{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_30206/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_30206","id":"gutenberg_30206","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/30206","summary":null,"tags":["Atheism","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Free thought"],"text":"HUMANITY'S GAIN from UNBELIEF\n\nBy Charles Bradlaugh\n\n[Reprinted from the \"North American Review\" of March, 1889.]\n\nLONDON\n\nFREETHOUGHT PUBLISHING COMPANY,\n\n1889.\n\n\n\n\n\nHUMANITY'S GAIN FROM UNBELIEF.\n\nAs an unbeliever, I ask leave to plead that humanity has been real\ngainer from scepticism, and that the gradual and growing rejection of\nChristianity--like the rejection of the faiths which preceded it--has in\nfact added, and will add, to man's happiness and well being. I maintain\nthat in physics science is the outcome of scepticism, and that general\nprogress is impossible without scepticism on matters of religion. I\nmean by religion every form of belief which accepts or asserts the\nsupernatural. I write as a Monist, and use the word \"nature\" as meaning\nall phenomena, every ph\u00e6nomenon, all that is necessary for the happening\nof any and every ph\u00e6nomenon. Every religion is constantly changing, and\nat any given time is the measure of the civilisation attained by what\nGuizot described as the _juste milieu_ of those who profess it. Each\nreligion is slowly but certainly modified in its dogma and practice by\nthe gradual development of the peoples amongst whom it is professed.\nEach discovery destroys in whole or part some theretofore cherished\nbelief. No religion is suddenly rejected by any people; it is rather\ngradually out-grown. None see a religion die; dead religions are like\ndead languages and obsolete customs; the decay is long and--like the\nglacier march--is only perceptible to the careful watcher by comparisons\nextending over long periods. A superseded religion may often be traced\nin the festivals, ceremonies, and dogmas of the religion which has\nreplaced it. Traces of obsolete religions may often be found in popular\ncustoms, in old wives' stories, and in children's tales.\n\nIt is necessary, in order that my plea should be understood, that I\nshould explain what I mean by Christianity; and in the very attempt at\nthis explanation there will, I think, be found strong illustration of\nthe value of unbelief. Christianity in practice may be gathered from\nits more ancient forms, represented by the Roman Catholic and the Greek\nChurches, or from the various churches which have grown up in the last\nfew centuries. Each of these churches calls itself Christian. Some\nof them deny the right of the others to use the word Christian. Some\nChristian churches treat, or have treated, other Christian churches\nas heretics or unbelievers. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants in\nGreat Britain and Ireland have in turn been terribly cruel one to\nthe other; and the ferocious laws of the seventeenth and eighteenth\ncenturies, enacted by the English Protestants against English and Irish\nPapists, are a disgrace to civilisation. These penal laws, enduring\nlongest in Ireland, still bear fruit in much of the political mischief\nand agrarian crime of to-day. It is only the tolerant indifference of\nscepticism that, one after the other, has repealed most of the laws\ndirected by the Established Christian Church against Papists and\nDissenters, and also against Jews and heretics. Church of England\nclergymen have in the past gone to great lengths in denouncing\nnonconformity; and even in the present day an effective sample of\nsuch denunciatory bigotry may be found in a sort of orthodox catechism\nwritten by the Rev. F. A. Gace, of Great Barling, Essex, the popularity\nof which is vouched by the fact that it has gone through ten editions.\nThis catechism for little children teaches that \"Dissent is a great\nsin\", and that Dissenters \"worship God according to their own evil\nand corrupt imaginations, and not according to his revealed will, and\ntherefore their worship is idolatrous\". Church of England Christians\nand Dissenting Christians, when fraternising amongst themselves, often\npublicly draw the line at Unitarians, and positively deny that these\nhave any sort of right to call themselves Christians.\n\nIn the first half of the seventeenth century Quakers were flogged and\nimprisoned in England as blasphemers; and the early Christian settlers\nin New England, escaping from the persecution of Old World Christians,\nshowed scant mercy to the followers of Fox and Penn.