1
10
1
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/4f0c71ebc0e72adef0c2fd6bedf8fb75.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=eQtNYxv3uEaLrdHVvQZok-3LkCFClxe%7E%7EatXSqBXIjBCj5AghOs2JX1b82W3-K-yjNKwuIJ4kRY%7E1OBhdkEvhwnwcikp3U9u8cnwngqym65SbTe0eoPWFT68xjuCFdC13DqFuseYAWmrFkOKilQU4xi%7EaiwnWJhrVIxN3ctRYqN3VWN0UlJpeZDnP4RwqzrPABkfgox6Osf0cC%7EJBwqRvUPwZTmv2IKyNqwaXQsbj45rRZ2%7EVmWqVplifSOIOwqcI8h6Y4czPui%7ENeL2GyNsCNb3WdyxDtDH29WYEEUpGg-M-qRVoDYs5pWbvvc%7ExvetD5321SsE8ihVoOSiZk%7EVfw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
a2000903cee70a690ada280668102e6e
PDF Text
Text
NOTZ
The following appeared in the “ Clarion ” of
March 25th last:—■
r
|
A BRISTOL MINISTER ON
“GOD AND MY NEIGHBOUR.”
•_
AN OBJECT LESSON.
t
,
, (
(By ROBERT BLATCHFORD.)
A Bristol reader sends me a pamphlet, by the
Rev. Hugh C. Wallace, containing, I am sorry
to say, some spiteful and ill-considered per
sonal attacks on me, and asks me to say “a
few words in defence.”
No defence is called
for.
My life and work are my defence.
Neither is Mr Wallace’s pamphlet worthy of
notice, .except as a regrettable manifestation of'
littleness of mlind and bitterness of spirit which
are, unfortunately, too common amongst pro
fessing Christians.
T'he pamphlet is entitled “ ‘ God and My
Neighbour’: a Criticism of iMr Blatchford’s
book, by Hugh C. Wallace.”
It would have
been more correctly described as “ A Personal
Attack on Robert Blatchford, by one whoneither knows nor understands him.”,
Now, although it .is perhaps advisable topoint out io tin
Christian ministers
who have descended to the level of personal
recrimination, the error of theiir ways, .it is not
easy to deal with a case like this without
seeming to be severe.
And I do not want tobe severe, nor to give pain to Mr Wallace, nor
to any other Christian.
My .sole desire is, to
say a few words for the -cause of toleration and
human kindness, and, -at the same time, to
convince my assailants, if that is possible,
that their conduct is mistaken and indefen
sible.
On page 5 of his pamphlet Mr Wallace
says:—
.
One is disposed to ask, “ How has socialism
affected ‘ Nunquam ’ ? ” He is no longer a
■private in the army 'b-ut the editor an in
fluential ■and largely circulated paper. What
effect has his infidelity had upon his position ?
Instead' of going down-, the “Clarion” cir
culation has gone up since he commenced
his series- of attacks upon the Christian faith.
In the- light of that I -am perfectly prepared'
to believe his statement on page 190 that: —
“ My attack is not. wanton, but- deliberate ;
n>ot purposeless, but very purposeful.”
Here Mr Wallace tacitly charges' me with
attacking religion for the sake o.f making
money. And he makes this charge, not hastily
and in anger, but- deliberately and in cold!
■ blood.
Now, I submit to Mr Wallace that even if he
knew for*a certainty that his charge was true,,
he ought, as a Christian minister to have ex
pressed it more, gently, -and with more dignity.
But he has chosen to be deliberately sarcastic
and bitter.
/
�2.
And I submit to him that as a matter of commom honesty and manliness he ought not to
have made so gross and so offensive a sugges
tion until he had taken great pains to make
sure of its truth.
But if he had taken even a very little trouble
he would have found tout, that his suspicion
was not only unfounded1, but grotesquely un
true. I conclude, then, that Mr Wallace—a
professed Christian and a minister of the
gospel.—has allowed his anger and his pre
judice ito mislead! him into' charging with base
eoniducib a man of whose life1 and character he
is utterly ignorant.
