-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/be82b027544bce8cebbd25e6062dc2a0.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=MGcZHN%7ElLte0Jv7jsATFIWMRwXOl51m4PtfL8ny4uk2SiXDtTW0hDcBdf%7E8vqyIHuJTxQ2phJL3udRZsGwyiMujiPn6LqF0kQb6qvRwa56GIxFZWIdtRJXNHNcRg5U6Twpm-TcmNAAIIrASqOBOeac5-irquzNQnYi6lxQpkYzFXGDinYOGo0F1bXn93eaWzqWhuKHKYFvjpc0GXmb3aVJ-wnXqafPRcsJMQF3PfgW8v1NwHxfb4N%7EHyhIEB6DDA7Igeaka%7E8BtHv72HydpDFzbLw8oUrKFC-oPHDRn6E6g4b1%7Ek%7ErKUE3kT02nr2daZk5wDsROVTw1eIZv%7EwHKxBg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
72b2c1ad5a23f376c93a051b7c120cab
PDF Text
Text
THE
Principles of Secularism
Sllustratem
BY
GEORGE JACOB
HOLYOAKE.
“Do the duty nearest hand,”—Goethe.
[third
edition, revised.]
LONDON:
BOOK STORE, 282, STRAND ;
Austin
& co.,
17,
Johnson’s court, fleet street.
1870
t
• XMt i i
m J C 4^4
t**A.-M4* *-I
»
�“ If you think it right to differ from the times, and to make a stand for any
valuable point of morals, do it, however rustic, however antiquated, how
ever pedantic it may appear ; do it, not for insolence, but seriously—as a
man who wore a soul of his own in his bosom, and did not wait till it was
breathed into him by the breath of fashion.”—'The Rev. Sidney Smith,
Canon of St. Paul’s.
�CONTENTS.
•PAGE.
Chapter
I.—Introductory.
Chapter
II.—The Term Secularism.
5
8
Chapter
III.—Principles of Secularism Defined,
11
Chapter
IV.—Laws of Secular Controversy.
Chapter
V.—Maxims of Association.
•14
16
Chapter
VI.—The Secular Guild.
18
Chapter VII.—Organization Indicated.
2'1
Chapter VIII.—The Place of Secularism.
25
Chapter
IX.—Characteristics of Secularism,
2.7
��5
INTRODUCTORY.
CHAPTER I.
N a passage of characteristic sagacity, Dr. J. H. Newman
has depicted the partisan aimlessness more descriptive
of the period when this little book first appeared, sixteen years
ago, than it is now. But it will be long before its relevance and
instruction have passed away. I therefore take the liberty of
still quoting his words :—
“ When persons for the first time look upon the world of
politics or religion, all that they find there meets their mind’s
eye, as a landscape addresses itself for the first time to a
person who has just gained his bodily sight. One thing is as
far off as another; there is no perspective. The connection
of fact with fact, truth with truth, the bearing of fact
upon truth, and truth upon fact,. what leads to what,
what are points primary and what secondary, all this
they have yet to learn. It is all a new science to them,
and they do not even know their ignorance of it. Moreover,
the world of to-day has no connection in their minds with the
world of yesterday; time is not a stream, but stands before
them round and full, like the moon. They do not know what
happened ten years ago, much less the annals of a century:
the past does not live to them in the present; they do not
understand the worth of contested points; names have no
associations for them, and persons kindle no recollections.
They hear of men, and things, and projects, and struggles,
and principles; but everything comes and goes like the wind;
nothing makes an impression, nothing penetrates, nothing has
its place in their minds. They locate nothing : they have no
system. They hear and they forget ; or they just recollect
what they have once heard, they cannot tell where. Thus
they have no consistency in their arguments; that is, they
argue one way to-day, and not exactly the other way
to-morrow, but indirectly the other way at random. Their
�6
INTRODUCTORY.
lines of argument diverge ; nothing comes to a point; there
is no one centre in which their mind sits, on which their
judgment of men and things proceeds. This is the state of
many men all through life; and miserable politicians or Church
men they make, unless by good luck they are in safe hands,
and ruled by others, or are pledged to a course. Else they
are at the mercy of the wind and waves ; and without being
Radical, Whig, Tory, or Conservative, High Church or Low
Church, they do Whig acts, Tory acts, Catholic acts, and
Heretical acts, as the fit takes them, or as events or parties
drive them. And sometimes when their self importance is
hurt, they take refuge in the idea that all this is a proof that
they are unfettered, moderate, dispassionate, that they observe
the mean, that they are no ‘ party menwhen they are, in
fact, the most helpless of slaves; for our strength in this world
is, to be the subjects of the reason and our liberty, to be
captives of the truth.”*
How the organization of ideas has fared with higher class
societies others can tell: the working class have been left so
much in want of initiative direction that almost everything has
to be done among them, and an imperfect and brief attempt
to direct those interested in Freethought may meet with some
acceptance. To clamour for objects without being able to
connect them with principles; to smart under contumely with
out knowing how to protect themselves; to bear some lofty
name without understanding the manner in which character
should correspond to profession—this is the amount of the
popular attainment.
In this new Edition I find little to alter and less to add. In
a passage on page 27, the distinction between Secular instruc
tion and Secularism is explained, in these words :—“ Secular
education is by some confounded with Secularism, whereas the
distinction between them is very wide. Secular education
simply means imparting Secular knowledge separately—by
itself, without admixture of Theology with it. The advocate
of Secular education may be, and generally is, also an
advocate of religion; but he would teach religion at another
time and treat it as a distinct subject, too sacred for coercive
admixture into the hard and vexatious routine of a school. He
* “ Loss and Gain,” ascribed to the Rev. Father Newman.
�INTRODUCTORY.
7
would confine the inculcation of religion to fitting seasons and
chosen instruments. He holds also that one subject at a time
is mental economy in learning. Secular education is the policy
of a school—Secularism is the policy of life to those who do
not accept Theology.”
Very few persons admitted that these distinctions existed
when this passage was written in 1854. This year, 1870, they
have been substantially admitted by the Legislature in con
cession made in the National Education Bill. It only remains
to add that the whole text has been revised and re-arranged
in an order which seems more consecutive. The portion on
Secular Organizations has been abridged, in part re-written,
explaining particulars as to the Secular Guild.
A distinctive summary of Secular principles may be read
under the article “ Secularism,” in Chambers’s Cyclopaedia.
�8
THE TERM SECULARISM.
THE TERM SECULARISM.
CHAPTER II.
“ The adoption of the term Secularism is justified by its including a large
number of persons who are not Atheists, and uniting them for action which
has Secularism for its object, and not Atheism. On this ground, and because,
by the adoption of a new term, a vast amount of impediment from prejudice
is got rid of, the use of the name Secularism is found advantageous.”—
Harriet Martineau. Boston Liberator.—Letter to Lloyd Garrison,
November, 1853.
VERY one observant of public- controversy in England,
is aware of its improved tone of late years. This im
proved tone is part of a wider progress. Increase of wealth
has led to improvement of taste, and the diffusion of knowledge
to refinement of sentiment. The mass are better dressed,
better mannered, better spoken than formerly. A coffeeroom discussion, conducted by mechanics, is now a more
decorous exhibition than a debate in Parliament was in the
days of Canning * Boisterousness at the tables of the rich,
and insolence in the language of the poor, are fast disappear
ing. “ Good society ” is now that society in which people
practise the art of being genial, without being familiar, and in
which an evincible courtesey of speech is no longer regarded
as timidity or effeminacy, but rather as proof of a disciplined
spirit, which chooses to avoid all offence, the better to maintain
the right peremptorily punishing wanton insult. Theologians,
more inveterate in speech than politicians, now observe a
respectfulness to opponents before unknown. That diversity
of opinion once ascribed to “badness of heart” is now, with
more discrimination, referred to defect or diversity of under
standing—a change which, discarding invective, recognizes
instruction as the agent of uniformity.
Amid all this newness of conception it must be obvious that
* From whose lips the House of Commons cheered a reference to a
political adversary as “ the revered and ruptured Ogden.”
�THE TERM SECULARISM;
9
many old terms of theological controversy are obsolete. The
idea of an “ Atheist ” as one warring against moral restraints
—of an “Infidel” as one treacherous to the truth—of a
“ Freethinker ” as a “ loose thinker,”* arose in the darkness
of past times, when men fought by the flickering light of their
hatreds—times which tradition has peopled with monsters of
divinity as well as of nature. But the glaring colours in which
the party names invented by past priests were dyed, no
longer harmonize with the quieter taste of the present day.
The more sober spirit of modern controversy has, therefore,
need of new terms, and if the term “ Secularism ” was merely
a neutral substitute for “ Freethinking,” there would be
reason for its adoption. Dissenters might as well continue
the designation of “ Schismatics,” or Political Reformers that
of “ Anarchists,” as that the students of Positive Philosophy
should continue the designation “Atheism,” “Infidelism,” or
any similar term by which their opponents have contrived to
brand their opinions. It is as though a merchant vessel should
consent to carry a pirate flag. Freethinker is, however,
getting an acceptable term. Upon the platform, Christian
disputants frequently claim it, and resent the exclusive
assumption of it by others. These new claimants say, “We
are as much Freethinkers as yourselves,” so that it is neces
sary to define Freethinking. It is fearless thinking, based
upon impartial inquiry, searching on both sides, not regarding
doubt as a crime, or opposite conclusions as a species of moral
poison. Those who inquire with sinister pre-possessions will
never inquire fairly. The Freethinker fears not to follow a
conclusion to the utmost limits of truth, whether it coincides
with the Bible or contradicts it. If therefore any pronounce
the term “ Secularism ” “ a concealment or a disguise,” they
can do so legitimately only after detecting some false meaning
it is intended to convey, and not on the mere ground of its
being a change of name, since nothing can more completely
“ conceal and disguise ” the purposes of Freethought than the
old names imposed upon it by its adversaries, which associate
with guilt its conscientious conclusions and impute to it as out
rages, its acts of self-defence.
Besides the term Secularism, there was another term which
seemed to promise also distinctiveness of meaning—namely,
As the Reverend Canon Kingsley has perversely rendered it.
�IO
THE TERM SECULARISM.
Cosmism, under which adherents would have taken the designa
tion of Cosmists. But this name scientific men would have under
stood in a purely physical sense, after the great example of
Humboldt, and the public would not all have understood it—
besides, it was open to easy perversion in one of its declinations.
Next to this, as a name, stands that of Realism—intrinsically
good. A Society of Realists would have been intelligible,
but many would have supposed it to be some revival of the
old Realists. Moralism, a sound name in itself, is under
Evangelical condemnation as “ mere morality.” Naturalism
would seem an obvious name, were it not that we should
be confounded with Naturalists, to say no more. Some
name must be taken, as was the case with the Theophilanthropists of Paris. Many of them would rather not have
assumed any denomination, but they yielded to the reason
able argument, that if they did not choose one for them
selves, the public would bestow upon them one which
would be less to their liking. Those who took the name
of Philantropes found it exposed them to a pun, which
greatly damaged them: Philantropes was turned into filoux
en troupe.