\n\nIt is customary, in controversy, for those advocating the claims of\nChristianity, to include all good done by men in nominally Christian\ncountries as if such good were the result of Christianity, while they\ncontend that the evil which exists prevails in spite of Christianity.\nI shall try to make out that the ameliorating march of the last few\ncenturies has been initiated by the heretics of each age, though I quite\nconcede that the men and women denounced and persecuted as infidels by\nthe pious of one century, are frequently claimed as saints by the pious\nof a later generation.\n\nWhat then is Christianity? As a system or scheme of doctrine,\nChristianity may, I submit, not unfairly be gathered from the Old and\nNew Testaments. It is true that some Christians to-day desire to escape\nfrom submission to portions, at any rate, of the Old Testament; but this\nvery tendency seems to me to be part of the result of the beneficial\nheresy for which I am pleading. Man's humanity has revolted against Old\nTestament barbarism; and therefore he has attempted to disassociate\nthe Old Testament from Christianity. Unless Old and New Testaments are\naccepted as God's revelation to man, Christianity has no higher claim\nthan any other of the world's many religions, if no such claim can be\nmade out for it apart from the Bible. And though it is quite true that\nsome who deem themselves Christians put the Old Testament completely in\nthe background, this is, I allege, because they are out-growing their\nChristianity. Without the doctrine of the atoning sacrifice of Jesus,\nChristianity, as a religion, is naught; but unless the story of Adam's\nfall is accepted, the redemption from the consequences of that fall\ncannot be believed. Both in Great Britain and in the United States the\nOld and New Testaments are forced on the people as part of Christianity;\nfor it is blasphemy at common law to deny the scriptures of the Old and\nNew Testaments to be of divine authority; and such denial is punishable\nwith fine and imprisonment, or even worse. The rejection of Christianity\nintended throughout this paper, is therefore the rejection of the Old\nand New Testaments as being of divine revelation. It is the rejection\nalike of the authorised teachings of the Church of Rome and of the\nChurch of England, as these may be found in the Bible, the creeds, the\nencyclicals, the prayer book, the canons and homilies of either or both\nof these churches. It is the rejection of the Christianity of Luther, of\nCalvin, and of Wesley.\n\nA ground frequently taken by Christian theologians is that the\nprogress and civilisation of the world are due to Christianity; and\nthe discussion is complicated by the fact that many eminent servants of\nhumanity have been nominal Christians, of one or other of the sects. My\nallegation will be that the special services rendered to human progress\nby these exceptional men, have not been in consequence of their adhesion\nto Christianity, but in spite of it; and that the specific points of\nadvantage to human kind have been in ratio of their direct opposition to\nprecise Biblical enactments.\n\nA. S. Farrar says (1) that Christianity \"asserts authority over\nreligious belief in virtue of being a supernatural communication\nfrom God, and claims the right to control human thought in virtue of\npossessing sacred books, which are at once the record and the instrument\nof the communication, written by men endowed with supernatural\ninspiration\".\n\n     1 Farrar's \"Critical History of Freethought\".\n\nUnbelievers refuse to submit to the asserted authority, and deny this\nclaim of control over human thought: they allege that every effort at\nfreethinking must provoke sturdier thought.\n\nTake one clear gain to humanity consequent on unbelief, i.e. in the\nabolition of slavery in some countries, in the abolition of the slave\ntrade in most civilised countries, and in the tendency to its total\nabolition. I am unaware of any religion in the world which in the past\nforbade slavery. The professors of Christianity for ages supported it;\nthe Old Testament repeatedly sanctioned it by special laws; the New\nTestament has no repealing declaration. Though we are at the close of\nthe nineteenth century of the Christian era, it is only during the\npast three-quarters of a century that the battle for freedom has been\ngradually won. It is scarcely a quarter of a century since the famous\nemancipation amendment was carried to the United States Constitution.