{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_39119/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_39119","id":"gutenberg_39119","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/39119","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Politics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Christianity -- Controversial literature","Rationalism"],"text":"*SATIRES AND PROFANITIES*\n\n\n                                  _By_\n\n                            *James Thomson*\n\n                    _With a Preface by G. W. Foote_\n\n                                _London_\n\n                                 _1884_\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\n    PREFACE\n    THE DEVIL IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND\n    RELIGION IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAINS\n    THE STORY OF A FAMOUS OLD JEWISH FIRM\n    CHRISTMAS EVE IN THE UPPER CIRCLES\n    HEINE ON AN ILLUSTRIOUS EXILE WITH SOMETHING ABOUT WHALES\n    THE DAILY NEWS\n    JESUS: AS GOD; AS A MAN\n    THE ONE THING NEEDFUL\n    THE SWINBURNE CONTROVERSY\n    GREAT CHRIST IS DEAD\n    RESURRECTION AND ASCENSION OF JESUS\n    SOME MUSLIM LAWS AND BELIEFS\n    THE CHRISTIAN WORLD AND THE SECULARIST\n    THE ATHANASIAN CREED\n    OUR OBSTRUCTIONS\n    MR. KINGSLEY\u2019S CONVERTITES\n    THE PRIMATE ON THE CHURCH AND THE WORLD\n    SPIRITISM IN THE POLICE COURT\n    A COMMISSION OF INQUIRY ON ROYALTY\n    Draft\n    A BIBLE LESSON ON MONARCHY\n    PRINCIPAL TULLOCH ON PERSONAL IMMORTALITY\n    THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE\n\n\nBelieving as I do that James Thomson is, since Shelley, the most\nbrilliant genius who has wielded a pen in the service of Freethought, I\ntake a natural pride and pleasure in rescuing the following articles\nfrom burial in the great mausoleum of the periodical press. There will\ndoubtless be a diversity of opinion as to their value. One critic, for\ninstance, has called \u201cThe Story of a Famous Old Jewish Firm\u201d a witless\nsquib; but, on the other hand, the late Professor Clifford considered it\na piece of exquisite mordant satire worthy of Swift. Such differences\nare inevitable from the very nature of the subject. Satire, more than\nany other form of composition, rouses antipathy where it does not\ncommand applause; and the greater the satire, the more intense are the\nfeelings it excites.\n\nBut which side, it may be inquired, is likely to be the best judge?\nSurely the friendly one. Sympathy is requisite to insight, as Carlyle\nsays; while hostility blinds us to a thousand virtues and beauties. I am\naware that many will take objection to the employment of satire at all,\nwhether good or bad, on religious topics; but this seems to me\npreposterous, and I should readily answer it, if Thomson had not done so\nhimself in the most vigorous and triumphant manner.\n\nNearly all the pieces in this volume appeared originally in the National\nReformer or the Secularist. I have attempted no arrangement of them, not\neven a chronological one; the compositor has shuffled them at his own\nsweet will. All I have done, besides collecting them and carefully\nreading the proofs, is to indicate in each case the year of first\npublication; and I think the reader will approve this plan as both\nmodest and sensible.\n\nI am much mistaken if this volume does not become a well-prized treasure\nto many Freethinkers; that it will ever be valued by the general public\nI dare not hope. Yet the number of its admirers will increase with the\ngrowth of a healthy scepticism. It will not fall like a bombshell among\nordinary readers, who serenely ignore the most terrible mental\nexplosives, and render them comparatively innocuous by mere force of\nneglect; but it will startle and stimulate some minds, and in time its\ninfluence will extend to many more.\n\nWhat value Thomson placed on these pieces it is difficult to decide.\n\u201cWorking off the talent,\u201d he once remarked when I mentioned them. But\nthe fact remains that he allowed one or two of them to be reprinted as\npamphlets before any of his poems were collected in a volume. He\nnaturally cared more for his poems than for his prose. What poet ever\ndid the contrary? But even for these he cared little, except \u201cThe City\nof Dreadful Night\u201d and a few others, which expressed his profoundest\nconvictions.\n\nThere were several articles in his \u201cEssays and Phantasies\u201d that proved\nThomson to be a born satirist as well as a born poet; notably \u201cProposals\nfor the Speedy Extinction of Evil and Misery,\u201d a tremendous display of\nsustained irony, to my mind unsurpassed even by Swift at his greatest,\nand with a poetic grandeur quite beyond him. The contents of this volume\nshow marks of the same strong hand. There is never, perhaps, so\ncontinuous an exertion of power; but there is more versatility, more\nfreedom, and often more abandon. I fancy, too, there is more rapidity\nand suppleness, and I am sure there is more mirth.\n\nThomson\u2019s satire was always bitterest, or at any rate most trenchant,\nwhen it dealt with Religion, which he considered a disease of the mind,\nengendered by folly and fostered by ignorance and vanity. He saw that\nspiritual superstition not only diverts men from Truth, but induces a\nslavish stupidity of mind, and prepares the way for every form of\npolitical and social injustice. He was an Atheist first and a Republican\nafterwards. He derided the idea of making a true Republic of a\npopulation besotted with religion, paralysed by creeds cringing to the\nagents of their servitude, and clinging to the chains that enthral them.\n\nA few words only as to Thomson\u2019s life. Outwardly it was singularly\nuneventful, although inwardly it was intense and exciting. He was bom at\nPort Glasgow, on the 23rd of November, 1834; and he died in London, on\nthe 1st of June 1882. His father was a merchant captain, and his mother\na zealous Irvingite. Left parentless in his infancy, he was educated at\nthe Caledonian Orphan Asylum. For some years he served as a schoolmaster\nin the army, during which time he contracted an intimate friendship with\nMr. Bradlaugh, with whom he subsequently worked and lived in London.\nSoon after leaving Mr. Bradlaugh he devoted himself to journalism, to\nwhich he brought a well-practised pen; contributing to the _National\nReformer, the Secularist, the Liberal, Cope\u2019s Tobacco Plant_, and other\nperiodicals. Shortly before his death he gained access to the _Weekly\nDispatch_ and the _Fortnightly Review_. His poems and essays were mostly\nwritten before he tried to live by his pen. Four volumes of these have\nbeen published by Reeves and Turner, under the generous editorship of\nMr. Bertram Dobell, who has prefixed a memoir to the last, entitled \u201cA\nVoice from the Nile and Other Poems.\u201d Besides the five volumes of\nThomson\u2019s writings now before the public, there are many essays and\narticles and a few poems still uncollected, some of them of high value;\nand many poems in manuscript, unknown to all but a few privileged\nfriends. Mr. Dobell hopes to publish them all in time. Thomson\u2019s\npoetical reputation is, however, already established. The best judges\ngive him the highest praise. My own judgment assigns him the next place\nto Robert Browning. Of course it is no blasphemy to dispute my estimate;\nbut what prospect is there of reversing the common verdict of George\nEliot, George Meredith, Swinburne, and Rossetti?\n\nMr. Dobell refers to the charm of Thomson\u2019s manner in social\nintercourse. His personal appearance told in his favor. He was of the\nmedium height, well-built, and active. He possessed that striking\ncharacteristic sometimes found in mixed races\u2014black hair and beard, and\ngrey-blue eyes. The eyes were fine and wonderfully expressive. They were\nfull of shifting light, soft grey in some moods and deep blue in others.\nThey contained depth within depth; and when he was moved by strong\npassion they widened and flashed with magnetic power. When not suffering\nfrom depression he was the life of the company. He was the most\nbrilliant talker I ever met, and at home in all societies; a fine\ncompanion in a day\u2019s walk, and a shining figure at the festive table or\nin the social drawing-room. But you enjoyed his conversation most when\nyou sat with him alone, taking occasional draughts of our national\nbeverage, and constantly burning \u201cthe divine weed.\u201d\n\nThomson\u2019s sympathy with radical and revolutionary causes is not much\nnoticed by Mr. Dobell, but it was very strong. He was secretary for some\ntime to the Polish Committee in London, and his glorious lines on \u201cA\nPolish Insurgent\u201d which I for one can never read without tears, proves\nthat he might have written the noble songs that George Eliot hoped he\nwould compose. He sympathised with all self-sacrifice, all lofty\naspiration, and in particular with all suffering. This last emotion was\noften betrayed by a look rather than expressed in words. I vividly\nremember being with him once on a popular holiday at the Alexandra\nPalace. We were seated on the grass, watching the shifting groups of\nhappy forms, and exchanging appreciative or satirical remarks. Suddenly\nI observed my companion\u2019s gaze fixed on a youth who limped by with a\npleasant smile on his face, but too obviously beyond hope of ever\nsharing in the full enjoyment of life. Thomson\u2019s eyes followed him until\nhe passed out of sight, and the next moment our eyes met. I shall never\nforget the gentle sadness of that look, its beautiful sympathy that\ntranscended speech, and made all words poor.\n\nThomson\u2019s life was a long tragedy. He inherited from his father a fatal\ncurse, and in his youth he lost the beautiful girl to whom he was\nengaged. She was the object of his passionate adoration, and allusions\nto her often occur in his poems. Her image mingled with all the sombre\npanoramas of Love and Death and Grief that passed before the eyes of his\nimagination. Yet I do not agree with Mr. Dobell in regarding this\nbereavement as the _cause_ of his life-long misery. She was, I hold,\nmerely the peg on which he hung his raiment of sorrow; without her,\nanother object might have served the same purpose. He carried within him\nhis proper curse, constitutional melancholia. From long and careful\nobservation I formed this conclusion, and it explains Thomson\u2019s life and\nphilosophy. I would not dogmatise, however; for the profundities and\nsubtleties of the human heart baffle all calculation. Certitude is now\nimpossible. The seal of eternal silence is set on Thomson\u2019s lips\u2014\u201cafter\nlife\u2019s fitful fever he sleeps well.\u201d He is buried at Highgate, and his\ndarling lies, I suspect, in an unknown grave. Death has at last united\nthem, but their love survives in the glory of immortal song.\n\n\n\n\nTHE DEVIL IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND\n\n\n(1876.)\n\nThe Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has delivered judgment in\nthe case of Jenkins v. Cook. Many of the highest personages in the\nrealm, including the Archbishop of Canterbury and the great law-lords,\nwere present to give weight and solemnity to the decision, which was\nread by the Lord Chancellor. It was reported at full length in the\n_Times_ of the following day, Feb. 17, 1876, the length being two\ncolumns of small print.\n\nI must try to indicate briefly the main facts of the case, before\nhazarding any comments on it. Mr. Jenkins, of Christ Church, Clifton,\nbrought an action against his vicar, the Kev. Flavel S. Cook, for\nrefusing him the Sacrament of the Holy Communion. Mr. Cook justified the\nrefusal on the ground that Mr. Jenkins did not believe in the Devil, all\npassages relating to the Devil and evil spirits having been excluded\nfrom a bulky volume published by Mr. Jenkins, entitled \u201cSelections from\nthe Old and New Testaments.\u201d By the evidence of Mrs. Jenkins, who\nattempted an amicable arrangement, it appears that Mr. Cook said to her:\n\u201cLet Mr. Jenkins write me a calm letter, and say he believes in the\nDevil, and I will give him the Sacrament.\u201d Whereupon Mr. Jenkins wrote\non July 20, 1874: \u201cWith regard to my book, \u2018Selections from the Old and\nNew Testaments,\u2019 the parts I have omitted, and which has enabled me\n[meaning, doubtless, and the omission of which has enabled me] to use\nthe book morning and evening in my family are, in their present\ngenerally received sense, quite incompatible with region or decency (in\nmy opinion). How such ideas have become connected with a book containing\neverything that is necessary for a man to know, I really cannot say; I\ncan only sincerely regret it.\u201d Mr. Cook replied in effect: \u201cThen you\ncannot be received at the Lord\u2019s table in my church.\u201d Mr. Jenkins, a\nregular communicant, and admittedly a man of exemplary and devout life,\nanswered: \u201cThinking as you do, I do not see what other course you could\nconsistently have taken. I shall, nevertheless, come to the Lord\u2019s table\nas usual at \u2018your\u2019 church, which is also mine.\u201d Accordingly he presented\nhimself, and was repelled, whereupon he brought an action against Mr.\nCook.\n\nThe case was first tried in the Court of Arches, and the dean dismissed\nthe suit and condemned Mr. Jenkins in costs, saying, \u201cI am of opinion\nthat the avowed and persistent denial of the existence and personality\nof the Devil did, according to the law of the Church, as expressed in\nher canons and rubrics, constitute the promoter [Mr. Jenkins] \u2018an evil\nliver,\u2019 and \u2018a depraver of the Book of Common Prayer and Administration\nof the Sacraments,\u2019 in such sense as to warrant the defendant in\nrefusing to administer the Holy Communion to him until he disavowed or\nwithdrew his avowal of the heretical opinion, and that the same\nconsideration applies to the absolute denial by the promoter of the\ndoctrine of the eternity of punishment, and, of course, still more to\nthe denial of all punishment for sin in a future state, which is the\nlegitimate consequence of his deliberate exclusion of the passages of\nscripture referring to such punishment.\u201d\n\nSo far, so well; the Church of England was assured of the Devil and the\neternal punishment it has always held so dear. But Mr. Jenkins appealed\nto the highest court, and this has reversed the decision of the lower,\nadmonished Mr. Cook for his conduct in the past, monished him to refrain\nfrom the like offence in future, and condemned him in the costs of both\nsuits. Do you think, then, that the Church of England is authoritatively\ndeprived of her dear Devil and her beloved eternal punishment? Not at\nall; the really important problem is evaded with consummate lawyerlike\nwariness; the points in dispute are most shiftily shifted like slides of\na magic lantern; we have a new decision essentially unrelated to that\nwhich it cancels; we have a judgment which concerns not the Devil\u2014except\nthat he would chuckle over the too clever unwisdom which fancies it can\nextinguish \u201cburning questions\u201d with legal wigs.\n\nTheir most learned lordships in the first place observe that the learned\njudge of the Court of Arches appears to have considered that the canon\nand the rubric severally warrant the repulsion from the Lord\u2019s table of\n\u201can evil liver,\u201d and \u201ca depraver of the Book of Common Prayer,\u201d whereas\nthe terms are \u201can open and notorious evil liver,\u201d and \u201ccommon and\nnotorious depravers.\u201d This is a most pregnant distinction, teaching us\nthat an evil liver and a depraver of the said book, as long as he is not\nnotoriously such, is fully entitled to the Holy Communion, fully\nentitled to the privilege of \u201ceating and drinking damnation to himself?\u201d\na privilege from which the notorious evil liver and depraver is\nrighteously debarred.\n\nNow, their most learned lordships find that there is absolutely no\nevidence that the appellant was an evil liver, much less an open and\nnotorious evil liver. The Question follows, Was he a common and\nnotorious depraver of the Book of Common Prayer? It was contended that\nthe Selections, coupled with the letter of July 20, proved him to be\nthis. But the letter was not written spontaneously. He was invited by\nthe respondent, Mr. Cook, to write it. It was a friendly and private, as\nwell as a solicited, communication. Therefore, whatever be the\nconstruction of the letter, and even if there be in it a depravation of\nthe Book of Common Prayer, still it would be impossible to hold that the\nwriting of such a letter in such circumstances could make the appellant\n\u201ca common and notorious depraver.\u201d Whence it is clear that a man may\ndeprave the Book of Common Prayer as much as he pleases in private\nconversation and letters, yet retain the precious privilege of \u201ceating\nand drinking damnation to himself\u201d in the Holy Communion; he can only\nforfeit this by common and notorious depravation of that blessed\nbook\u2014for instance, by a depravation repeatedly published in a newspaper,\nor persistently proclaimed by the town-crier.\n\nSo far the law seems most clear, and the judgment quite incontestible.\nBut leaving the strait limits of the law, and looking at the facts in\nevidence, there is one part of the judgment which to the common lay mind\nis simply astonishing. Their most learned lordships \u201c_desire to state in\nthe most emphatic manner that there is not before them any evidence that\nthe appellant entertains the doctrines attributed to him by the Dean of\nArches_;\u201d wherefore their most learned and subtle lordships \u201cdo not mean\nto decide that those doctrines are otherwise than inconsistent with the\nformularies of the Church of England.\u201d Nor, of course, do they mean to\ndecide that those doctrines _are_ inconsistent with, those formularies.\nNo, \u201cThis is not the subject for their lordships\u2019 present\nconsideration.\u201d Indeed, \u201cIf they were [had been] called upon to decide\nthat [whether] those opinions, or any of them, could be entertained or\nexpressed by a member of the Church, whether layman or clergyman,\nconsistently with the law and with his remaining in communion with the\nChurch, they would have looked upon this case with much greater anxiety\nthan they now feel in its decision.\u201d\n\nMr. Jenkins compiles and publishes a book of \u201cSelections from the\nBible,\u201d carefully excluding all passages relating to the Devil and evil\nspirits. The book is bulky; and, in fact, though this is not expressly\nstated, seems to contain pretty well all the Bible except such passages.\nHe further exhibits in the case a book of selections from the liturgy of\nthe Church of England, apparently compiled on the same principle of\nexclusion.. Mr. Cook sends through Mrs. J. a message: \u201cLet Mr. J. write\nme a calm letter, and say he believes in the Devil, and I will give him\nthe Sacrament.\u201d Mr. J. replies, as we have seen, that the parts he has\nomitted are, in his opinion, quite incompatible with religion or\ndecency, _in their generally received sense_; such generally received\nsense being evidently (to all of us save their most learned and subtle\nlordships) that in which the Church of England receives them. Mr. C.\nreplies, \u201cThen I must refuse you the Communion.\u201d Mr. J. answers,\n\u201cThinking as you do, I do not see what other course you could con-.\nsistently have taken;\u201d and resolves to test the question of legality.\nWith these facts staring them in the face, their most learned and most\nsubtle lordships can, with the utmost solemnity, and in the most\nemphatic manner, declare that there is not any evidence before them that\nMr. Jenkins does not believe in the Devil in the common Church of\nEngland sense! What the eyes of laymen, however purblind, cannot help\nseeing clearly, their far-sighted lordships, putting on legal\nspectacles, dim with the dust of many ages, manage not to discern at\nall.\n\nThe question cannot be left thus undecided. As matters stand, the poor\nChurch does not know whether, legally, it has a Devil or not. Its Devil,\nits dear and precious old Devil, is in a state of suspended animation,\nneither dead nor alive; a most inefficient and burdensome Devil. He must\neither be restored to full health and vigor, or buried away decently for\never; decently and solemnly, the Archbishop of Canterbury, in the\npresence of all their lordships of the Judicial Committee of the Privy\nCouncil, reading the appropriate Church service over his grave. That\nwould be touching and impressive!\u2014\u201cForasmuch as it hath pleased Almighty\nGod (with the sanction and authority of the Judicial Committee of the\nPrivy Council) of his great mercy to take unto himself the soul of our\ndear brother here departed, we therefore commit his body to the ground;\nearth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust; in sure and certain hope\nof the resurrection to eternal life, through our Lord Jesus Christ.\u201d At\npresent it appears that every clergyman and layman in the Church has the\nlegal right to sing as a solo in private, especially if solicited,\nBeranger\u2019s refrain, \u201c_The Devil is dead! The Devil is dead!_\u201d while it\nis doubtful whether he is at liberty to chant it publicly and in\nchorus\u2014a state of things anomalous beyond even the normal anomalism of\nall things in this our happy England. It is urgent that some one, lay or\ncleric, should compel the decision which the suit of Mr. Jenkins has\nfailed to obtain.\n\nIn considering the question whether disbelief in the Devil would\n\u201cdeprave\u201d the Prayer Book, we must refer to this book itself. It\ncontains three creeds\u2014the Apostles\u2019, the Nicene, and that called of\nAthanasius. Of these the Nicene (the creed in the Communion Service, by\nthe way) mentions neither the Devil nor Hell; the Apostles\u2019 and the\nso-called Athanasian mention hell but not the Devil. In No. III. of the\nThirty-nine Articles hell is solidly established, but again there is no\nmention of the Devil. It may be argued that hell implies the Devil, as a\nfox-hole implies a fox; but his existence is not authoritatively\naverred. Strangely enough, the only personage who, according to the\ncreeds and articles, has certainly been in hell, is Jesus Christ\nhimself: \u201cHe descended into hell; the third day he rose again from the\ndead; he ascended into heaven.\u201d What took _him_ to hell? The Prayer Book\ndoes not inform us. But we learn from the Epistle called 1 Peter, chap.\niii., 19, 20, and chap. iv., 6: \u201cBy which also he went and preached unto\nthe spirits in prison, which sometime were disobedient, when once the\nlong-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a\npreparing, wherein few, that is eight souls, were saved by water.... For\nthis cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they\nmight be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God\nin the spirit.\u201d Whence it appears that the spirits in prison were not\nthe Devil and his angels, but the spirits of those who were drowned in\nthe Flood for disobedience; and it furthermore appears that these\nspirits were saved by the preaching of Christ; so that in this famous\nharrying of hell, he seems to have left it as empty as the mosstroopers\nin their forays left farmsteads. It is true that No. VI. of the Articles\nsettles the canon of the Old and New Testaments, and that anyone daring\nto exclude from belief anything in this canon might be convicted of\ndepraving the Prayer Book. But in that case all the best scholars and\ndivines of the Church are guilty of this dreadful sin; and not only\nguilty, but openly, commonly and notoriously guilty: and therefore all\nmerit repulsion from the Lord\u2019s table. Let the truly faithful clergy,\nthose who believe all without question or distinction, do their duty to\nthe Articles of religion of their Church (the Creeds, as I have pointed\nout, are neutral), and they will shut out from their Communion nearly\nall the intelligent piety and learning which lend it whatever dignity it\nstill retains. Granted the canon in its integrity, and the existence of\na personal Devil, and the doctrine of eternal punishment cannot be\nfairly disputed. Without multiplying texts, I may refer to Revelation,\nchap. xx., as decisive on these points.\n\nFrom these considerations it follows that if the Church of England is\nbound by her own articles she will hold fast to the Devil and hell, and\ndeny the privilege of her Communion to any one who depraves the\nPrayer-Book by common and notorious disbelief in them. And for my own\npart, I do not see how the Church could get on at all without a Devil\nand hell, especially in competition with the other Christian sects,\nwhich make unlimited use of both. The Devil is in fact as essential to\nthe Christian schemes as a leader of the opposition to that great\npolitical blessing, government by party. If he were to die, or be\ndeposed, it would be necessary to elect another to the vacant dignity.\nYou cannot put the leadership in commission as the unfortunate Liberals\nwere taunted with doing, in their demoralisation after their disasters\nof the General Election and Mr. Gladstone\u2019s sudden retirement. Just as\nMr. Disraeli lamented the withdrawal of Mr. Gladstone, complaining of\nthe embarrassment caused to the Government by having no responsible\nleader opposed to it, so we can imagine dear God lamenting the absence\nof a Devil, and declaring that the Christian scheme could not work well\nwithout one. His utter loss would make the government of the world\nretrograde from an admirably balanced constitutional monarchy to a mere\nOriental absolute despotism. You must choose some one to lead, if only\nin name and for the time, as the Whigs chose Lord Hartington. But though\nLord Hartington is still tolerated by us English, a Lord Hartington of a\nDevil, be it said with all respect to both his lordship and his\nDevil-ship, would scarcely be tolerated by either the celestial or the\ninfernal benches.\n\nIn Beranger\u2019s authentic record, already alluded to, of \u201cThe Death of the\nDevil\u201d\u2014which, however, relates only to the Church of Rome\u2014we read how,\non learning the catastrophe:\u2014\n\n    \u201cThe conclave shook with mortal fear;\n    Power and cash\u2212box, adieu! they said;\n    We have lost our father dear,\n    The Devil is dead! the Devil is dead!\u201d\n\nBut while they they were in this passion of grief and despair, St.\nIgnatius offered to take the place of the dead Devil; and none could\ndoubt that he with his Jesuits for imps would prove a most efficient\nsubstitute. Wherefore the Church threw off its sorrow and welcomed his\noffer with most holy rapture:\u2014\n\n    \u201cNoble fellow! cried all the court,\n    We bless thee for thy malice and hate.\n    And at once his Order, Rome\u2019s support,\n    Saw its robe flutter Heaven\u2019s gate.\n    From the angel\u2019s tears of pity fell:\n    Poor man will have cause to rue, they said;\n    St. Ignatius inherits Hell.\n    The Devil is dead! the Devil is dead!\u201d\n\nThus matters continued well for the Church of Rome, and, in fact, became\neven better than before. But if the Devil should die in the Church of\nEngland, whom has she that could efficiently take his place? She has no\nsaints except the disciples and apostles of the New Testament, and these\nhave long since gone to glory. Would Mr. Gladstone undertake the office?\nor Mr. Beresford Hope, with the _Saturday Review_ for his infernal\ngazette? or the editor of the _Rock?_ or he of the _Church Times?_ or\nthe man who does religion for the _Daily Telegraph?_ Each of these\ndistinguished gentlemen might well eagerly accept the candidature or a\npost so lofty: but I fear that none of them could be considered equal to\nits functions. Perhaps Mr. Disraeli has the requisite genius, and\nprobably he would be very glad to exchange the Premiership of little\nEngland for that of large hell: but unfortunately he has already\ncommitted himself to the side of the angels, meaning by angels the\nhumdrum Tory angels of heaven\u2014for, as Dr. Johnson said, the Devil was\nthe first Whig. On the whole, the Church of England had better keep\nloyal to its ancient and venerable Devil, being too impoverished in\nintellect and character to supply a worthy successor.\n\nI have ventured to compare the government of the world in the Christian\nscheme, by a God and a Devil, with our own felicitous government by\nparty. There is, however, or rather there appears to be, a striking\ndifference between the two. In our government, when the Prime Minister\nfinds himself decidedly in a minority, he goes out of office, and the\nLeader of the Opposition goes in; in the Government of the World the\nLeader of the Opposition seems to have always had an immense majority\n(and his majority in these days is probably larger than ever before,\nseeing that sceptics and infidels have multiplied exceedingly), yet the\nother side is supposed to retain permanent possession of office. I say\n\u201csupposed,\u201d because the Bible itself suggests that this popular opinion\nis a mistake, the Devil (if there be a Devil) being entitled by it the\nprince of this world, which surely implies his accession to power.