2
10
12
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/0c79c0891c51a0ac8ef780936cf77952.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=rHXG5UN7g10a7YCGYlDHs8Xh4-VwL2VkVTgepISkOw3E6UO8MZrFhlGIAxumqeP6aFkTN8LCeig1FNgKTLjmPNxdB7wMRFj3FH1Gj6vlOeHIN%7EVORB3ttVDCkUk1gHma6hWwpO4fmyrHRTLBt45%7EEkTW4u7E6SFVHL2O1lcWl5x18tM%7EPejVLOOXPHk8X96oxdia-qJFCnu0ChRJr03kPjsjBRFOw9aDLJ0Y57LD-sO39D0SKcft7ciaDgQz8pHa8BRk3l%7EhlwhYPVOgS8M3p5mAF9bH-L1ltPIyrrxn7Ut1KRcdSa5j7vswRrA0aEmfRjrHdBvqHnFOBBVNqaTPfA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
4d39785ceaf91ad9ff9450d11e4832f8
PDF Text
Text
THE POWERS OF WOMEN, AND IIOW TO USE
THEM.
HERE has been, perhaps, a greater change of opinion in England
on a greater variety of subjects—social, political, and religious
—during the last ten years than had taken place in the whole period
which had elapsed since Europe was convulsed by the Reformation.
Whether the change has been for the better or the worse will be, of
course, estimated differently by different minds, but the fact itself
will hardly be disputed.
Ten years ago household suffrage was considered an impossible
tenet belonging to the ultra-Radicals ; we have lived to sec it given
by a Conservative Government. The abolition of the Irish State
Church was the scheme of “ philosophical levellers;” it has become
the popular cry on which a party rides into power. “ Essays and
Reviews ” was petitioned against as fraught with horrible novelties
of heresy; the book may be said to have died in bringing forth a
bishop, but scarcely a weekly paper or a monthly magazine now
appears which does not contain doctrines almost as “advanced.”
The revolution has been more tranquil and peaceful than any
former one. The Bishop of Peterborough did not offer to go to the
stake in defence of the Irish Establishment; Lord Derby swallowed
the bitter draught of the suffrage instead of laying down his head like
Strafford on the scaffold. Liberal admissions take out the sting of the
strongest defences of orthodoxy ; and the revision of the authorized
version, headed by the Bishop of Winchester, looks a little like the
�¿22
THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW.
theological equivalent of Mr. Disraeli taking the political bread out of
the mouths of his adversaries by the “ ten minutes ” Bill. Lastly,
the whole question of the use of women in the world, their “ rights ”
and their 11 wrongs,” is being discussed in a manner which contrasts
very remarkably with the tone of even a few years back; while the
discussions in Parliament upon female suffrage, the municipal vote
granted last year to single women possessing the necessary quali
fication, the Married Women’s Property Bill, which has just passed
the House of Commons, the education—artistic, medical, scientific,
and literary—now offered to them by so many bodies, public and
private, show the breach which has been made in the fortress of
ancient opinion.
The movement has now indeed attained a wider, deeper signifi
cance than is even indicated by such changes in England. It is
spreading over the whole world in the marvellously rapid way with
which the interchange of ideas takes place at present among nations ;
through that “ solidarity ” which is at last comprehending even the
unchanging East. It is showing itself in Russia and Spain, in India
and America, the old world and the new alike. Russian ladies are
taking medical degrees at Zurich, and now at St. Petersburg; schools
for Hindoo girls are established and well attended at Madras and
Calcutta. Monseigneur Dupanloup protests against the lowering
effect of the poor education given to girls in France, and the Roman
Catholic bishop is as urgent in his demand for a higher ideal of
woman’s life as our English radical philosopher.
But though both extremes of opinion agree as to the evil of the
present state of things, though the Saturday Review is as strenuous
in its description of the vacuity of the lives and occupations of
thousands of women as the most strong-minded of the lady writers,
there is the greatest possible divergence as to the remedy and the
means of applying it. Give them the same education as men, says
one side ; but we are at this very moment revolutionising the instruc
tion in our boys’ schools, and declaring the subjects to be often illtaught, and not always worth learning.
Shut them up with
governesses and in school-rooms more strictly, says the other ; but
it is the girls who are the result of this very training of whom we
are now complaining.
Meantime two or three hard facts have come out in the discussions
on the subject. The census of 1851 showed three millions and a half
of women working for a subsistence, of these two millions and a half
were unmarried. At the census of 1861 the number of self-supporting*
* The wretched gulf below into which so many of these are driven by misery, the
wholesale destruction of soul and body which takes place, cannot here be entered on, and
indeed this class is not included in these numbers.
�THE POWERS OF WOMEN.
523
women had increased by more than half a million, many with relations
dependent upon them. The pretty, pleasant, poetic view of life
by which man goes forth to labour for his wife, while her duty
is to make his home comfortable, is clearly not possible for this large
portion of womankind, since, although a certain number of them
are single because they preferred celibacy to any choice offered to
them, a very large proportion are so from necessity, and certainly
find the burden of maintaining themselves a heavy one.
That the “highest result” of life both for men and women is a
really happy marriage there can be no doubt; where each is im
proved by the other, and every good work is helped, not hindered,
for both. It is an ideal which has existed, though it may not have
been carried out, from very early times—and it is somewhat dis
couraging that, as Mr. Lecky has shown, some of the most beautiful
pictures of the relation, and indeed of womanhood at large, are to
be found in Homer and the Greek tragedians; “the conjugal
tenderness of Hector and Andromache, the unwearied fidelity of
Penelope, whose storm-tossed husband looked forward to her as to
the crown of all his labours, the heroic love of Alcestis volun
tarily dying that her husband might live,” and many more such.
Later in history, though Aristotle gives a touching account of a
good wife, and Plutarch declares her to be “ no mere housekeeper,
but the equal and companion of her husband,” we must go on
to Rome for an equally high type of a wife. “ The Roman matron
was from the earliest times a name of honour,” and a jurisconsult of
the empire defined marriage as “ a lifelong fellowship of all divine
and human rights.” Indeed, “ the position of wives during the
empire was one of a freedom and dignity which they have never
since altogether regained.”
That modern society has not always shown an advance on these
questions may be seen in Mr. Maine’s observation that the canon law,
which nearly everywhere prevailed on the position of women, has
on several points “deeply injured civilization.”
Mr. Mill’s description of the relation seems drawn from his own
experience:—
“ What marriage maybe in the case of two persons of cultivated minds,
identical in opinions and purposes, between whom there exists the best
kind of equality” (not that of powers, but of different capacities), “with
each their respective superiority, so that each can have alternately the plea
sure of leading and being led in the path of development . . . where the
two care for great objects in which they can help and encourage each other,
so that the minor matters on which their tastes differ are not all-important,
. . . here is a connection of friendship of the most enduring character,
making it a greater pleasure to each to give pleasure to the other than
to receive it. . . . This is 110 dream of an enthusiast, but a social rela-
�524
THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW.
tion on whose general realization will depend the best development of our
race.”
To enable women to fulfil their share of this union it will be
granted must require far more cultivation than they now generally
attain. For the very large portion who cannot obtain this “highest
result,” and who yet have the misfortune to require food and
clothing, which they must earn for themselves or starve, it is
surely not too much to ask that they be furnished ungrudgingly
with all possible means of fitting themselves to perform well what
ever work society will permit them to carry out.
As to what is “ unnatural” work, opinion varies so much in different
ages and countries, that we are hardly yet entitled to dogmatise.
“ Nature,” Mr. Mill thinks, “ may be safely left to take care
of itself, and that in any work for which women are really in
competent they will drop out of the race ;” but he hardly seems to
allow for the extraordinary plasticity with which women adapt them
selves to the ideal required of them by public opinion. Among
the North American Indians all the heavy labour—the carrying of
burdens, &c.—falls to their share without any feeling of hardship,
the duty of the “ braves ” being only to fight. In many parts of
Germany the division is the same ; the peasant woman digs, ploughs,
manages the cattle, carries the fuel and the hay from the mountains,
while the men are either with the army, or sitting smoking and
drinking in the little “ platz ” of the village. In Scotland the
stalwart fishwives would be horrified at their husbands doing any
thing but manage the sea share of the business; they have their
boats and nets to look after, and have nothing whatever to do with
matters on shore, where the woman reigns paramount.
An extremely curious instance of what habit and opinion can make
of women appeared not long ago in that very unromantic source of
information, a British Blue-Book. In the account of a mission sent by
England in 18G3 to induce the King of Dahomey to give up the slave
trade, the envoy, Commodore Wilmot, remarks incidentally :—
“ The Amazons are everything in this country. There are nearly 5,000
of them in the king’s army;” and he adds, “ there can be no doubt that
they are the mainstay of the kingdom. They are a very fine body of
women, remarkably well-limbed and strong, armed with muskets, swords
gigantic razors for cutting off heads, bows and arrows, blunderbusses, &c. ;
their large war-drum was conspicuous, hung round with skulls.
“ They are first in honour and importance, all messages are carried by
them to and from the king and his chiefs. They are only found about the
lojal palaces, form the bodp-guard of the sovereign, and no one else is
allowed to approach them. At the reception of the embassy the kinoordered them to go through a variety of movements and to salute me, which
they did most creditably; they loaded and fired with remarkable rapidity,
singing songs all the time. . . . They marched better than the men, and
�THE POWERS OF WOMEN.
