
covenant. The myth, which is here put in the place
of natural causes, is of small importance for wellinformed persons, but the truly important consideration
is that it is presented to children as an absolute fact,
and that they are thus taught and accustomed to rest
satisfied with merely chimerical explanations of natural
phenomena.
What must be the influence of a primary education,
which turns thus continually upon an inexhaustible
stock of marvels 1 How can we expect the intellectual
faculties of our children to be awakened, confirmed and
developed, if, to all their questions about the nature of
things, the only reply is this,—God is God, and He is
omnipotent.
Master, the child will say, is it really true that there
have been men who lived more than 900 years ? Is it
really true that one or two men have ascended up to
heaven in a chariot of fire ? That two or three others,
being actually dead, have come to life again ?—What
presumption to ask if these things are true ! How can
you be so wicked as to doubt it ?—They are written in
the Bible.
Master, how can a she-ass speak?—Everything is
possible to God.
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
21
But that cruse of oil which never failed nor was
exhausted, how was that?—God is all-powerful.
And how could Jonah have been able to live three
days and three nights in the belly of a fish?—My
child, if the Bible said that Jonah swallowed the whale,
instead of being swallowed by it, it would still be
necessary to believe it.
It is thus that, while wishing to teach our children
to honour God, and to believe His Word, they are in
reality taught to learn nothing, but to bend their minds
in passive submission to this modern and Protestant
form of the worst feature of Popery,—the Bible says
so, or the Bible does not say so.
I have often heard it said that there is nothing
which children learn more willingly than sacred history.
I can easily believe it ; for, excepting fairy tales, there
is nothing better suited to please their childish minds :
it is so full of prodigies ! But will the recounting of
prodigies convey genuine instruction to the children?
Will they thus be taught to think, to reflect, to observe,
and to search always for truth and reality ? Or will
the influence of such teaching be exactly the reverse ?
You see it is a practical question, demanding the
most serious consideration. The teacher of a primary
school is in the presence of children, by far the greater
number of whom cannot be expected to acquire in after
life any regular knowledge of the natural, physical, or
mathematical sciences. It must certainly be injurious
to make such children believe that one day, at the end
of a battle between two Asiatic tribes, in order to con
fer upon a Jewish captain the signal advantage of
slaughtering a few more fugitives, God actually caused
the sun to halt in its diurnal motion through the sky,
and to stand still for “ about a whole day,” and that
He moreover set to work, (for the Bible says so, and
the children will take it in the most literal sense,)
to “cast dozen great stones from heaven,” (hailstones)
whereby more of the fugitives died than those who
�22
Sacred History:
were slain by the victorious Israelites. (Josh. x. 11-13.)
To confirm the impression of this prodigious miracle as
a literal fact upon their minds, the children will
probably be reminded of another occasion, when,
touched by the prayers and tears of a sick king who
had been told that he was about to die, God relented
so far as to promise him a supplement of fifteen years
of life, and, as a sign that the promise would be ful
filled, “ He brought the shadow ten degrees backward,
by which it had gone down in the dial of Ahaz,” (2
Kings xx. 11); “So the sun returned ten degrees, by
which it was gone down,” (Isaiah xxxviii. 8).
What man of common sense, if he will only give the
matter a serious thought, can ever be persuaded that
this profusion of miracles, bidding defiance to all the
conclusions of human reason, and even to the laws of
mathematics, is a wholesome education for the minds
of children, ignorant, credulous, imaginative, and con
fiding, who will probably never afterwards be in a
position to acquire a scientific notion of the laws of
nature, and to whom therefore and henceforth, it will
seem, as it did to the primitive peoples, quite natural
that a miracle should, at any moment, interfere with
and upset the regular course of nature ?
There are, however, some teachers who, on the con
trary, maintain that nothing is better fitted to form the
intellect and to improve the mind of a child, than the
study of miracles. The miraculous is, according to
them, one of the best means of culture. Such a thesis
can only be maintained by those who do not properly
understand what a miracle is. If a child sets himself
to reflect upon the miracle of Isaiah or of Joshua, how
ever little he may have been taught of the elements of
cosmography, it will immediately occur to him that, if
the Sun (or the Earth) had stood still or gone backwards
in space, there must have thence resulted, in instant
succession, throughout vast systems of worlds, endless
perturbations, huge catastrophes, universal destruction ;
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
23
and, rather than, suppose such impossibilities to serve
no purpose but to favour a petty Jewish king, or to
complete the massacre of a troop of Amorites, a child
who has been truly taught to reflect will think of these
miracles exactly what you think of those of all re
ligions, except your own.
It is impossible to find any mode but one, of recon
ciling the miraculous with good instruction ; and that
is to explain it, or, in other words, to deny it; and
this is what even the believers are now, in some
measure, forced to do. In these days, for example,
even among the orthodox, you will find very few
persons who believe in the plagues of Egypt. It is
not now uncommon to hear even fervent defenders of
miracle explaining, that these plagues arose from natural
causes which occur in Egypt every year but in smaller
proportions; that frogs, lice, locusts, water resembling
blood, etc., are well known there; and that the Bible
narrative only shows us God giving to these facts a
proportion and a fitness, which raised them to the
sphere of the miraculous. Well, be it so ; but having
once entered upon this path, how far are we to go ?
With regard to the passage of the Red sea, the
physical possibility of this famous miracle may be
explained to the children by the action of the tides
combined with violent winds. As to the manna and the
quails it may be said that in winter innumerable flocks
of quails reach the warm countries, and that the manna
appears to have been the savoury fruit of a shrub which
grows abundantly in thedesert of Arabia. Elsewhere, the
teacher may explain to his pupils that the art of discover
ing springs of water, and of rendering the water drink
able, still continues to be a requisite qualification for the
guide of an army or of a tribe in the sands of Arabia, etc.
It is thus that some of our Protestant theologians
are now disposed to treat sacred history, while others,
more conservative, are ready to exclaim,—Take care
what you do, to explain a miracle is to reject it, and
�24
Sacred History:
all the miracles hang together, so that if you reject
one of them, you reject them all.
Very true; and, likewise, if you adopt one of them,
you adopt all the others. Human history is one great
book, of which every page is full of miracles. How
can the supernatural be preserved whole and entire in
a single one of these pages, when it is banished with
out hesitation from all the others? Tf God has
performed miracles among the Jews, why deny that
He may have done the same among the Hindoos and
among the Persians, among the Celts and among the
Germans, as the ancient writings of all these peoples
abundantly affirm that He did ?
Then you had better say at once that, in the name of
science and through hatred of the supernatural, you mean
to deprive us of the whole Bible, Old and New Testaments.
No, this discussion has no tendency whatever to
deprive you of the Bible, but only of the superstition
of the Bible. Even you who profess so absolutely to
revere the Bible as the “Word of God,” do you think
it would be difficult to make you confess that you
reject many passages of it as containing indefensible
errors? Do you believe, for example, that the hare
and the rabbit are ruminants ? It is not merely Moses
however, it is God himself who, according to two
formal texts of the Bible (I speak always of the Bible
which is in every hand), directly affirms that both these
animals chew the cud, (Lev. xi. 4-6; Deut. xiv. 7).
If there be one single error in the Bible, there may
be two, there may he ten, and we thenceforth differ
from one another only about a question of number;
which amounts to saying that no person can any longer
maintain the absolute infallibility of the Bible; and,
if it contains errors, then there is nothing, even from
the believers’ point of view, to hinder us or them from
regarding the supernatural as one of these errors.
Upon the third point, it is often affirmed that sacred
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
25
history abundantly compensates, in precious advan
tages, for all the objections which can otherwise be
brought against it. There are many who admit that
it presents deficiencies and inaccuracies with regard to
the knowledge of humanity and of nature, while main
taining its entire perfection with regard to the know
ledge of God.
I do not forget that Biblical history, suitably treated
from the Christian point of view, often serves admir
ably to impress upon the children these two grand ideas,
—that of the one God, and that of the living God.
Even here, however, is there not some illusion ?
Among the men of three or four thousand years ago,
the notion of God evidently was not, could not be,
that which it has become with the progress of humanity.
In the earliest times of which the vestiges have been
preserved to us in certain books of the Bible, it bore
the stamp of a rude anthropomorphism. But, however
rude it may have been, it is not we who shall forget
that, in its time, anthropomorphism was a progress,
and that it marked the first dawn of religious and
philosophical thought.
We do not at all wonder to see God humanized in
the most ancient pages of this same Bible, in the later
portions of which we shall find the purest and highest
expression of the religious sentiment, precisely because
we know that the Bible is neither an exceptional book,
nor even the work of one single period ; but merely a
collection of Hebrew literature from its first attempts
to its highest development.
In the earliest portions, everything bears the trace
of a primitive social state, everything there has, so
to say, the tone and the aspect of childhood; but by
degrees the images change, the symbols are purified,
and the worship, as well as the literature of the nation,
becomes more elevated and more spiritual. If this
development be taken into account, the differences
which appear between Genesis, for example, and the
�q.6
Sacred History:
poetic writings of the later period, are not greater nor
more surprising than the interval which separates the
Niebelungen from Klopstock and from Goethe, or than
the contrast between the “ legends of the round table ”
and the works of our modern historians. If, on the
contrary, this successive and progressive character be
abstracted from the books of the Bible, then sacred
history becomes a chaotic mixture of sublime and of
rude ideas, and then it must tend, upon many points,
to mislead the mind of a child.
If the Bible is a human book, its anthropomorphism
is not only no reproach, but must even be admired, as
it is admired in the commencements of other ancient
religions. When I read therein, God repents, God is
angry, God forgets, and God remembers, God is glad,
and God is grieved, when I read on every page, God
speaks, or God appears, I easily reduce to their true
value these various symbols, while fully appreciating
their ingenuity or simplicity, and the beauty or the
truth which they may contain. But when you give
these same symbols to a child, as so many supernatural
facts, derived from a book which not only is true, but
which is the very Word of God, then the danger com
mences, and it is necessary to protest against this sub
stitution of ancient Hebrew anthropomorphism for
eternal and pure truth.
God is not only thus humanly personified in the
Bible, but He is therein sometimes materialized to an
extent which is now almost inconceivable to us, who
are accustomed to contemplate Jehovah only through
the light of Gospel times. For example, when Noah
came out of the Ark, he offered a burnt-offering of
many animals to God ; “ and the Lord smelled a sweet
savour
“ and the Lord said in his heart, I will not
again curse the ground any more,” (Gen. viii. 21).
Would the most fervent imitators of the Biblical style
now venture to employ such an expression, even
under the pretext of symbolism ?
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
27
It would be more than wearisome to collect here all
the traces of a similar materialism, all the texts in
which corporeal forms are attributed to God. Think
of the burning bush; think of Sinai, where, from the
midst of cloudsand of thunders, with “the voice of
the trumpet exceeding loud,” God gives, with his own
hand, to Moses, two tables, written, says Exodus,
“with the finger of God,” (xxxi. 18 ; xxxii. 16). Think
especially of the prominence given to this idea,—
majestic, if its poetic symbolism be understood, but
extremely rude if taken literally as given in the Bible:
—no man can see or hear God without instantly
dying: one single people has been able to hear him,
one single man has been able to see him—without
perishing. Would it be easy to explain the following
passages, so that they shall not have, at least for
children, a sense decidedly too material ?
Exod. xix. 18-24.—“And Mount Sinai was altogether
on a smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire:
and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace,
and the whole mount quaked greatly. And when the voice
of the trumpet sounded long, and waxed louder and louder,
Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice. And the
Lord came down upon Mount Sinai, on the top of the
mount; and the Lord called Moses up to the top of the
mount; and Moses went up. And the Lord said unto
Moses, Go down, charge the people, lest they break
through unto the Lord to gaze, and many of them perish.
And let the priests also, which come near unto the
Lord, sanctify themselves, lest the Lord break forth upon
them........... Thou shalt come up, thou and Aaron with
thee; but let not the priests and the people break
through to come up unto the Lord, lest he break forth
upon them.”
Exod. xx. 18-21.—“And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and
the mountain smoking: and when the people saw it, they
removed, and stood afar off. And they said unto Moses,
Speak thou with us, and we will hear; but let not God
speak with us lest we die..............And the people stood afar
�Sacred History:
off: and Moses drew near unto the thick darkness where
God was."
Deut. v. 24-26.—“Behold, the Lord onr God hath
shewed us his glory and his greatness, and we have heard
his voice out of the midst of the fire: we have seen this
day that God doth talk with man, and he liveth. Now,
therefore, why should we die ? for this great fire will con
sume us : if we hear the voice of the Lord our God any
more, then we shall die. For who is there of all flesh that
hath heard the voice of the living God speaking out of the
midst of the fire, AS WE have, and lived? ”
And, as a commentary upon this scene, as grand
and imposing, as it is possible for an exhibition of
symbols to be, addressed only to the senses through
the imagination, let us see how Moses afterwards sums
it up and estimates its importance:—
Deut. iv. 32-36.—“ Ask now of the days that are past,
which were before thee, since the day that God created
man upon the earth, and ask from the one side of heaven
unto the other, whether there hath been any such thing
as this great thing is, or hath been heard like it. . Did ever
people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the
fire, as thou hast heard, and live? .... Out of heaven he
made thee to hear his voice, that he might instruct thee :
and upon earth he shewed thee his great fire; and thou
heardest his words out of the midst of the fire.”
Elsewhere it is not the voice, it is the sight of God
which kills. It is said to have happened, in a small
number of quite exceptional cases, that God has con
sented to let himself be seen, and seen by the eyes of
the flesh. These miracles are accordingly narrated to
us with the greatest solemnity.
One day, the seventy elders of Israel followed Moses
up into “ the Mount of God.” Moses, however, alone
went up to God in the mount, but the elders went up
so far, that, according to the text,—
Exod. xxiv. 10. 11.—“ They saw the God of Israel: and
there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a
sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
29
clearness. And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he
laid not his hand : also they saw God and did eat and drink."
Moses alone,—and it was this which gave him in the
eyes of his people a supernatural character,-—was able
to penetrate into that cloud where resided “ the glory
of God,” and out of which God appeared like a con
suming fire. God himself renders to him this testimony,
that He would speak with him “ mouth to mouth" even
apparently, and not in dark speeches,” (Num. xii. 8.)
This peculiar privilege is repeatedly described —“The
Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as -a man speaketh
unto his friend,” (Exod. xxxiii. 11; Deut. xxxiv. 10,
&c.).
Such declarations as these, and many more such
might be quoted, have a character thoroughly and
undeniably materialistic, if regarded as records of literal
facts, and not as poetic fictions; but even these are
Dot the worst. The material conception or representa
tion of God has been carried to a degree of still more
astounding grossness. Witness that passage which
equals, in primitive rudeness, anything which the most
barbarous nations have written about the nature of
their, gods. Moses had long conversed with God, but
hitherto he had not seen him. He said to God one
day, “ I beseech thee, show me thy glory! ” God did
not reply that his essence being incorporeal cannot be
seen ; but, on the contrary, He consented to pass before
Moses, and to let him hear his voice: but, added He,—
Exod. xxxiii. 20-23.—“ Thou canst not see my face; for
there shall no man see me and five. And the Lord said,
Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon
a rock: and it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth
by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will
cover thee with my hand while I pass by : And I will take
away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts; but my
face shall not be seen.”
Would it not be highly irreverent and even profane
to regard this passage as a literal, and divinely inspired,
�30
Sacred History:
and therefore infallible record of facts ? What would
be said of such a story, if it were found anywhere else
than in “ the Holy Bible I ”
When people and teachers come to see, in all these
pretended miracles of Horeb and of Sinai, only their
true character of tragic and sombre poetry, there will
no longer be any question about the propriety of putting
them into the hands and heads of children, any more
than there is at present about the ‘ Prometheus ’ of
TEschylus, or the 1 Inferno ’ of Dante, or Milton’s
‘ Paradise Lost.’ But, once more, do you not perceive
what an abyss there is between admiring myths as
myths, and accepting them as supernatural facts dic
tated by God himself?
Elsewhere, God is represented as a man obliged to
make personal inquiry as to whether a rumour which
has reached him is correct or not:—
Gen. xviii. 20, 21.—“ And the Lord said, Because the
cry of Sodom and Gomorrha is great, and because their sin
is very grievous; I will go down now, and see whether they
have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is
come unto me; and if not, I will know.”
Again, men began to build a tower, whose top should
reach unto heaven :—
Gen. xi. 5-7.—“ And the Lord came down to see the city
and the tower, which the children of men builded. And
the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all
one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing
will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to
do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their
language.”
And it is thus that the famous confusion of languages
is explained !
Surely the specimens which I have quoted, though
the series might easily be largely extended, are amply
sufficient to show, to those who require such proof,
that not everything in the Bible is fitted to convey to
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
31
our children such a pure and spiritual notion of God as
it has been customary to believe. Some one will hasten to reply:—11 But we never
read these passages in the schools, we suppress them,
or we suitably modify them in our lesson-hooks.”—I
am fain to believe that in many cases it is so; but,
whether you teach these things or not, they are never
theless in the Bible, and are there by the same title as
the most admirable passages; so that they suffice to
show to us clearly, in its true aspect, the degree of
civilization and of enlightenment, to which the books
containing them belong.
And then, although you may, in some measure,
suppress such passages as bear too visibly their date
upon them, you do not suppress those innumerable
revelations, apparitions, or manifestations of God, of
which the Bible is full, and you cannot deny that they
all (excepting perhaps some of the prophecies which,
moreover, do not come under the denomination of
sacred history) address themselves to the senses through
the imagination.
From one end of the Bible to the other, God speaks
to patriarchs, to judges, to kings, to warriors, to priests.
Is it by the voice of conscience 1 No, it is by a vision,
a “ sign,” by a miracle, by a dream. When He
speaks to all his people, it is by blessings or cursings
of a temporal kind. It is not from within, it is from
without that He governs : it is not by love, it is by fear.
Ah ! my readers, is there not still a necessity, even
after so many centuries of Christianity, for a fresh and
vigorous effort to extirpate that superstitious instinct,
which even now makes so many people tremble at the
noise of thunder and at the flash of lightning, as if God
were then either more present or more to be feared
than when the sun shines clearly in a serene sky ?
Must we still continue to propagate, in our families or
in our schools, that false idea which is the very soul of
the primitive history of every nation, and of the- Jews
�32
Sacred History:
as of the others :—if you suffer, God is punishing you :
if you prosper, God is blessing you: if an epidemic, a
famine, or an earthquake ravages a country, God is
angry : if the harvest is double, God is favourable : you
have been victorious, then the Eternal has fought upon
your side : vanquished, it is because He has abandoned
you 1
One of the masterpieces of Semitic literature, which
has been and must ever be in all ages admired,—the
poem of Job,—presents to us the first recorded protest
of the human conscience against this idea. Job is struck
with plagues and afflictions, and his friends thence infer,
according to the custom, that God is thus punishing
him for his sin. But Job replies with indignant
eloquence—“ No, I am not guilty. No, my suffering
is not an expiation.”
Job xiii. 15-18.—“ Though he slay me, yet will I trust
in him ; but I will maintain (in the margin, prove or argue)
mine own ways before him. He also shall be my salvation ;
for an hypocrite shall not come before him..............Behold
now, I have ordered my cause: I know that I shall be jus
tified.” (Read also ch. xxxi. &c.).
Every one knows that, at the end of the poem, God
declares to the three friends that they have been wrong,
and that Job’s view of the matter is correct :—
Job xlii. 7.—“For ye have not spoken of me the thing
that is right, as my servant Job bath.''''
This is manifestly the chief signification and purport
of the book ■, and it is to this that the attention of our
children ought chiefly to be directed, if we would have
them to understand what they read; instead of insisting
precisely upon the one circumstance which weakens the
lesson, by shewing them that, in the end, God restores
to Job all his possessions, and by thus teaching them,
here also, to regard material prosperity as a criterium of
the divine favour.
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
33
Plato, wishing to make us understand how entirely
the moral life is independent of external conditions,
shows to us the just man overwhelmed with sufferings,
with contempt, with calumnies, and with afflictions of
every kind; in the midst of which, and even upon the
cross where he dies, we are taught to recognize in him
the just man, the teacher of truth, the friend of God,
the pattern for our imitation, and, at the same time,
the most truly happy of men ! Would not this sublime
lesson be worth more than hundreds of Biblical miracles
for teaching our children to realize that they are more
or less near to God, not in proportion to the success of
their enterprises, not according to external indications
of prosperity or adversity, popularity or contempt, but
according to the internal testimony of their own con
science, according to their degree of obedience to duty ?
It would be absurd to look for this profound intelli
gence of the spiritual sense of religion, in a nation or
tribe at the commencement of its social development.
But it is none the less absurd that, three or four thou
sand years afterwards, it should still be imagined that
we have only to reproduce, without any change, the
first lispings of human thought, and to regard this
reproduction as an infallible revelation.
Where the notion of the Bather Almighty, revealing
himself to the reason and to the conscience, has not yet
acquired all its fulness, we need not wonder to find
that the relations between God and man are often pre
sented in a very imperfect fashion.
Take, for example, prayer or blessing, as it appears
in the first books of the Old Testament, and try to
discover in these a spiritual and moral character. You
will not find it any more than you will find there the
God who is purely spirit and purely love.
Prayer* is there, as among all the peoples of that
period, a mystic spell, a sort of magic power, a cabal* And Imprecation. See the history of Balaam, Num. xxiii.
25, 26.
�^4
Sacred History:
istic formula. Let us look at a single specimen. It is
at the crisis of a battle : Moses has not taken part in
the fight, but has withdrawn to an adjoining hill, armed
with his rod, and there he intercedes for his people.
Exod. xvii. 11-14.—“And it came to pass, when Moses
held up his hand, that Israel prevailed; and when he let
down his hand Amalek prevailed. But Moses’ hands were
heavy ; and they took a stone and put it under him, and he
sat thereon : and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, the
one on the one side, and the other on the other side : and
his hands were steady until the going down of the sun.
And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people with the
edge of the sword. And the Lord said unto Moses, Write
this for a memorial in a book.”
Here again I would be the first to recognise a beauti
ful poetic image, if the story is to be understood in
the same manner as the analogous stories, which we
may read in the Vedas, or elsewhere. But those who
desire to make us and our children believe that the
thing has actually taken place, ought to see that, if
such virtue must be literally attributed to this
mechanical prayer of Moses, they have no longer any
right to ridicule the prayer-mills of the Budhists, or
the rosaries of the Roman Catholics.
But, it is said by some, this is a type, an emblem, an
allegory, which we must “interpret spiritually.”
Be it so, but who hinders you from interpreting
spiritually all the similar imagery, which abounds in
the other religious and mythological books of antiquity?
If you have so much indulgence for the rudest allegories
of Hebrew legend, whence comes your severity or con
tempt for the most beautiful and symbolical stories of
Greek, Hindoo, or Scandinavian legend ? God speaks,
God appears in person, God dictates a book ! and that
book contains pages which, in order to be accepted by
reason, require to be “ spiritualized,” neither more nor
less than those of Hesiod, of the Vedas, or of the
Eddas!
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
35
The truth, is that, among all primitive peoples,
prayer, blessing, and cursing have a peculiar virtue, a
mysterious influence, a magic power. Of this the
history of Isaac is one of the clearest examples.
The old man, wishing and intending to bless Esau,
is the dupe of a coarse imposition; and the words
which, in his thought, he addresses to Esau, fall,
unknown to him, upon the ears of Jacob. When
Esau returns from his hunting, to which he had been
sent by his father himself, Isaac, astonished and
trembling, says to him :—
Gen. xxvii. 33-37.—“ Thy brother came with subtilty,
and hath taken away thy blessing........... I have blessed
him, yea, and he shall be blessed............ I have made him
thy lord, and all his brethren have I given to him for
servants; and with corn and wine have I sustained him:
and what shall I do now unto thee, my son ? ”
Can it be denied in presence of words so clear, that,
for the Isaac of Genesis, the blessing was a kind of
talisman or spell, an enchanted formula, consisting in
the words, not in the thought, and having a virtue
equally independent of the intention of him who gave
it, and of the merit of him who received it 1 A stolen
blessing was not on that account the less valid I
How can all this be explained to children 1
But an explanation is not withheld, we have often
heard and read it, as follows :—Isaac knew very well
that, before the birth of the twin brothers, God had
said to Rebecca, “ the elder shall serve the younger.”
Moreover, when the blessing had been given to Jacob,
Isaac felt that it was, notwithstanding the imposture
of his son, an accomplished fact, which he did not feel
himself at liberty to undo, and which had acquired, by
its very accomplishment, a providential character.
The whole was the result of a divine decree, and this
was perceived by the conscience of Isaac at the very
moment when the act of blessing was consummated.
�36
Sacred History:
We frankly confess that, in morality no less than in
good sense, this incredible theory, of an accomplished
fact which acquires by its very accomplishment a provi
dential character, appears to us even more deficient, if
that be possible, than the explanation of the biblical
Isaac. “ Thy brother hath come with subtilty, and hath
taken away thy blessing, I have blessed him, yea, and he
shall be blessed.”