Historical characteristics, however, seemed to point to a
term which expressed the Secular element in life; a term
deeply engrafted in literature; of irreproachable associations;
a term found and respected in the dictionaries of opponents,
and to which, therefore, they might dispute our right, but
which they could not damage. Instead, therefore, of finding
ourselves self-branded or caricatured by this designation, we
have found opponents claiming it, and disputing with us for
its possession.
�PRINCIPLES OF SECULARISM DEFINED.
II
PRINCIPLES OF SECULARISM DEFINED.
CHAPTER III.
I.
ECULARISM is the study of promoting- human welfare
by material means ; measuring human welfare by the
utilitarian rule, and making the service of others a duty of life.
Secularism relates to the present existence of man, and to action,
the issues of which can be tested by the experience of this life—
having for its objects the development of the physical, moral,
and intellectual nature of man to the highest perceivable
point, as the immediate duty of society: inculcating the
practical sufficiency of natural morality apart from Atheism,
Theism, or Christianity: engaging its adherents in the pro
motion of human improvement by material means, and making
these agreements the ground of common unity for all who
would regulate life by reason and ennoble it by service. The
Secular is sacred in its influence on life, for by purity of mate
rial conditions the loftiest natures are best sustained, and the
lower the most surely elevated. Secularism is a series of
principles intended for the guidance of those who find
Theology indefinite, or inadequate, or deem it unreliable.
It replaces theology, which mainly regards life as a sinful
necessity, as a scene of tribulation through which we pass to a
better world. Secularism rejoices in this life, and regards it as
the sphere of those duties which educate men to fitness for any
future and better life, should such transpire.
A Secularist guides himself by maxims of Positivism,
seeking to discern what is in Nature—what ought to be in
morals—selecting the affirmative in exposition, concerning him
self with the real, the right, and the constructive. Positive
principles are principles which are provable. “A positive
�12
PRINCIPLES OF SECULARISM DEFINED.
precept,” says Bishop Butler> “is a precept the reason of
which we see.” Positivism is policy of material progress.
III.
Science is the available Providence of life. The problem to
be solved by a science of Society, is to find that situation in
which it shall be impossible for a man to be depraved or poor.
Mankind are saved by being served. Spiritual sympathy is a
lesser mercy than that forethought which anticipates and ex
tirpates the causes of suffering. Deliverance from sorrow or
injustice is before consolation—doing well is higher than mean
ing well—work is worship to those who accept Theism, and
duty to those who do not.
IV.
Sincerity, though not errorless, involves the least chance of
error, and is without moral guilt. Sincerity is well-informed,
conscientious conviction, arrived at by intelligent examination,
animating those who possess that conviction to carry it into
practice from a sense of duty. Virtue in relation to opinion
consists neither in conformity nor non-conformity, but in sincere
beliefs, and in living up to them.
V.
Conscience is higher than *
Consequence.
VI.
All pursuit of good objects with pure intent is religiousness
in the best sense in which this term appears to be used. A
“ good object ” is an object consistent with truth, honour,
justice, love. A pure “ intent ” is the intent of serving
humanity. Immediate service of humanity is not intended
to mean instant gratification, but “ immediate ” in contradistinc
tion to the interest of another life. The distinctive peculiarity
of the Secularist is, that he seeks that good which is dictated
by Nature, which is attainable by material means, and which
is of immediate service to humanity—a religiousness to which
the idea of God is not essential, nor the denial of the idea
necessary.
Vide Mr. Holdreths’ Papers.
�PRINCIPLES OF SECULARISM DEFINED.
13
VII.
Nearly all inferior natures are susceptible of moral
and physical improvability; this improvability can be indefinitely secured by supplying- proper material conditions;
these conditions may one day be supplied by a system of wise
and fraternal co-operation, which primarily entrenches itself
in common prudence, which enacts service according1 to
industrial capacity, and distributes wealth according- to rational
needs. Secular principles involve for mankind a future,
where there shall exist unity of condition with infinite diversity
of intellect, where the subsistence of ignorance and selfishness
shall leave men equal, and universal purity enable all things
—noble society, the treasures of art, and the riches of
the world—to be had in common.
VIII.
Since it is not capable of demonstration whether the
i nequalties ofhuman condition will be compensated for in another
life—it is the business of intelligence to rectify them in this
world. The speculative worship of superior beings, who
cannot need it, seems a lesser duty than the patient service
•of known inferior natures, and the mitigation of harsh
destiny, so that the ignorant may be enlightened and the
low elevated.
,t
�LAWS OF SECULAR CONTROVERSY.
LAWS OF SECULAR CONTROVERSY.
CHAPTER IV.
I.
IGHTS of Reason. As a means of developing- and
establishing- Secular principles, and as security that the
principles of Nature and the habit of reason may prevail,
Secularism uses itself, and maintains for others, as rights of
reason:—
The Free Search for Truth, without which its full attainment
is impossible.
The Free Utterance of the result, without which the increase
of Truth is limited.
The Free Criticism of alleged Truth, without which its
identity must remain uncertain.
The Fair Action of Conviction thus attained, without which
conscience will be impotent on practice.
II.
Standard of Appeal. “Secularism accepts no authority
but that of Nature, adopts no methods but those of science
and philosophy, and respects in practice no rule but that of
the conscience, illustrated by the common sense of mankind.
It values the lessons of the past, and looks to tradition as
presenting a storehouse of raw materials to thought, and in
many cases results of high wisdom for our reverence; but it
utterly disowns tradition as a ground of belief, whether
miracles and supernaturalism be claimed or not claimed on its
side. No sacred scripture or ancient church can be made
a basis of belief, for the obvious reason that their claims always
need to be proved, and cannot without absurdity be assumed.
The association leaves to its individual members to yield
whatever respect their own good sense judges to be due to
the opinions of great men, living or dead, spoken or written,
�LAWS OF SECULAR CONTROVERSY.
15
as also to the practice of ancient communities, national or
ecclesiastical. But it disowns all appeal to such authorities as
final tests of truth.”*
III.
Sphere of Controversy. Since the principles of Secular
ism rest on grounds apart from Theism, Atheism, or Christianism, it is not logically necessary for Secularists to debate the
truth of these subjects. In controversy, Secularism concerns
itself with the assertion and maintenance of its own affirma
tive propositions, combating only views of Theology and
Christianity so far as they interfere with, discourage, or dispa
rage Secular action, which may be done without digressing
into the discussion of the truth of Theism or divine origin of
the Bible.
IV.
Personal Controversy.
A Secularist will avoid indis
criminate disparagement of bodies or antagonism of persons,
and will place before himself simply the instruction and service
of an opponent, whose sincerity he will not question, whose
motives he will not impugn, always holding that a m.an whom
it is not worth while confuting courteously, is not worth while
confuting at all. Such disparagements as are included in the
explicit condemnation of erroneous principles are, we believe,
all that the public defence of opinion requires, and are the only
kind of disparagement a Secularist proposes to employ.
V.
Justification of Controversy.
The universal fair and open
discussion of opinion is the highest guarantee of public
truth—only that theory which is submitted to that ordeal is to
be regarded, since only that which endures it can be trusted.
Secularism encourages men to trust reason throughout, and
to trust nothing that reason does not establish—to examine
all things hopeful, respect all things probable, but rely upon
nothing without precaution which does not come within the
range of science and experience.
* “Programme of Freethought
(Reasoner, No. 388.)
Societies,” by F. W.
Newman.
�16
MAXIMS OF ASSOCIATION,
MAXIMS
OF ASSOCIATION.
CHAPTER V,
I.
T is the duty of every man to regulate his personal
and family interests so as to admit of some exertions
for the improvement of society. It is only by serving
those beyond ourselves that we can secure for ourselves
protection, sympathy, or honour. The neglect of home for
public affairs endangers philanthropy, by making it the enemy
of the household. To suffer, on the other hand, the interests
of the family to degenerate into mere selfism, is a dangerous
example to rulers.
II.
“ No man or woman is accountable to others for an^
conduct by which others are not injured or damaged.”*
III.
Social freedom consists in being subject to just rule and
to none other.
IV.
Service and endurance are the chief personal duties
of man.
V.
Secularism holds it to be the duty of every man to reserve
a portion of his means and energies for the public service, and
so to cultivate and cherish his powers, mental and physical, as
* D. in the Leader, 1850, who, as a correspondent, first expressed
this aphorism thus.
�MAXIMS OF ASSOCIATION.
17
to have them ever ready to perform service, as efficient as
possible, to the well-being of humanity. No weakness, no
passion, no wavering, should be found among those who are
battling for the cause of human welfare, which such errors
may fatally injure. Self-control, self-culture, self-sacrifice, are
all essential to those who would serve that cause, and wouldnot bring discredit upon their comrades in that service.
*
VI.
To promote in good faith and good temper the immedi
ate and material welfare of humanity, in accordance with the
laws of Nature, is the study and duty of a Secularist,
and this is the unity of principle which prevails amid whatever
diversity of opinion may subsist in a Secular Society, the bond
of union being the common convictions of the duty of advancing
the Secular good of this life, of the authority of natural
morality, and of the utility of material effort in the work of
human improvement. In other words, Secularist union implies
the concerted action of all who believe it right to promote the
Secular good of this life, to teach morality, founded upon the
laws of Nature, and to seek human improvement by material
methods, irrespective of any other opinions held, and irre
spective of any diversity of reasons for holding these.
* Mr. L. H. Holdreth, Religion of Duty.
�i8
THE SECULAR GUILD.
THE SECULAR GUILD.
CHAPTER VI.
EVERAL expositors of Secular principles, able to act
together, have for many years endeavoured by counsel,
by aid and by publication to promote Secular organiza
tion. At one time they conducted a Secular Institute in Fleet
Street, London—in 1854. The object was to form Secular
Societies for teaching the positive results of Freethought. In
the first edition of this work it was held to be desirable that there
should be a centre of reference for all inquirers upon Secular
principles at home and abroad. Attention should be guar
anteed to distant correspondents and visitors, so that means of
communication and publication of all advanced opinions in soci
ology, theology, and politics might exist, and be able to com
mand publicity, when expressed dispassionately, impersonally,
and with ordinary good taste.
It has been generally admitted that the operations at that
time conducted, helped to impart a new character to Freethought advocacy, and many of its recommendations have
since been copied by associations subsequently formed. The
promoters of Secularism alluded to, have not ceased in the
Reasoner and other publications, by lectures, by statements, by
articles, by pamphlets to urge a definite and consistent repre
sentation of Secular and Freethought principles: as many
mistake merely mechanical association for the organization
of ideas.
The promoters in question have since adopted the form of
action of a Secular Guild, and continue the Reasoner (of which
there is now issued a “ Review Series ”) as their organ. The
objects of a Council of the Guild is to promote, as far as means
may permit, or counsel prevail, organization of ideas:—
I.—To train Advocates of Secular principles.
�THE SECULAR GUILD.
19
2. —To advise an impersonal policy of advocacy, which seeking to carry its
ends by force of exposition, rather than of denunciation, shall command the
attention and respect of those who influence public affairs.
3. —To promote solution of political, social, and educational questions on
Secular and unsectarian grounds.