525
looked far more warlike in every way ; their activity is astonishing—they
would run with some of our best performers in England. On one occasion
the king appeared in a carriage drawn by his body-guard of women. As
soldiers in an African kingdom and engaged solely in African warfare, they
are very formidable enemies, and fully understand the use of their
weapons.”
Besides 5,000 of these under arms, there are numerous women to
attend on them as servants, cooks, &c. Their numbers are kept up
by young girls of thirteen or fourteen, attached to each company,
who learn their duties, dance, sing, and live with them, but do not
go to war till they are considered old enough to handle a musket.
They are fully aware of the authority they possess—their manner
is bold and free; but in spite of a certain swagger in their walk, he
speaks particularly of “ their good manners and modest behaviour ;
most of them are young, well-looking, and without any ferocity in
their expression, though an occasional skull or jaw-bone may be
seen dangling at their waist-belts. They are supposed to live a life
of chastity, and there is no doubt that they do so, as it would be
impossible for them to do wrong without being found out, and such
discovery would lead to instant death.” “ The only menial service
they perform is to fetch water (which is extremely scarce) for the
use of the king and his household, and morning and evening
long strings of them may bo seen with water jars on their heads
silently and quietly wending their way to the wells in single file,
the front one with a bell round her neck, which she strikes when
any men are seen ; these immediately run off to leave the road
clear, and must wait till the file has passed, for if an accident
happened to the woman or her jar, any man near would be con
sidered responsible, and cither imprisoned for life or his head cut
off. Business is stopped, and everybody delayed to their great
inconvenience, by this absurd law.” The Amazons enjoy their con
sequence, and laughed heartily when they saw the commodore obliged
to step aside in order to avoid them.
It was mentioned by Bishop Crowther, in a lecture at Torquay,
that in war, fewer prisoners by far are made among them than
among the men soldiers ; they fight more fiercely, with more deter
mination, and would rather die than yield. “ Indeed,” says Wilmot,
11 they are far superior to the men in everything—in appearance, in
dress, in figure, in activity, in their performance as soldiers, and in
bravery.” It is curious to see the old Greek legends, which we have
so long disbelieved, thus fully borne out.
The evidence is the more interesting as it appears merely as part
of the report of the embassy,“ presented to both Houses of Parliament
by command of her Majesty,” with no object of proving anything to
anybody in the matter.
�526
THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW.
Here is a whole body of women distinguished for the very qualities
we should bo most inclined to refuse them, the produce of a “ welldirected ” education to the end required.
It is difficult at present to make any sweeping assertions as to
what women can or cannot do, as even if we decide categori
cally for England, we shall find the standard of their ability
vary by merely crossing the Channel in France ; and if such a dis
cussion had been possible in India, and a Hindoo Mr. Mill had
expressed hopeful views of their powers and of wliat might be
expected from them under a different régime, the weekly papers of
Benares would certainly have replied that the nature of women was
tolerably well known since the beginning of the world ; that they
had had time enough in all conscience to give proof that their
powers were but little above those of animals ; that they could not
be trusted out of the zenana to take care even of themselves ;
that it was doubtful whether they had any souls at all, and, at all
events, certain to the orthodox, that theii1 only chance of immor
tality was by burning themselves on the funeral pile of their hus
bands. Yet even with public feeling so strongly against them,
“ the best native Indian governments are those directed by women,”
says Mr. Mill, borne out by Sir Richard Temple and many other
authorities.
Seven-eighths of the world is Pagan, Mahometan, or Budd
hist, where the lowest opinion concerning women still prevails ;
and even in Christian countries the education given to them is
so much for show, so little for use, so empty of real knowledge,
that we have hardly yet the materials on which to found our
judgment as to their powers, unless exceptionally.
That these will turn out to be the same as those of men is, to say
the very least, most improbable ; that God should have created two
sets of beings, so different physically and outwardly, if he had
intended one to be merely the repetition of the other, and unless they
had been fitted to perform different functions in the world’s great
work. Such a variety of gifts is required to accomplish what is
wanted around us, that it will be strange if we cannot arrive at a
certain joint co-operative action between men and women which
shall be better than that of either alone. “ Two are bettei’ than one,”
as Solomon says, and even than one and one. There is a male and
female side to all great work which will not be thoroughly carried
out unless both can labour at it heartily together. The silent share
contributed by women in man’s work,—to take only a few of the
instances found in late biographies, the assistance given by the
sister of Mendelssohn in the composition of the “ Lieder ohne
Worte,” by old Miss Herschel in her brother’s calculations, by Mrs.
�THE POWERS OF WOMEN.
527
Austen and Lady Hamilton* in the production of their husbands’
works on jurisprudence and metaphysics, and that which is told
by M. Renan and Mr. Mill in their touching tributes, the
first to his sister, the other to his wife,—is only known from
magnanimous men, rich enough in ideas not to grudge such
acknowledgments. “ On ne prête qu’aux riches,” says a French
proverb. But how this joint work for the world can best
be generally carried out remains still to be settled. To take,
however, one instance : the administrative power with which
Mr. Mill credits woman enables her to assist most efficiently
conjointly with men in the management of philanthropic estab
lishments— hospitals, reformatories, asylums, workhouses, &c.r
where she is found to give more comfort more economically than
men, to spend less with greater results. She has generally more
intuitive insight into character, and is less liable to be taken in (pro
vided her affections are not concerned). She is both more considerate
and considering, more observant of small indications than a man,
and draws her conclusions more carefully, and carries out her kind
intentions with more thought. “ And Mary pondered all these things
in her heart,” is a very true picture of her sex. She is a particularly
efficient teacher of male pupils, says one good educational authority ;
there is a certain rude chivalry among boys when they know that
they cannot be compelled to do a thing by force, which will often
make them yield. For example, a class of unruly lads in a ragged
school, utterly unamenable to the discipline of a man, has been
known to obey a young woman ; as a difficult-tempered horse is
sometimes most easily guided by a female hand, when it is at the
same time both skilful and light.
There was one remarkable instance of such influence in the late
American war. After the arrival of the lady nurses in the different
field hospitals of the northern army, the degraded attendance which
ordinarily follows a camp gradually melted away. The husbands,
brothers, and relations of the women who had given up the pro
tection of their homes for the sake of the wounded did not choose
that their belongings should be exposed to such scenes, and the baser
element almost entirely disappeared, at least from sight.
One of the most curious “ changes of front ” in public opinion
which has taken place, is concerning the care of the sick. Surgery
and medicine seem to have been regarded as peculiarly feminine
occupations in the Middle Ages. Even queens and princesses were
regularly instructed in the “ healing arts.” To be a good leech was
as important in a complete education then as to play on the piano
nowadays, and was certainly not less useful.
* The Edinburgh Review says
“ We are, in truth, indebted to these two ladies
that the most profound and abstruse discussions of law and metaphysics which have
appeared in our time became accessible and intelligible to the public.”
vol.
xiv.
n n
�528
THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW.
That there are certain branches of the profession adapted for
women most people will now admit—i.c., midwifery and the diseases
of women and children; we may indeed come to regard this part of
the craft as one into which men have intruded themselves instead of
the contrary cry. But it is clear that women physicians neither can
nor ought to be consulted or trusted who have not undergone the
most thorough training and submitted to the most searching exami
nation. The difficulties which must result from a course of joint
study for men and women together are such in the present state of
things as to render it most undesirable ; but in France, the question
is solved by a separate training, which there for sixty-nine years
has given as perfect an education to midwives, both practical and scien
tific, as well can be. It includes a course of instruction in a hospital
of two hundred beds, where none but women pupils are received. A
first-class certificate is not given under two years, a second-class not
under one, and without a certificate no one can practise in France.
The lady professors of this institution are physician accoucheurs, not
merely midwives, and hold a rank, both scientific and practical, quite
equal to our first-class “ ladies’ doctors ” here. No classes or lectures
such as are often proposed in England, could possibly afford the
requisite training, unless accompanied by the practical work on the
patients themselves such as is thus afforded in France. In the same
way no certificates or examinations in nursing could be of any avail
unless they are the result and the evidence of trained work in a
hospital, to be judged of not by a board theoretically, but by the
training surgeons and nurses.
Many foreign universities, however, Zurich, Stockholm, &c., have
•shown no jealousy of women doctors, but will now admit any woman
who can pass their examination for a medical degree.
With regard to other special training, the greater facilities given
in the classes at the Royal Academy, the female schools of design at
South Kensington and elsewhere, the Academy of Music, &c., will
now enable women to obtain the thorough knowledge necessary
for good work in art. It is to be hoped that some proof of effi
ciency may soon be exacted for governesses and schoolmistresses:
a diploma such as is required to be shown by them in Germany,
France, and Switzerland, will be a natural result, indeed, of the
examinations now offered by Cambridge, London, Dublin, Edin
burgh, and, lastly, Oxford. The class of female teachers will thus be
raised both in position and salary. In America, at this moment, they
stand very high in the scale, and are even entrusted with a great
.share of the conduct of large boys’ schools.
But it is for those women who do not intend to be either doctors,
or artists, or schoolmistresses, that our improved education is most
wanted. As it is, in the very fields which are considered to belong
�THE POWERS OF WOMEN.
529
to women by the most niggardly estimate of their powers, they are
totally without training of any kind, and each individual is forced to
make out the very A B C of useful knowledge for herself.
