-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/b2c6fbdad63289e3e6a702cb1ba6dacc.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=JH6%7Eq%7EybQxUscZTjLyqWxEHeuceBZEtfS2NYahLWbJEXe%7EplIC30kmhLv45imkzL7F2Nvf-M1-N2Fk78y8nhKuI6HBgL6a4kd5Vsfz0ZheLi9jKr9BAG3Z2Z4yLGP4OUgdCaYzCGFxGNRvxZVw2g8oMsFPmrRLJIj7ZSBJpyvSAVuAYEc4HKy7SCBQCKC5LH8l1fL17ShKfIWPvWQRosrEHayknZNKXoPoqaosfQ2AYNc535O2Wh72JOCgidcbYf9tkjehPdaV3Lcd8yOtj4EYT9f2vjm-DXIrmCWpy1gJSEWbxIW-5qz7-VZQecJDe3hdG%7E-7Wxm-p-a-aWM0nuEg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
011b9fc9be42ce504b35852346bdbb31
PDF Text
Text
A WOMAN’S LETTER.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
MOUNT PLEASANT, RAMSGATE.
Price, Threepence.
��A WOMAN’S LETTER.
-------- ♦---------
My Dear Friend,—You have expressed much sur
prise, and no little sorrow, at the opinions held by me
on the subject of Bible inspiration, opinions which,
however, are fast gaining ground amongst educated
women in the present day.
Will you allow me briefly to lay before you some of
the reasons which have induced me to form those
opinions, contrary as they are to the teaching and
training on such subjects, received in early youth.
Perhaps I may at least be able to convince you that
they are not the wild and impious theories that many
suppose them to be, but the natural result of honest,
unprejudiced, and impartial investigation.
There is an idea very prevalent, though seldom
plainly stated,—that it is unbecoming in a woman to
think for herself at all, except on such subjects as may
directly affect her household interests. Politics,
science, art, and, above all, religion, are held to be
matters beyond her sphere, and her ideas (if she have
any) on these subjects are to be received without
question from her nearest male relatives; or, failing
these, from the man who gains the greatest influence
over her. Where this view is not so clearly expressed,
it still appears under a more veiled form in the axioms
we daily hear, that “men may reason, women must
trust; ”—that “ faith is woman’s privilege,” and others
of a similar character. Now it is quite clear that to a
certain extent this is true. Without an education
�>4
4
A Woman’s Letter.
far superior to that she generally receives, a woman
cannot verify for herself the truth, of gravitation, nor
investigate the theories of light and sound. Neither
can she form an opinion on the currency, or on free
trade, without a political education such as she seldom
enjoys. ‘In such matters she must take her views
from those about her best qualified to judge, and re
frain from obtruding her second-hand ideas on those
who are able to form an independent judgment. It is
clear, however, that in this case, the faith or reliance
on others that she is obliged to exercise, is the result
of a defect in her mental training, and adds in no way
to her grace or virtue. She would be nobler, wiser,
and happier, were she able to come to a reasonable
conclusion, thinking out the subject for herself, rather
than taking the bare word of others who are themselves
liable to error. If this be true in science or art, it is
doubly so in religion. Here none can presume to
claim superior knowledge or more unerring judgment.
The Book which is received as the sole text-book of
religion, is open to all, and the most learned divines
agree that its teaching is so plain that “ a wayfaring
man, though a fool, shall not err therein.” You hold
the doctrine of the inspiration of the Bible, but is such
a doctrine tenable if none but the wise and learned can
comprehend its pages ? Or of what use would he a
revelation from God to man if none but scholars were
entitled to search out its meaning ? You cannot really
mean that the command “Search the Scriptures” only
applies to University men in Holy Orders, and that
none but these, or persons of equal learning, have any
right to investigate the truth for themselves ! There
is a strange inconsistency in checking the spirit of
enquiry amongst educated women in England, whilst
encouraging it amongst ignorant savages abroad. Here
you urge the principle that safety lies in accepting
without question, or as it is called,—in simple faith,—
whatever has been taught us in infancy, there you
�A Womans Letter.