*
4. —To point out new Books of Secular relevance, and where possible, to
accredit Advocates of Secularism that the public may have some guidance,
and the party be no longer liable to be judged by whoever may appeai
to write or speak on the subject.
5. —To assist in the protection and defence of those injured, or attempted to
be injured on account of Freethought or Secularist opinion.
6. —To provide for the administration of property bequeathed for Secular
purposes, of which so much has been lost through the injustice of the law,
and machinations of persons opposed to Liberal views.
7. —When a member has been honourably counted on the side of Secularism,
has been a Subscriber or a Worker for a term of years, the Guild, keeping
a record of such Service, proposes to give a Certificate of it which among
Friends of Freethought may be a passport to recognition and esteem. To
constitute some such Freemasonry in Freethought, may elevate associa
tion in England. A certificate of Illuminism or of Carbonarism in Italy
was once handed down from father to son as an heirloom of honour, while
in England you have to supplicate men to join a society of progression,
instead of membership being a distinction which men shall covet. At
present a man who has given the best years of his life to the public service
is liable (if from any necessity he ceases to act) to be counted a renegade
by men who have never rendered twelve months’ consecutive or costly
service themselves. There ought to be a fixed term of Service, which, if
honourably and effectively rendered, should entitle a man to be considered
free, as a soldier after leaving the army, and his certificate of having
belonged to the Order of Secularism should entitle him to distinction and
to authority when his opinion was sought, and to exemption from all but
voluntary service. At present the soldiers of Progress, w’hen no longer
able to serve, are dismissed from the public eye, like the race-horse to the
cab stand, to obscurity and neglect. This needs correction before men can
be counted upon in the battle of Truth. A man is to be estimated
according to the aims of the party to which he is allied. He is to be
esteemed in consequence of sacrifices of time, and discipline of conduct,
which he contributes to the service and reputation of his cause.
In foreign countries many persons reside interested in
Secularism; in Great Britain indeed many friends reside where
* This has been done to some extent in the discussion of the National
Education question. The Proposer of the Guild contributed what he could
to this end by reading the paper published in the proceedings of the Con
ference of the Birmingham Education League, by letters like that to the
Daily News, commented upon by the Bishop of Peterborough, at Leicester
[see official publications of the Manchester National Education Union,] by
discussions as those with the Revs. Pringle and Baldwin, at Norwich, and
with Mr. Chas. Bradlaugh, at the Old Street Hall of Science, London; and
by Lectures during the time the question of National Education has been
before Parliament.
�20
THE SECULAR GUILD.
no Secular Society is formed; and in these cases membership
of the Guild would be advantageous to them, affording means
of introduction to publicists of similar views: and even in
instances of towns where Secular Societies do exist, persons in
direct relation to the Secular Guild would be able to furnish
Secular direction where the tradition and usage of a Secular
Society are unknown, or unfamiliar.
�ORGANIZATION INDICATED.
21
ORGANIZATION INDICATED.
CHAPTER VII.
S the aim of the Guild is not to fetter independent thought,
but to concert practical action, it is mainly required
of each member that he undertakes to perform, in good
faith, the duties which he shall consent to have assigned to him;
and generally so to comport himself that his principles shall not
be likely to suffer, if judged by his conduct. He will be expected
to treat every colleague as equal with himself in veracity, in
honour, and in loyalty to his cause. And every form of speech
which casts a doubt upon the truth, or imputes, or assumes a
want of honour on the part of any member, will be deemed a
breach of order. If any member intends such an accusation
of another, it must be made the matter of a formal charge,
after leave obtained to prefer it.
What it is desirable to know about new members is this: —
Do they, in their conception of Secularism, see in it that which seeks not
the sensual but the good, and a good which the conscience can be engaged
in pursuing and promoting; a Moralism in accordance with the laws of
•Nature and capable of intrinsic proof: a Materialism which is definite
without dogmatism or grossness ; and a unity on the ground of these com
mon agreements, for convictions which imply no apostolate are neither
earnest nor generous. No one ought to be encouraged to take sides with
Secularism, unless his conscience is satisfied of the moral rightfulness of its
principles and duties both for life and death.
It is not desirable to accept persons of that class who decry
parties—who boast of being of no party—who preach up
isolation, and lament the want of unity—who think party the
madness of the many, for the gain of the few. Seek rather
the partisan who is wise enough to know that the disparage
ment of party is the madness of the few, leading to the utter im
potence of the many. A party, in an associative and defen
sible sense, is a class of persons taking sides upon some
�22
ORGANIZATION INDICATED.
definite question, and acting- together for necessary ends,
having principles, aims, policy, authority, and discipline.
*
With respect to proposed members, it may be well to
ascertain whether neglect, or rudeness, or insult, or unfairness
from colleagues, or overwork being imposed upon him, or
incapacity of others, would divert him from his duty. These
accidents or necessities might occur: but if a society is to be
strong it must be able to count upon its members, and to be
able to count upon them it must be known what they will
bear without insubordination; and what they will bear will
depend upon the frankness and completeness of information
they receive as to the social risks all run who unite to carry
out any course of duty or public service.
Always assuming that a candidate cares for the objects for
which he proposes to associate, and that it is worth while
knowing whom it is with whom you propose to work them
out; answers to such inquiries as the following would tend to
impart a working knowledge and quality to the society:—
Is he a person previously or recently acquainted with the principles he is
about to profess ?
Does he understand what is meant by “ taking sides ” with a public
party ? Would he be faithful to the special ideas of Secularism so long as he
felt them to be true ? Would he make sacrifices to spread them and vindicate
them, or enable others to do so ? Would he conceive of Secularism as a
cause to be served loyally, which he would support as well as he was able,
if unable to support it as well as he Could wish ?
Is he of decent, moral character, and tolerably reliable as to his future
conduct ?
In presenting his views to others, would he be likely to render them in
an attractive spirit, or to make them disagreeable to others ?
Is he of an impulsive nature, ardent for a time, and then apathetic or
reactionary—likely to antagonize to-morrow the persons he applauds
to-day ?
Is he a person who would commit the fault of provoking persecution ?
Would ridicule or persecution chill him if it occurred? Is he a man to
stand by an obscure and friendless cause—or are notoriety, success, applause,
and the company of others, indispensable to his fidelity ?
Is he a man of any mark of esteem among his friends—a man whose
promise is sure, whose word has weight ?
Is his idea of obedience, obedience simply to his own will? Would he
acquiesce in the authority of the laws of the Society, or the decision of the
Society where the laws were silent ? Would he acknowledge in democracy
the despotism of principles self-consented to—or as an arena for the
* In a school there is usually teaching, training, discipline, science, system,
authorities, tradition, and development.—Times, 1846.
�ORGANIZATION INDICATED.
23
assertion of Individualism before winning the consent of colleagues to the
discussion of special views ?
The membership sought may be granted, provided the
actual knowledge of Secular principles be satisfactory, and
evident earnestness to practise them be apparent. The purport
of the whole of the questions is to enable a clear opinion
to be formed as to what is to be expected of the new
member—how far he is likely to be reliable—how long he is
likely to remain with us—under what circumstances he is
likely to fail us—what work may be assigned him—what
confidences he may be entrusted with, and in what terms he
shculd be introduced to colleagues, and spoken of to others.
The Membership here described would and should be no
restricted and exclusive society, where only one pattern of
efficiency prevails; but a society where all diversities of
capacity, energy, and. worth, may be found, so far as it is
honest and trustworthy. A Society, like the State, requires the
existence of the people, as well as public officers—men who
can act, as well as men who can think and direct Many men
who lack refinement, and even discretion, possess courage and
energy, and will go out on the inevitable “ forlorn hopes ” of
progress; which the merely prudent avoid, arid from which
the cultivated too often shrink. Our work requires all orders
of men, but efficiency requires that we know which is which,
that none may be employed in the dark.
In every public organization there are- persons who promote
and aid unconnected with the Society.
Active members are those who engage to perform specific
duties; such as reporting lectures, sermons, and public meet
ings, so far as they refer to Secularism.
*
To give notice of meetings and sermons about to be held or
delivered for or against Secularism.
To note and report passages in books, newspapers, maga
zines, and reviews referring to Secularism.
Each active member should possess some working efficiency,
or be willing to acquire it. To be able to explain his views
by tongue or pen with simple directness, to observe carefully,
* In reporting, each member should be careful to understate rather than
overstate facts, distinguishing carefully what is matter of knowledge from
rumour, conjecture, or opinion.
�24
ORGANIZATION INDICATED.
to report judiciously, to reason dispassionately, to put the best
construction on every act that needs interpretation, are desir
able accomplishments in a Propagandist.
In all public proceeding’s of the Society, written speeches
should be preferred from the young-, because such speeches
admit of preconsidered brevity, consecutiveness, and purpose,
and exist for reference. In the deliberations and discussions
of any Society, it might usefully be deemed a qualification to
make a contribution to the subject in speeches brief and
direct.
Non-reliableness in discharge of duties, or moral disqualifi
cation, shall be a ground of annulling membership, which
may be done after the member objected to has had a fair
opportunity of defending himself from the specific disqualifi
cations alleged against him and communicated to him, and has
failed therein.
The duties assigned to each member should be such as are
within his means, as respects power and opportunity; such,
indeed, as interfere neither with his social nor civil obligations ;
the intention being that the membership of the Society shall
not as a rule be incompatible with the preservation of health,
and the primary service due to family and the State.
*
Any persons acquainted with the “Principles of Secularism ’’
here given, who shall generally agree therein, and associate
under any name to promote such objects, and to act in concert
with all who seek similar objects, and will receive and take
into official consideration the instructions of the Guild, and to
make one subscription yearly among its members and friends on
behalf of its Propagandist Funds, shall be recognized as a
Branch of it.
* As a general rule, it will be found that any one who sacrifices more
than one-fifth of his time and means will become before long reactionary,
and not only do nothing himself, but discourage others.
�THE PLACE OF SECULARISM.
25
THE PLACE OF SECULARISM.
CHAPTER VIII.
“ We do not, however, deny that, false as the whole theory [of Secularism]
appears to us, it is capable of attracting the belief of large numbers of
people, and of exercising considerable influence over their conduct; and we
should admit that the influence so exercised is considerably better than no
influence at all.”—Saturday Review, July 2, 1859-
HIS first step is to win, from public opinion, a standing place
for Secularism. So long as people believe Secularism
not to be wanted, indeed impossible to be wanted—that it is
error, wickedness, and unmitigated evil, it will receive no
attention, no respect, and make no way. But show that it
occupies a vacant place, supplies a want, is a direction
where no other party supplies any—and it at once appears
indispensable. It is proved to be a service to somebody,
and from that moment it is tolerated if not respected. It
may be like war, or medicine, or work, or law, disagreeable
or unpalatable, but when seen to be necessary, it will have
recognition and support. We are sure this case can be
made out for Secularism. It is not only true, but it is known;
it is not only known, but it is notorious, that there are thou
sands and tens of thousands of persons in every district of
this and most European countries, who are without the pale
of Christianity. They reject it, they disprove it, they dis
like it, or they do not understand it. Some have vices and
passions which Christianity, as preached around them, con
demns. As Devils are said to do, they “ believe and tremble,”
and so disown what they have not the virtue to practise.