For instance, in the conduct of their houses and the management
of their children, which the staunchest Conservative would declare to
be their peculiar province, what pains is taken to give them even the
most elementary knowledge of the things likely to be most useful to
them ? What woman has learnt how to prevent the frost from
bursting the water-pipes, which flood half the houses in London
unnecessarily every winter ? or what has caused the cracking of the
boiler, and how it may be avoided? or the facts concerning food, that
proportion which is best for each different stage of life, and how to make
the best of it ? “ I’m sure it was the bread was very nice last time ;
I can’t think why it isn’t so this while,” says even a clover cook.
The rule of thumb is universal, and the mistress cannot correct it.
Again, with regard to the health of the children and household,
the frightful ignorance of mothers, both rich and poor, annually
sacrifices the lives, and, what is really worse, the health, of thousands
of human beings. It is a common saying that the first child is
generally a victim to the experimental efforts of the poor mother,
who, having never learnt what is good either for herself or her off
spring, can only guide herself after having been taught by the bitter
knowledge of experience.
Women will be found “sending for the doctor ” for the slightest
ailment, either of their own or of their children, which the commonest
sense and the most easy acquaintance with hygiene ought to enable
them to cope with ; yet “laudamy and calomy” are the “simples”
they have not scrupled to use. Every girl ought to go through a course
of training as to what is required in all ordinary cases of emergency—
how to bind up a cut, to put out fire, to treat a burn, the bad effect of
air on a wound, its necessity to the lungs, the measures necessary to
guard against infection—“ common things,” as they are called, but
uncommonly little known at the present day. Questions of fresh
air are beginning to be a little better understood; yet still,
passing along the crowded streets of London, and looking up at
most of the nursery windows, rows of little pale faces may be seen
peering through the closed casements, “ for fear they should
catch cold,” which is often the only form of care conceived of, and
is carried out by making them as liable to cold as possible. A
great medical authority declares that the children of the lowest
and artisan class in London are healthier than those of the class above
them, because they are allowed to play in the gutter, which cannot
be permitted to “ genteel ” children, and the fresh air compensates
for inferior Eving and much want of care. How much of the disease
NN2
�530
THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW.
and ill-temper of our children, and consequently of our own, is owing
to ignorance in their keepers, which might be prevented by the
better education of nursemaids (no very Utopian notion), it is grievous
to think of.
Again, with regard to education, there is a peculiar appetite in a
healthy-minded child, evidently placed there by nature, for observing
the facts around it, and seeking for their interpretation—“ why ? ”
“ what?” “ where?” is the substance of the talk of intelligent children.
Questions as to the reasons of everything, as to the birds, beasts,
flowers, and stones they meet with. Instead, however, of satisfying
this curiosity, we give them names, the hardest husks of knowledge,
“ Mangnall’s Questions,” and “ Pinnock’s Catechisms,” the very
deadest dry bones of information. As a general rule let what it can
sec, and touch, and taste, and smell, and the explanation thereof,
come before things which its limited experience does not enable
it to realise, and therefore take interest in, and which are
generally to it mere words, such as history, geography, grammar.
The abstract comes later in life. There can be no doubt that such
instruction comes within a woman’s province ; let her, at least, learn
how best it may be accomplished.
There are many questions still remaining to be solved as to how
body and soul react on each other, which women are peculiarly fitted
to assist in settling ;—for instance, although asceticism and epi
cureanism are alike mistaken rules of life, how yet the good
which exists undoubtedly in both is to be secured in education ;
how to give the mind the fairest play ; to “ have the body under
subjection,” in one sense—to make it the slave, and not the master,
in the joint concern,—yet so to cultivate it as to render it the
healthy organ, or interpreter to execute the intentions of the mind,
and how neither mind nor body can do its best without a proper
balance being attained. Education having gone too much in the
cramming direction, the pendulum seems likely now to sway too far
on the opposite side for men—athletics, for their own sake, (although
the sitting still regimen is still required for women) ; while the wisest
among the Greeks seem to have aimed at the perfection of outward
form, chiefly as the instrument of the inward powers of man.
Again, the field of philanthropy has never been contested to
woman: let her be taught to fulfil it wisely. Men have such respect
apparently for her power of intuition that they seem to think she can
do as well without as with study. The excellent women who under
take to assist the poor, probably at this moment are doing at least
as much harm as good, demoralising them by teaching dependence,
and diminishing their power of self-reliance ; they are utterly ignorant
in general of political economy, in its best sense ; of the laws of
�THE POWERS OF WOMEN.
53i
supply and demand; of that which constitutes real help, i.c., that
which rouses man to help himself; while their religious teaching
too often resolvesitself into proselytism and dissemination of doctrinal
tracts. These are studies without which charity degenerates into the
pouring of water into baskets, whereas in France the administration
of the Poor Law, the bureau de bienfaisance, is committed by Govern
ment to the care of the Sisters of Charity, who are considered as the
fittest instruments for the work.
With regard to comparatively smaller matters, such as art, there
can be no doubt that if woman’s knowledge of what really constitutes
beauty were more cultivated, if her taste were higher, or, indeed, any
thing but the merest accident of feeling, oui' hideous upholstery, our
abominable millincry-portraits, the vulgar or vapid colouring of our
drawing-rooms, would improve. “ Natural selection ” would get rid
of the monstrosities in our shops by the simple process of the bad not
finding purchasers, as much as by any schools of design.
Again, with regard to dress, wider interests would probably indi
rectly tend to cure the extravagance which constant change of
fashion produces. For a woman to take care that her outward cloth
ing makes her as pleasing as circumstances comport, is a real duty
to her neighbours ; but this is not at all the aim of fashion. There
is nothing which puzzles the male mind, and especially the artist
mind, like its mystery—why every woman, short and tall, fat and
thin, must wear exactly the same clothes ; why their heads must all
bud out in an enormous chignon one year, and their bodies expand
into an immense bell in the next, under pain of being unpleasantly
remarkable, by the edict of some irresponsible Vehmgericlit which
rules over us. The tyranny of opinion is such that no woman dreams
of resisting beyond a certain point; she has been taught that to be
singular is in her almost a crime, and she accordingly undresses
her poor old shoulders, or swells out her short body, and is intoler
ably ugly and unpleasant to look at to her male relations, but is satis
fied with the internal conviction of right given by the feeling that
at least she is in the fashion ! More knowledge of real art would
show her that if certain lines are really becoming, their opposites
cannot be so too; that there is a real science of the beautiful, to
contravene which is as painful to the instructed eye as notes out of
tune in music to the instructed ear.
The power wielded by woman is at present so enormous, that if
men at all realized its extent, they would for their own purposes
insist on her being better qualified to use it. If any man
will candidly confess to himself the amount of influence on
his habits of thought and feeling throughout his life, first
of his mother and sisters, of young ladyhood in general, and
�532
THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW.
later of his wife, daughters, and female friends, the opinions modified,
the incentives supplied by women, old and young, he will be almost
appalled by the thought of the manner in which this potent being
has been left to pick up what education she could from an ignorant
governess or an indifferent school; while her ideas of right and wrong,
her religion and morality, have generally been obtained by being care
fully kept from hearing that there is another side to any question The important and the trivial are generally strangely mixed up in
her mind: traditional rules—such as that though it is wicked to read
history on Sundays, you may make riddles out of the Bible ; that you
may cut paper for patchwork on the Sabbath, but if you sew it is a sin
—being not seldom considered almost as binding as the Gospel itself.
A custom becomes in such a woman’s eyes as sacred as morality;
the inextricable confusion of the form with its meaning, which is so
common, and which makes it so dangerous to touch or improve a
symbol lest we damage the thing symbolized, may be greatly traced
to the unreasoning traditional mode in which women, half the
human race, regard everything. The sentimental part of their
minds being stronger, their power of association more vivid than
that of men, anything connected, however remotely, with their affec
tions, is clung to more warmly, and makes it more difficult for
them to part with the external shape which a thought has been in
the habit of taking in their eyes.
Accordingly, even in matters of politics, which have been sup
posed to be out of their line, “ the party of the roses and night
ingales,” as Mr. Grant Duff once euphuistically called it, has been a
power in the State, a very sensible influence, which has often
checked, and even prevented, useful reforms.
To give her the “ responsibility of her opinions ” might be a cure
for this, but the question of the suffrage cannot be looked upon as
an important one. During the past session the municipal franchise
was granted to unmarried women, with this comment from the con
servative ex-Chancellor, in assisting to pass the Bill: “ Since an
unmarried woman could dispose of her property, and deal with it in
any way that she thought proper,” said Lord Cairns, “ he did not
know why she should not have a voice in saying how it should be
lighted and watched, and in controlling the municipal expenditure to
which that property contributed.” In one of the southern counties,
five large, well-managed estates, almost adjacent to each other,
belong to women either unmarried or widows. Here a district,
amounting in size almost to a small county, is virtually unrepre
sented. If the representation of property is to be a reality, it seems
as if these women ought to “ have a voice in choosing the repre
sentatives who are to regulate ” the national “ expenditure ” to which
�THE POWERS OF WOMEN.
533
they contribute so largely. A single woman is no infant to whom
the law allots trustees ; she can conduct her own affairs and dispose
of her estate as she sees good. The franchise is certainly an inferior
privilege to such functions as these.
It is perfectly true that these women would prefer being without
the franchise, but the question is, what are the arrangements by
which the duties of property may be best performed? They are
called upon, as a matter of course, to use “ the legitimate influence
of a landlord ” with their tenants : why should they be allowed to
shirk the responsibility, to be spared the personal onus of decision in
political opinions ? Are not these likely to be better weighed, more
justly and well considered, if they know they can be called to account
for the proper employment of their power ?