\n\nAlthough the Godhead or governing power of the world, according to the\nChristian scheme, is usually spoken and written of as a trinity, it is,\nin fact, quarterary or fourfold for Protestants, and quinary or fivefold\nfor Roman Catholics. The former have God the Father, God the Son, God\nthe Holy Ghost, and God the Devil; the latter supplement these with\nGoddess the Virgin Mary. Both formally acknowledge the first three as\ncollectively and severally almighty, but Protestants implicitly\nacknowledge the fourth, and Roman Catholics the fifth, as more almighty\nstill (these solecisms of dogma cannot be expressed without solecisms of\nlanguage). With the Roman Catholics I am not concerned here. With regard\nto the Protestants, and those especially professing the Protestantism of\nthe Church of England, I may safely affirm that the Devil is not less\nessential to their theology than is any person of the Trinity, or, in\nfact, than are the three persons together. Indeed, the Father and the\nHoly Ghost have been practically dispensed with, leaving Christ and\nSatan to fight the battle out between themselves.\n\nAs this is a gloriously scientific age, nobly enamored of the exact\nsciences, I will endeavor to expound this sublime subject of the\ndivinity of the Church of England mathematically, even after the manner\nof the divine Plato in Book VIII. of \u201cThe Republic,\u201d treating of divine\nand human generation; and in the \u201cTim\u00e6us,\u201d treating of the creation of\nthe universal soul. His demonstrations, indeed, are so divinely obscure\nas to confound all the scholiasts; my demonstration, however, shall be\nso translucent that even the most learned and subtle lords of the\nJudicial Committee of the Privy Council, with their legal spectacles on,\nshall not be able to help seeing through it. And whereas the figures,\nwhich are shapes, are more intelligible to most people than the figures\nwhich are numbers, let the exposition be geometrical. We will say, then,\nthat the Church of old conceived the divinity in the form of an\nequilateral triangle, whereof the base was Christ as the whole system\nwas founded on belief in the Lord Jesus Christ, and the Father and the\nHoly Ghost were the two sides, leaning each on the other; and the Devil\nwas the apex, as opposed to, and farthest from, our blessed Savior. But\nin course of time the theologians (perhaps merely wanting some\noccupation for their vigorous talents, perhaps deeming it undignified to\nhave two persons of the godhead supporting each other obliquely like a\ncouple of tipsy men, perhaps simply in order to make matters square) set\nto work, and pushed up the two sides, so that each might stand firm and\nperpendicular by itself. This process had two unforeseen results; it\nexpanded the apex, which was a very elastic point, so that it became the\ncrowning side of the square, and it so unhinged the sides that after a\nbrief upright existence they lost their balance, and were carried to\nLimbo by the first wind of strange doctrine which blew that way; and the\nDevil and Christ, or Christ and the Devil (arrange the precedence as you\nplease), were left alone confronting each other. These two are of course\nequal and parallel, the main distinction between them being that Christ\nis below, and the Devil above, or, in other words, that the Devil is\nsuperior and Christ inferior (the Devil seems entitled to the\nprecedence). Thus matters have continued even to the present time, the\ndivinity showing itself, as we may say, without form and void; and we\nare free to speculate on the momentous questions: Will the crown (which\nis the Devil) fall into the base (which is Christ)? Will the base float\nup into the crown? Will the two coalesce half way? Will they both,\nunknit from their sides, be carried away to Limbo by some blast of\nstrange doctrine? One thing is certain, they cannot long remain as they\nare. Rare Ben Jonson chanted the Trinity, or Equilateral Triangle; rare\nWalt Whitman has chanted the Square Deific (with Satan for the fourth\nside); no poet can care to chant the two straight lines which, in the\nlanguage of Euclid, and in the region of intelligence, cannot enclose a\nspace, but are as a magnified symbol of equal\u2014to nothing.\n\nP. S.\u2014It may be appropriately added that the books of Euclid are really\nsymbolic and prophetic expositions of most sublime and sacrosanct\nmysteries, though in these days few persons seem aware of the fact. Thus\nthe very first definition, \u201cA point is position without magnitude,\u201d\nexactly defines every point of difference between the theologians. So a\nline, which is as the prolongation of a point, or length without\nbreadth, represents in one sense (for each symbol has manifold meanings)\nthe history of any theological system. An acute angle is, say, Professor\nClifford; an obtuse angle, Mr. Whalley; a right angle, the present\nwriter: _non angeli sed Angli_. The first proposition, \u201cTo erect an\nequilateral triangle upon a given finite straight line,\u201d indicates the\nproblem solved by Christianity, when it erected the Trinity on the basis\nof the man we call Jesus. This pregnant subject should be worked out in\ndetail through the whole eight books.\n\n\n\n\nRELIGION IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAINS\n\n\nTop of Pike\u2019s Peak, March 4th, 1873.\n\nHonored with your special commission, I at once hurried across to\nDenver, and thence still westward until I found myself among the big\nvertebrae of this longish backbone of America. I have wandered to and\nfro among the new cities, the advanced camps of civilisation, always\ncarefully reticent as to my mission, always carefully inquiring into the\nstate of religion both in doctrine and practice. You were so hopeful\nthat high Freethought would be found revelling triumphant in these high\nfree regions, that I fear you will be acutely pained by this my true\nreport. Churches and chapels of all kinds abound\u2014Episcopalian, Methodist\nEpiscopal (for the Methodists here have bishops), Presbyterian, Baptist,\nCongregational, Roman Catholic, etc. Zeal inflaming my courage, three\nand even four times have I ventured into a church, each time enduring\nthe whole service; and if I have not ventured oftener, certainly I had\nmore than sufficient cause to abstain. For as I suffered in my few\nvisits to churches in your England, so I suffered here; and such\nsufferings are too dreadful to be frequently encountered, even by the\nbravest of the brave. Whether my sensations in church are similar to\nthose of others, or are peculiar to myself, I cannot be sure; but I am\nquite sure that they are excruciating. On first entering I may feel\ncalm, wakeful, sane, and not uncomfortable, except that here I rather\nregret being shut in from the pure air and splendid sky, and in England\nrather regret having come out through the raw, damp murk, and in both\nregret that civilisation has not yet established smoking-pews; but the\nChurch is always behind the age. It is pleasant for awhile to note the\nwell-dressed people seated or entering; the men with unctuous hair and\nsomewhat wooden decorum; the women floating more at ease, suavely\nconscious of their fine inward and outward adornments. It is pleasant to\nkeep a hopeful look-out for some one of more than common beauty or\ngrace, and to watch such a one if discovered. As the service begins, and\nthe old, old words and phrases come floating around me, I am lulled into\nquaint dream-memories of childhood; the long unthought-of school-mates,\nthe surreptitious sweetstuff, the manifold tricks and smothered\nlaughter, by whose aid (together with total inattention to the service,\nexcept to mark and learn the text) one managed to survive the ordeal.\nThe singing also is pleasant, and lulls me into vaguer dreams.\nGradually, as the service proceeds, I become more drowsy; my small\nfaculties are drugged into quiet slumber, they feel themselves off duty,\nthere is nothing for which they need keep awake. But, with the\ncommencement of the sermon, new and alarming symptoms arise within me,\ngrowing ever worse and worse until the close. Pleasure departs with\ntranquility, the irritation of revolt and passive helplessness is acute.\nI cannot find relief in toffy, or in fun with my neighbors, as when I\nwas a happy child. The old stereotyped phrases, the immemorial\nplatitudes, the often-killed sophistries that never die, come buzzing\nand droning about me like a sluggish swarm of wasps, whose slow\ndeliberate stinging is more hard to bear than the quick keen stinging of\nanger. Then the wasps, penetrating through my ears, swarm inside me;\nthere is a horrid buzzing in my brain, a portentous humming in my\nbreast; my small faculties are speedily routed, and disperse in blind\nanguish, the implacable wasps droning out and away after them, and I am\nleft void, void; with hollow skull, empty heart, and a mortal sinking of\nstomach; my whole being is but a thin shell charged with vacuity and\ndesperate craving; I expect every instant to collapse or explode. It is\nbut too certain that if anyone should then come to lead me off to an\nasylum for idiots, or a Young Men\u2019s Christian Association, or any\nsimilar institution, I could not utter a single rational word to save\nmyself. And though all my faculties have left me, I cannot attempt to\nleave the church; decorum, rigid and frigid, freezes me to my seat; I\nstare stonily in unimaginable torture, feebly wondering whether the\nsermon will outlast my sanity, or my sanity outlast the sermon. When at\nlength released, I am so utterly demoralised that I can but smoke\nfuriously, pour much beer and cram much dinner into my hollowness, and\nso with swinish dozing hope to feel better by tea-time. Now, though in\norder to fulfil the great duties you entrust to me, I have cheerfully\ndared the Atlantic, and spent long days and perilous nights in railroad\ncars, and would of course (were it indeed necessary) face unappalled\nmere physical death and destruction, I really could not go on risking,\nwith the certainty of ere long losing, my whole small stock of brains;\nespecially as the loss of these would probably rather hinder than\nfurther the performance of the said duties. For suppose me reduced to\npermanent idiocy by church-going, become a mere brazen hollowness with a\nriotous tongue like Cowper\u2019s church-going bell; is it not most likely\nthat I would then turn true believer, renouncing and denouncing your\nnoble commission, even as you would renounce and denounce your imbecile\ncommissioner?\n\nFinding that I could not pursue my inquiries in the churches and\nchapels, I was much grieved and perplexed, until one of those thoughts\noccurred to me which are always welcome and persuasive, because in exact\nagreement with our own desires or necessities. I thought of what I had\nremarked when visiting your England: how the churches and chapels and\nlecture-halls, each sect thundering more or less terribly against all\nthe others, made one guess that the people were more disputatious than\npious; how one became convinced, in spite of his infidel reluctance,\nthat the people were indeed, as a rule, thoroughly and genuinely\nreligious, by mingling freely with them in their common daily and\nnightly life. I asked myself, What really proved to me the pervading\nChristianity of England? the sermons, the tracts, the clerical lectures,\nthe missionary meetings? the cathedrals and other theatres and\nmusic-halls crowded with worshippers on Sunday, while the museums and\nother public-houses were empty and shut? No, scarcely these things; but\nthe grand princeliness of the princes, the true nobleness of the nobles,\nthe lowliness of the bishops, the sanctity of the clergy, the honesty of\nthe merchants, the veracity of the shopkeepers, the sobriety and thrift\nof the artisans, the independence and intelligence of the rustics; the\ngeneral faith and hope and love which brightened the sunless days, the\ngeneral temperance and chastity which made beautiful the sombre nights;\nthe almost universal abhorrence of the world, the flesh, and the Devil;\nthe almost universal devotion to heaven, the spirit, and God.\n\nI thereupon determined to study the religion out here, even as I had\nstudied it in England, in the ordinary public and private life of the\npeople; and you will doubtless be sorely afflicted to learn that I have\nfound everywhere much the same signs of genuine, practical Christianity\nas are so common and patent in the old country. The ranchmen have sown\nthe good seed, and shall reap the harvest of heavenly felicity; the\nstockmen will surely be corraled with the sheep, and not among the\ngoats, at the last day; not to gain the whole world would the\nstorekeepers lose their own souls; the pioneers have found the narrow\nway which leadeth unto life; the fishermen are true disciples, the\ntrappers catch Satan in his own snares, the hunters are mighty before\nthe Lord; bright are the celestial prospects of the prospectors, ana the\nminers are all stoping-out that hidden treasure which is richer than\nsilver and much fine gold. As compared with the English, these Western\nmen are perchance inferior in two important points of Christian\nsentiment: they probably do not fear God, being little given to fear\nanyone; they certainly do not honor the king, perhaps because they\nunfortunately have none to honor. On the other hand, as I have been\nassured by many persons from the States and the old country, they are\neven superior to the English in one important point of Christian\nconduct. Christ has promised that in discharging the damned to hell at\nthe day of judgment, he will fling at them this among other reproaches,\n\u201cI was a stranger, and ye took me not in,\u201d and this particular rebuke\nseems to have wrought a peculiarly deep impression in these men, perhaps\nbecause they have much more to do with strangers than have people in old\nsettled countries, so much, indeed, that the word \u201cstranger\u201d is\ncontinually in their mouths. The result is (as the said persons from\nEngland and the States have often solemnly assured me) that any and\nevery stranger arriving in these regions is most thoroughly, most\nbeautifully, most religiously taken in. So that should any of these fine\nfellows by evil hap be among the accursed multitude whom Christ thus\naddresses, they will undoubtedly retort in their frank fashion of\nspeech: \u201cWall, boss, it may be right to give us hell on other counts,\nbut you say you was a stranger and we didn\u2019t take you in. What we want\nto know is, Did you ever come to our parts to trade in mines or stock or\nsich? If you _didn\u2019t_, how the Devil _could_ we take you in? if you\n_did_, it\u2019s a darned lie, and an insult to our understanding to say we\n_didn\u2019t_.\u201d\n\nBut though the practical life out here is so veritably Christian, you\nstill hope that at any rate the creeds and doctrines are considerably\nheterodox. I am sincerely sorry to be obliged to destroy this hope. In\nthe ordinary talk of the men continually recur the same or almost the\nsame expressions and implications of orthodox belief, as are so common\nin your England, and throughout Christendom. Why such formulas are\ngenerally used by men only, I have often been puzzled to explain: it may\nbe that the women, who in all lands attend divine service much more than\ndo the men, find ample expression of their faith in the set times and\nplaces of public worship and private prayer; while the men, less\nmethodical, and demanding liberal scope, give it robust utterance\nwhenever and wherever they choose. These formulas, as you must have\noften remarked, are most weighty and energetic; they avouch and avow the\nsupreme personages and mysteries and dogmas of their religion; they are\nusually but brief ejaculations, in strong contrast to those long prayers\nof the Pharisees which Jesus laughed to scorn; and they are often so\nsuperfluous as regards the mere worldly meaning of the sentences in\nwhich they appear, that it is evident they have been interjected simply\nto satisfy the pious ardor of the speaker, burning to proclaim in season\nand out of season the cardinal principles of his faith. I say speaker,\nand not writer, because writing, being comparatively cold and\ndeliberate, seldom flames out in these sharp swift flashes, that leap\nfrom living lips touched with coals of fire from the altar.(1)\n\n    1. Is it not time that we wrote such words as this damn at full\n    length, as did Emily Bront\u00eb, the Titaness, whom Charlotte justly\n    indicates in this as in other respects; instead of putting only\n    initial and final letters, with a hypocritical fig-leaf dash in\n    the middle, drawing particular attention to what it affects to\n    conceal? These words are in all men\u2019s mouths, and many of them\n    are emphatically the leading words of the Bible.\n\nI am aware that these fervid ejaculations are apt to be regarded by the\nlight-minded as trivial, by the cold-hearted as indecorous, by the\nsanctimonious as even profane; but to the true philosopher, whether he\nbe religious or not, they are pregnant with grave significance. For do\nnot these irrepressible utterances burst forth from the very depths of\nthe profound heart of the people? Are they not just as spontaneous and\nuniversal as is the belief in God itself? Are they not among the most\ngenuine and impassioned words of mankind? Have they not a primordial\nvigor and vitality? Are they not supremely of that voice of the people\nwhich has been well called the voice of God? Thus when your Englishman\ninstead of \u201cStrange!\u201d says \u201cThe Devil!\u201d instead of \u201cWonderful!\u201d cries\n\u201cGood Heavens!\u201d instead of \u201cHow startling!\u201d exclaims \u201cO Christ!\u201d he does\nmore than merely express his emotions, his surprise, his wonder, his\namaze; he hallows it to the assertion of his belief in Satan, in the\ngood kingdom of God, in Jesus; and, moreover, by the emotional gradation\nranks with perfect accuracy the Devil lowest in the scale, the heavens\nhigher, Christ the loftiest. When another shouts \u201cGod damn you!\u201d(1) he\nnot only condemns the evil of the person addressed; he also takes\noccasion to avow his own strong faith in God and God\u2019s judgment of\nsinners. Similarly \u201cGod bless you!\u201d implies that there is a God, and\nthat from him all blessings flow. How vividly does the vulgar hyperbole\n\u201cInfernally hot,\u201d prove the general belief in hell-fire! And the phrase\n\u201cGod knows!\u201d not merely declares that the subject is beyond human\nknowledge, but also that an all-wise God exists. Here in the West, as\nbefore stated, such brief expressions of faith, which are so much more\nsincere than long formularies repeated by rote in church, are quite as\ncommon as in your England. When one has sharply rebuked or punished\nanother, he says \u201cI gave him hell.\u201d And that this belief in future\npunishment pervades all classes is proved by the fact that even a\nprofane editor speaks of it as a matter of course. For the thermometer\nhaving been stolen from his sanctum, the said worthy editor announced\nthat the mean cuss who took it might as well bring or send it back (no\nquestions asked) for it could not be of any use to him in the place he\nwas going to, as it only registered up to 212 degrees. The old notion\nthat hell or Hades is located in the middle of the earth (which may have\na scientific solution in the Plutonic theory that we dwell on the crust\nof a baked dumpling full of fusion and confusion) is obviously tallied\nby the miner\u2019s assertion that his vein was true-fissure, reaching from\nthe grass-roots down to hell. The frequent phrase \u201cA God-damned liar,\u201d\n\u201cA God-damned thief,\u201d recognise God as the punisher of the wicked. I\nhave heard a man complain of an ungodly headache, implying first, the\nexistence of God, and secondly, the fact that the Godhead does not ache,\nor in other words is perfect. Countless other phrases of this kind might\nbe alleged, a few of them astonishingly vigorous and racy, for new\ncountries breed lusty new forms of speech; but the few already given\nsuffice for my present purpose. One remarkable comparison, however, I\ncannot pass over without a word: it is common to say of a man who has\ntoo much self-esteem, He thinks himself a little tin Jesus on wheels. It\nis clear that some profound suggestion, some sacrosanct mystery, must\nunderlie this bold locution; but what I have been hitherto unable to\nfind out. The connexion between Jesus and tin may seem obvious to such\nas know anything of bishops and pluralists, pious bankers and traders.\nBut what about the wheels? Have they any relation to the opening chapter\nof Ezekiel? It is much to be wished that Max M\u00fcller, and all other such\ngreat scholars, who (as I am informed, for it\u2019s not I that would presume\nto study them myself) manage to extract whatever noble mythological\nmeanings they want, from unintelligible Oriental metaphors and broken\nphrases many thousand years old, would give a few years of their\nsuperfluous time to the interpretation of this holy riddle. Do not,\ngentleman, do not by all that is mysterious, leave it to the scholars of\nmillenniums to come; proceed to probe and analyse and turn it inside out\nat once, while it is still young and flourishing, while the genius who\ninvented it is still probably alive, if he deceased not in his boots, as\ndecease so many gallant pioneers.\n\nAnd here, before afflicting you further, O much-enduring editor, let me\nsoothe you a little by stating that some particles of heresy, some few\nheretics, are to be found even here. I have learned that into a very\ngood and respectable bookstore in a city of these regions, certain\ncopies of Taylor\u2019s \u201cDiegesis\u201d have penetrated, who can say how? and that\nsome of these have been sold. A living judge has been heard to declare\nthat he couldn\u2019t believe at all in the Holy Ghost outfit. It has also\nbeen told me of a man who must have held strange opinions as to the\noffspring of God the Father, though certainly this man was not a\nrepresentative pioneer, being but a German miner, fresh from the States.\nThis Dutchman (all Germans here are Dutch, doubtless from _Deutsche_,\nthe special claims of the Hollanders being ignored) was asked solemnly\nby a clergyman, \u201cWho died to save sinners?\u201d and answered \u201cGott.\u201d \u201cWhat,\u201d\nsaid the pained and pious pastor, \u201cdon\u2019t you know that it was Jesus the\n_Son_ of God?\u201d \u201cAh,\u201d returned placidly the Dutchman, \u201cit vass one of te\nboys, vass it? I always dought it vass te olt man himselben.\u201d This good\nGerman may have been misled by the mention of the sons of God early in\nGenesis, yet it is strange that he knew not that Jesus is the only son\nof God, and our savior. A story is moreover told of two persons, of whom\nthe one boasted rather too often that he was a self-made man, and the\nother at length quietly remarked that he was quite glad to hear it, as\nit cleared God from the responsibility of a darned mean bit of work.\nWhence some have inferred the heresy that God is the creator of only a\npart of the universe; but I frankly confess that in my own opinion the\nreply was merely a playful sarcasm.\n\nThe most decided heresy which has come under my own observation was\ndeveloped in the course of a chat between two miners in a lager-beer\nsaloon and billiard-hall; into the which, it need scarcely be remarked,\nI was myself solely driven by the fierce determination to carry out my\ninquiries thoroughly. Bill was smoking, Dick was chewing; and they stood\nup together, at rather rapidly decreasing intervals, for drinks of such\n\u201cfine old Bourbon\u201d rye whiskey as bears the honorable popular title of\nrot-gut. The frequency with which the drinking of alcoholic liquors\nleads to impassioned and elevated discussion of great problems in\npolitics, history, dog-breeding, horse-racing, moral philosophy,\nreligion, and kindred important subjects, seems to furnish a strong and\nhitherto neglected argument against tee-totalism. There are countless\nmen who can only be stimulated to a lively and outspoken interest in\nintellectual questions by a series of convivial glasses and meditative\nwhiffs. If such men really take any interest in such questions at other\ntimes, it remains deplorably latent, not exercising its legitimate\ninfluence on the public opinion of the world. Our two boys were\ndiscussing theology; and having had many drinks, grappled with the\ndoctrine of the triune God. \u201cWall,\u201d said Bill, \u201cI can\u2019t make out that\ntrinity consam, that three\u2019s one and one\u2019s three outfit.\u201d Whereto Dick:\n\u201cIs that so? Then you wam\u2019t rigged out for a philosopher, Bill. Look\nhere,\u201d pulling forth his revolver, an action which caused a slight stir\nin the saloon, till the other boys saw that he didn\u2019t mean business;\n\u201clook here, I\u2019ll soon fix it up for you. Here\u2019s six chambers, but it\u2019s\nonly one pistol, with one heft and one barrel; the heft for us to catch\nhold of, the barrel to kill our enemy. Wall, God a\u2019mighty\u2019s jest made\nhisself a three-shooter, while he remains one God; but the Devil, he\u2019s\nonly a single-shot deringer: so God can have three fires at the Devil\nfor one the Devil can have at him. Now can\u2019t you figure it out?\u201d \u201cWall,\u201d\nsaid Bill, evidently staggered by the revolver, and feeling, if\npossible, increased respect for that instrument on finding it could be\nbrought to bear toward settlement of even such a difficulty as the\npresent; \u201cWall, that pans out better than I thought it could: but to\ncome down to the bedrock, either God\u2019s a poor mean shot or his piece\ncarries darned light; for I reckon the Devil makes better play with his\none chamber than God with his three.\u201d \u201cMaybe,\u201d replied Dick, with calm\ncandor, strangely indifferent to the appalling prospects this theory\nheld out for our universe; \u201csome of them pesky little things jest shoot\npeas that rile the other fellow without much hurting him, and then, by\nthunder, he lets daylight through you with one good ball. Besides, it\u2019s\nlikely enough the Devil\u2019s the best shot, for he\u2019s been consarned in a\ndevilish heap of shooting more than God has; at any rate\u201d\u2014perchance\nvaguely remembering to have heard of such things as \u201creligious wars\u201d\u2014\u201cof\nlate years, between here and \u2019Frisco. Wall, I guess I don\u2019t run the\ncreation. Let\u2019s liquor;\u201d manifestly deriving much comfort from the\nconsciousness that he had no hand in conducting this world. Bill\nacquiesced with a brief \u201cJa,\u201d and they stood up for another drink. I am\nbound to attest that, in spite or because of the drinks, they had argued\nthroughout with the utmost deliberation and gravity, with a dignified\ndemeanour which Bishops and D.Ds. might envy, and ought to emulate.\n\nHaving thus comforted you with what little of heresy and infidelity I\nhave been able to gather, it is now my painful duty to advance another\nclass of proofs of the general religiousness here; a class of which you\nhave very few current specimens in England, unless it be among the Roman\nCatholics. All comparative mythologists\u2014indeed, all students of\nhistory\u2014are said to agree that the popular legends and myths of any race\nat any time are of the utmost value, as showing what the race then\nbelieved, and thus determining its moral and intellectual condition at\nthat period; this value being quite irrespective of the truth or untruth\nto fact of the said legends. Hence in modern times collections of old\ntraditions and fairy tales have been excellently well received, whether\nfrom the infantile literature of ancient peoples, as the Oriental and\nNorse, or from the senile and anile lips of secluded members of tribes\nwhose nationality is fast dying out, as the Gaelic and Welsh. And truly\nsuch collections commend themselves alike to the grave and the frivolous\nfor the scientific scholar finds in them rich materials for serious\nstudy, and the mere novel-reader can flatter himself that he is studying\nwhile simply enjoying strange stories become new by extreme old age. All\nprimitive peoples, who read and write little, have their most popular\nbeliefs fluidly embodied in oral legends and myths; and in this respect\nthe settlers of a new region, though they may come from the oldest\ncountries, resemble the primitive peoples. They are too busy with the\ntough work of subduing the earth to give much time to writing or reading\nanything beyond their local newspapers; they love to chat together when\nnot working, and chat, much more than writing, runs into stories. Thus\nreligious legends in great numbers circulate out here, all charged and\nsurcharged with faith in the mythology of the Bible. Of these it has\nbeen my sad privilege to listen to not a few. As this letter is already\ntoo long for your paper, though very brief for the importance of its\ntheme, I will subjoin but a couple of them, which I doubt not will be\nquite enough to indicate what measureless superstition prevails in these\nyoungest territories of the free and enlightened Republic.