Samson is again another example, among a thousand,
of these false and rude ideas, regarding the relations
between God and man. Here it is neither a prayer
nor a blessing, but a vow, in virtue of which the hair
of Samson’s head (orthodox theologians believe it
still), was the thing, the charm, or the talisman,
wherein his supernatural strength lay !
Samson keeps company with a woman of loose
character, (Judges xvi.); but that does not in the
smallest degree deprive him of the divine favour
attached to his hair. His head being cropped, he
loses the distinctive blessing of God; but his hair
grows again, and with it comes back the divine bless
ing. It is impossible to see anything else in the text,
unless it be put there by force; for, immediately
before narrating the last exploit of Samson, the Bible
explains to us how he has regained his strength by
telling us :—
Judges xvi. 22.—“ Howbeit the hair of his head began
to grow again after he was shaven.”
What is the profound religious idea which we may
hope, without sophistry, to derive from this lesson, for
the improvement of the minds or the hearts of our
children ? Explain it as you may, Samson will always
be for them only the Jewish Hercules ; and, I confess
it, I greatly prefer for their instruction the Hercules of
the Greeks. The latter, at least, will not now teach
them to think that God—the true God, the God whom
they themselves ought to worship—has actually figured
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
y]
in scenes and anecdotes, which, like those about Samson,
are trifling, superstitious, and absurd.
In conclusion :—To excite, to over-excite, in children
the taste for the extraordinary, to make them seek God,
not where He is ever to he found, not in the laws of
the physical or moral world, not in the eternal har
mony of the stars, not in the marvellous organisation
of the flower or of the insect, not in the sublime spec
tacle of unity and design presented by the Universe,
but in all sorts of disorders and capricious interferences
which, if they had taken place, would have proved
nothing but the divine instability, improvidence, and
weakness ; thus greatly to exaggerate and to confirm,
instead of counteracting, in their young minds, their
naturally fantastic and chimerical notions of things,
their ignorance of causes, their disregard of rule, fear
instead of thought, credulity instead of knowledge ;
and then to seal the whole with this disastrous idea,
that, if they have the misfortune to contest the absolute
truth of even the most absurd narratives, doctrines, or
miracles attested by a pretended Word of God, they are
guilty of blasphemous sacrilege, and doomed therefore
to eternal damnation, unless they repent and learn at
least to say, that the whole book is a divine revelation
of truth:—behold and consider the kind of influence
which the teaching of sacred history always inevitably
exerts, only in greater or less degree according to the
absence or presence of various antidotes, upon the cul
ture of our children’s intelligence, and upon the forma
tion of their ideas of humanity, of nature, and of God.
Ere long we will publish the second and the more
important division of the subject; and therein we will
strive to show how this kind of teaching acts upon the
conscience, and upon the moral direction of life.
�
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
Sacred history as a branch elementary education. Part I. Its influence on the intellect
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Ramsgate
Collation: 37 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Date of publication from British Library catalogue.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Thomas Scott
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1870]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT208
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
Subject
The topic of the resource
Education
Bible
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 (Sacred history as a branch elementary education. Part I. Its influence on the intellect), 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
Education
Religious Education
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/24d908bb8cf9a68a84ce39533152964a.pdf?Expires=1785369600&Signature=WtjSksdFnDUpWuhaoXNMd6CAB4p4pc84fmAYOM8to2W4MngYvciuDPMumPM4EoBhsEKXNWknpMeAY6dM0H-Rs9HA6nfzYsN1YmuX4zkNYOHj7-VGealVlsaM-KTaJPs7BIx3NPF-bRERanpUyt7JtA9xCLdP4Xm7o49THlSoCfTkeX9cJJXTgiZq861clYgNyk-2K-HhAuV8xWPrQCkOep1zC8XzSwdUP%7EmuXRdcgNJUL0dpWET1YJOCJNM5T4OomWTxzPsV3CzQgXyBS-Gzb0TtfxnRgPj6CHc4-O24pcg-Sr%7E0tmUX1pDllKaENSkvXHPOpfzoJEr0MOMqXDlR2w__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
5c6b3f84986f11ad78d2b29b49163a0f
PDF Text
Text
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
II THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD, UPPER NORWOOD
LONDON, S.E.
1876.
Price Sixpence.
�LONDON :
FEINTED RY C. W. EEYNELL, LITTLE PULTENEY STREET,
HAYMARKET, W.
�INTRODUCTION.
Those who, having given a cursory glance at
this “ Interior,” put it down and never resume it,
have the cordial sympathy of the writer, who "is
well aware that portions of it strongly resemble
passages from the ‘ Lives of the Saints,’ a work
said to have been “ written by knaves and read
by fools.” These pages can interest those only
who have had some experience of earnest, per
severing, fruitless prayer. They can be useful
to those only who may still be running after
phantoms, building beautiful castles upon fallacious texts, and striving to grasp the unattain
9
able.
Those who are satisfied with themselves and
their prayers are advised not to give their atten
tion to this “Interior,” which is calculated to
wound their feelings and to suggest doubts which
may disturb their peace of mind.
�w’-.■j/
�AN INTERIOR.
AM a straightforward1 practical woman. I have
never been into hysterics, and was never fond
of allegories, fairy tales, or ghost stories. I was not
particularly piously brought up. Religion in our
family was viewed mainly from a controversial point
of view. My mother was a consistent churchwoman,
and went to church once a week. My father cared
only for good sermons and good organs ; he generally
waited till all the prayers were over before he entered
any place of worship. There was nothing at home
to draw my attention to the subject of prayer. I
may have been about eighteen when an aunt came to
see us, and hearing that I had not been confirmed,
said it would be “as well” to send in my name,
because, if in after years, I should wish to be con
firmed, I might “feel awkward among the young
people.” This view of the subject was entertained,
and, to’ avoid the contemplated contingency, it was
voted that I might “ as well ” be confirmed. The
Rev. Llewelyn Davies prepared me for the rite. He
did not inquire into the state of my religious belief,
which, considering the praiseworthy motive which
brought me to him, was fortunate. He gave me
many questions, which I answered to his satisfaction,
and obtained my ticket for Confirmation.
I suppose the rite had already been delayed too
I
•
B
�6
An Interior.
long, for I felt exceedingly awkward on the Confir
mation day; others, especially the boys, looked as if
they felt uncommonly awkward too. However, they
might have felt still more ill at ease in after life, and
it was perhaps “ as well ” to confirm them then.
That day was an eventful one, for my aunt had her
pocket picked in the church, and an impression was
made upon me which may be called the beginning of
my spiritual career. Upon returning to the pew
after kneeling at the altar, I took my seat; therewere no hassocks. Presently the young lady next
me placed herself upon her knees upon the dirty
floor, and began praying with evident fervour. Her
hands covered her face, and I could see the tears
streaming between her fingers. I felt inclined to
laugh, but was ashamed of myself. I ended by
admiring her moral courage, and by envying her her
apparent faith and sincerity.
Converting in the received sense of the word I did
not require. I was a thoughtful, studious girl. I
hated dancing and all other amusements which
involved late hours. I never omitted morning and
evening prayers, and was rather fond of going to
church. I had long been a communicant, so that
Confirmation was not in my case a stepping-stone to
the Lord’s Supper. I had looked upon it as an
optional affair, and went through it without faith or
fervour. By prayer, I understood nothing beyond
reading over or repeating by heart other people’s
compositions. That young girl did not appear to me
to be doing either, and her conduct struck me, though
the impression faded away.
Some months later we passed a few weeks with a
friend who had an Irish cook. One winter’s morning
I rose for some forgotten reason earlier than usual,
and went into the kitchen at a quarter to seven. At
the same moment in walked the Irish cook out of the
foggy street. An unworthy suspicion crossed my
�An Interior.
7
mind, and I wished myself back in my room ; it wasdark enough for me to retreat unobserved, but Nancy
had the gas alight in a trice, and we stood face to
face. In her chapped hand was a well-worn prayer
book, and round her huge wrist was a rosary. She
had been to Mass, and it was not Sunday. “ That,”
said my friend, “ is the best of Nancy, she gets my
husband’s breakfast ready every morning at half-past
seven.” Nancy’s conduct made a deep and lasting
impression upon me. There was something earnest
and practical about it that edified me, and I began to
“meditate upon these things.” I determined to
devote more time and attention to prayer, and, as
there was morning service twice a week at our own
church, I began to attend it with great regularity. I
made quite a study of the Liturgy, and at length
came with reluctance to the conclusion that it was
an inappropriate manual for constant use. I was
not always in the same mood, but the prayers were
always equally melancholy, depressing, and mono
tonous. My spirits were frequently at high water
mark, and on those occasions I felt like a dissembler
while saying my prayers—or rather somebody else’s
prayers—for it never entered my head to use words
of my own when speaking to God, or even to ask
Him for anything that was not named in the Prayer
Book. However, it very often struck me that we
were saying an immense deal to God, and not giving
Him the opportunity of saying anything to us. I
felt attracted towards God, dissatisfied with the
means I was using to get at Him, and very anxious
to feel upon a surer footing with Him. I suppose I
was what is called “ awakened ”—I was in earnest.
I repeated my prayers with unflagging reverence, and
while wishing they were more in harmony with my
grateful happy frame of mind, continued to use them,
until one morning, while the curate was reading a
chapter in the Old Testament consisting principally
�8
An Interior.
of names, if struck me that I was making no spiritual
progress; that those prayers would remain the same;
that, having admitted for the millionth time that I
was a miserable sinner, I was absolutely unable to
keep my soul in such a penitential attitude any
longer. I required a more varied diet; and though
nobody I knew found any fault with the Liturgy,. I
was painfully conscious that it no longer suited me,, so
I began to. confine my devotions to Sunday. It seems
very strange that it never occurred to me to address
God in words of my own choosing. Though most
anxious to become better acquainted with God, and
to realise something like fervour, I saw no further
than that melancholy Prayer Book, and of mental
prayer I had, no idea whatever. The people I knew
never appeared to care at all about these things, so- I
kept my aspirations to myself. Now and then I
went to dissenting chapels, but the vulgarity of the
extempore prayers I heard there soon thoroughly dis
gusted me, and for a while I took more kindly to my
own sad Liturgy as- the lesser of two evils. I
wonder it never once occurred to me to pray extem
pore myself, for I was deeply interested in my soul’s
welfare, but it did not. I was very well acquainted
with the tenets, of the Church of Rome, but took no
interest in Catholics^ and never went to their chapels.
However, I always defended them whenever I heard
them ridiculed for the absurdity of their doctrines. I
used to say, with pertinent flippancy,, “thosewho live
in glass houses should not throw stones; and you
must give u.p nearly all you hold before you are in a
position, to twit them with the absurdity of what they
hold.” My friends were shocked. We had but one
Roman Catholic acquaintance, and he was far above
the average: at that time he was our most intellectual
visitor.
One morning,, long after my interest in the Church
prayers had considerably diminished, I was walking
�An Interior.
9
in the region of the wretched little French Catholic
Chapel and it began to rain heavily. The door was
open ; I went in, and there I saw one solitary man
kneeling near the altar. I had never noticed a man
on his knees before. He was in a very cramped
position and must have been extremely uncom
fortable ; but there he remained for a long time, and
I sat watching him. He had no book. I could see
his profile. His lips were closed, his eyes were fixed
upon the altar. Not until he turned his full face
towards me as he came down the aisle did I recognise
our highly-cultivated Roman Catholic friend. I
wished myself out in the rain, and fancied he would
feel ashamed of being caught upon his knees in such
a miserable little place as that chapel was then. I
felt myself turn scarlet, but he came forward with
his usual simple, manly manner, and said, “ Say a
little prayer for my intention, I am rather in a fix; ”
then composedly beating the dust off his knees with
his gloves he went away, leaving me with abundant
matter for meditation.
I had never seen any one praying in a church when
no service was going on. I had never seen any one
praying mentally. The people I knew viewed prayer
solely as a duty and were glad if anything prevented
its accomplishment. They never seemed to me to
expect any results to ensue from their prayers, and
they laughed at those who went to church on week
days. Here was a man of more than ordinary acute
ness who came on a week-day to pray upon his knees
for half-an-hour without a book, in an empty church,
to be helped out of “ a fix.” The simplicity of the
scene puzzled me beyond measure. Of course I was
well aware that Adam’s conduct had placed us all in
“ a fix,” and that we must be continually beseeching
God to ‘‘have mercy upon us miserable sinners;” but
here was a man asking his Father to help him out of
a private, personal dilemma, and I envied him his
�IO
An Interior.
filial confidence towards that Being with whom I so
earnestly longed to become better acquainted.
Four years’ practical experience of the lachrymose
Liturgy of the Church of England had wofully
disappointed me. For some months I had been
merely putting up with it, but the idea of leaving
the Anglican communion never occurred to me,
not even on that memorable morning in the little
chapel.
It was not as a Homan Catholic that my friend
came before me, but simply as one who seemed on a
very enviable footing with God. He appeared to
have attained what I was aiming at. Had I seen a
Quaker or a Mahommedan thus earnestly engaged in
prayer, I should have been equally sure that he was
nearer God than I was, and should have envied him
as I envied my friend; moreover he had asked me
to pray for his intention, which nobody had ever
done before. I knew people who were in “a fix,”
but they never said “Let us prayperhaps they
had found out the futility of prayer, as I did later on.
I was just thinking about leaving the chapel when
the door was pushed, and in came a man. He did not
take the trouble to go into a seat, he knelt in the aisle
close to the door, slightly in advance of me. After
several failures he at length succeeded in poising his
dripping hat upon the knob of his umbrella, and
producing a very thick book, began to pray. I
looked over his shoulder and read “ Litany of the
Holy Ghost.” Here was a discovery! there were
other Litanies.
I might have asked for the title of the book, but
in leaning forward, shook the woodwork, and down
went the hat and umbrella; so I merely apologised
and took my leave.
As far as I was concerned there might as well
have been no Holy Ghost, though I was supposed to
have received Him in Confirmation.
�An Interior.
11
I walked home full of good resolutions, which for
fifteen years were, in spite, of many obstacles,
religiously kept.
Before going further it seems necessary to state
what my idea of religion was. I lived in an atmo
sphere of religious discussion, and had come to the
conclusion that doctrinal difficulties had nothing to
do with personal piety. I had seen my father con
found men of different persuasions with the simplest
questions, and was of opinion that the doctrines
about which they grew so vehement could never be
satisfactorily proved, and that therefore salvation
could not depend upon them. I was tired of these
continual discussions, which rarely ended amicably,
and which were so hostile to my notion of piety.
So little interest did I take in the subjects generally
brought forward that I could defend either side
without scruples of conscience. The truth of Chris
tianity and the inspiration of the Bible were never
attacked in our house. I firmly believed both ; but
so contrary to common sense did I consider the
doctrine of the Trinity, that I wondered how
believers in that could cavil at Transubstantiation,
Baptismal Regeneration, &c.
To know and to love God under the name of
Christ, and to get into communication with Him by
His own appointed means—Prayer—was my ambition.
Quite tired of the Church Prayers, and thoroughly
disgusted with the lamentable want of unity among
Christians generally, I found no help from without.
I was in the Anglican Church, but not of it. Still
I had no intention of joining any other sect. Por
forms, ceremonies, choral services, and sermons, I
cared not one whit. Sermons I always thought a
vexatious excrescence thrust in when the attention
was wearied with so many prayers ; my mother and
I often sneaked off before the sermon began. I only
cared for Prayer. Those who are neither tired of
�I2
An Interior.
the Liturgy nor much interested in these matters will
fail to appreciate the intense delight and sense of
relief I experienced while turning over the leaves of
the Catholic prayer-books I bought.
After having addressed God in a minor key until
I no longer felt sorry at all, it was indescribably
refreshing to get into a major key, and find prayers
suggested by a spirit of love from which all fear was
banished—prayers emanating from a feeling of grati
tude, not merely for abstract and contingent blessings,
but for tangible, every-day advantages—prayers, in
short, of which the spirit was in harmony with my
own, and which gave a fillip to my devotion, then on
the wane. It was not that I admired those prayers
—far from it: as compositions they were inferior to
those in our Liturgy, and the translations were less
dignified; but as a bird would rather fly around a
large barn than hop about a golden cage, so I, after
my long confinement to the Liturgy, enjoyed the
wider range afforded by a book in which there were
more varied devotions, and where the Holy Ghost was
prominently brought forward as the great illuminator
and consoler of the faithful.
*
Conscious how utterly I had neglected Him, and
most anxious to be enlightened, I commenced in
voking Him with a fervour and a perseverance which
in the retrospect amazes me.
Casting aside the feeble translations, I committed
the noble Latin hymns to memory, and in the simple
words of the fine old “Veni Sancte Spiritus,” I
invoked the Holy Ghost w’ith all my heart. Not by
fits and starts, but many times a day for many
months did I implore Him to give me light to know
and strength to execute God’s will. I addressed Him
in a spirit of reparation for past neglect, and long
after I had entered the more lofty region of mental
prayer the “ Veni Sancte Spiritus ” was one of my
daily companions. It became painful to me to listen
�An Interior.
13
to the frequent discussions concerning His personality,
mission, procession, etc., which went on in our
family; I ceased to take any share in them, and used
to pray that they might be discontinued. The Ghost,
however, was not invoked to the exclusion of the
Father and the Son. I invoked them all with all the
faith, hope, charity, reverence, and humility I could
command. I did my very best. I used to visit
Catholic chapels merely because they were open, and
as others were praying too, I was not an object of
attention. I always chose times when no service was
going on, and was aiming at feeling alone with God.
Occasionally I prayed mentally, but it was not until
Christ became the main object of my love and
devotion that I dived deeply into the depths of that
unfathomable ocean called mental prayer. I had
been quite ashamed of having for years all but
ignored the existence of the Holy Ghost, and had
been zealously making up for past negligence; but
now it occurred to me that Protestants, at any rate
Anglicans, were extremely remiss in reference to Christ
too ; for they pray to the Father almost exclusively.
There is but one Collect in their Prayer-book to
God the Son, while in my Catholic manual He took
precedence, and the petitions to the Father were few
and far between. I preferred the Son to the Father,
and could no longer blind myself to the fact that I
was of the Roman Catholic Church, but not in it.
Led, as I firmly believed, by the Holy Ghost, whom
I was continually petitioning for light, I abandoned
the Anglicans entirely. Ever since I had found out
that even on Sunday during High Mass Catholics
were quite at liberty to use what prayers they pleased,
and were by no means compelled to follow the priest,
I had given up going to my own Church. I dearly
loved the liberty I enjoyed, and ardently did I thank
God for leading me, through the inspiration of the
Holy Ghost, along the flowery path of prayer. I had
�14
An Interior.
not a misgiving. I looked upon the tendency of my
mind as an answer to prayer, and was content to
follow the guidance of that Ghost whithersoever it
might lead me ; it led me into the Church of Rome.
Of course my relatives had no faith in the holiness
of any ghost who led the way to Rome, and she
who had formerly promoted my Confirmation now
refused to kiss me !
I had not one Romish acquaintance; he of the
“ fix ” had gone to the colonies. Reared for none of
the Romish ceremonies. I cared solely for what I
believed to be the Holy Ghost and His inspiration ;
if I was mistaken it was not my fault. The ill-will
of my relations did not disturb my peace of mind ; I
went on my way rejoicing, doing all I could to be
good, and trying to imitate the Christ of the Gospels
to the best of my poor ability.
Had it occurred to me (and I wonder it did not) to go
up with the others to Communion as if I were a Catholic
I believe I should never have joined Rome outwardly.
But I longed to get nearer to Jesus'. All the best
prayers were addressed to Him “ in the Blessed Sacra
ment,” and I was most anxious to become one with
Him in that mysterious rite. Knowing that Confes
sion and Absolution preceded Communion in the
Roman Church, I again and with renewed fervour
besought the Holy Ghost to “ show me the way
wherein I should walk,” and he (or, as some Pro
testants would say, a “ lying spirit ”) led me into the
Church of Rome. I went to a Jesuit, told him how
hard I had been praying, explained to him the bent
of my inclination, but assured him that I could not
care at all about Indulgences, Purgatory, Angels,
Saints, Sacred Hearts, Scapulars, &c.
He said that faith in all these things would come
by-and-by, that if I was willing to receive the teaching
of the Church, God would supply what was wanting.
After three interviews he baptised me, and three
�An Interior.
*5
weeks later I made my first Communion. I made it
with boundless faith. I really believed most fervently
that Jesus would help me to overcome some of my
faults. For many years I communicated four times
weekly, and no inducement would have been strong
enough to divert me from my purpose. Through all
weathers, at all seasons, I took a walk of twenty
minutes, before seven, for I was always in church
long before Mass began, and with never-failing fervour
I engaged in earnest mental prayer.
I am sure that no worldly advantages would have
induced me to forego my Communions. I delibe
rately gave up a trip to Paris because I feared that
my devotion might cool amid the festivities of that
gay capital; so I stayed at home by myself.
“ Ask and it shall be given unto you, seek and ye
shall find, knock and it shall be opened unto you.” I
was ready to lay down my life for the truth of those
assertions, and though I was painfully conscious that
hitherto I had not realised any of the help I sought,
either for myself or others, I thought it must be my
fault, and turned with importunity to the Holy
Ghost to teach me how to pray.
Prayer now engrossed nearly all my attention and
a great portion of my time.
Of distractions in prayer I knew nothing. Entirely
engrossed with my subject, I could remain for an
hour sunk in a species of mute adoration, called con
templation, so profound that not until it was over was
I aware how stiff and tender my knees had become.
No slamming of doors, tuning of the organ, or any
other disturbance could rouse me. I was intensely
happy. Occasionally all sense of weight seemed to
leave my limbs, and sometimes while walking down
the aisle I was not conscious of the boards. Torrents
of delicious tears gushed from my eyes, and thus
cradled, as I fancied myself, in 11 the everlasting
arms,” I enjoyed every day what S. Climachus calls
�An Interior.
.
a “ spiritual feast; ” for the “ gift of tears” is, accord
ing to him and all the Saints, a very great favour. I
had no difficulty in realising what is called “ The Pre
sence of God,” and whether in the street, a railway
station, or even in a place of amusement, my heart
was always kneeling before the altar. I lost all
interest in the studies which had formerly been my
delight. I gave up the several languages of which
I had previously been so fond, and for ten years or
more I rarely looked into a secular book. God, I
knew, was a jealous God. I was aiming at becoming
a faithful spouse of the Holy Ghost, who demanded
all my heart, all my soul, and all my strength. He
wanted all, and I gave him all, not grudgingly, but
cheerfully, lovingly, and devotedly. I occupied my
time with visiting the sick poor and with other
charitable undertakings. Unaware that mine was an
exceptional class of prayer, and that even to be able to
pray without distractions was extremely rare; unaware,
moreover, that Catholics were encouraged to add
experiences such as mine when they went to Confes
sion, and that these experiences were called a 11 mani
festation of conscience,” I should in all probability
have kept all these things and “ pondered them in my
heart,” without having recourse to priests, had I not
become acquainted with some very fervent and intel
ligent Roman Catholic ladies.
Not a syllable did I utter respecting the state of my
“ interior,” but soon collected that I was the recipient
of unusual “ graces ”—graces which were ordinarily
the portion of great saints; they talked about
“ spiritual direction,” and mentioned St. Teresa and
Penelon. Through them I made the unwelcome dis
covery that it Was very rare indeed to receive an
answer to prayer, so rare that I ought not to expect
any. Prayer, said they, is a duty; if God gave us
what we want we might become proud ; He withholds
His gifts to try us and to keep us humble. It struck
�An Interior.
me that if by prayer they meant the irreverent
gabble which so lamentably disfigures the public
services of the Church of Rome, it was not surprising
that no results ensued.
I did not like what the ladies said. I would not
believe that Christ could deceive. “ Everyone that
asketh receiveth,” were words attributed to Him, and
I clung to them. From £ime to time,, however, an
ominous cloud had crossed, my horizon, many miser
able misgivings had assailed me. Over and. over
again had I struggled with irrepressible doubts as to
the veracity of such assertions as “ all things whatso
ever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive,”
and I could not conceal from myself the budding con
viction that the whole affair was a delusion. Such
notions I did my best to eject as suggestions from
the Evil One; I accused myself in Confession of
“ doubting about God’s mercy,” got absolution, and
recommenced praying with renewed fervour. I never
undertook anything without earnestly imploring God
to enlighten me as to whether it was His will that I
should engage in it. No light came. My prayers
were mainly for others—for the sick, the suffering,
for people in “ fixes,” and, above all, for the conver
sion of sinners. To prayer I added penance, care
fully abstaining from everything that gratified my
senses. Every Friday, by the advice of my Confessor,
I took the discipline for seven minutes, and wore a
hair shirt d discretion; in short, I endeavoured by
every means in. my power to propitiate God in the
various ways approved by the Church of Rome. The
non-success of my prayers I attributed to my own
remissness, want of faith, hope, charity, &c., though
I knew I was doing my best. I was very glad that
my earthly parents were not so inexorable as my
heavenly one, but thought it wicked to draw com
parisons. I did not neglect Mary. For years I said
the rosary daily with a definite object, but nothing
�i8
An Interior.
ever came of it. I thought over what the ladies had
said, and procured Fenelon’s works and Teresa’s
autobiography. The plot thickened. A new era
began in my spiritual life.