Faith does not touch them, and reason is not tried—indeed
reason is decried by the evangelically religious, so that not
being converted in one way, no other way is open to them.
Others are absorbed or insensate; they are busy, or stupid,
or defiant, and regard Christianity as a waste of time, or as
monotonous or offensive. It bores them or threatens them.
They are already dull, therefore it does not attract them—
they have some rude sense of independence and some feeling
of courage, and they object either to be snubbed into con
formity or kicked into heaven. Another and a yearly
increasing portion of the people have, after patiently and
�26
THE PLACE OF SECULARISM.
painfully thinking over Christianity, come to believe it to be
untrue; unfounded historically; wrong morally, and a dis
creditable imputation upon God. It outrages their affections,
it baffles their understandings. It is double tongued. Its
expounders are always multiplying, and the more they increase
the less they agree, and hence sceptics the more abound.
Disbelievers therefore exist; they augment: they can neither
be convinced, converted, nor conciliated, because they will yield
no allegiance to a system which has no hold on their conscience.
It is, we repeat, more than known, it is notorious that these
persons live and die in scepticism. These facts are the cry of
the pulpit, the theme of the platform, the burden of the
religious tract. Now, is nothing to be done with these people ?
You cannot exterminate them, the Church cannot direct them.
The Bible is no authority to them—the “ will of God,” as the
clergy call it, in their eyes is mere arbitrary, capricious, dog
matical assumption; sometimes, indeed, wise precept, but
oftener a cloak for knavery or a pretext for despotism. To
open the eyes of such persons to the omnipresent teachings of
Nature, to make reason an authority with them, to inspire them
with precepts which experience can verify—to connect con
science with intelligence, right with interest, duty with selfrespect, and goodness with love, must surely be useful. If
Secularism accomplishes some such work, where Christianity
confessedly accomplishes nothing, it certainly has a place of
its own. It is no answer to it to claim that Christianity is higher,
more complete, better. The advocates of every old religion, say
the same. Christianity may be higher, more complete, better
—for somebody else. But nothing can be high, complete, or
good, for those who do not see it, accept it, want it, or act
upon it. That is first which is fit—that is supreme which is
most productive of practical virtue. No comparison (which
would be as irrelevant as offensive) between Secularism and
Christianity is set up here. The question is—is Secularism
useful, or may it be useful to anybody ? The question is not—
does it contain all truth ? but does it contain as much as may
be serviceable to many minds, otherwise uninfluenced for good ?
Arithmetic is useful though Algebra is more compendious.
Mensuration performs good offices in hands ignorant of Euclid.
There may be logic without Whately, and melody without
Beethoven; and there may be Secular ethics which shall be
useful without the pretension of Christianity.
�CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
27
CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
CHAPTER IX.
I.
ECULARISM means the moral duty of man in this life
deduced from considerations which pertain to this life
alone. Secular education is by some confounded with
Secularism, whereas the distinction between them is very wide.
Secular education simply means imparting Secular knowledge
separately—by itself, without admixture of Theology with it.
The advocate of Secular education may be, and generally is, also
an advocate of religion • but he would teach religion at another
time and treat it as a distinct subject, too sacred for coercive ad
mixture into the hard and vexatious routine of a school. He would
confine the inculcation of religion to fitting seasons and chosen
instruments. He holds also that one subject at a time is
mental economy in learning. Secular education is the policy
of a school—Secularism is a policy of life to those who do
not accept Theology. Secularity draws the line of separation
between the things of time and the things of eternity. That
is Secular which pertains to this world. The distinction may
be seen in the fact that the cardinal propositions of Theology
are provable only in the next life, and not in this. If I believe
in a given creed it may turn out to be the true one; but
one must die to find that out. On this side of the grave
all is doubt; the truth of Biblical creeds is an affair of
hope and anxiety, while the truth of things Secular becomes
apparent in time. The advantages arising from the practice
of veracity, justice, and temperance can be ascertained from
human experience. If we are told to “ fear God and keep
His commandments,” lest His judgments overtake us, the in
direct action of this doctrine on human character may make a
vicious timid man better in this life, supposing the interpretation
ofthe will of God,and the commandments selected to be enforced,
are moral; but such teaching is not Secular, because its main
�28
CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
object is to fit men for eternity. Pure Secular principles have
for their object to fit men for time, making- the fulfilment of
human duty here the standard of fitness for any accruing
future. Secularism purposes to regulate human affairs by
considerations purely human.
Its principles are founded
upon Nature, and its object is to render man as perfect as
possible in this life. Its problem is this: Supposing- no other
life to be before us, what is the wisest use of this ? As the Rev.
Thomas Binney puts it, “ I believe * * that even * * if
there were really no God over him, no heaven above, or eternity
in prospect, thing-s are so constituted that man may turn the
materials of his little life poem, if not always into a grand
epic, mostly into something of interest and beauty; and it is
worth his while doing so, even if there should be no sequel
to the piece.’’* Chalmers, Archbishop Whately, and earlier
distinguished divines of the Church of England, the most con
spicuous of whom is Bishop Butler, have admitted the
independent existence of morality, but we here cite Mr.
Binney’s words because among Dissenters this truth is less
readily admitted. A true Secular life does not exclude any from
supplementary speculations. Not until we have fulfilled our
duty to man, as far as we can ascertain that duty, can we
consistently pretend to comprehend the more difficult relations
of man to God. Our duties to humanity, understood and dis
charged to the best of our ability, will in no way unfit us to
il reverently meditate on things far beyond us, on Power un
limited, on space unfathomed, on time uncounted, on
‘ whence ’ we came, and ‘ whither ’ we go.”f The leading
ideas of Secularism are humanism, moralism, materialism,
utilitarian unity: Humanism, the physical perfection of this
life—Moralism, founded on the laws of Nature, as the guid
ance of this life—Materialism, as the means of Nature for the
Secular improvement of this life—Unity of thought and action
upon these practical grounds. Secularism teaches that the
good of the present life is the immediate concern of man, and
that it should be his first endeavour to raise it. Secularism
inculcates a Morality founded independently upon the laws of
Nature. It seeks human improvement through purity and suit
ableness of material conditions as being a method at once
moral, practical, universal, and sure.
* “ How to make the best of both worlds,” p. 11.
t F. W. Newman.
�CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
29
II.
The province of Positivism is not speculation upon the
origin, but study of the laws of Nature—its policy is to destroy
error by superseding it. Auguste Comte quotes, as a cardinal
maxim of scientific progress, the words “ nothing is destroyed
until it is replaced,” a proverbial form of a wise saying of
M. Necker that in political progress “ nothing is destroyed for
which we do not find a substitute.” Negations, useful in their
place, are iconoclastic—not constructive. Unless substitution
succeeds destruction—there can be no sustained progress.
The Secularist is known by setting up and maintaining affirm
ative propositions.. He replaces negations by affirmations,
and substitutes demonstration for denunciation. He asserts
truths of Nature and humanity, and reverses the position of
the priest who appears as the sceptic, the denier, the dis
believer in Nature and humanity. Statesmen, not otherwise
eager for improvement, will regard affirmative proposals.
Lord Palmerston could say—“ Show me a good and I will
realize it—not an abuse to correct.”
III.
“All science,” says M. Comte, “ has prevision for its end, an
axiom which separates science from erudition, which relates to
events of the past without any regard to the future. No accumula
tion of facts can effect prevision until the facts are made the basis
of reasonings. A knowledge of phenomena leads to pre
vision, and prevision to actionor, in other words, when we
can foresee what will happen under given circumstances, we
can provide against it. It by no means follows that every
Secularist will be scientific, but to discern the value of
science, to appreciate and promote it, may be possible to most.
Science requires high qualities of accurate observation, close
attention, careful experiment, caution, patience, labour. Its
value to mankind is inestimable. One physician will do more
to alleviate human suffering than ten priests. One physical
discovery will do more to advance civilization than a generation
of prayer-makers. “ To get acquaintance with the usual course
of Nature (which Science alone can teach us), is a kind of
knowledge which pays very good interest.”* The value of this
knowledge becomes more apparent the longer we live. There
* Athenaeum, No. 1,637, March 12, 1859.
�30
CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
may be a general superintending Providence—there may be
a Special Providence, but the first does not interfere in human
affairs, and the interpositions of the second are no longer to
be counted upon. The age of Prayer for temporal deliver
ance has confessedly passed away. But without disputing
these points, it is clear that the only help available to man,
the sole dependence upon which he can calculate, is that of
Science. Nothing can be more impotent than the fate of that
man who seeks social elevation by mere Faith. All human
affairs are a process, and he alone who acts upon this know
ledge can hope to control results. Loyola foresaw the neces
sity of men acting for human purposes, as though there were
no God. “ Let us pray,” said he, “ as if we had no help in our
selves ; let us labour as if there was no help for us in heaven.”
Society is a blunder, not a science, until it ensures good sense
and competence for the many. Why this process is tardy,
is that creedists get credit for hoping and meaning well.
Creedists of good intent, who make no improvement and
attempt none, are very much in the way of human betterance.
The spiritualist regards the world theoretically as a gross
element, which he is rather to struggle against than to work
with. This makes human service a mortification instead of
pure passion. We would not deify the world, that is, set up
the sensualism of the body, as spiritualism is set up as the
sensualism of the soul. Secularism seeks the material purity
of the present life, which is at once the means and end of Secular
endeavour. The most reliable means of progress is the im
provement of material condition, and “purity” implies “improve
ment,” for there can be no improvement without it. The aim
of all improvement is higher purity. All power, art, civiliza
tion and progress are summed up in the result—purer life.
Strength, intellect, love are measured by it. Duty, study,
temperance, patience are but ministers to this. “ There is that,”
says Ruskin, “ to be seen in every street and lane of every city,
that to be found and felt in every human heart and countenance,
that to be loved in every road-side weed and moss-grown wall,
which, in the hands of faithful men, may convey emotions
of glory and sublimity continual and exalted.”
IV.
It is necessary to point out that Sincerity does not im
ply infallibility. “ There is a truth, which could it be stamped
�CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
31
on every human mind, would exterminate all bigotry and
persecution. I mean the truth, that worth of character and true
integrity, and, consequently, God’s acceptance, are not neces
sarily connected with any particular set of opinions.”* If you
admit that Mark and Paul were honest, most Christians take
that to be an admission of the truth of all related under their
names. Yet if a man in defending his opinions, affirm his
own sincerity, Christians quickly see that is no proof of
their truth, and proceed to disprove them. Sincerity may
account for a man holding his opinions, but it does not account
for the opinions themselves. Nothing is more common than
uninformed, misinformed, mistaken, or self-deluded honesty.
But sincere error, though dangerous enough, has not the
attribute of crime about it—personal intention of mischief.