It is no new theory, after all, that women should be treated as
political entities. One barony, at least, was bestowed by Pitt on a
single lady in right of her borough influence ; and the very fact of a
woman being able to use the power of a great proprietor without the
check of publicity and open responsibility, inclines her to make the
question a personal one, and not a trust for the good of the
“ republic.”
With regard to a married woman, it seems to be very unwise to press
her claim. Any property she possesses is, after all, represented by
her husband ; if she votes contrary to him, it will merely neutralize
his vote ; if she votes with him, it is an unnecessary reduplication ;
there seems no good in putting such an abstract cause of contention
among married people.
In England, by manners, although not perhaps by law, the influ
ence of woman has been more useful, calmer, less dreaded, and more
open, than in any country since the days of Evo. When they
have ruled it has been by acknowledged sway; the difference between
Queen Elizabeth and Queen Philippa, and the Montespans and
Pompadours of France. The Maitresse du Rot has been no re
cognised part in our constitution; no fine ladies like Madame de
Longueville, and the other lady leaders of the Fronde, have ruled
the destinies of our country according to the influence of the lover
of the moment. There have been names of power amongst us, but
they have been good as well as great.
In Roman Catholic countries, where the feeling for women has
culminated in the adoration of the Virgin and the deification of
many female saints, where the longing for feminine tenderness
which could not find satisfaction in the stern ideal to which they
had reduced their Christ, has erected an intercessor in “ the mother of
God,” woman, intellectually, has been degraded curiously to the
utmost, the notion of her spiritual eminence having, as it were,
�534
THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW.
stifled any other. Christianity, great as its influence has been for
woman, has not worked at all alike in this respect in different
nationalities even close at home, and it would be curious to trace out
the reason for her varying position at the present day in the different
Christian countries—in America, where from the disparity of the
sexes she takes a high hand as to her personal claims, but does
not seem to have improved in wisdom beyond her old-world sisters ;
in Germany and Italy, where she holds a strangely inferior place,
from the most different causes, for the German woman is generally
and in some respects highly educated, while the Italian (with some
exceptions in the north) is almost utterly ignorant; in France,
where the influence of woman has always been more really great,
probably, than in any country in the world, America not ex
cepted, with the single exception, which however symbolizes a
good deal, that they must not wear the crown—i.e., be ostensibly
sovereign. The Frenchman is said to be more good-tempered, the
woman more imperious; in a household she is very really the better
half. Partly, perhaps, in consequence of the drain upon the male
part of the nation caused by its warlike propensities, the affairs of
the shop, of the bureau, the management of the money of the family,
in fact, has devolved in great part on her. Monsieur often is
amusing himself at the café, while madame, nothing loth, is admi
nistering the joint affairs of the commerce, in which she has probably
an equal stake in money, while her property is to a great extent
under her own control, and is looked after very keenly; indeed, her
strict attendance at the bureau is mentioned in an interesting
article of the Revue des Deux Mondes as one reason for the fearful
mortality among infants in France. Again, the power of the mother
over her grown-up sons, both by law and custom, is in our eyes
most extraordinary. One of Madame Sand’s best-known novels
runs on the refusal of the widowed mother of a marquis of forty, in
full possession of his own estate, to let him marry a young lady, well
born and well-bred, but poor. No surprise is expressed; it is an
ordinary incident in his social world—it is impossible for the marriage
to take place without her permission.
The relation, however, between the sexes in France seems to be
one of antagonism—an armed peace—constant resistance on one
side, and terror of encroachment on the other. In the absence of
any idea of justice, “a woman’s rights are what she can get foi’
herself;” and their amount is almost incredibly large to our notions,
lor instance, on the occasion of a marriage in the higher classes, the
bridegroom is required as a matter of course by the young girl and
her mother to renounce his profession, which is often mentioned as
one reason of the frivolous life led by young men of family in France.
�THE POWERS OF WOMEN.
535
The sudden change in a French girl’s life, the tremendous leap
from her convent education to the rush of dissipation in the world,
makes her temptation to independence still greater. She has not
even been allowed the choice of the man who is to rule her ; he is
generally more or less in love, she has all the advantage that perfect
coldness and self-possession can give. She rules by dint of her
esprit, her strong will, her tact in pleasing the least worthy part of
men ; and her desire for power is evidently far greater than in
England, where, after the first blush of youthful coquetry is over,
a girl generally subsides rapidly after marriage into the “family
woman,” the wife and the mother ; whereas the Frenchwoman’s
career onlv then begins. And what is considered at least to be its
nature may be guessed from M. Fame’s problem (for even a caricature
is evidence of a popular mode of thought), “Etant donnée la femme,
c’est à dire un être illogique, subalterne, malfaisant, mais charmant
comme un parfum délicieux et pernicieux,” how is she to be treated?
In England, on the contrary, at the present moment, take it for
all in all, the position of an educated woman of a certain class is
probably unequalled both in legitimate influence and happiness. If
she is at all qualified for it by character, she is trusted and consulted
by her husband in everything ; she is respected by her sons for her
experience in life ; she has a large field for her administrative
capacitie,—the schools, the cottages, the sick, the poor, both in
London and the country, employ all her philanthropic energies.
She is cut off from no great questions of national interest, poli
tical, literary, benevolent ; if her opinion is worth having, she
is listened to by men with perfect respect and attention. She
wants nothing more of privilege for herself of any kind. It
is not for these that any change is necessary. But because these
have their “ rights,” in cant phrase, and indeed something more, by
custom, if not by law, it is no use for them to blink the fact of the
intolerable sufferings endured often by women of the lowest class
without a chance of redress, or that the lives of the greater portion
of the middle class are miserably wanting in interests and cultivation
of any kind ; while for the increasing number of women who must
earn their own bread, there are hardly any fields open, and they
have hitherto been even denied the facilities for fitting themselves
to work which are provided so largely for men.
That this has happened by accident more than design, appears in
the Reports upon Endowed Schools, which are proved to have often
been intended by their founders for girls as well as boys. The com
mittee, headed by Lord Lyttelton, sitting now upon them, has been
requested to ascertain what means can be adopted in each case to add
a separate provision for the education of girls, or to enable them to
�53^
THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW.
share in the classes for boys, as in the national schools. At present
the lower class is bettor provided for in this matter than the middle
and upper. It is to be hoped that Government will not neglect so
fair an opportunity of securing what might become a national and
lasting provision for this want. Mr. Rogers has already led the way
by starting a middle-class school for girls pari passu with the great
school for boys in the City of London.
Meantime, as if to prove that girls would make use of any oppor
tunities given them, several of the school inspectors in England and
Scotland report that they found the capabilities of girls as good in
general as those of boys ; that although part of the school-day was
devoted rightfully to needlework, they did as well as the lads of the
same amount of training when taught by the same masters. In the
few schools for the upper class which have existed, the acquirements
of the average of boys and girls are found to run very evenly, though
here and there a boy appeared who beat all the girls. The brains
of women, says Dr. Barlow, quoting many authorities, English
and foreign, are larger than those of men in proportion to the size
of their bodies, while their temperaments are more nervous and sen
sitive ; they thus require good education for their guidance more even
than men ; whereas cut off, as they too often have been, from the
most interesting subjects in life, it is not surprising if they often
throw their whole souls into petty questions with a vehemence which
makes good men sigh and hard men laugh. “Les femmes excellent à
gâter leur vie,” has been most truly said, and not seldom that of their
belongings besides. Excellent women may be seen spoiling the
comfort, as far as in them lies, of their “ mankind,” about some
miserable little matter of anise and cummin to which their illdirected conscience affixes an inordinate interest, while the greatest
national questions of right and wrong (for which they have proved they
can care so deeply) are to them uninteresting often because unknown ;
for how large a portion of them may still be said to be “ brought up
in the religion of darkness and fear,” which Plato complained of
even in his day ? They are often accused of putting their affections
above any abstract interest, however high, yet how many of them
have shown the power to suffer and to die for the noblest causes.
Martyrs are of no sex or time. “ The mother of seven sons,” as told
in Maccabees, “ saw them all slain in one day with horrible torments ”
for their faith, by Antiochus. Filled with courageous spirits, stir
ring up her womanish thoughts with a manly stomach, she stood
by and exhorted them to remain firm for the right, “and last of all,
after her sons, died also.” Women like Vivia Perpétua, whose
martyrdom for her faith was preceded by the agony of appeals from
her husband holding up her baby before her, and her father entreat
�THE POWERS OF WOMEN.
537
ing her to have compassion on his grey hairs. Through all the phases
of persecution, Pagan, Catholic, and Protestant alike, women have
never been found wanting, and not in religious questions alone—in the
French Revolution the women suffered for their political faith like the
men. It has been remarked that no woman ever then put forward her
sex as a reason for being spared; they had “ the courage of their
opinions,” and went to the scaffold unflinchingly, although some
of them, like Madame Roland, did not believe in any future state.
In the Indian mutiny there were no weak lamentations or com
plaints under the almost intolerable sufferings and privations to
which the women were exposed. They had most of them spent
their lives in the gossip and idleness of Indian stations, yet when
courage and endurance were called for, their heroism was as great
as that of the men.
The stuff is there, it only requires to be adequately made use of.