To my exceeding amazement, that remarkable
woman’s experience of prayer, &c., seemed marvel
lously like my own. I could have written many of
the pages I was reading w-jth such interest. Here I
found the same love of solitude, devotion to mental
prayer, indifference to transitory things, zeal for the
conversion of sinners, and, above all, the same, though
in her case intensified, mysterious physical sensations,
such as lightness of body, bright light, interior words,
&c. However, though she was in ecstasies with
God, she seemed to have found Joseph more propi
tious, for she very distinctly tells us that she never
appealed to him in vain, and the Church, in a prayer
to St. Joseph called the “ Memorare,” reminds him
that St. Teresa had never had recourse to him
in vain.
I was both amazed and amused. Here was a great
saint, a woman of experience who, after soaring into
celestial regions and communing for hours with the
Blessed Trinity, came down to Joseph io get what she
wanted 1 Hitherto I had been disposed to ridicule
Catholics for having so many strings to their bow. I
thought it so Uncomplimentary to Christ and his pro
mises ; now my eyes were opened. Even the sublime
Teresa sighed for reciprocity—had she found it in God
would it have occurred to her to turn to Joseph ?
After basking in the ineffable rays of God’s myste
rious presence, she went round like any other beggar
to the back door for some broken victuals. Joseph
received her well, gave her what she wanted, and,
like a sensible woman, she made frequent appeals to
his generosity, and was never refused. In simple,
forcible language, she urges everybody to apply to
Joseph; she gives her “experience,” and a verystrik-
�An Interior.
*9
ing one it is. 1 had no faith in Joseph. She and
Fenelon strongly advise “ direction.” I was bewildered
about many things, and determined I would have a
director—but I took my time. It consoled me to find
that St. Teresa had heartily hated manifesting her
interior to her director ; for so thoroughly did I abhor
even the mere thought of it, that I hesitated some
time before I could entertain it at all. My own old
Confessor had gone abroad, and the new one did not
know me so well, which enhanced the difficulty.
Before exposing myself to an ordeal so objection
able, and which was not of obligation, I determined
to take the opinion of an eminent Jesuit. Praying
earnestly to know the will of God from the mouth of
His minister, I entered his confessional and said
“ Father, I have come merely to ask your advice as
to whether it is expedient to expose other things in
dependent of sins to one’s Confessor—to have, in
short, a “ director.”
“Far better,” said he, “for every one to be his or
her own director.” An anwer so opposed to my ex
pectation and so entirely at variance with the opinions
of so many distinguished writers, perplexed and dis
appointed me. I determined to try another priest.
Prefacing my visit with a prayer to the Ghost as
before, I applied to an oblate of St. Charles, a man of
vast psychological experience and well-known piety.
“Hot only,” said he, “ do I earnestly recommend
you to have a director, but I tell you it is your bounden
duty to have one.” There is but one Holy Ghost,
thought I. Two entirely different counsels can never
come from the same ghost. I had better have no
director; he might be under the influence of the
wrong ghost and mislead me. St. Teresa had
suffered grievously for years, owing to an inexpert
director; so might I. However, one morning I
was in Church absorbed as usual with my devo
tions, when, just as the Sanctus bell rang, a bright
�20
An Interior.
light shone round me. I lost all consciousness of the
church, the priest, etc. I saw happy faces, felt in
tensely happy, and,, upon regaining my normal condi
tion at the“Domine non sum dignus,” thought the
altar, the vestments, the flowers^ etc., all looked
wofully faded, and paltry by, comparison with the
scene I had just left. This species . of vision deter
mined me to have a “ spiritual conference ” with my
Confessor.. Fully but briefly I stated all I considered
necessary to enable him to judge of my “ interior.”
With some hesitation he assured me that it was
extremely difficult to distinguish the operations of
God from those of the devil; that Satan could trans
form himself into an angel of light, that even St.
Teresa had pronounced it well nigh impossible to feel
certain on these matters—that he felt unequal to the
responsibility of “directing” me, and advised me to
seek counsel elsewhere.- I did nothing of the sort.
I bought a bottle of medicine to cure the ulcers
which fasting had induced in my throat, and bade a
long farewell to “ directors ” and to ghosts generally !
In my quiet corner of the church I loved so well,
and where I had passed so many hours, not merely
in petitioning but in devoutly worshipping God, I
reviewed my fifteen years’ experience of that eleva
tion of the soul to God commonly called mental
prayer.
. Not once nor twice, but frequently, did I meditate
upon the practice of prayer, and finally determined
to give it up entirely as useless, presumptuous, and
absurd. Not in a moment of fretful impatience, of
unwonted dejection, or of sudden indignation, but
after considerable reflection, with reverence and hu
mility, with confidence and gratitude, did I abandon
a practice from which I had learnt many a solemn
lesson. As we smile at a child who fills his pockets
with salt in the hope of catching birds, so I smiled at
my former self for believing that the Changeless One
�An Interior,
21
would alter His course to suit me, for wishing Him to
do so, and for supposing that He wanted any prompt
ing from me as to the time when He should set about
His own business.
In me the religious faculty was largely developed ;
but in my loftiest flights I had felt the futility, the
want of reciprocity, the chilling discouragement of
the whole affair, and prayer in the sense of mere
petition I had given up long before I had ceased
communing with God in the various methods which,
under the names of meditation, contemplation, prayer
of silence, ecstacy, &c., have engrossed religious
minds of all denominations. I never pray now.
I have left off running after ghosts. I have
given up building castles upon fallacious texts. I
no longer try to grasp the unattainable. I am
happy and contented. Formerly I fancied every
thing would go wrong if I neglected my prayers;
now I am convinced that the power we call God is
and ought to be uninfluenced by our petitions. Now
I am satisfied with God; I am certain He will do the
right thing at the right time, and that fortunately His
creatures can neither say nor do anything which can
interfere with the perfect harmony of His mighty'
operations. “I was blind, now I see.” Upon those
fifteen years I look back with more amazement than
regret. I was in good faith doing my best, and quite
unconscious what a poor, mean, childish idea I bad
formed of our great Creator. I have broader notions
now and live in a healthier atmosphere. It took me
many years to learn my lesson, but at length I mas
tered it, and am daily profiting by it.
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
An interior
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 21 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. A personal account, by an anonymous woman, of religious life and disillusion. Printed by C.W. Reynell, Little Pulteney Street, 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
1876
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT188
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
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 (An interior), 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
Catholic Church
Prayer
Conway Tracts
Faith
Prayer
Roman Catholic Church
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/0c201a0053440a0827a1fc33c6038b86.pdf?Expires=1785369600&Signature=HqTccz9mjaWlL%7EqsJGgG16SkuBJRe9tAMztn7TXk1gmXjd12XuSM7vTzLsCkiJzMz032n5dkmNKNPW8Nza2VmldCpK5kdQILFZM3Nfmup9WA6jAxdV3tHdxaP1hjGk-fWIrpDpCtz%7E3uq71793bvJ-ZNlKZ-8sJNaKWmdDMusHZShMw7AJYueXeo4wZh443GLscXvZ%7ETgGFiDagTCURCXldLh3W5mBo1yjFhnHVZzQIOEV5sAg1g%7EiSn9JALTff2b64CyPU%7EQCMbDJjr-1LOeQdmRsJrkvsq-e375gLLl4P2pfuLhoki6jB5iBPfa7mKYstad%7EXcoGx-lcfbH-F0KA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
2d3690c886856a310249be71b3e1f142
PDF Text
Text
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
11 THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD, UPPER NORWOOD,
LONDON, S.E.
1876.
Price Threepence.
SIGNS OF THE TIMES.
APRIL, 1876.
AST month we left the Devil in extremis; this
month we announce his decease, but a decease of
an uncomfortable and dubious description, in no way
satisfactory to the survivors. Mr. Jenkins has come
out a victor:—a man who disbelieves in the devil is
not henceforth necessarily an open and notorious evil
liver—and without a clear and definite belief in the
personality of Satan a man may henceforth eat and
drink the body and blood of Christ. So far every
thing is clear and comfortable, but the devil, thus
roughly pushed out of sight, does not appear to be
finally disposed of, since there are already rumours in
the air ecclesiastical of an intention to prosecute Mr.
Haweis, the well-known Broad Church clergyman,
L
�2
because he stated in a sermon that the existence of
an arch-devil was not susceptible of proof. This suit
would be of a more crucial character, and might
enable our Courts to decide on the reality or un
reality of Satan, whether he be shadow or substance,
ideal or fact. As regards the late trial, as shown
last month, the judgment would have been neces
sarily equally favourable to Rationalists whether it
supported Mr. Jenkins or the Rev. Flavel Cook;
for if Mr. Cook’s action were endorsed the orthodox
would triumph and the liberal party be enraged,
while if Mr. Jenkins were vindicated the orthodox
would rebel. The judgment has been given, and
already the storm-clouds begin to gather; the
Brighton branch of the English Church Union has
passed a resolution unanimously “expressing indig
nation and alarm at the decision given by the Judicial
Committee of the Privy Council, in the case of
Jenkins v. Cook, and respectfully asking the Lord
Bishop of the diocese to take any steps he may
think desirable against such a wrenching of the
custody of the sacrament from the hands of the
Church, by which the communion of our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ has been grossly slighted.”
Here are the elements of “ a very pretty quarrel
no dogma has been more fruitful in divisions than
that of the “ Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper the
seamless robe has been rent over and over again
about the fashion of the remembrance and the
character of the rite; the giving of the cup to the
laity, the true substance taken by the faithful, the
sacrificiatory nature of the service, the effect of con
secration, the necessity of an episcopally-ordained
minister to officiate in it, all these points recall the
memory of bitter words and cruel deeds, and remind
the rationalist that the feast of communion has ever
been transformed into the source of excommunication.
And now has arisen a new dilemma: all good ortho
�3
dox people believe in the good orthodox devil: it is
one of the cardinal points of the faith once delivered
to the saints ; without belief in the devil—and the
devils—belief in the inspiration of the Bible is im
possible ; without belief in the fall brought about by
“that old serpent” no belief in the redemption is
likely; without belief in an evil spirit to account for
the sin and misery in the world, how can belief in a
good spirit be defended ? From what do we need to
be delivered by the blood of Christ and the guiding
of the Holy Ghost, if there be no devil to lead us
astray ? And if no devil, surely no hell, and if no hell
no need for a dying Saviour, and if no dying Saviour
then no Christianity. Thus wide reaching, thus
fatal, are the issues dependent upon belief or non
belief in the devil. “ And can it be,” the orthodox
may fairly argue, “ that a man who denies the devil,
and thus implicitly denies hell, the redemption, and
Christianity itself, shall be accounted as a worthy
recipient of the symbol of the Christianity he is de
stroying ? If the non-believer in the devil may thus
be welcomed, why not also the non-believer in Jesus ?
The most sacred recesses of the Church are thus
thrown open to the infidel and perhaps to the atheist.”
The Low Church party, who joyfully welcomed the
State as its ally against the hated Ritualist, and were
unhurt by the handling of the sacred things of their
adversaries by a secular Court, now find out, to their
horror, that their own sacred things are subjected to
the same treatment, and that the State lays sacri
legious hands upon the very devil himself. One wail
arises from either side : if one cries that the sacra
ment is wrenched from the hands of the Church, the
other moans over the cardinal truths of Christianity,
and bewails the laxity of professors and the growing
power of a false philosophy ; Pilate and Herod make
friends to-day, to slay, if possible, the liberty which
might otherwise escape. TheAWc, strangely, favours
�4
the judgment, although reprobating Mr. Jenkins,
thus standing at variance with its party ; in a letter
to it we read that it is only the duty of a clergyman
to warn, not to repel, and that if any insist on coming
after being told that “ The receiving of the Holy
Communion doth nothing else but increase your
damnation. Therefore, if any of you be a blasphemer
of God, an hinderer and slanderer of His word . . . .
come not to that Holy Table, lest after the taking of
that Holy Sacrament the devil enter into you, as he
entered into Judas;” if, after this, any insist, then it
is their fault and not the clergyman’s, and apparently
they should charitably be left free to “ increase their
damnation,” though this being already endless it is
not easy to understand how it is to be increased.
At Clifton itself the commotion is great. Mr.
Cook having stated that the appearance of Mr.
Jenkins at the Communion Table would be the signal
for his resignation, a requisition was signed by some
600 Cliftonians, asking Mr. Jenkins not to press his
victory, but to take the Communion at one of the
many other churches of Clifton, so as to save Mr.
Cook from the necessity of giving up his charge, a
necessity imposed upon him by his conscience. Mr.
Jenkins dryly replied, through his solicitor, that he
should go to his parish church to take the Communion
when it suited him so to do ; he added that he re
gretted that Mr. Cook could not obey the law of the
land and of the Church. Hereupon Mr. Cook an
nounces that he resigns his living, and says, “ he
bows to the law of the land by resigning the living
he has held; and in reference to the allusion to the
law of the Church he remarks that there is a law of
much higher authority.” It is rumoured that the
admirers of Mr. Cook intend to build him a
church in Clifton, where he can obey the law of
higher authority, and be free from the interference of
Privy Councils. An address has been forwarded to
�5
Mr. Cook by Canon Conway from Convocation, a
“ memorial of sympathy. ” Mr. Cook, in acknowledging
it and thanking them for “ their kindness and moral
support,” says that the writers have “ manifested their
goodwill towards me in this my time of suffering
for the truth
the “ truth” in question is the devil;
would it then be fair to say that Mr. Cook is suffering
for the sake of the devil ? and if so, is it true to say
that he is suffering for the sake of God ? and if so,
are “God” and “devil” interchangeable terms, as
some have been led to infer from the fact that in 2 Sam.
xxiv. 1, Jehovah, and in 1 Chron. xxi., Satan is repre
sented as having incited David to commit the sin of
numbering Israel, and was punished for bis com
pliance by the inciter, whichever it might have been ?
Mr. Ridsdale is another martyr, the Privy Council
which disestablished the devil being rivalled in its
cruelty by the new Court under Lord Penzance. His
vestments are forbidden, his candles blown out, his
crucifix iconoclasted, his raised pictures smoothed
away, his bowings straightened. Poor Mr. Ridsdale !
and when he meekly asked that he might go on as
usual until the appeal was finally decided, Lord Pen
zance sharply refused to accede to the application,
and ordered that the monition should be complied
with. How terrible a sentence this is, and how fear
ful this deprivation of the coats of many colours,
may be judged by the following extract from the
Church Times:—“ Timid Catholics feel now exactly
as Christians felt when the outbreak of the Tenth
Persecution showed that three hundred years of
blameless conduct had done nothing to conciliate
Pagans, but that the same lies were circulated, and
the same cruelties inflicted as had marked the first
onslaught under Nero.” It must want a good deal
of imagination—or of faith—to see much likeness
between being forbidden to wear many-coloured
raiment and being torn to pieces by wild beasts.
�For the “ blameless conduct ” it would perhaps be
too cruel to quote as witness the Apostle Paul, in his
first Epistle to the Corinthians. Degraded impurity,
licence, drunkenness and fierce quarrelling are all
apparently consistent with “ blameless conduct.”
Some little excitement is going on in the town of
Newton Abbot, in Devon, in connection with the
following circumstances :—A woman, named Burnett,
lay sick in one of the wards of the Newton Abbot
Union, and the chaplain, the Rev. William Langley
Pope, D.D., was reading for her the “ Service for
the Visitation of the Sick.” What followed shall be
told in his own words :—“ I asked, in the course of the
‘ Service for the Visitation of the Sick ’ appointed by
the Church, ‘ Dost thou believe ?’ repeating the Creed,
in the form of a question, and perfectly unaware and
uninformed, by the woman Prowse, or any person, of
the person questioned being a disbeliever of the
■Creed. The woman Burnett then commenced an
answer to my question, stating, in a voice perfectly
audible, and intended to be heard by the ward, that
she disbelieved ‘ the end of the world,’ the existence
■of ‘hell’ in any other sense than the ‘grave,’ ‘the
Resurrection of the body,’ and ‘ the coming of Christ
to judgment.’ She also said, before making these
most infidel statements, that she believed that her
‘ sins were cancelled! ! I ’ On hearing these most
dreadful blasphemies I felt perfectly horrified; and,
raising my hands to heaven, I exclaimed, in utter
horror of soul, and yet with the desire to set the poor
wretched woman right if psssible, ‘ Oh ! what horrible
blasphemy I Oh ! what dreadful lies ! yes, damnable
lies 1 ’ These were my exact words, and I do not see
what else I could have said, for she uttered her dis
belief in a very sustained tone and most assured
manner. The very essentials of Christianity are surely
not to be allowed to be ruthlessly and ignorantly as
sailed and denied without indignant reprobation on the
�part of any honest and true Christian. I also spoke
from the strongest sense of duty to do what good, by
God’s blessing, I might be permitted to accomplish.”"
Is this kind of language supposed to be beneficial to
the sick ? It certainly does not lack vigour, but can
scarcely be regarded as exemplifying the “ meekness
and gentleness of Christ,” nor can it be thought to
obey the command : “ The servant of the Lord must
not strive, but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach,
patient, in meekness instructing those who oppose them
selves.” The woman appears simply to have honestly
answered the questions put to her, and must have
been somewhat startled at the torrent of abuse poured
out upon her. How could the remarks of this re
verend gentleman “ set the poor wretched woman
right ?” There is no instruction conveyed in shouting
out: “ Oh ! what dreadful lies ! yes, damnable lies ! ”
and, one would fancy, “ God’s blessing ” would
scarcely be appropriate on such expressions. Dr.
Pope says: “ I can say most sincerely, before Al
mighty God, that I have most fully performed my
duties under very painful circumstances, thrust upon
me, when at my right post.” Dr. Pope may, of
course, be sincere, but so excitable a person is not theone best suited to the delicate duties which fall to the
share of a workhouse chaplain; he resembles his
namesake—the Pope—too much in the freedom with
which ‘‘profane cursing and swearing ” flow from his;
lips. Is it just to pay such a man as this from the
taxes contributed by people of all creeds ? Few liberalminded Christians would think their faith best re
commended by a clergyman of this sort, Doctor of
Divinity though he be; if the horror he expressed
were genuine, and not affected, it shows a marvellous
ignorance of the movements going on in the world
around him, of the questionings on every side, of the
rapid and steady spread of “ infidelity” in every rank
of life. Doubtless, poor women lying sick in Union
�8
wards ought not to venture thus to answer the chap
lain’s questions, but should show to the “ good kind
gentleman” the proper pauper acceptance of what
ever he may please to say ; but still, even in dealing
with unbelieving paupers, one cannot but feel that
the language of this “ honest and true Christian ”
over a sick bed, is deserving of the strongest and
most “ indignant reprobation.” So near Ash Wednes
day, one cannot deny that clergymen have a vested
right to curse their neighbours, but then it must only
be done formally in church, and while cursing the man
who removes his neighbour’s landmark may be justi
fiable, there is no provision made by the Church for
cursing the pauper who denies the resurrection of
the body.
The Jewish World really deserves the support of
Rationalists for the able articles against popular and
traditional Christianity which it frequently inserts.
In its issue of March 3, dealing with “ The Christian
Logos,” it traces very clearly the gradual growth of
the idea embodied in Christ. It says :—“ The per
sonification of the word of God as a vehicle of power
and means of communication between God and man,
was a very early conception, and is first traceable
to those masters in all religious idealities, the Hindus.
In pre-historic Vedic times they had such an image
in the goddess Vach (vox), who is called in the Rigveda, the earliest extant scripture existing in any
language, ‘ the speech of the primeval spirit.’ At a
later time the Hindus had a male form of the like
import, whom they styled Menu (Mens), or the em
bodiment of the mind or wisdom of the Deity. The
Pythagoreans and Platonists, who derived their cul
ture from the East, adopted the like mythical represen
tation of the Divine action, terming it the Logos, or
Word of God. In the Hebrew Scriptures a similar
figure occurs.” Then “at length there is the fancy
of a Divine Sonship attached to this image,” and we
�9
see this divine personage in the fiery furnace, guard
ing Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego. The book
of Enoch still further develops the idea. “ The Son
of God, the Elected One, the Prince of Righteous
ness.” Then Philo-Judaeus takes up the notion and
formulates it yet more precisely : “ He makes his
imaginary idol to be the Son of God, a second Di
vinity, the first begotten of God, superior to all beings
in heaven or earth, the instrument by whom the
world was made, the substitute for God, through
whom all operations are conducted, the light of the
world, the only one cognisant of God, the most an
cient of all His works, equal with God, a messenger
from God to man, the mediator, the advocate and in
tercessor for mortal man, the true High Priest, the
giver to man of everlasting life, the shepherd of God’s
flock, the physician who heals all evil, the seal of
God, the universal refuge, the heavenly nutriment of
the soul.” This notion is the exact counterpart of
the Christian Logos, the Word of the Father. “ Philo’s
time covers that alleged to have been occupied by the
life of Christ. . . . And he is seen to have provided, out
of the workings of his imagination, all that the writer
of the fourth gospel puts together and makes use of
in exhibition of the Christ depicted by him. Philo
has given the framework and the drapery, which the
other has adjusted to his alleged living subject. He
has described the powers and the attributes which the
evangelist has adopted as carried out in the person of
Jesus.” Thus do allies, from a different standing
point, attack the crumbling traditional creed, exposing
the rottenness of its foundations by the breaches
made therein by the cannon-balls of history and of
thought.
Why cannot the hysterical of the churches leave
the little children alone, to grow up bright and fear
less in healthy naturalness ? In the Clvristian is a
sermon for the young, in which we read “ So with
�10
you, dear little ones, if there is one sin against you
written down in God’s presence, you cannot see the
beautiful place and the lovely flowers in the heavenly
country, If the sin is not rubbed out you can never
enter that beautiful place.” And then we read of
“ sinful hearts ” and “ naughty hearts,” and “ wash
you in His precious blood,” and so on. Imagine the
dread and the anxiety inflicted on a sensitive child
by this notion of every wrong thought and word
being “ written down in God’s presence” against it.
It is bad enough to drive men and women into the
madhouses with these miserable revivals ; the children
at least might be left alone until the brain and heart
have somewhat hardened, and the pulses thrill less
keenly in fear of the unknown.
We append an anonymous letter, bearing the Liver
pool post-mark, recently sent to us; it is another
specimen of the hysterical style of the Moody and
Sankey school of preachers :—“ I beseech you, cease
from the awful blasphemies you are uttering by your
pen—you are but trying to spread darkness and
despair, and leaguing yourself with him who has
been ‘ a murderer and a liar from the beginning.’
Speaking as you do against the Most High God.
Shall the thing formed say to Him that formed it,
‘ Why hast thou made me thus ? ’ Poor miserable
worm of the dust, how dare you! If you do not
know the joy of having made your peace with God
through' the one Name under Heaven through which
we may be saved, seek it at once through your
Crucified Saviour and repent of your blasphemies.
Do not go on and ‘ darken counsel with words without
knowledge.’ ‘Turn ye, turn ye, why will' ye C’3.’
‘ Look unto me and be ye saved all the ends of the
earth, for I am God, and there is ,none else.’ ” The
zeal of these anonymous letter-writers is always far
more conspicuous than their courage.
PRINTED BY C. W. REYNELL, LITTLE PELTENEY 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
Signs of the times. April, 1876
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 10 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: 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
1876
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT198
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 (Signs of the times. April, 1876), 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
Christianity
Christianity-Controversial Literature
Conway Tracts
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/2c3401b3f2d528ea3daaf6b14be77836.pdf?Expires=1785369600&Signature=hBhG0lXpkQBJEMuR%7El0CYwj9Asj4vGx4-ZskWa5gbL8cTRHdZRTTGn-i2NnqlEu61d-3D-whMVS-soS%7EJlfIefH8t3Hod1HOiOYTiogVuhatvVbJgsFoA6zQNI1Ht71QuJU2Pb7UJf-EWexF7dgsfq4aBSShq8oGc13N%7EL2c%7E5krOTWoKiMd9xSt01QG2wDBHHOjopB%7EQAzyYZ70H7RaI5fZh3yzq89UfHP0j2BTRtPGQl9GyHljEiKN59ZqX1cDK6T82-qHwsBxnl60Kr3DTLMvu09BL87X8f4FPG27FZRgq6yqVO2AieRcx2gHJpkLEKEbF5M294G4LV61-NdnBQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
07cd6a5590319c986374241e8e134b1f
PDF Text
Text
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
II THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD, UPPER
NORWOOD,
LONDON, S.E.
Price Threepence.
SIGNS OF THE TIMES.
JULY,
1876.
EADERS of our “ Signs ” may not be aware
that we have a rival, entitled “ The Christian
Herald and Signs of our Times.” It is a curious
publication of the extreme Low Church and Dissent
ing type, and contains much deeply-interesting infor
mation about “things not seen as yet.” One of the
“ signs of our times ” is the Eastern question, and
“ the most tangible proximate sign for the Christian
to discern is the return of the Jews to Palestine,” It
appears that the Jews are to go to Palestine, and a
eovenant is to be made between these said Jews and
E
�2
“ Anti-ChristAnti-Christ is to be discovered By
his making the covenant: let us hope that it will not
be Disraeli; but is not his very name a terrible sign ?