\n\nIt is told\u2014on what authority no one asks, the legend being universally\naccepted on its intrinsic merits, as Protestants would have us accept\nthe Bible, and Papists their copious hagiology\u2014that St. Joseph, the\nputative father of our Lord, fell into bad habits, slipping almost daily\nout of Heaven into evil society, coming home very late at night and\nalways more or less intoxicated. It is suggested that he may have been\ndriven into these courses by unhappiness in his connubial and parental\nrelations, his wife and her child being ranked so much above himself by\nthe Christian world, and the latter being quite openly attributed to\nanother father. Peter, though very irascible, put up with his misconduct\nfor a long time, not liking to be harsh to one of the Royal Family; and\nit is believed that God the Father sympathised with this poor old\nJoseph, and protected him, being himself jealous of the vastly superior\npopularity of Mary and Jesus. But at length, after catching a violent\ncold through getting out of bed at a preposterous hour to let the\nstaggering Joseph in, Peter told him roundly that if he didn\u2019t come home\nsober and in good time, he must just stay out all night. Joseph, feeling\nsick and having lost his pile, promised amendment, and for a time kept\nhis word. Then he relapsed; the heavenly life proved too slow for him,\nthe continual howling of \u201call the menagerie of the Apocalypse\u201d shattered\nhis nerves, he was disgusted at his own insignificance, the memory of\nthe _liaison_ between his betrothed and the Holy Ghost filled him with\ngall and wormwood, and perhaps he suspected that it was still kept up.\nSo, late one night or early one morning Peter was roused from sleep by\nan irregular knocking and fumbling at the gate, as if some stupid dumb\nanimal were seeking admittance. \u201cWho\u2019s there?\u201d growled Peter. \u201cIt\u2019s\nme\u2014Joseph,\u201d hiccoughed the unfortunate. \u201cYou\u2019re drunk,\u201d said Peter,\nsavagely.\n\n\u201cYou\u2019re on the tear again; you\u2019re having another bender.\u201d \u201cYes,\u201d\nanswered Joseph, meekly. \u201cWall,\u201d said Peter, \u201cyou jest go back to where\nyou come from, and spend the night there; get.\u201d \u201cI can\u2019t,\u201d said Joseph.\n\u201cThey\u2019re all shut up; they\u2019ve turned me out.\u201d \u201cThen sleep outside in the\nopen air; it\u2019s wholesome, and will bring you round,\u201d said Peter. After\nmuch vain coaxing and supplicating, old Joe got quite mad, and roared\nout, \u201cIf you don\u2019t get up and let me in at once, by God I\u2019ll take my son\nout of the outfit and bust up the whole consarn!\u201d Peter, terrified by\nthis threat, which, if carried out, would ruin his prospects in eternal\nlife by abolishing his office of celestial porter, caved in, getting up\nand admitting Joseph, who ever since has had a latch-key that he may go\nand come when he pleases. It is to be hoped that he will never when\ntight let this latch-key be stolen by one of the little devils who are\nalways lurking about the haunts of dissipation he frequents; for in that\ncase the consequences might be awful, as can be readily imagined.\n\nAgain it is told that a certain miner, a tough cuss, who could whip his\nweight in wild cats and give points to a grizzle, seemed uncommonly\nmoody and low-spirited one morning, and on being questioned by his chum,\nat length confessed that he was bothered by a very queer dream. \u201cI\ndreamt that I was dead,\u201d he explained; \u201cand a smart spry pretty little\nangel took me up to heaven.\u201d \u201cDreams go by contraries,\u201d suggested the\nchum, by way of comfort. \u201cLet that slide,\u201d answered the dreamer; \u201cthe\npoint isn\u2019t there. Wall, St. Peter wasn\u2019t at the gate, and the angel\ncritter led me on to pay my respects to the boss, and after travelling\nconsiderable we found him as thus. God the Father, God the Son, God the\nHoly Ghost and Peter, all as large as life, were playing a high-toned\ngame of poker, and there was four heavy piles on the table\u2014gold, not\nshinplasters, you bet. I was kinder glad to see that they played poker\nup in heaven, so as to make life there not on-bearable; for it would be\nbut poor fun singing psalms all day; I was never much of a hand at\nsinging, more particularly when the songs is psalms. Wall, we waited,\nnot liking to disturb their game, and I watched the play. I soon found\nthat Jesus Christ was going through the rest, cheating worse than the\nheathen Chinee at euchre; but of course I didn\u2019t say nothing, not being\nin the game. After a while Peter showed that he began to guess it too,\nif he wasn\u2019t quite sure; or p\u2019r\u2019aps he was skeared at up and telling\nChrist to his face. At last, however, what does Christ do, after a bully\nbluff which ran Pete almost to his bottom dollar, but up and show five\naces to Pete\u2019s call; and \u2018What\u2019s that for high?\u2019 says he, quite cool.\n\u2018Now look you, Christ,\u2019 shouts Pete, jumping up as mad as thunder, and\nnot caring a cent or a continental what he said to anybody; \u2018look you,\nChrist, that\u2019s too thin; we don\u2019t want any of your darned miracles\nhere!\u2019 and with that he grabbed up his pile and all his stakes, and went\noff in a mighty huff. Christ looked pretty mean, I tell you, and the\ngame was up. Now you see,\u201d said the dreamer, sadly and thoughtfully,\n\u201cit\u2019s a hard rock to drill and darned poor pay at that, if when you have\na quiet hand at poker up there, the bosses are allowed to cheat and a\nman can\u2019t use his deringer or put a head on \u2019em; I don\u2019t know but I\u2019d\nrather go to the other place on those terms.\u201d Not yet to be read in\nbooks, as I have intimated, but circulating orally, and in versions that\nvary with the various rhapsodists, such are the legends you may hear\nwhen a ring is formed round the hotel-office stove at night, in shanties\nand shebangs of ranchmen and miners, in the shingled offices of judge\nand doctor, in railroad cars and steamboats, or when bumming around the\nstores; whenever and wherever, in short, men are gathered with nothing\nparticular to do. The very _na\u00efvet\u00e9_ of such stories surely testifies to\nthe child-like sincerity of the faith they express and nourish. It is\nthe simple unbounded faith of the Middle Ages, such as we find in the\nold European legends and poems and mysteries, such as your poetess Mrs.\nBrowning well marks in Chaucer.\n\nMany of the so-called liberal clergy complain of the gulf which yawns in\nthis age of materialistic science between religion and every-day life,\nin this world and the things are treated as mere thin abstractions, they\nsay; and only the lower things are recognised as real. These pious\npioneers, in the freshness and wonderfulness of their new life, overleap\nthis gulf without an effort, realising heaven as thoroughly as earth.\nHow could the communion and the human nature of saints be better\nexhibited than in St. Joseph falling into dissipation and St. Peter\nplaying poker? How could the manhood as well as the Godhead of Jesus\nChrist be more familiarly brought home to us than by his taking a hand\nat this game and then miraculously cheating When generations have passed\naway, if not earlier, such next, heaven\n\n    \u201cthe infantine Familiar clasp of things divine.\u201d\n\nThe higher legends as these will assuredly be gathered by earnest and\nreverent students as quite invaluable historical relics. They must fill\nthe Christian soul with delight; they must harrow the heart of him who\nhath said in his heart, There is no God.\n\nIn conclusion, I must again express my deep regret at being forced by\nthe spirit of truth to give you so favorable an account of the state of\nreligion out here, both in creed and practice. I trust that you will\nlose no time and spare no exertion in attacking and, if possible,\nrouting out the Christianity now entrenched in these great natural\nfortresses. Be your war-cry that of the first pioneers, \u201cPike\u2019s Peak or\nbust\u201d; and be not like unto him found teamless half-way across the\nplains, with the confession on his waggon-tilt, \u201cBusted, by thunder.\u201d\nFor you can come right out here by railroad now. As for myself, I\nclimbed wearily and with mortal pantings unto the top of this great\nmountain, thinking it one of the best coigns of vantage whence to\ncommand a comprehensive view of the sphere of my inquiries, and also a\nspot where one might write without being interrupted or overlooked by\nloafers. Unfortunately I have not been able to discover any special\nreligious or irreligious ph\u00e6nomena; for, though the prospect is indeed\nample where not intercepted by clouds or mist, very few of the people\nand still fewer of their characteristics can be made out distinctly even\nwith a good glass. How I am to get down and post this letter puzzles me.\nThe descent will be difficult, dangerous, perhaps deadly. Would that I\nhad not come up. After all there is some truth in the Gospel narrative\nof the Temptation: for by studying the general course of ecclesiastical\npromotion and the characters of the most eminent churchmen, I was long\nsince led to recognise that it is indeed Satan who sets people on\npinnacles of the temple; and I am now moreover thoroughly convinced that\nit is the Devil and the Devil only that takes any one to the top of an\nexceeding high mountain.\n\n\n\n\nTHE STORY OF A FAMOUS OLD JEWISH FIRM\n\n\n(1866.)\n\nMany thousand years ago, when the Jews first started in business, the\nchief of their merchants was a venerable and irascible old gentleman\nnamed Jah. The Jews have always been excellent traders, keen to scent\nwealth, subtle to track it, unweary to pursue it, strong to seize it,\ntenacious to hold it; and the most keen, subtle, untiring, strong,\ntenacious of them all, was this Jah. The patriarchs of his people paid\nhim full measure of the homage which Jews have always eagerly paid to\nwealth and power, and all their most important transactions were carried\nout through him. In those antique times people lived to a very great\nage, and Jah is supposed to have lived so many thousands of years that\none may as well not try to count them. Perhaps it was not one Jah that\nexisted all this while, but the house of Jah: the family, both for pride\nand profit, preserving through successive generations the name of its\nfounder. Certain books have been treasured by the Jews as containing\nexact records of the dealings of this lordly merchant (or house) both\nwith the Jews themselves and with strangers. Many people in our times,\nhowever, have ventured to doubt the accuracy of these records, arguing\nthat some of the transactions therein recorded it would have been\nimpossible to transact, that others must have totally ruined the richest\nof merchants, that the accounts often contradict each other, and that\nthe system of book-keeping generally is quite unworthy of a dealer so\ntruthful and clear-headed as Jah is affirmed to have been. The records\nare so ancient in themselves, and they treat of matters so much more\nancient still, that it is not easy to find other records of any sort\nwith which to check their accounts. Strangely enough the most recent\nresearches have impugned the accuracy of the most ancient of these\nrecords; certain leaves of a volume called the \u201cGreat Stone Book,\u201d\nhaving been brought forward to contradict the very first folio of the\nledger in which the dealings of Jah have been posted up according to the\nJews. It may be that the first few folios, like the early pages of most\nannals, are somewhat mythical; and the present humble compiler (who is\nnot deep in the affairs of the primaeval world, and who, like the late\nlamented Captain Cuttle with his large volume, is utterly knocked up at\nany time by four or five lines of the \u201cGreat Stone Book\u201d) will prudently\nnot begin at the beginning, but skip it with great comfort and pleasure,\nespecially as many and learned men are now earnest students of this\nbeginning. We will, therefore, if you please, take for granted the facts\nthat at some time, in some manner, Jah created his wonderful business,\nand that early in his career he met with a great misfortune, being\ncompelled, by the villainy of all those with whom he had dealings to\nresort to a wholesale liquidation, which left him so poor, that for some\ntime he had not a house in the world, and his establishment was reduced\nto four male and as many female servants.\n\nHe must have pretty well recovered from this severe shock when he\nentered into the famous covenant or contract with Abraham and his heirs,\nby which he bound himself to deliver over to them at a certain, then\ndistant, period, the whole of the valuable landed property called\nCanaan, on condition that they should appoint him the sole agent for the\nmanagement of their affairs. In pursuance of this contract, he conducted\nthat little business of the flocks and herds for Jacob against one\nLaban; and afterwards, when the children of Abraham were grown very\nnumerous, he managed for them that other little affair, by which they\nspoiled the Egyptians of jewels of silver and jewels of gold; and it is\neven asserted that he fed and clothed the family for no less than forty\nyears in a country where the commissariat was a service of extreme\ndifficulty.\n\nAt length the time came when he was to make over to them the Land of\nCanaan, for this purpose evicting the several families then in\npossession thereof. The whole of the covenanted estate he never did make\nover to them, but the Jews freely admit that this was through their own\nfault. They held this land as mortgaged to him, he pledging himself not\nto foreclose while they dealt with him faithfully and fulfilled all the\nconditions of the covenant. They were to pay him ten per cent, per annum\ninterest, with sundry other charges, to put all their affairs into his\nhands, to have no dealings whatsoever with any rival merchants, etc.,\netc. Under this covenant the Jews continued in possession of the fine\nlittle property of Canaan for several hundred years, and they assert\nthat this same Jah lived and conducted his business throughout the whole\nperiod. But, as I have ventured to suggest, the long existence of the\nhouse of Jah may have been the sum total of the lives of a series of\nindividual Jahs. The Jews could not have distinguished the one from the\nother; for it is a strange fact that Jah himself, they admit, was never\nseen. Perhaps he did not affect close contact with Jews. Perhaps he\ncalculated that his power over them would be increased by mystery; this\nis certain, that he kept himself wholly apart from them in his private\noffice, so that no one was admitted even on business. It is indeed\nrelated that one Moses (the witness to the execution of the covenant)\ncaught a glimpse of him from behind, but this glimpse could scarcely\nhave sufficed for identification; and it is said, also, that at certain\nperiods the chief of the priesthood was admitted to consultation with\nhim; but although his voice was then heard, he did not appear in\nperson\u2014only the shadow of him was seen, and everyone will allow that a\nshadow is not the best means of identification. And in further support\nof my humble suggestion it may be noted that in many and important\nrespects the later proceedings attributed to Jah differ extremely in\ncharacter from the earlier; and this difference cannot be explained as\nthe common difference between the youth and maturity and senility of one\nand the same man, for we are expressly assured that Jah was without\nchange\u2014by which we are not to understand that either through\nthoughtlessness or parsimony he never had small cash in his pocket for\nthe minor occasions of life; but that he was stubborn in his will,\nunalterable in his ideas, persistent in his projects and plans.\n\nThe records of his dealings at home with the Jews, and abroad with the\nEgyptians, the Assyrians, the Philistines, the Babylonians, the\nPersians, the Edomites, and other nations, as kept by the Jews\nthemselves, are among the strangest accounts of a large general business\nwhich have ever been put down in black on white. And in nothing are they\nmore strange than in the unsullied candor with which the Jews always\nadmit and proclaim that it was their fault, and by no means the fault of\nJah, whenever the joint business went badly, and narrate against\nthemselves the most astonishing series of frauds and falsehoods, showing\nhow they broke the covenant, and attempted to cheat the other party in\nevery imaginable way, and, in order to ruin his credit, conspired with\nforeign adventurers of the worst character\u2014such as MM. Baal, Ashtaroth,\nand Moloch. Jah, who gave many proofs of a violent and jealous temper,\nand who was wont to sell up other debtors in the most heartless way,\nappears to have been very patient and lenient with these flagitious\nJews. Yet with all his kindness and long-suffering he was again and\nagain forced to put executions into their houses, and throw themselves\ninto prison; and at length, before our year One, having, as it would\nseem, given up all hope of making them deal honestly with him, he had\nput certain strict Romans in possession of the property to enforce his\nmortgage and other rights.\n\nAnd now comes a sudden and wonderful change in the history of this\nmysterious Jah. Whether it was the original Jah, who felt himself too\nold to conduct the immense business alone, or whether it was some\nsuccessor of his, who had not the same self-reliance and imperious will,\none cannot venture to decide; but we all know that it was publicly\nannounced, and soon came to be extensively believed, that Jah had taken\nunto himself two partners, and that the business was thenceforth to be\ncarried on by a firm, under the style of Father, Son, and Co. It is\ncommonly thought that history has more of certainty as it becomes more\nrecent; but unfortunately in the life of Jah, uncertainty grows ten\ntimes more uncertain when we attain the period of this alleged\npartnership, for the Jews deny it altogether; and of those who believe\nin it not one is able to define its character, or even to state its\npossibility in intelligible language. The Jews assert roundly that the\nalleged partners are a couple of vile impostors, that Jah still conducts\nhis world-wide business alone, that he has good reasons (known only to\nhimself) for delaying the exposure of these pretenders; and that,\nhowever sternly he has been dealing with the Jews for a long time past,\nand however little they may seem to have improved so as to deserve\nbetter treatment, he will yet be reconciled to them, and restore them to\npossession of their old land, and exalt them above all their rivals and\nenemies, and of his own free will and absolute pleasure burn and destroy\nevery bond of their indebtedness now in his hands. And in support of\nthese modest expectations they can produce a bundle of documents which\nthey assert to be his promissory notes, undoubtedly for very large\namounts; but which, being carefully examined, turn out to be all framed\non this model: \u201cI, the above-mentioned A. B.\u201d (an obscure or utterly\nunknown Jew, supposed to have lived about three thousand years ago),\n\u201chereby promise in the name of Jah, that the said Jah shall in some\nfuture year unknown, pay unto the house of Israel the following amount,\nthat is to say, etc.\u201d If we ask, Where is the power of attorney\nauthorising this dubious A. B. to promise this amount in the name of\nJah? the Jews retort: \u201cIf you believe in the partnership, you must\nbelieve in such power, for you have accepted all the obligations of the\nold house, and have never refused to discount its paper: if you believe\nneither in Jah nor in the partnership, you are a wretch utterly without\nfaith, a commercial outlaw.\u201d In addition, however, to these remarkable\npromissory notes, the Jews rely upon the fact that Jah, in the midst of\nhis terrible anger, has still preserved some kindness for them. He\nthreatened many pains and penalties upon them for breach of the\ncovenant, and many of these threats he has carried out; but the most\ncruel and horrific of all he has not had the heart to fulfil: they have\nbeen oppressed and crushed, strangers have come into their landed\nproperty, they have been scattered among all peoples, a proverb and a\nby-word of scorn among the nations, their religion has been accursed,\ntheir holy places are defiled, but the crowning woe has been spared them\n(Deut. xxviii., 44); never yet has it come to pass that the stranger\nshould lend to them, and they should not lend to the stranger. There is\nyet balm in Gilead, a rose of beauty in Sharon, and a cedar of majesty\non Lebanon; the Jew still lends to the stranger, and does not borrow\nfrom him, except as he \u201cborrowed\u201d from the Egygtian\u2014and the interest on\nmoney lent is still capable, with judicious treatment, of surpassing the\nnoble standard of \u201cshent per shent.\u201d\n\nAnd even among the Gentiles there are some who believe that Jah is still\nthe sole head of the house, and that the pair who are commonly accounted\njunior partners are in fact only superior servants, the one a sort of\nmanager, the other general superintendent and agent, though Jah may\nallow them a liberal commission on the profits, as well as a fixed\nsalary.\n\n\u2014But the commercial world of Europe, in general, professes to believe\nthat there is a _bona fide_ partnership, and that the three partners\nhave exactly equal authority and interest in the concern; that, in fact,\nthere is such thorough identity in every respect that the three may, and\nought to be, for all purposes of business, considered as one. The second\npartner, they say, is really the son of Jah; though Jah, with that\neccentricity which has ever abundantly characterised his proceedings,\nhad this son brought up as a poor Jewish youth, apparently the child of\na carpenter called Joseph, and his wife Mary. Joseph has little or no\ninfluence with the firm, and we scarcely hear of a transaction done\nthrough him, but Mary has made the most profitable use of her old\n_liaison_ with Jah, and the majority of those who do business with the\nfirm seek her good offices, and pay her very liberal commissions. Those\nwho do not think so highly of her influence, deal with the house chiefly\nthrough the son, and thus it has come to pass that poor Jah is virtually\nousted from his own business. He and the third partner are little more\nthan sleeping partners, while his mistress and her son manage every\naffair of importance.\n\nThis state of things seems somewhat unfair to Jah; yet one must own that\nthere are good reasons for it. Jah was a most haughty and humorous\ngentleman, extremely difficult to deal with, liable to sudden fits of\nrage, wherein he maltreated friends and foes alike, implacable when once\noffended, a desperately sharp shaver in the bargain, a terrible fellow\nfor going to law. The son was a much more kindly personage, very affable\nand pleasant in conversation, willing and eager to do a favor to any\none, liberal in promises even beyond his powers of performance, fond of\nstrangers, and good to the poor; and his mother, with or without reason,\nis credited with a similar character. Moreover, Jah always kept himself\ninvisible, while the son and mother were possibly seen, during some\nyears, by a large number of persons; and among those who have never seen\nthem their portraits are almost as popular as photographs of the Prince\nand Princess of Wales.\n\nWith the real or pretended establishment of the Firm, a great change\ntook place in the business of Jah. This business had been chiefly with\nthe Jews, and even when it extended to foreign transactions, these were\nall subordinate to the Jewish trade. But the Firm lost no time in\nproclaiming that it would deal with the whole world on equal terms: no\nwonder the Jews abhor the alleged partners! And the nature of the\ncontracts, the principal articles of trade, the mode of keeping the\naccounts, the commission and interest charged and allowed, the salaries\nof the agents and clerks, the advantages offered to clients, were all\nchanged too. The head establishment was removed from Jerusalem to Rome,\nand branch establishments were gradually opened in nearly all the towns\nand villages of Europe, besides many in Asia and Africa, and afterwards\nin America and Australia. It is worth noting that in Asia and Africa\n(although the firm arose in the former) the business has never been\ncarried on very successfully; Messrs. Brahma, Vishnu, Seeva, and Co.,\nthe great houses of Buddha and Mumbo Jumbo, various Parsee firms, and\nother opposition houses, having among them almost monopolised the trade.\n\nThe novel, distinctive, and most useful article which the Firm engaged\nto supply was a bread called _par excellence_ the Bread of Life. The\nProspectus (which was first drafted, apparently in perfect good faith,\nby the Son; but which has since been so altered and expanded by\nsuccessive agents that we cannot learn what the original, no longer\nextant, exactly stated) sets forth that the House of Jah, Son and Co.\nhas sole possession of the districts yielding the corn whereof this\nbread is made, the sole patents of the mills for grinding and ovens for\nbaking, and that it alone has the secret of the proper process for\nkneading. The Firm admits that many other houses have pretended to\nsupply this invaluable bread, but accuses them all of imposture or\npoisonous adulteration. For itself, it commands the genuine supply in\nsuch quantities that it can under take to feed the whole world, and at\nso cheap a rate that the poorest will be able to purchase as much as he\nneeds; and, moreover, as the firm differs essentially from all other\nfirms in having no object in view save the benefit of its customers, the\npartners being already so rich that no profits could add to their\nwealth, it will supply the bread for mere love to those who have not\nmoney!\n\nThis fair and beautiful prospectus, you will easily believe, brought\nvast multitudes eager to deal with the firm, and especially large\nmultitudes of the poor, ravished with the announcement that love should\nbe henceforth current coin of the realm; and the business spread\namazingly. But at the very outset a sad mischance occurred. The Son, by\nfar the best of the partners, was suddenly seized and murdered and\nburied by certain agents of the old Jewish business (furious at the\nprospect of losing all their rich trade), with the connivance of the\nRoman installed as inspector. At least, these wretches thought they had\nmurdered the poor man, and it is admitted on every side that they buried\nhim: but the dependants of the Firm have a strange story that he was not\nreally killed, but arose out of his tomb after lying there for three\ndays, and slipped away to keep company with his father, the invisible\nJah, in his exceedingly private office; and they assert that he is still\nalive along with Jah, mollifying the old man when he gets into one of\nhis furious passions, pleading for insolvent debtors, and in all things\nby act and counsel doing good for all the clients of the house. They,\nmoreover, assert that the third partner, who as the consoling substitute\nfor the absent Son is commonly called the Comforter, and who is very\nenergetic, though mysteriously invisible in his operations, superintends\nall the details of the business in every one of the establishments. But\nthis third partner is so difficult to catch, that, as stated before, the\nmajority of the customers deal with the venerable mother, as the most\naccessible and humane personage belonging to the house.\n\nDespite the death or disappearance of the Son, the firm prospered for a\nconsiderable time. After severe competition, in which neither side\nshowed itself very scrupulous, the great firm of Jupiter and Co., the\nold Greek house, which had been strengthened by the amalgamation of the\nwealthiest Roman firms, was utterly beaten from the field, sold up and\nextinguished. In the sale of the effects many of the properties in most\ndemand were bought in by the new firm, which also took many of the\nclerks and agents into its employment, and it is even said adopted in\nseveral important respects the mode of carrying on business and the\nsystem of book-keeping. But while the firm was thus conquering its most\nformidable competitor, innumerable dissensions were arising between its\nown branch establishments; every one accusing every other of dealing on\nprinciples quite hostile to the regulations instituted by the head of\nthe house, of falsifying the accounts, and of selling an article which\nwas anything but the genuine unadulterated bread. There were also\ninterminable quarrels among them as to relative rank and importance.\n\nAnd whether the wheat, as delivered to the various establishments, was\nor was not the genuine article which the firm had contracted to supply,\nit was soon discovered that it issued from the licensed shops\nadulterated in the most audacious manner. And, although the prospectus\nhad stated most positively that the bread should be delivered to the\npoor customers of the firm without money and without price (and such\nseems really to have been the good Son\u2019s intention), it was found, in\nfact, that the loaves, when they reached the consumer, were at least as\ncostly as ever loaves of any kind of bread had been. It mattered little\nthat the wheat was not reckoned in the price, when agents\u2019,\ncommissioners\u2019, messengers\u2019 fees, bakers\u2019 charges, and a hundred items,\nmade the price total so enormous. When, at length, the business was\nflourishing all over Europe, it was the most bewildering confusion of\ncontradictions that, perhaps, was ever known in the commercial world.