In spite of what Mr. Mill says, there can be little doubt that women
are by nature more pliable than men, more ready to take the colour
which public opinion represents as right, and also to endure more for
what they believe to be true, in small things* as well as great. But
this only makes it more incumbent upon society, which in this case
means men, to see that the ideal life held up to women is a wise one,
and that their education is in a wise direction. The jealousy of
women acquiring knowledge, in England at least, is quite modern.
At the time of the Reformation, of the revival of learning through
the classics, they were allowed to obtain whatsoever they pleased
of the new fields of knowledge; and Latin and Greek, through
which alone these could be obtained, were freely, taught to
them. They suffered death again and again in political risings in
England, that unpleasant proof of their importance. Lady Salisbury,
Jane Grey, Arabella Stewart, were not spared because they were
women ; and in the feudal times, Mr. Mill declares that both politics
and war were considered part of their proper business in life. Sir
Thomas More, in his ideal republic, even proposes that the “ priests
should be few in number, of either sex.” And though we arc not
very likely to follow out such a counsel as this, yet northern civiliza
tion has always been based, more or less, upon respect for women,
as shown alike in the honour paid to female prophets and priestesses
in the earlier faiths of Teutonic and Scandinavian nations, and the
ideal held up by chivalry in later Christian ages. “ We may, on
the whole, well admire the instinct,” says Mr. F. Newman, “ which
made the old Germans regard wTomen as penetrating nearer to the
* Would anything induce men to submit to the tortures of tight-lacing, or of tho
Chinese “lily feet”—utter absurdities of the most harmful kind—for the sake of being
“ comme il faut ”—in the literal sense, “ as one ought to be ? ”
�538
THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW.
mind of God than man docs.” That a large share of the higher
moral and ideal work of the world may fairly be taken by her, is
shown by the fact that though the male and female population is
nearly equal in number, the crimes committed by men are usually
five times as numerous.
Her influence now is more than sufficiently great; it is not desirable
that it should be in any degree increased. What is wanted is to
give her the training and discipline by which that which she has
may best be used. There are symptoms on all sides of a change
of thought, a desire to make more use of her powers in various
work. Dean Alford, in his. paper on “The Christianity of the
Future,” has observed, that “woman’s action in the Church” has
been neglected in our present civilization, that “ the Reformers
levelled in the dust, instead of attempting to regenerate, the whole
conventual system of Catholicism.”
Mr. Tennyson hints in his
Guinevere at the double power which the united action of men
and women brings forth; and the reason he gives for his hero
Arthur’s failure is the failure of his wife. “ If he could find,”
says the “bard,”
“ A woman in lior womanhood as great
As he was in his manhood, then, he sung,
The twain together well might change the world.”
And again, in “ The Holy Grail,” he makes Arthur himself declare
that if he can be joined to her whom he considers the pearl of
women—
“ Then might we live together as one life,
And reigning with one will in everything,
* Have power on this dark land to lighten it,
And power on this dead world to make it live.”
Mr. Tennyson has insisted on the “ diverse ” nature of men and
women in lines which have become almost hackneyed by constant
use, and therefore these hints at the joint action which shall
make both more strong, the division of the work of the world
between them, each supplying the deficiencies of the other, are the
more important.
To enable women, by the wisest teaching which the nation can
give, to make themselves ready for such a future, must be our
object. A move of such an extent as is now taking place in women’s
minds cannot be repressed, their further advance is merely a question
of time ; let us insure that it is made in the right direction. Not in
solitary action, for which with her quick sympathies and tender
affections she is eminently unfit; not by usurping the work of men
either as M.P.s, Amazons, or female lawyers, nor again by dooming
half the human race to the most petty trivialities by way of keeping
�THE POWERS OF WOMEN.
539
them virtuous and contented, shall we obtain the best work for the
world. It is Iago only who condemns women to “ suckle fools and
chronicle small beer.” To find the use of everything is the grand
discovery of modern science, to waste nothing of whatever kind, and
certainly not power. The body politic can hardly be made stronger
by bandaging one hand tightly (even if it be the left) to prevent it
from getting into mischief. A beautiful Hungarian myth says,
“ Woman was not taken from man’s heel, that he might know he was
not to trample on her, nor from his head, for she was not to rule
over him, but from the rib next his heart, that she might be nearest
and most necessary in every action of his life.” And not until this
joint action shall have been fully carried out in all work (different in
kind for man and woman, and therefore for that very reason each
fitting into each) shall man indeed “have power on this dead world
to make it live,” as the Creator of both seems to have intended for
the benefit of all.
V.
�
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 powers of women and how to use them
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Verney, Frances Parthenope [1819-1890]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [s.l.]
Collation: [521]-539 p. ; 25 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Article signed as 'V'. Also known as Frances Parthenope Nightingale. From Contemporary Review 14, July 1870.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.n.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1870]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5402
Subject
The topic of the resource
Women
Suffrage
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 powers of women and how to use them), 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-Suffrage
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/dbbccb730ff36c526a8ddf14e02617c9.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=B%7Exik2-QJ3og5hpVBU44KQSLGvz8Jkh-ia6nQ0qFRT9USwxdrzESRl-c6Hk73jRvrnvzGUsoCt9SlnSh%7EOC8mnIr4wZsX%7E73MK5J64CzUe1nydptYcfLILit7t1MsWcNDiiJTlxuTn1KJC3UiWMnT3RVjaWQ-7L5Ex0c3baPUzIj9Si0N0N0Bx-kudlYSgbKWnmdMW5OtmzFJLf5wTxWhmwskcSBaXA1AL-%7EBeL00xgqIne0jPBM2X2qqcBJp57aDTh-36K6zGDi13UFbpRxb%7EELAputGPoy6h4usSpW2n88WqJ58YzyYNm8NvftRvzTSh1l0mYEdbjT4rDpkkGCsA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
925564b80f29f004b39b58ef1b374308
PDF Text
Text
f nationalsecular society
WHY WOMEN SHOULD
BE SECULARISTS.
21 Cecture,
•*
BY
LOUISA
SAMSON.
PRICE TWOPENCE.
$
LONDON:
PROGRESSIVE PUBLISHING COMPANY,
28 Stonecutter Street, E.C.
1891
��B 3118
A-
®II)D Women shoulJr be Secularists,
has been said that “ every nation has got the government it deserves.’
The same might, perhaps, be as truthfully, or as untruthfully, stated
regarding its religion. I am inclined to question the veracity of that
proverb. If we had, in the past, taken such an axiom for granted, all
great progressive movements would have been impossible. We must re
member, however, that reforms, political, religious or social, have always
originated with minorities—they have generally been fought for in the
face of popular scorn, derision, or laughter, worked for amid persecution
and hardship, accomplished finally by dint of stern resolve and noble
self-sacrifice. And when these great reforms or progressions have be
come accomplished facts, the people have looked back shudderingly at
what, before, they were content to accept without grudge; and come to
regard, perhaps, as barbaric and repulsive, what at one time was con
sidered natural and convenient. The emancipation of the slaves might
never have been accomplished, if the individual desires of the slaves
themselves had been first consulted. Long years of slavery and of
oppression had rendered thousands of them apathetic and indifferent to
freedom. Had it not been for such men as Rousseau, Voltaire, and
Montesquieu, France might never have shaken herself free from the
grinding oppression of the monarchy; while to Mazzini and Garibaldi,
the prophets and liberators of Italy, is due, perhaps, the turning point
in that country’s history. Political and religious freedom go hand in
hand—the women of England need both. To-day they are pleading for
political rights—for a voice in the making of the laws they are compelled
to obey, and in the levying of the taxes for which they are made
responsible ; to-morrow they will throw oft the shackles of superstition,
and breathe the pure air of religious liberty of thought.
I am addressing myself particularly to women to-night, because we
are told, and I admit with truth, that women are the backbone of the
Christian Churches to-day. The congregations of our churches and
chapels are composed mainly of women, while among Freethought
audiences and societies women are decidedly in the minority. However
much we regret the fact, it is nevertheless true. And the reason is not
far to seek. Through long ages the education of women has been
neglected. Their need for mental progress has been entirely ignored.
t
I
�4
The Church, which owes so much to woman, has always been the one
to insist upon her position as the chattel and the slave of man ; to deny
to her intellectual liberty, to oppress her with the chains of servitude
and the bonds of ignorance.
It is an admitted fact, and I do not suppose the most devout or
bigoted Christian would attempt to deny it, that superstition has always
been the handmaid of ignorance. The Christian creed had its origin in
mythological tales, its first followers were drawn from the uneducated
classes, its teachers were illiterate men; its devotees from then until
now have been composed, to a large extent, of men and women who
have been ready to accept, without thought, the teachings of its priests,
while those who have rejected it have usually been men who have
studied science and the phenomena of nature. And so heresy has
spread wherever science has set her foot, honest unbelief has flourished
in proportion as education has advanced, and those who have been denied
the benefits of scientific culture have remained correspondingly in the
grasp of ignorance and religious credulity.
In order to understand the state of mental poverty which, until
recently, women occupied, it will be necessary to take a glance into the
past, and to consider, for a short time this evening, the conditions and
surroundings of the women of the Old and New Testaments. In the
second and third chapters of Genesis, we are introduced to the “first
woman,” who, according to that account, was made by God, as a sort
of after-thought, out of the rib of Adam as he lay sleeping. She is
taught, almost at the commencement of her career that she is an in
ferior animal: “Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule
over thee” (Gen. iii. 16). The book of Genesis then goes on to recount
how this inferior creature, this woman, held a conversation with a ser
pent (and evidently animals had the power of speech in those wonderful
days), and that in accordance with the directions of the serpent (who
seems to have had far more knowledge of the world than either she or
Adam), she picked an apple and handed one to her husband, who “like
wise did eat,” and who, as soon as he was found out, after skulking be
hind the trees, threw, like a coward, all the blame upon his wife.