Besides, the white horse of the Revelation must be
the white horse of Hanover, and its rider Death, the
destruction that Disraeli, as Anti-Christ, will bring
upon the land. When this covenant is made Christ
will come and take up the Church, his Bride, into
the air, “ but his coming then will be comparatively
invisible to the world. The marriage of the Lamb
with his Bride raised and translated to the heavens
will be celebrated, and the position and duties of the
component parts of this mystical body will all be duly
arranged before Christ’s further descent from the air
to the earth, when the prophecy will be fulfilled,
‘ Behold he cometh with clouds, and every eye shall
see him.’ The glorified Church will descend with
him. It may, and probably will, be several years
before Christ thus descends visibly in the sight of the
world, after the translation of the wise virgins.”
These years may be called the honeymoon of Christ
and his wise virgins. Then the Jews in Palestine are
to be attacked, and Jesus is to appear as their king
and deliverer; it is to be hoped that he will be more
successful than he was last time. Well may the
writer of all this marvellous nonsense begin by saying
that “ This shuts out all human wisdom Ghosts are
only visible when all light is excluded. We are next
taken to the resurrection, and told all about resurrec
tion bodies. “ The resurrection body of the saints
shall be invested with divine attributes. A radiance
shall encircle it brighter than the noon-day sun.”
“ The celestial body shall possess angelic power, and move
with the velocity of electricity. It will possess all the spright
liness and activity of the heavenly bodies. No violence can
either break or derange it. Its senses and organs will be inten
sified and enlarged. Its vision far-reaching as the telescope
which sweeps the heavens, and yet minute as the microscope.
There shall be no old age, offensive appearance, or incipient
�3
disease afflicting the resurrection body. Immortal youth,
requiring no relaxation or repose, shall adorn the heavenly
body.”
Imagine “ sprightly heavenly bodies cheerful suns
and joking moons. But if these new bodies rush
about with the velocity of electricity they'will be very
dangerous, both to their neighbours and to themselves ;
the destructive power of a flash of lightning will be
nothing in comparison to the effect of two clashing
resurrection bodies. It will, however, be pleasant for
ladies to learn that
“ The resurrection body shall appear in angelic costume.
The angel that appeared to the women at the sepulchre re
sembled ‘ a young man ’ clothed in a long white garment, his
countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow.
Thus shall the celestial body shine in all the beauty and fresh
ness of youth, clearer than crystal, fairer than the virgin
rose.”
They will be made “ beautiful for ever ” in fact; a
celestial Madame Rachel will enamel them once for
all. “ The sheeted dead bursting the cerements of
mortality, and assuming crystallised and ethereal
forms.” But the sheets of many will long since have
mouldered away, and the cerements will have turned
into dust, grass, sheep, and other forms of life, and
can scarcely be “ burst.” Nor is this all.
‘ ‘ The dying groans of creation will be heard, and the ele
ments melt with fervent heat. The whole fabric of nature
will be in a state of conflagration. The rumblings of earth
quakes and volcanic eruptions will make this stricken planet
quiver. Behold that vast procession descending from heaven.
The Judge descends, arrayed in judicial vesture. ”
It would be interesting to know where the heaven
is which “ the vast procession descends from.” We can
plumb the depths of space on every side this planet
for millions on millions of miles, but the strongest
telescope fails to bring us back news of any heaven
from which this procession can come “ down ” to
earth. Many talcs the telescope whispers to us, tales
�4
of marvellous wonder, tales of far-off fairy lands of
nebulae not yet stars, but no stories of a heaven above
them all whence Jesus and his legions can descend
to desolate this fair world. Of course, in all this
judgment and resurrection, readers of the wrong
“signs of the times” will find themselves in sore
trouble. “ What shall be the doom of the sensualist,
the sceptic, the sneering world, when the flaming
judge appears ? ” And then they call on the moun
tains in the proper and orthodox fashion. We fancy
that would be a poor resource. There are not moun
tains enough in the world to cover all the sceptics
that have existed. It is curious how Christians per
sist in bracketing “ sensualists and sceptics,” and
yet no two classes could be more utterly opposed to
each other. Scepticism implies thought and study,
close examination, and earnest research ; such qualities
can never be found in the sensualist, where the pas
sions master the brain. But it is the old story, “ if
you have no case abuse the other side,” and Christians
only follow the example of the Bible, which classes
together the ill-living and the unbeliever.
Does any one desire to know the most advantageous
position in heaven, according to Mr. Spurgeon ? You
are not to “lie like slaves beneath the throne nor
11far offfrom, the thronenor “behind the throne nor
“ upon the throne,” where “ the proud infidel wants to
getbut only “ before the throne,” where “ they can
always look at God, and God can always look at
them.” What a strange omnipresent God, who can
only see people in front of one special place.
Dr. Talmage is, however, the most notable contri
butor to the “ Signs,” and he begins his discourse as
follows:—
“ Seven is the favourite number in the Bible. Seven days
for the week. Seven fat kine for Pharaoh’s vision. Seven
years of service that Jacob may win Rachel. Seven rams’
horns to blow down the walls of Jericho. Seven golden vials.
Seven last plagues. Seven thunders. Seven candlesticks.
�5
Seven stars. Seven churches. Seven loaves to feed the thou
sands. The lamb with seven horns. The woman with seven
devils.”
Fortunately we do not get beyond the seven devils,
and seven Dr. Taimages would be far worse in the
way of spirits ; think what the infliction would be of
seven preachers of the following type:—
“ Leave the caravan of iniquity in the desert; throw away
your account books ; quit your reckoning. Hark ! from the
throne of God the proclamation, ‘ ‘ Thy sins and thine iniqui
ties will I remember no more. ” Release ! signed in tears,
sealed in blood, written on heavenly parchment, recorded in
eternal archives. The black ink of the indictment is written
all over with the red ink of the cross.”
Is it conceivable that sane people listen to this sort
of rant Sunday after Sunday, and enjoy it ? But Dr.
Talmage is wise in his generation, like unto one of
the children of this world :—
“ I specially recognise in this presence this morning, the
manner in which you came to the rescue when recently our
Lay College building was threatened by the foreclosure of a
mortgage of 15,000 dollars. You did magnificently. God will
give back to you every dollar: first in worldly prosperity, and then
in spiritual and eternal dividends. ”
That is the way to induce people to subscribe:
“You will get back here all you give, and eternal
life into the bargain.” It is the very argument of
Jesus: “ An hundredfold in this present world, and
in the world to come everlasting life.”
Among the many May meetings we notice one of
the Home and Colonial School Society, at which
Canon Hoare delivered his soul against the School
Board system of Education. The Canon has been
travelling in America, and he visited the “best
school” in New York, containing 600 children. He
seems to have been much delighted at first with the
order and regularity that prevailed, and on his asking
questions in history and geography he found them
well taught. Then the Canon explained that he was
�6
going to cross to England, and “ I suppose you have
all read of one who could walk across the roughest
sea, and who did not want steam. Who was that ?”
“ The mistress then came to my daughter, who sat
close by me, and said: ‘ If you please, he must not
speak on that subject. Pray stop your father.’ My
daughter then pulled me by the coat-tail, and stopped
me, telling me what had been said to her. I might
speak of the Queen of England, the Czar of Russia,
the Emperor of China, but not one word about the
Lord Jesus Christ might I utter in that room. This
broke us up entirely;” and Canon Hoare thinks that
“ the tendency of the present day, or at least the ten
dency of the whole education system, is to edge out
Christian truth.” Canon Hoare is perfectly right,
for in a country whose citizens are of all faith and of
no faith, no education can be made compulsory which
is not purely secular. The State has no right to com
pel the children of Free Thinkers or of Jews to learn
Christianity, nor to instruct the children of Christians
in Free Thought or Jewish principles. No parent has
a right to object that the State does not furnish re
ligious or anti-religious teaching to his children, for
the legitimate rights of conscience would thereby be
interfered with with regard to the other children in
the school. But very naturally do the clergy object
to any training which has not a distinctly religious
bias, for they complain dolorously that unless they
train the children they will never gain any influence
over them in later years. They are perfectly right.
No one trained without belief from childhood is likely
to join the Church when he grows up, for he will be
without the habit-thought which accepts a faith un
questionably and wears it half-unconsciously from
fashion, and not from conviction. A purely secular
education will make thinkers, and that is a consum
mation not to be desired by the priesthood.
The Society for the Conversion of the Jews seems
�7
to be more blessed by the Lord with the good things
of this world than with the conversion of souls. Money
flows in very plentifully, but the jewels eternal very
slowly. A Jew seems to cost between 5,000Z. and
10,000Z. to convert, and then he is apt to go back
again when business becomes flourishing. About two
Jews are said to have been converted abroad last year,
and the Jeunsh World sneers mercilessly at the small
success of the Christians. Just now, that very liberal
paper appears to act as a kind of friend in need to
distressed vicars and curates, and within its columns
a voice is heard, lamentation, weeping, and great
mourning, parsons weeping for the hindrances to free
speech, and refusing to be comforted because they are
not at liberty. These utterances are valuable and
most suggestive. A “ country vicar” writes :—
‘ ‘ The more antiquated and hoary, the more authoritative
and sacred is the symbolum. The whole truth was discovered,
think some pious folk, or was revealed, in the remote past;
and all modern light and inspirations are a delusion unless
they go to confirm old legends. Moreover, the old legends
must be taken, as my early tutor used to phrase it, literally,
and construed grammatically, and they are sure to read right.
So literally, indeed, are they often taken, that the teacher has
reason to feel that either he himself or some of his hearers
prefer darkness to light. ”
A “ country curate” says :—
“ Like him I have taken vows and feel responsibilities, and
I may add that, like him, I am dissatisfied. 1 have long borne
these difficulties, long groaned under the weight of the chains
which hang so heavily upon my internal convictions. But
what am I to do ? I have a wife and family, and they form in
themselves substantial reasons for me to appear weekly, and
act contrary to my own most cherished opinions. I cannot
dig, and to beg I am ashamed. Can you or your readers sug
gest any means by which I can escape a thraldom grievous to
bear ? My case is that of too many in the English Church,
and also, I doubt not, in the various communities existing out
side the Establishment.”
Another remarks :—
�8
“I could once, theologically, make two and two into five,
but I have been for years gradually losing the capacity in con
sequence of the study of the dangerous sciences of physics
metaphysics, and historical criticism. ”
r j
»
And. to these cries from the house of bondage is
added a manly letter from an “ex-parson,” wherein
he blames the Rationalistic Clergy for their outward
conformity to a creed which they have outgrown:—
“Many
^em’ from. mere fear of privation in case of
withdrawal from the pulpit, go on gagging themselves, searing
their consciences, and petrifying themselves into monuments
of self-deception by using phrases which are untrue to their
convictions. Why don’t they come out and prove the reality
of their zeal for truth and freedom by quitting their anoma
lous position, daring to be free and honest, regardless of con
sequences ? Why don’t they become throughout leaders,
instead of, as they are, in most cases, truculent followers of
their people ? Never did martyr of old, through suffering rack
or flame, win a crown more worthy than the prize of selfrespect, liberty, and honour, which is only to be won by vacat
ing a position, necessarily hollow and corrupting to him who
in his convictions has outlived it.”
Not only does the Jewish World thus offer an oppor
tunity of free speech to Christian clerics, but it also
boldly leads the way to free investigation of creeds ;
for it challenges all improbable things to the bar of
reason to show cause why they should be believed.
“ Admitting as we do the omnipotence of the Great
Creator, we honour him when we question that which
seems improbable. This will appear, we doubt not,
clear to all. With God, we feel and think all things
are possible. It does not follow, however, when cer
tain things are put forward for our acceptance by men
like ourselves, that we should admit the possibility
before having investigated the probability. This will
at all times be found a safe guide from the errors alike
arising from credulity and superstitious inferences.”
A spirit such as this is the true spirit of the rationalist,
whatever may be the conclusions to which it leads.
“We cannot accept things contrary to our common
�9
sense, no matter who utters them. ... In past ages
false deductions were more liable to be inade than at
present. The onward stride of science has enabled
us to comprehend more clearly than our forefathers,
hundreds of years since.” Free Thought among the
Jews seems to be advancing hand-in-hand with Free
Thought among the Christians, and is making the
efforts of conversion societies more hopeless than
ever.
A curious book has just been issued, entitled,
‘Discussion in General on Christianity, translated
from the Arabic language, by His Excellency Abdul
Hamed Bey.’ It consists of three chapters on “ The
Trinity,” on “ The inconsistency of the four writers
of the Gospel, and the character of Christ as a
Redeemerand on “ Testimony that Mahommed is
the apostle of God.” The discussion of the Trinity is
ably argued, and the special sonship of Jesus denied,
it being urged that the doctrine of the Trinity has only
been taught since the time of Christ, and that if Christ
had been in existence prior to his birth, such pre
existence would no doubt “ have been revealed to the
Children of Israel,” that if God called Christ his Son,
the title was not unique, for “ Thus saith the Lord,
Israel is my son, even my first-born.” (Ex. iv. 22).
“ It is needlees to say, if Christ was born without a
father, and God called him his son, naturally it
follows that Adam, Melchisedec, Israel and others
being in the same degree, eminence and position
relative to Christ, they must also be Gods as Jesus
is.” That the whole life of Jesus is against the
theory of his divinity, and his behaviour after the
resurrection is conclusive evidence that he was only
man. “Is it consistent with reason, and could it be
possible for the Supreme God, who is a most Holy
Spirit, to show his hands and his feet to prove that
he is formed of flesh and bone, and eat broiled fish and
honeycomb ? ” “ Divinity and humanity are too
�10
opposite in nature to blend and unite together.
Could fire and water, light and darkness, truth and
falsehood, ever be united ? if so, then indeed divinity
and humanity might unite.” “Who dares to say
that God, the most merciful, the most benign, retaineth his anger and is unforgiving, so that a Redeemer
is requisite ? . . . . Why should Christ feel more
compassion for mankind than the merciful and benign
Father of the universe ? ” “ Looking up at the
firmament and contemplating the boundless universe,
we find that this earth of ours is like a grain of sand
of the sea-shore, a drop in an ocean • then such being
the case, we wonder at the absurdity of the Christian
doctrine that the Supreme Being (to whom be glory
for ever and ever) not forgiving the human race out of
his own goodness and clemency, but sending his pre
tended son to this mite of dirty earth to go through
the absurd tragedy of the crucifixion and all belong
ing to it, for what ? to save us contemptible worms
from punishment.” Such is the doctrine of the
Redeemer and the Trinity seen from the standing
point of a believer in Mohammed, who believes in,
and who draws many arguments from the Old Testa
ment Scriptures. The inconsistencies of the Evan
gelists are somewhat sharply touched upon, and it is
urged that they calumniate Jesus, “ the holy
messenger of God,” by ascribing to him unworthy
actions, like the cursing of the fig-tree, “ an act quite
foreign to his blessed and holy nature.”
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
Signs of the times. July, 1876
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 10 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed by Printed by C.W. Reynell, Little Pulteney Street, 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
1876
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT170
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
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 (Signs of the times. July, 1876), 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
Christianity
Christianity-Controversial Literature
Conway Tracts
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/37332d4af46d573bbdaeb3a054045b90.pdf?Expires=1785369600&Signature=rMIi9lhiS8wxf3WLDgTrT7Nvnrded0DDipTfMl7pyGA05Zh3z9zgKgidl9IzBXNaEn7ydYZFv3naBzm6UbCa3CNI%7ERt6DGTVxzrWSXs5dKEZuKAjezdCfqKZXv278qU2%7ENKKuUfBvU8qn0bvE0xblp3Icoik65tU%7EW3MbpuVVUC9XtcGOiL%7EbmK9wmsUwrjp76Rq97RvJ9oXKq3O1b26Lnkb1mbFagULG8ruzBnGN5jSzYsO%7EDGsadBx7yRf%7E%7E1gFkhy8oKD0hZpDy4ssQBJAcwBlmAEaqEIumt0KjnExql3pcKSL2wsmlxnlvOMvp81Whr-arJgLPPu3NaXFolrHg__&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=1785369600&Signature=phaOfh-XaXayzT0hdF7OXWALm14rgDoGxKy2BSO8sd1ZcDsMP86bS3o4vTso%7EKzpSNDEeOB4nrnnlLjxbX7%7EuDoYwAxPa0oxCuEzOcxkpcEIjU3SMfWM0jEKH-EjNvxR0XQCnhiSUufsGjUXoCyvaVxoLA3n7GowHPzsCl1qByawr0hAlOJaY0db5CRYAAunDglaHI6Ny0wCLYU02-lKmP3SEEKaZiJaPPIkmHHrMk1%7EGUSuys8bAHTrcKltY8KNT8tInNdAMbfj3v5OI4wPqbDYrzU7BDz0d3INW4paSNevQpGQAalgzpuFTN0f04LSXGVWzXHKxEZsFLpluhGzTg__&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/27b1f78563fea3105687586015395ea4.pdf?Expires=1785369600&Signature=TC9xVX%7EGRTXiu1JEVlGMGN1AAYPm6HB2z8kFSOIBT9y6y6fO212wt27plv7WCXZTKEAvLHh0JlhCMPevcUaFC6%7EngY19A2I3ef4XEJ5LC57L1wt9b-qyDgJQR0if460CvUvglrWIgFhaxegkHDuKj%7ELJDrgQhDtW%7EFQKTzvIhbzZYxyExXk5y44PTNstREAXKOoSF-DM1QWDV7mlFaVlbp5matAueu24Ga3v7TavZFX6whatsWVupk3Fp0V0XpunWiX99avBZra-OeU3pEZMMDFYY%7EWUFW2ZTaa54K2mvJv1ZnG67u4ct7r-6wl5aLy2U-oyEAF0u9O0Fac7UXYWFw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
19d30f0a99e6f437725b4ff0b6737165
PDF Text
Text
CT
PUBLISHED
BY THOMAS
SCOTT,
11 THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD, UPPER NORWOOD,
LONDON S.E.
1876.
\ Price Threepence.
SIGNS OF THE TIMES.
MARCH, 1876.
ROTHER going to law with brother is the most
notable sign of the present times; the daily
newspapers have been filled with theological contro
versy, and the Devil and a Ritualistic clergyman have
divided public attention between them, such atten
tion, at least, as remained possible while the allimportant question of “ Reverend or not Reverend”
was agitating the hearts of men. What seems to
some to be a terrible blow has been struck at the
Established Church, in the persons of her ministers,
for the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council have
reversed the findings of the inferior Courts, and have
proclaimed that the “ Rev. Henry Keet, Wesleyan
minister, of Owston Eerry, in the county and diocese
B
�2
of Lincoln and province of Canterbury,” is rightfully
and duly styled “ Rev.,” and may print that title on
a tombstone, or elsewhere, none hindering him. Alas 1
a “ reverend ” seems no longer revered since a schis
matic and heretical minister may hereafter claim the
designation as his own, and thus desecrate it, even as
the body of Guibord unhallowed the consecrated
burial ground in Montreal. Dire are the lamenta
tions that rend the air ; clergymen striving for their
title, and will not be comforted, because it is not ex
clusively their own. This new wickedness of the
Privy Council is causing unwonted disturbance in the
dignified seclusion of the Guardian publishing office,
for clerical missives sternly bid the publishers of that
church organ to omit, from henceforth, the oncehonoured prefix, and to style them either “ Rector ”
or “ Vicar.” But even here will arise a difficulty, for
“ Rector ” is a title which is also borne by those on
whose heads has never rested the consecrating touch
of a Bishop’s hand. The rector of a parish is he,
whether cleric or layman, who receives the large
tithes, and he may not only be a layman, but may
be a Jew, a Roman Catholic, or an Atheist. May not
this be a yet more desecrated title than the other ?
One especially injured clergyman advertises in a local
paper that he will not open letters directed to him as
the “ Rev.,” and warns all his would-be correspondents
to address him only by name and surname. Such an
outbreak of petty spite as this speaks eloquently of
the spirit of some of those clergy of the Establishment
who, scattered up and down throughout the country,
serve in each parish as a centre of “ sweetness and
light.” In perfect consistency with this spirit is the
exaggerated importance attached to dress, gesture,
and position, by the members of every section of the
Church. Mr. Ridsdale, a Ritualistic clergyman at
Folkestone, is tried for mixing water and wine, for
standing with his back to the people, for wearing
�3
certain garments, for lighting unnecessary candles,
etc., etc., and the whole machinery of a court of law
is set in motion to decide on these trumpery points.
The position of the celebrant at the altar is, certainly,
instructive to antiquarians, as a relic of the ancient
sun-worship, of which so many traces appear in the
Christian mythology ; what more suggestive at Easter
time than the eastward facing priest and the bowed
congregation, as the celebrant chants :—“ He is the
very Paschal Lamb which was offered for us, and hath
taken away the sin of the world;” one can fancy one
self transported back to ancient days, hearing the Sun
priest welcome the glorious Sun as the very Lamb of
God, who takes away the darkness of the weary winter,
and shines out on the fresh spring world from the
zodiacal station of Aries. As he pours the wine, we
remember the libation to Bacchus, the god of the vine,
“ the true vine ;” and in the mingling of water and
wine, which gives life to the world, we catch a fanciful
hint of that most ancient thought of every mythology,
the union of the life-giving elements, which we meet
in the cosmogony of Moses, when the spirit moves on
the face of the waters. The antiquarian will regret
to see all these traces of the elder faiths swept away,
these ancient ceremonies in new dresses, which are
performed so innocently by the simple Christian
worshippers. How the church people, however, who
do not see this antique charm, manage to get so ex
cited over dresses and candles, is a mystery; for
God, who is a spirit, and looketh at the heart and
not at the outward appearance, must surely regard
it as a matter of the most complete indifference
whether a man “ serve the altar” clad in a plain
white surplice or in an alb and chasuble. Lord Pen
zance, as Dean of the Court of Arches, has now
decided in this case against Mr. Ridsdale upon every
point, and condemned him in the costs of the suit.
The Devil has been causing much stir in orthodox
�4
circles; once he disputed with Michael about the
body of Moses ; now the dispute is as to the reception
of the body of Christ. Mr. Jenkins, of Clifton, was
refused the Sacrament because his faith did not in
clude a belief in the prince of this world. We have
before, in these papers, noted the earlier combats;
how the lay non-believer fought the clerical believer,
and how both appealed to the Bishop of Gloucester
and Bristol; how his lordship corresponded with
both, equivocated lamentably in the witness-box, and
generally discredited himself; how the Sacrament
was refused to Mr. Jenkins by the Rev. Flavel S.
Cook, not because he could not “ be a partaker of the
Lord’s table and of the table of devils,” but because,
while he believed in the Lord, he was sceptical as to
the devil; how Mr. Jenkins prosecuted Mr. Cook, and
how Mr. Jenkins lost his suit. Sir Robert Phillimore,
in the Court of Arches, declared “ the avowed and
persistent denial by Mr. Jenkins of the existence and
personality of the devil did, according to the law of
the Church, as expressed in her canons and rubrics,
so constitute him an evil liver, and a ‘depraver of the
Book of Common Prayer and administration of the
Sacraments,’ as to warrant Mr. Cook in refusing to
administer the Holy Communion to him until he dis
covered or withdrew his statement of unbelief, and
the same consideration applied to the denial of the
eternity of punishment, and punishment for sin in a
future state, by his deliberate exclusion of the pas
sages of Scripture referring to such punishment.”
From this judgment the appeal was made. It ap
pears, according to the statement of Dr. Deane, the
appellant’s counsel, that “ it was not the existence of
a spirit of evil that was denied by the appellant, but
he contended that the commonly received sense of the
words, ‘ personality of the devil ’ was inconsistent
with what was decent and becoming, and was a low
and humiliating view of the subject.” An impersonal
�5
-
spirit of evil seems rather a vague object of faith, but
such is the “ devil,” in whom alone Mr. Jenkins thinks
it “decent and becoming” to believe. As regards
eternal punishment, Mr. Jenkins does not believe in
“ physical torments but—we may presume—in a
spiritual fire and an incorporeal worm. The Archbishop of Canterbury suggested to the counsel that
they might say “ you call upon us not to condemn as
penal the expression of a hope that even the ultimate
pardon of the wicked, who are condemned in the day
of judgment, will be consistent with the will of
Almighty God.” This is putting it softly and deli
cately, and seems to hint at the desire of the Court to
avoid being driven into a corner, and being forced to
declare positively either on the one side or on the other.
The Church of England is in a very awkward posi
tion ; if the decision goes against Mr. Jenkins, then
the whole liberal section will be up in arms; there
will be an outcry against the enforcement of obsolete
superstitions, and the cultured thought outside the
Establishment will turn from it with added disdain
and increased contempt; if, on the other hand, Mr.
Jenkins be re-instated in his position as Communicant,
the High and Low Church parties will unite in a
passionate protest on behalf of their cherished doc
trines, and there will be talk of secession, of 11 a cor
rupted Church,” and of a betrayed faith. Easy-going
folk, like the Archbishop of Canterbury, must be
aghast at the imprudence of zealous believers like
Mr. Cook, who drag such delicate questions into the
full glare of a public court of justice, instead of
leaving them in the decent twilight of doubt and
indecision.