“ Because human nature is frail and fallible, the ground of
our acceptance with God, under the Gospel, is sincerity. A
sincere desire to know and do the will of God, is the only con
dition of obtaining the Christian salvation. Every honest man
will be saved.But Sincerity, if the reader recurs to our
definition of it, includes a short intellectual and moral
education with respect to it. Those worthy of the high
descriptive “ sincere,” are those who have thought, in
quired, examined, are in earnest, have a sense of duty with
regard to their conviction, which is only satisfied by acting
upon it. These processes may not bring a man to the truth,
but they bring him near to it. The chances of error are
reduced hereby as far as human care can reduce them. Secu
larism holds that the Protestant right of private judgment
includes the moral innocency of that judgment, when conscien
tiously formed, whether for or against received opinion; that
though all sincere opinion is not equally true, nor equally
useful, it is yet equally without sin; that it is not sameness of
belief but sincerity of belief which justifies conduct, whether
regard be had to the esteem of men or the approval of God.
Sincerity, we repeat, is not infallibility. The conscientious
are often as mischievous as the false, but he who acts ac
cording to the best of his belief is free from criminal
intention. The sincerity commended by the Secularist is an
active sentiment seeking the truth and acting upon it—not the
* Dr. Price.
t John Foster’s Tracts on Heresy.
�32
CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
fortuitous, insipid, apathetic, inherited consent, which so often
passes for honesty, because too indolent or too cowardly to
inquire, and too stupid to doubt. The man who holds merely
ready-made opinions is not to be placed on the same level
with him whose convictions are derived from experience. True
sincerity is an educated and earnest sentiment.
V.
In the formation and judgment of opinions we must
take into account the consequences to mankind involved in
their adoption. But when an opinion seems true in itself
and beneficial to society, the consequences in the way of in
convenience to ourselves is not sufficient reason for refusing- to
act upon it. If a particular time of enforcing- it seem to be
one when it will be disregarded, or misunderstood, or put
back, and the sacrifice of ourselves on its behalf produce no
adequate advantage to society, it may be lawful to seek a
better opportunity. We must, however, take care that this
view of the matter is not made a pretext of cowardice or
evasion of duty. And in no case is it justifiable to belie con
science or profess a belief the contrary of that which we
believe to be true. There may in extreme cases be neutrality
with regard to truth, but in no case should there be com
plicity in falsehood. So much with respect to this life. With
respect to Deity or another life, we may in all cases rely upon
this, that in truth alone is safety. With God, conscience
can have no penal consequences. Conscience is the voice of
honesty, and honesty, with all its errors, a God of Truth will
regard. “We have,” says Blanco White, “no revealed rule
which will ascertain, with moral certainty, which doctrines are
right and which are wrong—that is, as they are known to
God.” * * “ Salvation, therefore, cannot depend on ortho
doxy ; it cannot consist in abstract doctrines, about which
men of equal abilities, virtue, and sincerity are, and always
have been, divided.” * * “ No error on abstract doctrines
can be heresy, in the sense of a wrong belief which endangers
the soul.” - “The Father of the Universe accommodates not
His judgments to the wretched wranglings of pedantic theolo
gians, but every one who seeks truth, whether he findeth it w not,
and worketh righteousness, will be accepted of Him.”* Thomas
Bishop Watson’s Theological Tracts.
Introductory.
�CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
33
Carlyle was the first English writer, having the ear of the pub
lic, who declared in England that “ sincere doubt is as much
entitled to respect as sincere belief. ”
VI.
Going to a distant town to mitigate some calamity there, will
illustrate the principle of action prescribed by Secularism.
One man will go on this errand from pure sympathy with
the unfortunate ; this is goodness. Another goes because his
priest bids him ; this is obedience. Another goes because the
twenty-fifth chapter of Matthew tells him that all such per
sons will pass to the right hand of the Father ; this is calcula
tion. Another goes because he believes God commands him ;
this is piety. Another goes because he believes that the
neglect of suffering will not answer; this is utilitarianism.
But another goes on the errand of mercy, because it is an
errand of mercy, because it is an immediate service to human
ity ; and he goes to attempt material amelioration rather than
spiritual consolation; this is Secularism, which teaches that
goodness is sanctity, that Nature is guidance, that reason is
authority, that service is duty, and that Materialism is help.
VII.
The policy of S.ecular controversy is to distinguish and
assert its own affirmative propositions. It is the policy of Secu
larism not so much to say to error “ It is false,” as to say of
truth “ This is true.” Thus, instead of leaving to the popular
theology the prestige of exclusive affirmation accorded to it
by the world, although it is solely employed in the incessant
re-assertion of error, Secularism causes it to own and publish
its denial of positive principle; when the popular theology
proves itself to be but an organized negation of the moral
guidance of nature and its tendencies to progress. A Secu
larist sees clearly upon what he relies as a Secularist. To
him the teaching of Nature is as clear as the teaching of the
Bible: and since, if God exists, Nature is certainly His work,
while it is not so clear that the Bible is—the teaching of Nature
will be preferred and followed where the teaching of the Bible
appears to conflict with it. A Secular Society, contemplating
intellectual and moral progress, must provide for the freest
expression of opinion on all subjects which its members may
deem conducive to their common objects. Christianism, Theism,
I
�34
CHARACTERISTICS OE SECULARISM.
Materialism, and Atheism will be regarded as open questions,
subject to unreserved discussion. But these occasions will be
the opportunity of the members, not the business of the society.
All public proceedings accredited by the society should relate
to topics consistent with the common principles of Secularism.
“Innecessary things, unity: in doubtful things, liberty: in all
things, charity.”* The destruction of religious servitude may
be attempted in two ways. It may be denounced, which
will irritate it, or it may be superseded by the servitude of
humanity. Attacking it by denunciation, generally inflames and
precipitates the persecution of the many upon the few; when
the weak are liable to be scattered, the cowardly to recant,
and the brave to perish.
VIIL
The essential rule upon which personal association can
be permanent, or controversy be maintained in the spirit in which
truth can be evolved, is that of never imputing evil motives
nor putting the worst construction on any act. Free Inquiry
has no limits but truth, Free Speech no limits but exactness,
Policy (here the law of speech) no limits but usefulness. Un
fettered and uncompromising are they who pursue free inquiry
throughout—measured and impassable may those become,
who hold to a generous veracity. Far both from outrage
or servility—too proud to court and too strong to hate—are
those who learn to discard all arts but that of the austere
service of others, exacting no thanks and pausing at no
curse. Wise words of counsel to Theological controversialists
have been addressed in a powerful quarter of public opinion:
“ Religious controversy has already lost much of its bitterness.
Open abuse and exchange of foul names are exploded, and
even the indirect imputation of unworthy motives is falling
into disuse. Another step will be made when theologians
have learnt to extend their intellectual as well as their moral
sympathies, to feel that most truths are double edged, and not
to wage an unnecessary war against, opinion which, strange,
incongruous, and unlovely as they may at first appear, are
built, perhaps, on as firm a foundation, and are held with
equal sincerity and good faith, as their own.”f This is advice
which both sides should remember.
* Maxim (much unused) of the Roman Catholic Church,
t Times Leader of November 8, 1855.
�CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
35
IX.
“ No society can be in a healthy state in which eccentricity
is a matter of reproach.” Conventionality is the tyranny
of the average man, and a despicable tyranny it is. The
tyranny of genius is hard to be borne—that of mediocrity
is humiliating. That idea of freedom which consists in the
absence of all government is either mere lawlessness, or refers
to the distant period when each man having attained perfec
tion will be a law unto himself. Just rule is indispensable rule,
and none other. The fewer laws consistent with the public
preservation the better—there is, then, as Mr. Mill has shown
in his “Liberty,” the more room for that ever-recurring
originality which keeps intellect alive in the world. Towards
law kept within the limits of reason, obedience is the first of
virtues. “ Order and Progress,” says Comte, which we
should express thus:—Order, without which Progress is im
possible ; Progress, without which Order, is Tyranny. The
, world is clogged with men of dead principles. Principles
that cannot be acted upon are probably either obsolete or false.
One certain way to improvement is to exact consistency between
profession and practice; and the way to bring this about is to
teach that the highest merit consists in having earnest views
and in endeavouring to realize them—and this whether the
convictions be contained within or without accredited creeds.
There will be no progress except within the stereotyped limits of
creeds, unless means are found to justify independent convic
tions to the conscience. To the philosopher you have merely
to show that a thing is true, to the statesman, that it is useful,
but to a Christian, that it is safe. The grace of service lies in
its patience. To promote the welfare of others, irrespective
of their gratitude or claims, is to reach the nature of the
Gods. It is a higher sentiment than is ascribed to the Deity
of the Bible. The abiding disposition to serve others is the
end of all philosophy. The vow of principle is always one of
poverty and obedience, - and few are they who take it—and
fewer who keep it. If hate obscure for a period the path of
duty, let us remember nothing should shake our attachment
to that supreme thought, which at once stills human anger and
educates human endeavour—the perception that “ the suffer
ings and errors of mankind arise out of want of knowledge
rather than defect of goodness.”
fl
�36
CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
X.
A leading object of Secularism is the promotion of the
material purity of the present life—“ material purity,” which
includes personal as well as external condition. The question
of Spiritualism (without employing it and without disparaging
it) it regards as a distinct question, and hence the methods
by which Secularists attempt “improvement” will be “material”
as being the most reliable. The tacit or expressed aim of all
Freethinking, has ever been true thinking and pure thinking.
It has been a continued protest against the errors Theology
has introduced, and the vicious relations it has conserved and
sanctified. It is necessary to mark this, and it can be done by
insisting and keeping distinctly evident that the aim of Secular
ism is the purity of material influences. This precludes the
possibility of Secularism being charged either with conscious
grossness or intentional sin. Secularism concerns itself with
the work of to-day. “ It is always yesterday or to-morrow,
and never to-day,”* is a fair description of life according to
theologies. Secularism,' on the contrary, concerns itself with
the things of “ to-day.”
To know
That which before us lies in daily life
Is the prime wisdom.
The cardinal idea of the “ popular Theology ” is the neces
sity of Revelation. It believes that the light of Nature is
darkness, that Reason affords no guidance, that the Scriptures
are the true chart, the sole chart, and the sufficient chart of
man, and it regards all attempts to delineate a chart of
Nature as impious, as impracticable, and as a covert attack
upon the Biblical chart in possession of the churches. Know
ing no other guidance than that of the Bible, and disbelieving
the possibility of any other, theology denounces Doubt, which
inspires it with a sense of insecurity—it fears Inquiry, which
may invalidate its trust—and deprecates Criticism, which may
expose it, if deficient. Having nothing to gain, it is reluctant
to incur risk—having all to lose, it dreads to be disturbed—
having no strength but in Faith, it fears those who Reason—
and less from ill-will than from the tenderness of its position,
it persecutes in self-defence. Such are the restrictions and the
logic of Theology.
Story of Boots, by Dickens.
�CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
37
XI.
On the other hand, Rationalism (which is the logic of Nature )
is in attitude and spirit quite the reverse. It observes that
numbers are unconvinced of the fact of Revelation, and feel
the insufficiency, for their guidance, of that offered to them.