\nFor in all the establishments the agents professed and very solemnly\nswore that they dealt on principles opposed and infinitely superior to\nthe old principles of trade; yet their proceedings (save that they\nchristened old things with new names) were identical with those which\nhad brought to shameful ruin the most villainous old firms. The\nsub-managers, who were specially ordered to remain poor while in the\nbusiness, and for obedience were promised the most splendid pensions\nwhen superannuated, all became rich as princes by their exactions from\nthe clients of the house; the agents, who were especially commanded to\nkeep the peace, were ever stirring up quarrels and fighting ferociously,\nnot only with opposition agents but with one another. The accounts,\nwhich were to be regulated by the most honest and simple rules, were\ncomplicated in a lawless system, which no man could understand, and\nfalsified to incredible amounts, to the loss of the customers, without\nbeing to the gain of the firm. In brief, each establishment was like one\nof those Chinese shops where the most beautiful and noble maxims of\njustice and generosity are painted in gilt letters outside, while the\nmost unblushing fraud and extortion are practised inside. When poor\ncustomers complained of these things, they were told that the system was\nperfect, that the evils were all from the evil men who conducted the\nbusiness! but the good people did not further explain how the perfection\nof the system could ever be realised, since it must always be worked by\nimperfect men. Complainants thus mildly and vaguely answered were very\nfortunate; others, in places where the firm was very powerful, were\nanswered by imprisonment or false accusations, or by being pelted and\neven murdered by mobs. Many who thought the bread badly baked were\nthemselves thrust into the fire.\n\nYet so intense is the need of poor men for some bread of life, so\nwilling are simple men to believe fair promises, that, in spite of the\nmonstrous injustice and falsehood and cruelty and licentiousness of the\nmanagers and submanagers and agents of the firm, the business continued\nto flourish, and all the wealth of Europe flowed into its coffers. And\ngenerations passed ere some persons bethought them to think seriously of\nthe original Deed of Partnership and the fundamental principles of the\nFirm. These documents, which had been carefully confined in certain old\ndead languages which few of the customers could read, were translated\ninto vulgar tongues, which all could read or understand when read, and\neveryone began studying them for himself. This thinking of essentials,\nwhich is so rare a thought among mankind, has already produced\nremarkable effects, ana promises to produce effects yet more remarkable\nin a short time.\n\nBehold a few of the questions which this study of the first documents\nhas raised.\u2014The Father, whom no one has seen, is there indeed such a\npersonage? The Son, whom certainly no one has seen for eighteen hundred\nyears, did he really come to life again after being brutally murdered?\nThe junior partner, whom no one has ever seen, the Comforter, is he a\ncomforter made of the wool of a sheep that never was fleeced? The\nbusiness, as we see it, merely uses the names, and would be precisely\nthe same business if these names covered no personages. Do the managers\nand submanagers really carry it on for their own profit, using these\nhigh names to give dignity to their rascality, and to make poor people\nbelieve that they have unbounded capital at their back? One is punished\nfor defamation of character if he denies the existence of the partners,\nyet not the very chief of all the managers pretends to have seen any of\nthe three!\n\nAnd the vaunted Bread of Life, wherein does it differ from the old\ncorn-of-Ceres bread, from the baking of the wheat of Mother Hertha?\nChiefly in this, that it creates much more wind on the stomach. It is\nnot more wholesome, nor more nourishing, and certainly not more cheap:\nand it does us little good to be told that it would be if the accredited\nagents were honest and supplied it pure, when we are told, at the same\ntime, that we must get it through these agents. It is indeed affirmed\nthat, in an utterly unknown region beyond the Black Sea, the genuine\nwheat may be seen growing by any one who discovers the place; but, as no\none who ever crossed the sea on a voyage of discovery ever returned, the\nassertion rests on the bare word of people who have never seen the\ncorn-land any more than they have seen the partners of the firm; and\ntheir word is bare indeed, for it has been stripped to shame in a\nthousand affairs wherein it could be brought to the test. They tell us\nalso that we shall all in time cross the Black Sea, and if we have been\ngood customers shall dwell evermore in that delightful land, with\nunlimited supplies of the bread gratis. This may be true, but how do\nthey know? It may be true that in the sea we shall all get drowned for\never.\n\nThese and similar doubts which, in many minds, have hardened into\npositive disbelief, are beginning to affect seriously the trade of the\nfirm. But its interests are now so inextricably bound up with the\ninterests of thousands and millions of well-to-do and respectable\npeople, and on its solvency or apparent solvency depends that of so\nlarge a number of esteemed merchants, that we may expect the most\ndesperate struggles to postpone its final bankruptcy. In the great Roman\nestablishment the manager has been supported for many years by\ncharitable contributions from every one whom he could persuade to give\nor lend, and now he wants to borrow much more. The superintendent of the\nshops in London is in these days begging for ten hundred thousand pounds\nto assist the poor firm in its difficulties.\n\nIt seems a good sum of money; but, bless you, it is but a drop in the\nsea compared with what the business has already absorbed, and is still\nabsorbing. Scattered shops in the most distant countries have only been\nsustained for many years by alms from customers here. The barbarians\nwon\u2019t eat the bread, but the bakers sent out must have their salaries. A\nmillion of pounds are being begged here; and people (who would prosecute\na mendicant of halfpence) will give it no doubt! Yet, O worthy manager\nof the London Shops, one proved loaf of the real Bread would be\ninfinitely more valuable, and would infinitely more benefit your firm!\nThe villainy of the agents was monstrous, generation after generation,\nthe cost of that which was promised without money and without price was\nruinous for centuries; but not all the villainy and extortion multiplied\na hundredfold could drive away the poor hungry customers while they had\nfaith in the genuineness of the bread. It was the emptiness and the wind\non the stomach after much eating, which raised the fatal doubts as to\nthe _bona fides_ of the whole concern. The great English managers had\nbetter ponder this; for at present they grope in the dark delusion that\nmore and better bakers salaried with alms, and new shops opened with\neleemosynary funds will bring customers to buy their bran cakes as\nwheaten loaves. A very dark delusion, indeed! If the pure promised bread\ncannot be supplied, no amount of money will keep the business going very\nlong. Consider what millions on millions of pounds have been subscribed\nalready, what royal revenues are pouring in still; all meant for\ninvestment in wholesome and nourishing food, but nearly all realised in\nhunger and emptiness, heartburn and flatulence. The old Roman shrewdly\ncalculated that the House of Olympus would prove miserably insolvent if\nits affairs were wound up, if it tried honestly to pay back all the\ndeposits of its customers. As for this more modern firm, one suspects\nthat, in like case, it would prove so insolvent that it could not pay a\nfarthing in the pound. For Olympus was a house that dealt largely in\ncommon worldly goods, and of these things really did give a considerable\nquantity to its clients for their money; but the new firm professed to\nsell things infinitely more valuable, and of these it cannot prove the\ndelivery of a single parcel during the eighteen hundred years it has\nbeen receiving purchase-money unlimited.\n\nThe humble compiler of this rapid and imperfect summary ought, perhaps,\nto give his own opinion of the firm and the partners, although he\nsuffers under the disadvantage of caring very little for the business,\nand thinks that far too much time is wasted by both the friends and the\nenemies of the house in investigation of every line and figure in its\nbooks. He believes that Jah, the grand Jewish dealer, was a succession\nof several distinct personages; and will probably continue to believe\nthus until he learns that there was but one Pharaoh King of Egypt, but\none Bourbon King of France, and that the House of Rothschild has always\nbeen one and the same man. He believes that the Son was by no means the\nchild of the Father, that he was a much better character than the\nFather, that he was really and truly murdered, that his prospectus and\nbusiness plans were very much more wise and honest and good than the\nprospectus as we have it now, and the system as it has actually been\nworked. He believes that the Comforter has really had a share in this as\nin every other business not wholly bad in the world, that he has never\nidentified his interests with those of any firm, that specially he never\ncommitted himself to a partnership of unlimited liability with the\nHebrew Jah, that he undoubtedly had extensive dealings with the Son, and\nplaced implicit confidence in him while a living man, and that he will\ncontinue to deal profitably and bountifully with men long after the firm\nhas become bankrupt and extinct. He believes that the corn of the true\nbread of life is sown and grown, reaped, ground, kneaded, baked and\neaten on this side of the Black Sea. He believes that no firm or company\nwhatever, with limited or unlimited liability, has the monopoly for the\npurveyance of this bread, that no charters can confer such monopoly,\nthat the bread is only to be got pure by each individual for himself,\nand that no two individuals of judgment really like it prepared in\nexactly the same fashion, but that unfortunately (as his experience\ncompels him to believe) the bulk of mankind will always in the future no\nless than in the past persist in endeavoring to procure it through great\nchartered companies, finally, he believes that the worthy chief baker in\nLondon with his million of money is extremely like the worthy Mrs.\nPartington with her mop against the Atlantic.\n\n\n\n\nCHRISTMAS EVE IN THE UPPER CIRCLES\n\n\n(1866.)\n\nPoor dear God sat alone in his private chamber, moody, melancholy,\nmiserable, sulky, sullen, weary, dejected, supenally hipped. It was the\nevening of Sunday, the 24th of December, 1865. Waters continually\ndripping wear away the hardest stone; year falling after year will at\nlength overcome the strongest god: an oak-tree outlasts many generations\nof men; a mountain or a river outlasts many celestial dynasties. A cold\nlike a thick fog in his head, rheum in his eyes, and rheumatism in his\nlimbs and shoulders, his back bent, his chin peaked, his poll bald, his\nteeth decayed, his body all shivering, his brain all muddle, his heart\nall black care; no wonder the old gentleman looked poorly as he cowered\nthere, dolefully sipping his Lachryma Christi. \u201cI wish the other party\nwould lend me some of his fire,\u201d he muttered, \u201cfor it is horribly frigid\nup here.\u201d The table was crowded and the floor littered with books and\ndocuments, all most unreadable reading: missionary reports,\ncontroversial divinity, bishops\u2019 charges, religious periodicals, papal\nallocutions and encyclical letters, minutes of Exeter Hall meetings,\nponderous blue books from the angelic bureaux\u2014dreary as the humor of\n_Punch_, silly as the critiques of the _Times_, idiotic as the poetry of\n_All the Year Round_. When now and then he eyed them askance he\nshuddered more shockingly, and looked at his desk with loathing despair.\nFor he had gone through a hard day\u2019s work, with extra services\nappropriate to the sacred season; and for the ten-thousandth time he had\nbeen utterly knocked up and bewildered by the Athanasian Creed.\n\nWhile he sat thus, came a formal tap at the door, and his son entered,\nlooking sublimely good and respectable, pensive with a pensiveness on\nwhich one grows comfortably fat. \u201cAh, my boy,\u201d said the old gentleman,\n\u201cyou seem to get on well enough in these sad times: come to ask my\nblessing for your birthday _f\u00eate_?\u201d \u201cI fear that you are not well, my\ndear father; do not give way to dejection, there was once a man\u2014\n\n\u201cO, dash your parables! keep them for your disciples; they are not too\namusing. Alack for the good old times!\u201d \u201cThe wicked old times you mean,\nmy father; the times when we were poor, and scorned, and oppressed; the\ntimes when heathenism and vain philosophy ruled everywhere in the world.\nNow, all civilised realms are subject to us, and worship us.\u201d \u201cAnd\ndisobey us. You are very wise, much wiser than your old worn-out father;\nyet perchance a truth or two comes to me in solitude, when it can\u2019t\nreach you through the press of your saints, and the noise of your\neverlasting preaching and singing and glorification. You know how I\nbegan life, the petty chief of a villainous tribe. But I was passionate\nand ambitious, subtle and strong-willed, and, in spite of itself, I made\nmy tribe a nation; and I fought desperately against all the surrounding\nchiefs, and with pith of arm and wile of brain I managed to keep my head\nabove water. But I lived all alone, a stern and solitary existence. None\nother of the gods was so friendless as I; and it is hard to live alone\nwhen memory is a sea of blood. I hated and despised the Greek Zeus and\nhis shameless court; yet I could not but envy him, for a joyous life the\nrogue led. So I, like an old fool, must have my amour; and a pretty\nintrigue I got into with the prim damsel Mary! Then a great thought\narose in me: men cannot be loyal to utter aliens; their gods must be\nhuman on one side, divine on the other; my own people were always\ndeserting me to pay homage to bastard deities. I would adopt you as my\nown son (between ourselves, I have never been sure of the paternity),\nand admit you to a share in the government. Those infernal Jews killed\nyou, but the son of a God could not die; you came up hither to dwell\nwith me; I the old absolute king, you the modern tribune of the people.\nHere you have been ever since; and I don\u2019t mind telling you that you\nwere a much more loveable character below there as the man Jesus than\nyou have proved above here as the Lord Christ. As some one was needed on\nearth to superintend the executive, we created the Comforter, prince\nroyal and plenipotentiary; and behold us a divine triumvirate! The new\nblood was, I must own, beneficial. We lost Jerusalem, but we won Rome;\nJove, Neptune, Apollo, Bacchus, and the rest, were conquered and slain;\nour leader of the opposition ejected Pluto and Pan. Only I did not\nbargain that my mistress should more than succeed to Juno, who was, at\nany rate, a lawful wife. You announced that our empire was peace; you\nannounced likewise that it was war; both have served us. Our power\nextended, our glory rose; the chief of a miserable tribe has become\nemperor of Europe. But our empire was to be the whole world; yet instead\nof signs of more dominion, I see signs that what we have is falling to\npieces. From my youth up I have been a man of war; and now that I am old\nand weary and wealthy, and want peace, peace flies from me. Have we not\nshed enough blood? Have we not caused enough tears? Have we not kindled\nenough fires? And in my empire what am I? Yourself and my mistress share\nall the power between you; I am but a name at the head of our\nproclamations. I have been a man of war, I am setting old and worn out,\nevil days are at hand, and I have never enjoyed life; therefore is my\nsoul vexed within me. And my own subjects are as strangers. Your darling\nsaints I cannot bear. The whimpering, simpering, canting, chanting\nblockheads! You were always happy in a pious miserableness, and you do\nnot foresee the end. Do you know that in spite of our vast possessions\nwe are as near bankruptcy as Spain or Austria? Do you know that our\ninnumerable armies are a Chinese rabble of cowards and traitors? Do you\nknow that our legitimacy (even if yours were certain) will soon avail us\nas little as that of the Bourbons has availed them? Of these things you\nare ignorant: you are so deafened with shouts and songs in your own\npraise that you never catch a whisper of doom. I would not quail if I\nhad youth to cope with circumstance; none can say honestly that I ever\nfeared a foe; but I am so weak that often I could not walk without\nleaning on you. Why did I draw out my life to this ignominious end? Why\ndid I not fall fighting like the enemies I overcame? Why the devil did\nyou get born at all, and then murdered by those rascally Jews, that I\nwho was a warrior should turn into a snivelling saint? The heroes of\nAsgard have sunk into a deeper twilight than they foresaw; but their\nsunset, fervent and crimson with blood and with wine, made splendid that\ndawnless gloaming. The joyous Olympians have perished, but they all had\nlived and loved. For me, I have subsisted and hated. What of time is\nleft to me I will spend in another fashion. Let us eat and drink, for\nto-morrow we die.\u201d And he swallowed hastily a bumper of the wine, which\nthrew him into convulsions of coughing.\n\nSerene and superior the son had let the old man run on. \u201cDo not, I\nentreat you, take to drink in your old age, dear father. You say that\nour enemies lived and loved; but think how unworthy of divine rulers was\ntheir mode of life, how immoral, how imprudent, how disreputable, how\nsavage, how lustful, how un-Chris-tian! What a bad example for poor\nhuman souls!\u201d \u201cHuman souls be blessed! Are they so much improved now?...\nWould that at least I had conserved Jove\u2019s barmaid; the prettiest,\npleasantest girl they say (we know you are a Joseph, though you always\nhad three or four women dangling about you); fair-ankled was the wench,\nbright-limbed; she might be unto me even as was Abishag, the Shunammite,\nunto my old friend David.\u201d \u201cLet us speak seriously, my father, of the\ngreat celebration to-morrow.\u201d \u201cAnd suppose I _am_ speaking very\nseriously, you solemn prig; not a drop of my blood is there in you.\u201d\n\nHere came a hurried knocking at the door, and the angelic ministers of\nstate crawled in, with super-elaborate oriental cringings, to deliver\ntheir daily reports. \u201cMessages from Brahma, Ormuzd, etc., to\ncongratulate on the son\u2019s birthday.\u201d \u201cThe infidels! the mockers!\u201d\nmuttered the son. \u201cGood words,\u201d said the father; \u201cthey belong to older\nfamilies than ours, my lad, and were once much more powerful. You are\nalways trying to win over the parvenus.\u201d \u201cA riot in the holy city. The\nblack angels organised to look after the souls of converted negroes\nhaving a free fight with some of the white ones. My poor lambs!\u201d sighed\nthe son. \u201cBlack sheep,\u201d growled the father; \u201cwhat is the row?\u201d \u201cThey\nhave plumed themselves brighter than peacocks, and scream louder than\nparrots; claim precedence over the angels of the mean whites; insist on\nhaving some of their own hymns and tunes in the programme of to-morrow\u2019s\nconcert.\u201d \u201cLock\u2019em all up, white and black, especially the black, till\nTuesday morning; they can fight it out then\u2014it\u2019s Boxing Day. Well have\nquite enough noise to-morrow without \u2019em. Never understood the nigger\nquestion, for my part: was a slave-holder myself, and cursed Ham as much\nas pork.\u201d \u201cNew saints grumbling about lack of civilised accommodation:\nwant underground railways, steamers for the crystal sea, telegraph wires\nto every mansion, morning and evening newspapers, etc., etc,; have had a\npublic meeting with a Yankee saint in the chair, and resolved that\nheaven is altogether behind the age.\u201d \u201cConfound it, my son, have I not\ncharged you again and again to get some saints of ability up here? For\nyears past every batch has been full of good-for-nothing noodles. Have\nwe no engineers, no editors at all.\u201d \u201cOne or two engineers, we believe,\nsire, but we can\u2019t find a single editor.\u201d \u201cGive one of the _Record_\nfellows the measles, and an old _l\u2019Univers_ hand the cholera, and bring\nthem up into glory at once, and we\u2019ll have two daily papers. And while\nyou are about it, see whether you can discover three or four pious\nengineers\u2014not muffs, mind\u2014and blow them up hither with their own\nboilers, or in any other handy way. Haste, haste, post haste!\u201d\n\u201cDeplorable catastrophe in the temple of the New Jerusalem: a large part\nof the foundation given way, main wall fallen, several hundred workmen\nbruised.\u201d \u201cStop that fellow who just left; countermand the measles, the\ncholera will be enough; we will only have one journal, and that must be\nstrictly official. If we have two, one will be opposition. Hush up the\naccident. It is strange that Pandemonium was built so much better and\nmore quickly than our New Jerusalem!\u201d \u201cAll our best architects and other\nartists have deserted into Elysium, my lord; so fond of the company of\nthe old Greeks.\u201d\n\nWhen these and many other sad reports had been heard, and the various\nministers and secretaries savagely dismissed, the father turned to the\nson and said: \u201cDid I not tell you of the evil state we are in?\u201d \u201cBy hope\nand faith and charity, and the sublime doctrine of self-renunciation,\nall will yet come right, my father.\u201d \u201cHumph! let hope fill my treasury,\nand faith finish the New Jerusalem, and charity give us peace and\nquietness, and self-renunciation lead three-quarters of your new-fangled\nsaints out of heaven; and then I shall look to have a little comfort.\u201d\n\u201cWill you settle to-morrow\u2019s programme, sire? or shall I do my best to\nspare you the trouble?\u201d \u201cYou do your best to spare me the trouble of\nreigning altogether, I think. What programme can there be but the old\nrehearsal for the eternal life (I wish you may get it)? O, that horrible\nslippery sea of glass, that bedevilled throne vomiting thunders and\nlightning, those stupid senile elders in white nightgowns, those four\nhideous beasts full of eyes, that impossible lamb with seven horns and\none eye to each horn! O, the terrific shoutings and harpings and\nstifling incense! A pretty set-out for my time of life I And to think\nthat you hope some time or other to begin this sort of thing as a daily\namusement, and to carry it on for ever and ever! Not much appearance of\nits beginning soon, thank goodness\u2014that is to say,, thank badness. Why\ncan\u2019t you have a play of Aristophanes, or Shakespeare, or Moli\u00e8re? Why\nshould I meddle with the programme? I had nothing to do with first\nframing it. Besides, it is all in your honor, not in mine. You like\nplaying the part of the Lamb; I\u2019m much more like an old wolf. You are\nravished when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks; as for me,\nI am utterly sick of them. Behold what I will do; I must countenance the\naffair, but I can do so without disturbing myself. I\u2019ll not go\nthundering and roaring in my state-carriage of the whirlwind; I\u2019ll slip\nthere in a quiet cloud. You can\u2019t do without my glory, but it really is\ntoo heavy for my aged shoulders; you may lay it upon the throne; it will\nlook just as well. As for my speech, here it is all ready written out;\nlet Mercury, I mean Raphael or Uriel, read it; I can\u2019t speak plainly\nsince I lost so many teeth. And now I consider the matter, what need is\nthere for my actual presence at all? Have me there in effigy; a noble\nand handsome dummy can wear the glory with grace* Mind you have a\nhandsome one; I wish all the artists had not deserted us. Your pious\nfellows make sad work of us, my son. But then their usual models are so\nugly; your saints have good reason to speak of their vile bodies. How is\nit that all the pretty girls slip away to the other place, poor\ndarlings? By the bye, who are going on this occasion to represent the\ntwelve times twelve thousand of the tribes of Israel? Is the boy Mortara\ndead yet? He will make one real Jew.\u201d \u201cWe are converting them, sire.\u201d\n\u201cNot the whole gross of thousands yet, I trust? Faugh! what a greasy\nstench there would be\u2014what a blazing of Jew jewelry!\n\n\u201cHand me the latest bluebook, with the reports....\n\n\u201cAh, I see; great success! Power of the Lord Christ! (always you, of\ncourse). Society flourishing. Eighty-two thousand pounds four shillings\nand twopence three-farthings last year from Christians aroused to the\nclaims of the lost sheep of the House of Israel. (Very good.) Five\nconversions!! Three others have already been persuaded to eat pork\nsausages. (Better and better.) One, who drank most fervently of the\ncommunion wine suffered himself to be treated to an oyster supper.\nAnother, being greatly moved, was heard to ejaculate, \u2018O, Christ!\u2019...\nHum, who are the five? Moses Isaacs: wasn\u2019t he a Christian ten years ago\nin Italy, and afterwards a Mahommedan in Salonica, and afterwards a Jew\nin Marseilles? This Mussulman is your oyster-man, I presume? You will\nsoon get the one hundred and forty-four thousand at this rate, my son!\nand cheap too!\u201d\n\nHe chuckled, and poured out another glass of Lachryma Christi; drank it,\nmade a wry face, and then began coughing furiously. \u201cPoor drink this for\na god in his old age. Odin and Jupiter fared better. Though decent for a\nhuman tipple, for a divinity it is but _ambrosie stygiale_, as my dear\nold favorite chaplain would call it. I have his devotional works under\nlock and key there in my desk. _Apropos_, where is he? Left us again for\na scurry through the more jovial regions? I have not seen him for a long\ntime.\u201d \u201cMy father! really, the words he used, the life he led; so\ncorrupting for the young saints! We were forced to invite him to travel\na little for the benefit of his health. The court _must_ be kept pure,\nyou know.\u201d \u201cSend for him instantly, sir. He is out of favor because he\nlikes the old man and laughs at your saints, because he can\u2019t cant and\nloves to humbug the humbugs. Many a fit of the blues has he cured for\nme, while you only make them bluer. Have him fetched at once. O, I know\nyou never liked him; you always thought him laughing at your sweet pale\nface and woebegone airs, laughing \u2018_en horrible sarcasm et sanglante\nderision_\u2019 (what a style the rogue has! what makes that of your favorite\nparsons and holy ones so flaccid and flabby and hectic?) \u2018Physician,\nheal thyself!\u2019 So, in plain words, you have banished him; the only jolly\nsoul left amongst us, my pearl and diamond and red ruby of Chaplains,\nabstracter of the quintessence of pantagruelism! The words he used! I\nmusn\u2019t speak freely myself now, and the old books I wrote are a great\ndeal too coarse for you Michael and Gabriel told me the other day that\nthey had just been severely lectured on the earnestness of life by one\nof your new _prot\u00e9g\u00e9s_; they had to kick him howling into limbo. A fine\nset of solemn prigs we are getting!\u201d \u201cMy father, the holiness of sorrow,\nthe infiniteness of suffering!\u201d \u201cYes, yes, I know all about it. That\nlong-winded poet of yours (he does an ode for you to-morrow?) began to\nsermonise me thereon. By Jupiter, he wanted to arouse me to a sense of\nmy inner being and responsibilities and so forth. I very soon packed him\noff to the infant school where he teaches the alphabet and catechism to\nthe babies and sucklings. Have you sent for my jovial, joyous, jolly\nCur\u00e9 of Meudon?\u201d \u201cI have; but I deeply regret that your Majesty thinks\nit fitting to be intimate with such a free-liver, such a glutton and\nwine-bibber and mocker and buffoon.\u201d \u201cBah! you patronised the publicans\nand sinners yourself in your younger and better days. The strict ones\nblamed you for going about eating and drinking so much. I hear that some\nof your newest favorites object to the wine in your last supper, and are\ngoing to insist on vinegar-and-water in future.\u201d\n\nWhereupon entered a man of a noble and courtly presence, lively-eyed and\ngolden bearded, ruddy complexioned, clear-browed, thoughtful, yet\njoyous, serene and unabashed. \u201cWelcome, thrice welcome, my beloved\nAlcofribas!\u201d cried the old monarch; \u201cvery long is it since last I saw\nyou.\u201d \u201cI have been exiled since then, your Majesty.\u201d \u201cAnd I knew nothing\nof it!\u201d \u201cAnd thought nothing of it or of me until you wanted me. No one\nexpects the King to have knowledge of what is passing under his eyes.\u201d\n\u201cAnd how did you manage to exist in exile, my poor chaplain?\u201d \u201cMuch\nbetter than here at court, sire. If your Majesty wants a little\npleasure, I advise you to get banished yourself. Your parasites and\nsycophants and courtiers are a most morose, miserable, ugly, detestable,\nintolerable swarm of blind beetles and wasps; the devils are beyond\ncomparison better company.\u201d \u201cWhat! you have been mixing with traitors?\u201d\n\u201cOh, I spent a few years in Elysium, but didn\u2019t this time go into the\nlower circles. But while I sojourned as a country gentleman on the\nheavenly borders, I met a few contrabandists. I need not tell you that\nlarge, yea, enormous quantities of beatitude are smuggled out of your\ndominions.\u201d \u201cBut what is smuggled in?\u201d \u201cSire, I am not an informer; I\nnever received anything out of the secret-service money. The poor angels\nare glad to run a venture at odd times, to relieve the tedium of\neverlasting Te Deum. By the bye, I saw _the_ Devil himself.\u201d \u201cThe Devil\nin my kingdom! What is Uriel about? he\u2019ll have to be superannuated.