INTUITIVE EVIDENCE OF THE EXISTENCE OF SPIRITS. (continued 6)

1049. For this purpose, my dear angel child, in your next interview through our much-respected medium, allow me to request the favour of you to make my letter so far the subject of your communication, as may exhibit the reality of your spiritual existence, intelligence, and clairvoyance, and your continued correspondence of heart and mind with your happy father.

“Christmas, 1854.

1050. Shortly after writing this letter, at the circle of which I am a member, the following communication was spelled out on the spiritoscope or disc.

1051. ‘Darling Father: I wish to say something to you about William’s communication. He has impressed you since you were sick more than myself. You are rapidly developing as an impressional medium.

1052. ‘We have been constantly with you. Having wished to give a communication the evening our friend (a lady who is a very superior medium) was with you and mother, but the mode was too tedious. It was an era in mother’s life. Her opposition tends in some measure to repulse us; not that we love her less, but our loving natures must meet reciprocal tenderness.

1053. ‘Love begets love in the heavenly spheres, as well as on earth. I cannot say more at present, but I think William will speak more at length about the letter.

Maria.’

1054. ‘What letter?’ ‘Father knows,’ was the reply. The next communication for me on the same evening was the following:

1055. ‘Father, I wish you to read the letter which you have in your pocket-book before you go home; it will dispel all doubts in your mind relative to its spiritual origin.

W. G.’

1056. On the next evening, finding myself incidentally one of a happy meeting of spiritual friends, the following came for me through the spiritoscope from my brother, referring to my letter:

1057. ‘Brother William: We are still with and around you. During your sickness it was the province of Maria to watch you daily. Other friends were near; among these were father and mother, with your sons Jacob, William, and Henry, Rebecca, and many others bound to you by the ties of consanguinity. On Christmas-day we held a levee in your room. If you could have seen us, I think it might have disturbed your placidity, but you sat as composed as if you were entirely alone. I think if you will recall the circumstances, you will confess that a power foreign to your own was exerting an influence to give forth spiritual monitions.

1058. ‘I am anxious that Maria should make a communication in regard to the letter, and she will do so when an opportunity offers.’

1059. On the next meeting of our circle, the following beautiful letter was put in my hand by our intelligent and highly-developed medium, Mrs. Gourlay, written by her under spiritual impression:

1060. ‘Dear Father: I mentioned to you briefly at the circle that brother William impressed you to write the letter which you addressed to me on Christmas-day. I perceive with pleasure that my friend Mrs. G. is now sufficiently under my control to answer your affectionate epistle. The proposed correspondence between us affords me much pleasure, and causes me to feel as if I were really to live over again the days of my earthly existence, when I was blessed with the oft-repeated manifestations of your parental love and affection. I flatter myself, my dear father, that this revival of loving association will tend much to your happiness as well as mine. I will be a friendly star to guide you in your course over the troubled sea of life, that you may not become submerged in its surging billows, but arrive safely at the haven of eternal joy and felicity. I will lift your soul by degrees to the source of love and wisdom, and cause you to feel sensations of pleasure such as you have never before experienced. You have a mind which delights in the beauties of nature and art. Let me tell you, then, that no scene of earthly grandeur which you have ever witnessed, nor the sublimest flight of fancy of the wildest enthusiast in the cause of Spiritualism, can compare with the beauties and joys of the spirit home.

1061. ‘I regret that the members of my loved family are so much blinded by prejudice, as to debar themselves the holy privilege of spiritual intercourse—a communion which would serve to connect them indissolubly with us, and teach them of a world beyond death and the grave. Oh! father, how my heart rejoices that I can come to you with cheering words, and pour into your willing ear the tidings of the gospel of peace, which will prove a balm of consolation to your drooping spirit! The ordinary trials of life are but as dew on the eagle’s wing, when the proud bird soars aloft to court the rays of the rising sun. Father, I have already presented you with a view of the beautiful realities of my spirit home. The picture I have drawn is no ideal one, but a real and substantial scene of enduring pleasures. Now let me ask, How will your joys compare with ours? Oh! that the minds of my darling children might become imbued with an understanding of this most holy religion, for I am conscious that it would add largely to their present and future bliss!

1062. Dear father, I perceive the emotions of your inmost heart, and if the love of a devoted child can in any wise conduce to your happiness, it is most freely thine. Oh! that dear mother could feel as you do, how happy her declining years on earth might become! When she is disposed to listen to the voices of her spirit children, it will be our pleasure to come to her “with glad tidings of great joy.” Wishing you both, my dear parents, all the happiness which earth can afford, I subscribe myself your ever loving daughter.

Maria.’”

1063. The following letter was placed in a sealed envelope, addressed and handed to Mrs. Gourlay for an impressional reply. A few days afterward the answer to it, here annexed, was handed to me by my esteemed friend, the lady named, with the original letter still in the sealed envelope as it had been handed to her. This has to be regarded as a beautiful specimen of psychometric mediumship.

Philadelphia, March 23, 1855.

1064. My dear Brother John: Your communication last evening at our circle of “progress” afforded me much gratification, as you are doubtless aware from your pervading perception. I regret that circumstances do not allow of a more frequent intercourse with my beloved friends of the spirit land. It is also my ardent desire to hold communion with all my spirit relatives, and would wish with you, my dear brother, to bring about this delightful consummation.

1065. Your injunction of cheerfulness, as an efficient means of securing a healthful equilibrium of the vital organism, I can fully appreciate, and shall endeavour to profit by your welcome brotherly and excellent advice, as far as circumstances will permit. It is true, my dear John, that a longer sojourn here harmonizes with my desire to effect some objects, the accomplishment of which would probably add to my happiness here, and my claim for congenial association. The object to which I allude is the amelioration of the condition of the poor and wretched of my fellow-creatures, making them through my agency the recipients of some active benevolence.

1066. I have imbibed the opinion that the only acceptable offering at the throne of the great God, is the actual performance of those duties which are incumbent on us as individuals and social beings; beginning with the establishment of our own personal physical and moral character, and those of our own household and immediate social circle of relatives and friends; and then, to the accomplishment of this, to cultivate the sentiment of benevolence in aiding to promote the individual welfare of mankind in the use of what talent and other means may have fallen to our lot. I am prone, in my relations with the great Omnipotent Ruler of the universe, to apply the time-honoured maxim, “Actions speak louder than words.”

1067. Your invitation, my dear brother, to increase my intercourse with my spirit friends, finds in my heart and mind a very ready compliance. You propose a daily appropriation of time to this object. If you will do me the favour to appoint the time most agreeable to them and most desirable for myself, it shall be, to the fullest extent of my power, sacredly devoted to a duty and pleasure that are nearest to my heart.

1068. I feel the assurance that the good earth-character and intelligence of my spirit family, and the extent of our mutual love and affinity, afford me a more than ordinary opportunity for receiving information of that bright world which has become a delightful prospective inheritance to me and to thousands of doubting, fearful, and despairing minds.

1069. Your inspiring cheerfulness, my dear John, has already verified your sensible prognostic of the great influence on disease of a cheerful mind. I have learnt to entertain a high opinion of the bright intelligence and clairvoyance of the more elevated denizens of the spirit world; and shall always, therefore, regard any advice that may be offered me for the better government of my body and soul as a welcome and precious offering from those I love. I will close for the present with the assurance of my unaltered affection.

William.

1070. My dear Brother: With heartfelt love and affection I respond to your letter in reply to a message which I delivered through the instrumentality of our devoted friend, Mrs. Gourlay. During our happy interchange of thought, it will be my endeavour to suggest such ideas to your mind as may serve to elevate it and develope its capabilities. To the mind that is ignorant and prejudiced, this mode of communion with the invisible world may seem to be a direct violation and infringement of nature’s laws; but it is, on the contrary, not only natural, but perfectly legitimate to the age in which you now live. It is not a new revelation, but simply the discovery of hidden truths peculiarly adapted to the present advanced state of the race. It is old material in a new form. The material and spiritual elements are contributing, as never before, to the elevation and happiness of mankind, and already is established a spiritual telegraph on which I am at this moment successfully operating—sending a message of love to you, my brother.

1071. You say my words of cheer have wrought a change for the better in your system. This is a result which naturally follows a strict adherence to my prescription—cheerfulness.

1072. You desire to know what time would be most advisable for you to sit for spiritual communion. I would say, early in the morning, before the mind becomes taxed with the cares of the day, make a record of your impressions.

1073. You observe that it gives you great pleasure to receive messages from those in the spirit world who are bound to you by the ties of relationship. Let me assure you, my dear brother, that the feeling is mutual; and while time lasts with you, it will be our endeavour to gladden your heart with tokens of our increasing and untiring love. Your cup of happiness shall be filled to the brim, if it depends on us.

1074. Brother, may you meet with friends true and kind; may the labours of the cheerful morn render each day a happier one to you; and when night steals upon a slumbering world, may you close your outward eyes in peace with all mankind! Keep the mind’s sunshine bright! You have a soul to feel for others’ woes, and this is the true stamp of divinity.