To them the pages of Nature seem clearer than those of the
Apostles. Reason, which existed before all Religions and
decides upon all—else the false can never be distinguished
from the true—seems self-dependent and capable of furnishing
personal direction. Hence Rationalism instructed by facts,
winning secrets by experiments, establishing principles by
reflection, is assured of a morality founded upon the laws of
Nature. Without the advantage of inductive science to assist
discoveries, or the printing press to record corroborations of
them, the Pre-Christian world created ethics, and Socrates
and Epictetus, and Zoroaster and Confucius, delivered precepts,
to which this age accords a high place. Modern Rationalists
therefore sought, with their new advantages, to augment and
systematize these conquests. They tested the claims of the
Church by the truths of Nature. That Freethought which
had won these truths applied them to creeJs, and criticism
became its weapon of Propagandism. Its consciousness of
new truth stimulated its aggression on old error. The preten
sions of reason being denied as false, and rationalists them
selves persecuted as dangerous, they had no alternative but
to criticise in order to vindicate their own principles, and
weaken the credit and power of their opponents. To attack
the misleading dogmas of Theology was to the early Free
thinkers well understood self-defence. In some hands and
under the provocations of vindictive bigotry, this work, no
doubt, became wholly antagonistic, but the main aspiration
of the majority was the determination of teaching the people
t( to be a law unto themselves.” They found prevailing a
religion of unreasoning faith. They sought to create a
religion of intelligent conviction, whose uniformity consisted
in sincerity. Its believers did not all hold the same tenets,
but they all sought the same truth and pursued it with the
same earnestness. It was this inspiration which sustained
Vanini, Hamont, Lewes, K.ett, Legate, and Wightman at the
stake, and which armed Servetus to prefer the fires of Calvin
to the. creed of Calvin, which supported Annet in the pillory,
and Woolston and Carlile in their imprisonments. It was no
«
.* /it
�38
CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
capricious taste for negations which dictated these deliberate
sacrifices, but a sentiment purer than interest and stronger
than self-love—it was the generous passion for unfriended truth.
XII.
The intellectual, no less than the heroic characteristics of
Freethought have presented features of obvious unity. Tindal,
Shaftesbury, Voltaire, Paine, and Bentham, all vindicated
principles of Natural Morality. Shelley struggled that a pure
and lofty ideal of life should prevail, and Byron had passionate
words of reverence for the human character of Christ.
*
The
distrust of Prayer for temporal help was accompanied by trust
in Science, and all saw in material effort an available deliver
ance from countless ills which the Church can merely deplore.
Those who held that a future life was “ unproven,” taught that
attention to this life was of primary importance, at least
highly serviceable to humanity, even if a future sphere be
certain. All strove for Free Inquiry—Rationalism owed its
existence to it; all required Free Speech—Rationalism was
diffused by it; all vindicated Free Criticism—Rationalism
established itself with it; all demanded to act out their
opinions—Rationalism was denuded of conscience without this
right. In all its mutations, and aberrations, and conquests,
Freethought has uniformly sought the truth, and shown the
courage to trust the truth. Freethought uses no persecution,
for it fears no opposition, for opposition is its opportunity. It
is the cause of Enterprise and Progress, of Reason and Duty
—and now seeking the definite and the practical, it selects for
its guidance the principle that “ human affairs should be regu* Thus we read, Canto xv. stanza xviii., of Don Juan
Was it not so, great Locke ? and greater Bacon ?
Great Socrates ? And thou Diviner still
Whose lot it is by man to be mistaken,
And thy pure creed made sanctions of all ill ?
Redeeming world to be by bigots shaken,
How was thy toil rewarded ?
To this stanza Lord Byron adds this note :—
“ As it is necessary in these times to avoid ambiguity, I say that I
mean by “ Diviner still ” Christ. If ever God was man—or man God—
he was both. I never arraigned his creed, but the use—or abuse—made
of it.”
t L. H. Holdreth.
�CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
39
lated by considerations purely human.”f These—the
characteristics which the term Secularism was designed
• to express—are therefore not inventions, not assump
tions, but the general agreements of the Freethought party,
inherent, traditional, and historic. That which is new, and of
the nature of a development, is the perception that the positiv
ism of Freethought principles should be extended, should be
clearly distinguished and made the subject of energetic
assertion—that the Freethought party which has so loudly
demanded toleration for itself, should be able to exercise it
towards all earnest thinkers, and especially towards all co
workers—that those who have protested against the isolation
of human effort by sectarian exclusiveness, should themselves
set the example of offering, in good faith, practical conditions
of unity, not for the glory of sects, or coteries, or schools, but
for the immediate service of humanity.
XIII.
The Relation of Secularism to the future demands a few
words. To seek after the purity and perfection of the Present
Life neither disproves another Life beyond this, nor disqualifies
man for it. “ Nor is Secularism opposed to the Future so far
as that Future belongs to the present world—to determine
which we have definite science susceptible of trial and verifi
cation. The conditions of a future life being unknown, and
there being no imaginable means of benefiting ourselves and
others in it except by aiming after present goodness, we shall
confessedly gain less towards the happiness of a future life by
speculation than by simply devoting ourselves to the energetic
improvement of this life.”* Men have a right to look beyond
this world, but not to overlook it. Men, if they can, may
connect themselves with eternity, but they cannot disconnect
themselves from humanity without sacrificing duty. Secular
knowledge relates to this life. Religious knowledge to
another life. Secular instruction teaches the duties to man.
Religious instruction the duties to God apart from man. Reli
gious knowledge relates to celestial creeds. Secular know
ledge relates to human duties to be performed. The religious
teacher instructs us how to please God by creeds. The Secu
lar teacher how to serve man by sympathy and science.
* F. W. Newman
�40
CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
Archbishop Whately tells the story of a lady at Bath, who,
being- afraid to cross a tottering bridge lest it should give way
under her, fortunately bethought herself of the expedient of «
calling for a sedan chair, and was carried over in that convey
ance. Some of our critics think that we shall resemble this
ingenious lady. But those who fear to trust themselves to the
ancient and tottering Biblical bridge, will hardly get into the
sedan chair of obsolete orthodoxy, and add the weight of that
to the danger. They prefer going round by the way of
reason and fearless private judgment.
XIV.
Secularism, we have said, concerns itself with four rights:—
1. The right to Think for one’s self, which most Christians
now admit, at least in theory.
2. The right to Differ, without which the right to think is
nothing worth.
3. The right to Assert difference of opinion, without which
the right to differ is of no practical use.
4. The right to Debate all vital opinion, without which
there is no intellectual equality—no defence against the errors
of the state or the pulpit.
It is of no use that the Protestant concedes the right to think
unless he concedes the right to differ. We may as well be
Catholic unless we are free to dissent. Rome will concede
our right to think for ourselves, provided we agree with the
Church when we have done; and when Protestantism affects
to award us the right of private judgment, and requires us to
agree with the thirty-nine Articles in the end—or when Evan
gelical Ministers tell us we are free to think for ourselves, but
must believe in the Bible nevertheless, both parties reason on the
Papist principle; both mock us with a show of freedom, and
impose the reality of mental slavery upon us. It is mere irony
to say “ Search the Scriptures,” when the meaning is—you
must accept the Scriptures whether they seem true or not.
Of the temper in which theological opinions ought to be
formed, we have the instruction of one as eminent as he was
capable. Jefferson remarks, “ In considering this subject,
divest yourself of all bias, shake off all fears and servile pre
judices, under which weak minds crouch: fix reason in her
�CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
41
seat firmly; question with boldness, even the existence of God ;
because, if there be one, he must approve the homage of
reason more than that of blindfolded fear. Read the Bible as
you would Tacitus or Livy. Those facts in the Bible which
contradict the laws of Nature must be examined with care.
The New Testament is the history of a person called Jesus.
Keep in your eye what is related. They say he was begotten
by God, but born of a virgin (how reconcile this ?) ; that he
was crucified to death, and buried ; that he rose and ascended
bodily into heaven: thus reversing the laws of Nature. Do
not be frightened from this inquiry by any fear, and if it ends
in a belief that the story is not true, or that there is not a God,
you will find other incitements to virtue and goodness. In
fine, lay aside all prejudices on both sides, neither believe nor
reject anything because others have rejected or disbelieved it.
Your reason is the only oracle given you by heaven, and you
are answerable, not for the rightness, but for the uprightness
of your opinion ; and never mind evangelists, or pseudo-evan
gelists, who pretend to inspiration.”* It is in vain the Chris
tian quotes the Pauline injunction, “Prove all things; hold
fast that which is good,” if we are to hold fast to his good,
which may be evil to us. For a man to prove all things need
ful, and hold fast to that which he considers good, is the true
maxim of freedom and progress. Secularism, therefore, proclaims and justifies the right to Differ, and the right to assert
conscientious difference on the platform, through the press, in
civil institutions, in Parliament, in courts of law, where it
demands that the affirmation of those who reject Christi
anity shall be as valid as the oath of those who accept it.
XV.
Yet some opponents have professed that Secular cannot be
distinguished from Christian rights. Is this so ? The right to
think for ourselves has been emphatically and reiteratedly
declared to be a Christian right ;f it “ belongs essentially to
Christianity.” Now Christianity has no such right. It has the
right to think the Bible true, and nothing else. The Christian
* “Jefferson : Memoirs.” Vol. II. Quoted by Sir G. Cockbum, in his
“ Confessions of Faith, by a Philosopher,” pages 4 and 5.
f “ Six Chapters on Secularism,” by Dr. Parker, Cavendish Pulpit,
Manchester.
�42
CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
has no right to think Christianity untrue, however untrue it
may appear. He dare not think it false. He dare no more
think it false than the Catholic dare differ from the dictum of
the Church, or the Mahomedan differ from the text of the
Koran, or the Hindoo differ from the precepts of the
■Brahmin. Therefore, the Christian’s right to think for himself
is simply a compulsion, to believe. A right implies relative
freedom of action; but the Christian has no freedom. He has no
choice but to believe, or perish everlastingly. The Christian
right to think for himself is, therefore, not the same as the
Secular right. We mean by the right to think, what the
term right always implies—freedom and independence, and
absence of all crime, or danger of penalty through the honest
exercise of thought and maintenance of honest conclusions,
whether in favour of or against Christianity. Our assertion is
that “Private judgment is free and guiltless.” The Christian
is good enough to say, we have “ a right to think, provided
we think rightly.” But what dofes he mean by “ rightly ?”
He means that we should think as he thinks. This is his
interpretation of “ rightly.” Whoever does not fall in with
his views, is generally, in his vocabulary, a dishonest perverter
of scripture. Now, if we really have the right to differ, we
have the right to differ from the Minister or from the Bible, if
we see good reason to do so, without being exposed to the
censure of our neighbours, or disapprobation of God. The
question is not—does man give us the right to think for our
selves ? but, does God give it to us ? If we must come to a
given opinion, our private judgment is unnecessary. Let us
know at once what we are to believe, that we may believe
it at once, and secure safety. If possible disbelief in Chris
tianity will lead to eternal perdition, the right of private
judgment is a snare. We had better be without that perilous
privilege, and we come to regard the Roman Catholic as
penetrative when he paints private judgment as the suggestion
of Satan, and the Roman Catholic no less merciful than con
sistent when he proscribes it altogether. We must feel
astonishment at him who declares the Secular right to be
essentially a Christian right, when it is quite a different
thing, is understood in an entirely different sense, and has
an application unknown and unadmitted by Christianity.
This is not merely loose thinking, it is reckless thinking.
�CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
43
XVI.