5
press on every 'hearer the duty of investigating the
nature of his idols, and of doubting the assertions and
pretensions of his priests. Nay, nearer liomej by what
right can you send missionaries to sow doubt in. the
hearts of your Roman Catholic brethren, if. you your
self hold that doubt, and the spirit of enquiry that
leads to doubt, is a deadly sin ? If “ simple faith ” in
her early teaching be the proper limit to woman’s
religious thought, then, to be consistent, we must leave
undisturbed the belief of a Hindoo widow in the
efficacy of Suttee, nor seek to interfere with the
religious training of Harem or Zenana. Still less can
we assume the right to arouse a spirit of enquiry in
those who have been taught from infancy to believe im. >
doctrines which, though more nearly resembling our ”
own, we still hold to be full of fatal error. The
Reformation would have been impossible had its
leaders never shaken off the yoke of “simple faith,”
and fairly measured their strength against their
teachers. Go further back, and Christianity itself
would never have arisen had its Founder or his
apostles shrunk from the responsibility of shaking off
the trammels of early religious training. Remember
that we are as responsible for our own belief, as for
our own conduct,—by these we shall be judged, and
neither the faith nor the life of others can excuse or
justify our own. It cannot surely be presumptuous to
exercise the reason God has given us, in the examina
tion of doctrines we have hitherto received with a
C*
faith which, if applied to the commonest worldly
A
transaction, would be called by some less attractive
name.
There is an objection sometimes made to the spirit of
religious enquiry amongst women, a purely sentimental
one, and almost unworthy of serious notice. Still it
influences many. I may call it the sesthetical objection.
There is an idea that religious doubt is unbecoming,
ungraceful, and contrary to all established poetic con
�6
A Womans Letter.
ceptions of female character, that were it to supplant
faith, both painters and poets would lose their favourite
themes, and that on the whole,—as a lady once ex
pressed herself to me,—“ men wouldn’t like it.” I will
fain hope that men are not responsible for half the
foolish sentiments attributed to them, and that this,
amongst others, is a false and distorted idea of their
real opinion. Of one thing I am sure,—that no honest
man will ever do otherwise than respect honest
enquiry,—and that a very small exercise of courage will
enable the most timid of women to face the censure of
those whose only conception of womanly grace is
drawn from the imaginative works of the artist. The
true beauty of woman’s character is to be found rather
in a pure, simple honest-hearted search for truth, than
in any number of poems and pictures.
There is another objection which meets every one
whose mind is first aroused to religious enquiry. It
is this ! “ Am I prepared to face the possible conse
quences of free investigation ?” “ Whither will it
lead me ?” “ Would it not be wiser not to embark on
a voyage whose end I cannot foresee ?” To this the
answer is plain. Our duty is simply to ascertain the
truth as it is without bias as to what we may wish it
to he. We must not grumble, if, in our search for
truth, we find her of different aspect from what we had
imagined or hoped, and God will most surely not hold
us responsible for what we may discover during our
honest, single-hearted enquiry, though He may justly
condemn us for neglecting to investigate those subjects
which are at the root of our spiritual life. I grant
that the shock may be rude when we find our pre
conceived ideas to have no solid foundation ; when
the beliefs and fancies, and imaginations which have
grown with our growth, prove hollow and insecure,
but painful as it may be, we are safer, wiser, more
near to God than when a mist of falsehood hung
between us and Him.
�A Womans Letter.
7
How many poetic fancies of onr childhood .have
been dispelled by the more accurate knowledge of
later years ! And yet do we not feel that we are the
gainers by our loss ? The child who thinks the rainbow a path for angels to tread, may grieve to find his
dream a delusion, but does not his maturer knowledge
of the cause of that glorious arch, show him far more
clearly the wisdom and the power of God than any
such poetic fancy could do ? If you ask me what will
supply the place of old beliefs and cherished creeds
should you be compelled to relinquish these, I can
offer you but one substitute—but that an all-sufficing
one ; viz :—the consciousness that you have earnestly
and honestly sought for truth, and that God will give
His blessing on the search.