John.

MARRIAGE ON EARTH AND IN HEAVEN.

The Hymeneal Tie in the Spirit World grows out of the necessity of the Connubial Union in the Mundane Sphere. “Free love” imputation refuted.[19]

1075. Some peculiar views respecting marriage, which are not consistent with the ideas of female delicacy and chastity heretofore entertained, have been designated by the name of “Free Love,” and have been commented on as proceeding from the spirit world. I am happy to say that, agreeably to the impressions which I have derived from my spirit friends, any doctrine, having a tendency of the kind thus described, would be at least as much censured in the spirit world as in this. As the best mode of removing this groundless imputation on Spiritualism, I will state the impressions which I entertain on the subject of marriage.

1076. Among the sources of happiness in the spirit world much insisted on is that resulting from a combined union of those really created for each other. The marriage contracted in this world, loses its binding power in the spirit world, yet may endure if mutually desired. If a husband has had several wives, or a wife several husbands, the tie endures only between the most congenial pair.[20]

1077. Sexual association is the means throughout nature by which the perpetuation of species is effected. But that this association may exist among human beings without degradation, it is manifestly necessary that it should not be indiscriminate. Not only delicacy, modesty, and the cultivation of congenial affection, but likewise the interests of offspring, require that the parents and children should form one family. The welfare of children, their equal duty to both parents, and natural affections between the parents and their children, must make a separation painful to all parties, however affection may have declined between the husband and wife, on the part of either or both.

1078. Hence, in the mundane sphere, the perpetuation of the human race consistently with decorum, and the welfare of offspring, and the happiness of the parties, especially the mother and wife, seems to be the great object of matrimony. In the spheres it is difficult to perceive how any motives of equally high importance can exist. It must be that connubial union in the spirit world rather grows out of marriage in this world, in order to fill up the void in the heart which might otherwise arise from our mundane habits. It would seem as if it were a benevolent indemnification for celibacy, or for the miseries so often resulting from the connubial state in this world, consequent, like the sufferings of child-bearing, to the perpetuation of mankind.

1079. It seems to me an error to suppose that the terrestrial marriage can be a secondary object with God, when the important part which it performs is taken into view.

1080. Incapacity to maintain a family often renders it impossible for those who would marry to come together, and worldly motives induce marriages, even when disgust or indifference may exist on the part of one, if not on that of both the parties.

1081. It seems, moreover, even where marriage actually results from the passion of love, that it is more or less the consequence of a species of hallucination, through which lovers deck an object with all that they would wish to exist in the way of merit, and feel toward them an affection proportionate to their own capacity to love, rather than of the degree of power in the object, reasonably to excite such intense partiality. It is thus that the love of the mother to the child she believes to be her own, will be powerful in proportion to her own capacity for maternal love, rather than of the child to excite love; since though it be a monster, and not really her own child, but fraudulently substituted therefor, it will cause no diminution of her maternal devotion.

1082. It is the impression on the mind that determines the object to which the passion is directed; the character of the being actuated by the passion, which determines its strength.

1083. But where to all those qualifications which would create friendship between persons of the same sex, the peculiar emotions which take place between those of different sexes are superadded, those who come together in this world under the hymeneal tie, may find it something more than a mere civil contract, and not terminated by death. Moreover, independently of the original passion, there arises an affection which is justly distinguished as conjugal, and which differs from the other in this highly important particular, that it is founded on a thorough reciprocal knowledge, instead of that ignorance which too often accompanies attachments produced by the arrows of the blind god, as Cupid is sometimes designated with figurative consistency.

1084. Having always supposed that independently of the emotions peculiar to the sexes, there could only be friendship between a man and woman like that which would exist between a brother and sister, I am at a loss to understand what it can be which, in the spiritual state of existence, can induce indissoluble marriage.

1085. On submitting the suggestions comprised in the preceding statement to the spirit to whom I owe much information, herein quoted, and to the spirit of a most intimate male friend, by both it was alleged that peculiar emotions were attendant on sexual affection in the spheres, as well as on earth, so far as consistent with the absence of that which exists in common with brutes.

THE MORALITY OF CHRISTENDOM BEING IRRECONCILABLE WITH THE NEW TESTAMENT, CANNOT BE ITS LEGITIMATE OFFSPRING.

Inspiration can have no higher authority, than the human testimony on which its existence is arrogated.

1086. Is it not a mistake to suppose that any doctrine gains any validity by claiming inspiration as its source, when there is nothing but human testimony to advance in support of that claim? For if in the instance of Spiritualism, human testimony is deemed to be unavailable, how comes it to avail when adduced in support of this arrogant claim of inspiration? As well might a man expect to cure the defect of a marshy foundation by substituting columns of iron for wooden posts, or that, while resting on wood, the support could be made firmer by introducing iron into the superstructure.

1087. As the introduction of the iron would diminish the competency of the foundation in proportion to the augmentation of weight, so the claim to inspiration lessens the competency of the testimony upon which it is advanced, proportionally as the incredibility is increased.

1088. But as respects the ancient witnesses, their own statements make them out unworthy of confidence. Facts or circumstances are stated which are manifestly blasphemous, inconsistent, and absurd, if not impossible. Thus a want of veracity or of discretion being demonstrated in some points, is sufficient to destroy validity in all.

1089. Revelation assumes God to be omnipotent, omniscient, prescient, and all good, yet represents him as under the necessity of subjecting his creatures to probation, to find out what, by the premises, he must foresee. It represents him while wishing his creatures to know him and his attributes, as not teaching them that which he wishes them to learn, yet punishing them and their posterity for ignorance arising from his own omission.

1090. It does not suffice to allege that the Old Testament taught God’s will to the Jews; since it is to me incredible that our Heavenly Father would give instruction of vital importance to a few of his children, leaving all the rest uninstructed, and yet afflict them for this result. But, admitting this possible, it appears that the instruction given the Jews in the book of Moses failed in those particulars, which are of paramount importance.

1091. In the Bible, God is represented as susceptible of jealousy, of wrath, of authorizing the butchery of three thousand Israelites for worshipping a golden calf; sanctioning the massacre of the whole nation of the Midianites, with the reservation of the virgins for violation by the bloody murderers of their kindred; the outrageous deception and fraud on the part of Jacob; swindling the Egyptians by borrowing their ornaments with intention of purloining them; hardening the heart of Pharaoh, yet afflicting his subjects for the obduracy thus produced; instructing Saul to surprise and massacre the Amalekites, even to each “suckling babe”, for a wrong done by their ancestors some hundred years before, as authorizing the hewing down with a sword the regal prisoner Agag in cold blood,[21] and sanctioning the destruction of whole pagan communities by David.[22]

1092. The following is the account given of this favourite of Jehovah: “And David said in his heart, I shall now perish one day by the hand of Saul: there is nothing better for me than that I should speedily escape into the land of the Philistines; and Saul shall despair of me, to seek me any more in any coast of Israel; so shall I escape out of his hand. And David arose, and he passed over with the six hundred men that were with him unto Achish, the son of Maoch, king of Gath. And David dwelt with Achish at Gath, he and his men, every man with his household, even David with his two wives, Ahinoam the Jezreelitess, and Abigail the Carmelitess, Nabal’s wife. And it was told Saul that David was fled to Gath: and he sought no more again for him. And David said unto Achish, If I have now found grace in thine eyes, let them give me a place in some town in the country, that I may dwell there: for why should thy servant dwell in the royal city with thee? Then Achish gave him Ziglag that day: wherefore Ziglag pertaineth unto the kings of Judah unto this day. And the time that David dwelt in the country of the Philistines was a full year and four months. And David and his men went up, and invaded the Geshurites, and the Gezrites, and the Amalekites: for those nations were of old the inhabitants of the land, as thou goest to Shur, even unto the land of Egypt. And David smote the land, and left neither man nor woman alive, and took away the sheep, and the oxen, and the asses, and the camels, and the apparel, and returned, and came to Achish. And Achish said, Whither have ye made a road to-day? And David said, Against the south of Judah, and against the south of the Jerahmeelites, and against the south of the Kenites. And David saved neither man nor woman alive, to bring tidings to Gath, saying, Lest they should tell on us, saying, So did David, and so will be his manner all the while he dwelleth in the country of the Philistines. And Achish believed David, saying, He hath made his people Israel utterly to abhor him; therefore he shall be my servant forever.”

1093. Here is massacre, spoliation, base lying to Achish, his truly noble-hearted friend, whom he deceives into a belief that he had made the people of Israel abhor him, when it was his intention to become king of Judea, and of course the enemy of his too-confiding protector, whenever an opportunity offered.

