1
10
1
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/11e01181078899406b1767cef824b451.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=fjsMDKA8IJsNGuVSdkVKy3tdg7hkXNFT5d9vnF8N8qh6xmSsWlTgAYwssbBPvpAXocTKkt9brozPA0G0FfhCoEZrclJI4ofU71weygCCslhFMxkKCpfZu3%7EI5SQyzepIGwwMu1bXyiP7lW3-K1Wes6FmQJdIus12qCq8Phk%7EUUe9nFhPtxQsFImrpIIkPsvg9q%7EAloVdABd24iwxI1dnLKfGO4NM95vV7bSESziFwhoizrowr7sEfYxfjZpOp3zdihLDX0tF5LkGP-uvcmm7EgpGHcQ6zhgUyK0aB15syb3sEvTjAGrByO9NXwrqxJj8klBCJJfsWe-gTbkSo4fVyw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
6cab05a77843f9fe791c69930a5887f5
PDF Text
Text
NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY
SOCRATES,
BUDDHA,
AND
JESUS.
• . . JSt
•>
-
BY
ARTHUR
B.
MOSS.
LONDON:
WATTS & Co., S4, FLEET STREET, E.C.
ONE PENNY.
��s, 2.507
msoa
SOCRATES, BUDDHA, AND JESUS.
Three more imposing and memorable figures of antiquity
than Socrates, Buddha, and Jesus it would be impossible
to name. Each of them religious reformers in his day;
each working with an unselfish patriotism to improve the
condition of his fellows ; each proclaiming high moral
principles, and leaving to posterity an example worthy
of ardent imitation; while, in addition, two of them—
Socrates and Jesus—were persecuted by bigots, and
unjustly condemned to death for having the manliness
and courage to advocate unpopular opinions.
These
great reformers are types of the men to whom the world
is indebted for its social, moral, and religious advance
ment ; and, though by some they are elevated to a posi
tion beyond their merits, and worshipped as veritable
gods, their lives afford interesting study to Freethinkers,
who, in estimating the value of their work for humanity,
are free to accept all that is good in their teaching, while
wisely casting aside all that is false and harmful.
Our first character,
SOCRATES,
probably one of the greatest philosophers the world
has ever known, was born at Athens in the year 469 b.c.,
and, after a life of great activity, both intellectually
and physically, died the death of a martyr, at the ripe
age of seventy, in the year 399 b.c. His father, Sophroniscus, was a sculptor, who had performed some good
work in his noble profession ; and, being desirous that
his son should follow the same calling, had him specially
trained for that purpose.
Although Socrates early
achieved considerable success as a sculptor, he was not
destined to work at the noble art for long. A wealthy
�4
SOCRATES, BUDDHA, AND JESUS.
Athenian, named Crito, was so struck by his charming
manner, so impressed by his intellectual strength, that
he determined to have him thoroughly educated, with a
view of giving him a better opportunity of shining in the
world.
His academical studies completed, Socrates
abandoned the art of sculpture for philosophy, and,
among his most ardent disciples, succeeded in winning
Crito, his worthy benefactor.
The personal appearance of Socrates was certainly
far from favourable to the philosopher, who is described
as a “ brawny, squab, ugly man
but sensible persons
do not judge by outward form alone. “ Handsome is
who handsome does ” is an old maxim, the truth of
which most of us acknowledge ; and assuredly, in the
case of Socrates, no nobler soul could have been set in
more uncomely frame. His extreme ugliness was matter
for daily comment. Like all wise men, however, Socrates
despised those who merely judged him by his appear
ance, and not by speech and conduct In his habits
he was consistently temperate, esteeming this as one of
the highest virtues that belong to man. By temperance
Socrates did not understand merely moderation in the
use of drink; he meant by it much more than this : to
him the term included temperateness in eating, drinking,
attire, and, above and before all, in speaking—in fact,
moderation in all things.. Some malignant opponents
calumniate him by declaring that, on one occasion, at a
public banquet, Socrates indulged so excessively that,
while regular “old topers ” had succumbed to the large
quantity of drink they had consumed, and dropped help
lessly drunk under the table, he sat complacently in
his seat and drank on. These petty traducers of the
reputations of great men do not boldly declare that this
philosopher, like many other estimable men, from bishops
downwards, on one occasion got drunk, though they in
sinuate as much.