Throughout the Old Testament women are treated with contempt.
They are bought and sold in the same way as other objects of merchan
dise. Rebekah was bought with precious things by Abraham’s servant
for Isaac. The account of the purchase is given in Genesis xxiv. 53.
Jacob paid seven years’ service to Laban for each of his two first wives
(Gen. xxix. 15-28). In the twenty-first chapter of Exodus, from the
seventh to the tenth verses, permission is given for men to sell their
daughters into slavery. We find also that, in many cases, there were
�5
actually no formalities of marriage. Sarah made a present of Hagar,
her maidservant, to Abraham ; in the words of the Bible, “she gave her
to her husband Abraham to be his wife ”; and when he was tired of her
he sent her away, with her child, into the wilderness, with the magni
ficent present of a piece of bread and a bottle of water from his stores
of wealth. And this, we are told in the twenty-first chapter of Genesis
and the twelfth verse, was with the express permission of God.
In Exodus xxi. 4 it is related that in the case of a man being a slave,
and having married during his term of slavery, when he went free he
had to leave behind his wife and his children; he had to “go out by
himself,” while his wife and family became the property of his master.
A little farther on (Deut. xxiv. 1) we find that after a man had taken a
wife, if she found no favor in his eyes, he might “ write her a bill of
divorcement, give it into her hand and send her out of his house.”
After he had turned her out, she might, if she liked, go and be another
man’s wife; and as nothing at all is said about giving her money, or
food, or clothes, it is probable that she would have to do that or starve.
After she had been cast adrift a few times, it is just as likely she would
prefer starvation. It is just as well to notice, too, that the woman had
no appeal. The husband was the accuser, the judge, and the jury. All
he had to do was to write out his sentence of divorce, give it to his wife
and send her away into the wide world. Women might also be taken as
captives of war, outraged and then cast aside. Express directions for
this kind of treatment are given in the twenty-first chapter of Deuter
onomy from the tenth to the fourteenth verses. Polygamy was general
among the peoples of the Bible ; perhaps the most remarkable example
of a much married man is that of Solomon, “the wisest man who ever
lived,” one of whose acts of wisdom was the possession of 700 first-class
and 300 second-class wives. But we do not need to rely only upon the
teachings of the Old Testament to find proof of the low estimation in
which women have always been held in Biblical times.
In Corinthians it is stated, “For the man is not of woman, but the
woman of the man; neither was man created for the woman, but the
woman for the man,” and again, “Let the women keep silence in the
churches, for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are
commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they
will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home, for it is a
shame for women to speak in the church.” If a woman has a healthy
desire for information, it is nipped in the bud. If her husband be as
ignorant as herself, she must be content, and ask nothing further.
But this is not all. In the 5th chapter of Ephesians we read: “Wives,
submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord, for the
�6
husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the
Church, and he is the savior of the body. Therefore, as the Church is
subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands
in everything.” Nothing is said here about the beautiful doctrine
of forbearance one with another—no suggestion of mutual friend
ship and comradeship, which should exist in all true marriages.
Peter, in fact, commands the wives to couple their conversation
with fear. The New Testament looks upon marriage as a sort of
necessary evil. St. Paul taught that it was only to be adopted
as a concession to the weakness of man’s animal nature. That
purity and dignity of life, or that intellectual and sympathetic com
panionship should be the attributes of marriage never seems to have
occurred to the New Testament teachers. Mr. Lecky, in his History of
European Morals, says that marriage, under Christian rule, was viewed
in the most degraded form. The notion of its impurity, too, took many
forms, and exercised for some centuries an extremely wide influence
over the Church.
There is not one word in the New Testament condemnatory of poly
gamy. The restriction to one wife appears only to apply to bishops and
deacons (1 Tim. iii., 2, 12). Writing of the mediaeval Christians, Lecky
says: “ Christianity had assumed a form as polytheistic, and quite as
idolatrous as the ancient Paganism.” Sir William Hamilton, too, in his
Discussion of Philosophy and Literature, dealing with later Christianity,
and speaking particularly of Luther and Melancthon, says : “ They
promulgated opinions in favor of polygamy, and went to the extent of
vindicating to the spiritual minister the right to a private dispensation,
and to the temporal magistrate the right of establishing the practice, if
he chose, by public law.”
Professor George Dawes tells us that on December 19, 1539, at
Wittenberg, Luther and Melancthon drew up the famous Concillium,
authorising Phillip of Hesse to have a plurality of wives. This impor
tant document bears the names of nine of the most prominent men of
the Protestant Reformation. I find, from the same authority, that
John of Leyden established the practice of polygamy at Munster, and
drove from their homes all those who dared to oppose the odious custom;
and other Protestants followed his example. Until quite lately, the
Mormons, who are an extremely religious sect, practised polygamy.
The Mormons take the Bible as their moral guide, and are so sancti
monious that even their dances and festivities are opened and closed
with prayer.
It is instructive to compare the treatment of women under the rule
of Christianity with that of the ancient Romans. Moncure Conway,
�7
in one of his able discourses in South Place Institute some years ago
said, “ there was not a more cruel chapter in history than that which
records the arrest, by Christianity, of the natural growth of European
civilization as regards woman. In Germany it found woman partici
pating in the legislative assembly, and sharing the interests and counsels
of man, and drove her out and away, leaving her to-day nothing of her
ancient rights but the titles that remain to mark her degradation. In
the Pagan countries of Egypt, Greece, and Rome, woman’s position was
far higher than under Christian sway. The Egyptians neither degraded
her by polygamy nor kept her secluded. The Greeks, who at first treated
their women almost as slaves, gradually improved their condition, and
learnt from the Egyptians the arts of humanity and justice towards
women.” Lecky, in his Position of Women, says: “On the whole,
it is probable that the Roman matron was from the earliest period a
name of honor; that the beautiful sentence of a jurisconsult of the
Empire, who defined marriage as a lifelong fellowship, of all
divine and human rights, expressed most faithfully the feelings of the
people, and that female virtue had, in every age, a considerable place in
Roman biographies.” Long before the era of Christianity, the great
poetess Sappho flourished, of whom Plato spoke in such high terms of
honor. In ancient Greece, women taught in the philosophical schools,
and lectured on scientific and literary subjects. The last prominent
popular representative was Hypatia, the daughter of Theon, the
mathematician, who not only expounded the doctrines of Plato and
Aristotle, but commented upon the writings of Apollonius. But just at
this time Christianity was coming into power, and one of its apostles
was St. Cyril, who succeeded Theophilus to the Bishopric of Alexandria.
Hypatia was a heretic, St. Cyril was a Christian. One day as Hypatia
was proceeding to her lecture hall, she was set upon by a mob of monks
who, under the religious direction of Cyril, stripped her naked, dragged
her into a church, and there murdered her. They afterwards cut her
body to pieces, scraped the flesh from her bones with shells, and cast
the remnants into the fire. St. Cyril, the pious minister of Christ, was
never called to account for this terrible crime. In fact, to the Christians
the extermination of heretics was no crime, and so philosophy was
stamped out and destroyed, just as the great Alexandrian Library was
destroyed by Theophilus, the uncle of this St. Cyril, who for fear of the
heresy which inevitably accompanies knowledge, did away with the
grand array of literature which had been collected by the Ptolemys—
the Ptolemys who, in the words of Draper, “ recognized that there is
something more durable than the forms of faith, which, like the
organic forms of geological ages, once gone, are clean gone for ever, and
�8
have no restoration, no return. They recognized that within this world
of transient delusions and unrealities, there is a world of truth; and
that that world is not to be discovered through the vain traditions that
have brought down to us the opinions of men who lived in the morning
of civilization, nor in the dreams of mystics, who thought that they
were inspired. It is to be discovered by the investigations of geometry,
and by the practical interrogation of nature. These confer on humanity
solid, and innumerable, and inestimable blessings.”
I have endeavored to show that Christianity has always been the
enemy of education and of science. Such men as Galileo and Giordano
Bruno have fallen victims to its bigotry and intolerance. Servetus was
roasted to death over a slow fire, by order of Calvin, because he had the
audacity to think for himself upon religious matters. Dr. Draper, in
his Conflict between Religion and Science, says of the Inquisition, that
“ in general terms, its commission was to extirpate religious dissent by
terrorism, and surround heresy with the most horrible associations;
this necessarily implied the power of determining what constitutes
heresy. The criterion of truth was thus in possession of this tribunal,
which was charged to discover, and to bring to judgment, heretics
lurking in towns, houses, cellars, woods, caves, and fields. With such
savage alacrity did it carry out its object of protecting the interests of
religion that between 1481 and 1808, it had punished 340,000 persons,
and of these nearly 32,000 had been burnt.”
It has often been argued that persecution only emanated from the
Catholic Church. But Protestants have persecuted Catholics ; both of
these Christian sects have fallen upon each other whenever they have
had the chance. Not much more than 300 years ago, in the reign of
Elizabeth, who boasted of her religious tolerance, within twenty years
more than 200 Catholic priests were executed, while a yet greater num
ber perished in the filthy and fever-stricken gaols into which they were
plunged (Green’s Short History of the English People).