And now, having touched upon some of the difficul
ties thrown in the way of every woman who wishes to
analyse the religious teaching she has received, I
will frankly tell you what are the chief conclusions at
which I have arrived during my examination. The
key-note to all such religious teaching, the stand-point
from which all doctrinal points are decided, is the
Inspiration of the Bible. What does the word mean ?
Teachers interpret it variously; some maintaining
that every phrase and expression was directly dictated
by God to the authors of the various books, others
that He put the general idea, as it were, into their
minds, leaving them to express it as they pleased,
with their own glosses, and often with their own
errors; while a third party consider that part of the
scriptures was dictated by God to the writers, and
part is simply the expression of their own sentiments.
How this Inspiration, or mental dictation, is per
formed, or by what means we can recognise its oper
ation, is never explained. Let me now point out to
you why these three views of the Inspiration of the
Bible appear to me alike untenable. That the God
of the universe should have directly dictated every
■
J
e
' .
-
•
.
�A Womans Letter.
word and line of the whole scriptures is so preposter
ous an idea that it seems impossible for any reasonable
being to hold it. Can we conceive the Creator of all
things, the Spirit whom we must worship in the spirit,
dictating from His throne on high pages upon pages
of frivolous directions about the ceremonial of worship,
the vestments of priests, the adornment of the taber
nacle, without one precept, one promise, for the guid
ance or comfort of men’s souls ? Is it possible that
taches of gold, almonds, and knops, spoons and
snuffers, can be in His eyes subjects worthy of being
specially dictated in wearisome detail, while the deeper
matters of righteousness are passed over 1 Can we
conceive an unerring and omniscient Being dictating
errors in facts, errors in numbers, errors in physical
science, or more incredible still, commanding the prac
tice of cruel, revengeful and immoral laws, which the
Founder of Christianity, far from recognising as
divinely inspired, dismisses from his notice with the
contemptuous phrase, 11 It hath been said by them
of old time ?” Besides, if every line of the Bible is
alike inspired by God, there can be no degrees or grad
ations in that inspiration, every precept must be of
equal weight, alike perfect as becomes His word, and
true as He Himself is true. We have no right to
press upon one command which pleases our moral
sense, and to pass over another which may offend it.
I confess I can not believe that God ever inspired the
command that a man who beats his man-servant or
maid-servant to death, provided the victim does not
die within forty-eight hours, shall go unpunished, (Ex.
xxi. 20, 21,) nor that a wilful boy shall be “ stoned
with stones that he die,” (Deut. xxi. 18-21,) for the
faults probably produced by the over indulgence of
his parents. Take the law as written in the Penta
teuch, and see whether your mind does not recoil from
many of its precepts. Legislation for slavery, legis
lation for polygamy, cruel enactments against the
�A Womans Letter.
9
impossible crime of witchcraft, superstitious trial by
ordeal, these we find in its pages, and if the Bible be
the word of a God who cannot change, we dare not
pass these passages by, as being obsolete, as being
ephemeral utterances of no permanent value. If you
say that these unjust and vindictive laws were given
by God to the Jews in the infancy of their civilisation,
what is it you lay to His charge, but this : that He
inspired degrading precepts and enactments because
the people to whom He spoke were degraded !
I will not ask you how I am to believe that the
Creator of all things knew so little about his own
creations as to suppose that the sun moved, or that
the shadow on the dial could move backwards without
the destruction of our planet and the convulsion of
our system. Neither will I enquire whether He
whose lesser works are so marvellous, could have
inspired a writer with the idea that labbits and hares
chew the cud. Nothing but a determination to shut
our eyes to clear plain fact, will enable us to avoid the
impossibility of reconciling such statements with the
doctrine of verbal inspiration.