\nAnd it is impossible for any well-informed Christian to deny that the\nabolition movement in North America was most steadily and bitterly\nopposed by the religious bodies in the various States. Henry Wilson, in\nhis \"Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America\"; Samuel J. May, in his\n\"Recollections of the Anti-Slavery Conflict\"; and J. Greenleaf Whittier,\nin his poems, alike are witnesses that the Bible and pulpit, the Church\nand its great influence, were used against abolition and in favor of the\nslaveowner. I know that Christians in the present day often declare\nthat Christianity had a large share in bringing about the abolition\nof slavery, and this because men professing Christianity were\nabolitionists. I plead that these so-called Christian abolitionists were\nmen and women whose humanity, recognising freedom for all, was in this\nin direct conflict with Christianity. It is not yet fifty years since\nthe European Christian powers jointly agreed to abolish the slave trade.\nWhat of the effect of Christianity on these powers in the centuries\nwhich had preceded? The heretic Condorcet pleaded powerfully for freedom\nwhilst Christian France was still slave-holding. For many centuries\nChristian Spain and Christian Portugal held slaves. Porto Rico freedom\nis not of long date; and Cuban emancipation is even yet newer. It was\na Christian King, Charles 5th, and a Christian friar, who founded in\nSpanish America the slave trade between the Old World and the New. For\nsome 1800 years, almost, Christians kept slaves, bought slaves, sold\nslaves, bred slaves, stole slaves. Pious Bristol and godly Liverpool\nless than 100 years ago openly grew rich on the traffic. Daring the\nninth century week Christians sold slaves to the Saracens. In the\neleventh century prostitutes were publicly sold as slaves in Rome, and\nthe profit went to the Church.\n\nIt is said that William Wilberforce, the abolitionist, was a Christian.\nBut at any rate his Christianity was strongly diluted with unbelief.\nAs an abolitionist he did not believe Leviticus xxv, 44-6; he must\nhave rejected Exodus xxi, 2-6; he could not have accepted the many\npermissions and injunctions by the Bible deity to his chosen people to\ncapture and hold slaves. In the House of Commons on 18th February, 1796,\nWilberforce reminded that Christian assembly that infidel and anarchic\nFrance had given liberty to the Africans, whilst Christian and monarchic\nEngland was \"obstinately continuing a system of cruelty and injustice\".\n\nWilberforce, whilst advocating the abolition of slavery, found the whole\ninfluence of the English Court, and the great weight of the Episcopal\nBench, against him. George III, a most Christian king, regarded\nabolition theories with abhorrence, and the Christian House of Lords\nwas utterly opposed to granting freedom to the slave. When Christian\nmissionaries some sixty-two years ago preached to Demerara negroes under\nthe rule of Christian England, they were treated by Christian judges,\nholding commission from Christian England, as criminals for so\npreaching. A Christian commissioned officer, member of the Established\nChurch of England, signed the auction notices for the sale of slaves as\nlate as the year 1824. In the evidence before a Christian court-martial,\na missionary is charged with having tended to make the negroes\ndissatisfied with their condition as slaves, and with having promoted\ndiscontent and dissatisfaction amongst the slaves against their\nlawful masters. For this the Christian judges sentenced the Demerara\nabolitionist missionary to be hanged by the neck till he was dead.\nThe judges belonged to the Established Church; the missionary was a\nMethodist. In this the Church of England Christians in Demerara were\nno worse than Christians of other sects: their Roman Catholic Christian\nbrethren in St. Domingo fiercely attacked the Jesuits as criminals\nbecause they treated negroes as though they were men and women, in\nencouraging \"two slaves to separate their interest and safety from that\nof the gang\", whilst orthodox Christians let them couple promiscuously\nand breed for the benefit of their owners like any other of their\nplantation cattle. In 1823 the _Royal Gazette_ (Christian) of Demerara\nsaid:\n\n\"We shall not suffer you to enlighten our slaves, who are by law our\nproperty, till you can demonstrate that when they are made religious and\nknowing they will continue to be our slaves.\"\n\nWhen William Lloyd Garrison, the pure-minded and most earnest\nabolitionist, delivered his first anti-slavery address in Boston,\nMassachusetts, the only building he could obtain, in which to speak, was\nthe infidel hall owned by Abner Kneeland, the \"infidel\" editor of the\n_Boston Investigatory_ who had been sent to gaol for blasphemy. Every\nChristian sect had in turn refused Mr. Lloyd Garrison the use of the\nbuildings they severally controlled. Lloyd Garrison told me himself how\nhonored deacons of a Christian Church joined in an actual attempt to\nhang him.