1094. Praise be to God that he has sent us a new way to religious light, not associated with this detestable immorality!

1095. Jehovah is made to arrest the sun, in order that Joshua may slaughter his flying foes. He is described as authorizing the Jews to extirpate their neighbours and seize their territory. I do most conscientiously declare that the portrait of Jehovah by the Bible appears to me more suitable for Satan than for our heavenly Father, who is represented by the spirits as perfectly impartial and equally loving to all his creatures.

1096. The example set in the Bible of slandering and persecuting those who did not believe in its doctrines, has ever been followed out by scriptural devotees, who would presumptuously represent that it is only from the Scriptures, which they recognise as the word of God, that a correct knowledge of the divine attributes can be obtained. But this is the converse of the truth. As described by Seneca, the Roman Sage, the God of the ancient theist was to the Jehovah of the Bible as Hyperion to Satyr. (See Seneca’s opinions of God, 1224)

1097. It appears to me a striking proof how far men can be demented by educational bigotry, that it should be supposed that their omnipotent God can require human missionaries’ aid to promulgate or carry out his will.

1098. The Old Testament does not impart a knowledge of immortality, without which religion were worthless. The notions derived from the gospel are vague, disgusting, inaccurate, and difficult to believe. The Pentateuch did not give the Jews an idea of immortality, nor were those Jews distinguished for morality, who from other sources than the Pentateuch embraced a belief in immortality. It has already been pointed out that the most enlightened sect among the children of Israel, the Sadducees, did not believe in a future state, while the Pharisees, who professed to believe therein, appear to have been so immoral as to be pre-eminently the objects of Christ’s denunciation.

1099. As respects the precepts of Christ, those on which he laid most stress are not only neglected, but grossly violated, by the opposite course being sanctioned by the overruling sentiment of society. Nothing would subject a man to more contempt in Christendom than a tame submission to blows, or being so poor as to wear patched or ragged clothes. There are few, if any, in Christendom, who would not rather have any deficiency in attire attributed to accident or taste, than to poverty.

1100. I have shown that the idea which the Pharisees entertained of heaven, as portrayed by Josephus, representing the wicked like the rich man within sight of the good, would be a hell to a good-hearted angel. This representation is sanctioned by Christ in his story of the rich man and Lazarus. The only reward promised to his apostles was worldly preeminence in the form of judgeships. Hence it were hardly reasonable for those who are subordinate in merit to the disciples to expect any better remuneration. Hell is as absurdly as horridly typified by eternal exposure to interminable fire.

1101. Thus neither among the Jews, nor among Christians, has the Bible furnished any adequate account of a future state, nor has it been productive of higher morality; since the only morality which does exist, is coupled not only with the neglect, but with the violation of those precepts which the gospel inculcates.

1102. Diogenes took a lantern to see if he could find an honest man in Greece. Were any one to employ a lime-light, he would not in Christendom find a Christian who carries out in practice the precepts of his divine Master. If those who know their Master’s will, yet do it not, are to be beaten with many stripes, while the ignorant pagan is to bear but few, were it not better to be a pagan than such a Christian as those are, for the most part, who exist in Christendom? Unless our missionaries can make better Christians, is it not inhumane to add to the number?

1103. On calling on a bigoted, self-styled disciple of Christ to show me anyone who put the precepts of Christ into practice, the reply was, “We rely on his merits.” “That is all you do,” said I. “In common with others of your tenets, you make the blood of Christ a fund on which every sinner may draw in proportion as he has confidence in its detersive influence.”

1104. I am supported in some of the views above presented, by a communication from a believer in revelation, under the signature of Bosanquet, to the Baltimore Church Times, for June 15, 1848. I will quote a portion of this communication, which is as follows:

1105. “But the want of faith is more open and direct than this, and it is the more obvious and pointed upon religious subjects. The Bible is boldly and practically denied in every particular. No class or body of men believe and obey it, and strange as it may seem, it is by no nation, or people, or churches, or sects of men, less implicitly believed and followed than by those very people and sections of the church who talk so much about it. There are no persons less obedient to the plain sense and mandates of the written word of God, than those who most speak of and uphold it as the sole authority and standard, and reject all assistance from the history of the church and what is spoken against as tradition. Every class of persons reject some portion or other of the sacred Scriptures. If you talk to some of temporal honour and rewards, and the observance of a day of rest, and the patriarchs, they will say, Oh! that is the Old Testament, and is abrogated. If you speak to others of good works, they will say, Oh! that is only in the Gospels, and the Epistles carry us much beyond that, and are superior to it. Unitarians, again, receive a Bible of their own; that is, just so many passages are excluded as will suit their own belief and purpose. Others, of numerous sects, dwell each upon some half dozen chapters, or passages, or phrases, or words of Scripture, of the Epistles especially, and dwell upon them idolatrously and devotedly, to the exclusion of all the rest, so far as the authority of Scripture is concerned, from belief and practice.

1106. This is even in the religious world—the thinking and reasoning world. Let us now turn our observation to the world itself; to the working and practical.

1107. The Bible is denied in every particular. Men do not believe that we are really to be Christians; that we are to imitate our Lord. They do not believe that the world could possibly go on if all men were to act upon pure Christian motives, and up to a perfect Christian rule: if they were to forgive and forget injuries; if they were not to resent an affront; if they were to give to people because they asked them: if they were to lend money without looking for interest; if we were all to give up luxuries, and style, and costly furniture and equipage; if we, our cattle and servants, were strictly to observe the day of rest. How many are there among us who believe that ‘the tree of knowledge’ is not an absolute good? or that we ought to receive the gospel with the simplicity of little children. Who believes that we ought to honour our father and mother, and our sovereign? Who is there that acts up to the precept that we ought not to judge others in their character? How many are there who appear to believe that it is not right to be anxious about the future; that riches are not a good thing; that the entrance into heaven is easier to the poor man; that we ought to return a tenth to God; that we would bring a blessing to give freely and largely to the poor; that children are a blessing and a gift from the Lord, and that the man is happy who has his quiver full of them? It is evident that in all these points the Bible is disbelieved and is practically denied, and does not control or guide us in our habits and principles of life and society.

1108. Still less do we believe that the public measures, the laws, and government of the state, and the intercourse with other nations, ought to be, or can be, carried on and conducted upon Christian principles. What number or classes of persons believe that righteousness exalteth a nation? that we are punished according to the national sins of the people, and for the sins of the rulers? and that if wicked and irreligious men preside over our councils, we shall as a nation suffer the penalties of it? or that the conscience of the government is the conscience of the people, and that our rulers are bound to take the first care for the pure religion and morals of the country; and that, if they do so, their righteousness will bring down a blessing upon the nation?

1109. To come again to more direct practice, and to our own habits of life. Who is there who thinks first what is right, and according to the pattern of Christ, and after the will of God, in what he is about to do, and not what is wise and expedient? Who seeks first the kingdom of God, and God’s rule of righteousness, and trusts that all temporal good consequences will follow upon it? Who is there who thinks and abides only by the rule of what is right and commanded? We may almost answer in the words of Scripture, ‘There is none righteous, no, not one!’ Who believes in and trusts to the assistance and suggestions of the Spirit in his designs and undertakings, and believes, and acts, and writes, and thinks, as believing that the most useful and important and influential suggestions of our thoughts and invention come to our mind by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, more than by our own cleverness, and exertion, and memory, and prays for divine help upon commencing every task, or writing, or undertaking accordingly? Who forbears strictly and endeavours to expel at once all thought and every suggestion of the mind in worldly matters on a Sunday, with confidence and faith that the same and more useful thought will be supplied on the succeeding week-days, and that the unqualified dedication and sanctification of the Lord’s day will make the labour of the six days more effectual and fruitful than would be that of the seven? Who would believe now that a sabbatical year would not necessarily be impracticable and ruinous, or that a populous country could exist under such a rule, or that it would not produce a debasing and demoralizing idleness?”

1110. Let not the reader infer that these admissions come from a free-thinker. The following remarks will prove the writer one of the faithful, in the sense in which this epithet argues a mind chained down by abject enthralment, to put any constructions on facts but that which is subversive of educational prejudice: “All the evils of which the existence is admitted are due to our narrowing down our reception of truths and facts to the limits of reason—of our own more or less shallow individual reason.”

1111. Now to me it seems that the nominal profession of a faith in facts which are absurd and contradictory, and professed reverence for precepts which are as utterly impracticable as unwise in the abstract, induces this monstrous incompatibility of the actual morality of Christendom with the professions of Christians and doctrines of Christianity.

1112. Our submission to scriptural authority is not to be governed by our own reason, but by that of persons who lived many ages ago, originally assumed to be inspired by God, upon human testimony; which in the case of Spiritualism, or any other than the one in point, is treated as mere chaff.

1113. It strikes me, from the considerations presented under the head of Mundane Wealth, that the precepts of Christ were fundamentally erroneous, so far as they discredit and discourage efforts for the honest acquisition of wealth. (908.)