\u201d\n\u201cBah! your Majesty knows very well that Satan comes in and returns as\nand when he likes. The passport system never stops the really dangerous\nfellows. When he honored me with a call he looked the demurest young\nsaint, and I laughed till I got the lockjaw at his earnest and spiritual\ndiscourse. He would have taken yourself in, much more Uriel. You really\nought to get him on the list of court chaplains. He and I were always\ngood friends, so if anything happens.... It may be well for you if you\ncan disguise yourself as cleverly as he. A revolution is not quite\nimpossible, you know.\u201d The Son threw up his hands in pious horror; the\nold King, in one of his spasms of rage, hurled the blue-book at the\nspeaker\u2019s head, which it missed, but knocked down and broke his favorite\ncrucifix. \u201cJewcy fiction _versus_ crucifixion, sire; _magna est veritas\net prevalebit!_ Thank Heaven, all that folly is _out*side my brains; it\nis not the first book full of cant and lies and stupidity that has been\nflung at me. Why did you not let me finish? The Devil is no fonder than\nyour sacred self of the new opinions; in spite of the proverb, he loves\nand dotes upon holy water. If you cease to be head of the ministry, he\nceases to be head of the opposition; he wouldn\u2019t mind a change, an\ninnings for him and an outings for you; but these latest radicals want\nto crush both Whigs and Tories. He was on his way to confer with some of\nyour Privy Council, to organise joint action for the suppression of new\nideas. You had better be frank and friendly with him. Public opposition\nand private amity are perfectly consistent and praiseworthy. He has done\nyou good service before now; and you and your Son have always been of\nthe greatest assistance to him.\u201d \u201cBy the temptation of Job! I must see\nto it. And now no more business. I am hipped, my Rabelais; we must have\na spree. The cestus of Venus, the lute of Apollo, we never could find;\nbut there was sweeter loot in the sack of Olympus, and our cellars are\nnot yet quite empty. We will have a *petit souper_ of ambrosia and\nnectar.\u201d \u201cMy father! my father! did you not sign the pledge to abstain\nfrom these heathen stimulants?\u201d \u201cMy beloved Son, with whom I am not at\nall well pleased, go and swill water till you get the dropsy, and permit\nme to do as I like. No wonder people think that I am failing when my\nchild and my mistress rule for me!\u201d\n\nThe Son went out, shaking his head, beating his breast, scrubbing his\neyes, wringing his hands, sobbing and murmuring piteously. \u201cThe poor old\nGod! my dear old father! Ah, how he is breaking! Alack, he will not last\nlong! Verily, his wits are leaving him! Many misfortunes and disasters\nwould be spared us were he to abdicate prudently at once. Or a regency\nmight do. But the evil speakers and slanderers would say that I am\nambitious. I must get the matter judiciously insinuated to the Privy\nCouncil. Alack! alack!\u201d\n\n\u201cLet him go and try on his suit of lamb\u2019s wool for to-morrow,\u201d said the\nold monarch. \u201cI have got out of the rehearsal, my friend; I shall be\nconspicuous by my absence; there will be a dummy in my stead.\u201d \u201cRather\nperilous innovation, my Lord; the people may think that the dummy does\njust as well, that there is no need to support the original.\u201d \u201cShut up,\nshut up, O, my Cur\u00e9; no more politics, confound our politics! It is\nSunday, so we must have none but chaplains here. You may fetch Friar\nJohn and sweet Dean Swift and the amiable parson Sterne, and any other\ngodly and devout and spiritual ministers you can lay hold of; but don\u2019t\nbring more than a pleiad.\u201d \u201cWith Swift for the lost one; he is cooling\nhis \u2018s\u00e6va indignatio\u2019 in the Devil\u2019s kitchen-furnace just now,\ncomforting poor Addison, who hasn\u2019t got quit for his death-bed brandy\nyet.\u201d \u201cA night of devotion will we have, and of inextinguishable\nlaughter; and with the old liquor we will pour out the old libations.\nYea, Gargantuan shall be the feast; and this night, and to-morrow, and\nall next week, and twelve days into the new year the hours shall reel\nand roar with Pantagruelism. Quick, for the guests, and I will order the\nbanquet!\u201d \u201cWith all my heart, sire, will I do this very thing. Parsons\nand pastors, pious and devout, will I lead back, choice and most elect\nsouls worthy of the old drink delectable. And I will lock and double\nbolt the door, and first warm the chamber by burning all these devilish\nbooks; and will leave word with the angel on guard that we are not to be\ncalled for three times seven days, when all these Christmas fooleries\nand mummeries are long over. Amen. Selah. _Au revoir_. Tarry till I\ncome.\u201d\n\n\n\n\nA WORD ON BLASPHEMY.\n\n(1867.)\n\nThis is one of our few and far-between outbursts of Rabelasian laughter,\nirresistibly provoked by the aggressive absurdities of theology; and as\nsuch I consider it thoroughly defensible. In all seriousness I affirm\nthat its mockery is far less \u201cblasphemous\u201d than the solemn outrage on\nreason, the infernal damnation of all mankind who are sensible and sane\nor who are even mad otherwise than the author, the cold-blooded\ndissection of the infinite and eternal God as a superior surgeon may\ndissect an inferior corpse, perpetrated by its prototype the so-called\nAthanasian Creed. I do not see in what the statement that an old monkey\nof the tribe once saw the tail of this great big monkey is more\nirreverent than that other statement how Moses of the tribe of Levi once\nsaw the back parts of the Lord; whom the Church believes to be a Spirit\ninfinite, without parts, a sort of omnipresent \u00e6ther or supersubtle gas.\nNor do I see that the monkey, who is at least a natural animal, is a\nmore outrageous symbol or emblem than the utterly unnatural Lamb as it\nhad been slain, with seven horns and seven eyes, encompassed by all \u201cthe\nmenagerie of the Apocalypse.\u201d It would be easy to produce, I think,\nmockeries far more insulting, buffooneries far more bitter and\nmalignant, lavished upon Paganism, Socinianism, Atheism, and many\nanother _ism_, in the works of the most saintly divines. The hierarchy\nof Olympus is more venerable than the triune Lord of the New Jerusalem;\nyet how is it treated in our most popular burlesques? I go to a theatre\nand find a Christian audience, very tenderly sensitive as to their own\nreligious feelings rolling with laughter and thundering applause at the\nrepresentation of a ballet-girl Jupiter ascending in a car like a\nmonstrous coal-scuttle, with a deboshed mechanical eagle nodding its\nhead tipsily to the pit; a male Minerva, spectacles on nose, who takes\nsly gulps from a gin bottle and dances a fish-fag carmagnole; a Bacchus\nsprawling about drunken and brutish as Caliban; all uttering idiotic\npuns and singing idiotic songs. And if other mythologies were equally\nfamiliar, they would doubtless be maltreated with equal contempt. You\nthus deliver over to your dismal comic writers, to your clowns and\nmerry-andrews and bayaderes, the gods of Homer and \u00c6schylus, of\nHerodotus, Pindar and Phidias, you the sanctimonious and reverent modern\nBritons; and you cry out aghast against \u201catrocious blasphemy\u201d touching a\nDivinity, who was first the anthropomorphic clan-god of a petty Syrian\ntribe, who grew afterwards into a vague Ormuzd with the devil for\nAhriman when this tribe had been captive in Babylonia, whom you have\nfilched from this tribe which you still detest and disdain, with whom\nyou have associated two colleagues declared by this tribe (which surely\nought to know best) utterly spurious, whom you worship with rites\nborrowed from old pagans you decry, and discuss in divinity borrowed\nfrom old philosophers and schoolmen you sneer at; who gave to his tribe\nsome millenniums back laws which you preserve in the filched book of\nyour idolatry, but which not one of you dare read to his wife and\nchildren; whose son and colleague gave you laws which are certainly\nreadable enough, but which you are so far from obeying that you would\nassuredly consign to Bedlam any one seeking to act upon them perfectly.\n\nBut mockery of the Olympians hurts no one\u2019s feelings, while mockery of\nthe Tri-unity hurts the feelings of nearly all who hear or see it? I\nknow that there are here and there a few pious and tender hearts, with\nwhom habitude has become nature; people who, having less intellectual\nthan cordial energy, more affection and reverence than curiosity and\nself-reliance, pour their whole melted nature into whatever religious\nmoulds chance to be nearest, and harden to the exact shape and size of\nthe mould, so that any blow struck upon it jars and wounds them; and the\nfeelings of these I should be very loth to hurt. I care not for\npropagandism in general, and in such cases above all propagandism is\ncertainly useless. Why seek to convert women to a struggling faith? Let\nthe women be always on the victorious side, let the men do the fighting\nand endure the hardships. When their struggling faith has conquered such\ntriumph as it merits, they will find the women all at once in agreement\nwith them, converted not by ideas (for which women care not an\napple-dumpling) but by feminine love and loyalty to manhood. One must\nalways be very loth, I say, to wound the feelings of the pious and\ntender hearts, of the beautiful feminine souls; and fortunately these\nlove to seclude themselves in tranquillity, avoiding debates and\ncontroversies. Whose religious feelings, then, are likely to be wounded\nby \u201catrocious blasphemies,\u201d by \u201cblasphemous indecencies\u201d? The feelings\nof \u201cthe gentle spirit of our meek Review,\u201d the benign and holy\n_Saturday!_ The feelings of tract distributors, scripture-readers,\npolemical parsons, all those in general who violate every courtesy of\nlife to thrust their narrowminded dogmas upon others, and who preach\neverlasting damnation against people too sensible to care for their\nranting! They outrage our reason, they vilify our human nature, they\nblaspheme our world, they pollute our flesh, and they wind up by dooming\nus to eternal torture because we differ from them: these trifles are, of\ncourse, not supposed to hurt _our_ feelings. We endeavor to enthrone\nhuman reason, to ennoble human nature, to restore the human body to its\npure dignity, to develop the beauty and glory of the world; and we wind\nup, not by retorting upon them their fiendish curses, not even by\nlaughing at the idea of an almighty and all-good God, but by laughing at\ntheir notions of an almighty and all-good God, who has a Hell ready for\nthe vast majority of us: this horrible laugh lacerates their pious\nsensibilities, and we hear the venomous whine of \u201catrocious blasphemy.\u201d\nAfter condemning us to death they commit us for contempt of court, which\nsurely is an anomalous procedure!\n\nYou can mock the Grecian mythology, you can burlesque Shakespeare,\nwithout wounding any pious heart? No: Olympus is as sacred to many as\nMount Sion is to you; our own Shakespeare is as venerable and dear to us\nas to you that bundle of dissimilar anonymous treatises which you have\nmade coherent by help of the bookbinder and called the Book of Books.\nAnd mark this; the Grecian mythology is dead, is no longer aggressive in\nits absurdities; the priestcraft and the foul rites have long since\nperished, the beauty and the grace and the splendor remain. But your\ncomposite theology is still alive, is insolently aggressive, its lust\nfor tyrannical dominion is unbounded; therefore we must attack it if we\nwould not be enslaved by it. The cross is a sublime symbol; I would no\nmore think of treating it with disrespect while it held itself aloft in\nthe serene heaven of poetry than of insulting the bow of Phoebus Apollo\nor the thunderbolts of Zeus; but if coarse hands will insist on pulling\nit down upon my back as a ponderous wooden reality, what can I do but\nfling it off as a confounded burden not to be borne?\n\nAnd now let us consider for a moment the meaning of this word\n\u201cblasphemy,\u201d which is the burden of the _S. R.\u2019s_ slanderous song; not\nthe legal meaning, but the philosophic, the sense in which it would be\nused by enlightened and fair controversialists. The most Christian _S.\nR._ says to the Atheistic Iconoclast, You blaspheme. Whom? The Christian\nGod! And the _S, R._ does not appear to see that it is assuming the very\nexistence of God which is in dispute between itself and Iconoclast! For\nthe Atheist, God is a figment, nothing; in blaspheming God he therefore\nblasphemes nothing. A man really blasphemes when he mocks, insults,\npollutes, vilifies that which he really believes to be holy and awful.\nThus a Christian who really believes in the Christian God (and there\n_may_ be a hundred such Christians in England) can be guilty of\nblasphemy against that God, whether that God really subsists or not; for\nsuch a Christian in mocking or vilifying God would really be violating\nthe most sacred convictions of his own nature. Speaking philosophically,\nan honest Atheist can no more blaspheme God than an honest Republican\ncan be disloyal to a King, than an unmarried man can be guilty of\nconjugal infidelity.\n\n    [This \u201cWord on Blasphemy,\u201d as I have ventured to call it, is\n    from a long article on the _Saturday Review_ and the _National\n    Reformer_, the rest of which was of merely temporary interest,\n    and that only to the readers of those two journals. The\n    \u201coutburst of Rabelasian laughter\u201d which so provoked the\n    _Saturday Review_, was a short satire on Christian theology and\n    priestcraft, entitled \u201cThe Fanatical Monkeys,\u201d ascribed to\n    Charles Southwell, and just then published in the _National\n    Reformer_.\u2014Editor.]\n\n\n\n\nHEINE ON AN ILLUSTRIOUS EXILE WITH SOMETHING ABOUT WHALES\n\n\n(From the \u201cDe l\u2019Allemagne.\u201d) (1867.)\n\nNeptune is still the monarch of the empire of the seas, and Pluto\n(although metamorphosed into the Devil) has retained the throne of\nTartarus. They have both been more lucky than their brother Jupiter, who\nhad to suffer specially the vicissitudes of fortune. This third son of\nSaturn, who after the fall of his sire assumed the sovereignty of the\nheavens, reigned for a long series of years on the summit of Olympus,\nsurrounded by a jovial court of high and of most high gods and demigods,\nas well as on high and of most high goddesses and nymphs\u2014their celestial\nladies of the bedchamber and maids of honor, who all led a joyous life,\nreplete with ambrosia and nectar, despising the clowns attached to the\nsoil down here, and taking no thought of the morrow. Alas, when the\nreign of the Cross, the empire of suffering, was proclaimed, the supreme\nChronide emigrated and disappeared amidst the tumult of the barbarian\ntribes which invaded the Roman world. All traces of the ex-God were\nlost, and I have questioned in vain old chronicles and old women; no one\nhas been able to furnish me with any information as to his destiny. I\nhave burrowed in many a library, where I made them bring me the most\nmagnificent _codex_ enriched with gold and jewels, veritable odalisques\nin the harem of science; and as is the custom, I here render my public\nthanks to the erudite eunuchs who, without too much grumbling and\nsometimes even with affability, have given me access to these luminous\ntreasures confided to their care. I am now convinced that the middle\nages have not bequeathed to us any traditions concerning the fate of\nJupiter after the fall of Paganism. All that I have been able to\ndiscover in connection with this subject is the history told me long ago\nby my friend Niels Andersen.\n\nI have just mentioned Niels Andersen, and this good figure, at once so\ndroll and so lovable, emerges all riant in my memory. I must devote a\nfew lines to him here. For the rest, I like to indicate my authorities\nand to show their good or bad qualities, in order that the reader may be\nin a position to judge himself how far these authorities deserve to be\ntrusted.\n\nNiels Andersen, born at Drontheim, in Norway, was one of the most\nskilful and intrepid whalers I have ever known. It is to him that I am\nindebted for what knowledge I have of the whale fishery. He taught me\nall the subtleties of the art; he made me acquainted with all the\nstratagems and dodges which the intelligent animal employs to baffle\nthese subtle snares and make its escape. It was Niels Andersen who\ntaught me the management of the harpoon; he showed me how you should fix\nthe knee of the right leg against the gun-whale of the boat when\nlaunching the harpoon, and how with the left leg you launch a vigorous\nkick at the imbecile sailor who don\u2019t pay out quickly enough the rope\nattached to the harpoon. To him I owe all, and if I have not become a\nfamous whaler the fault rests neither with Niels Andersen nor with\nmyself, but with my evil star, which has never allowed me in the course\nof my life to encounter any whale with which I might have engaged in\nhonorable combat. I have only encountered vulgar stockfish and miserable\nherrings. Of what use is the best harpoon when you have to deal with a\nherring? Now that my limbs are paralysed I must renounce for ever the\nhope of pursuing whales. When at Ritzebuttel, near Cuxhaven, I made the\nacquaintance of Niels Andersen. He was scarcely more nimble himself, for\noff the coast of Senegal a young shark, which no doubt took his right\nleg for a stick of barley sugar, had snapped it off with a snap of his\nteeth. Since then poor Niels Andersen went limping upon an artificial\nleg manufactured from one of the firs of his country, and which he\nextolled as a masterpiece of Norwegian carpentry. His greatest pleasure\nat this period was to perch himself on the top of a large empty barrel,\non the belly of which he drummed away with his wooden leg. I often\nhelped him to climb upon this barrel; but sometimes, when he wished to\nget down again, I would not give him my help except on the condition\nthat he told me one of his curious traditions of the Arctic Sea.\n\nAs Mahomet-Ebn-Mansour commences all his poems with a eulogy of the\nhorse, so Niels Andersen prefaced all his narratives with a panegyrical\nenumeration of the qualities of the whale. He of course commenced with\nsuch a panegyric the legend we give here.\n\n\u201cThe whale,\u201d he said, \u201cis not only the largest, but also the most\nmagnificent of animals; the two jets of water leaping from his nostrils,\nplaced at the top of his head, give him the appearance of a fountain,\nand produce a magical effect, above all at night, in the moonshine.\nMoreover, this beast is sympathetic. He has a good character and much\ntaste for conjugal life. It is a touching sight,\u201d he added, \u201cto see a\nfamily of whales grouped around its venerable patriarch, and couched\nupon an enormous mass of ice, basking in the sun. Sometimes the young\nones begin to frisk and romp, and at length all plunge into the sea to\nplay at hide-and-seek among the immense ice-blocks. The purity of\nmanners and the chastity of the whales should be attributed less to\nmoral principles than to the iciness of the water wherein they\ncontinually sport. Nor can it, unhappily, be denied,\u201d went on Niels\nAnderson, \u201cthat they have not any pious sentiment, that they are totally\ndevoid of religion....\u201d\n\n\u201cI believe this is an error,\u201d I cried, interrupting my friend. \u201cI have\nlately read the report of a Dutch missionary, wherein he describes the\nmagnificence of the creation, which, according to him, reveals itself\neven in the polar regions at the hour of sunrise, and when the teams of\nday, transfiguring the gigantic rocks of ice, make them resemble those\ncastles of diamonds we read of in fairy tales. All this beauty of the\ncreation, in the judgment of the good _dominie_, is a proof of the power\nof God which influences every living creature, so that not only man, but\nlikewise a great brute of a fish, ravished by this spectacle, adores the\nCreator and addresses to him its prayers. The _dominie_ assures us that\nhe has seen with his own eyes a whale which held itself erect against\nthe wall of a block of ice, and swayed the upper part of its body as men\ndo in prayer.\u201d\n\nNiels Andersen admitted that he had himself seen whales which, propping\nthemselves against a cliff of ice, indulged in movements very similar to\nthose we remark in the oratories of the various religious sects, but he\nmaintained that devotion has nothing to do with this ph\u00e6nomenon. He\nexplained it on physiological grounds; he called my attention to the\nfact that the whale, this Chimborazo of animals, has beneath its skin\nstrata of fat of a depth so prodigious that a single whale often\nfurnishes a hundred to a hundred and fifty barrels of tallow and oil.\nThese layers of fat are so thick that while the colossus sleeps,\nstretched at its full length upon an icefield, hundreds of water rats\ncan come and settle in it. These _convives_ immensely larger and more\nvoracious than the rats of the mainland, lead joyous life under the skin\nof the whale, where day and night they gorge themselves with the most\ndelicious fat without being obliged to quit their holes. These banquets\nof vermin at length trouble their involuntary host and even cause him\nexcessive sufferings. Not having hands as we have, who, God be thanked,\ncan scratch ourselves when we feel an itching, the whale tries to\nmitigate his pangs by placing himself against the protruding and sharp\nangles of a rock of ice, and by there rasping his back with a real\nfervor and with vigorous movements up and down, as we see the dogs\nrasping their skin against a bed-post when the fleas bite them overmuch.\nNow in these movements the good _dominie_ thought he saw the edifying\nact of prayer, and he attributed to devotion the jerkings occasioned by\nthe orgies of the rats. Enormous as is the quantity of oil in the whale,\nit has not the least religious sentiment. It is only among animals of\nmediocre stature that we find any religion; the very great, the\ncreatures gigantic like the whale are not endowed with it. What can be\nthe reason? Is it that they cannot find a church sufficiently spacious\nto afford them entrance into its pale? Nor have the whales any taste for\nthe prophets, and the one which swallowed Jonah was not able to digest\nthat great preacher; seized with nausea, it vomited him after three\ndays. Most certainly that proves the absence of all religious sentiment\nin these monsters. The whale, therefore, would never choose an ice-block\nfor prayer-cushion, and sway itself in attitudes of devotion. It adores\nas little the true God who resides above there in heaven, as the false\npagan god who dwells near the arctic pole, in the Isle of the Rabbits,\nwhere the dear beast goes sometimes to pay him a visit.\n\n\u201cWhat is this _Isle of Rabbits_?\u201d I asked Niels Andersen. Drumming on\nthe barrel with his wooden leg, he answered, \u201cIt is exactly in this isle\nthat the events took place of which I am going to tell you. I am not\nable to give you its precise geographical position. Since its first\ndiscovery no one has been able to visit it again; the enormous mountains\nof ice accumulated around it bar the approach. Once only has it been\nvisited, by the crew of a Russian whaler driven by-tempests into those\nnorthern latitudes, and that was more than a hundred years ago. When\nthese sailors, reached it with their ship they found it deserted and\nuncultivated. Sickly stalks of broom swayed sadly upon the quicksands;\nhere and there were scattered some dwarf shrubs and stunted firs\ncrouching on the sterile soil. Rabbits ran about everywhere in great\nnumbers; and this is the reason the sailors call the islet the _Isle of\nRabbits_. A cabin, the only one they discovered, announced the presence\nof a human being. When the mariners had entered the hut they saw an old\nman, arrived at the most extreme decrepitude and miserably muffled in\nrabbit skins. He was seated upon a stone settle, and warmed his thin\nhands and trembling knees at the grate where some brushwood was burning.\nAt his right hand stood a monstrously large bird, which seemed to be an\neagle; but the moulting of time had so cruelly stripped it that only the\ngreat stiff main-plumes of its wings were left, so that the aspect of\nthis naked animal was at once ludicrous and horribly ugly. On the left\nof the old man was couched upon the ground an aged bald-skinned she-got,\nyet with a gentle look, and which, in spite of its great age, had the\ndugs swollen with milk and the teats fresh and rosy.\n\n\u201cAmong the sailors who had landed on the Isle of Rabbits there were some\nGreeks, and one of these, thinking that the man of the hut could not\nunderstand his tongue, said to his comrades in Greek, \u2018This queer old\nfellow must be either a ghost or an evil spirit.\u2019 At these words the old\nman trembled and rose suddenly from his seat, and the sailors, to their\ngreat astonishment, saw a lofty and imposing figure, which, with\nimperious and even majestic dignity, held itself erect in spite of the\nweight of years, so that the head reached the rafters of the roof. His\nlineaments, though worn and ravaged, conserved traces of beauty; they\nwere noble and perfectly regular. Thin locks of silver hair fell upon\nthe forehead wrinkled by pride and by age; his eyes, though glazed and\nlustreless, darted keen regards, and his finely-curved lips pronounced\nin the Greek language, mingled with many archaisms, these words resonant\nand harmonious:\u2014\u2018You are mistaken, young man, I am neither a spectre nor\nan evil spirit; I am an unfortunate who has seen better days. But\nyou\u2014what are you.\u2019\n\n\u201cAt this demand the seamen acquainted their host with the accident which\nhad driven them out of their course, and they begged him to tell them\nall about the isle. But the old man could give them but scant\ninformation. He told them that from immemorial times he had dwelt in\nthis isle, of which the ramparts of ice offered him a sure refuge\nagainst his implacable enemies, who had usurped his legitimate rights;\nthat his main subsistence was derived from the rabbits with which the\nisle abounded; that every year, at the season when the floating\nice-blocks formed a compact mass, troops of savages in sledges visited\nhim, who, in exchange for his rabbit skins, gave him all sorts of\narticles most necessary to life. The whales, he said, which now and then\napproached his isle, were his favorite society. Nevertheless, he added\nthat he felt much pleasure at this moment in speaking his native\nlanguage, being Greek by birth. He begged his compatriots to inform him\nas to the then state of Greece. He learnt with a malicious joy, badly\ndissimulated, that the Cross once surmounting the towers of the Hellenic\ncities had been shattered; he showed less satisfaction when they told\nhim that this Christian symbol had been replaced by the Crescent. The\nmost singular thing was that none of the seamen knew the names of the\ntowns concerning which he questioned them, and which, according to him,\nhad been flourishing cities in his time. On the other hand, the names by\nwhich the seamen designated the towns and villages of modern Greece were\ncompletely unknown to him; and the old man shook his head often, as if\nquite overwhelmed, and the sailors looked at each other with wonder.\nThey saw well that he knew perfectly the localities of the country, even\nto the minutest details; for he described clearly and exactly the gulfs,\nthe peninsulas, the capes, often even, the most insignificant hills and\nisolated groups of rocks. His ignorance of the commonest typographical\nnames, therefore astonished them all the more.\n\n\u201cThe old man asked, with the most lively interest, and even with a\ncertain anxiety, about an ancient temple, which, he said, had been of\nold the grandest in all Greece. None of his hearers recognised the\nname,, which he pronounced with tender emotion. At last,, when he had\nminutely described the place where this, monument stood, a young seaman\nsuddenly recognised the spot. \u2018The village where I was born,\u2019 he\nexclaimed, \u2018is situated precisely there. During my childhood I have long\nwatched there the pigs of my father. On this site there are, in fact,\nthe ruins of very ancient constructions, which must have been incredibly\nmagnificent. Here and there you see some columns still erect; they are\nisolated or connected by fragments of roofing, whence hang tendrils of\nhoneysuckle and red bind-weeds. Other columns, some of them red marble,\nlie fractured on the grass. The ivy has invaded their superb capitals,\nformed of flowers and foliage delicately chiselled. Great slabs of\nmarble, squared fragments of wall and triangular pieces of roofing, are\nscattered about, half-buried in the earth. I have often, continued the\nyoung man, \u2018passed hours at a time in examining the combats and the\ngames, the dances and the processions, the beautiful and ludicrous\nfigures which are sculptured there. Unfortunately these sculptures are\nmuch injured by time, and are covered with moss and creepers. My father,\nwhom I once asked what these ruins were, told me that they were the\nremnants of an ancient temple, of old inhabited by a Pagan God, who not\nonly indulged in the most gross debaucheries, but who was, moreover,\nguilty of incest and other infamous vices; that in their blindness the\nidolators had, nevertheless, immolated oxen, often by hundreds, at the\nfoot of his altar. My father assured me that we still saw the marble\nbasin wherein they had gathered the blood of the victims, and that it\nwas precisely the trough to which I frequently led my swine to drink the\nrain-water, and in which I also preserved the refuse which my animals\ndevoured with so much appetite.