The natural effect of all these law-suits is much
restlessness and unquiet among the more earnest and
orthodox of the clergy. A noteworthy symptom of
this has lately occurred ; the following announcement
appeared in the Morning Post:—“ We understand
�6
that information has come to light which reveals, on
the part of an extreme section of the English clergy,
a direct intrigue with Rome, which only waits for
completion to be publicly announced.” It is sup
posed that the Ritualistic clergy, alarmed and horrified
by the Public Worship Regulation Act, no longer
feel justified in acknowledging allegiance to the
Bishops who accept it, and therefore propose to
secede, to form a separate Church, and to place this
Church under the supremacy of the Roman Pontiff,
owning him as primate. One of the main difficulties
in the way of this hopeful scheme is the Wives
■of the seceding clerics, and the Ritualists therefore
plead to be allowed to keep their wives, “ celibacy
being a matter of discipline, not of doctrine.” They
desire, also, for policy’s sake, to retain the English
Book of Common Prayer, at any rate for the present.
All this being arranged, flocks and pastors are to
•secede and to form an Uniat Church, “ acknowledging
the Pope as their chief Bishop.” It is said, in addi
tion, that the recalcitrant clergy have met together,
and have elected unto themselves Bishops, but it is
not stated by whom the newly-chosen prelates are to
be consecrated, and here some slight difficulty may
presumably be experienced by those who must neces
sarily keep unbroken the Apostolical succession, and
receive the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands.
The scheme scarcely appears to be a promising one,
and at the most could only issue in a feeble move
ment, analogous to that of the Old Catholics in
Germany, who have neither the strength of the great
Roman organisation nor the vitality of independent
and private judgment.
Meanwhile, Rome herself is busily engaged in
spreading wide her nets, and her latest feat has been
to open, with much ostentation, “ the Manchester
Academia of the Catholic Religion.” The object of
this institution is, according to its own rules, “to
�7
promote the study of the Catholic religion, to oppose
the errors of the day, to preserve the young from
the influence of such errors, and to supply a want
experienced among Catholics, viz., that of lectures
upon literary, historical, and scientific subjects in
connection with the Catholic religion. The special
object of the lectures and dissertations is to lay down
solid and true principles in connection with Catholic
doctrine; to demonstrate the harmony between reason
and faith ; to cultivate higher intellectual tastes; and
to provide, as widely as possible, literary and scientific
instruction in harmony with the Catholic religion for
those who desire to continue or perfect their educa
tion.” The way in which reason and faith are to be
harmonised is shown by Cardinal Manning, in his
inaugural address; he takes the case of Galileo.
“ Galileo did not demonstrate. He enunciated his
hypothesis, and that hypothesis was not demonstrated
for a century afterwards. . . . When Newton de
monstrated the truth, he demonstrated nothing to
touch the faith, but as soon as he demonstrated it,
the Church at once, which had carefully guarded the
popular and visible interpretation of the historical
words of scripture, lest, without cause, the mind of
man should be perturbed and doubts should be in
sinuated without necessity and power of solution—
as soon as that demonstration was made, the Church,
in its wisdom, at once declared that the language of
Holy Scripture in this matter of science was thelanguage of man, as it was the language of sense
which we used to this very day.” That is about as
neat a piece of audacious sophistry as could by any
possibility be conceived. Galileo made a scientific
hypothesis, which appeared to be contrary to faith.
Galileo was therefore imprisoned, threatened, forced
to recant; yet is the Church in nowise an enemy of
science, since she accepted the same hypothesis when
demonstrated by Newton. But how can any hypo
�8
thesis be demonstrated, if the thinker is to be thrust
into prison the moment he formulates his thoughts ?
No chance will ever come of demonstrating the truth,
for the thinker will have been forced into recantation
of the hypothesis, and his search will be put an end
to. Newton’s demonstration only became possible
when science had grown too strong to be strangled
by the Church, and the thinker, freed from Church
oppression and from fear of punishment, was able to
study out the problem quietly, and put the hypothesis
of Galileo for ever beyond the death-grip of the
Church. Put into plain language, the words of the
Cardinal mean, “ The Church will always struggle
against every new thought, against every fresh ad
vance, and will only accept a discovery when the
discovery is patent to all and can no longer be denied;
then she will try and manipulate the Bible, so as to
twist its words into some sort of resemblance to the
reality.” Such is the harmony between reason and
faith taught at the new Roman Catholic Academy.
The Burials Bill is likely to be the most prominent
ecclesiastical measure during the present session of
Parliament, and social and theological feeling is
running very high upon it; the Church party are as
obstinate and as unfeeling as ever, carrying on the
struggles of life beside the open grave, and mingling
the sobs of the mourners with the fierce tones of
partisan strife. The Archbishop of Canterbury has
pointed out, that both in Roman Catholic and in
Greek countries the Protestant may bury his dead in
peace, using over the body the words that were dear
in life to the lost one, and which sound homelike and
consoling to those who gather round the tomb.
Surely the grave, at least, might be kept., free from
miserable quarrels, and in death those might sleep
side by side who in the battle of life were marshalled
under opposing flags.
PRINTED BY C. W. REYNELL, LITTLB 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
Signs of the times. March, 1876
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 C.W. Reynell, Little Pulteney Street, 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
1876
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT177
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
Subject
The topic of the resource
Christianity
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 (Signs of the times. March, 1876), 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
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/14c20735dd9486705b8b7711dc8885bd.pdf?Expires=1785369600&Signature=o2RCRfA4%7E5L9DQ1gA07kjPW3se5pK2pFxsR5nwJ1M0Tnp9rtBPldmAuT6SPSbY-NxQh-yanu6rZ%7EvwCEr8QES6FCmPSqgJBM9UeBVJCeHewtphEqvjLY3nqLSsLskIwewHeV73s6PMVjS4nDYk0RUY66pdeZsDZvuBSBF-SahcYC2Vo-8ujFc%7EnsE13veofzUgv7mg6bZzOAOxlmHOxechDEb31t52avWn%7EYsR8j4sNEbf1aB0tcrKUL82MjZjcu2wZ6wvzr7p1FvYMqYyEojZnbddaHRDxgnZmMCdAmkZgg5bcrdkxGU1mDhyIpaUQ724iQyAmbW7kv3fNCET70tA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
112960047acaa48fee1515dba0010ce6
PDF Text
Text
RELIGIOUS IGNORANCE
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
11 THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD, UPPER NORWOOD
LONDON, S.E.
1875.
Price Threepence.
�LONDON:
TRINTED BY C. W. REYNELL, LITTLE TVLTENEY STREET,
HAYMARKET.
�RELIGIOUS
IGNORANCE.
Great deal is continually being said and written
about the duty of instructing the poor and
providing for the spiritual wants of the working
classes. Night schools, Sunday schools, Bible classes,
and periodicals of all kinds are set on foot for the
benefit of the ignorant poor, but nothing is ever said
or written about the expediency of instructing the
educated classes, who, upon the subject of religion,
are frequently as ill-informed, if not quite so ignorant,
as the “common people ” towhose religious improve
ment they sometimes devote themselves with edifying
zeal, recklessly guiding them to the brink of that
capacious ditch destined to receive the blind and
their leaders.
He would be a public benefactor who would under
take the delicate and difficult task of instructing
those who, for thirty years or more, have imagined
themselves well acquainted with the Bible, the church,
and religious truth generally, but who, when weighed
in the balance of first rudiments, are found wanting.
Those who have enjoyed the inestimable advantage
of not having been brought up under the auspices of
any particular sect, are quite amazed, not merely
at the ignorance which prevails among religious
people about the only book they seem to care for, but
at their unwillingness to admit their ignorance and
their disinclination to listen to their superiors in
learning and piety. Bor instance, people will talk
with glib assurance about “ the apocryphal books,”
just as if they knew what the word apocrypha means,
A
�6
Religious Ignorance.
and which the apocryphal books really are. Ask
what they mean, and you will be readily informed
that they (the apocryphal books) are the “ spurious
writings ” which were expunged from the Canon as
uninspired and therefore valueless. Ask if they are
acquainted with the apocryphal books of the New
Testament; you will find that they have never heard
of them, and that they do not wish to hear of them,
being abundantly satisfied with the four Gospels in
their Testament, and certain of their truth. Venture
still further, and tell them that an apocryphal book
does not mean one that is false, but merely one of
which the author is hidden or unknown, and that
therefore many of the books which have been retained
in the Canon are quite as apocryphal as those that
have been rejected, for that neither Jew nor Gentile
can tell who wrote them: you will not be encouraged
to proceed; your listeners do not want to hear any
more ; they see you want to “ shake their faith ” in—
no matter what, provided they believe it.
Great allowance must be made for them. A mind
nurtured in error, entangled with superstition and
clogged by conceit can no more accept a simple truth
than an enfeebled stomach can digest a heavy meal.
A long preparation is necessary before we can suffi
ciently divest' ourselves of our previous prejudices to
take in anything at variance with them. Few people
can, as Madame S wetchine pertinently observes, “bear
the weight of an entire truth,” and still fewer have
the humility to become “ little children,” even for
Christ’s sake. The excessive ignorance of the edu
cated classes in reference to religious matters must
be encountered to be realised. Ignorance, when
acknowledged, may be overcome; but ignorance
combined with conceit is likely to become invincible.
S. Paul accounts for the blindness of the Jews when
“Moses is read,” by saying that “the veil is upon
their heart,” but how thick a veil must be upon the
�Religious Ignorance.
7
heart of Christians when Jesus is read ; for what words
can be more intelligible than those attributed to the
simple and sensible teacher of Gallilee, “ Except ye
be converted and become as little children ye shall
not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” Where are
the Christians who think those words at all applicable
to themselves, who think they need conversion, or
who are humble enough to see that they are the very
people whom Christ would have placed with the
Pharisees among the “ little children ” in the infant
school ? It is only the “ common people ” round the
corner who want taking in hand, instructing and
converting ; they indeed should become “ little
children” and join a Bible class: but the gentle
folks at the manor, like the Pharisees at the Syna
gogue, are safe on the pinnacle of their self-suffi
ciency, giving thanks to God that they are “ not as
other men,” misinformed, unenlightened, credulous,
irrational; they have got hold of the real thing, and
can go on their way, rejoicing that “ wisdom is justi
fied of her children; ” not indeed that they know
what those words mean or that they might be more
accurately rendered. Not even an angel from heaven
could persuade such people that they have anything
to learn concerning what they call Bible truth.
It by no means detracts from the merit of the dis
courses attributed to Jesus, to be told that it was
generally the lower orders, “the common people” who
“heard him gladly,” and the Pharisees who despised
him. The Pharisees of old, like the orthodox of to
day, were full of their own notions, their own tradi
tions, their own doctrines, customs, ceremonies, and
self-complacency. The carpenter’s son should have
joined them, attended their Bible class, and accepted
their exposition of God’s word, instead of striking
out a path for himself.
It was precisely the educated Pharisee who had
not the wit to see that a man might deviate materially
�8
•
Religious Ignorance.
from, the path of orthodoxy and yet be a son of
■wisdom and a worthy inheritor of one of the “ many
mansions ” of the Father’s house. They were far
too narrow-minded and ceremonial to appreciate such
an unconventional character as Christ, who set times
and seasons, forms and ceremonies at naught, praying
and preaching when and where he chose, and eating
and drinking with those whom the Pharisees would
have scorned to salute in the market-place; but
wisdom was “justified of her children.”
To instruct the ignorant, unruly children of the
supine poor, is a most irksome and unthankful task,
but to enlighten the cultivated members of fashionable
congregations would be an incomparably more diffi
cult and disheartening undertaking, for their pastors
have laboured so sedulously to keep them in error
that they are almost incapable of giving truth a
hearing.
“ Wisdom,” says the worldly-wise writer of Eccle
siastes, “ is good with an inheritance,” but of course
if folly bring in a larger income wisdom may go to the
wall, and as “the inheritance” in traditional Chris
tianity is unfortunately contingent upon the due pro
mulgation of numerous time-honoured errors called
truths, the poor pastor must either uphold them or
forfeit his bread and butter.
A fair proportion of the clergy, including even
dissenters, are extremely well-informed upon many
religious and biblical matters ; they know for instance,
that the book of Ecclesiastes just quoted, is, in the
legitimate sense of the word, apocryphal; and that
Solomon, its reputed author, is the very last man
likely to have written it. Many of them believe in
Noah’s Ark just as little as Catholic priests do in
the liquifaction of the blood of S. Januarius. They
preach indeed to their hearers, but are careful not to
teach them anything which might open their eyes and
set them thinking; they know too well what the
�Religious Ignorance.
9
effect of thinking has been in their own case to run
any risk with their seat-holders !
Those who combine dense ignorance with extreme
conceit—a combination very often met with among
the “ Lord’s people ” in country towns—are beyond
the reach of sound instruction, and must be given
up as too “ wise in their own conceits ” to be taught
anything at variance with them ; but those who are
unaware of their own ignorance, who really do not
know how very little knowledge they possess, and
who are designedly kept in leading strings by those
who watch for their souls “ as they that must give
account,” and who guard them with tender solicitude
against the baneful influence of inquiry and common
sense; those are the people so sincerely to be pitied,
and how to get at them is the great difficulty.
Hemmed in by prejudice, early impressions, super
stitious fears, and vigilant relatives, their intellect
has never fair play, for they never venture to think
for themselves.
Some time ago a sermon was preached by a curate
one Sunday morning in a London church, the rector
being absent. The text selected was unfortunately
“ There are three that bear witness in earth, the
spirit, and the water and the blood.” In the evening
of the same day the rector preached from the same
text.
Alluding to the new translation of the Bible then
contemplated, he said, “ the words I have taken for
my text must certainly go, as they are of no earlier
date than the sixteenth century.” How if all
religious guides would frankly impart the knowledge
they have obtained as did that rector, now a dis
tinguished but sorely censured Broad-churchman, we
should less frequently have to deplore the ignorance
of the people and the insincerity of the clergy. Of
course, many of the parsons know perfectly well
upon what a very uncertain foundation the whole
�io
Religious Ignorance,
fabric called Christianity really rests, and what
childish notions are afloat concerning the meaning
of the curious and interesting collection of oriental
books they get their living by “ expounding,” accord
ing to those childish notions. They must follow in
the footsteps of those who preceded them and keep
repeating the same platitudes, as feast after feast of
the ecclesiastical year comes round. Those clergy
men are not upon a bed of roses; their position, not
merely before God but even in their own eyes, makes
them wince. Time was when they firmly believed in
the inspiration of the Bible and could preach from a
spurious text with zeal and unction; that was the
time when they knew very little and thought still less.
Subsequent research and reflection have convinced
them of the purely human origin of the whole of it;
a discovery which enhances rather than diminishes
their appreciation of it, but which materially inter
feres with their theological views, and places them
in a most unenviable position in regard to their
flock. Too old to embrace any other profession and
with probably several children to educate, they must
stay where they are and console themselves with the
hope that they are more sinned against than sinning.
No help can come from the clergy taken as a body;
justifiable adherence to loaves and fishes silences the
few who could speak out if they dared, and unjusti
fiable ignorance and arrogance silences the many who
give themselves no trouble to ascertain truth, who
are too proud to profit by the literary labours of
others; or, if by some chance they hit upon such a
fact for example, as the culpable substitution of the
word “ scapegoat ” for the “ Azazel ” of the original,
Lev. xvi. 8, they are too weak to bear the weight of
it—for it is heavy! Well might the grave and
sensible Channing write, “ An Established Church is
the grave of intellect,” and well might Cobbett ask
“Is it worth one pound ? ” remarks wrung from
�Religious Ignorance.
11
those who “ meditate upon these things ” and would
gladly make their “profitingappear to all ” so that
“wisdom might be justified other children;” but
how is it to be done ?
The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat, no
hope is to be expected from the clergy, the wise
among them are—and mean to continue—wise for
themselves as Solomon says, suffering fools “ gladly ”
as S. Paul did, and dispensing the weekly portion of
milk and water to deluded hearers who esteem them
selves highly privileged to be allowed to pay for it 1
When Jesus preached the famous sermon attributed
to him, not a single conversion is reported to have
taken place—it was so far a failure; but when the
contemptible coward Peter delivered his involved and
clumsy discourse, we are required to believe that
3,000 souls were added to the Church; and “ as it was
in the days of the Son of Man, so it is now.” Fools
have rushed in where angels fear to tread, contemptible
cowards are sitting in brave old Moses’ seat, and “ the
end,” alas, “ is not by-and-by.”
Humble students whose pecuniary position is fortu
nately uninfluenced by the free expression of their
opinions, dare to doubt whether Hebrew really was
the language in which the Old Testament was origi
nally written, whether it really is of such early date
as is commonly supposed, and whether we are justi
fied in assuming that ancient Jews were so much
more trustworthy than modern Jews ;—but religious
people, who never study at all, have no such doubts
—they know all about the authorship, language, date,
translation, and meaning of every word in the volume.
They have the light of faith, the wisdom which is
“ not of this world,” while the poor student is an
infidel, whose wisdom “ is folly before God.” Impos
sible to convince them that their appreciation of the
Bible would in no wise be diminished by a better
acquaintance with its history. Useless to tell them
�e
12
*
v*
"
.
'
Religious Ignorance.
that neither Moses nor Jesus ever said a word about
the duty of reading the Bible, and that, as it has not
pleased God to preserve one single letter of the origi
nals of either Old or New Testament, but has suffered
the entire collection of the so-called Holy Scriptures
to disappear from the face of the earth, it does not
seem probable that He thought them necessary to
salvation; they have made up their minds that they
are necessary to salvation, and most cheerfully do they
contribute towards the nine thousand pounds which
are annually spent in England for the furtherance of
the spread of the Word of God among nations who
have not yet had the privilege of possessing the
Blessed Book. Not until people are brought to under
stand that they could love and adore God as fervently
and serve their neighbour as zealously, without believ
ing in a collection of oriental fables, which have no
more claim to be called the Word of God than any
other allegorical or astronomical tales—not until they
can be persuaded that many who have long ago
abandoned all belief in the inspiration of the Bible
are nevertheless as devoted to the practice of prayer
as themselves—have quite as lively a hope in the
immortality of the soul, and whose conduct to their
neighbour is characterised by a far more comprehen
sive and exalted charity than their own—not until
then will their minds be able to bear the weight of
those truths which have been so long withheld from
them, and not until then shall we realise the full force
and practical application of those suggestive words,
“ Wisdom is justified of her children.”
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
Religious ignorance
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 12 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed by C.W. Reynell, Little Pulteney Street, 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
1875
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT145
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
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 (Religious ignorance), 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
Religion
Conway Tracts
Religion
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/ce128bd3629bb61c70b688577e7b91a6.pdf?Expires=1785369600&Signature=j4CoxVvj8O6Ou0ny0z21N-%7Eim-axSSLl%7Ea%7EDcExUmY95tf2MIpeQcbChyPplqaxvpqd-I81dhhRtsAIf476nyeq3ZPO2ZHlHdDksRR1PPpjQsLZNwn1R0na1scG%7Ecq59fGGHlbyk-C5hpepIFkqq%7EnWGs1B%7EZJbmGIZ5KrMvkJfLsCMkx7Tfz9zfHxxBudS6aQpOduFP5O8PS6gsJrJV1YPvb5D-pvQqf-WB9ssJ%7EXR7IGViu1jZicnboo41hoSAd8drMCCFWpKQNf1xz6KlhIqEohk%7EtlrLOsoCb0aWql0iCh4-HEowK1QLza8jBh-rku-GBJ8MRLf1VWRiKrPfCQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
a155657640bfcbe5c446964e3bcfd138
PDF Text
Text
Ci log.
PLEAS FOR FREE INQUIRY:
FROM THE POINT OF VIEW,
(1.) OF
DUTY,
(2.) OF
INCLINATION,
BY
“M. A.”
TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
MOUNT PLEASANT, RAMSGATE.
Price, Sixpence.
��PLEAS EOB EBEE INQUIBY.
-------- ♦--------
i.
“ TF we were to begin to reason upon miracles and
JL to inquire about them,” said a young lady, in
my hearing, a few evenings ago, “ we might possibly
end by disbelieving them.” “And, therefore, it is
much better not to do anything of the kind,” added
her mother; and this sentiment, I could not but ob
serve, was received with marked approval by those
present.
Not long since a gentleman of my acquaintance, a
man gifted with strong reasoning powers, and with
a great thirst for truth on most subjects, happened to
take up a volume of “ Colenso on the Pentateuch” in
my library. “ Have you read the work ?” I asked.
“Oh dear, no!” he replied, “I am not anxious to
cloud my belief by any such investigations.” *
It may seem almost puerile to make a note of such
observations as these; for do they not indicate a
frame of mind common to nine-tenths of mankind,
in and out of these islands ? But it is, on that very
account, of importance to consider what is the real
meaning which underlies them. They can have but
one meaning. “ In religious matters it is much better
for us to cleave to the belief which has been instilled
into us in our infancy, and to make no inquiries.”
* According to one wlio declares he knew him well, the
great Faraday said, “I prostrate my reason in this matter
(i.e. religion), for if I applied to it the same process of
reasoning which I use in matters of science, I should be an
unbeliever.”—Letter in the Spectator, Feb. 1870.
�4
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
111 take my creed from the parson, as I take my coat
from the tailor,” said Goldsmith, expressing, in rather
coarse terms, the same idea.
Now, if this view of onr duty with regard to reli
gious inquiries be a correct one, it will be well to
notice some of the consequences to which it must
necessarily lead. All missionary enterprizes ought to
cease. The very ground of their existence is com
pletely cut away. You could not consistently tender
the gospel to a Hindoo, for he might reply to you, in
your own words, “ In religious matters it is best for
me to cleave to what I have been taught,” or, even if
he were not likely to make so foolish a reply, you,
who have asserted the truth of that proposition, are
bound to leave him alone, or to give up the truth of
the proposition. If your views had been held three
centuries ago there could not possibly have been a
Reformation. Nay, Christianity itself must have
perished in its cradle. For, granted that certain
startling miracles were wrought, of a nature to con
vince those who witnessed them of the truth of that
revelation, without further inquiry, it is not pretended
that the witnesses of such miracles were numerous.
They were not exhibited before the whole of the hu
man race then in being, nor (according to the Pro
testant view) before many successive generations.
The time, therefore, soon came when it was requisite
to tender the Christian system to the Heathen, as a
system to be judged of on its merits. Some sort
of inquiry, some act of judgment, however rude, was
necessary on the part of those who, otherwise than
through the direct operation of these miracles, em
braced the new religion; and embracing a new religion
involved the throwing off of their old one. In other
words, they did not cling to what had been taught
them. If they, and every one else, had acted in the
way my young lady friend's mother would have all
to act, it would be difficult to say what our creed
�Pleas for .Free Inquiry.
5
would be in the present day. It certainly would not
be Christianity.
At this point some may be inclined to ask, “For
whom can this self-evident reasoning be intended ? ”
My answer is, “For nearly every one.” For, in fact, as
I have already said, and as is quite patent, ninety-nine
out of every hundred men and women, in the present
day, do act and think in regard to religion precisely in
this way, and in no other. While no one would deem
it necessary to warn an intelligent man, such as the
friend who came into my library, not to take up with
a conclusion about the ballot, or the purchase system
in the army, or the existence of the gigantic Moa, or
Spirit-rapping, or the Tichborne case, without some
consideration, or in consequence of what his parents
or teachers had told him, it is clear that in the matter
of religion the vast majority of mankind are mere
children. They seem to lose their heads whenever
that great subject comes uppermost. Men who would
not put a hundred pounds into ■ a railway without
long and laborious investigations as to its position
and prospects, will embark what they themselves
deem their spiritual all in a system into the founda
tions of which they have never taken the trouble to
inquire, while others actually shun any such inquiry.
There are some defences of such a course, which
deserve attention. One is the plea of authority, and
would probably be put forward in some such terms
as these :—“ In a world where the bulk of mankind
are necessarily engaged in the work of providing for
themselves and their families, it is unavoidable that
many beliefs should be held, which nevertheless the
mass of mankind lack the time or the capacity for
verifying for themselves. We believe that water is
made up of oxygen and hydrogen, we believe that
the blood circulates, that Sirius is so many billions of
miles from the earth, that the next total eclipse of
the sun will be visible in London in such and such a
�6
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
year, without ever having investigated the truth of
these statements for ourselves. We believe in these
things because they have received a general consensus,
founded on the labours of capable men, to whom
civilized mankind has tacitly entrusted the task of
inquiring into them. And there are other conclu
sions which we accept for a like reason, not because
they are undisputed, but because they are the results
of what we consider the best obtainable opinions;
the advantages of Free Trade, for example, or the
efficacy of vaccination. Well, for similar reasons,
among others, we believe in our religion. We know
that for eighteen centuries it has been held to be true
by-the ablest and most virtuous of mankind. We
know that for the same length of time it has been
exposed to the criticism of the acutest intellects and
the assaults of the most determined opponents with
out, as far as we can judge, its foundations having
been in any way loosened, and we think this reason
a sufficient one. ”
Upon this, it must be observed.