But perhaps you hold that the general idea only
was inspired by God, and that the writers were left to
express this idea in their own manner and with their
own interpretation. Would this be a revelation at
all ? What should we think of the report of a speech
in the House of Commons, by which the reporter
should have expressed his own ideas about what Mr
Gladstone or Mr Disraeli wished to say, introducing
his own glosses into the text, and mixing up his own
mistakes as to names, dates, and figures, with the real
facts given by the speaker? Would not either of
these orators indignantly repudiate such a version of
his speech ? And yet this is what such a view of
Bible inspiration results in. Far better that God
should never have spoken, than that He should speak
merely to be mis-interpreted. It is difficult to see of
�IO
A Womans Letter.
what use would be the pure spring of divine truth, if
it flowed through so foul and corrupt a channel that
its waters, ere they reached us, were tainted by the
conduit. Clearly, from this stand-point, you can
never appeal to the Bible as to an infallible authority;
for if the writers have misconstrued the word of God
in one place, there can be no security against their
having done so in another.
The third opinion as to the inspiration of the Bible
held by some is, thatpartof the volume is a purely human
production, and part God’s own dictation. Thus they
consider the minute directions for the temple service
to have been the work of a Jewish legislator, while
they accept the ten commandments, and other moral
precepts as the word of God himself. The chapters of
useless genealogies and lists of names they attribute to
the uninspired mind of the writer, while those pas
sages which treat of higher themes are supposed to
have divine authority. They do not, however, explain
how the difference can be distinguished, -when trivial
and frivolous matters are mingled with those of
greater importance ; and the same objection applies to
this, as to the preceding view of inspiration, viz : that
it stultifies the very purpose of a revelation. A book
which is partly composed of human remarks and
observations, and partly of the words of a supreme
Being,—the whole appearing in one form—clothed
with the same authority, and with nothing to indicate
the varying value of its contents, would be indeed,
a fatal gift from God to man. Surely He cannot be
imagined to make a special revelation of His will—and
then render it unintelligible by allowing it to be
mingled with a mass of purely human inventions 1
If a revelation were needed to teach us His will, then
most certainly it would have been given to us in plain
terms, and we should not have been left to sift the
wheat from the chaff,—relying on our intuitive sense
of right alone to decide which we should retain and
which cast away.
�A Womans Letter.
ir
I have now briefly told you some of the reasons
which prevent me from accepting the Bible as a
Divinely inspired book.
I have of course, only glanced at the considerations
which weigh most in my own mind, and even though
you should think them valueless, still, you may perhaps
grant that they deserve at least examination.
As a storehouse of Jewish learning, as a record of
the sublime truth of monotheism,—a truth held firmly
amidst opposing influences by a despised people
as a collection of noble precepts and struggling
aspirations, the Bible remains to me, though my
better nature revolts from the idea that the falsehood,
cruelty, and immorality contained in its pages can be
the inspired word of Him who is truth and mercy and
purity. It is often assumed that without the Bible,
we should be unable to form for ourselves any just
estimate of right and wrong, and that our moral
perceptions would become distorted without constant
reference to the precepts contained in its pages. But
is this so 1 Is not this mistaking its power ? Surely
it is our innate moral feeling which enables us to
admire the beautiful and reject the base in the Bible,
and not the Bible itself which confers this power of
discrimination. It cannot be the Bible alone which
teaches us the true knowledge of God, if our own
unaided views of Him are higher and holier than
many of those contained in its pages. When we find
this to be the case, we are certainly justified in prefer
ring those which do Him most honour, to those which
claim to be divinely inspired. Again, when two
passages in Scripture directly contradict each other,
we must, from our own conception of God, decide
which is most likely to be true, which most likely to
be His will. But this cannot be called an infallible
revelation, an inspired Bible, if private judgment
must be trusted to decide on its merits.
How one inspired dogma can be totally opposed to
�12
A Womans Letter.
another inspired dogma, people do not trouble them
selves to enquire, but are content to receive each
separately and by turns without question. Thus they
will at one time speak of the many beautiful passages
which show us one, true, divine Being, sharing His
glory with none,—and at another time they dwell on
verses which show a second, and even a third Divinity
dividing the empire and sharing His attributes.
From one passage they teach that God is love, ready
to forgive, waiting to pardon,—from another they
teach that His pleasure is to create men who are to
suffer agonizing torture for ever. Here is set forth
that the highest reward for virtue, is length of days
and honour, and prosperity,—there—that we must
despise the glory of this world, and esteem happy the
poor and the sorrowful.