\n\nWhen abolition was advocated in the United States in 1790, the\nrepresentative from South Carolina was able to plead that the Southern\nclergy \"did not condemn either slavery or the slave trade\"; and Mr.\nJackson, the representative from Georgia, pleaded that \"from Genesis to\nRevelation\" the current was favorable to slavery. Elias Hicks, the brave\nAbolitionist Quaker, was denounced as an Atheist, and less than twenty\nyears ago a Hicksite Quaker was expelled from one of the Southern\nAmerican Legislatures, because of the reputed irreligion of these\nabolitionist \"Friends\".\n\nWhen the Fugitive Slave Law was under discussion in North America, large\nnumbers of clergymen of nearly every denomination were found ready to\ndefend this infamous law. Samuel James May, the famous abolitionist, was\ndriven from the pulpit as irreligious, solely because of his attacks\non slaveholding. Northern clergymen tried to induce \"silver tongued\"\nWendell Philips to abandon his advocacy of abolition. Southern pulpits\nrang with praises for the murderous attack on Charles Sumner. The\nslayers of Elijah Lovejoy were highly reputed Christian men.\n\nGuizot, notwithstanding that he tries to claim that the Church exerted\nits influence to restrain slavery, says (\"European Civilisation\", vol.\ni., p. 110):\n\n\"It has often been repeated that the abolition of slavery among modern\npeople is entirely due to Christians. That, I think, is saying too much.\nSlavery existed for a long period in the heart of Christian society,\nwithout its being particularly astonished or irritated. A multitude\nof causes, and a great development in other ideas and principles of\ncivilisation, were necessary for the abolition of this iniquity of all\niniquities.\"\n\nAnd my contention is that this \"development in other ideas and\nprinciples of civilisation\" was long retarded by Governments in which\nthe Christian Church was dominant. The men who advocated liberty were\nimprisoned, racked, and burned, so long as the Church was strong enough\nto be merciless.\n\nThe Rev. Francis Minton, Hector of Middlewich, in his recent earnest\nvolume (1) on the struggles of labor, admits that \"a few centuries\nago slavery was acknowledged throughout Christendom to have the divine\nsanction....\n\n     1 \"Capital and Wages\", p. 19.\n\nNeither the exact cause, nor the precise time of the decline of the\nbelief in the righteousness of slavery can be defined. It was doubtless\ndue to a combination of causes, one probably being as indirect as the\nrecognition of the greater economy of free labor. With the decline of\nthe belief the abolition of slavery took place.\"\n\nThe institution of slavery was actually existent in Christian Scotland\nin the 17th century, where the white coal workers and salt workers of\nEast Lothian were chattels, as were their negro brethren in the Southern\nStates thirty years since; they \"went to those who succeeded to the\nproperty of the works, and they could be sold, bartered, or pawned\". (1)\n\"There is\", says J. M. Robertson, \"no trace that the Protestant clergy\nof Scotland ever raised a voice against the slavery which grew up before\ntheir eyes. And it was not until 1799, after republican and irreligious\nFrance had set the example, that it was legally abolished.\"\n\n     1 \"Perversion of Scotland,\" p. 197. 2 \"Capital and Wages \",\n     pp. 15, 16.\n\nTake further the gain to humanity consequent on the unbelief, or rather\ndisbelief, in witchcraft and wizardry. Apart from the brutality by\nChristians towards those suspected of witchcraft, the hindrance to\nscientific initiative or experiment was incalculably great so long as\nbelief in magic obtained. The inventions of the past two centuries, and\nespecially those of the 18th century, might have benefitted mankind much\nearlier and much more largely, but for the foolish belief in witchcraft\nand the shocking ferocity exhibited against those suspected of\nnecromancy. After quoting a large number of cases of trial and\npunishment for witchcraft from official records in Scotland, J. M.\nRobertson says: \"The people seem to have passed from cruelty to cruelty\nprecisely as they became more and more fanatical, more and more devoted\nto their Church, till after many generations the slow spread of human\nscience began to counteract the ravages of superstition, the clergy\nresisting reason and humanity to the last\".