Whenever the Church has been most powerful, she has been most in
tolerant, and by “ the Church” I mean all communities whose thoughts
are bound by religious creeds. To-day the Church is losing her power
with the spread of education, and she is becoming more tolerant. One by
one, the old doctrines are slipping from under her feet. Priests of the
Established Church, like Archdeacon Farrar, have rejected Eternal
Punishment by Hell Fire; and the Inspiration of the Bible, the Birth
of the World 6,000 years ago, the Universal Flood: all these things which
at one time it was death at the stake to deny, are not now insisted upon
by many ministers of the gospel, who claim to be of the Broad School
of Christianity. And why are these things not as true to-day as they
�9
were a hundred years ago ? Simply because the pure light of science
has streamed upon them, and civilization is crumbling to atoms the
theories which have descended from primitive and barbaric times ; be
cause men and women are profiting by the experiences of the ages
because the inventions of railways and the telegraph, of newspapers,
and of the postal system are placing within reach of the poorest the
knowledge which, in the past, was withheld from them.
Now, it may be asked, What do I mean by Secularism? I mean,
the religion of this life. Secularists are constantly charged with
“negativeness.” We are charged with pulling down with one hand,
and building up nothing with the other—or rather we are accused
of expending all our energies upon the work of destruction, and with
constructing nothing—because, say the Christians, we have “nothing
to construct.” Let us see, therefore, what code of morals our Secular
ism embraces. Secularism sees only this world. It does not pretend
to waste valuable time, which might be employed in practical work
for the good of humanity, in discussing whether there may or may
not be, in some far off misty region, which has never yet been defined,
another world where all the ills of this one may be set right. Our
experience of this world has never proved to us, by any possible
method of reasoning, that another one, which at best must be an im
aginative one, will be any improvement on the present. We are content
to place the mythologies of the Bible upon a par with the mythologies
of Greece, or of Rome; to read the writings of the Biblical prophets
only as we might read the literature of other and more ancient reli
gions ; to study the welfare of our fellow creatures, to do right for the
love of rectitude, and not for the hope of a future reward, or the fear of
a future punishment. We hold that only by making happiness for
those around us, and by endeavoring, individually, to make the world
a little brighter for our having lived in it, can we hope to gain happi
ness for ourselves. We believe in the liberty of thought and of speech,
but we do not believe in any individual attempting to explain the
workings of some supposed cause, outside the universe of which, like
us, he knows nothing. We believe in concentrating our efforts upon
the improvement of this world, which is all the world we know of.
If this other world, with which Christians are apparently so well ac
quainted, should really exist; according to their own creed, only a very
few people are to get there. “ Strait is the gate and narrow the way,
and few there be that find it.” There will be no room for the heretics,
for the great reformers and inventors of all ages, for such men as
Galileo, or Bruno, or Spinoza. Truly the Secularist would rather seek
immortality in the hearts of men, the Secularist would rather recognise
�10
the eternity of great works accomplished, of liberties won, of all those
influences which can never die, than he would sigh for the paltry glory
of never-ending psalm-singing and knee-bending. But, alas, with all
our progress, with the gradual rejection of creeds among men, we
women, the larger part of the community, are still bound by the fetters
of the Church. Yet, as we gather by slow degrees the advantages of
education, which have until recently been withheld from us, so surely
shall we begin to think, to reason, and so to doubt. The great cry against
women is, that they “do not think.” Yes! but you have not let us
think. You have withheld from us the means by which we should have
been taught to think. We have only been thrown the crumbs which
fell from the table of knowledge. In an excellent article by Dr. Fitch,
in the latest edition of Chambers' Encyclopaedia, upon Education, he
says, speaking of endowed schools of the 18th, and the beginning of the
present century: “It is to be observed that while schools of the charity
class were open to girls, the whole of the grammar school education
was provided for boys only. There is scarcely a record in all the
voluminous reports of later charity commissions, of any school whose
founder deliberately contemplated a liberal education for girls ; certainly
not one which fulfilled such a purpose, whether it was contemplated by
the founder or not. A girl was not invited to the university or grammar
school; but she might, if poor, be needed to contribute to the comfort
of her ‘ betters,’ as an apprentice or a servant, and therefore the
charity schools were open to her.” It is only recently that some of the
Universities have partially thrown open their doors to women ; the
secular University of London led the way. Even now, when women,
as in the case of Miss Fawcett, outstrip the men in intellectual attain
ments, they are not allowed to receive the honorable rewards of their
work.
Fortunately, the emancipation of women has begun, the spirit of the
age points to freedom, and by and bye, when the myths and super
stitions of religious creeds shall have taken their places far back amid
the shadows, women shall stand side by side with all honest men, work
ing hand in hand with them in the arena of life for the commonweal,
given the same opportunities, the same rewards, the same inducements
for effort. And I would have you bear in mind that in order to have
strong intellectual men, in order that the race may grow in mental as
well as in physical vigor, it is necessary that the minds of women
should be cultivated.
The ancient Spartans, who were remarkable for the wondrous vigor
and strength of their men, recognised this necessity, at any rate as
regards the physical education of their women. They desired men of
�11
strong bodily configuration ; their ideal heroes were hardy, daring, and
resolute. Professor James Donaldson, writing in the Contemporary
Review, in 1878, says of the Spartans: “ The one function which
woman had to discharge was that of motherhood. But this function
was conceived in the widest range in which the Spartans conceived
humanity. In fact, no woman can discharge effectively any one of
the great functions assigned her by nature without the entire culti
vation of all parts of her nature. And so we see in this case. The
Spartans wanted strong men: the mothers therefore must be strong.
The Spartans wanted brave men; the mothers therefore must be
brave. The Spartans wanted resolute men—men with decision of
character: the mothers must be resolute. They believed with in
tense faith that, as are the mothers, so will be the children. And they
acted on this faith. They first devoted all the attention and care they
could to the physical training of their women. From their earliest
days the women engaged in gymnastic exercises ; and when they reached
the age of girlhood, they entered into contests with each other in
wrestling, racing, and throwing the quoit, and the javelin.” Farther
on in his essay, Professor Donaldson says: “ Such was the Spartan
system. What were the results of it ? For about four or five hundred
years there was a succession of the strongest men that possibly ever
existed on the face of the earth. The legislator was successful in his
main aim. And I think that I may add that these men were among
the bravest. They certainly held the supremacy in Greece for a con
siderable time, through sheer force of energy, bravery, and obedience to
law. And the women helped to this high position as much as the men.
They were themselves remarkable for vigor of body and beauty of form.”
Dealing with the education of the Spartan women, Donaldson says:
“Many of the wives were better educated than their husbands, and the
fact was noticed by others. ‘ You of Lacedemon,’ said a stranger lady
to Gorgo, wife of Leonidas, ‘ are the only women in the world that rule
the men.’ ‘ We,’ she replied, ‘ are the only women that bring forth
men.’ There is a great deal of point in what Gorgo said. If women
bring forth and rear men, they are certain to receive from them respect
and tenderness, for there is no surer test of a man’s real manhood than
his love for all that is noblest, highest, and truest in women, and his
desire to aid her in attaining to the full perfection of her nature.”
And so even now, late in the day as it is, we have begun to learn the
lesson that it is necessary, if men would advance, the women should
advance also.
Ah ! but we are told, women are not logical like men, they are more
impulsive, they are naturally more sentimental and superstitious. I
�12
admit it, but I contend that their position in these respects is the result
of their past training, or, rather, neglect of training. Does not the
tree of ignorance always bear the fruit of superstition? And just in
proportion as women become educated so do they become logical and
self-reliant. No one, however, pretends to deny that the highest
education and belief in Christianity often go together. But one must
remember, also, that part of the doctrine of Christianity is “to become
as little children ”—or, in other words, when dealing with religious
questions, it is necessary to accept the Bible narratives, with the simple
credulity of children. When an educated person comes, therefore, to
deal with Christianity—if he wishes to remain true to his faith—he
must necessarily put inductive and deductive reasoning out of sight; he
must be prepared to swallow whole, miracles, resurrections, marvellous
births, and other wonders, without the slightest attempt at mental
mastication. In dealing with these matters, the educated Christian is
compelled to throw reason and logic to the winds, or his belief would
falter. But it is impossible to settle these matters without the use of
reason. The Christian must therefore be content to shelve them, and
he finds the usual hackneyed phrase very useful at this crisis: “ These
are mysteries, ive do not attempt to understand them.” Now, that is where
the Secularist differs radically with the Christian. The Secularist main
tains that it is the duty of every man and woman to reason out, upon
the lines of experience, each and every question which affects the pro
blem of life. Secularists cannot see tl^e necessity of making exceptions
to this rule whenever religion is concerned. Naturally, women who
have always been kept in subjection—who have been taught that blind
unquestioning obedience and servile submission are qualities which
they should possess, are more readily adaptable to religious dogmas than
men, who have always enjoyed a wider freedom than women. Sub
mission to the rule of the Church, and humble reverence for its mini
sters have always been part and parcel of religious teachings.
As I have said, too, men are, by their training in the past, and in the
present, more logical in thought than women. It has often occurred
to me that this is one reason, out of many, why women are more
devoted to the Christian faith than men. It, however, only partially
explains it, because, as we have just seen, a vast number of people are
content to put into the background their logic and reason when they
come to deal with questions of belief.