1114. God has given the fowls of the air feathers as a natural clothing, and thus any effort to procure clothing on their part is rendered unnecessary; he has not given them hands nor intellectual ingenuity to spin and weave. On the other side, with little exception, man is naturally devoid of clothing, and requires clothes to protect him from the scorching solar rays or freezing blasts of winter, but has been furnished with the hands and the ingenuity to spin and weave. Under these circumstances, was it reasonable to allege that man should be governed by the example of the feathered creation? Was it reasonable to infer that there should be no spinning or weaving by men, because there neither was nor could be any performed by fowls?

1115. Again, the lily, like all other vegetables, not only comes into existence naked, but remains so, since it neither can nor will clothe itself, and would perish if by any artificial clothing it were shut out from the influence of the solar rays, and from the absorption of carbonic acid, which furnishes the vegetable creation with the carbon requisite for the fibres essential to stability. Hence the allegation that Solomon in all his glory was not clothed like the lily, is irreconcilable with the nature and actual state of this beautiful flower, which is destitute of clothing by nature, and which would perish if it were clothed. The skin of vegetable leaves, to a certain extent, performs for them what mouths do for animals. How unreasonable, then, to argue from one to the other, that man should imitate the vegetable; or to compare a plant, naturally and of necessity naked, with a king gorgeously clothed?

1116. The degrading a rich man, whether honest or not, to the level of a felon or murderer, as respects accessibility to heaven, and of course favour in the sight of God, is so erroneous, that there never was a precept which was less respected in practice, by the votaries of its author. As I have heretofore remarked, the conduct of Christians is not merely negative in respect to this precept—they do not merely neglect it; their course is the converse of any obedience to its dictates. Yet professed Christians while violating their divine Master’s behests in a way which makes their performance the inverse of the results which their professions involve, for the most part treat any person who does not profess devotion for Christ’s doctrines, as actually more culpable than themselves, and more liable to retribution after death. This is about as just as for a man, who after marrying a woman and calling her his wife, should act the inverse of the obligations imposed by the connubial contract, and then consider an individual who had never entered into any obligation with her of any kind, as guilty of sinful neglect in not acknowledging as a wife, one whom he never married. The question is, who treats the woman most ill, he who acknowledges but neglects, or he who does not display a hymeneal devotion which he never led her to expect?

1117. Again, the precept to return good for evil, would, if acted up to, encourage evil. Were a man to submit quietly to be robbed, whipped, and cheated, he would encourage robbing, flagellation, and fraud. Far wiser is the precept of Confucius, “Return good for good; for evil, justice.” The impracticable precept of Christ is so far from being carried out by professing Christians, that in their conduct to the aborigines of Africa, India, and America, they have always been aggressive, always rewarding the hospitality of the natives with fraud and violence, and their conduct toward each other is the inverse of the ultra precept of Christ—“Return good for evil.” They not unfrequently return evil for good.

1118. There is, as I think, nothing more injurious than the habitual violation of acknowledged professions. If the violator be aware of his inconsistency, it involves the incessant perpetration of manifest wickedness; and if his mind be so cramped by education that he commits such violations unconsciously, it must degrade the all-important power of distinguishing good from evil. Thus, in the garb of truth,

1119. It is this nominal devotion to the doctrines of Christ, with a demeanour diametrically in teeth of them, which causes that anti-Christian morality which Bosanquet portrays.

1120. But I am conscientiously of opinion that the respect paid to Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Samuel, David, &c., by which one five hundred-millionth of the blood of Abraham is made an honour to Jesus Christ, is among the reasons of the low state of morality among those who consider the Bible as the Word of God, and are thus led to view with indulgence, prostitution, murder, massacre, rape, cheating, and fraud. Agreeably to the opinion of a champion of Christianity, already quoted, “The worshipper is assimilated to the imaginary deity whom he worships.”

1121. With the exchange of two words for two other words, the verses which Pope ascribes to Eloisa, might well be uttered by many self-called Christians, who in defending the gospel from any conscientious attack, hesitate not at any intemperance of language, and yet think that the marriage ceremony is all that is called for.

1123. Although the substitution of the words wealth and power for love and man would spoil the rhythm, it would not lessen the applicability to the great mass of those who call themselves Christians, while not only neglecting, but positively violating the precepts of Him by whose blood they still hope, by a due degree of faith, to wash away their transgressions.

1124. The universe, as it is presented to my mind, induces a belief that it must have a presiding deity of commensurate power. As there are millions of suns, each having its planets; as the space which it occupies appears to us little short of infinity; as it must have endured from eternity, and must endure eternally,—the power and glory of this presiding deity must be commensurate with his realm, as to extent and magnificence. Yet evil exists; which can only exist from choice on his part, or because it cannot be avoided. There must be a want of will or power to prevent or remove evil. Such is the God which my reason obliges me to acknowledge. Where impressions are the offspring of reason, they cannot destroy their parent. But those who owe their opinions of their deity to tradition, have a deity which, not having originated from reason, may always be made the means of setting its dictates aside.

1125. The bigot’s god is a dangerous idol, although he be not represented by an image; and no less dangerous is any book which owes authority to hereditary, intolerant dictation and servile devotion.

1126. The fear of public opinion, or a desire to do what is deemed right among men, seems to be the principal motive for religious professions and church-going in the great mass of society. The prevailing morality being, as already noticed, not only neglectful of Christ’s precepts, but absolutely the inverse of them—not only permitting, but calling for a course diametrically opposite, as respects the acquisition of wealth and submission to wrongs—shows that it is not generally founded on a desire to cultivate the good will of Christ, but to square with sectarian opinion. I hold that one cause of this is, that the conviction of a future state, in which happiness is in proportion to our deportment here, is not so deep as that which I now have. Under the conviction which I have, nothing could tempt me to act in such way as to produce a retrograde influence on my pretensions as a spirit.

1127. It seems to me, as urged by me before, that no one believing the language of Abraham, as narrated and sanctioned by Christ, to have come authenticated direct from the Son of God, and consequently expecting it to be verified, would render himself liable to the punishment of Dives for the sake of enjoying the good things of this world.

1128. The idea that souls are to remain in the grave till the “last day,” the procrastination of that day and geological knowledge being inconsistent with the belief that any such day will arrive, makes the sinner less fearful, the good less hopeful, and diminishes the number of those who are actually, in their worldly conduct, influenced by their hopes or fear of future rewards or punishments.

1129. The expectation of washing away sin through the merit of a bigoted belief in Christ, co-operating with the vague, contradictory, and irrational idea of heaven and hell recorded in Scripture, seems to be the reason why Christians act so inconsistently with the precepts of Him whom they professedly adore.

1130. Nothing can be more inconsistent with the religion inculcated by my spirit friends, than the idea of atonement for sin by faith in any religion, true or false.

1131. Had there ever been any available light let in from the spirit world, this error had been denounced, and having been thus stamped as erroneous from on high, could not have acquired or retained its mischievous hold of so many millions of human beings, by substituting blind faith for genuine virtue.

Injurious Influence of unreasonable Restriction.

1132. Another reason why, throughout Christendom, the vices most deprecated by Christ are those pre-eminently prevalent, is that his precepts were absolutely impracticable, unless explained away in the style of Lord Peter in the “Tale of a Tub.”

1133. Some of the excellent Society of Friends may, as respects war, have been obedient to the precepts of Christ, and probably in other respects deviate from them less than most other sects; but as to wealth their course is the inverse of giving away their money. They are rationally among the most active and successful in the honest acquisition of money. In this they would act morally, excepting the violation of their recognised obligation to obey the precepts of Christ.

1134. Does not experience show that nothing is more injurious to morals than unreasonable restraint? This has been seen in the profligacy of the children of puritanical sectarians. To disobey an unreasonable restriction always appears comparatively a trivial offence. Going to a play, in the opinion of the mass of the world, is not sinful; but for a minor to go to a play in disobedience of parental authority, by stealth, deception, or lying, becomes sinful delinquency, and introduces a habit which may lead to crime as wicked as that of the conduct of Jacob to Esau. Lying and deceiving for venial purposes will soon induce the habit. The restriction from eating pork or drinking wine has no doubt induced much deception and falsehood among the followers of Mohammed, and thus made a crime where none would have existed. In like manner, the putting a rich man on a footing with a felon, as respects access to heaven, forbidding the resistance to blows or spoliation, makes almost every professed Christian practically unfaithful to his professions, and of course an infidel of the worst kind. More or less of this infidelity is involved in various ways, as above admitted by “Bosanquet.”

1135. If the history of Christianity, so called, be reviewed, it will be found that the deviations from the precepts of Christ during the present age are quite venial, compared with those which took place during the thousand years or more in which Romanism had the ascendency.

1136. A painful picture of the morals of the clergy during that period may be found in a recent work by Bishop Hopkins of Vermont. It would seem as if the crimes and indecency displayed during the Middle Ages, exceed even those of Abraham, Moses, Jacob, and David, and Samuel, the cruel, despotic pope of Judea. The deposition of Saul for not killing Agag, and his hewing his royal prisoner down with a sword in cold blood, may have been looked to as a justification of pontifical cruelty and despotism.