It has been asserted that the second right, “ the right to
differ,” is also a Christian right. “ Christianity recognizes the
claim to difference of opinion. Christians are not careful to
maintain uniformity at the expense of private judgment.”
This is omitting a part of the truth. Christians often permit
difference of opinion upon details, but not upon essentials, and
this is the suppression made. The Christian may differ on
points of church discipline, but if he differ upon the essential
articles of his creed, the minister at once warns him that he
is in “danger of the judgment.” Let any minister try it him
self, and his congregation will soon warn him to depart, and
also warn him of that higher Power, who will bid him depart
“ into outer darkness, where there will be wailing and gnashing
of teeth.” With respect to the third right, “ the right of asserting
difference of opinion,” this is declared to be not peculiar to
Secularism ; that “ Christian churches, chapels, literature and
services, are so many confirmations of the statement that
Christians claim the right of speaking wliat they think,
whether it be affirmative or negative.” Yes, so long as what
they speak agrees with the Bible. This is the Christian limit;
yet this is the limit which Secularism expressly passes and
discards. It is the unfettered right which makes Secularism
to differ from Christianity, and to excel it.
XVII.
The right of private judgment, always in set terms conceded
to us, means nothing, unless it leads to a new understanding
as to the terms in which we are to be addressed. In the
“ Bible and the People,” it is described as “ an insolence to
ignore Christianity.”* We do not understand this language.
It would be insolence to Deity to ignore a message which we
can recognize as coming from Him, but it may rather imply
reverence for God to reject the reports of many who speak in
His name. Were we to require Christians to read our books
or think as we think, they would resent the requirement as an
impertinence; and we have yet to learn that it is less an
impertinence when Christians make these demands of us. If
Christians are under no obligation to hold our opinions,
neither are we under obligation to hold theirs. By our own
* No. I. Vol. I., p. 8. Edited by the Rev. Brewin Grant.
�44
CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
act, or at their solicitation, we may study “ sacred ” writing’s,
but at dictation, never ! So long- as Secularists obey the laws
enacted for the common security, so long as they perform the
duties of good citizens, it is nothing to Christians what opinions
they hold. We neither seek their counsel nor desire their
sentiments—except they concede them on terms of equality.
The light by which we walk is sufficient for us; and as at
the last day, of which Christians speak, we shall there have,
according to their own showing, to answer for ourselves, we
prefer to think for ourselves; and since they do not propose
to take our responsibility, we decline to take their doctrines.
Where we are to be responsible, we will be free; and no man
shall dictate to us the opinions we shall hold. We shall
probably know as well as any Christian how to live with
freedom and to die without fear. It is in vain for Christians
to tell us that Newton and Locke differed from us. What is
that to us unless Newton and Locke will answer for us ? The
world may differ from a man, but what is the world to him,
unless it will take his place at the judgment-day ? Who is
Paul or Apollos, or Matthew or Mark, that we should venture
our eternal salvation on his word, any more than on that of a
Mahomedan prophet, or a Buddhist priest ? Where the dan
ger is our own, the faith shall be pur own. Secularism is not
an act conceived in the spirit of pride, or vanity, or self-will,
or eccentricity, or singularity, or stiff-neckedness. It is simply
well-understood self-defence. If men have the right of
private judgment, that right has set them free; and we own
no law but reason, no limits but the truth, and have no fear
but that of guilt. We may say we believe in honour, which
is respecting the truth—in morality, which is acting the truth
—in love, which is serving the truth—and in independence,
which is defending the truth.
XVIII.
Confucius declared that the foundation of all religion wa’s
reverence and obedience.
*
The Religious sentiment is the
intentional reverence of God. The Christian is ever persuaded
that there is only one way of doing this, and he arrogantly
assumes that he has that way. Whereas the ways are as
* Sir John Bowring.
�CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
45
diverse as human genius. Let those who deny that Secular
Truth meets' the emotional part of their nature, settle what is
the nature of the emotions they desiderate. The miser wants
money—the sensualist wants the cook—the scholar wants
knowledge—and the mother desires the life, growth, and
happiness of her child. But what can man want in a rational
sense which Nature and humanity may not supply ? Do we not
meet the demand of the many when we show that Secularism
is sufficient for progress; that it is moral, and therefore suffi
cient for trust; that it builds only upon the known, and is
therefore reliable ? It is the highest and most unpresumptuous
form of unconscious worship. It is practical reverence without
the arrogance of theoretical homage. We at least feel con
fident of this, that the future, if it come, will not be miserable.
, There may be a future—this remains to awaken interest and
perennial curiosity. If Nature be conscious, it will still design
the happiness of man, which it now permits—this assurance
remains, stilling fear and teaching trust.
XIX.
In surveying the position of Christianism in Great Britain,
there is found to exist a large outlying class, daily increasing,
who for conscientious reasons reject its cardinal tenets. Hence
arises the question :—Are good citizenship and virtuous life on
Secular principles, possible to these persons ? Secularism
answers, Yes. To these, excluded by the letter of scripture,
by the narrowness of churches, by the intrinsic error and
moral repulsiveness of doctrine, Secularism addresses itself;
to these it is the word of Recognition, of Concert and Morality.
It points them to an educated conscience as a security of
morals, to the study of Nature as a source of help, and seeks
to win the indifferent by appeals to the inherent goodness of
human Nature and the authority of reason, which Christianism
cannot use and dare not trust. If, however, the Secularist
elects to walk by the light of Nature, will he be able to see ?
Is the light of Nature a fitful lamp, or a brief torch, which
accident may upset, or a gust extinguish ? On the contrary,
the light of Nature may burn steady, clear, and full, over the
entire field of human life. On this point we have the testi
mony of an adversary, who was understood to address us,
a testimony as remarkable for its quality as for its felicity of
*
expression:—“ There is the ethical mind, calm, level, and clear;
�46
CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
chiefly'intent on the good ordering of this life; judging all things
by their tendency to this end, and impatient of every oscillation
of our nature that swings beyond it. There is nothing low or
unworthy in the attachment which keeps this spirit close to
the present world, and watchful for its affairs. It is not a
selfish feeling, but often one intensely social and humane, not
any mean fascination with mere material interests, but a
devotion to justice and right, and an assertion of the sacred
authority of human duties and affections. A man thus tempered
deals chiefly with this visible life and his comrades in it,
because, as nearest to him, they are better known. He plants
his standard on the present, as on a vantage ground, where
he can survey his field, and manoeuvre all his force, and com
pute the battle he is to fight. Whatever his bearings fervours
towards beyond his range, he has no insensibility to the claims
that fall within his acknowledged province, and that appeal to
him in the native speech of his humanity. He so reverences
veracity, honour, and good faith, as to expect them like the
daylight, and hears of their violation with a flush of scorn.
His word is a rock, and he expects that yours will not be a
quicksand. If you are lax, you cannot hope for his trust; but
if you are in trouble, you easily move his pity. And the sight
of a real oppression, though the sufferer be no ornamental
hero, but black, unsightly, and disreputable, suffices perhaps
to set him to work for life, that he may expunge the disgrace
from the records, of mankind. Such men as he constitute for
our world its moral centre of gravity; and whoever would
compute the path of improvement that has brought it thus far
on its way, or trace its sweep into a brighter future, must take
account of their steady mass. The effect of this style of thought
and taste on the religion of its possessor, is not difficult to
trace. It may, no doubt, stop short of avowed and conscious
religion altogether; its basis being simply moral, and its scene
temporal, its conditions may be imagined as complete, without
any acknowledgment of higher relations.”*
XX.
Nature is, That which is, is the primary subject of study.
The study of Nature reveals the laws of Nature. The laws of
* Professor Martineau, in Octagon Chapel, Norwich, 1856.
�CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
47
Nature furnish safe guidance to humanity. Safe guidance is
to help available in daily life—to happiness, self-contained—
to service, which krjows how “to labour and to wait.” For
authority, Nature refers us to Experience and to Reason. For
help, to Science, the nearest available help of man. Science
implies disciplined powers on the part of the people, and con
cert in their use, to realize the security and sufficiency neces
sary to happiness. Happiness depends on moral, no less
than on physical conditions. The moral condition is the full
and fearless discharge of Duty. Duty is devotion to the
Right. Right is that which is morally expedient. That is
morally expedient which is conducive to the happiness of the
greatest numbers. The service of others is the practical form
of -duty; and endurance in the service of others, the highest,
form of happiness. It is pleasure, peace, security, and desert.
XXL
We believe there is sufficient soundness in Secular principles
to make way in the world. All that is wanted is that advocates
of them shall have clear notions of the value of method in their
work. To the novice in advocacy policy seems a crime—at
least, many so describe it. Unable himself to see his way, the
tyro fights at everything and everybody equally; and too
vain to own his failure, he declares that the right way. Not
knowing that progress is an art, and an art requiring the
union of many qualities, he denies all art, cries down policy,
and erects blundering into a virtue. Compare the way which
Havelock reached Lucknow, and the way in which Sir Colin
Campbell performed the same feat, and you see the difference
between courage without, and courage with' strategy. It
was because magnitudes existed, which were inaccessible
and incapable of direct measurement, that mathematics arose.
Finding direct measurement so often impossible, men were
compelled to find means of ascertaining magnitude and distance
indirectly. Hence mathematics became a scientific policy.
Mathematics is but policy of measurement—grammar but the
policy of speech—logic but the policy of reason—arithmetic
but the policy of calculation—temperance’ but the policy of
health-—trigonometry but the policy of navigation—roads but
the policy of transit—music but the policy of controlling
sound—art but the policy of beauty—law but the policy of
protection—discipline but the policy of strength—love but the
�48
CHARACTERISTICS OF SECULARISM.
policy of affection. An enemy may object to our having- a
policy, because it suits his purpose that we should be without
one; but that a friend should object to our having- a policy
is one of those incredible infatuations which converts partisans
into unconscious traitors. The policy adopted may be a bad
policy, and no policy at all is idiotcy. If a policy be bad,
criticise and amend it; but to denounce all policy is to com
mit your cause to the providence of Bedlam. If, therefore,
throughout all intelligent control of Nature and humanity,
policy is the one supreme mark of wisdom, why should it
be dishonourable to study the policy of opinion ? He who con
sistently objects to policy, would build railway engines without
safety valves, and dismiss them from stations without drivers;
he would abolish turnpike roads and streets, and leave us
to find our way at random; he would recommend that
vessels be made without helms, and sail without captains,
that armies fight without discipline, and artillery-men should
fire before loading, and when pointing their guns, should aim
at nothing. In fine, a man without policy, honestly and intelli
gently opposed to policy, would build his house with the roof
downwards, and plant his trees with their roots in the air; he
would kick his friend and hug his enemy; he would pay wages
to servants who would not work, govern without rule, speak
without thought, think without reason, act without purpose, be
a knave by accident, and a fool by design.
�INDEX.
PAGE.
Action, Secular and Theological
Affirmative Policy......................
Association, its Maxims..............
Atheists, angry origin of the term
Atheistic maxim of Loyola .......
33
33
16
9
30
PAGE.