And by following this plan they are, as they think, honestly able to
accept Christianity in its entirety, and to regard belief in such matters
as the Trinity, the Incarnation and the Atonement as essential to their
salvation. Individuals of this school, like Jonathan Edwards, or, to
�13
take examples of the present period, men like Mr. Spurgeon or Dr.
Talmage, are, as far as their religion is concerned, perfectly consistent;
and for my part I would far more respect men of this type than those
who belong to what is called the Broad school of Christianity, the men
who are neither true to Christianity nor Secularism; but who, to use a
vulgar phrase, run with both hare and hounds, and endeavor to keep
within distance of the advanced thought of the nineteenth century
while at the same time they pander to the superstitions of a creed
which is barbarous and unfit for a civilised community. I am not con
tending, however, that consistent Christians are not honest. I know
that great names are cited upon the side of Christianity, such as those
of Mr. Gladstone, Cardinal Newman or Sir Isaac Newton; and that, on
the other hand, Secularists can refer to such men as Charles Darwin,
Herbert Spencer, or Colonel Robert Ingersoll as having rejected the
Christian dogma. The real fact is that great names prove nothing so
far as individual thought is concerned. What we need to do is to
think for ourselves,—what we have no right to do is to control the
thought of others.
Mothers have no right to take advantage of the plasticity of their
children’s minds to instil into them doctrines which by and bye they
will have to unlearn. Of all confidences there is none greater, none
more unfaltering, than that of the child in its parent. Long before
reason has grown, the myths of the Bible have been related as veritable
facts to the infant mind. Slowly but surely the child is moulded for
the Church prison, and its impressionable nature stamped with creed
and dogma. What a terrible responsibility is this! and yet it is under
taken every day and every hour by the mothers of our nation, under
taken as a duty, as a labor of love—undertaken, too, with honesty and
sincerity. And so the child is sent out into the world, handicapped at
the outset; his mind warped with the narrow tenets of the Christian
faith. He goes forth to take his part in the world’s struggle wrapped
round with the mantle of superstition, which clings and drags around
his mental form, impedes the free movement of his thought, and
obstructs his reasoning faculties. And for this, as I have said, the
mother—nay, the education of the mother—is responsible. Well, in
deed, if women were taught to
Then would the wider field of
duty appear; the individuality of the child would not be sacrificed to
the authority of the parent; the spirit of enquiry would be nurtured
and stimulated; and the child would gain in self-reliance and percep
tion, while he would be untrammelled with delusions and faiths. We
have no right to bind the intellects of our children. We have no right
to pollute their minds with the horrible doctrines of Everlasting Dam
�14
nation and of the natural depravity of man; we have no right to
describe to them the barbarous and bloodthirsty actions of the men of
the Bible, and fill their youthful minds with horror at the awful doom
awaiting those who will not accept these stories as divine.
One duty at least we owe to our children—to give them fair play. I
do not mean, by that, that we are to bring them up in ignorance of
Biblical knowledge. Such knowledge is necessary and useful. But so
also is a knowledge of other religions of the world. The history and
development of Buddhism, of Hinduism, of Muhammadanism, and of
other ancient or modern faiths are of value to every thinking individual,
inasmuch as something may be learned from each oHthem. But if we
place before our children the religion of the Bible, it is surely our duty
to acquaint them with the important fact that it is but one out of
many religions ; and that having special prominence in this country, it
is perhaps necessary to study in particular its history and methods.
I think it is generally admitted that women are both practical and
sympathetic. If the great majority of women were Secularists, how
much more temporal work might be done. The time spent in praying
to the God of the Christians to grant favors or to avert disasters, to
alter decrees which, at the same time, he is supposed to have immut
ably determined, might be occupied in useful work; the hours spent at
the confessional or at the altar might be employed in the discharge of
the duties of citizens; the days given to Scripture reading would be
spent in the search for truth; the observance of religious rites and
forms would give place to following after the teachings of science; the
inmates of nunneries, at present shut away from the world, and offici
ating only in the solitudes of the cell, as the brides of Christ, would
become earnest, active workers, helping to spread the doctrine of intel
lectual freedom.
Let us look for a moment at some of the work that is being accom
plished to-day in the name of Christianity; and it may be as well to
bear in mind that women are always to the front whenever practical
work is to be done. Let us take, for instance, the British Women’s
Temperance Association. Perhaps no organisation for reform is more
energetic or can show better results than this society. But what I
want to draw special attention to is that the work is said to be done in
the, name of Christianity. Now, putting aside the fact that the founder
of Christianity on more than one occasion clearly sanctioned the prac
tice of wine-drinking, it must be obvious to anyone jwho at all seriously
considers the matter, that the drink question has absolutely nothing
whatever to do with any distinctive creed. In order to reform a drunk
ard he must be brought to see that excessive drinking is injurious to
�15
himself; that unless it be given up it will sooner or later end in the de
struction of his body. (I say nothing about the soibl because, according
to Christians, the repentance of an hour is sufficient to atone for the
sins of a lifetime, and is a certain passport to glory.) I say, then, that
the acceptance or non-acceptance of a creed has nothing to do with the
drink question. In fact, the followers of Muhammad set the Christian
bishops and priests a good example, for one of the Muhammadan rules
is abstention from intoxicating liquors, and the Muhammadans have no
taverns or gaming houses. Christians, too, are in the habit of sending
out batches of missionaries to preach the gospel of Christ to the poor
deluded heathen; and the same ships that carry the missionaries are
loaded with barrels of vile, adulterated rum which it is intended they
should consume in the intervals of digesting the good news which these
Christian ministers preach to them. The North American Indians are
indebted to Christianity for the introduction of drunkenness among
them! Then there is the great Peace Movement, started in this country
chiefly by the Quakers. Both the Peace Society and the International
Peace and Arbitration Society has its Female Committee, a band of
women who are pledged to support arbitration and use their influence
to put down war in the name of Christianity! And yet the Archbishop
of the Christian Church, as by law established, publicly consecrates the
flags of the army, and in times of war the Christian priests pray to the
God of the Christians to bless the murderous work of hewing down their
fellow creatures or blowing out their brains. Take, for instance, the
case of the Zulu war, when thousands of Zulus, fighting in defence of
their own country, and with only assegais to defend themselves against
the scientific weapons of civilised England, were butchered wholesale by
the English soldiers; who, upon their return to this Christian land, were
publicly applauded for their heroic deeds, and upon whose breasts her
Most Gracious Majesty the Queen pinned medals of honor. And then
the drums rolled and the trumpets played, and the ministers of the
Christian Church offered public thanksgiving to God for this glorious
victory. And the women—the peace-loving women of England—knelt
within the Church pews and joined devoutly in the national thanks
giving. And yet the Peace Movement is called a Christian movement!
and the religion which has been responsible for centuries of oppression
and bloodshed poses as affording its blessing and sanction to English
Peace Societies.
But I might go on interminably enumerating the great reform move
ments of the age which have been engendered by the spirit of progress
and of humanity, and which are totally distinct from any question of
creed or belief. I maintain that all great progressions tending towards
�16
political or social freedom, all noble endeavors to better the conditions
and surroundings of mankind have been undertaken in spite of and not
as a consequence of Christianity. I do not need to remind you of the
prominent place that women have taken in the secular work of the
Salvation Army. I am endeavoring to show how much the secular
work of women is impeded, and not advanced, by the Christian creed.
If the women of the Salvation Army devoted themselves entirely to
secular work, so much the more would their services be of value to the
community. But it is at least one step nearer truth when religionists
of the nineteenth century admit practically, if not theoretically, that
the salvation of the body is of more urgent necessity than that of the
soul; it is at least one point gained when secular work comes first and
spiritual work second; it is a significant sign of the times when Chris
tians are forced to admit that the only way in which it is to-day possible
to keep alive their creed among the poorest classes is to sandwich the
Atonement in between a good supper and a night’s rest, and silver the
pill of Eternal Damnation with a coating of material help. The Chris
tian women of the Salvation Army have, -in spite of themselves, had
to reject at least one of the teachings of the New Testament. If they
had followed the advice of St. Paul in one particular respect they could
not have undertaken the positions of preachers; they would have had
to “keep silence”; and if the women had kept silence, I will venture to :i
say the Army would not have become the big thing it has turned out to 'f
be. Mr. Stead, in his article in the Review of Reviews for October, ’.A
1890, says that the Salvation Army was “largely founded by a woman,”
i
and that “the extent to which the Salvation Army has employed women 2
in every department of its administration has been one of the great J.:
secrets of its strength.” I am not quoting this remark in order that
women may appear to take special credit, but only as proving the truth 'J;
of the assertion that women possess, perhaps in particular, the faculty ,
of persuasion.
The conversion, therefore, of women to Secularism will mean the.ijBft
increase of Secularism among men, and among the children who will be
the men and women of the future; it will mean the gradual relinquish
ing of prayer for helpful work; it will mean the abandonment of peni
tent submission for the display of energy in improving the surroundings
of life; it will mean the closing of the eye of faith in the supernatural
and the increase of confidence in noble self-effort; it will mean the ulti
mate death of .tyranny and fear and the beautiful realisation of the
Brotherhood of Man.
J .
j.
o
�
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
Why women should be secularists : a lecture
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Samson, Louisa
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 16 p. ; 19 cm.
Notes: Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Progressive Publishing Company
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1891
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N604
Subject
The topic of the resource
Women
Secularism
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 (Why women should be secularists : a lecture), 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
NSS
Secularism
Women
Women Freethinkers