But, besides being uncharitable and unjust,
Mr Wallace’s personal attack on me is mani
festly unwise. For even if what he insinuates
were true, even if I were as contemptible a
creature as he represents me, what 'bearing
would that have upon the question at issue
between us? Would the fact that one Agnostic
was a rogue prove Christianity to 'be true?
If so, the easy task of finding a professed
Christian who is a liar or a thief might be
alleged as a proof that Christianity is false.
Mr Wallace, in his pamphlet, suggests that
I am mercenary, insincere, incompetent, con
ceited, frivolous, irreverent, and devoid of
spirituality and the saving grace of humour.
Suppose I am all that, I am what thousands
of other men are, and -amongst them some
ministers of the Gospel. But what has that
to do with the case?
A man writes a book in which he argues
that the Christian religion is not true. Mr
Wallace retorts 'by saying that infidelity pays.
Is that a wise, or a dignified, or an effective
reply. The question of truth or untruth of
the national religion is a very serious public
question. Mr Wallace iis trifling with the sub
ject and with the public when he offers them
a pamphlet in which personal attacks upon
Robert Blatchford waste the space that -should
be devoted to answering the arguments
brought by Agnostics against Christianity.
On page 14- of his pamphlet Mr Wallace says:
A few years ago there lived at Bowdon a
prosperous Christian man; he was clear
headed, far-sighted, a genius and inventor;
at the bidding of the Spirit of God he gave
up his fine house and grounds, and went
to live in one of the darkest slums of Man
chester, Ancoats; he did this that he might
redeem it from its vice and make it part of
the Kingdom of God. iHis name was -Frank
Crossley.
There was another man who, by sheer
force of character and by honest hard work,
climbed up the ladder step by .step from
being a, private in the army to an influential
and responsible position in the newspaper
world; and then he went to live in a snug
little villa in a London suburb. His name
was Robert Blatchford. Nothing .more need
be said.
I think a good deal more need be said', for
I think Mr Wallace is very superficial in this
matter. He honours Mr Crossley for going tolive in a slum, and he suggests that I am to
blame because I do not live in a. slum. Am I
right in assuming that the Rev. Hugh C.
Wallace does not live in a slum? Am 1 right
�in assuming that such popular religious leaders
as Dr Horton, Dr Clifford, the Rev. R. J.
Campbell, a*nd the Archbishop of Canterbury
do not live in slums, but actually live in better
houses than I can afford, and are better paid;
for preaching the Gospel than I am for preach
ing Socialism?
I cannot see' that it is my duty tO' go and
live in a slum, nor to take my wife and
children to live in such an unlovely and un
healthy place. Doubtless Mr Crossley was jus
tified in his action, but is Mr Wallace sure
that I am not justified in mine?
No human being ought to live in a slum.
The best way to help those who are. doomed
to confinement in such miserable surroundings
is by helping to- abolish such surroundings,
'by helping to remove the evil and the injustices
which cause the slums. This I have tr:ed to
do. in the only way in which it can be done,
by preaching Socialism. And, although I may
be wrong and- Mr Wallace may be right, I
think I have done more good in the past dozen
veai's ,by my public work than I could have
done by going to live in a slum.
The more
especially as I should probably have died there,
and done no good at all.
Of course Mr Wallace wishes to convey the
impression that Christianity makes men
altruist's, and that Agnosticism makes them
selfish. He might have taken a more logical
and a less offensive' way of advanc:ng that
■claim. .But stated in any form I dispute it.
During the recent discussion on religion in
the “Clarion ” I could not help seeing that my
Christian opponents were less generous- and
less 'courteous to me than I was to them; that
whereas I only attacked dogmas and arguments
they attacked me- personally. Can Mr Wallace
explain this difference ? I account for it by
assuming that my philosophy is better than
the Christians’ religion.
Finally, I assure Mr Wallace that he1 has
misunderstood' and misrepresented me, and I
ask him to confine himself in the future- to
answering his opponents’ arguments and to
refrain from recklessly maligning their char
acters. Anyone who- knows: me- or my work
would convince Mr Wallace in a few minutes
that he has acted unwisely, and has brought
discredit upon himself in. hi-s desire to- injure
■me. Of course Mr Wallace: know no better,
but a man in his position should be more
careful -and discreet.