Socrates married ; but, unfortunately for him, his
choice was anything but a happy one, for in Xanthippe,
his “ partner for life,” he found nothing but a perverse,
scolding woman, who did her best to render his life as
miserable as possible. No doubt Xanthippe could find
many defenders among modern representatives of female
superiority. But, in plain truth, Xanthippe was a shrew.
�SOCRATES, BUDDHA, AND JESUS.
5
Though naturally of an irascible temperament, Socrates
bore his wife’s scoldings with remarkable coolness and
forbearance. It is recorded that on one occasion the
coolness of his bearing, during one of her severest
torrents of abuse, so exasperated Xanthippe that she
emptied a vessel of water over him, upon which he re
marked : “ Did I not say that Xanthippe was thunder
ing, and would soon rain ?” On another occasion, on
being asked by a friend what induced him to marry such
a shrewish woman as his wife, he wittily replied : “ Those
who wish to become skilled in horsemanship generally
select the most spirited horses : after being able to bridle
those, they believe they can bridle all others. Now,, as
it is my wish to live and converse with men, I married
this woman, being firmly convinced that, in case I should
be enabled to endure her, I should be enabled to endure
all others.” But, though Socrates himself thus playfully
condemned his wife’s temper, he was exceedingly careful
that her children should show her proper respect, and
promptly rebuked her son, Lamprocles, for deviating
from his duty in this respect.
The ordinary conversation of Socrates was rather
peculiar. He mixed with the workers in tan-pit and
brass-foundry, and seemed to take a strange interest in
their employment. So that Plato remarks : “ If any one
will listen to the talk of Socrates, it will appear to him
extremely ridiculous ; the phrases and expressions which
he employs fold around his exterior the skin, as it were,
of a rude and wanton satyr. He is always talking about
brass-founders and leather-cutters and skin-dressers ; and
this is his perpetual custom, so that any dull and un
observant person might easily laugh at his discourse. But
if any one should see it opened, as it were, and get within
the sense of his words, he would then find that they, alone
of all that enters into the mind of man to utter, had a
profound and persuasive meaning, and that they were
most divine ; and that they presented to the mind in
numerable images of every excellence, and that they
tended towards objects of the highest moment, or rather
towards all that he who seeks the possession of what is
supremely beautiful and good need regard as essential
to the accomplishment of his ambition.”
Nothing seemed to give this philosopher greater plea
�6
SOCRATES, BUDDHA, AND JESUS.
sure than to mingle with the people, and glean as much
information from them as possible. He never pretended
'to be a teacher; and when, in the Market Place, he
encountered the learned sophists in debate, he modestly
disclaimed all pretensions to knowledge, saying that he
came to learn and not to teach. Upon subjects that
most people thought themselves competent to speak
upon Socrates showed how little even the most learned
knew respecting them. He would ask his opponents
what they meant by “justice,” “piety,” “law,” ’‘demo
cracy;” and he invariably found that those who pretended
to know most respecting these things knew positively
nothing Socrates was called wise; but, said the philo
sopher : “ I am not wise; yet in one thing I am wiser
than my fellows : I know how ignorant I am, whereas
they are ignorant how ignorant they are.”
Though the Athenian philosopher devoted a great
deal of time to the discussion of important problems,
he did not neglect his manifold duties as a citizen. Not
only did he perform every duty devolving upon him in
relation to his family and the State, but, as Plato has
declared, he comported himself with great bravery in
three battles, and won for himself the admiration of
all who beheld his incomparable heroism under trying
circumstances. Yet this was the man who, when ripe
. with years, old in the service of mankind as teacher,
philosopher, and guide, was brought before the tribunal to
answer the charge of “impiety and corruption”! Socrates
treated the charge with contempt. It is true he had
denied the Athenian gods, and that, perhaps, might be
construed into impiety ; but he believed in the great
unseen God of the universe, who directed him in all his
actions. As to the charge of “corrupting the minds of
youth,” there was really nothing in it; and Socrates
steadfastly refused from the first either to make any
defence himself, or to allow any of his friends to engage
an orator to make one for him. And so he was con
demned to suffer death ! After his sentence had been
pronounced the philosopher opened his mouth, and
delivered, perhaps, the most eloquent and touching
address on record, which speech the reader will find in
Plato’s immortal “Apology.” One thing all can admire
in this address. Socrates told his judges that he would
�SOCRATES, BUDDHA, AND JESUS.
7
“ sooner die having spoken after his manner than speak
in their manner and live.” Thirty days after the con
demnation Socrates drank of the hemlock, and died as
quietly as one who—
“ Wraps the drapery of his couch about him,
And lies down to pleasant dreams.”