\u2019\n\n\u201cWhen the young sailor had thus spoken, the old man gave a deep sigh of\nthe most bitter anguish; he sank nerveless upon the stone seat, and\nhiding his visage in his hands, wept like a child. The bird at his side\nemitted terrible cries, spread its enormous wings, and menaced the\nstrangers with talons and beak. The she-goat moaned and licked the hands\nof her master, whose sorrows she seemed trying to comfort by her humble\ncaresses. At this sight a strange trouble swelled in the hearts of the\nseamen; they hastily quitted the hut, and did not feel at ease until\nthey could no more hear the sobbings of the old man, the croakings of\nthe hideous bird, and the bleatings of the goat. When they got on board\ntheir vessel again they related their adventures. Among the crew there\nchanced to be a scholar, who declared that it was an event of the\nhighest importance. Applying with a sagacious air his right forefinger\nto his nose, he assured the seamen that the old man of the Isle of\nRabbits was beyond all doubt the ancient god Jupiter, son of Saturn and\nRhea, once sovereign lord of the gods; that the bird which they had seen\nat his side was evidently the famous eagle which used to bear the\nthunderbolts in its talons; and that, in all probability, the goat was\nthe old nurse Amalthea, which had of old suckled the god in the isle of\nCrete, and which now continued to nourish him with its milk in the Isle\nof Rabbits.\u201d\n\nSuch was the history of Niels Andersen, and it made my heart bleed. I\nwill not dissemble; already his revelations concerning the secret\nsufferings of the whale had profoundly saddened me. Poor animal! against\nthis vile mob of rats, which house themselves in your body and gnaw you\nincessantly, no remedy avails, and you carry them about with you to the\nend of your days; rush as you will to the north and to the south, rasp\nyourself against the ice-rocks of the two poles, you can never get rid\nof these villainous rats? But pained as I had been by the outrage\nwreaked upon the poor whales, my soul was infinitely more troubled by\nthe tragical fate of this old man who, according to the mythological\ntheory of the learned Russian, was the heretofore King of the gods,\nJupiter the _Chronide_. Yes, he, even he, was subject to the fatality of\nDestiny, from which not the immortals themselves can escape; and the\nspectacle of such calamities horrifies us, in filling us with pity and\nindignation. Be Jupiter, be the sovereign lord of the world, the frown\nof whose brows made tremble the universe! be chanted by Homer, and\nsculptured by Phidias in gold and ivory; be adored by a hundred nations\nduring long centuries; be the lover of Semele, of Danae, of Europa, of\nAlcmena, of Io, of Leda, of Calisto! and after all, nothing will remain\nat the end but a decrepit old man, who to gain his miserable livelihood\nhas to turn dealer in rabbit skins, like any poor Savoyard. Such a\nspectacle will no doubt give pleasure to the vile multitude, which\ninsults to-day that which it adored yesterday. Perhaps among these\nworthy people are to be found some of the descendants of those unlucky\nbulls which were of old immolated in hecatombs upon the altar of\nJupiter; let such rejoice in his fall, and mock him at their ease, in\nrevenge for the blood of their ancestors, victims of idolatry; as for\nme, my soul is singularly moved, and I am seized with dolorous\ncommiseration at the view of this august misfortune.\n\n\n\n\nTHE DAILY NEWS\n\n\n(1874.)\n\n::    \u201cIch hab\u2019 mein Sach auf Nichts gestellt,\n       Juchhe! Drum ist\u2019s so wohl mir in der Welt; Juchhe!\u201d\u2014G\u00f4the.\n\n       \u201cHe got so subtle that to be Nothing was all his glory.\u201d Shelley,\n       \u201cPeter Bell the Third\u201d\n\nIt is now some time since the _Daily News_, which, perhaps with more\nhonor than profit, and not seldom at great risk of its life, had been\nfor many years a really leading Liberal journal, fighting gallantly\nalways in the van, often in forlorn hopes, took to heart a certain\nvery-obvious truth. It awoke fully to the fact that while a captain in\nthe forlorn hope or vanguard is constantly in great peril, and has but\nfew supporters, one with the main body is much less exposed and has many\nmore to help him. Weary and discouraged, it resolved to fall back from\nthe front and join the mass of the army, the myriads of the commonplace\nand the timorous, the legions of the rich and respectable, the countless\nhosts of the snobbery of Bumbledom. But in making this \u201cstrategic\nmovement,\u201d it is well aware that honor equal to the danger is attached\nto the forlorn hope and the vanguard, and it clung to the honor while\nrenouncing the danger, and continued to call itself a leading Liberal\njournal when it had quite given up the lead\u2014nay, continues thus to vaunt\nitself still. This is how some malicious people explain the altered\nposition of the Daily News and its growing number of supporters, or, in\nthe language of periodicals, its increasing circulation. Now, say these\nimpatient and intemperate persons, a paper is free to serve Bumble (as\nnearly all papers do), or to serve Progress, the enemy of Bumble; but it\nhas no right, while serving the one, to claim the merit of serving the\nother. This _Daily News_, they go on, which still dares to call itself\nLiberal, is now just as liberal as the jester\u2019s Garrick, who used to set\nout with generous intentions, and was scared back at the corner of the\nstreet by the ghost of a ha\u2019penny. In its case it is the ghost of a\npenny, the ghost of the representative penny of all the pennies ready to\nbuy vapid twaddle, but not earnest thought.\n\nFor my own part, however, I find the _Daily News_ still really liberal,\nand, in fact, extremely liberal. It is liberal in long special telegrams\nand interminable Jenkins letters about the most insignificant movements\nand actions of royal personages. It is equally liberal in reticence,\nslightly tempered by sneers, as to all advanced movements, all unpopular\nprinciples and their champions. It is liberal in the space it gives to\nall fashionable frivolities, sports and pastimes, to all the bagatelles\nof life. If it has not a paragraph to spare for a Radical meeting, it\nhas always columns at the command of boat races, yacht races, horse\nraces, cricket and polo matches, and the like important events, as well\nas other columns for the gossip of clubs and the babble of society. It\nis liberal in hopefulness that wrong may be right, falsehood truth, evil\ngood. It is very liberal in soft phrases, and in \u201cpassages that lead to\nnothing.\u201d Nothing, indeed, is the great end of its endeavor; for what\nalteration can be needed by a world in which the circulation of the\n_Daily News_ is continually increasing? Unless, perchance, as the\ncirculation is already \u201cworld-wide,\u201d the world will have to be extended\nin order to accommodate it. But this concerns Father God or Mother\nNature, not mere mortals. All these liberalities I could amply\nillustrate did space permit; as it is, I can give but an instance each\nto the first two. The Prince of Wales being in France, amusing himself\nlike any other man who has money and leisure, \u201cThe Prince of Wales in\nFrance\u2014Special,\u201d heads its placards in the largest letters. On the other\nhand, I heard one of our three or four greatest writers, Garth\nWilkinson, declare at a public meeting that he had written several\nletters to it on a subject then agitating the public mind, but that he\ncould as easily get a letter into the moon as into the _Daily News_. Yet\nthe subject was medical; and Garth Wilkinson is not only one of our\ngreatest writers and thinkers, but also an M.D. and F.R.S., who has\npractised for I know not how much more than a quarter of a century. To\nrefuse his letters on that matter was like refusing to hear Carlyle on\nCromwell or Darwin on Natural Selection. Why, then, did the _Daily News_\nreject them? For the simply sufficient reason that they advocated the\nunpopular side of the question.\n\nYes, it is still liberal and beyond measure liberal in these and many\nother respects. It has still great care of the people\u2014to keep aloof from\nthem; it loves them more than ever\u2014at a distance. It still belongs to\nthe Left\u2014in the rear. It is still of the Mountain, only it has descended\nto provision itself; as the sage rhyme runs,\n\n    \u201cThe mountain sheep were sweeter,\n    But the valley sheep were fatter;\n    We therefore deemed it meeter\n    To carry off the latter.\u201d\n\nIt is still Radical, having a rooted love of ease and hatred of\ndisturbance. It is still revolutionary, but has resolved that henceforth\nrevolutions shall be made with rose-water, and omelettes without\nbreaking of....\n\nWhile thus freely acknowledging that in many things the _Daily News_ is\nnow more liberal than ever it was, I must also record my admiration for\nits strenuous endeavors to assume an air of aristocratic refinement and\nrepose. From its serene indifference to the troubles of vulgar humanity,\nfrom the languid lisp and drawl of its voice, from its perpetual\nallusions to the luxuries and enjoyments of the wealthy and noble, one\nreadily divines that its staff, like the staff of my Lord Chamberlain or\nother court lackey, can move only in the highest circles; but whether\nits members are admitted into these as gentlemen or as gentlemen\u2019s\ngentlemen, I must leave for those familiar with such circles to declare.\nThis is certain, that they flit about amidst a lordly festival in the\ngay and careless fashion of men who have no thought save of enjoying\nthemselves; not like poor devils who have duties which, though better\npaid, are as onerous and strictly subservient to the gathering as those\nof the waiters or the footmen. It must surely be by a mere afterthought,\nand purely for their own amusement, that they throw off a description of\nthe scene and an account of what occurred there. By the bye, it is\nrumored that the staff has been thoroughly changed of late years. The\nold members were able enough, but they were too coarse, too loud, too\nviolent, too opiniative, too much given to discussing important\nquestions as if they really cared for the same. Their manners especially\ncould not be endured One entered the Editor\u2019s sanctum (which had then\njust been refurnished under the supervision of the Count of Monte\nCristo) in his wet boots, although embroidered slippers were provided at\nthe foot of the stairs. Another exploded with a \u201cDamned old idiot!\u201d on\nreading the charge of one of our Right Reverend Fathers in God. Another\nwas caught smoking a clay pipe over a pint of beer, although narghil\u00e9s\nand hookahs and the choicest cigarettes, with unlimited supplies of the\nmost costly wines and liqueurs, are always set out for the staff and\nsuch visitors as are admitted to the inner offices. The _Daily News_\nwrote to my Lord Chief Justice demanding that this fellow should be sent\nwithout trial to keep company with Arthur Orton, and for all I know the\nChief Justice humbly obeyed. Another was seen walking arm-in-arm with\nthe Editor of the _Times_, and was of course instantly dismissed, the\n_Daily News_ writing to warn the man of the other journal.\n\nThis, I am assured, is historical fact, to which the Editor of the\n_Times_ will bear witness, if he be not ashamed to avow what may seem to\nhurt his dignity. For these and the like offences the old members have\nbeen all dismissed.\n\nIt is said to be a peculiarity of the _Daily News_ that all the leading\narticles are manufactured on the premises, if I may venture on a shop\nphrase in such a connection. I have spoken of the luxury of the Editor\u2019s\nsanctum, which is a large and noble apartment. The leader-writers are\nborne to the office in closed carriages, with double or triple windows\nand india-rubber tires, lest some rude oath, or nasty smell, or even the\nloud noise of the streets should shock them into hysterics, or at least\nso unstring their nerves as to render writing impossible for the day. In\nthe sumptuous boudoir-sanctum, lounging, smoking, and sipping, they\nreceive on silver salvers telegrams from all parts of the rolling globe,\nwith innumerable communications and documents, written and printed; and\nsuch of these as they are pleased to look at tin Epicurean gods:\n\n    \u201cFor they lie beside their nectar,\n    and the bolts are hurled\n    Far below them in the valleys.\u201d\n\nThey lie a good deal beside their nectar; but their bolts are anything\nbut thunderbolts. Thunderbolts! The mere word would make these gasp and\nshudder. They are not thunderbolts, they are not rockets, they are not\neven squibs; they are bonbons and genuine _confetti_, not your\n_confetti_ of the Carnival.\n\n    \u201c*There* they smile in secret, looking over wasted lands,\n    Blight and famine, plague and earthquake, roaring deeps and fiery sands,\n    Clanging fights and flaming towns, and sinking ships and praying hands.\n\n    But they smile, they find a music centered in a doleful song\n    Steaming up, a lamentation and an ancient tale of wrong,\n    Like a tale of little meaning, tho the words are strong;\n\n    Chanted from an ill\u2212used race of men that cleave the soil,\n    Sow the seed and reap the harvest with enduring toil,\n    Storing yearly little dues of wheat, and wine and oil.\u201d\n\nNaturally these lofty beings smile; for what have they to do with the\ncares and woes, the hopes and fears of ordinary mortals? Besides,\nbattles and shipwrecks, disasters and convulsions, make the best of\ncopy; and the music centred in the doleful song is a hymn of triumph,\nwith the glorious refrain, \u201cOur circulation is still increasing! Our\nworld-wide circulation continues to increase!\u201d And surely the ill-used\nrace of men that till the soil should be appeased and amply satisfied by\nthe showers of bonbons and sweetmeats the _Daily News_ is always\nflinging down. It has more important duties to attend to than fighting\nthe battles and righting the wrongs of an ignorant, passionate,\nunreasonable, wretched rabble, considerably addicted to dirt,\ndrunkenness, and vice. For thirty hours at least in every twenty-four it\nis in attendance on some Royalty or another, or at the sports and\nentertainments of \u201cSociety, with a capital S.\u201d It is said that the\n\u201ccopy\u201d of these superlative writers, who always wear kid gloves while\nwriting, is written with golden pens and tinted and perfumed ink, on\nperfumed and tinted paper. It is moreover said that the journal itself\nis soon to be printed on vellum, in the illuminated style, with\narabesque borders. It is also rumored that the _Court Journal_ and the\n_Morning Post_, finding themselves quite outdone by the _Daily News_,\nand their occupation gone, will shortly cease to appear.\n\nI must not omit to mention that I have been told on authority, which I\nincline to consider good, that in the said gorgeous sanctum is\nconspicuous a table of commandments, wrought in letters of fine gold,\nwhich commandments are these:\n\nI. Thou shalt never be in earnest about anything, and shalt abhor\nenthusiasm.\n\n     II. Thou shalt not have a decided opinion on any subject.\n\nIII. Thou shalt never write an unqualified sentence, or risk an\nunmodified statement.\n\nIV. Thy style shall be always in the tone of a sweet murmur or soft\nwhisper; a lullaby of peace for drowsy-headed Bumbledom.\n\nV. Thou shalt write with an air of assured superiority to everybody, and\neverything.\n\nVI. Thou shalt ever bear in mind that there is no joy but calm, and that\nthe supreme moral excellence is good taste, which may be quite\ncompatible with meanness, servility, and cowardice, but cannot be\ncompatible with the foolish fervor of zeal.\n\nVII. Thou shalt always mention and allude to as many persons, places,\nand luxuries of high life as possible.\n\nVIII. Thou shalt drag into every article three or four literary\ncitations or allusions, whether relevant or irrelevant, in order to show\nto the world thy culture.\n\nIX. Thou shalt carefully avoid mention of all ardent reformers and\nunpopular thinkers, and their doings, save to lightly banter or coldly\nrebuke them.\n\nX. Thou shalt treat with profound respect and tenderness all the powers\nthat be, and all popular opinions, social, political and religious,\nhowever thou mayest contemn them in thy heart; for great Bumble is the\nsole lord of large circulations, and only through his continued grace\ncan our circulation continue to increase.\n\nIt is by assiduously conforming themselves to this most wise and holy\ndecalogue, that the members of the staff of the _Daily News_ have become\nsuch rare flowers of sweetness and light; worthy of that serene\nProfessor of Haughty-culture, Matthew Arnold himself, ere he had\nperpetrated \u201cLiterature and Dogma.\u201d\n\nBut while, in common with all the other worshippers of the _Daily News_,\nI exult in its world-wide and ever-increasing circulation, I am haunted\nby a horrible fear, which I cannot conceal, but will hint and whisper as\ngently as possible. When a stone falls into a pond\u2014but no, pond is\nvulgar\u2014when a stone falls into a still lake, the first small rings are\nclearly defined, but the circlings as they enlarge grow fainter and\nfainter, until at length they can no more be perceived. Now, as all the\nworld knows, our beloved and revered Daily News, in its ever-increasing\ncirculation, has hitherto followed precisely the same law; and my dread\nis that it will continue to do so unto the utmost extremity, becoming\never more and more faint and undefined as the circulation increases,\nuntil it shall altogether vanish away. It is getting so refined that I\nfear it will soon be fined away to nothing; so delicate and dainty, that\nit is already unfit for this rough world, whose slightest shock may kill\nit; so ethereal that its complete evaporation seems imminent; so\nsupernal that it must surely soon disappear, absorbed into the Empyrean.\nMay that good God, who we have been told \u201cwill think twice before\ndamning a person of quality,\u201d think many, many times before condemning\nour fashionable world to such an irreparable loss!\n\n\n\n\nJESUS: AS GOD; AS A MAN\n\n\n(1866.)\n\n    \u201cThese hereditary enemies of the Truth... have even had the\n    heart to degrade this first preacher of the Mountain, the purest\n    hero of Liberty; for, unable to deny that he was earth\u2019s\n    greatest man, they have made of him heaven\u2019s smallest\n    god.\u201d\u2014Heine: Reis\u00e9bilder.\n\nThe doctrine of the divinity of Jesus, which, in whatever relation\nregarded, is full of self-contradictions and absurdities, is, above all,\npernicious in its moral and spiritual results. Most myths have a certain\njustification in their beauty, in their symbolism of high truth. This\none distorts the beauty, degrades the sublimity, stultifies the meaning\nof the facts and the character wherein it has been founded, taking away\nall true grandeur from Jesus, benumbing our love and reverence.\n\nJesus, as a man, commands my heart\u2019s best homage. His words, as reported\nby the Evangelists, are ever-flowing fountains of spiritual\nrefreshments; and I feel that he was in himself even far more wise and\ngood than he appears in the gospel. What disciple could be expected to\nreport perfectly the words of a teacher so mystically sublime? The\ndisciple intends and endeavors to report faithfully; but when he hears\nwords which to him are without sense, because they express some truth\nwhose sphere is beyond the reach of his vision, he makes sense of them\nby some slight change\u2014slight as to the letter, immense as to the spirit;\nfor the sense is a truth or truism of his own lower sphere. And when the\nreports are not put into writing until many years after the words were\nfirst uttered, the changes will be important even as to the letter; for\na narrative from a man\u2019s mouth always alters year after year as much as\nthe man himself alters, for he continues grafting his own sense (which\nmay be deplorable nonsense) upon words which have been spoken. When we\nfind sentences of the purest beauty and wisdom in the records of a man\u2019s\nconversation, we may safely proportion the whole philosophical character\nof the speaker to such sentences. They mark the altitude at which his\nspirit loved to dwell. We are but completing the circle from the\nclearest fragment-arc left. Sentences of wisdom less exalted, or of\napparent unwisdom, have perhaps been degraded by the reporter, or have\nbeen relative to circumstances which we cannot now learn thoroughly.\n\nJesus as a man, whose words have been recorded by fallible men, is not\nlowered in my esteem by such contradictions as I find between his\nvarious speeches. Every proverb has its antagonist proverb, each being\ntrue to a certain extent, or in certain relations. Could we conceive an\nabstract intellect, we might conceive it dwelling continually in the\nsphere of abstract and absolute truth; but no man, however wise, dwells\ncontinually in this sphere. As a man living in the world, his intellect\nno less than his body lives in the relative and the conditioned, and\nnaturally reflects the character of this sphere. The wise man finds\nhimself surrounded and obstructed by certain concrete errors, and he\nattacks these errors with relative truths. Were the errors of another\nsort, the truths commonly in his mouth would be of another sort too.\nMany wise men of different ages and countries are pitted against each\nother as if their doctrines were fundamentally antagonistic, while, in\ntruth, their doctrines are essentially in unison, and either would have\nspoken or written much the same as the other had he lived in the same\ncircumstances. For a wise man only attacks the errors that are in his\nway; things which he never meets he can scarcely think of as\nobstructions. Hannibal, whose business it is to get into Italy from\nGaul, sets about blasting the Alps. Stephenson, whose business it is to\nget from Manchester to Liverpool, sets about filling up Chat Moss. The\nsame man, who muffles himself in as many furs as he can get in\nGreenland, will strip himself to a linen robe in Jamaica. Luther said\nthat the human mind is like a drunken peasant on horseback: he is\nrolling off on the right, you push him up, he then rolls over on the\nleft. Exactly so; and because one sage, seeing him roll down to the\nright, has pushed him up on the right, while another sage, seeing him\nroll down to the left, has pushed him up on the left, are the two sages\nto be accounted antagonists? Now as a wise man in the course of his\nexistence meets errors of many sorts, some of a quite opposite tendency\nto others, and as he proves his wisdom by applying to each error its\nrelative or pertinent truth, the rule is almost rigidly exact: that the\nwiser the man the more of apparent contradictions can be found in his\nwritings or conversation treating of actual life.\n\nBut deity is beyond the sphere of the relative and conditioned. When\ndeity speaks and deity reports the speeches, all should be absolute\ntruth transparently self-consistent, else what advantage or gain have we\nby the substitution of God for Man? Why bring in God to utter and record\nwhat could have been as well uttered and recorded by man?\n\nEverything for which we love and venerate the man Jesus becomes a bitter\nand absurd mockery when attributed to the Lord Christ. The full heart is\npraising the man; you turn him into God, a ruinous salvo is added to the\npraise.\n\nHe went about doing good: if God, why did he not do all good at once? He\ncured many sick: if God, why did he not give the whole world health? He\nassociated with publicans and sinners: if God, why did he make publicans\nand sinners at all? He preached the kingdom of heaven: if God, why did\nhe not bring the kingdom with him and make all mankind fit for it? He\nloved the poor, he taught the ignorant: if God, why did he let any\nremain poor and ignorant? He rebuked the Pharisees and Sadducees: it\nGod, why did he not wholly purify them from formalism, hypocrisy, and\nunbelief? He died for love of mankind: if God, why did he not restore\nmankind to himself without dying? and what great thing was it to seem to\ndie for three days? He sent apostles to preach salvation to all men: if\nGod, why did he not reveal it at once to all men, and so reveal it that\ndoubt had been impossible? He lived an example of holiness to us all: if\nGod, how can our humanity imitate Deity? And finally, a question\ntrampling down every assertion in his favor: why did he ever let the\nworld get evil?\n\nOne is ashamed of repeating these things for the ten-thousandth time,\nbut they will have to be repeated occasionally, so long as a vast\necclesiastical system continues to rest on the foundations of the\nabsurdities they oppugn. And while one is grinding such chaff in the\ntheological mill, he may as well have a turn at the Atonement, which is,\nin fact, the essence of the dogma of the Incarnation. No wonder this\npoor Atonement has been attacked on all sides; it invites attack; one\nmay say that in every aspect it piteously implores us to attack it and\nrelieve it from the misery of its spectral existence. It is so full of\nbreaches that one does not know where to storm.\n\nI am content to note one aspect of this unfortunate mystery which, so\nfar as I am aware, has been seldom studied. The whole scheme of the\nAtonement, as planned by God, is based upon a crime\u2014a crime infinitely\natrocious, the crime of murder and deicide, is essential to its success:\nif Judas had not betrayed, if the Jews had not insisted, if Pilate had\nnot surrendered, if all these turpitudes had not been secured, the\nAtonement could not have been consummated. Need one say more? Sometimes,\nwhen musing upon this doctrine, I have a vision of the God-man getting\nold upon the earth, horribly anxious and wretched, because no one will\nmurder him. Judas has succeeded to a large property, and would not be\ntempted to betray him by three hundred pieces of silver; the chief\npriests and elders think him insane, and, therefore, as Orientals, hold\nhim in a certain reverence; Pilate is henpecked and superstitious,\naccounts the wife\u2019s dreams oracular, and will have nothing to do with\nhim; even Peter won\u2019t deny him, although he has restored Peter\u2019s\nmother-in-law to life. The situation is desperate; he has again and\nagain prayed his Father to despatch a special murderer to despatch him,\nyet none appears: shall he have to perish by old age or disease? may he\nbe compelled to commit suicide? must he go back to Heaven unsacrificed,\nfoiled for want of an assassin?\n\nBenjamin Disraeli attained the cynical sublime when he suggested a\nmonument of gratitude to Judas. In fact, Christendom ought to have\nerected hundreds of years ago three grand monuments to the sub-trinity\nof Christianity, to the three men without whose devoted assistance the\nheavenly trinity would not have triumphed in the scheme of Salvation by\nAtonement; Judas, Caiaphas and Pilate; and as these three men could not\nhave done what they did in furtherance of the glorious work without a\nwell-known inspiration, a fourth memorial\u2014the grandest of all\u2014should\nhave been erected to the Devil. But the world, even the religious world,\nhas always been ungrateful to its most generous benefactors.\n\nIs it not the worst of sacrilege, a foul profanation of our human\nnature, which for us, at least, should be holy and awful, when the\nheroic and saintly martyrdom of a true Man is thus falsified into the\nself-schemed sham sacrifice, ineffectual, of a God? The people who\nprofess belief in this are shocked at the outrage offered to our\nhumanity by the Development Theory, while they themselves commit this\noutrage more flagitious. Little matters whence we sprang; we are what we\nare. But much matters to what we may attain. If the Development Theory\nplants our feet in the slime, the Christian Theory bows our head to the\ndust. It asserts that human nature could not possibly be so good as\nJesus, that human genius could not possibly write the books which tell\nof him; it denies us our noblest prerogatives, and declares us bastards\nwhen we claim a crown. It climbs to God by trampling on Man, it builds\nHeaven in contempt of Earth, its soul is a phosphorescence from the\nslain and rotting Body; its fervent faith vilifies us worse than the\ncoldest sneer of Mephistopheles. Yet the orthodox shudder and moan,\noutraged in their pious sensibilities, when one dares to speak with\nmanly plainness of their doctrines, which commence by polluting our\ncommon nature, continue by insulting our reason, and conclude by damning\nthe large majority of us!\n\n\n\n\nTHE ONE THING NEEDFUL\n\n\n(1866.)\n\nWhen I survey with pious joy the present world of Christendom, finding\neverywhere that the true believers love their neighbors as themselves\nand are specially enamored of their enemies; that no one of them takes\nthought for the morrow, what he shall eat or what he shall drink, or\nwherewithal he or she shall be clothed; that all the pastors and flocks\nendeavor to outstrip each other in laying not up for themselves\ntreasures upon earth, where moth and rust corrupt, and where thieves\nbreak through and steal; and all are so intensely eager to quit this\nearthly tabernacle and become freeholders of mansions in the skies; when\nI find faith as universal as the air, and charity as common as cold\nwater; I sometimes wonder how it is that any misbelievers and\nunbelievers are left, and feel astonished that the New Jerusalem has not\nyet descended, and hope that the next morning\u2019s _Times_ (rechristened\n_The Eternities_) will announce the inauguration of the Millennium.