No one would believe that a capable farmer would make such a mistake as to sow garlic instead of wheat. Yet God, while represented as having intended to sow Protestantism, is considered as having caused, throughout Christendom, a crop of Catholicism, in the Roman or Grecian form, for more than a thousand years; those weeds still occupying more than half of the whole soil.

1137. The immense importance attached by mankind to correct religious impressions is demonstrated, in the first place, by the enormous expenditure throughout this world in sustaining those who are conceived by their constituents to be the true expounders of religion;[23] and, in the second place, by the blood and treasure which have been expended either in missions or in wars, for the extension or defence of the impressions believed by various sectarians to be the most accordant with truth.

1138. Yet it must be plain that in no case has there been any higher evidence than that of an alleged human communication, direct or indirect, with some recognised deity, if not the true God. If the will of God has ever been revealed, the number who have actually pretended to an interview with him, or with any immortal subordinate spirit are very few. The Old Testament depends upon the testimony of Moses and a few Hebrew prophets, whose inspiration rests upon their own allegations, respecting themselves or each other.

1139. As regards the basis of Christianity, there are two irreconcilable opinions: one held by the Protestants, the other by the Roman Catholics; since although there is a great diversity of opinion between Protestants, there is between all Protestants and Papists this difference: The latter relying on their own church as the sole depository of all the evidence of Christianity, do not allow any direct recourse to Scripture for a rule of faith. The former reject the claims of the church of Rome, and resort to the gospel for their rule of faith.[24]

1140. But wherefore should such implicit confidence be placed in language alleged to have been held by Moses or any other ancient author? or should they be credited, even when they allege God to have used such words as these, “Let me wax hot in my wrath that I may consume them.” The motive for this imputation against God, was that Moses might take credit for moderation in slaughtering only three thousand of God’s chosen people in one day, for worshipping a golden calf, made by his own brother, afterward made high-priest. Thus the ringleader, being the brother of Moses, was loaded with honours, while those whom he led astray were to be massacred in cold blood. Yet it is on such witnesses as this blood-thirsty, blasphemous bigot, that orthodoxy relies for assuming the Pentateuch to be the word of God, censuring, if not persecuting, all who do not concur with it.

1141. The intercourse with the angel Gabriel rests upon the evidence of Mary alone, who was interested immensely to make her child a god, instead of being her illegitimate offspring. Of the dream of Joseph there can be no witness besides himself. But would a dream be now admitted as testimony in any court of justice.

1142. The diversity of opinion existing between Romanists and Protestants, are briefly exhibited in the subjoined quotations from the controversy between Archbishop Hughes and the Rev. Mr. Breckinridge. They have already been cited by me in a pamphlet on the better employment of the first day of the week. Here are the opinions of two men highly qualified to judge. In one, we have an eminent champion of Romanism; in the other, a no less able champion of Calvinism. To the latter belongs the distinction of having persecuted the Quakers and witches, and of having roasted Servetus; to the former, putting some hundreds of thousands to death or torture by the sword, the rack, or the fagot.

1143. Agreeing with each of the parties that the other is in the wrong, I, of course, assume that they are both in error. Taken together, they may be considered as proving that there is no evidence in favour of Christianity, which I have not the authority of eminent Christians for rejecting. In the 29th page of the controversy between himself and Breckinridge, Bishop Hughes speaks as follows:

1144. “My fourth argument was, that the Protestant rule of faith actually undermines the authority of the Scriptures, by extinguishing the proofs of their authenticity and inspiration, and consequently terminates in moral suicide. Just imagine to yourself an ordinary will or testament, written but twenty years ago, purporting to be the last will and testament of a wealthy deceased relative, and designating you as heir, but without either signature or probate, and ask yourself what it would be worth? Could such a document establish its own authenticity? And yet this is precisely the situation to which the Protestant rule of faith reduced the Scriptures, by which, and by which alone, their authenticity could have been established. St. Augustine, of whom Presbyterians are sometimes wont to speak with respect, declared that it was the testimony of the church which moved him to believe in the Scriptures. But now the order of belief is ‘reformed.’ Men pick up (pardon the phrase) the sacred volume, as they find it floating on the sea of two thousand years, and by one great but gratuitous act of belief, which flings all intermediate church authority and tradition to the winds, they say ‘the Bible is the Bible, and we are its interpreters, every man for himself.'”

1145. It seems not to have occurred to the right reverend champion of the Catholic creed, that it is not more true that a testament without witnesses is of no validity, than it is true that the testimony of witnesses claiming under the will, cannot be admitted. A document written after the death of the testator would not be considered in a court of justice as entitled to the name of a testament. But were persons to write a will after a man’s death, and bring it forward, claiming under it supremacy, would their claim produce any result beside derision?

1146. The distinguished prelate justly treats the gospel as resting on the traditionary evidence of the church; since, as he truly urges, the church existed before the gospel, having been instituted at the time when his instructions were given to the apostles by Christ.

1147. But how much value is to be attached to the testimony of the church, may be learned from the following opinion of the learned clergyman to whom I have alluded as the other party in the controversy, (pages 35, 36:)

1148. “The unwarrantable liberties of your church with the word of God show her fallible to a deplorable degree.

1149. Your rule, if observed, requires implicit faith in the decretals and interpretations of fallible men, which is subversive of the very nature and end of religion in the soul. Faith supposes knowledge, conviction on evidence, and trust in God, founded on a belief of divine truth; but your rule requires unconditional submission to the dicta of the church in the lump. The ‘Carbonaria fides,’ or faith of the collier, is the very faith required. It is as follows: When asked, ‘What do you believe?’ he answered, ‘I believe what the church believes.’ ‘What does the church believe?’ Ans. ‘What I believe.’ ‘Then what do you and the church together believe?’ Ans. ‘We both believe the same thing.’ This is the grand catholicon for believing every thing, without knowing any thing. In this soil grew the maxim that ‘ignorance is the mother of devotion.’ It is believing by proxy, or rather not believing at all, in the true sense. Here is the secret of the unity of your church.”

1150. To conclude, I agree with the right reverend able and learned archbishop, that Christianity has no witnesses but those disciples of Christ whom he calls the church; but I also concur with his able, learned, and reverend opponent, that the said church is neither competent as a witness, nor reliable as a foundation for Christianity.

1151. Breckinridge does not perceive that the gospel on which he relies, and the recorded traditions which ascribe that work to inspiration, have no better foundation than the testimony of fallible men.

1152. Manifestly, however, the authority of the church of Rome cannot be overset without oversetting the authenticity of the Christian religion.

1153. Could any one believe that an experienced farmer would sow a field with garlic when intending to have a crop of wheat? Would not the conclusion be that if a field upon his farm were occupied by that objectionable weed, it must have been the spontaneous production of the soil, not of a mistake so gross on his part? Yet our prescient God is represented as so much inferior in foresight to an ordinary farmer, that while the religious soil of Christendom was for ages occupied with crops of Catholicism, in the Grecian or Roman modification, the seed of Protestantism was sown by God through his son and vicegerent, Christ, intending to have the soil occupied by Protestantism. Manifestly, either it was intended that Catholicism should prevail, as above described, or an omnipotent, omniscient, and prescient God did not preside over the seeding.

1154. Yet notwithstanding this diversity as to the true import of Christianity between the most distinguished Christian sectarians, each sect conceives itself justified in propagating its own peculiar opinions among ignorant pagans. The principle being thus sanctioned, that those who believe themselves to have become acquainted with religious truth, are justified in propagating a knowledge of it, wherefore should not that privilege be exercised by a spiritualist as well as a Christian?

1155. Humility is one of the virtues inculcated by Christ; but if his disciples assume to themselves a peculiar capacity to know what is true, and an exclusive right to teach what they thus assume to be truth, there will be no humility in their practice, however it may be blazoned among their professions.

1156. The view which I have presented in the preceding pages is corroborated by a personage of no less authority than William Pitt, afterward the Earl of Chatham, and prime minister of England. His opinions, alleged to have been originally published in the London Journal for 1733, are as follows:

Letter of William Pitt.

“Pure Religion and undefiled before God and the Father, is this: to visit the Fatherless and Widows in their afflictions, and to keep one’s self unspotted from the World.”