Future, the, separated but not
prejudged ............... 39
Guides of the Secularist ........... 11
Guild, Secular.............................. 18
„ its uses in Foreign countries 20
Bond of Union .......................... 17
Heresy no sin, Blanco White,
Branch of the Secular Guild,
upon..................................
defined........................... 24
Byron Lord, his passionate
Imputation of motives ...............
Christianism ............... 3g Inferior natures, religious duty
towards them...............
Characteristics of Secularism ... 27
Christian rights.......................... 42 Infidel, an imputative term .......
„
distinguished
from Secular rights
Comte on prevision ,.................
Controversy, new tone of...........
Conscience higher than con
sequence..................
Controversy, sphere of ...............
„
personal..................
Construction of conduct...............
Conventionality..........................
Degrees of progress ..................
Distinction between Secular
Instruction and Secularism
Emotional nature, its variety ...
Ethical life, Professor Martineau’s
view..........................
Features of the Future ...............
Fleet Street Secular Institute ...
Freethinking, true-thinking .......
32
34
13
9
Jefferson, on boldness of inquiry 41
43 Justification of Controversy....... 15
29
8 Knowledge, a remunerative
investment............... 29
12 Laws of Secular Controversy ... 14
15 Legitimate topics of Secular
15
Societies .................. 34
34 Limits of Imputation................... 21
9
35 Loose-thinking .......
12
Maxims of association ............... 16
Martineau Harriet, on the term
5
Secularism ............... 8
45 Membership, diversities of ........ 23
Method, material and spiritual... 36
46 Mill, J. S. on originality ............ 35
45 Morality, its independence of
theology ........................ 28
18
36 Neckar’s maxim............................ 29
�50
INDEX.
PAGE.
Newman, Dr. J. IT. on organiz
ation.............................. 5
Objects of Secular Guild ...........
Open questions ..........................
Organization of ideas.................
„
indicated...............
Outlying classes..........................
19
33
18
21
45
Persistence in Opinion ............... 2
Personal duty.............................. 16
Place of Secularism ................... 25
Positivism, its subjects of study 29
Policy, its Secular necessity... 47-48
Private judgment absolute ... 43-44
Principles of Secularism defined 11
Public duty.................................. 16
Qualities of new members........... 21
„
of active members....... 23
Rationalism, its securities...........
Reason, its self-dependence .......
Religiousness, its moral meaning
Revelation, its absolute chart ...
Rights of Reason .....................
Ruskin, on the morality of
realism..........................
37
37
12
36
14
30
Science, its social problem ....... 12
Secularism, its relative influence 25
„
persons whom it
addresses.................. 25
„
compared with Chris
tianity ...................... 26
„
the sum of Freethought agreements 38
Secularity, its line of demarcation 27
Sincerity defined..... v.............. ... 12
„
distinguished from in
fallibility .................. 30
Sincerity distinguished from sin 31
Spiritualism, the sensualism of
the soul .................. 30
Standard of appeal...................... 14
Summary of Secularism.............. 47
Term Secularism, not a disguise 9
Trustworthiness of Candidates..- 22
Utilitarian action ...................... 33
Various terms of Freethought ... 10
Vow of principle, its nature..... 35
Written speeches ...................... 24
�THE
REASONER
(ESTABLISHED 1846.)
Advocates the Free Search., Free Utterance, Free Criticism, the
Free Action of Secular Principles.
REVIEW
SERIES.
[The following extracts are given as the only independent means of indicating to
strangers and Christian readers (who commonly have prepossessions that the advocacy
of Freethought must be outrage and sin) the spirit in which it has been the endeavour
of the Editor to conduct the heasoner—the title of which does not assume perfection in
reasoning, but is merely a sign that principles and criticisms will, by preference, be
urged upon grounds of reason. For as Professor Martineau observes, “ In every en
deavour to elevate ourselves above reason, we are seeking to rise beyond the atmosphere,
with wings which cannot soar but by beating the air.” Of the remarks which follow,
the chief, it will be seen, must apply to contributors.]
“The Reasoner . . . edited by G. J. Holyoake, is written with considerable
ability, and conducted with no small amount of tact. It addresses itself to that large
and constantly increasing class in English society—the class of artizans; men who de
mand to be dealt with logically. The Reasoner is calm, affectedly dispassionate, im
personal ; piques itself upon being scrupulously exact in its statement of facts, rigorous
in its inductions, and charitable and tolerant in its judgment. This air, which seems
partly real, is eminently calculated to prepossess its readers with the idea of its strength
and' firmness. Its conductors are by no means common-place men. There is evidently
a great deal of ability in them. Such men may not be dispised, nor their doings over
looked. The writers of the other works which we have classed with this have no object
beyond the miserable pittance which their labour brings them. These men have a
creed. They apparently have principles, too, at stake.”—Daily News, Nov. 2, 1848.
“The adoption of the term Secularism is justified by its including a large number
of persons who are not Atheists, and uniting them for action which has Secularism for
its object, and not Atheism. On this ground, and because, by the adoption of a new
term, a vast amount of impediment from prejudice is got rid of, the use of the name
Secularism is found advantageous; but it in no way interferes with Mr. Holyoake’s
profession of his own unaltered views on the subject of a First Cause. As I am writing
this letter, I may just say, for myself, that I constantly and eagerly read Mr.
Holyoake’s writings, though many of them are on subjects—or occupied with stages of
subjects—that would not otherwise detain me, because I find myself morally the better
for the influence of the noble spirit of the man; for the calm courage, the composed
temper, the genuine liberality, and unremitting justice with which he treats all manner
of persons, incidents, and topics. I certainly consider the conspicious example of Mr.
Holyoake’s kind of heroism to be one of our popular educational advantages at this
time.”— Harriet Martineau. Letter. to Uoyd Garrison, editor of the Liberator,
Boston, U.S., Nov. 1, 1853.
“ You inform me that the Reasoner is to be enlarged into a political magazine, and
you ask my permission to insert in it, as Political Fragments,various articles which have
already appeared from my pen in provincial newspapers or elsewhere. In giving you
full permission to make your own selection, and authorising you to tell the public that
you have that permission, I think it due to you to put on record why I most cordialy
accede to your request. It is because I think you so remarkably unite the two qualities
—uncompromising hostility to false or unjust systems, and a tender and just allowance
for the men who carry on those systems—that I rejoice in your becoming a political
spokesman for English operatives, who are too often carried away by violent invective
against persons—invective which always fails to effect reform. I know you to be a
reasonable man as well as a “ reasoner,” and though I do not entirely go along with
jtour politics any more than with your anti-theology, yet I have a deep belief in your
moral soundness; and the want of this is, after all, our greatest national weakness.—
Professor Newman, March 8, 1855. Reasoner, No. 459.
�“1. I do not know any other man who so consistently vindicates the right of every
opinion to its own free utterance. 2. I do not know any other man who is so un
swervingly firm in paying a candid, courteous, and painstaking attention to the state
ment of opinions opposed to his own.”—Thornton Leigh Hunt, Aug. 23, 1858.
“ You are welcome to any writing or fragment of mine, which you may wish to re
print for the Reasoner. Thought, according to me, is, as soon as publicly uttered, the
property of all, not an individual one. In this special case, it is with true pleasure
that I give the the consentment you ask for. The deep esteem I entertain for your
personal character, for your sincere love of truth, perseverance, and nobly tolerant
habits, makes me wish to do more; and time and events allowing, I shall. But,
whilst gladly granting your kind request, I feel bound in my turn to address one to you,
and it is to grant me the selection of the two first fragments. They will shield my own
individuality against all possible misinterpretations, and state at once the limits within
which we commune; these limits are political and moral, not philosophical. We pur
sue the same; progressive improvement, association, transformation of the corrupted
medium in which we are now living, overthrow of all idolatries, shams, lies and conventialities. We both want man to be, not the poor, passive, cowardly, phantasma
goric unreality of the actual time, thinking in one way and acting in another; bending
to power which he hates and despises; carrying empty popish, or thirty-nine article
formulas on his brow and none within ; but a fragment of the living truth, a real in
dividual being linked to collective humanity, the bold seeker of things to.come; the
gentle, mild, loving, yet firm, uncompromising, inexorable apostle of all that is just
and heroic, the Priest, the Poet, and the Prophet. We widely differ as to the how
and why.”—Joseph Mazzini, June 8, 1855. Reasoner, No. 472.
“ Here we have before us a weekly publication, written with an ability superior to
that displayed by the majority of English provincial journals, which has been regularly
issued for the last nine years, and yet the name of which is now for the first time men
tioned to the Indian reader. It is an unstamped journal, containing nothing that can
legally be taken as news, but enforcing with all the regularity and power of a wellconducted newspaper, a certain defined set of opinions. These opinions are, in regard
to politics, democratic to the extent of being socialistic; and in regard to religion (for
religion is discussed in the columns of this journal) rationalistic to the extent of being
atheistic. The conductors of this journal openly avow their objects to be—1. To test
religion by reason, to which in these days the most advanced churches appeal. 2. To
found public action on secular principles—which, being based on experience, all men
are enabled to judge them; and being unsectarian, all liberal men can unite about
them. 3. To train the working class to take part in public affairs, English and foreign;
developing the ability of self-government, personal, local, and national; cultivating
sentiments of inflexible truth, justice, and good-will; because a people in such respects
self-consistent may, by vigilantly contrasting the conduct of their rulers with the pre
cepts they deliver to the people, force them into integrity, or shame them into privacy.’ ’
— Hindoo Patriot, June 28, 1855.
“ I am not fond of substituting authorities for arguments, and there is only one other
witness I will call. There are many members of this house, and many more of the
working classes, who are familiar with the name of Mr. Holyoake. He is chiefly known
in connection with philosophical speculations of an unpopular character, and also as
warmly and earnestly sympathising with the cause of democratic institutions in Europe.
No one is a more fitting representative in that respect of the feelings of that section of
the working class which interests itself most strongly in politics. Mr. Holyoake may
fairly be taken to represent the feelings of persons of extreme political opinions, and it
is with his political opinions alone with which I have to do.”—Speech of Lord Stanley,
House of Commons, Miarch 21, 1859. Vide The Times, March 22.
“ Who can tell us anything about the working man ? Are they the mere dupes of
interested leaders, as men of Mr. Bright’s order invariably assure us <vhen they have
to contend with strikes and labour leagues? Are they anxious for nothing but
relief from taxation? Are they brimful of undeveloped energies, as Mr. Kingsley
seems to think; or running over with potential religious unction, as our High Church
lady novelists insinuate in multitudinous single volumes; Do they believe in Mr. Ernest
Jones as they believed in Mr. Feargus O’Conner ? Do they listen to such instructors as
Mr. Holyoake, as Lord Stanley hinted to the House of Commons, not without some
facts to back him ?—The Saturday Review, March 26, 1859.
�
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 principles of secularism illustrated
Description
An account of the resource
Edition: 3rd rev. ed.
Place of publication: London
Collation: 50 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Contains bibliographical references and index. Illustrations at the head of chapter headings. Extracts of reviews of The Reasoner, from various sources, on unnumbered pages at the end.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Holyoake, George Jacob
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Austin & Co.
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
G4962
Subject
The topic of the resource
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 (The principles of secularism illustrated), 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
Secularism