(1.) That the beliefs here sought to be compared
with religious belief differ from it in some important
particulars. It is not, speaking roughly, likely that
any great harm will befall a man in this world, and
it will hardly be contended that harm might befall
him in another world, owing to his holding, on the
authority of a great number of other people, a
scientific or philosophical, or economical opinion
which afterwards proved to be erroneous. Though,
even on these points, cases might easily be put, in
which it would be his duty to verify as far as he is
able, his opinions. And it is to be observed how,
when the idea is once started that some evil effects
may possibly follow in this life, upon any received
conclusion or established practice, people will eagerly
bestir themselves and enquire into and discuss the
grounds for its acceptance. The recent agitation
�Pleas for Free Inquiry.
7
against Vaccination is an example of this. But with
regard to religion, the case is quite one sui
generis. The Roman Catholic will hardly admit
that the Protestant can be saved from excruciating
and everlasting torture; and the orthodox Pro
testant is inclined to look with very much the
same sort of eye upon the Roman Catholic.
*
And if it be said that this is putting the matter too
strongly, this much may be affirmed with confidence,
that the believer in each religion deems that religion
to offer to such as embrace it the best chance of
escaping so frightful a future. And this consideration
attaches at once a most important consequence to
the act of belief in religious matters. I will take fit,
if you please, on authority, that the water in my well
is composed of oxygen and hydrogen, and will
continue to drink the water without further inquiry.
But the case is different with regard to a plant or
vegetable which is declared by whole nations to
produce, after a certain period of indulgence in it,
some frightful malady. The fact that a number of
other people have been eating the plant in question
won’t satisfy me; especially if these people have
gone off, one after another, to a distant country
where I must needs lose sight of them. Common
prudence would, in such a case, dictate the necessity
of analyzing its ingredients.
(2.) This is, to say the least, a very dangerous
argument for protestants to depend upon. It has, in
fact, been extensively used against them. If acted
upon in the sixteenth century, it would, as I said
just now, have rendered the Reformation impossible,
and if pressed home at the present day, it would
make the holding of the reformed faith a piece of
* The Dean of Exeter (Dr. Boyd) is reported by the Western
Morning News to have recently expressed himself in these
terms, “No one can charitably entertain the hope that a mere
Roman Catholic can be saved.”
�8
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
dangerous imprudence. There are, at this hour,
probably about twice as many Roman Catholics as
Protestants in the world, and looking back on the last
‘ nineteen centuries, an immeasurably greater number
of the former than of the latter have passed through
existence. In the list of learned men, men of science,
great writers, great thinkers, profound philosophers,
who have flourished throughout that period, at least
two Catholics might be found for every Reformer.
So that the argument from authority might carry
some of those who hold it a great deal further than
they intend. If we are to take refuge in a crowd,
to save ourselves from the trouble of thinking, it
would be advisable to take refuge in the largest
crowd.
(3.) That a belief is and has been held by a large
portion of mankind, learned as well as simple, may
be put forward as a plea for acquiescing in it, till it
shall have been shown to be unreliable, but cannot
for a moment be accepted as a proof of its truth.
There are few beliefs which have commanded more
universal assent down to a comparatively recent
period of the world’s history than that in witchcraft;
and the same may be said of the existence of ghosts
and of fairies, in various shapes, and the divine or
prophetic character of dreams, of the ideas that the
world was flat and that antipodes were inconceivable,
that a body could not act where it was not, and
many others. Yet there are few educated persons who
cling to these notions now-a-days. If the upholders
of the “ authority ” argument be right, then those
who burnt witches two centuries ago were abundantly
justified in doing so. But we believe them to have
been certainly wrong in their conclusions.
.
(4.) The task of verifying a Divine Revelation
ought not, one would imagine, to be attended with
the same difficulties as the verification of abstruse
mathematical or physical or economic truths, difficulties
�Pleas for Free Inquiry.
9
which are indeed such as to oblige the mass of man
kind to take these upon authority. For it is of the
very essence of a revelation—not, perhaps, that all
its parts should be easy to understand—but at any
rate that the grounds for its acceptance as a whole
should be intelligible to those to whom it is addressed j
that its claim to come from God should not be capable
of being decided upon only by philosophers and
learned men, but should be within reach of the
ordinary mind. For, if the inquiry be so complex,
either from the contradictory character of the evidence,
or from other circumstances, that the general run of
men are quite unable to judge for themselves; if
they have to fall back upon the assurances of experts;
then, even supposing that all these latter were
agreed—which is the direct contrary of the fact in
this instance—we should never have grounds for
believing in Christianity which would not fall very
far short of the “ sure and certain hope,” the con
viction of its truth, which is, I understand, necessary
to be attained to by the mind in order that we may
participate in the benefits of the revelation. We
should be forced to admit that as these wise and
learned persons have been constantly mistaken in
other conclusions of theirs, in arriving at which,
their minds were much less likely to be biassed by
education and habit, so they might have gone equally
wrong on this occasion. The case would be different,
if the truth of revelation were demonstrable. Then,
the ablest minds might alone be capable of working
out the demonstration, and the masses would be
justified in taking it from them, as we see them do
very properly in scientific matters, every day. But
this, confessedly, is not the character of the Christian
proofs, which are not susceptible of demonstration,
either by the learned alone, or by any, but which
require an exercise of the judgment and a weighing
of pros and cons, such as are evidently not beyond the
�io
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
reach of ordinary humanity.
Bishop Butler, the
greatest of modern Christian apologists, admits this.
“ The general proof of natural religion and of Christ
ianity lies level to common man, even those whose
time is chiefly taken up with providing the con
veniences, perhaps necessaries, of life.” Part II., c. 6.
Butler. was far too able a man to use this argument
from authority.
Seeing, then, that such exceptional interests are at
stake for ourselves, that the above plea from authority
is dangerous for protestants and doubtful for all in
religious matters, that we must always be uncertain
as to the truth of what we fancy ourselves to hold in
such matters, so long as we have not looked into them
for ourselves, and, further, that there is no such
difficulty in this inquiry as can be urged as a reason
for not undertaking it, it would seem that some case
may already have been made out for inducing us to
inquire.
But there are some other arguments which we hear
used in favour of taking our religion as it comes to
us, and not probing it too closely, which must be
briefly noticed. Here is one. “ My belief such as it
is, makes me happy and comfortable : why seek to
disturb it ? If you should succeed in doing so, you
have nothing to offer me in its place.” Reasoning of
this kind, if indeed it can be called reasoning, and
almost every other plea which is advanced against
free inquiry in religious matters, labours under this
capital defect, that it entirely ignores any difference
between what is True and what is False, and the
importance to man (not to use a stronger term) of dis
tinguishing, as far as he is able, the one from the other.
Those who put forward these pleas, founded on such
a vicious basis, seem not to be aware that they are
mere announcements of selfish and stolid contentment
with what Bacon called “ Idols.” They are the voice
of the moral sluggard, “You have woke me too soon,
�Pleas for Free Inquiry.
11
I must slumber again ”—slumber on peaceably in the
enjoyment of my dreams, whatever they may be, and
which are, at any rate, more enjoyable than your
realities! They are the last expression of human
cowardice : the cry of a civilized being afraid to find
himself alone with his own reason. They have,
underlying them, a principle which, if admitted, would
be fatal to all human progress: this same notion that
man is not bound to search after Truth, for its own
sake and regardless of consequences; but that he may
acquiesce ih shams, or what he has no ground to
suppose other than shams, provided such a course
should seem most conducive to his own individual
comfort.
Can any one, who has glanced at the history of
man, doubt that such a view, if acted upon generally,
would be fatal to the development of his higher
faculties'? From “the first syllable of recorded time”
to the present hour, the world has been one battle
field of truth against error. Every truth that has
been established has been a fresh position won and
kept in the upward progress of the race from the
rudest barbarism to our existing point of civilization.
The first assailants of error, the benefactors of society
whose names we revere, have fought in the van, with
a motto on their shields the exact opposite to that
of these reasoners. They have never thought of
their own personal ease, which forms the essence of
this plea. They have almost always had some kind
of martyrdom to undergo; such of them as have been
religious reformers, in cases where they have not
suffered the comparatively easy fate of being despised
as visionaries, have come forward, only to endure
vexations, to be tortured, to be put to death, as
enemies of their kind. The great scientific and social
and political and religious discoveries which have
been made in every age have been made by those
who steadily adhered to the principle that Truth is
�12 '
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
to be sought for, for its own sake and regardless of
consequences. And there is no other method accord
ing to which such discoveries can, as a general rule,
be made.
Does not this look as if the duty of searching after
Truth is cast upon us ? And is there anything in the
nature of religion to except it from such a law ? I
should think the presumption is quite the other way.
I can conceive many generations of men getting on
pretty well, who yet held—as, in point of fact, many
generations did hold—that the earth was a flat,
stationary body, with the heavenly luminaries set in a
concave dome above it. Though they would neces
sarily be all the better for learning the truth on that
and kindred subjects, since no error of any kind can
be shown to have benefited man in the long run.
But is there not something absolutely rotten in the
condition of those who contentedly jog on with what
may be entirely false notions of their Deity ? Assur
edly, it is of as much consequence to the human race
to acquire, as far as it is able to do so, correct notions
about Him, as about the physical configuration of the
world it inhabits. And if people don’t choose to
inquire, they cannot make sure that their notions on
this head may not be deplorably false ones.
To the objection, “ You have nothing to offer me in
the place of my religion,” the same remarks will
apply, as to the “ What’s the odds so long as you are
happy ! ” cry. It is unworthy of being seriously put
forward, unless, indeed, Truth is not to be sought, for
its own sake, and self-gratification is to be the
accepted guide to all our conclusions. But, from this
point of view, that of the individual and his interests,
the objection merits a moment’s attention, in conse
quence of a misconception which prevails extensively
on the subject of the origin of religious beliefs. It is
true that the question, “ What can you give me,” &c.,
is a difficult one to answer off-hand; and for this
�Pleas for Free Inquiry.
13
reason, that religions always undergo a process of
development. They never spring into being, com
plete at all points. They never assume even a rudi
mentary form till the creeds which they are destined
gradually to replace have begun to be discredited in
the popular estimation, and in the same ratio as
*
these latter lose their hold over the masses, so do the
former generally gain in power and in consistency,
and push out fresh formulas and new dogmas,
cautiously at first, then with increasing boldness.
This seems to be the general law, and the conversion
of whole tribes by violent means to ready-made reli
gions is not an exception; only, a fresh force is put
in exercise. The bed of a river which overflows a
plain has been formed in the same way as the beds of
other rivers. It is a great mistake, for instance,
and yet one commonly made, to suppose that the
religion which we know under the name of Christianity
came at once into being, full-grown, like Eve from
the side of Adam, or Minerva from the head of Jove.
* In other words, they must supply a want; and such a
want may exist in nations which are not themselves clearly
conscious of it. Such seems to have been the condition of the
civilized world when the Christian religion made its appear
ance. It seems too as if, besides this, a certain state of the
moral atmosphere were necessary in order that a religion
should make rapid progress among those who were not born
in it; just as a fever will run through a whole population at
one time, but not at another. It may be doubted whether
Mahomet would have met with equal success if he had
appeared two centuries earlier or later than he did, or whether
Wesley would produce any great effect now-a-days, on a
population not much differing from that to which he
preached. We are not entitled to suppose that Christianity
would not have succeeded, at whatever time it might have
arisen (for, in this argument, we are not denying its divine
character) but we may point to the admitted fact that savage
nations are never converted now-a-days in a mass, as they
were in the early centuries, even long after the age of miracles
had passed. Their want is presumably the same; the
atmosphere seems to have changed.
�14
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
It took, on the contrary, a long time, even on the
showing of its orthodox apologists, to elaborate it
into a system. Similarly, what we know as Protes
tantism, or the reformed doctrine, was not at once
ready to hand for the benefit of those who had been
brought to entertain doubts of the teachings of
Roman Catholicism; but, first of all, that teaching
loosened its hold on the mind, and then a system to
supply its place was slowly manufactured. We have
reason to suppose that a similar law would govern the
rise of any religions which might displace the existing
ones. On the hypothesis that a miraculous revelation
should come to be generally disbelieved in, the
natural tendencies of the human mind would oblige
it to found a new system of worship in its place, and
we could not tell beforehand what it would be, in all
its details, till the hypothesis was realized. A transi
tion from an old creed to a new one necessarily entails
great misery on a large number of people, but this
usually falls most heavily upon one generation—
the generation which is losing its hold on the old
belief without having definitely constructed a new
one. Every great change, upheaval, war, revolu
tion, pestilence, potato-famine, the introduction of
fresh machinery, or improved modes of locomotion,
inflicts similar misery upon numbers of persons,
without any seeming compensation to themselves, but
often for the general benefit, as becomes apparent,
when things have settled down in the new order.
*
On the supposition then—an erroneous one as I
think, but I am willing to make it, in order to put.
* Any amount of illustrations might be given of the state
ment in the text. Since writing the above, I find that Mr
Pell, speaking on the Metric Bill in the House of Commons
(on Wednesday, July 26) remarked, “No doubt the present
generation would suffer from a change of weights and
measures ; but we ought to consider those who come after us,
and who would find it absolutely necessary to adopt the
metric system. ”
�Pleas for Free Inquiry.
*5
this plea for inquiry as disadvantageous^ for the
pleader as possible—that there is nothing at all to
offer to the individual, in place of his existing
religious belief—and noticing, by the way, that he
could not cease to hold it, till he became convinced
that it was untrue, in which case he clearly ought no,
longer to hold it, I think it cannot be doubted that
as soon as this disbelief became general, a fresh
religious creed would arise for the use of the human
race, and that creed would be the work of the
race itself, acting it may be through the medium of
many powerful or (which is less likely now-a-days,
but still possible) of one pre-eminent mind. And if
what these people would call the worst should happen,,
if the Christian dogmas on examination should prove
unworthy of credence, would it not, I ask, be farnobler, more befitting a man, even if not more con
ducive in the end to our own happiness, to take our
part in the contest against error, and our share in the
task of freeing the human mind from its fetters,, even
though ours should be the generation upon which the
bulk of the mental anguish caused by the change
should fall, rather than to draw the bed-clothes over
our heads with the childish idea that we shall thereby
escape from confronting the spirit of free inquiry ?
Our experience of life, if it be not altogether distorted
by selfishness, shows us that there are occasions when,
if we would play the part of men, we must needs
sacrifice life and fortune, and even our good name..
And shall it be said that if a similar and much higher
call arise, we are to decline to sacrifice what we ad
mit to be only our prepossessions 1 Religions may
be kept up, have indeed been kept up, for a long time,
for many centuries, on this basis, viz., that it is ex
ceedingly uncomfortable to make a change at all, and
that in case of changing, there is no other ready-made
edifice of dogmas at hand, to step into. But it is.
inevitable, that as knowledge grows, such a basis as
this must tumble to pieces.
�16
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
.One more plea may be noticed. There are people who
will say to you quite seriously and sincerely, “We feel
that our religion is true. We are as sure of its truth,
without further inquiry, as we are of our own existence.
Dr Arnold, if I remember rightly, lent his authority to
this wonderful delusion. It is related of him. I hope
incorrectly, that he advised a young man, who hesitated
about taking orders in consequence of some doubts
he had conceived, in these terms :—“ Preach Chris
tianity and you will feel that it is true.” Here,
again, we have the real character of Truth and
Falsehood utterly ignored : for, what is this but
to say that a persistent habit of looking at things
in one particular light, and carefully excluding from
the mind every counteracting influence, will en
gender an impression of their truth ? This is an un
doubted fact, and it is no less a fact that such a
course is in the highest degree immoral and vitiat
ing to the mind. Such a plea, equally valid for
every religion that has ever been taught under the
sun, does not merit further consideration. But, as
Habit has been mentioned, it may be well to observe
that its enormous influence has scarcely received
adequate notice, even from competent writers and
reasoners on theological topics. Perhaps, they have
rather shunned the subject. What the force of habit
and association, even in the case of the highest minds
is, may be realized, if we consider the well-known
phenomenon of the geographical distribution of
religious beliefs. If a visitor from another sphere
were informed of the various creeds which prevail
among men, if he were told that there were some people
who believed in one God, and others who believed
in two antagonistic gods, others again who worshipped
three gods in one, others who had no precise notion
of a personal Deity, and who held the transmigra
tion of souls; if he were further advised of the
numerous sub-sections into which each of these
�Pleas for Free Inquiry.
ly
great religions is divided; his first impression would
possibly be that they were scattered over the world
in such a way that in the same family one member
would be found believing A, another, B, a third, C;
or that the learned throughout the world as a
general rule held A, and that B, C, D, &c., were
divided among the unlearned, according to the cir
cumstances and education of each. He might, I
think, be somewhat surprised, till he had considered
the matter a little more closely, to learn that the
divisions were vertical instead of horizontal; that
whole wedges of mankind might so to speak be cut
out of the body of humanity impregnated with much
the same belief from the top to the bottom of the
mental scale; that creeds were for the most part
mere accidents of birth ; that by the transfer of the
parents of Bossuet to England, in all probability
an eloquent protestant apologist would have been
given to us, and that similarly in Whitfield, edu
cated at Madrid, we should have seen a powerful
Jesuit preacher. Habit and association of course
account for this. From this cause, there are immense difficulties to contend with in setting up a
new religion; once established, if not extirpated
by violence, its growth is for a long time only a
question of the propagation of the species. It has
often occurred to me that if an experiment could be
made, in an uninhabited planet, of starting a race of
beings with, say Pickwick for their inspired volume
(and it would not be difficult to give an allegorical
interpretation to its characters and incidents) mighty
nations, most highly civilized, might flourish for
many generations, which should cherish this same
Pickwick as a divine message and their dearest
possession. Thousands of excellent, able and devout
men would derive happiness and consolation from
its pages and die with the volume clasped to their
breasts. Many thousands of others would be put
�18
Pleas for Free Inquiry,
to death for questioning its divine claims : oceans
of blood and millions of treasure would be poured
out in wars between nations who took up with
conflicting views of the character of the younger
Weller; and as scientific truth, or in other words
God’s own undisputed truth, insensibly made its
way, and these horrors were in some degree miti
gated, a deadly hatred would still exist between
those who sided with the “ Eatanswill Gazette” and
those who swore by the “Independent;” and no person
who did not hold the prevalent and consequently
orthodox view about the journey to Bath or the
imprisonment in the Fleet would have a chance of
being elected to a seat in a popular legislature.
In short, all but a few would feel that Pickwick was
divine, and that it and it alone supplied all their
highest wants. While on the subject of Habit, I can
*
not but notice that Mr Mozley in his very able Bampton
Lectures, has spoken of what he calls the Historical
Imagination, as throwing difficulties in the way of a
belief in miracles. By the term, he understands
the power of realizing the past, so as to figure
oneself moving among its scenes and its actors, as
if it were the present, and when the past is so
apprehended (he says) miracles are realized too and,
* This illustration may seem far-fetched. But surely all
but a few who are past arguing with, will admit that we have
a parallel case in the Song of Solomon. When we find pas
sage after passage such as this, “By night on my bed I
sought him whom my soul loveth, ” “ I sought him but I found
him not,” &c., labelled after this fashion, “ The Church’s
fight and victory in temptation,” when “How beautiful are
thy feet with shoes, 0 prince’s daughter ! the joints of thy
thighs are like jewels. . . . thy navel is like a round goblet
. . . thy belly like a heap of wheat . . . thy neck as a tower
of ivory,” and a great deal more to the same effect, is taken
to be “A further description of the Church’s graces,” and
when we call to mind that in times past thousands of good
men have had their happiness sensibly increased by reading
these words, and would have cheerfully submitted to a slow
�Pleas for Free Inquiry.
19
being realized, they excite the same sort of surprise
and incredulity as would be occasioned to the mind
if we pictured them as occurring in the present day.
This is very true. And there is also a kind of
imagination, which may be described as the imagi
nation produced by habit and association, and which
causes a feeling of surprise and incredulity to be
engendered, when we figure to ourselves something
as being possibly true, which conflicts with the
ideas which have grown with our growth and form,
as it were, a part of ourselves, and which we see
to be held by all or nearly all around us. And
this acts as strongly and in the same manner as,
though in this case in a different direction to, the
same sort of faculty set face to face with events
conflicting with our daily experience. If, for example,
we permit ourselves to picture Christ as not having
risen from the dead, and ascended bodily into
Heaven ■, if we indulge in the thought that the
evidence for those events would certainly not satisfy
us if we found it in Herodotus or Livy; these
ideas are at once confronted by the whole force
of the Imagination of Habit. Every lesson learnt
at a mother’s knee, every sermon we have heard,
every Christian death-bed we have attended or read
fire the impugner of their divine inspiration, anything in the
way of allegorical rendering and book-worship will be con
ceivable.
I remember to have met somewhere with a religious
biography of a Mrs Adelaide Newton. This lady writes that
on a bed of sickness she was greatly comforted by Solomon’s
Song. The text, “ His legs are as pillars of marble, set upon
sockets of fine gold, ” she found particularly sustaining. In a
Life of the Rev. Mr M‘Cheyne, of Dundee, which I have lit
upon in the house where I am writing, I find in one of his
letters the following passage, “ I have a very dear boy in my
parish who is dying just now. He said to me the other day,
“ I have just been feeding for some days upon the words you
gave me, ” (singularly enough they are the same) “ His legs
are like pillars of marble set upon sockets of fine gold.”
�20
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
of, the massive cathedral with its “ storied windows
richly dight, casting a dim religious light,” the troops
of ■ rustic worshippers flocking down the sweet
summer lane to the sound of the village bells,
memories of our friends and relatives and records
of multitudes of other persons who have gone
through life clinging to the doctrines of the resur
rection and ascension as their greatest happiness
and consolation, visions of the catacombs, of the
early martyrs in their coats of pitch, of modern
missionaries in far-off lands, eighteen centuries look
ing down upon us from the Cross and the open
sepulchre ; all these, and countless similar images
crowd immediately into the mind, not indeed to
be separately apprehended and distinguished, but
in insensible combination and often with irresistible
effect. And the effect is to produce a shudder at
the bare notion that all these lessons and scenes
and memories and recorded saintly actions should
have their foundation in a delusion, that such
numbers of mankind (and this strikes us particularly)
should have been allowed, and should still be
allowed, to go wrong; a sense of pain and con
sequent incredulity is engendered in regard to the
picture which we first summoned up. “ As it is
the nature of doubt,” says Hume, “to cause a varia
tion in the thought, and transport us suddenly from
one idea to another, it must, of consequence, be
the occasion of pain.” Very few persons, in their
religious inquiries, will go beyond the point where
pain supervenes, generally taking that as a warn
ing to desist. Now this sort of Imagination has
had at least as much to do in keeping men steadfast
to a belief in the Christian miracles, as the other
kind has had to do in inducing a disbelief in them :
but it is hardly necessary to say that it has no
scientific value whatever, and ought not to be
allowed to bar the way to inquiry. On the con
�Pleas for Free Inquiry.
21
trary, if properly analyzed, it will be found to
render inquiry all the more desirable.
Hitherto, I have dwelt on the considerations
which would seem to show that it is our duty to
investigate, as far as possible, the claims of revealed
religion to our acceptance. And one would think
that, in the case of Christianity, if people would
only take off their coloured spectacles and look
straight at the matter with their naked eyes, a sense
of duty would be backed by inclination. It will
be the aim of the remainder of this paper to look a
little more closely, than is sometimes done, into
this question, around which some strange miscon
ceptions have gathered.
*
* There is a point which has occurred to me now and then,
which I have only space to advert to briefly in a foot-note,
and which does not appear to me so entirely unworthy of
notice, as it will doubtless be thought by many. If it be the
duty of such as are able, to enquire into the truth of the reli
gion which has been taught them, is it not conceivable that
some bad conseg'wences to the individual might follow the
neglect of that duty (as indeed we observe to be the case with
regard to all shortcomings) and that not only in this but also
in another world ? Suppose—and the supposition does not
seem, to me at least, a very violent one—that the distinguish
ing dogmas of Christianity should turn out to be untrue; but
that the existence of a God and a future state, in which some
results will follow on, and some notice will be taken of, our
conduct here (beliefs which are not peculiar to Christianity,
which were in the minds of men before its appearance, and
which it shares with several other religions) should, on the
contrary, prove to be quite true. In that case, would the
persons I have alluded to altogether deserve to escape censure
for having taken up with a creed, which proved to be in its
distinctive parts a false one, without investigation ? If it be
said that it would be unfair, on that hypothesis, to punish
them in any way for holding what they had been taught and
really did believe, would not this be applying an entirely
different standard to their case to that which Christians apply
to non-Christians, and the extreme among them, the Dean
Boyds of Protestantism and Catholicism, even to their fellowChristians? These considerations might be carried a great
deal further; and they seem to me to merit some attention.
�22
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
II.
It will not be my object in what follows, any more
than in what has preceded, to dispute the truth of what
is known as the Christian system of belief. My ob
ject will be to show that it is greatly to be hoped by
every well-wisher to the human species that that
system (as I understand it) may prove to be utterly
untrue. This is a proposition which, if fairly stated,
must, I think, command the assent of every impartial
mind, as surely as that two and two make four, or
that two straight lines cannot enclose a space. And
it may be thought by some that if this be so, a. reason
is furnished for supposing Christianity to be untrue.
But I shall not occupy myself with any consequences
of this sort which would or might flow from the pro
position. I shall consider the proposition by itself.