Socrates was undoubtedly a Theist, though the deity
in whom he believed Svas of a very ethereal kind. The
philosopher frequently admonished men to talk less
about the gods, and to concern themselves more about
things of which they had positive knowledge, rather than
proclaim their wisdom in matters celestial, while in
terrestrial matters they were superlatively ignorant.
Socrates regarded ignorance as the true source of all
misery and crime, and knowledge as the only means of
attaining virtue. To him virtue meant the highest happi
ness of which man was capable. To use Grote’s words:
“ Socrates resolved all virtue into knowledge, all vice
into ignorance and folly. To do right was the only way
to impart happiness, or the least degree of unhappiness
compatible with a given situation. Now, this was pre
cisely what every one wished for, only that many persons
from ignorance took the wrong road, and no man was
wise enough always to take the right. But as no man
was willingly his own enemy, so no man ever did wrong
wilfully: it’was not because he was not fully or correctly
informed of the consequences of his actions, so that the
proper remedy to apply was enlarged teaching of conse
quences and improved judgment.”
In this, then, we see the groundwork of Socrates’s
theory of ethics. But the philosopher saw that it was
not enough to teach men that they must do right; they
must be taught further that every action carries with it
consequences which, whether good or evil, fall inevitably
upon the actor as well as those by whom he is sur
rounded.
The life of Socrates supplies us with an illustration of
the power of knowledge to direct man aright in all his
actions towards his fellow men: in him Freethinker
and religionist alike will find much to admire, much that
is worthy of emulation. Faults he possessed, no doubt;
but no man is free from them. When we reflect, however,
�SOCRATES, BUDDHA, AND JESUS.
upon his unselfish career, his high moral principles,
his great wisdom and invincible heroism; when we re
member that it was he who said : “ A man who is good
for anything ought not to calculate the chance of living
or dying; he ought only to consider whether in doing
anything he is doing right or wrong, acting the part of a
good man or a bad. For wherever a man’s place is,
whether the place which he has chosen or that in which
he has been placed by a commander, there ought he to
remain in the hour of danger ; he should not think of
death, or of anything but disgrace ”—when we remember
all this, we cannot refrain from paying him the “homage
of our admiration and love.”
Come we now to our second character, Gautama,
called
BUDDHA.
More than five hundred years before the birth of
Christ, at Kapitavatthu was born the great Indian philo
sopher and reformer. Of Gautama’s early career little
or nothing is known, except that in connection with it
there are various legends, bearing a remarkable resem
blance to those which surround the lives of other religious
teachers and reformers—examples of which will be given
hereafter.
It is pretty clear, however, that Gautama
came of good parentage, and that he received an excel
lent intellectual and moral training, though the common
Buddhist view of his descent from a long succession of
Buddhas may be doubted. India, six centuries before
the Christian era, had already attained a high degree of
civilisation.
Learned Hindoos concerned themselves with the study
of philosophy aud religion. Schools of philosophy were
established, in which considerable freedom obtained in
regard to the discussion of theological and religious
questions.
Brahmanism, the prevailing religion, had
millions of adherents; but it was ultimately superseded
by Buddhism, of which Gautama was the founder.
As a young man, Gautama was so profoundly im
pressed by the great suffering and misery with which
human beings were afflicted that he left his home,
and for some time lived in seclusion, firmly resolved, if
possible, to find out the cause of this great evil, with a
�SOCRATES, BUDDHA, AND JESUS.
9
view of alleviating the sufferings of his fellows. He had
not studied for many years before he was convinced that
nature, at bottom, was radically wrong ; that for sentient
beings life was an inevitable struggle, with which pain
and misery were indissolubly connected.
Like many other religious reformers, Gautama was a
pessimist.
To him, nature did not appear to be the
work of a deity, fb^.he was not mentally blind to the
manifold evils in the universe, which it seemed incon
sistent to ascribe to a being combining the attributes of
infinite wisdom and goodness with that of infinite power.
Buddhism, as a philosophy, is based upon the indis
putable principle that concerning the existence of God
and the reality of a future existence nothing whatever is
known.