\n\nThe Rev. Mr. Minton concedes that it is \"the advance of knowledge which\nhas rendered the idea of Satanic agency through the medium of witchcraft\ngrotesquely ridiculous\". He admits that \"for more than 1500 years the\nbelief in witchcraft was universal in Christendom\", and that \"the public\nmind was saturated with the idea of Satanic agency in the economy of\nnature\". He adds: \"If we ask why the world now rejects what was once so\nunquestioningly believed, we can only reply that advancing knowledge has\ngradually undermined the belief\".\n\nIn a letter recently sent to the _Pall Mall Gazette_ against modern\nSpiritualism, Professor Huxley declares,\n\n\"... that the older form of the same fundamental delusion--the belief in\npossession and in witchcraft--gave rise in the fifteenth, sixteenth,\nand seventeenth centuries to persecutions by Christians of innocent men,\nwomen, and children, more extensive, more cruel, and more murderous than\nany to which the Christians of the first three centuries were subjected\nby the authorities of pagan Rome.\"\n\nAnd Professor Huxley adds:\n\n\"No one deserves much blame for being deceived in these matters. We are\nall intellectually handicapped in youth by the incessant repetition of\nthe stories about possession and witchcraft in both the Old and the New\nTestaments. The majority of us are taught nothing which will help us to\nobserve accurately and to interpret observations with due caution.\"\n\nThe English Statute Book under Elizabeth and under James was disfigured\nby enactments against witchcraft passed under pressure from the\nChristian churches, which Acts have only been repealed in consequence of\nthe disbelief in the Christian precept, \"thou shaft not suffer a witch\nto live\". The statute 1 James I, c. 12, condemned to death \"all\npersons invoking any evil spirits, or consulting, covenanting with,\nentertaining, employing, feeding, or rewarding any evil spirit\", or\ngenerally practising any \"infernal arts\". This was not repealed until\nthe eighteenth century was far advanced. Edison's phonograph would 280\nyears ago have insured martyrdom for its inventor; the utilisation of\nelectric force to transmit messages around the world would have been\nclearly the practice of an infernal art. At least we may plead that\nunbelief has healed the bleeding feet of science, and made the road free\nfor her upward march.\n\nIs it not also fair to urge the gain to humanity which has been apparent\nin the wiser treatment of the insane, consequent on the unbelief in\nthe Christian doctrine that these unfortunates were examples either of\ndemoniacal possession or of special visitation of deity? For centuries\nunder Christianity mental disease was most ignorantly treated. Exorcism,\nshackles, and the whip were the penalties rather than the curatives for\nmental maladies. From the heretical departure of Pinel at the close\nof the last century to the position of Maudsley to-day, every step\nillustrates the march of unbelief. Take the gain to humanity in the\nunbelief not yet complete, but now largely preponderant, in the dogma\nthat sickness, pestilence, and famine were manifestations of divine\nanger, the results of which could neither be avoided nor prevented.\nThe Christian Churches have done little or nothing to dispel this\nsuperstition. The official and authorised prayers of the principal\ndenominations, even to-day, reaffirm it. Modern study of the laws of\nhealth, experiments in sanitary improvements, more careful applications\nof medical knowledge, have proved more efficacious in preventing or\ndiminishing plagues and pestilence than have the intervention of the\npriest or the practice of prayer. Those in England who hold the old\nfaith that prayer will suffice to cure disease are to-day termed\n\"peculiar people\", and are occasionally indicted for manslaughter when\ntheir sick children die, because the parents have trusted to God instead\nof appealing to the resources of science.\n\nIt is certainly a clear gain to astronomical science that the Church\nwhich tried to compel Galileo to unsay the truth has been overborne by\nthe growing unbelief of the age, even though our little children are\nyet taught that Joshua made the sun and moon stand still, and that for\nHezekiah the sun-dial reversed its record. As Buckle, arguing for the\nmorality of scepticism, says (1):\n\n     1 \"History of Civilisation\", vol. i, p. 345.\n\n\"As long as men refer the movements of the comets to the immediate\nfinger of God, and as long as they believe that an eclipse is one of the\nmodes by which the deity expresses his anger, they will never be guilty\nof the blasphemous presumption of attempting to predict such\nsupernatural appearances. Before they could dare to investigate the\ncauses of these mysterious ph\u00e6nomena, it is necessary that they should\nbelieve, or at all events that they should suspect, that the ph\u00e6nomena\nthemselves were capable of being explained by the human mind.