The Christian religion, then, as commonly under
stood and preached among us Protestants, teaches,
along with others, the following so-called truths,
which are represented as having been miraculously
communicated from on high. Every human being
produced into the world, since the first pair, is born
the subject or victim of a primeval and inherited
curse of the most awful character. His natural
destiny, after a period in any case very short, spent
on this earth, is a never-ending existence of the most
frightful torture, surpassing in intensity anything
that the human imagination is able to conceive. In
order to provide a remedy for this state of things
the Almighty descended from Heaven, took upon him
the form of man, and suffered death upon a cross.
The actual fruits of this transaction appear to be
these, that a small number of persons, specially se
lected, and who have undergone a mysterious process
known as “ conversion ” or the “ new birth,” are not
merely excepted from the general fate, but made par
takers of eternal happiness. For the rest of mankind
�Pleas for Free Inquiry.
23
remains only that appalling destiny from which these
favoured persons have been providentially rescued.
*
Now I say that it would be impossible to conceive
a message more frightful in its purport than this,
which conveys such intelligence; unless, indeed, it
were one to the effect that all men were to be eternally
tortured, or, at any rate, that a yet larger number of
people were to be so tortured, or, that in the case of
those to be tortured, their sufferings were to be inten
sified to a still greater degree than we have reason to
apprehend under the Christian system—all so many
suppositions, for which, apart from this Christian
system, we should not have an atom of proof, if, in
deed, the indications do not all point in an opposite
direction. And it may be confidently affirmed that
an incalculably brighter message than this would be
one from on high, which should inform us that with
man “ death is the end of all things.” And every
right-thinking person who had previously held the
orthodox creed ought to hail such a message as a
relief from a hideous night-mare.
This view of the matter will surprise and doubtless
shock many who have been taught to look upon the
Christian dispensation as ushering “ glad tidings” into
the world, as “ bringing life and immortality to light,”
as the supreme expression of God’s mercy and tender
ness to a suffering world. They will ask how, for so
many centuries, this system of belief can have paraded
itself under a false name. Yet the answer is very
plain. By the “ Christian system of belief” I under
stand the whole system of revealed religion as adhered
to among us. If we take this as one great message,
or series of messages, to mankind, the term “glad
tidings ” may be fairly applied to one portion of it,
and has been so applied, on the assumption that cer
tain other portions of the message are proved to be
true. In other words, revelation does announce good
* See note at end.
�24
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
news, supposing always you accept as a fact that, if
it had never been made, the whole of mankind would
have been doomed, to endless perdition. But the an
nouncement of this fact is part of the general message,
or system of revealed religion, and stands or falls with
it. If, independently of revelation, we had arrived
at a knowledge of this state of things, then the
additional facts that we are said to have learnt in a
miraculous way, viz., that through Christ some will
be saved, would present themselves to us in the light
of a remedy. But there is nothing outside revela
tion itself, to lead us to any such conclusion; the
indications are all the other way. They tend to show
us mankind not as having experienced “a fall,” not
as having sunk from a lofty to a degraded condition,
but as having undergone the reverse process, as hav
ing emerged from the lowest savage state to a much
higher condition of civilization and morality. To
render my position clearer by an example. —A mes
sage to a number of people who had reason to know
that they were all of them to be roasted alive, to the
effect that only a certain portion of them were to be
roasted alive, would be, on the whole, glad tidings. But
a message to a number of people who had no reason
whatever to fear that any such fate was impending
over them, but for the message, to the effect that it had
been originally decided to roast them all, but that
now some were to be excepted, might be good tidings
for such as were excepted, but would be very bad
news indeed, for the general body. It might be quite
true, but the people in question would be authorized
to hope—the condemned for their own sake, and the
reprieved for the sake of their fellows—that the
whole of the news, including the alleged original
determination to roast all, might turn out to be a
mischievous invention.
It seems astonishing how such simple considerations
as these should fail to present themselves to our minds,
�Pleas for Free Inquiry.
25
or that divines and theologians should have power to
drive them away, when we are dealing with such a
stupendous subject as the relations between God and
man. For these theologians who thunder from their
pulpits and other places of vantage against “free
inquiry” have nothing whatever to advance in answer
to our particular proposition. I fail altogether to see
how, on their own showing, they can avoid admitting
that the discovery that there has never been any
revelation at all, a discovery which should even go so
far as to prove that there is no God and no future
state, would be on the whole an immense gain to the
species compared with what they have to offer us.
We should see this at a glance, if we took in the case
of another planet. Which would you consider pre
ferable for their interests, that the inhabitants of any
one orb in yonder heavens were mortal, and that they
passed into sleep when their present life was ended,
or that they existed eternally, a small portion in end
less happiness, the remainder in endless misery ?
You would not hesitate, for an instant, in giving me
an answer. And now look at the strange inconsis
tency of men! We live in a world where not only is
the last named prospect held before our eyes, but it
is converted by the alchemy of divines into a mercy
for which we ought to be grateful: we are warned
not to tamper with so precious a possession; we are
urged, as we value our happiness, not to raise a doubt
about, not even to inquire into the truth of a system,
which, if true, is to consign the greater part of us to
permanent misery ? If any consideration were wanting
to fill up the measure of our natural hopes with regard
to the soundness of such preaching as this, it would
be found in the sad spectacle furnished by the
orthodox believer and his easy-going acquiescence in
the prospect of a general holocaust of his relatives
and dearest friends, and the low opinion of human
nature to which such a spectacle must lead us. Every
�26
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
orthodox anglican clergyman and dissenting minister
holds (and indeed most of them preach every Sunday)
that the majority of persons with whom he is brought
in contact in his daily life, are lost creatures. I have
never been able to understand how such a belief can
be realized to the mind, and the person holding it can
retain the power to eat, or to sleep, or to think con
nectedly, or to do anything else than go raving mad,
in such a condemned cell of humanity as this world
must needs be. Even to a man who feels sure that
he has drawn for himself a prize in the dreadful
lottery, indulgence in anything like happiness or self
congratulation would seem an act of the most enor
mous selfishness. Yet these people live on very
comfortably; what seems to make them most unhappy
is, as a general rule, the smallness of their own earthly
incomes, their own trumpery rheumatisms and tooth
aches, the insubordination of the sexton, the neglect
of the great man at the Hall: they are rather anxious
than otherwise to pay their court to the worldly and
unregenerate whom fortune has placed above them,
and often give themselves much trouble to contract
friendships with people who are surely condemned to
a fate compared with which the pangs inflicted on a
Eavaillac or a Damiens were a flea-bite, if there be
one single word of truth in their own Sunday utter
ances. Is it that these people do not, after all,
believe what they profess to teach us ? or is it that
the belief (the possible truth of which we admit for
the purpose of this argument) is one to which the
human mind refuses to yield more than a kind of
vague assent, differing very little, when closely ana
lyzed, from total incredulity, or is it that this creed,
accepted in its entirety, is demoralizing and debasing
in its effects on men ?
This last question may seem improper, and indeed
blasphemous, on the part of one who does not profess,
in these pages, to deny the truth of a doctrine, which,
�r Pleas for Free Inquiry.
27
if true, must come from God. But the truth, if
once admitted, will so entirely overthrow all concep
tions which we should otherwise entertain of the
moral attributes of the Almighty, that I do not think
this objection to my language will, under the altered
circumstances, hold good. A being who has revealed
himself and his intentions concerning us his creatures,
in these terms, is clearly not susceptible of being judged
by a human standard. We certainly could not call
such an one a “ humane,” or “ a considerate,” or a
“ fair-dealing” God, if we are to give to these epithets
any meaning such as they possess among ourselves.
Or, if it be blasphemy to speak of him as other than
“just,” he is just in some sense not to be attained to
by our minds, and this is after all only a kind of
conjuring with words. Similarly, manifestations of
divine power, and revelations of the divine intentions,
which are “ demoralizing ” and “ debasing ” to us,
may at the same time harmonize with his plans and
express his great purposes, and there is no harm in
using words which have a relative and may indeed
have an absolute truth. For on accepting the dog
matic Christian belief, we find ourselves plunged in a
strange vortex:—
“ &v<a irorap-Giv lep&v xwpovcri Tray al
Kai SiKa Kai ir&vra irdXiv (rTp^tperai.”
Euripides, Medea., 411, 412.
*
It will appear that this world of ours, after having
been shot out of the sun in an incandescent state, or
otherwise originated as a separate planet, has turned
round slowly on its axis and cooled by degrees, and,
after undergoing a variety of other changes, has been
fitted for the habitation of man.f Man is called into
* “ The waters of the sacred rivers flow upwards (to their
sources) and justice and everything is reversed. ”
t Or, as some, following the letter of Genesis, still main
tain, in six days. The earth, in any case, was fitted for man’s
habitation, whether gradually or rapidly is of no consequence
here.
�28
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
being by God with the intention, as it would seem,
that he should live innocent and happy. Almost at
the same time another and a hostile power comes
upon the scene and debauches the mind of man—
whether from the mere wish to defeat the intentions
of his adversary, regardless of consequences, just as a
general, to win a certain position, is ready to sacrifice
any number of soldiers on either side, against whom
individually he bears no spite ; or with a deliberate
and fiend-like resolve to involve other created beings
in the same fate which has overtaken himself, is not
of much consequence either to our argument, or to
mankind. His success, in this undertaking, is com
plete. Henceforth, all men stand accursed. This
state of things demands, as we are told, a remedy.
The remedy, when applied, results in this, that only
an insignificant portion of mankind are touched by
it, the remainder following the exact destiny which
had been marked out for them by the author of evil.
Here is an immense and permanent victory of evil
over good, of a character to astonish us. The finite
created being has triumphed over Infinite Wisdom.
The world, after all, has been created in majorem
Diaboli gloriam. This is a mystery, it will be said.
Granted : but let us not disguise from our minds the
character of that mystery, as it affects ourselves. It
may be a part of a great and general plan that there
should be a contest in a number of inhabited worlds,
between the spirits of good and of evil, and that the
devil should win a victory in some of these worlds,
and God in other and (perhaps) more numerous
worlds. Or again, it is conceivable that every human
being should be made to suffer endless misery, for the
purpose of furnishing an example and a warning to
some other superior class of created beings. These
would be great mysteries and many others might be
supplied from the imagination, which, perhaps has
already had something to do with these matters.
�Picas for Free Inquiry.
29
But that would not alter the fact that the beings thus
falling under the power of Satan and condemned
to consequent suffering, would have reason to affirm
that their fate was a hard one; it woujd not prevent
them from hoping that any message conveying an
intimation of such a fate might prove untrue ; it would
certainly justify them in refraining from using the
word “ good ” of an omnipotent Being who did not
choose (for the word omnipotent excludes the supposition that he is not able) to carry out his designs
without such a flagrant violation of all that men call
*
Justice.
The moral conception of such beings will
* Some writers have objected to the term “omnipotent,”
as applied to God : among others, Archbishop Whately and
Mr Woodward, who goes so far as to say that, “there is no
such thing as unlimited and absolute omnipotence ; ” and
this view seems to be endorsed by an able writer in this
series, (“Is Death the end of all things for Man? by a
Parent and a Teacher.”) But I think it will be found
impossible to conceive one Supreme God, if we conceive his
power as originally short of what is expressed by the familiar
Saxon “All-Mighty.” If he be not. all-powerful, his power
must be limited by certain laws, subjected in its exercise to
certain conditions. But, whence those laws and conditions ?
If ab ext&ro, then either (1) they must be in the nature of
things, i.e., self-constituted, and, in that case, we may as
well give up the idea of a God altogether, for here is a no
god, an atheistical principle at work, laying down laws and
devising bounds. We might as well say that God found
matter ready to his hands. Whence, then, the matter ?
Or (2) they must be imposed on him by some independent
power, and then we have two Gods, one acting as a check
upon the other, and shall find ourselves involved in the
endless difficulties which such a theory carries with it. If,
on the other hand, we conceive limitations to his power,
which are self-imposed, this is not to deny the attribute of
omnipotence to God, but to affirm that, for purposes of his
own, he may have set bounds to that omnipotence ; a quite
different proposition. Bor example, I cannot conceive any
exercise of the Divine will which should obliterate or alter
what we call the past,—accomplished facts, such as the fact
of my consciousness at any moment of my life. Millions of
years hence, these will remain, not to be wiped out from the
�30
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
become confused. The terms right and wrong as
applied to the actions of their Deity will no longer
have a meaning for them. That the recipients of
such a revelation should be in any way debased and
demoralized by it will cease to be a proof that it is
not divine. For, as it would seem to be a part of the
divine plan that these beings should be made miser
able in another world, so it might well be part of the
same plan that they should be debased and degraded
in this present life. And the standard of morality as
far as relates to the Creator being entirely gone, there
would be no more harm in designating his acts as
immoral, than there would be in terming them cruel,
which from the constitution of our minds we must
deem them to be.
*
record of realities that have had an existence. But if it be
true that the Deity has called me into separate and individual
being, this will be an instance of self-limited power. A
subject such as this cannot be discussed in a foot-note, and
in treating it we are all of us liable to get out of our depth ;
but it must be noticed, because it has been contended by
some that, if God be not omnipotent, “the salvation of the
finally impenitent may be, impossible. ” If it be meant by
■this, that it may have been a condition imposed by God upon
himself that sinners should be eternally punished by him,
this is only another way of saying that God has determined
so to act; we are playing with words, and the statement
in the text is not affected. The meaning must be that a
necessity of this kind may be forced on him from some exter
nal source. I think the supposition quite untenable, but even if
we imagine such a thing possible, the beings spoken of above
would still have the strongest reasons for hoping that it was
not so ; they might still complain that they had been created
at all, when such frightful consequences to them must needs
follow their creation. Unless it be contended that God may
have been compelled to create human beings who should sin *
(which seems to me not more absurd than to suppose that he
may be compelled to damn them eternally, after they have
sinned) in which case, we shall only be falling foul of another
Birst Cause, in the shape of Necessity.
* When some of the missionaries in New Zealand were
expounding the horrors of Tophet and eternal fire, their
auditors exclaimed, “We will have nothing to say to your
�Pleas for Free Inquiry.
*
31
As I have spoken of an omnipotent Being inflict
ing suffering, it may be well to notice in passing the
obvious remark that there is suffering in this world.
But it is never wholly untempered by alleviation.
It is always of a kind which we can conceive to
be ultimately productive of some balance of good,
while, in very many cases, we can lay our finger
on the very good which it effects. Moreover, it will
be well to bear in mind that every physical pain
or disease, or moral anguish, or pang of unrequited
love, or wail of bereavement of which we have
any experience, or can form any idea, even if endured
by the same individual for any finite number of
millions of years, are to the pangs which ’tis a
thousand to one will overtake that individual, if
unfortunately for him Christianity should prove
true, as the portion of space occupied by an animal
cule in the milt of a cod-fish to infinite space itself.
In the spectacle of earthly suffering, there is nothing
which need upset our moral sense : the case, is
different when the prospect is such as I have referred
to. But even if the endless torturing of sentient
beings be in strict analogy to what we see here,
*
it is nothing to my point, which is, not that all'
these dreadful proceedings will not take place, but
that it is greatly to be hoped that they are a mere
figment of the brain ; in other words that it would
be much to our interest to disprove, if we could,
Christianity as a dogmatic religion ; and that there
is no benevolent man who sets himself to think
on this matter, who would not favour the attempt,
if only he thought it practicable.
This, however, is a digression. I was endeav
ouring to show that this terrible message, if it should
turn out to have a foundation in fact, will upset all
religion. Such horrid punishments can only be meant for
white men. We have none bad enough among us to deserve
them ! ”—Earle’s Residence in New Zealand.
�32
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
our moral judgments. So far as we have considered
it, we seem to have lost all hold on what is right
or wrong, or elevating, or debasing, or merciful,
or cruel, or in short, on anything that is not fated,
and to be wandering about in the darkness of
Necessity, like so many personages in a Greek
Tragedy. And the more we look into this extra
ordinary communication, the more do considerations
arise, one after another, which increase our bewilder
ment. If there be one character, more than another,
in which I am forced to conceive the Deity, it is
in that of a Lawgiver: if there be any attributes
which I am forced to assign to him they are those
which accompany the function of originating laws.
Yet what sort of a code is this, which we have
imposed upon us, embodied in his perfected Revela
tion ? God makes known his will to man, and it
is found to be one such as no man can comply
with. At best it is one such as only a small portion
of mankind are expected to obey. The behests are
wholly unsuited for the bulk of those for whom
they were designed. It is as though a human
Legislator promulgated statutes which should have
the effect of making nine-tenths of the population
capital convicts. Man, created imperfect and incap
able of rising above imperfection, is to be punished
eternally for not being perfect. The mere statement
of the hypothesis shows that these would be bad
and injudicious laws. Yet this is precisely the kind
of Legislation which we attribute to the Almighty.
This view clearly lowers our estimate of him as
a Lawgiver, if we are to argue from human exper
ience, that is to say if we are to exercise our reason
at all •, but where everything is in such a tangle as
far as our minds can reach to it, this is a point of small
consequence. I pass over the fact that many of his
supposed commands to the ancient Israelites are
distinctly immoral in our sense of the word, because
�Pleas for Free Inquiry.
33
this, to persons who can get over the other diffi
culties of the subject is, as we have seen, no difficulty
at all.
There remains yet another consideration, which is
not without a practical bearing on this subject. If
so many of our other conceptions of God’s attributes,
founded on human conscience, are to be discarded:
if what we call wrong may, with him, be right: if
what we should term cruelty, when exercised by him,
assumes the shape of justice : if, in short, the human
standard is quite inapplicable to the almighty, on
what ground can we be called upon to assign to him
the quality of Truthfulness ? I see none whatever.
It may be a part of his divine and inscrutable plan to
promise one thing and to perform another. If any
one says this is blasphemy, I reply that it is rank
blasphemy to question his right to act as he chooses,
and that if the human standard is to be set aside in
one particular it must be set aside in all others. If
the whole of his plan were unfolded before us, it
might be seen that it is on the whole advan
tageous for creation that man should be deceived in
this way. And, if this be so, neither can we attribute
*
unchangeableness to him, even though he has pro
claimed himself to be unchangeable. We shall, then,
be in this dilemma. We shall be by no means sure
that, if we obey his will, we shall receive the
promised reward. And we shall moreover be unable
to ascertain with certainty what his will may be.
Though many centuries ago he uttered commands
against murder, theft and idolatry, it does not at all
follow that he should be of the same mind now. I
see here some danger to Society, if Theologians should
* And such a course of action would be quite in accordance
with what we learn of God Almighty from the inspired
volume. In 1 Kings xxii., we are told how he wished to
make use of the volunteered services of a “lying spirit” to
deceive Ahab.
�34
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
continue to press upon us their idea of an absolute
and quite inhuman God. And it by no means follows
that because such dangerous consequences have been
hitherto kept in check by other forces (the chief of
which have been the unwillingness of some and the
inability of the many to carry out this doctrine to its
legitimate conclusions) they may not awaken to a
formidable life when the mass of mankind begin to
reason more closely on these subjects.
What has preceded goes merely to this : that we
have a sufficient and certain answer for those, if any
such there be, who tell us that it is not for our
interest to inquire into the truth of revealed religion.
The exact converse of this statement is as clearly
capable of proof as any proposition that commands
the assent of the mind. It is for our interest to
inquire into the truth of this so-called revelation, and
to disprove it if we can : as surely as it would be to
*
the advantage of a number of persons sailing together
in a ship who should be informed that the ship was
going to sink, to learn that the statement was untrue,
even if that statement were accompanied with the
offer of a life-preserving apparatus to such as,
believing the story, might choose to apply for one,
(and here I think I am rating the scheme of salvation
upon the whole more highly than its advocates claim
to put it: since according to them only a small
number of passengers hear of their peril and have
* Since writing this paper, I have met with a passage of
Voltaire in which that great writer, in a few pregnant
sentences, sums up the whole of my argument. It occurs in
his notes to the “ Pensees ” of Pascal “ Si dans votre systeme,
Dieu n’est venu que pour si peu de personnes, si le petit
nombre des elus est si eflrayant, si je ne puis rien du tout par
moi-meme, dites moi je vous prie quel interet j’ai & vous
croire ? N’ai-je pas un interSt visible a etre persuade du
contraire ? De quel front osez-vous me montrer un bonheur
infini, auquel d’un million d’hommes, un seul a peine a droit
d’aspirer ? ”
�Pleas for Free Inquiry.
35
the apparatus offered them.) It might be, I do not
say it would be, the result of further inquiry that we
should find there is no reason for supposing mankind
to be in these desperate straits. Let us, at any rate,
look somewhat more closely, each according to his
ability, into this matter, with the earnest hope, which
we are in every point of view thoroughly authorized
to entertain, that the alleged message, or revelation,
may prove to be untrue—yet, not suffering our hopes
to run away with our judgment, if, after adequate
investigation, the news should seem to be confirmed
by reasonable proofs. In that case, we must bow
our heads cemce parata ferre jugum, and every one
should look to securing his own safety, as best he may.
But let us also cease talking such nonsense (for it
is absolute nonsense) as is involved in saying that
this revelation is good tidings, or anything but very
bad tidings, for the bulk of mankind. To reject it,
if it should prove to be true, would be foolish : but
it is impossible not to hope that it may turn out a
myth : that we are not after all in the hands of a
Deity whose pleasure it is to act in' so barbarous and
ruthless a fashion towards ourselves: or of one whose
design, as a whole, compels him so to act towards
us : or of an iron necessity stronger than God and
which prevents him from acting otherwise ; and that,
in the words of Buckle, mankind may all the while
be only trembling before “ the bugbears of their own
imagination.”
NOTE, REFERRED TO AT PAGE
23.
It will doubtless be objected by some amiable per
sons, who are very much more humane than their own
supposed creed, that this is to misrepresent Revelation.
In what respect ? Certainly not in regard to the asser-
�36
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
tion that it sets us all down as by nature lost crea
tures, for this alleged fact underlies the whole scheme
of salvation. But it will be said that we are nowhere
in Holy Writ informed that a majority of mankind
will be ultimately damned. Yet it seems to me that
there are many passages in the New Testament which
can be understood only in this sense. “ Strait is the
gate and narrow is the way.” “Many are called,
but few are chosen.” “He that believeth and is
baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth
not, shall be damned.” “ Except a man be born
again of water and the spirit” &c., (it being quite
clear that only a few persons, comparatively speak
ing, have undergone the baptism of water and fewer
still that of the spirit) the sealing of a certain number
of persons in the apocalypse, and much of Paul’s
*
teaching.
The milder meanings which have been
conveyed into these passages by some commentatorsf
are, in reality, due to a half-acknowledged shrinking of
the mind from their real purport. The Fathers had no
such scruples, and with the exception of a very few,
who have never been esteemed quite orthodox, such
as Origen and Gregory of Nyssa, maintained the eternal
damnation of the greater part of the human species.
The Church Evangelicals, the Scotch Calvinists, the
orthodox Dissenters (more especially the Methodists
and Baptists) have long held the doctrine and hold
it at this day, and, of this, thousands of examples
from their sermons and speeches and writings might
be given. I give two or three, simply because they
happen to come to my hand, where I am writing this
note, far from any Theological Library to refer to.
* E.g., Eph. i. 4, 5, 6; 2 Thess. ii. 13; Rom. ix. 18-21 ;
Gal. iii. 10-16, and cf. 1 John v. 12.
t In an article in Fraser’s Magazine on Capital Punishments
(June 1864) bearing the well known signature J. F. S.,
attention is very forcibly called to the common mistake made
in terming the Christian religion a mild one. It is, in fact,
the most ruthless of all known creeds.
�Pleas for Free Inquiry.
yj
“Every Evangelical clergyman knows,” writes one of
the most esteemed correspondents of the Record
newspaper, under the signature of Fetus, “ if he gives
the subject a serious thought, that three fourths of the
people he addresses are travelling quietly along the
broad road.” In the memoirs of the Rev. Mr
M‘Cheyne of Dundee, a great light in Scotland, will
be found these words written by him. “ Hell is as
deep and burning as ever. Unconverted souls are
as surely rushing to it ... . The great mass you will
find to be unconverted ” (pp. 365-366). And again,
“ Seventy thousand die every day, about fifty every
minute, nearly one every second, passing over the
verge. Life is like a stream made up of human beings,
pouring on and rushing over the brink into eternity.
Are all those blessed ? Ah no. ‘ Blessed are the dead
that die in the Lorch’ Of all that vast multitude
continually pouring into the eternal world, a little
company alone have savingly believed on Jesus.
1 Strait is the gate and narrow is the way that leadeth
unto life, and few there be that find it.’” “ The
Scotch clergy declared that all mankind, a very small
portion only excepted, were doomed to eternal
misery,” (Buckle II. 372), and he gives numerous
specimens of this preaching.