Sects have thus arisen, professing the most opposite
doctrines,, each practising rites and ceremonies esteemed
abomination by others, yet all basing their creed on
some portion of the writings they hold to be infallible.
Now I cannot really suppose that God said at one time
what He contradicted at another, neither can I conceive
the irreverent idea which some people hold, that He is
capable of having “ repeated,”—altered His plan,—
improved His doctrine as it were, from the rough,
rudimentary teaching of early times, to the later, purer
doctrine of the Gospels. Surely the words “develop
ment,” “improvement,” “progress,” so often used by
preachers when dwelling on the superiority of New to
Old lestament teaching,—imply some previous error
and imperfection. But how without blasphemy, can
they attribute this imperfect, this erroneous teaching
to the direct word and inspiration of a Being who can
not err 1 Would it not be more honest to acknowledge
that where two passages in the Bible give irreconcil
able views of God’s will, His word, or His works,—
they cannot both be infallible ? Most certainly it
would,—but this admission cannot be made, if,—at all
�A Womans Letter.
13
hazards,—at any sacrifice of truth,—the claim for the
infallibility must be maintained;—for if one passage
be proved false, in a book declared to be inspired by
God,—false in doctrine, or false in facts,—then that
passage invalidates the claim of such a book to be the
pure and unerring exponent of His will. I believe
there are, not one only, but hundreds of passages in
the Bible, where even those unlearned in Hebrew or
Greek may discover for themselves discrepancies and
errors which would prevent any unprejudiced mind
from accepting it as an authority which admits of
neither doubt nor appeal; and yet those who hold it
to be their sacred duty to study its pages,—to become
familiar with its most trivial expressions, and to ex
tract from them a meaning they were never meant to
bear,—resolutely close their eyes, and refuse to see the
truth because it is not such as they desire it. All I
would urge is, the duty of fulfilling in honesty and
simplicity, the precept “ Search the Scriptures.” . This
is not done by perusing a few verses daily as a kind of
talisman to guard us from physical or moral evil, nor
by reading its pages in a spirit of blind assent to what
ever construction we may have been taught to put on
them. To examine closely, to analyse carefully, to sift
and separate the good grain from the bad, to enquire
on what reasonable evidence our belief is grounded,—this is the duty of every humble follower of the
command.
Perhaps you will ask me on what are we to frame
our lives if we should no longer be able to accept the
Bible as infallibly true, or its teaching as divinely in
spired ; what moral guide will remain, if this is not a
lamp sent from Heaven expressly to light our path.
Enough remains to be our guide and our comfort,—
its precepts none the less admirable, its promises none
the less consoling, The eternal truths of true religion
are still there, the purer for being freed from the
tangled weeds that choked them,—and we are able to
�14
A Woman’s Letter.
gather in the sound and wholesome wheat, without
being forced to garner with if the tares also. Were
the scriptures themselves to be destroyed to-morrow,
our foundation would still be firm. Faith in a God,
whose mercy, and truth, and justice, we see in all
His works, love and adoration of His perfection, a sin
cere desire to do His will by ministering as far as lies
in our power to the wants of our fellow-creatures, and
lastly a humble hope of a better life beyond the grave,
these would remain to us, a heritage for ever.
I have now very briefly stated some of my principal
reasons for holding opinions on Bible inspiration differ
ing widely from those taught and held by most of those
with whom I am thrown in contact,—I fear that my
task has been too badly performed to convey to you any
similar convictions, but I shall be contented if you ac
knowledge that they are not the result of any presump
tuous spirit, but the honest conclusions arrived at in a
course of humble enquiry.
I remain,
Sincerely yours.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
A woman's letter
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Ramsgate
Collation: 14 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Date of publication from British Library catalogue. Argues for women's ability and right to question biblical inspiration.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Thomas Scott
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1871]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5461
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
Subject
The topic of the resource
Women
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (A woman's letter), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Women
Women and religion