\"\n\nAs in astronomy so in geology, the gain of knowledge to humanity has\nbeen almost solely in measure of the rejection of the Christian theory.\nA century since it was almost universally held that the world was\ncreated 6,000 years ago, or at any rate, that by the sin of the first\nman, Adam, death commenced about that period. Ethnology and Anthropology\nhave only been possible in so far as, adopting the regretful words of\nSir W. Jones, \"intelligent and virtuous persons are inclined to doubt\nthe authenticity of the accounts delivered by Moses concerning the\nprimitive world\".\n\nSurely it is clear gain to humanity that unbelief has sprung up against\nthe divine right of kings, that men no longer believe that the monarch\nis \"God's anointed\" or that \"the powers that be are ordained of God\". In\nthe struggles for political freedom the weight of the Church was mostly\nthrown on the side of the tyrant. The homilies of the Church of England\ndeclare that \"even the wicked rulers have their power and authority from\nGod \", and that \"such subjects as are disobedient or rebellious against\ntheir princes disobey God and procure their own damnation\". It can\nscarcely be necessary to argue to the citizens of the United States of\nAmerica that the origin of their liberties was in the rejection of faith\nin the divine right of George III.\n\nWill any one, save the most bigoted, contend that it is not certain gain\nto humanity to spread unbelief in the terrible doctrine that eternal\ntorment is the probable fate of the great majority of the human family?\nIs it not gain to have diminished the faith that it was the duty of\nthe wretched and the miserable to be content with the lot in life which\nprovidence had awarded them?\n\nIf it stood alone it would be almost sufficient to plead as\njustification for heresy the approach towards equality and liberty for\nthe utterance of all opinions achieved because of growing unbelief.\nAt one period in Christendom each Government acted as though only one\nreligious faith could be true, and as though the holding, or at any\nrate the making known, any other opinion was a criminal act deserving\npunishment. Under the one word \"infidel\", even as late as Lord Coke,\nwere classed together all who were not Christians, even though they were\nMahommedans, Brahmins, or Jews. All who did not accept the Christian\nfaith were sweepingly denounced as infidels and therefore _hors de la\nloi_. One hundred and forty-five years since, the Attorney-General,\npleading in our highest court, said (1): \"What is the definition of an\ninfidel? Why, one who does not believe in the Christian religion. Then\na Jew is an infidel.\" And English history for several centuries prior\nto the Commonwealth shows how habitually and most atrociously Christian\nkings, Christian courts, and Christian churches, persecuted and harassed\nthese infidel Jews. There was a time in England when Jews were such\ninfidels that they were not even allowed to be sworn as witnesses. In\n1740 a legacy left for establishing an assembly for the reading of\nthe Jewish scriptures was held to be void (2) because it was \"for the\npropagation of the Jewish law in contradiction to the Christian religion\n\". It is only in very modern times that municipal rights have been\naccorded in England to Jews. It is barely thirty years since they have\nbeen allowed to sit in Parliament. In 1851, the late Mr. Newdegate in\ndebate (3) objected \"that they should have sitting in that House an\nindividual who regarded our Redeemer as an impostor\". Lord Chief\nJustice Raymond has shown (4) how it was that Christian intolerance was\ngradually broken down. \"A Jew may sue at this day, but heretofore he\ncould not; for then they were looked upon as enemies, but now commerce\nhas taught the world more humanity.\"\n\nLord Coke treated the infidel as one who in law had no right of any\nkind, with whom no contract need be kept, to whom no debt was payable.