1157. “Gentlemen: Whoever takes a view of the world, will find, that what the greatest part of mankind have agreed to call religion, has been only some outward exercise esteemed sufficient to work a reconciliation with God. It has moved them to build temples, flay victims, offer up sacrifices, to fast and feast, to petition and thank, to laugh and cry, to sing and sigh by turns; but it has not yet been found sufficient to induce them to break off an amour, to make a restitution of ill-gotten wealth, or to bring the passions and appetites to a reasonable subjection. Differ as much as they may in opinion concerning what they ought to believe, or after what manner they are to serve God, as they call it, yet they all agree in gratifying their appetites. The same passions reign eternally in all countries and in all ages, Jew and Mohammedan, the Christian and the Pagan, the Tartar and the Indian, all kinds of men who differ in almost every thing else, universally agree with regard to their passions. If there be any difference among them, it is this; that the more superstitious, the more vicious they always are, and the more they believe, the less they practise. This is a melancholy consideration to a good mind; it is a truth, and certainly above all things, worth our while to inquire into. We will, therefore, probe the wound, and search to the bottom; we will lay the axe to the root of the tree, and show you the true reason why men go on in sinning and repenting, and sinning again through the whole course of their lives; and the reason is, because they have been taught, most wickedly taught, that religion and virtue are two things absolutely distinct; that the deficiency of the one might be supplied by the sufficiency of the other; and that what you want in virtue, you must make up in religion. But this religion, so dishonourable to God, and so pernicious to men, is worse than Atheism, for Atheism, though it takes away one great motive to support virtue in distress, yet it furnishes no man with arguments to be vicious; but superstition, or what the world means by religion, is the greatest possible encouragement to vice, by setting up something as religion which shall atone and commute for the want of virtue. This is establishing iniquity by a law, the highest law; by authority, the highest authority; that of God himself. We complain of the vices of the world, and of the wickedness of men, without searching into the true cause. It is not because they are wicked by nature, for that is both false and impious, but because to serve the purposes of their pretended soul-savers, they have been carefully taught that they are wicked by nature, and cannot help continuing so. It would have been impossible for men to have been both religious and vicious, had religion been made to consist wherein alone it does consist; and had they been always taught that true religion is the practice of virtue in obedience to the will of God, who presides over all things, and will finally make every man happy who does his duty.

1158. This single opinion in religion, that all things are so well made by the Deity, that virtue is its own reward, and that happiness will ever arise from acting according to the reason of things, or that God, ever wise and good, will provide some extraordinary happiness for those who suffer for virtue’s sake, is enough to support a man under all difficulties, to keep him steady to his duty, and to enable him to stand as firm as a rock, amid all the charms of applause, profit, and honour. But this religion of reason, which all men are capable of, has been neglected and condemned, and another set up, the natural consequences of which have puzzled men’s understandings, and debauched their morals, more than all the lewd poets and atheistical philosophers that ever infested the world; for instead of being taught that religion consists in action, or obedience to the eternal moral law of God, we have been most gravely and venerably told that it consists in the belief of certain opinions which we could form no idea of, or which were contrary to the clear perceptions of our minds, or which had no tendency to make us either wiser or better, or, which is much worse, had a manifest tendency to make us wicked and immoral. And this belief, this impious belief, arising from imposition on one side, and from want of examination on the other, has been called by the sacred name of religion, whereas real and genuine religion consists in knowledge and obedience. We know there is a God, and know his will, which is, that we should do all the good we can; and we are assured from his perfections, that we shall find our own good in so doing.

1159. And what would we have more? are we, after such inquiry, and in an age full of liberty, children still? and cannot we be quiet unless we have holy romances, sacred fables, and traditionary tales to amuse us in an idle hour, and to give rest to our souls, when our follies and vices will not suffer us to rest?

1160. You have been taught, indeed, that right belief, or orthodoxy, will, like charity, cover a multitude of sins; but be not deceived; belief of, or mere assent to the truth of propositions upon evidence, is not a virtue, nor unbelief a vice; faith is not a voluntary act, does not depend upon the will; every man must believe or disbelieve, whether he will or not, according as the evidence appears to him. If, therefore, men, however dignified or distinguished, command us to believe, they are guilty of the highest folly and absurdity, because it is out of our power; but if they command us to believe, and annex rewards to belief, and severe penalties to unbelief, then they are most wicked and immoral, because they annex rewards and punishments to what is involuntary, and, therefore, neither rewardable nor punishable. It appears, then, very plainly unreasonable and unjust to command us to believe any doctrine, good or bad, wise or unwise; but, when men command us to believe opinions which have no tendency to promote virtue, but which are allowed to commute or atone for the want of it, then they are arrived at the utmost pitch of impiety, then is their iniquity full; then have they finished the misery, and completed the destruction of poor mortal man; by betraying the interest of virtue, they have undermined and sapped the foundation of all human happiness; and how treacherously and dreadfully have they betrayed it! A gift, well applied, the chattering of some unintelligible sounds called creeds; an unfeigned assent and consent to whatever the church enjoins, religious worship and consecrated feasts; repenting on a death-bed; pardons rightly sued out; and absolution authoritatively given, have done more toward making and continuing men vicious, than all the natural passions and infidelity put together. For infidelity can only take away the supernatural rewards of virtue; but these superstitious opinions and practices have not only turned the scene, and made men lose sight of the natural rewards of it, but have induced them to think, that were there no hereafter, vice would be preferable to virtue, and that they increase in happiness as they increase in wickedness; and this they have been taught in several religious discourses and sermons, delivered by men whose authority was never doubted, particularly by a late Rev. prelate, I mean Bishop Atterbury, in his sermon on these words: ‘If in this life only be hope, then we are of all men the most miserable,’ where vice and faith ride most lovingly and triumphantly together. But these doctrines of the natural excellency of vice, the efficacy of a right belief, the dignity of atonements and propitiations have, beside depriving us of the native beauty and charms of honesty, and thus cruelly stabbing virtue to the heart, raised and diffused among men a certain unnatural passion, which we shall call a religious hatred—a hatred constant, deep-rooted, and immortal. All other passions rise and fall, die and revive again; but this of religious and pious hatred rises and grows every day stronger upon the mind as we grow more religious, because we hate for God’s sake, and for the sake of those poor souls, too, who have the misfortune not to believe as we do; and can we in so good a cause hate too much? the more thoroughly we hate the better we are; and the more mischief we do to the bodies and states of these infidels and heretics, the more do we show our love to God. This is religious zeal, and this has been called divinity; but remember, the only true divinity is humanity.

W. Pitt.”

Offer of Guidance by a Mundane Spirit.

1161. The Rev. Allen Putnam, whose narrative of his conversion to Spiritualism, has been submitted, gave a very sensible and interesting lecture on this new doctrine, at the Melodeon, in Boston, last October. One of his remarks struck me as being very well warranted by my own observation and experience. He said that we are wont to express indignation at the absurd, cruel, and unnatural Chinese custom of cramping the female foot; but to him it appeared that in Christendom a much worse practice existed, that of cramping the minds of females by bringing them up zealous sectarians, their opinions, in general, being determined by their parentage. Thus Miss A. is a Romanist; Miss B. an Episcopalian; Miss C. a Calvinist; Miss D. a Methodist; Miss E. a Jewess; all most excellent creatures in any other respect excepting the effects of educational sectarianism, which had been interchanged, had their parentage been commuted. (259.)

1162. One of the blessings of Spiritualism, according to my view, is, that this cramped state of the mind, which attaches importance to various phases of analogous educational error, will be removed by receiving their opinions from the same source. But it seems that one of the most amiable and interesting among those angelic devotees, has been actuated by the same anxiety for my salvation from hell, that I have felt for her emancipation from the educational ligatures imposed upon her otherwise excellent understanding. The following letter is the fruit of her zeal in my favour:

August 1, 1855.

1163. My dear Sir: You have too much kindness yourself, not to receive in kindness what is so intended; and you have too much politeness not to grant as much as you ask of a friend. I, therefore, with all confidence, send you the enclosed letter, written by one of the first intellects in the country. Now, if when you send your pamphlets and the papers you wish me to read, you will state that you have read this letter, (with the care you wish me to read yours,) not to refute but to comprehend the mind of the writer, I will do the same. But, as what I send to you requires higher power than any power in created man, I will continue to pray to this higher power, this Creator of all things, that you may so read under his blessing and guidance, (before whom you and the very world upon which you tread, are but a molecule or mite,) that you, I say, may find that salvation for your immortal soul, which you seem so much to desire. If you believe that your father and sister exist, and consequently, that you have a soul that cannot die, you must feel a deep anxiety with us all for the future welfare of this soul, and will not treat with indifference the attempt to offer you that which is a complete satisfaction to your friend!

1164. I would avoid argument, as two persons at opposite points can never see the objects in the same light; but I send simply the Christian’s plan of salvation, to which I only ask you to attend as carefully as I attended to the statement of your theory. When I return to New York permanently, I will inform you. As I am anxious to retain these papers, and life is uncertain, please so arrange them that they may easily be found, should any thing happen.”

1165. The following lines, which are subjoined in the title page of my pamphlet, addressed to the Episcopal clergy, would have forewarned any but an enthusiast, that there was an outwork to be conquered before any impression could be made:

1167. Persons who should differ about axioms could never agree in mathematical demonstrations, nor is it possible for A and B to agree in theology, when A assumes what to B appears to comprise a contradiction within its premises and conclusions. Having for years held the opinion conveyed in the above lines, to be self-evident truth, it is of course useless to debate with those who take an opposite view, especially just at this time, when I believe that opinion to be sanctioned by my spirit friends. This opinion was urged in my letter to the Episcopal clergy; yet this kind adviser has not seen, or has not taken pains to understand, its all-important bearing.