\n\nWhat delayeth the end? Can there indeed be any general hindering sin or\nimperfection among the pure saints, the holy, unselfish, aspiring,\ndevout, peaceful, loving men and women who make up the population of\nevery Christian land? Can any error infect the teachings of the\ninnumerable divines and theologians, who all agree together in every\nparticular, drawing all the same doctrines from the same texts of the\none unvaried Word of God? I would fain believe that no such sin or error\nexists, not a single inky spot in the universal dazzling whiteness; but\nthen why have we to deplore the continued existence of heathens and\ninfidels? why is the New Jerusalem so long a-building? why is the\nMillennium so long a-coming? why have we a mere Sardowa instead of\nArmageddon?\n\nAfter long and painful thought, after the most serious and reverent\nstudy, I think I have found the rock on which the ship of the Church has\nbeen wrecked; and I hasten to communicate its extreme latitude and\ninterminable longitude, that all Christian voyagers may evade and\ncircumvent it from this time forward.\n\nThe error which I point out, and the correction which I propose, have\nbeen to a certain extent, in a vague manner, pointed out and proposed\nbefore. A clergyman named Malthus, not in his clerical capacity, but\ncondescending to the menial study of mundane science, is usually\nconsidered the first discoverer. But mundane science is conditioned,\nlimited, vague, its precepts are full of hesitation; while celestial\nscience is absolute, unlimited, clear as the noonday sun, and its\nprecepts are imperiously forthright.\n\nIt seems to me that the one fatal error which has lurked in our\notherwise consummate Christianity, and which demands immediate\ncorrection is this, that the propagation of children is reconcileable\nwith the propagation of the faith\u2014an error which while it lasts adjourns\n_sine die_ the day of judgment, and begins the Millennium with the Greek\nKalends.\n\nOne need not quote the numerous texts throughout the New Testament (let\nMatthew xix., 12, suffice) proving that Jesus and the epistolary\napostles accounted celibacy essential to the _highest_ Christian life.\nOne only of the disciples, so far as we know, was married; and he it was\nwho denied his master; and most of the more profound divines consider\nthat Peter was justly punished for marrying, when Christ cured his\nmother-in-law of that fever which might else have carried her off.\n\nBut many modest people may be content with a respectable Christian life\nwhich is not of the very highest kind. They may think that as husbands\nand wives they will make very decent middle-class saints in heaven,\nafter a comfortable existence on earth, leaving the nobler crowns of\nholiness for more daring spirits. Humility is one of the fairest graces,\nand we revere it; but there is a consideration, most momentous for the\nkind Christian heart, which such good people must have overlooked\u2014very\nnaturally, since it is very obvious.\n\nJesus tells us that many are called but few are chosen; that few enter\nthe strait gate and travel the narrow way, while many take the broad way\nthat leadeth to destruction. In other words, the large majority of\nmankind, the large majority of even those who have the gospel preached\nto them must be damned. When a human soul is born into the world, the\nodds are at least ten to one that the Devil will get it. Can any pious\nmember of the Church who has thought of this take the responsibility of\nbecoming a parent? I thoroughly believe not. I am convinced that we have\nso many Christian parents only because this very conspicuous aspect of\nthe case has not caught their view. If the parents could have any\nassurance that the piety of their offspring would be in proportion to\ntheir own, they would be justified in wedding in holiness. But alas! we\nall know that some of the most religious parents have had some of the\nmost wicked children. Dearly beloved brethren and sisters pause and\ncalculate that for every little saint you give to heaven, you beget and\nbear at least nine sinners who will eventually go to hell.\n\nThe remedy proposed is plain and simple as a gospel precept: let no\nChristian have any child at all\u2014a rule which, in the grandeur of its\nabsoluteness makes the poor timid and tentative Malthusianism very\nridiculous indeed. For this rule is drawn immediately from the New\nTestament and cannot but be perfect as its source.\n\nLet us think of a few of the advantages which would flow from its\npractice. The profane have sometimes sneered that Jesus and his\ndisciples manifestly thought that the world would come to an end, the\nmillennium be inaugurated, within a very few years from the public\nministry of Jesus. Luckily the profane are always ignorant or shallow,\nor both. For, as the New Jerusalem is to come down while Christians are\nalive, and as Christians in the highest sense or Christians without\noffspring must have come to an end with the first generation, it is\nplain that the belief which has been sneered at was thoroughly well\nfounded; and that it has been disappointed only because the vast\nmajority of Christians have not been Christians in the highest sense at\nall, but in their ignorance have continued to propagate like so many\nheathen proletarians.\n\nNow, supposing the very likely case that all Christians now living\nreflect upon the truth herein expounded, and see that it is true, and,\ntherefore, always act upon it, it follows that, with the end of our now\nyoung generation, the whole of Christendom will be translated into the\nkingdom of heaven. Either the mere scum of non-Christians left upon the\nearth will be wholly or in great part converted by an example so\nsplendid and attractive, and thus translate all Christendom in the\nsecond edition in a couple of generations more; or else the world, being\nwithout any Christianity, will, as a matter of course, be so utterly\nvile and evil that the promised fire must destroy it at once, and so\nbring in the New Heavens and New Earth.\n\nRoman Catholic Christians may indeed answer that, although the above\nargument is irresistible to the Protestants, who have no mean in the\nnext life between Heaven and Hell, yet that it is not so formidable to\nthem, seeing that they believe in the ultimate salvation of nearly every\none born and reared in their communion, and only give a temporary\npurgatory to the worst of their own sinners. And I admit that such reply\nis very cogent. Yet, strangely enough, the Catholics, even more than the\nProtestants, recognise and cultivate the supreme beatitude of celibacy;\ntheir legions of unwedded priests, and monks, and nuns and saints are so\nmany legions of concessions to the truth of my main (arguement).\n\nI am aware that one of the most illustrious dignitaries of our own\nNational Church, the very reverend and reverent Dr. Swift, Dean of St.\nPatrick\u2019s, has advocated on various grounds, and with impressive force\nof reasoning, the general eating of babies: and I anticipate that some\nprudent Christians may, therefore, argue that it is better to get babies\nand eat them than to have none at all, since the souls of the sweet\ninnocents would surely go to heaven, while their bodies would be very\nnourishing on earth. Unfortunately, however, the doctrine of Original\nSin, as expounded and illustrated by many very thoughtful theologians,\nand specially theologians of the most determined Protestant type, makes\nit very doubtful whether the souls of infants are not damned. It will\nsurely be better, then, for good Protestants to have no infants at all:\nQ. E. D.\n\n\n\n\nTHE SWINBURNE CONTROVERSY\n\n\n(1866.)\n\nNot having read Mr. Swinburne\u2019s \u201cPoems and Ballads,\u201d I have nothing to\nsay on the special case in which they are involved. A few of the adverse\ncritiques I have chanced to see, and these almost avail to convince one\nthat Mr. Swinburne is a true poet. The _Saturday Review_, shocked out of\nthe complacency of its stark peevishness, cried, \u201cPretty verses these to\nread aloud to young ladies in the drawing-room!\u201d As if there were any\ngreat book in existence proper to read aloud to young ladies in\ndrawing-rooms! and as if young ladies in drawing-rooms were the fit and\nproper judges of any great book! I should like to watch the smuggest and\nmost conceited of Saturday Reviewers attempting to read aloud to young\nladies in a drawingroom certain chapters in the Bible, certain scenes of\nShakespere, certain of the very best passages in Chaucer, Spenser,\nDryden, Pope, Swift, Fielding, Sterne, Smollett, Burns, Byron, Shelley.\nWhen Mr. Swinburne answers that he writes for full-grown men and women,\nthe acute _Fun_ affirms that men have read his book and have condemned\nit. As if our present brood of periodical critics were men! At home in\nprivate life, some of them probably are; but in their critical capacity,\nthat is to say incapacity, how many of them have any virility? The\n_Athenaeum_ squashes the detestable book by proclaiming that it contains\nsuch and such things in the style of Alfred de Musset, George Sand,\nVictor Hugo, Ovid, etc.; that is to say, in the style of some of the\nbest Latin and modern French writers! As for _Punch_, he makes a joke\nworthy of his present lively condition (were it not for Mr. C. H.\nBennett, one would say that there was no blood at all left in Mr. Punch\nwhen the great Leech dropped off), suggesting that the author should\ntake the appropriate name of Swine-born. But the mass of our present\ncritics are so far beneath contempt that we will waste no more time upon\nthem.\n\nI have just one remark to make, however, before saying a few words on\nthe general issue raised by this particular process. A large number of\nhighly respectable elderly personages in gowns, for the most part\nbelonging to the priesthood of our very dear National Church, and who by\nthemselves and by good Bumbledom in general are accounted the real\nclerisy of England, have devoted all, or nearly all, the years of their\nmaturity to what is termed the classical instruction of ingenuous youth.\nThe ingenuous youth thus magnificently instructed comprise young men of\nthe highest rank, with the most money and leisure and the reddest blood\nin the nation. Is it not rather ludicrous to see the said begowned\nelderly personages all wringing their hands and smiting their breasts,\nweeping and lamenting in sore astonishment and perplexity and terror,\nwhen one of these young men dares to give sign that he has actually in\nsome degree _assimilated_ such classical instruction, instead of merely\ngulping it down hastily and then vomiting it all crude at the\nexaminations?\n\nAs to the general questions, I will start by avowing frankly my\nconviction, that, in the present state of England, every thoughtful man\nwho loves literature should rejoice in the advent of any really able\nbook which outrages propriety and shocks Bumbledom, should rejoice in\nits advent simply and exactly because it does outrage propriety and\nshock Bumbledom, even if this book be nauseous to his own taste and bad\nin his own judgment. For the condition of our literature in these days\nis disgraceful to a nation of men: Bumble has drugged all its higher\npowers, and only the rudest shocks can arouse them from their torpor. We\nhave still, indeed, by the inscrutable bounty of nature, three or four\ngreat writers, the peers of the greatest in Europe; out they stand like\nso many forest-trees, antique oaks of Old England, in a boundless flat\nof kitchen-gardens\u2014cabbage and lettuce, radishes and onions, and all the\nmany-leaved \u201cpot-boilers,\u201d fit only to be soddened and seethed in a pot,\nand \u201cto pot,\u201d thank goodness, they all quickly go.\n\nOur literature should be the clear and faithful mirror of our whole\nworld of life, but at present there are vast realms of thought and\nimagination and passion and action, of which it is not allowed to give\nany reflex at all, or is allowed only to give a reflex so obscure and\ndistorted as to be worse than none. But, it may be objected, suppose\nSatyrs come leering into your mirror and Bacchantes whirl before it? I\nanswer that the business of a mirror is clear reflection: if it does not\nfaithfully image the Satyr, how can it faithfully image Hyperion? And do\nyou dread that the Satyr will be preferred to Hyperion, when both stand\nimaged in clear light before us? It is only when the windows are\ncurtained, when the mirror is a black gulph and its portraitures are\nvague dark shadows, that the beautiful and the noble can pass\nundistinguished from the hideous and the vile.\n\nIf, indeed, the realities not reflected became unrealities, were\nannihilated, then there would be some sense in veiling those portions of\nthe mirror in front of which certain features of our life are exposed.\nAnd if that which sees not could not be seen, it would be very sensible\nof the hunted ostrich to hide its head in the sand. But we all know that\nin darkness what is filthy and vile grows ever filthier and viler, what\nis pure and sweet sickens and decays.\n\n\u201cWe have left undone those things which we ought to have done; and we\nhave done those things which we ought not to have done; and there is no\nhealth in us.\u201d\n\nWe have suppressed mention of all facts which Bumble would fain ignore,\nand utterance of all opinions likely to disturb his sacred peace; we\nhave canted enough to nauseate the angels, and have continually lied for\nGod as for a man to pleasure him; so our popular books are fit for\nemasculated imbeciles, the _Times_ is our leading journal, and the\n_Daily Telegraph_ boasts the largest circulation in the world! And in\nthe meanwhile the police-reports are full of putrid flesh, all the\nblue-books are crammed with statistical dry bones; flesh from the\ncarcases and bones from the skeletons in that mass of death and\ncorruption under our imperial whited sepulchre.\n\nI do not complain of the kitchen-garden literature; many of the\nvegetables are very wholesome and savory in their season, very good for\neating to-day and forgetting to-morrow; I complain that in the interest\nof kitchen-gardens the rearing of all grander and loftier vegetation,\nthe growth of secular forest-kings has become almost impossible in\nEngland. The stupidest popular book would not be popular did it not find\na large number of people still more stupid than itself, to whom it is\nreally entertaining and instructive. These stupid people one does not\nblame, one can only pity or envy them according to one\u2019s mood. But what\nshall one say of that large number of educated people who are not\nstupid, who are familiar with continental literature; who yet, if an\nEnglish book appears advocating ideas such as they have been delighted\nwith in a French or German dress, feign astonishment and horror, and\njoin with all the poor little curs of Bumbledom in yelping and snarling\nat it? These men who know well what they are doing are the accomplices\nof Bumble who does not know what he is doing, who fondly fancies that he\nis doing something very different, in starving on thin diet and\nstupifying with narcotic drugs the intellect of our nation once so\nrobust and active; and assuredly if the process goes on much longer we\nshall come to rank mentally as a third-rate Power in Europe.\n\nNo intelligent man in England, without (which is a contradiction in\nterms) his ideas are exactly coincident with the non-ideas of Bumble, or\nwithout he is rich and independent, can afford to devote himself to\nhonest treatment of any great religious or social, moral or\nphilosophical question. If treated in a book, he must himself pay the\nexpense of publication; if treated in an article, not even by payment\ncould he get the portals of any popular periodical to open unto him. For\nperiodicals\u2014newspapers, magazines, reviews\u2014are the Fools\u2019 Paradise of\nthe commonplace, the mediocre, the orthodox, the respectable. As the\nstrength of a chain must be measured by its weakest link, so the thought\nof a periodical must be measured by the thought of its most imbecile\nsubscribers. A periodical to live must be a commercial success; the\nfaintest thrill of new ideas would affect its circulation by shocking\noff some of its regular readers; it must suit its articles to the size\nof its customers\u2014a very little hat for a very little head, a very little\nthought for a very little brain. Thus, though in thinking of their\ncriticisms I spoke so contemptuously of our critics, I do not doubt that\nmany of them are much wiser than their articles. The most honest of them\nmust live by their pen, so they do not attempt to tell the whole truth\nthough they will not tell a lie; many, however, undoubtedly are as apt\nfor the sin of commission as for the sin of omission.\n\nA noteworthy instance occurs to me as I write. An eminent English\nauthor, in some respects even a great author, complained that in our\ncountry no one since _Fielding_ had dared to attempt the full and\nfaithful portraiture of a man, and he set himself to the task in a work\npublished by instalments. As he entered upon certain phases of common\nvirile life, the circulation of the serial began to decrease. This\nauthor was eminent, well-off, much more honest and wise and brave than\nninety-nine authors in a hundred: of course, having begun his work he\nwould honestly finish it, he would not only tell the truth and nothing\nbut the truth, he would also tell the whole truth?\u2014he quietly left off\npainting the features objected to, finished such as were agreeable to\nthe public, and said with a cynical scorn (flavored perhaps with some\nbitterness of self-scorn), \u201c_So you don\u2019t want to see and hear the whole\ntruth? Very well!\u201d This author was revered by the great and\nnoble-hearted Charlotte Bront\u00eb; this author was *Thackeray_, strong with\nall the prestige of _Vanity Fair_; he could not think of continuing a\ncourse injurious to his \u201ccirculation,\u201d so \u201cPendennis\u201d is not almost\nworthy (as it might, else have been) to stand beside \u201cUn Grande Homme de\nProvince \u00e0 Paris\u201d of Balzac.\n\nWhen such is Thackeray, what must be Gigadibs?\n\nIf I write this rather strongly it is because I feel that I am writing\nin the interest of strength and health and purity and freedom, at a time\nwhen the mass of our literature is infected with servile weakness and\ndisease and that \u201cobscenity, which is ever blasphemy against the divine\nbeauty in life.\u201d For all obscene things batten on darkness, and light is\nfatal to them. But for the Bumble who rules over us, the naked beauty is\nobscene and the naked truth is blasphemous; he thinks that the Venus de\nMedici came out of Holywell Street, and is inclined to believe that all\nthe fossil records of geology were forged by the Devil to throw\ndiscredit upon the book of Genesis. One cannot without a keen pang of\nshame and rage think of what we are when one remembers what we were,\nwhen one recalls our old and glorious literature, in the wide world\nunsurpassed; our literature noble and renowned, ever most glorious when\nmost manly and daring.\n\n\n\n\nGREAT CHRIST IS DEAD\n\n\n(1875.)\n\nWe have all heard the wonderful story, recounted by Plutarch in his\ntreatise on the Cessation of the Oracles, how, in the reign of Tiberius\nC\u00e6sar, a ship sailing from Greece to Italy was becalmed for the night at\nthe islet-rock of Paxus in the Ionian Sea, between the Echinades and\nIthaca, when a loud and terrible voice from the land called Thamous the\npilot. And he having responded at the third appeal, \u201cI am here; what\nwould you with me?\u201d the voice, grown yet louder and more terrible,\ncommanded him to announce on arriving at Palodes that Pan the Great was\ndead. Accordingly, when the vessel reached this place, whose site I\nbelieve the learned have not yet fixed, Thamous stood on the prow and\nlifting his voice shoreward cried, \u201cPan the Great is dead!\u201d\u2014whereon were\nheard great moanings and lamentations, mysterious and multitudinous. Not\nhaving Plutarch at hand, I have refreshed my memory from Rabelais, who\nrepeats this well-authenticated story by the mouth of Pantagruel, in the\ntwenty-eighth chapter of the fourth book of his inestimable work,\nfollowing soon on that tempest of all tempests wherein Friar John and\nPanurge so variously distinguished themselves. The good Pantagruel goes\non to expound the story after his own manner, thinking that it referred\nnot to the heathen god Pan, but to our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ,\n\u201cignominiously put to death by the envy and iniquity of the pontiffs,\ndoctors, presbyters, and monks of the Mosaic dispensation....\u201d\n\nFor with good right may he in the Greek tongue be called Pan, seeing\nthat he is our All; all we are, all we live, all we have, all we hope,\nis him, in him, of him, by him. He is the good Pan, the great\nShepherd.... at whose death were moanings, sighs, trepidations and\nlamentations in all the machine of the universe, heavens, earth, sea,\nhells. With this my interpretation the time agrees. For that most good,\nmost great Pan, our only Savior, died at Jerusalem, reigning in Rome\nTiberius Caesar.\u2014Pantagruel, these words said, rested in silence and\nprofound contemplation. A little while after we saw the tears rolling\nfrom his eyes, large as ostrich eggs. I give myself to God if I lie in a\nsingle word.\u201d Notwithstanding the thrilling pathos of this close, and my\ndeep reverence for Rabelais, with whom no commentator in holy orders\nknown to me can be compared, except Dean Swift, I am inclined on this\npoint to follow the ordinary opinion that Pan the great god whose death\nwas thus miraculously announced was the Pan of the heathen Greeks.\nChrist had died, but only _pro tem_; had descended into Hell, but with a\nreturn ticket, and simply to harry that realm of Old Harry; in three\ndays he had risen from the dead, in forty more ascended into Heaven; his\nreign had begun and the reign of the old gods was ended; the spirit was\nexalted ana the flesh brought low, this world and life were contemned\nfor the life and world to come; Nature, the All, the great Pan, was\nannulled, and the Supernatural Nothing throned supreme. The poets have\nchanted this momentous revolution according to their religion, their\nphantasy, or their mood. Milton in his Hymn on the Nativity shouts harsh\nPuritanical scorn on the oracles stricken dumb, and the deities\noverthrown. Shelley in a magnificent chorus of \u201cHellas,\u201d \u201cWorlds on\nworlds are rolling ever,\u201d contests not the justice of their doom, while\nin the final chorus he predicts the same doom for their conqueror in his\nturn, In our own day Mr. Swinburne in the \u201cHymn to Proserpine,\u201d and\nelsewhere, has bewailed the dead immortals, with nothing but aversion\nand contempt for the pale Galilean, the \u201cghastly glories of saints, dead\nlimbs of gibbeted gods.\u201d Leopardi an early poem \u201cTo Spring,\u201d beautiful\nbut not of his deepest, regrets the banished divinities, and since the\nhalls of Olympus are void, appeals to Nature to restore to his spirit\nits first fire, if she indeed lives. Schiller in his \u201cGods of Greece\u201d\npassionately laments them; and Mrs. Browning more passionately answers\nhim, crying, \u201cGod himself is the best Poet, and the Real is his song and\nthe Real we accept perforce in its fulness, but discern not how it can\nderive from an unreal God. Novalis in his \u201cHymns to the Night\u201d laments\nwith Schiller the unsouling of Nature, \u201cbound in iron chains by arid\nnumber and rigorous rule;\u201d but goes on to celebrate the resurrection of\nHumanity in Christ. Heine in his. \u201cGods of Greece,\u201d after declaring in\nhis wild way that he has never loved the old deities, that to him the\nGreek are repugnant, and the Romans thoroughly hateful, yet avows that\nwhen he considers how dastardly and windy are the gods who overcame\nthem, the new reigning sorrowful gods, malignant in their sheep\u2019s,\nclothing of humility, he feels ready to fight for the former against\nthese. This change of the celestial dynasty is indeed a favorite theme\nwith him. Elsewhere he pictures the Olympians holding high revelry, with\nnectar and ambrosia, with Apollonian music and inextinguishable\nlaughter, when suddenly a wretched Jew staggers in, his brow bleeding\nfrom a crown of thorns, trailing on his shoulder a heavy cross, which he\nheaves upon the banquet table; and forthwith the revel is no more, the\ndivine feast disappears, the everburning lights are quenched, the\ntriumphant gods and goddesses vanish terror-smitten, dethroned for ever\nand ever. And again, in his incomparable \u201cGods in Exile,\u201d he tells us\nwhat became of these dispersed Olympians during the Dark Ages, in the\nthick night of the noontide of Christianity; how they were transformed\nfrom celestial to infernal by the monstrous superstition of that baleful\nera; as we find the hoofs and horns of Pan transferred to the Devil\nhimself; as we find Venus in that legend of Tannhauser which has\nfascinated so many poets, as well as great Wagner,\u2014\n\n    V\u00e9nus, ma belle d\u00e9esse,\n    Vous \u00eates diablesse!\n\nMore than eighteen hundred years have passed since the death of the\ngreat god Pan was proclaimed; and now it is full time to proclaim the\ndeath of the great god Christ. Eighteen hundred years make a fairly long\nperiod even for a celestial dynasty; but this one in its perishing must\ndiffer from all that have perished before it, seeing that no other can\nsucceed it; the throne shall remain void for ever, the royalty of the\nHeavens be abolished. Fate, in the form of Science, has decreed the\nextinction of the gods. Mary and her babe must join Venus and Love, Isis\nand Horus; living with them only in the world of art. Jesus on his cross\nmust dwindle to a point, even in the realms of legend under Prometheus\non Caucasus. For ages already the Father has been as spectral as\nJupiter; for ages already the Holy Ghost has been but the shadow of a\nshade. And the last, not least, member of the Divine Royal Family, Satan\nthe Prince of Darkness, Prince of this World, and Prince of the Powers\nof the Air, is no more alive than Pluto, who also was born brother to\nthe Monarch of Heaven. The Hebrew dynasty of the gods is no more; it has\ndone much evil in its long sovranty, which we will try to forget now it\nceases to reign; it has done some little good, whose remembrance we will\ncherish when it is sepulchred, Christ the Great is dead, but Pan the\nGreat lives again, as Mr. Maccall told us in some lines published in\nthis paper several years ago. Pan lives, not as a God, but as the All,\nNature, now that the oppression of the Supernatural is removed. I may be\ntold that Christianity is yet alive and flourishing, that its priesthood\nand its churches hold possession of Europe and America and Australia. So\nthe priesthood and the shrines of the Olympians kept possession of the\nRoman Empire centuries after the crucifixion of Jesus. When the spirit\nof a faith has departed, that faith is dead, and its burial is only a\nquestion of time. When the noblest hearts worship not at its altars,\nwhen the most vigorous intellects abandon its creeds, the knell of its\ndoom has rung. At the risk of being thought bigoted or prejudiced, I\nmust avow that to my mind the decomposition of Christianity is so\noffensively manifest and advanced, that, with the exception of a very\nfew persons whose transcendent genius could throw a glamor of glory over\nany creed however crude and mean, and whom I recognise as far above my\njudgment, I can no longer give my esteem to any educated man who has\ninvestigated and still professes this, religion, without grave deduction\nat the expense of his heart, his intellect, or his conscience, if not of\nall three. Miraculous voices are not heard in these days; but everywhere\nmyriads of natural voices are continually announcing to us, and\nenjoining us to announce to others, Great Christ is dead!\n\n\n\n\nRESURRECTION AND ASCENSION OF JESUS\n\n\n(1876.)\n\nIn reviewing Mr. R. H. Hutton\u2019s Essay on \u201cChristian Evidences, Popular\nand Critical,\u201d I was obliged to follow his lead, joining issue on such\npleas as he put forward. Thus with regard to the resurrection of Jesus,\nas Mr. Hutton adduced what he thought confirmatory evidence only from\nthe New Testament itself, I confined myself to showing or attempting to\nshow that such evidence is unsubstantial. But I could not consider this\nargument adequate or conclusive, for there are large general\nconsiderations of incomparably greater importance which it leaves out\naltogether. It is as if a case ruled by broad principles of equity were\nto be decided on the narrowest technical grounds. Therefore, while\nconfident that even on these grounds the case must go against the\nChristian believer, I wish to add a few words on its wider relations, in\norder that the decision may be established, not merely by the letter of\nthe law, but also by the spirit of justice.