\nThe plea of alien infidel as answer to a claim was actually pleaded in\ncourt as late as 1737. (5) In a solemn judgment, Lord Coke says (6):\n\"All infidels are in law _perpetui inimici_; for between them, as with\nthe devils whose subjects they be, and the Christian, there is perpetual\nhostility\". Twenty years ago the law of England required the writer of\nany periodical publication or pamphlet under sixpence in price to give\nsureties for \u00a3800 against the publication of blasphemy. I was the last\nperson prosecuted in 1868 for non-compliance with that law, which was\nrepealed by Mr. Gladstone in 1869. Up till the 23rd December, 1888, an\ninfidel in Scotland was only allowed to enforce any legal claim in court\non condition that, if challenged, he denied his infidelity. If he lied\nand said he was a Christian, he was accepted, despite his lying. If he\ntold the truth and said he was an unbeliever, then he was practically\nan outlaw, incompetent to give evidence for himself or for any other.\nFortunately all this was changed by the Royal assent to the Oaths Act on\n24th December. Has not humanity clearly gained a little in this struggle\nthrough unbelief?\n\n     1 Omychund v. Barker, 1 Atkyns 29.\n\n     2  D'Costa. D'Pays, Amb. 228.\n\n     3 Hansard cxvi. 381.\n\n     4 Lord Raymond's reports 282, Wells v. Williams.\n\n     5 Ramkissenseat v. Barker, 1 Atkyns 61.\n\n     6 Coke's reports, Calvin's ease.\n\nFor more than a century and a-half the Roman Catholic had in practice\nharsher measure dealt out to him by the English Protestant Christian,\nthan was even during that period the fate of the Jew or the unbeliever.\nIf the Roman Catholic would not take the oath of abnegation, which to\na sincere Romanist was impossible, he was in effect an outlaw, and the\n\"jury packing\" so much complained of to-day in Ireland is one of the\nhabit survivals of the old bad time when Roman Catholics were thus by\nlaw excluded from the jury box.\n\nThe _Scotsman_ of January 5th, 1889, notes that in 1860 the Rev. Dr.\nRobert Lee, of Greyfriars, gave a course of Sunday evening lectures on\nBiblical Criticism, in which he showed the absurdity and untenableness\nof regarding every word in the Bible as inspired; and it adds:\n\n\"We well remember the awful indignation such opinions inspired, and it\nis refreshing to contrast them with the calmness with which they are\nnow received. Not only from the pulpits of the city, but from the press\n(misnamed religious) were his doctrines denounced. And one eminent\nU.P. minister went the length of publicly praying for him, and for the\nstudents under his care. It speaks volumes for the progress made\nsince then, when we think in all probability Dr. Charteris, Dr. Lee's\nsuccessor in the chair, differs in his teaching from the Confession of\nFaith much more widely than Dr. Lee ever did, and yet he is considered\nsupremely orthodox, whereas the stigma of heresy was attached to the\nother all his life.\"\n\nAnd this change and gain to humanity is due to the gradual progress of\nunbelief, alike inside and outside the Churches. Take from differing\nChurches two recent illustrations: The late Principal Dr. Lindsay\nAlexander, a strict Calvinist, in his important work on \"Biblical\nTheology\", claims that \"all the statements of Scripture are alike to be\ndeferred to as presenting to us the mind of God \".\n\nYet the Rev. Dr. of Divinity also says:\n\n\"We find in their writings [i.e., in the writings of the sacred authors]\nstatements which no ingenuity can reconcile with what modern research\nhas shown to be the scientific truths--i.e., we find in them statements\nwhich modern science proves to be erroneous.\"\n\nAt the last Southwell Diocesan Church of England Conference at Derby,\nthe Bishop of the Diocese presiding, the Rev. J. G. Richardson said of\nthe Old Testament that\n\n\"it was no longer honest or even safe to deny that this noble\nliterature, rich in all the elements of moral or spiritual grandeur,\ngiven--so the Church had always taught, and would always teach--under\nthe inspiration of Almighty God, was sometimes mistaken in its science,\nwas sometimes inaccurate in its history, and sometimes only relative and\naccommodatory in its morality. It assumed theories of the physical\nworld which science had abandoned and could never resume; it contained\npassages of narrative which devout and temperate men pronounced\ndiscredited, both by external and internal evidence; it praised, or\njustified, or approved, or condoned, or tolerated, conduct which the\nteaching of Christ and the conscience of the Christian alike condemned.\"\n\nOr, as I should urge, the gain to humanity by unbelief is that \"the\nteaching of Christ\" has been modified, enlarged, widened, and humanised,\nand that \"the conscience of the Christian\" is in quantity and quality\nmade fitter for human progress by the ever increasing additions of\nknowledge of these later and more heretical days.","title":"Humanity's Gain from Unbelief: Reprinted from the \"North American Review\" of March, 1889","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":5193}