1168. The letter of this charming woman commences with begging the question. It is assumed that the arguments of her clerical friend require for comprehension a higher power than any power created in man. But this to me appears fanatical presumption, just as much as it would be in any other sectarian. The excellent authoress of the epistle puts herself in a class of females whom it has been my object to emancipate from the restraint imposed upon their minds, no less cramping than that to which the feet of Chinese ladies are subjected.

1169. It must be evident, that unless there was a successful precursory effort by facts and reasoning, to make me believe that what appears to me below good sense, is actually above it, her inference that discussion would be useless is quite evident. But this amounts to an admission that the opinions which it is her object to impart, are not founded in reason.

1170. Her clerical friend falls into the same error, as will appear from the following quotation. The last postulate in the world which he could induce me to admit, would be that any thing which owes its existence entirely to barbarous, wicked, ignorant, covetous, and blood-thirsty men, can be God’s word, and, therefore, paramount to human reason.

1171. How would he enable an idiot to believe in the Bible, or in any thing? Is not our capacity to believe correctly, greater as our reason is better by nature? It is only through his own intellectual faculties that he has received his opinions and can defend them. It is through my reason that my head and heart repel the Old Testament as, for the most part, the work of a set of unprincipled bigots, comprising allegations which the present state of astronomy and geology demonstrate to be fallacious, and which, independently of that cramping of the intellect by education, which it is my ardent desire to remove, would be denounced replete with indecency, immorality, and misrepresentation of God.

1172. It is striking that this kind lady, in referring to my sister and other spirit friends, should suppose that I would slight the direct heartfelt evidence received from them, in obedience to impressions felt by her in common with every other devotee to any religion whatever. They could, with just as much consistency, appeal to their tenets, and assume their “Koran,” their “Shasters,” or “Zendavesta” to be above my reason.

1173. But the whole tenor of this application shows that the authoress expects to set aside the results of nearly twenty months’ investigation, creating in me a firm devout conviction that I have a correct knowledge of the spirit world, received through my relatives, friends, and high spirits, in deference to those of a set of people of whom I know nothing but ill. May God do that for her which she has so benevolently implored for me, and remove from her brain the influence of educational narrowness. I would utter the same aspiration for the divine whom she has brought in as her advocate, who I hope as sincerely believes what he alleges, as I believe in the communications of my guardian spirits.

1174. But this superior intellect, it will be shown, falls into one of the most inexcusable errors, into which a tyro in reasoning can fall, that of founding his arguments on premises which are emphatically denied by the other party—a gross begging of the question, that the Bible is the word of God, and paramount to human reason.

1175. In a subsequent part of this letter, Hume’s excellent rule is set aside: that we must weigh the probability of the evidence against the improbability of the miracle. Rochefoucault alleges, ‘Tis better to tell a probable lie, than an extremely improbable truth. By what evidence can any record be proved true, when it is vastly more probable it should be false, than the facts recorded by it should be true.

1176. Manifestly, there are but these two ways in which any record can command credence: either there must be external evidence sufficient to weigh against the improbability of the facts which it has recorded; or those facts must be of a nature to create belief from their probability, from what is called internal evidence. As to external evidence, clearly any amount of that, may be adduced without creating a belief in spiritual manifestations. Human evidence is wholly inadequate to prove any thing which sectarianism does not wish to admit. Considering the external evidence of Scripture as vastly inferior to that on which Spiritualism is founded, and the miracles recorded, and the doctrines taught, as carrying no evidence of their truth, but the contrary, I do not understand upon what reasonable ground they are to be identified with the word of God.

1177. This fascinating lady supposes that she gave ear to my exposition of my views; but I am under the impression that she is quite deaf to any thing that does not concur with her fanatical impressions, otherwise she would never have looked upon me as one to be converted from the opinions which I entertain by the reasoning of her clerical friend, beginning with a begging of the question: assuming that revelation is God’s word, in order to prove it to be God’s word.

1178. So the Bible is true because of the miracles which it records; and these are true because the Bible records them!

1179. If she can so confine her mind as to become master of the pyramid of facts which I have raised in favour of Spiritualism, she will perceive that all other evidence of immortality sinks into insignificance as compared with it. Now all this may be nominally abrogated by denying the truth of it. But if I do not rely on my own senses, is it likely I shall rely on those of other persons, in whom I have no more confidence than her clerical adviser and herself have in Mohammed and his disciples.

1180. I subjoin a portion of the letter of the clerical champion, whose reasoning this interesting devotee deems so conclusive. I have gone over the whole of it, and have ascertained that by substituting Allah for God, Mohammed for Christ, Prophet for Redeemer, Mediator for Saviour, it has a qualification which would be deemed a merit elsewhere, if not in Christendom: it would serve just as well to uphold the religion of Mohammed, as that of Christ.

1181. The letter is so long that it would occupy too many pages to give the whole; but I will give a portion, sufficient to show how the reasoning, on which many sectarians rely, may be just as good for any other creed, founded on an arrogation of premises, as that for which they contend.

1182. “Allah forbid that I should depreciate the value of reason in any of its offices. Reason is Allah’s gift to man, and must be used as Allah designs. But so is the Koran Allah’s gift to man, and must be used as Allah designs. Two gifts from the same perfect being cannot conflict with each other. The Koran in its teachings and revealings may go beyond or rise above the comprehension of our reason, because reason in man is a finite and imperfect gift, while the Koran from Allah opens the mind of an infinite and perfect being. But the Koran does not and cannot in any thing contradict reason, because Allah does not and cannot contradict himself. Unless, therefore, you are prepared to say that the Koran is not Allah’s gift to man—if you are a believer in its true divine inspiration—you must see and admit that when the Koran, as Allah’s mouth, reveals any thing which our reason cannot as yet comprehend, because beyond or above, though not against, that reason, then Faith must submissively receive the revelation addressed to it, and Reason stop her speculation and shut her mouth at the limit which Allah has set. Reason has to do with the evidences which show the Koran to be Allah’s gift; with the grammatical and intended sense of what Allah taught and revealed in the Koran, and with the use of what in the Koran is clear to the comprehension of man. But here Reason’s province ends. When the Koran goes beyond or rises above this point, Reason must pause and adore, and Faith must go forward and receive. I do not hold, as you intimate, that the right exercise of reason ‘is impious,’ or that Reason is to be discarded and Faith substituted, if by this be implied any thing incompatible between the proper offices of Reason and Faith; but I mean that our finite reason is to stop at the limit assigned her by her author, and let Faith as a higher power go forward and receive what Allah teaches or reveals to her acceptance. Faith can now receive more than Reason can as yet comprehend. She does so in the province of nature; she must do so in the province of revelation. This cannot be denied without taking at once the ground of the infidel—a ground from which, I doubt not, you would shrink back as from the border of an open pit of destruction.

1183. I am thus brought to your remark, that ‘The Mohammedan system, as generally received, is not difficult to understand.’ If this be strictly true, it must be because that system, ‘as generally received,’ is not the true system; for, in this sense, or as truly and rightly received, the Mohammedan system contains various things which it is difficult to understand, if by understanding be meant comprehending. We may, indeed, understand that a fact or a truth exists or is revealed, while that fact or that truth itself is, for the present, utterly beyond or above our comprehension. And this is precisely the case with the Mohammedan system rightly viewed. It contains various facts and truths which our reason cannot yet fathom. Natural reason loves to separate and set aside these great and high things from the Koran as non-essentials, and then to busy itself with those parts of the Koran which are level with its own height; pleased with the dream that it has grasped enough, has grasped all that can be of any real value. Believe me when reason does this, for one who has the Koran in his hands, she plays at a perilous game.

1184. The main position which I have thus far taken is, however, virtually conceded in another part of your letter. Alluding to what I had urged as to the importance of acknowledging Mohammed as your mediator, and relying on his mediation only for justification as all-sufficient, reconciling all difficulties, and removing all embarrassment from the consideration of the union of justice and mercy in the deity, you say: ‘But does it remove all embarrassment? Is not Allah himself the author of the plan of salvation? Was not Mohammed himself Allah, and also his vicegerent?’ The impossibility of answering these questions satisfactorily to the plainest reason, teaches me to recoil from the impiety of inquiring how my Maker will save me or reconcile his own attributes? I know full well that the great mass of human minds are totally incapable of considering such a subject with any approximation to a solution of it, and therefore do I feel that the eternal salvation or condemnation of mankind does not depend on such theological questions. Here you directly admit the inability of reason in most minds satisfactorily to comprehend some of the great and high points of the Mohammedan system, and the consequent impiety of her attempting such a comprehension. You might as well explicitly admit her inability for this comprehension in all minds; for no mind in its present state can by reason alone grasp all that Allah has revealed in the Koran. These great and high things are not proposed to reason alone, but to reason so far as their evidence is concerned, and to faith so far as their substance is to be received. Reason may satisfy herself that they are revealed. Faith alone can take in the substance which they contain. When they are proposed to it, faith must receive them, or salvation cannot come, whether the reason of the individual addressed be the ‘plainest’ or otherwise.