The first sermon of Gautama is, perhaps, one of the
most remarkable discourses ever delivered by man. It
embraces, in truth, the true principles of a Secular philo
sophy, and is the one great theme upon which Buddha
constantly spoke. Dr. Rhys Davids, who has done
more than any other man in England to disseminate a
knowledge of the teachings of Buddha among the people,
thus translates Gautama’s Sermon on the Mount:—
“There are two extremes,” said the Buddha, “which
the man who devotes himself to the higher life ought
not to follow—the habitual practice, on the one hand,
of those things whose attraction depends upon the
passions, and especially of sensuality (a low and Pagan
way of seeking gratification unworthy, unprofitable,
and fit only for the worldly-minded); and the habitual
practice, on the other hand, of asceticism (or self
mortification), which is not only painful, but as un
worthy and unprofitable as the other. But the Buddha
(or Tathagata) has discovered a middle path, which
avoids these two extremes—a path which opens the
eyes and bestows understanding, which leads to peace
of mind, to the higher wisdom, to full enlightenment—
in a word, to Nirvana.
And this path is the noble
eight-fold path—that is to say, right views, high aims,
kindly speech, upright conduct, a harmless livelihood,
perseverance in well-doing, intellectual activity, and
earnest thought.”
“Birth,” continued Buddha, “is attended with pain;
�IO
SOCRATES, BUDDHA, AND JESUS.
and so are decay and disease and death. Union with the
unpleasant is painful and separation from the pleasant;
and any craving that is unsatisfied is a condition of
sorrow. Now, all this amounts, in short, to this : that
wherever there are the conditions of individuality there
are the conditions of sorrow. This is the first truth—
the truth about sorrow. The cause of sorrow' is the
thirst or craving which causes the rental of individual
existence—is accompanied by evil, and K ever seeking
satisfaction—now here, now there—that is to say, the
craving evil for sensual gratifications, or for continued
existence, or for the cessation of existence. This is the
noble truth concerning the origin of sorrow. Deliver
ance from sorrow is the complete destruction, the laying
aside, the getting rid of, the being free from, the har
bouring no longer of this passionate craving. This is
the noble truth concerning the destruction of sorrow.
The path which leads to the destruction of sorrow is
this noble eight-fold path alone—that is to say, right
views, high aims, kindly speech, upright conduct, a
harmless livelihood, perseverance in well-doing, intellec
tual activity, and earnest thought. This is the noble
truth concerning the path which,deads to the destruction
of sorrow.”
This sermon, short as it is, contains for man the whole
philosophy of life. Socrates might talk of the “great
spirit ” which guided him in all his actions ; Jesus might
preach of man’s duty to his “heavenly father;” but
Gautama assuredly was the first great teacher to proclaim
the true mission of man to be to understand and reform
himself. For some years Gautama journeyed from place
to place, preaching his noble doctrine, that man was to be
judged only according to the quality of his deeds ; and
the great teacher was gladly welcomed by the common
people, among whom he made many converts. Not
only did Gautama teach his disciples what they must do
to attain to true happiness ; he also told them how to
avoid present misery.
They were to refrain from
drinking intoxicants, from lying, stealing, all impurity,
and from self-destruction. Among their chief virtues
were to be purity of conduct, forbearance and fortitude
in the time of trouble. Thus Gautama proclaimed a
great Secular faith—a salvation for man on earth without
�SOCRATES, BUDDHA, AND JESUS.
II
belief in God or desire for a future life. What consti
tuted Buddha’s view of true divinity has been well ex
pressed in the following stanza :—
“ Pure men and modest, kind and upright men,
These are the so-called divine beings in the world.”
When Gautama came to die he called together his
disciples and inquired of them if they had any doubts or
misgivings concerning his teachings, for he was anxious
that it should not be afterwards said that “ our teacher
was face to face with us, and we could not bring ourselves
to inquire of the Blessed One when we were face to
face with him.” But his disciples were silent. Then,
turning to them, Gautama said: “Behold, now, brethren,
I exhort you, saying, ‘ Decay is inherent 'in all compo
nent things—work out your salvation with diligence !’ ”
And so he died. His life’s work, however, lives : his
teachings to-day are being brought more and more under
the notice of earnest and intelligent men and women,
who recognise in them the foundation upon which a
grand Secular “ Religion of the Future ” may be erected
—a religion broad enough to embrace all men, of what
ever nationality or colour, within its all-expansive grasp:
a religion that has its deepest roots in humanity’s great
heart, and for its sole end the peace, prosperity, and
happiness of the human race.
In respect to our third character,
JESUS,
three theories are advanced :—
First. That he was the “ very God.” This is the
theory of the Church. Some Churchmen, however, say
that he was partly God and partly man ; but these are
unable to distinguish the Divine from the human ele
ment in him.
Secondly. A second school contend that the Jesus of
the Gospels never existed; that he was only a myth.