*
Precisely the same
doctrine is being preached, at this very day in the
greater part of the pulpits of the country ; from Mr
Spurgeon (whose sermon on the execution of the
murderer Palmer, contains a graphic description of
the torments of hell the most singular that has ever
been produced by an imagination which we must
charitably hope to be diseased) down to,—or up to,
whichever may be the correct way of putting it—
Bishop Samuel Wilberforce. I This is undoubtedly
* The Scotch “Confession of Faith” does not even except
infants. “Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated
and saved by Christ!” (Ch. x. sect. 3.)
t Witness the extraordinary sermon preached by him at
�38
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
the prevailing theological view, and I believe it to be
a correct view of Gospel teaching : and it is to people
who hold this view that I address the challenge to
disprove my thesis “ That it would be greatly to the
advantage of mankind that revealed religion should
turn out to be untrue.” To those who say that this
tenet is not authorized by scripture, and who consider
it probable that a large majority will be saved—while
remarking on the singularity of the fact that the
language of Scripture should be so ambiguous on this
important point, that the most eminent authorities,
Fathers, Catholics, Anglicans, Nonconformists, should
have been led to interpret it in the, sense most un
favourable for the general interests—I am ready to admit
that some part of the reasoning contained in the
preceding paper is not applicable ; but for all that, I
will make bold to stand to my thesis, which will I
think hold good, if the case be that revelation tells
us of the eternal damnation of only a small portion
■of mankind. I will even go so far as to assert that
tidings which should contain among other news
this, that one man only was to be infinitely tormented,
ought to excite in the benevolent mind some hope of
its being false.
It may be well to add that my arguments do not of
course apply to Universalists, nor to those who
hold that the elect will be taken to Heaven and that
the rest of mankind will simply cease to exist; to
which latter notion Archbishop Whately seems to have
inclined, though he did not quite adopt it, for fear it
might not be in strict accordance with the letter of
Scripture. Those who hold this view may, in a cer
tain sense, logically call Christianity “ good tidings.”
They may allege that it is a message holding out a
- prospect of eternal life and happiness to some, while
Banbury in 1850, to “young people.” It is commented
upon at length by “Presbyter Anglicanus,” in an excellent
paper on “Eternal Punishment ” in this series.
�Pleas for Free Inquiry.
39
the remainder are not shown to be worse off than
they would otherwise appear to be. But I understand
that the bulk of Christians look on both these views
of the matter as heretical, perhaps in themselves
damnable—in which case the holders of them will
possibly have reason to change their views of the
“ gladness ” of the tidings, at any rate as regards
*
themselves.
In connection with this whole subject, I cannot
help noticing the strange sort of euphemism which is
constantly found in the mouth of the most determined
Evangelical Christian and upholder of the general
damnation theory, with regard to the Heathen. Such
an one will in general shrink from the idea of burning
these millions of human beings, and will fly off from
discussion, into space, on the wings of some such
passage as “ they are a law to themselves,” &c. “ The
whole thing is a mystery, these nations must be left
to God's mercy, &c.” f It does not seem to occur to
* In the Record or Low-Church organ, I remember read
ing, some time in the Autumn of 1868 an article in which the
views of the Universalists were spoken of as “indescribablysaddening ! ” Gems might be extracted from this newspaper
and put up into a small volume, which would be infinitely
more amusing than Punch.
t This is generally the cloudy method of the more refined
and humane among the orthodox : but violent and half
educated Christian teachers are not afraid to sweep whole
populations, past and present, into the bottomless abyss.
Thus, while the amiable poet Cowper exclaims
“ Ten thousand Sages lost in endless woe
For ignorance of what,they could not know?
That speech betrays at once a bigot’s tongue :
Charge not a God with such outrageous wrong !
Truth, 517-520,
Brother Carey, a Baptist Missionary, on being asked what
was to become of Mussulmans and Hindoos “expressed his
fears that they would all be lost.” Baptist Miss. Soc.
Trans, quoted by Sydney Smith in his article on “ Indian
Missions.” There are plenty of Brothers Carey, at this day.
�40
Pleas for Free Inquiry.
these good people that, if the theory of salvation
through a new birth alone, and of damnation for
those who have not been born again, is thus to be
softened down and frittered away, their reasons for
attempting to instil the Christian religion into these
Heathens are much weakened, if not altogether
destroyed. Brothers Carey and Ringletaube, who
deemed all Hindoos and Mahometans natural food for
hell-fire, were consistent in the course they took. But
if once we admit the possibility that a sort of rough
justice may be dealt out to the Heathen, we shall see
cause to stay our hands, lest, in case of our success,
their last state may be worse than their first. For if
we shall succeed in bringing every man of them over
to our views, we shall only be thrusting them and
their descendants into a position with regard to their
eternal interests which does not seem, at the first
blush, an improved one. Now, we ought not to wish
them to change their religion, in their own interests,
*
unless we are quite satisfied that the chance for the
individual, of escaping hell, will be smaller if he
remains as he is, than if he makes the change : a
supposition which seems hardly possible on our own
showing.
The Larger Catechism of the Church of Scotland is explicit
on this point. “ They who, having never heard, the Gospel,
know not Jesus Christ, and believe not in him, cannot be
saved” (Answer 60).
* I say “in their own interests,” because of course there
is the argument that God has ordered us to preach the Gospel
to the Heathen. But if the Heathen as a body are not to be
ultimately benefited by receiving the Gospel, if they are only
to be placed in such a condition, by conversion, that nearly
all of them will receive many stripes instead of a few, it will
be for our interest, not for tlieirs, that we shall try to convert
them, i. e. in order not to disobey God’s commands, and so bring
punishment upon ourselves.
TURNBULL AND SPEAKS, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH.
�
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
Pleas for free inquiry; from the point of view (1) of duty, (2) of inclination
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Ramsgate
Collation: 40 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: "By "M.A.", Trinity College, Cambridge". From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Date of publication from KVK.
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
1874
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT109
CT211
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 (Pleas for free inquiry; from the point of view (1) of duty, (2) of inclination), 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
Christianity
Free thought
Christianity-Controversial Literature
Conway Tracts
Free Thought
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/b2c6fbdad63289e3e6a702cb1ba6dacc.pdf?Expires=1785369600&Signature=j%7Ed%7Es4rptNxQZnGiH9a4tXvUmjiTV%7E5iFYSTCf7V0u3Jhh5RR6S0wJHHauWPidkj-kAKC1cLT%7EA00Zxp44L-hDQPud1k0BXu1hI2KWC1N9h8mNuOrBVeQmDEc031ZNGvnT8QA1VqeYCCfqo-IJI7AnfKIo01ipl7C8pLIG-SqHidEeMler7-UWIeKqcu9nHAUqtAd93VGj7DULlyOhsDqH4%7E1U%7En8kxQgbAWotDJi5vFEf-7Bh-TJaTUhXY%7EHTj%7EsuVvPxfiLxHHoX%7Eurl6q3GzKPUA%7EiajxhpjK2Wtix711s50iAPfw%7EM-nu%7EGaaJK%7EfcGzz6thn0TKFLdZ2yQybA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
011b9fc9be42ce504b35852346bdbb31
PDF Text
Text
A WOMAN’S LETTER.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
MOUNT PLEASANT, RAMSGATE.
Price, Threepence.
��A WOMAN’S LETTER.
-------- ♦---------
My Dear Friend,—You have expressed much sur
prise, and no little sorrow, at the opinions held by me
on the subject of Bible inspiration, opinions which,
however, are fast gaining ground amongst educated
women in the present day.
Will you allow me briefly to lay before you some of
the reasons which have induced me to form those
opinions, contrary as they are to the teaching and
training on such subjects, received in early youth.
Perhaps I may at least be able to convince you that
they are not the wild and impious theories that many
suppose them to be, but the natural result of honest,
unprejudiced, and impartial investigation.
There is an idea very prevalent, though seldom
plainly stated,—that it is unbecoming in a woman to
think for herself at all, except on such subjects as may
directly affect her household interests. Politics,
science, art, and, above all, religion, are held to be
matters beyond her sphere, and her ideas (if she have
any) on these subjects are to be received without
question from her nearest male relatives; or, failing
these, from the man who gains the greatest influence
over her. Where this view is not so clearly expressed,
it still appears under a more veiled form in the axioms
we daily hear, that “men may reason, women must
trust; ”—that “ faith is woman’s privilege,” and others
of a similar character. Now it is quite clear that to a
certain extent this is true. Without an education
�>4
4
A Woman’s Letter.
far superior to that she generally receives, a woman
cannot verify for herself the truth, of gravitation, nor
investigate the theories of light and sound. Neither
can she form an opinion on the currency, or on free
trade, without a political education such as she seldom
enjoys. ‘In such matters she must take her views
from those about her best qualified to judge, and re
frain from obtruding her second-hand ideas on those
who are able to form an independent judgment. It is
clear, however, that in this case, the faith or reliance
on others that she is obliged to exercise, is the result
of a defect in her mental training, and adds in no way
to her grace or virtue. She would be nobler, wiser,
and happier, were she able to come to a reasonable
conclusion, thinking out the subject for herself, rather
than taking the bare word of others who are themselves
liable to error. If this be true in science or art, it is
doubly so in religion. Here none can presume to
claim superior knowledge or more unerring judgment.
The Book which is received as the sole text-book of
religion, is open to all, and the most learned divines
agree that its teaching is so plain that “ a wayfaring
man, though a fool, shall not err therein.” You hold
the doctrine of the inspiration of the Bible, but is such
a doctrine tenable if none but the wise and learned can
comprehend its pages ? Or of what use would he a
revelation from God to man if none but scholars were
entitled to search out its meaning ? You cannot really
mean that the command “Search the Scriptures” only
applies to University men in Holy Orders, and that
none but these, or persons of equal learning, have any
right to investigate the truth for themselves ! There
is a strange inconsistency in checking the spirit of
enquiry amongst educated women in England, whilst
encouraging it amongst ignorant savages abroad. Here
you urge the principle that safety lies in accepting
without question, or as it is called,—in simple faith,—
whatever has been taught us in infancy, there you
�A Womans Letter.
5
press on every 'hearer the duty of investigating the
nature of his idols, and of doubting the assertions and
pretensions of his priests. Nay, nearer liomej by what
right can you send missionaries to sow doubt in. the
hearts of your Roman Catholic brethren, if. you your
self hold that doubt, and the spirit of enquiry that
leads to doubt, is a deadly sin ? If “ simple faith ” in
her early teaching be the proper limit to woman’s
religious thought, then, to be consistent, we must leave
undisturbed the belief of a Hindoo widow in the
efficacy of Suttee, nor seek to interfere with the
religious training of Harem or Zenana. Still less can
we assume the right to arouse a spirit of enquiry in
those who have been taught from infancy to believe im. >
doctrines which, though more nearly resembling our ”
own, we still hold to be full of fatal error. The
Reformation would have been impossible had its
leaders never shaken off the yoke of “simple faith,”
and fairly measured their strength against their
teachers. Go further back, and Christianity itself
would never have arisen had its Founder or his
apostles shrunk from the responsibility of shaking off
the trammels of early religious training. Remember
that we are as responsible for our own belief, as for
our own conduct,—by these we shall be judged, and
neither the faith nor the life of others can excuse or
justify our own. It cannot surely be presumptuous to
exercise the reason God has given us, in the examina
tion of doctrines we have hitherto received with a
C*
faith which, if applied to the commonest worldly
A
transaction, would be called by some less attractive
name.
There is an objection sometimes made to the spirit of
religious enquiry amongst women, a purely sentimental
one, and almost unworthy of serious notice. Still it
influences many. I may call it the sesthetical objection.
There is an idea that religious doubt is unbecoming,
ungraceful, and contrary to all established poetic con
�6
A Womans Letter.
ceptions of female character, that were it to supplant
faith, both painters and poets would lose their favourite
themes, and that on the whole,—as a lady once ex
pressed herself to me,—“ men wouldn’t like it.” I will
fain hope that men are not responsible for half the
foolish sentiments attributed to them, and that this,
amongst others, is a false and distorted idea of their
real opinion. Of one thing I am sure,—that no honest
man will ever do otherwise than respect honest
enquiry,—and that a very small exercise of courage will
enable the most timid of women to face the censure of
those whose only conception of womanly grace is
drawn from the imaginative works of the artist. The
true beauty of woman’s character is to be found rather
in a pure, simple honest-hearted search for truth, than
in any number of poems and pictures.
There is another objection which meets every one
whose mind is first aroused to religious enquiry. It
is this ! “ Am I prepared to face the possible conse
quences of free investigation ?” “ Whither will it
lead me ?” “ Would it not be wiser not to embark on
a voyage whose end I cannot foresee ?” To this the
answer is plain. Our duty is simply to ascertain the
truth as it is without bias as to what we may wish it
to he. We must not grumble, if, in our search for
truth, we find her of different aspect from what we had
imagined or hoped, and God will most surely not hold
us responsible for what we may discover during our
honest, single-hearted enquiry, though He may justly
condemn us for neglecting to investigate those subjects
which are at the root of our spiritual life. I grant
that the shock may be rude when we find our pre
conceived ideas to have no solid foundation ; when
the beliefs and fancies, and imaginations which have
grown with our growth, prove hollow and insecure,
but painful as it may be, we are safer, wiser, more
near to God than when a mist of falsehood hung
between us and Him.
�A Womans Letter.
7
How many poetic fancies of onr childhood .have
been dispelled by the more accurate knowledge of
later years ! And yet do we not feel that we are the
gainers by our loss ? The child who thinks the rainbow a path for angels to tread, may grieve to find his
dream a delusion, but does not his maturer knowledge
of the cause of that glorious arch, show him far more
clearly the wisdom and the power of God than any
such poetic fancy could do ? If you ask me what will
supply the place of old beliefs and cherished creeds
should you be compelled to relinquish these, I can
offer you but one substitute—but that an all-sufficing
one ; viz :—the consciousness that you have earnestly
and honestly sought for truth, and that God will give
His blessing on the search.
And now, having touched upon some of the difficul
ties thrown in the way of every woman who wishes to
analyse the religious teaching she has received, I
will frankly tell you what are the chief conclusions at
which I have arrived during my examination. The
key-note to all such religious teaching, the stand-point
from which all doctrinal points are decided, is the
Inspiration of the Bible. What does the word mean ?
Teachers interpret it variously; some maintaining
that every phrase and expression was directly dictated
by God to the authors of the various books, others
that He put the general idea, as it were, into their
minds, leaving them to express it as they pleased,
with their own glosses, and often with their own
errors; while a third party consider that part of the
scriptures was dictated by God to the writers, and
part is simply the expression of their own sentiments.
How this Inspiration, or mental dictation, is per
formed, or by what means we can recognise its oper
ation, is never explained. Let me now point out to
you why these three views of the Inspiration of the
Bible appear to me alike untenable. That the God
of the universe should have directly dictated every
■
J
e
' .
-
•
.
�A Womans Letter.
word and line of the whole scriptures is so preposter
ous an idea that it seems impossible for any reasonable
being to hold it. Can we conceive the Creator of all
things, the Spirit whom we must worship in the spirit,
dictating from His throne on high pages upon pages
of frivolous directions about the ceremonial of worship,
the vestments of priests, the adornment of the taber
nacle, without one precept, one promise, for the guid
ance or comfort of men’s souls ? Is it possible that
taches of gold, almonds, and knops, spoons and
snuffers, can be in His eyes subjects worthy of being
specially dictated in wearisome detail, while the deeper
matters of righteousness are passed over 1 Can we
conceive an unerring and omniscient Being dictating
errors in facts, errors in numbers, errors in physical
science, or more incredible still, commanding the prac
tice of cruel, revengeful and immoral laws, which the
Founder of Christianity, far from recognising as
divinely inspired, dismisses from his notice with the
contemptuous phrase, 11 It hath been said by them
of old time ?” Besides, if every line of the Bible is
alike inspired by God, there can be no degrees or grad
ations in that inspiration, every precept must be of
equal weight, alike perfect as becomes His word, and
true as He Himself is true. We have no right to
press upon one command which pleases our moral
sense, and to pass over another which may offend it.
I confess I can not believe that God ever inspired the
command that a man who beats his man-servant or
maid-servant to death, provided the victim does not
die within forty-eight hours, shall go unpunished, (Ex.
xxi. 20, 21,) nor that a wilful boy shall be “ stoned
with stones that he die,” (Deut. xxi. 18-21,) for the
faults probably produced by the over indulgence of
his parents. Take the law as written in the Penta
teuch, and see whether your mind does not recoil from
many of its precepts. Legislation for slavery, legis
lation for polygamy, cruel enactments against the
�A Womans Letter.
9
impossible crime of witchcraft, superstitious trial by
ordeal, these we find in its pages, and if the Bible be
the word of a God who cannot change, we dare not
pass these passages by, as being obsolete, as being
ephemeral utterances of no permanent value. If you
say that these unjust and vindictive laws were given
by God to the Jews in the infancy of their civilisation,
what is it you lay to His charge, but this : that He
inspired degrading precepts and enactments because
the people to whom He spoke were degraded !
I will not ask you how I am to believe that the
Creator of all things knew so little about his own
creations as to suppose that the sun moved, or that
the shadow on the dial could move backwards without
the destruction of our planet and the convulsion of
our system. Neither will I enquire whether He
whose lesser works are so marvellous, could have
inspired a writer with the idea that labbits and hares
chew the cud. Nothing but a determination to shut
our eyes to clear plain fact, will enable us to avoid the
impossibility of reconciling such statements with the
doctrine of verbal inspiration.
But perhaps you hold that the general idea only
was inspired by God, and that the writers were left to
express this idea in their own manner and with their
own interpretation. Would this be a revelation at
all ? What should we think of the report of a speech
in the House of Commons, by which the reporter
should have expressed his own ideas about what Mr
Gladstone or Mr Disraeli wished to say, introducing
his own glosses into the text, and mixing up his own
mistakes as to names, dates, and figures, with the real
facts given by the speaker? Would not either of
these orators indignantly repudiate such a version of
his speech ? And yet this is what such a view of
Bible inspiration results in. Far better that God
should never have spoken, than that He should speak
merely to be mis-interpreted. It is difficult to see of
�IO
A Womans Letter.
what use would be the pure spring of divine truth, if
it flowed through so foul and corrupt a channel that
its waters, ere they reached us, were tainted by the
conduit. Clearly, from this stand-point, you can
never appeal to the Bible as to an infallible authority;
for if the writers have misconstrued the word of God
in one place, there can be no security against their
having done so in another.
The third opinion as to the inspiration of the Bible
held by some is, thatpartof the volume is a purely human
production, and part God’s own dictation. Thus they
consider the minute directions for the temple service
to have been the work of a Jewish legislator, while
they accept the ten commandments, and other moral
precepts as the word of God himself. The chapters of
useless genealogies and lists of names they attribute to
the uninspired mind of the writer, while those pas
sages which treat of higher themes are supposed to
have divine authority. They do not, however, explain
how the difference can be distinguished, -when trivial
and frivolous matters are mingled with those of
greater importance ; and the same objection applies to
this, as to the preceding view of inspiration, viz : that
it stultifies the very purpose of a revelation. A book
which is partly composed of human remarks and
observations, and partly of the words of a supreme
Being,—the whole appearing in one form—clothed
with the same authority, and with nothing to indicate
the varying value of its contents, would be indeed,
a fatal gift from God to man. Surely He cannot be
imagined to make a special revelation of His will—and
then render it unintelligible by allowing it to be
mingled with a mass of purely human inventions 1
If a revelation were needed to teach us His will, then
most certainly it would have been given to us in plain
terms, and we should not have been left to sift the
wheat from the chaff,—relying on our intuitive sense
of right alone to decide which we should retain and
which cast away.
�A Womans Letter.
ir
I have now briefly told you some of the reasons
which prevent me from accepting the Bible as a
Divinely inspired book.
I have of course, only glanced at the considerations
which weigh most in my own mind, and even though
you should think them valueless, still, you may perhaps
grant that they deserve at least examination.
As a storehouse of Jewish learning, as a record of
the sublime truth of monotheism,—a truth held firmly
amidst opposing influences by a despised people
as a collection of noble precepts and struggling
aspirations, the Bible remains to me, though my
better nature revolts from the idea that the falsehood,
cruelty, and immorality contained in its pages can be
the inspired word of Him who is truth and mercy and
purity. It is often assumed that without the Bible,
we should be unable to form for ourselves any just
estimate of right and wrong, and that our moral
perceptions would become distorted without constant
reference to the precepts contained in its pages. But
is this so 1 Is not this mistaking its power ? Surely
it is our innate moral feeling which enables us to
admire the beautiful and reject the base in the Bible,
and not the Bible itself which confers this power of
discrimination. It cannot be the Bible alone which
teaches us the true knowledge of God, if our own
unaided views of Him are higher and holier than
many of those contained in its pages. When we find
this to be the case, we are certainly justified in prefer
ring those which do Him most honour, to those which
claim to be divinely inspired. Again, when two
passages in Scripture directly contradict each other,
we must, from our own conception of God, decide
which is most likely to be true, which most likely to
be His will. But this cannot be called an infallible
revelation, an inspired Bible, if private judgment
must be trusted to decide on its merits.
How one inspired dogma can be totally opposed to
�12
A Womans Letter.
another inspired dogma, people do not trouble them
selves to enquire, but are content to receive each
separately and by turns without question. Thus they
will at one time speak of the many beautiful passages
which show us one, true, divine Being, sharing His
glory with none,—and at another time they dwell on
verses which show a second, and even a third Divinity
dividing the empire and sharing His attributes.
From one passage they teach that God is love, ready
to forgive, waiting to pardon,—from another they
teach that His pleasure is to create men who are to
suffer agonizing torture for ever. Here is set forth
that the highest reward for virtue, is length of days
and honour, and prosperity,—there—that we must
despise the glory of this world, and esteem happy the
poor and the sorrowful.
Sects have thus arisen, professing the most opposite
doctrines,, each practising rites and ceremonies esteemed
abomination by others, yet all basing their creed on
some portion of the writings they hold to be infallible.
Now I cannot really suppose that God said at one time
what He contradicted at another, neither can I conceive
the irreverent idea which some people hold, that He is
capable of having “ repeated,”—altered His plan,—
improved His doctrine as it were, from the rough,
rudimentary teaching of early times, to the later, purer
doctrine of the Gospels. Surely the words “develop
ment,” “improvement,” “progress,” so often used by
preachers when dwelling on the superiority of New to
Old lestament teaching,—imply some previous error
and imperfection. But how without blasphemy, can
they attribute this imperfect, this erroneous teaching
to the direct word and inspiration of a Being who can
not err 1 Would it not be more honest to acknowledge
that where two passages in the Bible give irreconcil
able views of God’s will, His word, or His works,—
they cannot both be infallible ? Most certainly it
would,—but this admission cannot be made, if,—at all
�A Womans Letter.
13
hazards,—at any sacrifice of truth,—the claim for the
infallibility must be maintained;—for if one passage
be proved false, in a book declared to be inspired by
God,—false in doctrine, or false in facts,—then that
passage invalidates the claim of such a book to be the
pure and unerring exponent of His will. I believe
there are, not one only, but hundreds of passages in
the Bible, where even those unlearned in Hebrew or
Greek may discover for themselves discrepancies and
errors which would prevent any unprejudiced mind
from accepting it as an authority which admits of
neither doubt nor appeal; and yet those who hold it
to be their sacred duty to study its pages,—to become
familiar with its most trivial expressions, and to ex
tract from them a meaning they were never meant to
bear,—resolutely close their eyes, and refuse to see the
truth because it is not such as they desire it. All I
would urge is, the duty of fulfilling in honesty and
simplicity, the precept “ Search the Scriptures.” . This
is not done by perusing a few verses daily as a kind of
talisman to guard us from physical or moral evil, nor
by reading its pages in a spirit of blind assent to what
ever construction we may have been taught to put on
them. To examine closely, to analyse carefully, to sift
and separate the good grain from the bad, to enquire
on what reasonable evidence our belief is grounded,—this is the duty of every humble follower of the
command.
Perhaps you will ask me on what are we to frame
our lives if we should no longer be able to accept the
Bible as infallibly true, or its teaching as divinely in
spired ; what moral guide will remain, if this is not a
lamp sent from Heaven expressly to light our path.
Enough remains to be our guide and our comfort,—
its precepts none the less admirable, its promises none
the less consoling, The eternal truths of true religion
are still there, the purer for being freed from the
tangled weeds that choked them,—and we are able to
�14
A Woman’s Letter.
gather in the sound and wholesome wheat, without
being forced to garner with if the tares also. Were
the scriptures themselves to be destroyed to-morrow,
our foundation would still be firm. Faith in a God,
whose mercy, and truth, and justice, we see in all
His works, love and adoration of His perfection, a sin
cere desire to do His will by ministering as far as lies
in our power to the wants of our fellow-creatures, and
lastly a humble hope of a better life beyond the grave,
these would remain to us, a heritage for ever.
I have now very briefly stated some of my principal
reasons for holding opinions on Bible inspiration differ
ing widely from those taught and held by most of those
with whom I am thrown in contact,—I fear that my
task has been too badly performed to convey to you any
similar convictions, but I shall be contented if you ac
knowledge that they are not the result of any presump
tuous spirit, but the honest conclusions arrived at in a
course of humble enquiry.
I remain,
Sincerely yours.
�
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
A woman's letter
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Ramsgate
Collation: 14 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Date of publication from British Library catalogue. Argues for women's ability and right to question biblical inspiration.
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
[1871]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5461
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
Subject
The topic of the resource
Women
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 (A woman's letter), 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
Women
Women and religion