1185. Your argument in the above extract does not satisfy me so well as your admission. From the inability of the great mass of minds satisfactorily to comprehend the high mysteries of the Koran, you infer that the ‘eternal salvation or condemnation of mankind does not depend on such theological questions.’ Certainly, the salvation of mankind in the mass does not depend on these or any other theological questions; if by this be meant depending on the ability to comprehend such questions, because the points involved in these questions, so far as they are mysteries, are proposed not to reason as comprehending, but to faith as receiving. But do you mean to be understood as saying, that when the Koran is put into any man’s hand, and when Allah through the Koran opens to that man his revealed way of salvation, the individual thus approached may accept what is level with his reason, but reject what is proposed to his faith and above his reason, and that yet notwithstanding such rejection he may reasonably hope to be saved? If so, I ask you by what right you argue thus? Who is Allah, and what is man? When he tells you the way in which he will save you, not the mass of mankind or the heathen to whom the Koran has never come, but you yourself, what right have you to say that your salvation does not depend on your faith’s reception of those very things which are above your reason’s comprehension? How do you know but that the whole efficacy of the plan proposed to you, depends on your receiving the great facts and truths propounded to your faith? ‘Faith itself, I admit,’ you may contend, ‘does not save any man; it is the Mediator that saves.’ But you have no right to say, or think, or hope that he will or can save you with the Koran in your hand, in any other way than that which in the Koran he proposes to your faith. And if when he demands your faith in what surpasses your reason, you withhold that faith, and plead the sufficiency of what he has incidentally made level with your reason, do you not thereby show that you have not the spirit which he requires, and that you are yet none of his? In the Koran he has not only revealed to you his mission and sanctification, but also proposed to you his mediation as a propitiation for your sin; and he has told you that ‘you must be born again,’ not only of water, but also ‘of the spirit;’ that except you be converted and become as a ‘little child, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven;’ and that ‘he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned:’ ‘believeth’ not a part only, but the whole of the Koran then intrusted to its Ulemas. Here he explicitly demands your faith in the whole Koran. But suppose it had been otherwise, suppose he had simply opened to you a way by which he could certainly save you, without saying any thing about faith, as the one great and necessary receiver of the facts and truths involved in that way; I ask, would not a rejection of a part of those involved facts and truths be equivalent to a rejection of the whole? Would it not display the same spirit as a rejection of the whole? Would it not show that you were not walking in his way, but in some other which you supposed might possibly be found? Nay, would it not show that in your heart you had no confidence in him as a mediator; that you even rebelled against his right to prescribe to you the terms on which he would save you?”

1186. To conclude, with respect to this guardian angel of my soul, to whom this digression owes its existence; it may comfort her to know that I conceive myself so securely protected and guided already, and so sure of the result of that guidance and protection, that I would advise her, in my turn, to consider well whether she ought not to pray to God to give her a little more light respecting her own destiny, than is afforded by the book which is vaunted as being above reason, and as being the word of God. Does she conceive the subterranean cave with the “lake of unquenchable fire,” in which Dives is roasting in sight of the blessed, to be so satisfactory as to be unwilling to hear of a preferable abode in the azure sky? Does she aspire to some official position commensurate with that of the judgships which Christ promised his disciples? If it is to procure me a place in the heaven described in Scripture, I beg leave to decline, being pre-engaged; and therefore give her an invitation to meet me hereafter in the glorious abode to which I confidently aspire, and where I shall feel myself especially called upon to render her my assistance to rise from the inferior though happy sphere to which, with her present opinions, she is destined.

1187. I would recommend to her, and to others in the same predicament, the perusal of the influence of the conversion to Spiritualism on my friends, as presented in this volume. I would also recommend her to study the comparison made between the heaven and hell of Scripture and that of Spiritualism, as herein presented.

1188. I hope my would-be mundane guide to salvation will find in the verse and prose addressed to me by one more nearly allied (215, 250, 538) a sufficient apology for declining her kindly-tendered guidance, especially as the path through which she would lead me is known to this excellent relative, who has frequently passed and repassed it during her residence of more than two years in the spirit world, while to my mundane friend it is as yet unknown, and, as I believe, misapprehended. But although my mind has not been converted to her view of the service tendered, my heart will never cease to be gratefully inclined toward one who, while actually in want of guidance herself, thought so much of the supposed deficiency from which it is imagined I suffer.

Improper use of the epithet Infidel, as used in the parodied quotation from the Clergyman’s Letter.

1189. If a man cannot be guilty of infidelity to another man’s wife, how can he be guilty of infidelity to another man’s religion? The Mohammedan wrongfully calls the Christian “infidel,” because he does not believe in Mohammed; and as wrongfully is the epithet retorted, because the Mohammedan does not believe in Christ. The epithet can only be truly applicable to those who, while professing a religion, do not act up to their professions. In this sense, Christendom, so called, teems with infidels to Christianity.

On Atonement.

1190. Since my spirit sister’s translation to the spheres, she has risen from the fifth to the sixth sphere. It has been alleged by her that her ascent was retarded by her belief in the atonement. I subjoin some reasoning on that subject:

1191. As respects free-will, Dr. Johnson shrewdly said that all practice is in its favour, all theory against it; but whatever view may be taken on this subject, no one can deny that so far as it is possible for sin to be avoided, it must be within the power of God to make men virtuous. The fact that they are not sinless, must arise either from his not wishing to make them more virtuous, or from his inability to make them so. That he does not make them free from sin implies either a want of will or a want of power.

1192. But whatever may in this respect be true, his omniscience must have enabled him to perceive the result beforehand, and of course it is inconceivable that he would, consistently with his goodness, have created them, foreknowing that they would be so wicked as to deserve eternal punishment.

1193. All this it was in his power to obviate by not creating men, or by making their temptations less, or their power of resistance greater. But foreseeing their wickedness, and imposing fetters on his omnipotent power, so as to render a certain amount of suffering inevitable, he is said to have determined that a portion of the godhead should expiate in the flesh, by the pains of crucifixion, the punishment due to the sinful creatures which he has been supposed to have wilfully created, foreseeing this result.

1194. But in order to make men better, instead of using that almighty power with which he is said to have hardened the heart of Pharaoh, to soften the human heart and enlighten the human mind universally, he is made to resort to a method which, however cruel and manifestly unjust in making an innocent being suffer for the guilty, has proved utterly inefficient, since only a small minority of mankind profess Christianity, and of that minority only an imperceptible portion, if any, comply with its requisitions, as before observed; hence the greater part are liable “to be beaten with many stripes,” while those to whom the mission of Christ has been unknown are to “be beaten with but few stripes.”

1195. Human lawgivers may enact constitutions which result in practical failure, because they do not foresee the issue. Such failures are ascribed to their deficiency in practical wisdom. But the failure of measures for the production of any result proving it unwise, must demonstrate that it did not originate with an all-wise author; in other words, with the Almighty.

1196. It is manifestly absurd to ascribe to that Being any measures which have failed to effect the ends for which they have been specially devised. Knowing that Mohammed would have more followers than Christ, that the largest portion of mankind would remain pagans, that even in Christendom the Christian religion would be a source of bloody contention and theological hatred, making scarcely any real Christians,—how could it originate with a wise and prescient Deity?

1197. “By their fruits ye shall know them?” It being premised that God is omniscient, all-wise, and omnipotent, can any fruit proceed from that high source which has not proved to answer well the purpose for which it was intended?

1198. The actual morality of Christendom being the inverse of that excessive and impracticable restraint, which Christ enjoined as the object of his mission, must prove that his doctrine could not have originated with a being by whom its failure must have been foreseen.

1199. Arguments such as I have used are met often by referring to the evils, to which all animated nature is subjected, in the way of misery, mutilation, disease, or death. But when the government of the universe is attributed to general laws, it may be inferred that evil results from a want of power to render those laws free from bad consequences. Nothing but such limitation of power, or an indisposition to prevent those evils, can account for their occurrence. But this is widely different from assuming, in the first place, with self-called orthodoxy, that God is omnipotent, omniscient, all-wise, and all-good, and then representing him as resorting to measures for the accomplishment of his ends which are utterly inefficacious. This is accusing the Almighty of acting like an idiot. Can any thing be more preposterous, than that an all-wise, all-good, all-powerful, and all-foreseeing Deity should require the services of human missionaries to carry out his will? Would he not at least require that such messengers of his word should first agree as to what that word ought to be? A pagan might remain during his whole life a pagan, should he, before adopting any creed, require that professed Christians, in general, should agree as to the tenets which he should espouse.