Thirdly. All the Jews, and most Rationalists, hold
that Jesus was a man, and only a man.
Was Jesus God ? Can an infinite Deity transform
himself into a finite man ? Can infinite attributes be
compressed into a finite compass ? Can an eternal God
�12
SOCRATES, BUDDHA, AND JESUS.
be born, or die, or raise himself from the dead ? Can
the immutable change, or the all-knowing increase his
knowledge? If Jesus were God, it is strange he did not
say so in language of unmistakable clearness. Strange
that he spoke of a God who was in heaven, and who was
other than himself. Strange that he was afraid to die,
and prayed that his “heavenly father” should let the
bitter cup pass from him, when he must have known
either that he could not die, or, if he could, he could
easily raise himself to life again.
The theory of the Divinity of Jesus rests entirely
upon faith, for no amount of evidence would be suffi
cient to demonstrate a finite being to be an infinite god
in any sense of the word. Those who maintain that
the Jesus of the Gospels is not an historical character at
all stand on much more reasonable and solid ground
than the Christians. They contend that the miracle
stories that form the groundwork of the life of the
Nazarene carpenter, and without which Jesus would
stand on the same common level with all great religious
reformers, have been taken from certain traditions
relating to other great men, who lived hundreds of years
before. For instance, it is stated in the Gospels that
Jesus was born of a virgin, whose name was Mary.
Gautama is said to have been born of a virgin, too, and
her name was Maya. Jesus wras announced by angels
—so was Gautama; endowed with prophetic vision—so
was Gautama; baptised with water and afterwards with
fire—so was Gautama.
At the time of the birth of
Jesus a number of children were slaughtered in order
that he might be among them; the same is said of
Gautama. Jesus had long arguments with learned
doctors, and amazed them with his wisdom—so did
Gautama; was tempted by a devil—so was Gautama;
fasted for many days—so did Gautama; began to
preach at the age of thirty—so did Gautama; delivered
a sermon on the mount—so did Gautama; was hung
on a cross—so was not Gautama, but so it is alleged
was Chrishna. In further support of the theory that
Jesus was not an historical character, they contend that
there is no evidence of the existence of the “four
Gospels ” until the middle of the second century; that
it cannot be shown that the authors whose names they
�SOCRATES, BUDDHA, AND JESUS.
13
bear really wrote them, and that nobody knows when or
where they were written.
The third school say that there is naturally great
difficulty in proving that Jesus was an historical per
sonage ; that he lived so many years ago that we are
bound to rely, in a large measure, upon tradition : that
the accuracy of history much more modern might be
just as successfully impugned, because, before the printing
press came into use, the people had to depend upon
manuscripts, which were passed from one to another,
and altered in a variety of ways, and were only valuable
to the learned few, who used them for their own purposes.
Moreover, they contend that it is much more reasonable
to suppose that the man Jesus really lived ; that he went
about doing good ; that he preached unpopular opinions,
and that he was finally condemned as a blasphemer and
put to death—than to believe that some Christian
divine had genius enough to imagine the character, or
goodness enough to formulate the doctrines which it is
alleged Jesus proclaimed. It is, they further maintain,
a singular thing that great thinkers and philosophers,
like Voltaire, Paine, Strauss, Renan, John Stuart Mill,
and others, should acknowledge the historical character
of Jesus, if there be really so little evidence to support
it as some imagine.
For the sake of argument, then, let it be acknowledged
that Jesus really lived ; that he was a good man, and did
the best he could to enhance the well-being of his fellows.
In what respect was he better than Socrates ? Was he
wiser or more virtuous?
Did he fulfil his manifold
duties better, or even as well ? Was he a better citizen?
Was he as diligent a student, or as wise a teacher ? Or
was he a better, a more truly divine man, than Gautama?
Was he wiser, more virtuous, or more benevolent ? In
what respect was the goodness of Jesus superior to that
of Gautama ? Wherein were his doctrines better ? In
all sincerity, let the Christians answer these questions ;
and let not superstitious Freethinkers, who still cling to
the notion that Jesus was the “ divinest ” man that ever
lived, evade the difficulty.
Let the philosophy of Socrates be compared with
that of Jesus ; let the doctrines of Gautama be read
side by side with those of the Nazarene; let the lives of
�14
SOCRATES, BUDDHA, AND JESUS.
the three great reformers be fairly compared and con
trasted, and it will be found that, in some respects,
Socrates and Buddha are superior to Jesus. Space will
not admit of a lengthy comparison of the doctrines of
these men; but it may be said that, while there is much
that is good and true in the teachings of Jesus, there is
also much that is exceedingly harmful and misleading.