On page 7 of his pamphlet Mr Wallace1 says:
I judge him largely by his- preface. He
finds his fellows: so “ amusing.” He walks
along the Strand peopled, on his- own con
fession, by thieves, gamblers, and prosti
tutes, and he finds them “amusing”; and
this is the kind of man who sets himself
up to criticise a religion that teaches “Thou
shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."
This remarkable reading of the preface- to
“ God and My Neighbour,” and thi® astounding
picture of the frivolous author laughing at the
misery of his fellow creatures proved my con
tention that Mr Wallace does not know nor
understand the -man he ha® attacked.
To
quote Mr Wallace—“ There is no more to- be
said.”'
�4.
THE REV. HUGH C. WALLACE’S REPLY
TO
ROBERT
BLATCHFORD’S
BOOK,
“ GOD AND 'MY NEIGHBOUR.”
It has been thought well to issue in leaflet
.form Mt Blatchford’s notes, which appeared
in the “<£larion,” of 25th March last, on the
pamphlet published by the Rev. Hugh C. Wal
lace, of David Thomas Church, Bristol.
As Mr Wallace's attack is mainly personal,
stigmatising Mr Blatchford as unfit for the
task undertaken, and representing him to be
actuated by base and mercenary motives, it
is but right that those interested should have
a true .statement concerning these matters.
Mt Blatohford has been for many years an
earnest reformer, with a deep passion for the
welfare and ennoblement of humanity, and has
made this cause his life work.
He has had
a brilliant literary career, and is recognised
as an. acute and logical thinker.
He is the
author of many books, amongst which are
“Merrie England” and “Britain for the
British.”
The former obtained a circula
tion of over a million, and has been translated
into many languages.
He is certainly aslfit for the work entered
upon as were William ■ Cobbett and Shake
speare for the services' they so brilliantly per
formed. Previous to founding the “Clarion,”
Mr Blatchford was receiving a salary of £1000
per annum for 'his services to .a. well-known
paper.
On this paper his advocacy of the
cause he espoused was hampered, -and he
voluntarily sacrificed the position rather than
abandon his principles, and! launched the
“■Clarion” for their free advancement, despite
the fact, then known to him, that no. paper
previously issued, for the same humanitarian
purpose had paid. And, although the paper
was not remunerative for m'any years, and Mr
Bliatchford had received numerous outside
offers for his services, greatly .superior to any
thing the “ Clarion ” could provide in a
financial sense, he has not abandoned
■his task.
When .about, to. undertake the
criticism of theology, Mr Blatchford was
earnestly urged by friends of the paper to
desist from so doing, in the interest of the
circulation of the “’Clarion.”
To this Mr
Blatchford replied that he would not sacrifice
what he believed to' be true to monetary con
siderations.
Such are the facts.
It is dis
tasteful to refer further to these matters, but
it should be known that although Mr Blatch
ford is a brilliant novelist and a. popular
writer, with an international reputation, that,
in consequence of allying himself with a.p
unpopular cause, he is not 'So well paid for his
public work as is the Rev. Wallace for his
professional religious duties.
Indeed, it is
very., very probable that Mr Blatchford has
sacrificed more in the furtherance of his
principles than, even the Rev. Wallace.
However, placing these matters aside, it is
important that any further discussion should
be confined to 'dealing with fundamental facts
and essential argument.
w
>5
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
A Bristol minister on "God and my neighbour" : an object lesson
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Blatchford, Robert [1851-1943]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [London]
Collation: 4 p. ; 21 cm.
Notes: At head of title: "The following appeared in the "Clarion" of March 25th last." P.4, apparently written by the editor of The Clarion, justifies the "issue of Mr Blatchford's notes [...] on the pamphlet published by the Rev. Hugh C. Wallace of David Thomas Church, Bristol." Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Clarion Press
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[n.d.]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N077
Subject
The topic of the resource
Agnosticism
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (A Bristol minister on "God and my neighbour" : an object lesson), 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
Agnosticism
NSS
Robert Blatchford