Socrates taught that all error and all misery sprang from
ignorance, and sought to remove the evil. Jesus, appa
rently, did not mind how ignorant his followers were,
providing their ignorance was allied with faith.
He
would rather that they should not be wise if their wisdom
brought with it grave doubts and misgivings. Jesus said :
“ Love your enemies,” which no man can do; Gautama
said: “ Be just even to your foes ”—
“ Have good will
To all that lives, letting unkindness die,
And greed and wrath.”
Jesus said : “If any man come unto me, and hate not
his father and mother and wife and children and brethren
and sisters—yea, and his whole life, he cannot be my
disciple.” It should be remembered, too, that it was
Jesus who taught the frightful doctrine of belief and salva
tion, and disbelief and damnation—a blot sufficiently
large to obliterate the good influence of his general
teaching. Nothing that Socrates or Gautama ever said was
half as bad as this. To the Secularist, however, it seems
the highest wisdom to select the good teachings of each
of these great men. We admire and love them for their
wisdom, purity, and heroism; but we are not blind to
their shortcomings, and we should not be honest if we
failed to recognise and acknowledge them. No man is
perfect—perfection belongeth not to humanity. Socrates
had his faults, and no man would more readily own
them; so, too, had Gautama and Jesus; but, whatever
their failings—and, when everything is considered, they
were not numerous—they at least endeavoured, to the best
of their ability, to raise their fellows above the common
level, and to point to that higher life to which every
noble soul aspires, and for the realisation of which every
good man and every pure woman are arduously working.
I agree with Pascal that “ a man’s virtue is not to be
�SOCRATES, BUDDHA, AND JESUS.
15
measured by his great attempts, but by his common
actions.” Every action in our lives is important, and
we shall be strengthened by our study of the great
characters of the past only in proportion as we grasp this
undeniable truth. Let us never flinch from performing
our duty—the small task with the same enthusiastic
fidelity as the large one. Allured on by the grand
achievements of the world’s heroes; sustained and en
couraged by the knowledge that truth and justice must
ultimately prevail; guided and directed in all things by
the imperishable light of reason ; sharing with mankind
the joys and sorrows of life ; diffusing knowledge here,
helping a fallen one there ; being gentle to the suffering,
kind to the poor, and just to all—this indeed constitutes
real greatness, of which Longfellow sings :—
“ Lives of great men all remind us
We can make our lives sublime,
And, departing, leave behind us
Footprints on the sands of time—
Footprints that perhaps another,
Sailing on life’s solemn main
A forlorn and shipwreck’d brother,
Seeing, shall take heart again.”
WATTS & CO., PRINTERS, 17, JOHNSON’S C3URT, FLEET STREET, LONDON.
�THE
SECULAR
REVIEW.
A JOURNAL OF DAILY LIFE.
Edited by
...
Charles Watts & Saladin.
The Secular Review is strictly a Freethought Journal,
representing all phases of Advanced Thought. It also con
tains authentic information as to the progress of liberal
views in America and on the Continent;
To order, of Newsagents, or direct from 84, Fleet Street, London.
Published every Thursday, price Twopence.
ALSO BY THE , SAME AUTHOR.
THE MIRROR OF FREETHOUGHT..............................
..
THE BIBLE GOD AND HIS FAVOURITES..............................
FICTITIOUS GODS
........................................................................
CHRISTIANITY UNWORTHY
OF GOD
THE SECULAR FAITH........................................................................
IS RELIGION NECESSARY OR USEFUL?..............................
HEALTH, WEALTH, AND HAPPINESS
.............................
THE OLD FAITH AND THE NEW............................................
r
to
or
01
01
01
e 2
01
01
London : Watts & Co., 84, Fleet Street; or (to order) of all
Booksellers.
J9®" For Mr. Moss’s List of Objects of Freethought, Political, and
Social Lectures apply—89, Catlin^Street, Rotherhitlie Neat). Road, S,£,
a ■’’•k
�
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
Socrates, Buddha, and Jesus
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Moss, Arthur B.
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 15 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: List of works by the same author available from Watts & Co. on back page. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Watts & Co.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1885]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N504
G5127
Subject
The topic of the resource
Jesus Christ
Buddha
Socrates
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 (Socrates, Buddha, and Jesus), 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
Gautama Buddha
Jesus Christ
NSS
Socrates