\n\nWe leave thus the torturing of texts in the dim cells of the theological\nInquisition, a process by which almost any confession required can be\nand has been wrung from the unfortunate victims, and emerge into the\nopen daylight of common-sense and reason. And here I venture to assert\nthat if the story of the resurrection and ascension were recorded of any\nother than Jesus in any other sacred book than the Bible, Mr. Hutton and\nall other intelligent Christians would not only disbelieve it, but would\nnot even condescend to investigate it, condemning it offhand as too\npreposterous to be worthy of serious attention. Thus, what Christian has\never deigned to examine critically the marvels affirmed in the Koran,\nsuch as Mohammed\u2019s visit to heaven; although the Koran can be traced far\nmore surely to the Prophet of Islam than can the Gospels to their\nreputed authors, and this Prophet bears a far higher character for\ntruthfulness than do the early Christians? Nay, what Bibliolater has\never seriously weighed the evidence for the miracles of his fellow\nChristian the great St. Bernard; such as those which are minutely\nrelated and solemnly attested by ten eye-witnesses, men well known and\nof unimpeached veracity, and which are thus infinitely better attested\nthan any miracle in the Bible from Genesis to Revelation?\n\nYour enlightened Protestant simply shrugs his shoulders at all such\nstories, and says with a superior smile: \u201cOf course, mere imposture and\ncollusion, or superstition and delusion; no sensible man can afford to\nwaste his time in weighing that sort of stuff; we don\u2019t think twice\nbefore determining whether the impossible ever really occurred.\u201d How,\nthen, can this enlightened Protestant receive without question the\nmiracles of the Jewish books while rejecting without question all\nothers? We have seen that it cannot be because of any superiority of\nevidence for the former, since the evidence for the latter is in many\ncases infinitely greater and better authenticated, and since he does not\nattempt to weigh evidence before either accepting or rejecting, though\nhe may seek evidence and argument to confirm what he has already given\nhimself to believe. He accepts the Jewish miracles simply because they\nhave come down to him, through many generations of his forefathers,\ninvested with a glamor of sanctity, and he regards them with the eye of\nfaith which sees, and sees not, just what it wishes; he rejects miracles\nnot in the Bible because they come to him without any hallowed\nassociations, and he regards them with the eye of reason which beholds\nthe plain facts before it, and neither wishes nor is able to avoid\nbeholding them.\n\nIt is worth noting that while our Christian advocates insist with all\ntheir might, such as it is, upon the resurrection of Jesus, they\nwillingly pass over as lightly as possible, if they do not altogether\nignore, a similar miracle guaranteed by the very same authority. In\nMatt, xxvii., 52, 53, it stands recorded among the marvels following the\ndeath of Jesus: \u201cAnd the graves were opened; and many bodies of the\nsaints which slept arose, and came out of their graves after his\nresurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.\u201d The\nreader of Shakespeare will remember the prodigies anterior to the death\nof Julius C\u00e6sar when\u2014\n\n                  \u201cThe sheeted dead\n    Did squeak and gibber in the Roman streets.\u201d\n\nThis prodigal multiplicity and superfluity of resurrections seems to\nhave been not a little embarrassing to modern Christian champions,\nthough doubtless it did not in the least trouble the primitive\nnon-scientific believers, to whom nothing was more natural than the\nunnatural, including the supernatural and the infranatural. An apologist\nof our days who _must_ affirm the one resurrection, seeing that his\nwhole religion is based upon it, and who, though valiantly defying\nscience, seeks to conciliate historical possibility, finds his task\nquite heavy enough in accounting for the facts that the risen Jesus \u201cwas\nseen of above five hundred brethren at once,\u201d and yet that no record of\nhis rising can be found beyond the limits of the New Testament. But the\ndifficulties of the poor apologist are enormously increased if he must\nfurther contend that many bodies of the saints came out of their graves,\nand went into the holy city, and appeared unto many, and still there is\nno external evidence. We are surely at the utmost limits of the possible\nin conceiving that Jesus could appear unto five hundred of the brethren\nat once (there is no hint elsewhere that he had so many permanent\nfollowers in his lifetime; in Acts i., 15, we find that there were about\none hundred and twenty gathered after the ascension), without the\npriests and the Roman officials hearing of the apparition and\ninvestigating it. But if many others rose from their graves and appeared\nto many, it is absolutely impossible that anyone in Jerusalem could be\nignorant of the miracle; equally impossible that Pilate and his officers\ndid not investigate it, and equally impossible that finding it real he\ndid not report it with the evidence to Rome, for the Empire was a\nthoroughly organised State, and the Romans were a thoroughly practical\nand business-like people. Once in the imperial archives, the record of\nthe miracle would have spread everywhere; all subsequent historians\nwould have related it, all subsequent writers referred to it. So it is\nno wonder that, recoiling from these manifold impossibilities, the\nChristian advocates prefer to dwell on the one resurrection as if it\nwere unique, and avoid dwelling on the others that by the very same\ntestimony immediately followed it. It is very significant that neither\nin the Acts nor in the Epistles is there any allusion to these\nresurrections. When Peter and the others were preaching the resurrection\nof Christ, why did they not adduce and produce some of these many, risen\nsaints, whose visible, tangible, living and speaking evidence would have\nbeen irresistible?\n\nJust as the resurrection of Jesus could be accepted without misgiving by\nthe non-scientific early Christians, to whom miracles appeared among the\nmost frequent occurrences of life, so could the ascension. Their earth\nwas a plane, vaulted by the sky, lamped by the little sun and moon and\nstars; above this vault was Heaven, where their God dwelt enthroned;\nthey knew nothing of the law of gravitation; their Christ, standing in\nthe flesh on the Mount of Olives, floated up through this vault to sit\nenthroned beside his Father in the most natural supernatural manner. We\ncan conceive and sympathise with this simple faith; but it is hard to\nconceive and sympathise with the blind faith, which seems wilfully\nblind, of the modem educated Christians. It has been often remarked that\nCopernicus and Kepler and Newton have destroyed all the old mythologies,\nincluding of course the mythology of both the Old and New Testaments.\nWith the earth no longer the universe of mortal life, between a Heaven\nabove its domed firmament and a Hades like a vast dungeon beneath, but a\nquite infinitesimal grain of sand involved by an infinitesimal drop of\ndew, floating and revolving in an ocean of space boundless in heighth\nand depth and breadth, amidst innumerable other spherules, most of which\nvisible are very much greater than itself, and at inconceivable\ndistances from it; with man no longer the lord of the creation, for\nwhose service all things were made, but an animalcule inexpressibly\nsmall, living for a moment inexpressibly brief, with limitless time\nbefore his beginning and limitless time beyond his end; the Christian\nmythology and system, among others, because ineffably absurd. Where is\nthe Heaven for its God? where the Hell for its Devil? Where is above?\nWhere beneath? Whence came the winged angels, with their wrings which\nwould not enable them to fly?\n\nIf Jesus had ascended and continued to ascend with the speed of light,\nhe might be ascending now and go 011 ascending for millions and millions\nof years, and still not reach a heavenly region beyond the range of our\ntelescopes I And think of the scheme of the Atonement in the system of\nthe universe, as we are learning to know it now\u2014try to conceive an\ninfinite and eternal God of this infinite and eternal Whole sacrificing\nhis only son for the salvation of us most insignificant insects on our\nmost insignificant earth! The immense conceptions of science dwarf these\npetty conceptions of mythology to a littleness which reduces them\nbeneath consideration, which in our days reduces them even beneath\ncontempt.\n\nNaturally the churches have always hated and resisted science, and the\ntheologians have seldom dared to face its conclusions. They ignore the\nimmensities, and confine their vision to the pages of a single book, to\na history whose chronology counts not six thousand years. But, as I have\nremarked, even this minute field they cannot hold against the sceptic,\nwho has made them abandon all the rest of the universe. Why did their\nrisen Lord only slink about among his own disciples, appearing to these\nbut at flying instants: why did he not, with his well-known features and\nwith the wounds of the nails and the spear in his body, confront the\nchief priests and Pilate and the whole of Jerusalem, and compel them to\nacknowledge and bear enduring witness to his resurrection? Why did he\nnot summon all the people from the highest to the lowest to the solemn\nspectacle of his ascension, securing multitudinous and permanently\nrecorded evidence such as none of us could doubt? We might go on asking\nWhy? and Why? and Why? in this fashion on a hundred points, confident\nthat to not one of our questions could the Christian apologist give a\nstraightforward and satisfactory answer. As the scheme of the Atonement\nis presented to us, God sacrificed his only son that all mankind might\nbe saved through belief in him; yet not merely neglected to secure\ntrustworthy evidence and certain record of this supreme fact and the\nmiracles attesting it, but adopted every means possible to make the\nevidence untrustworthy, the record uncertain, the miracles and the\nsacrifice incredible.\n\n\n\n\nSOME MUSLIM LAWS AND BELIEFS\n\n\n(1876.)\n\nThe following notes are drawn from E. W. Lane\u2019s charming and instructive\n\u201cManners and Customs of the Modem Egyptians\u201d (fifth and standard ed.,\n1860), a worthy companion to Sir Gardner Wilkinson\u2019s book on the Ancient\nEgyptians, and written about forty years since, before\nsteam-communication had materially changed that people. The mu\u00e9doins,\nwhose summons to prayer is one of the few audible charms of the East to\na western, are generally chosen from the blind, in order that the harems\nand terraces of houses may not be overlooked from the minarets. _Our_\ncallers to prayer are generally blind also; but this is because few\nclearsighted men will in these days accept the office. The imams or\npriests and other religious officials are all paid from the funds of\ntheir respective mosques, and not by any contributions exacted from the\npeople: a lesson to us with our State Church. The im\u00e2ms have no\nauthority above other persons, and enjoy no respect save for reputed\nlearning and piety; they are not a distinct order of men set apart for\nthe ministry, but may resign or be displaced, losing with the office the\ntitle of im\u00e2m; they chiefly obtain their living by other means than\nservice in the mosque (for which their salaries are as a rule only about\na shilling a month), many of them being tradesmen: here surely are\nseveral good lessons for us. The mosques are open all day, and the great\nmosque El-Azhar all night; the Muslims have great reverence for them,\nyet in many of the larger ones persons lounge, chat, eat, sleep, spit,\nsew, etc.: another lesson to us with our churches nearly always closed\nand useless. The Muslim does not abstain from business on the Friday,\nhis Sabbath, except during the time of prayer, and for this he has the\nauthority of the Kur-\u00e2n: when will our bigoted Sabbatarians learn so\nmuch liberal wisdom from him? The Prophet did not forbid women to attend\npublic prayers in the mosques, but pronounced it better for them to pray\nin private; in Cairo they are not admitted to the public prayers, it\nbeing thought that their presence would inspire a wrong sort of\ndevotion. The result is that few women in Egypt pray at all. If ours\nwere in like case, how many churches and chapels would attract large\ncongregations? The Egyptians, like the modern Arabs, are not a truthful\npeople, but there are some oaths which few would falsely take; such as\nswearing three times by \u201cGod the Great,\u201d or on a copy of the Kur-\u00e2n \u201cBy\nwhat this contains of the word of God!\u201d\u2014I wonder whether the Christian\nEnglishmen are few who falsely swear by God and on the Bible. Mr. Lane\nwitnessed many instances of forbearance in persons of the middle and\nlower classes when grossly insulted; and often heard an Egyptian say on\nreceiving a blow from an equal, \u201cGod bless thee,\u201d \u201cGod requite thee\ngood,\u201d \u201cBeat me again\u201d: how many of the Christians obey in like manner\none of the plainest precepts of Christ? In general a quarrel terminates\nby one or both of them saying \u201cJustice is against me\u201d; often after this\nthey recite together the first chapter of the Kur-\u00e2n; and then,\nsometimes, embrace and kiss one another. If a similar custom prevailed\nhere there would be little serious quarrelling; for the men would all\navoid disputes save with pretty girls and charming women, and would\nalways make it up very quickly with them. The Muslim believes that there\nhave been six great Prophets and Apostles\u2014Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses,\nJesus, Mohammed; each of whom received a revealed law or system of\nreligion and morality, each of the first five abrogated and superseded\nby the next, though all were the same in essentials. Thus the Jews from\nthe time of Moses to that of Christ, and the Christians (if they did not\naccept the corrupt and idolatrous doctrine of the divinity of Jesus)\nfrom the time of Christianity to that of Mohammed, were true believers.\nOf course the last is the greatest Prophet, and since his revelation the\nMuslims only have been the faithful. The Pentateuch, Psalms and Gospels,\nthough of divine origin, have been so much altered as to contain very\nlittle of the true Word of God; but the Kur-\u00e2n is supposed to have\nsuffered no essential change whatever. Jesus was born of a pure virgin\nby the miraculous operation of God, without any father human or divine.\nWhen he had fulfilled the object of his mission, he was taken up to God\nfrom the Jews who sought to slay him, and another man, on whom God had\nstamped the likeness of Jesus, was crucified in his stead. He will come\nagain upon earth, to establish the Muslim religion and perfect peace and\nsecurity, after having killed Anti-Christ, and to be a sign of the\napproach of the last day. In all these doctrines the Muslims are\ndecidedly more consistent and liberal, as well as somewhat less\nsuperstitious than the Christians, with their God-man and trinity in\nunity, their damnation of Mohammed as a mere impostor and of his\nreligion, El Islam, as a vile fabrication of stolen materials. \u201cThe\nEgyptians pay a superstitious reverence not to imaginary beings alone:\nthey extend it to certain individuals of their own species; and often to\nthose who are justly the least entitled to such respect. An _idiot_ or a\n_fool_ is vulgarly regarded by them as a being whose mind is in heaven,\nwhile his grosser part mingles among ordinary mortals; consequently, he\nis considered an especial favorite of heaven. Whatever enormities a\nreputed saint may commit (and there are many who are constantly\ninfringing precepts of their religion) such acts do not affect his fame\nfor sanctity: for they are considered as the results of the abstraction\nof his mind from worldly things; his soul, or reasoning faculties, being\nwholly absorbed in devotion, so that his passions are left without\ncontrol. Lunatics who are dangerous to society are kept in confinement;\nbut those who are harmless are generally regarded as saints. _Most of\nthe reputed saints of Egypt are either lunatics, or idiots, or\nimpostors._\u201d wonder whether this applies at all, and if it does, to what\nextent, to the countless saints of our Most Holy Catholic Church of\nChristendom. In Egypt, as in other countries of the East, Muslims,\nChristians, and Jews adopt each other\u2019s superstitions, while they abhor\nthe leading doctrines of each other\u2019s faith. \u201cIn sickness, the Muslim\nsometimes employs Christian and Jewish priests to pray for him: the\nChristians and Jews, in the same predicament, often call in Muslim\nsaints for the like purpose!\u201d So much human nature is there in man, not\nto speak of woman. The Muslims profoundly reverence the Kur-\u00e2n, yet will\nquote it on the most trivial occasions in jest as well as on the most\nimportant in earnest. They are generally fond of conversing on religion\namong themselves; and the most prevalent mode of entertaining a party of\nguests among the higher middle classes, in Cairo, is the recital of the\nwhole of the Kur-\u00e2n, which is chanted by special persons hired for the\npurpose, or other religious exercises. This chanting of the Kur-\u00e2n takes\nup about nine hours. When will our fashionable Bibliolaters issue\ninvitations for the treat of hearing poor curates or scripture readers\nintone the whole of the Bible, or even so much of it at a time as might\nbe got through in nine hours? When, oh when?\n\nLadies will learn with approval that it is thought improper, and even\ndisreputable, for a man to be single. Mr. Lane was a bachelor during his\nfirst two visits to Egypt; and in the former of these, having to change\nhis residence, engaged another house. The lease was duly signed and some\nmoney paid in advance, but the inhabitants of the neighborhood (who were\nmostly descendants of the Prophet) would not have an unmarried man in\ntheir midst. The agent said they would gladly admit him if he would but\npurchase a female slave, thus redeeming himself from the opprobrium of\nnot possessing a wife of some sort. He managed to secure a house in a\nless scrupulous quarter, but had to engage that no creature wearing a\nhat should visit him. The Sheykh or chief of this quarter often urged\nhim to marry; Lane objected that he intended to live in Egypt only a\nyear or two longer. The Sheykh answered, with great moral force and\nearnestness, that a handsome young widow a few doors off would be glad\nto marry him, on the express understanding that he should divorce her on\ngoing away; while of course he could do so earlier if she did not suit\nhim. Now this young widow, in spite of her religion and veil, had\nseveral times contrived (the Sage saith that there is nothing a woman\ncannot contrive, except to refrain from contriving) to let our Oriental\nEnglishman catch a glimpse of her very pretty face; and the miserable\nbachelor was reduced to plead that she was the very last woman he would\nlike to marry _pro tempore_, for he felt sure that once wed he could\nnever make up his mind to part with her. Doubtless all our single men,\nand especially our Christian young men, would much rather be deemed\ndisreputable and denied decent lodgings than establish their character\nfor virtue and respectability by buying female slaves, however cheap, or\nmarrying nice young widows divorcible at pleasure!\n\nAs to polygamy, Mr. Lane remarks that it can only be defended as\npreventing a greater immorality than it occasions; and that Mohammed,\nlike Moses, did not introduce but limited and regulated it. The ancient\nEgyptians had but one wife each, though they might have slave\nconcubines. Polygamy, however, is rare, and rarer among the upper and\nmiddle classes than the lower; \u201cI believe that not more than one husband\nin twenty has two wives.\u201d The mere sentence, \u201cI give myself up to thee,\u201d\nuttered by a female to a man who proposes to become her husband (even\nwithout the presence of witnesses, if none can easily be procured)\nrenders her his legal wife if arrived at puberty. A man may divorce his\nwife twice, and each time take her back without any ceremony, unless she\nhas paid for it by resigning the reserved third of the dowry, furniture,\netc.; but if he divorces her the third time, or puts her away by a\ntriple divorce conveyed in one sentence, he cannot receive her again\nuntil she has been, married and divorced by another husband, who must\nhave consummated his marriage with her. To divorce her, he simply has to\nsay, \u201cThou art divorced,\u201d or \u201cI divorce thee\u201d; but the woman cannot\nseparate herself from her husband against his will, unless it be for\nsome considerable fault on his side, such as cruel treatment or neglect.\nThe facility of divorce has depraving effects, upon both sexes. Many men\nin the course of ten years have married twenty, thirty, or more wives;\nand women not far advanced in age have been wives to a dozen or more\nsuccessively. \u201cI have heard of men who have been in the habit of\nmarrying a new wife almost every month.\u201d But such conduct is generally\nregarded as very disgraceful; and few persons in the upper or middle\nclasses would give a daughter in marriage to a person who had divorced\nmany wives.\n\nThe women deem it more incumbent to cover the upper and back part of the\nhead than the face; and more requisite to conceal the face than most\nparts of the person. Many among the lower classes never conceal their\nfaces; women may often be seen with nothing but a narrow strip of rag\nround the hips. The face-veils have the advantage of leaving the eyes\nvisible, which are generally the most beautiful of the features; fine\nfigures being more common than altogether handsome faces; though some\nfaces are of a beauty distinguished by such sweetness of expression that\nthey seem the perfection of female loveliness, \u201cand impressed me at the\ntime with the idea that their equal could not be found in any other\ncountry.\u201d The women of Cairo are less strictly guarded than in most\nEastern lands; wives are proud of the restraint as showing that the\nhusbands value them highly, looking upon themselves as hidden treasures.\nTo such an absurd extent do Muslims carry their feeling of the\nsacredness of women that entrance into the tombs of some women is\nforbidden to men; and a man and woman are never buried in the same\nvault, without a wall between them\u2014as if their very corpses might get up\nto mischief. For adultery on the part of the woman the Kur-\u00e2n prescribes\ndeath by stoning, but drowning is generally substituted. Unless detected\nby an officer of justice _four eye-witnesses are required_; failing\nthese, the accuser is to be scourged with eighty stripes. This\nextraordinary law is traced to an accusation of adultery against the\nProphet\u2019s favorite wife \u201cA\u00efsheh,\u201d who was thus absolved from punishment,\nand subsequent revelations established her innocence. If we had a\nsimilar law here we might close our Divorce Court. If a husband without\nany witnesses accuses his wife of adultery, he must swear four times by\nGod that he speaks the truth, and the fifth time imprecate God\u2019s curse\non himself if he is a liar; but the wife can counterbalance this by\nswearing four times by God that he is a liar, and the fifth time\nimprecating God\u2019s wrath on herself if he speaks the truth. The\ncommentators and lawyers have agreed that in this dilemma the marriage\nmust be dissolved. When a peasant woman is found to have been unfaithful\nto her husband, in general he or her brother throws her into the Nile,\nwith a stone tied to her neck; or cuts her to pieces and then throws\nthese into the river. In most instances a father or brother punishes in\nthe same manner an unmarried daughter or sister who has been guilty of\nincontinence. These relatives are considered more disgraced than the\nhusband by the crime of the woman; and are often despised if they do not\nthus punish her. Women in easy circumstances are put to bed for from\nthree to six days after childbirth; but poor women in the same case\nseldom take to bed at all, and after a day or two resume their ordinary\noccupations, if these do not require great exertion.\n\nThe law of inheritance is remarkable in two respects; primogeniture is\nnot privileged, and in most cases the share of a female is half that of\na male in the same degree of relationship. A debtor is only kept\nimprisoned for debt if he cannot prove himself insolvent; but if able,\nhe may be made work out what he owes. Apostacy from the faith is death\nif not recanted on three warnings. Blasphemy against God or any of the\nGreat Prophets, whether repented or not, is instant death: on the ground\nthat apostacy or infidelity is but ignorance and misjudgment, while\nblasphemy shows utter depravity. If Christians blaspheming Mohammed were\npunished as are Muslims blaspheming Christians, what a number of our\nenlightened clerical teachers would have died the death of malefactors!\n\nThe Copts, or descendants of the ancient Egyptians, said to number about\n150,000, are Christians, but scarcely a credit to that religion whose\nvotaries boast of its civilising and elevating character. The fact is\nthat in advanced countries the Christianity has been civilised by the\nSecularism, not the Secularism by the Christianity; in countries where\nthe sciences and arts are stationary or retrograde, Christianity proves\nthat it has in itself no motive-power, and is generally even more\ndegraded than the other superstitions around it. Mr. Lane almost\ndespaired of learning anything about these Copts, until he had the good\nfortune to become acquainted with a character of which he had doubted\nthe existence\u2014a Copt of a liberal as well as an intelligent mind. They\nhate the Greeks and all other Christians not of their own sect much\nworse than they hate the Muslims themselves. The priests are supported\nonly by alms or by their own industry. Their language is a dead one.\nThey pray seven times a day, in the course of these reciting the whole\nBook of Psalms, as well as chapters of the Bible, prayers, etc.: a fine\nexample to their lax co-religionists here. They have long and arduous\nfasts. In spite or because of all this, they bear a very bad character\nas sullen, avaricious, abominable dissemblers, cringing or domineering\naccording to circumstances. The one respectable Copt discovered by Lane\nadmitted that they are generally ignorant, faithless, worldly, sensual,\nand drunken; he declared that the Patriarch was a tyrant and suborner of\nfalse witnesses; that the monks and priests in Cairo are seen every\nevening begging and asking the loan of money, which they never repay, at\nthe houses of their parishioners and other acquaintances, and procuring\nbrandy if possible wherever they call. So much for our esteemed\nfellow-Christians in Egypt, descendants of what in heathen times was\nlong the foremost nation in the world.\n\n\u201cWomen are not to be excluded from paradise, according to the faith of\nEl Islam; though it has been asserted by many Christians, that the\nMuslims believe women to have no soul. In several places in the Kur-\u00e2n,\nParadise is promised to all true believers.\u201d They will be admitted by\nGod\u2019s mercy on account of their faith, not of their good works; but\ntheir felicity there will be proportioned to their good works. The very\nmeanest male in Paradise is promised eighty thousand beautiful youths as\nservants, and seventy-two wives of the daughters of Paradise. These\ncelestial virgins we commonly call houris, but learned and accurate\nMr-Lane terms them hooreeyehs, vividly suggesting that the Muslim saints\nburst into rapturous and prolonged hoorays on first perceiving them. He\nmay also have the wives he had here below, if he wants them; and\ndoubtless the good will desire the good. On behalf of the earthly fair\nsex, I must emphatically protest against this part of the heavenly\narrangements. How do we know that the good husband will desire the good\nwife, however good, when he has two-and-seventy maidens of Paradise all\nto himself? The trust that he will, cannot be trusted; it is a\nperfidious consolation to poor women. No wonder Muslim wives are\nobsequious, when it depends on the will, pleasure or caprice of their\nhusbands whether they shall be re-married in the other world or not.\nMrs. Caudle herself would scarcely hazard a curtain lecture with this\natrocious alternative in prospect. Try to fancy being an old-maid or\ngrass-widow for ever and ever where all the men are very much married,\nhaving six dozen wives each at the very lowest! Such a heaven to a good\nwoman were ten times crueller than hell. When the Muslim women have been\naroused to a sense of their rights, they will insist on being treated in\nthe next world on equal terms with the men: the meanest woman of the\nfaithful (supposing any woman can be mean) shall have her eighty\nthousand beautiful servants, and her seventy-two husbands of the youths\nof Paradise, resplendent, adoring, ever obedient. This settled first, it\nwill be a question for consideration between herself and her terrene\nspouse whether they shall combine their several establishments, or agree\nto be divorced by death. But I digress; women always lead us into\ndigressions, only these are usually much more interesting than the dusty\nhigh-road along which it is our business to trudge. The meanest of\nMuslims will further have a very large tent bejewelled with pearls,\njacinths and emeralds. He will be waited on by three hundred attendants\nwhile he eats, and served in dishes of gold, whereof three hundred shall\nbe set before him at once, each containing a different kind of food,\n\u201cthe last morsel of which will be as grateful as the first.\u201d This\nabsence of satiety, this ever-fresh vigor, I believe, is to mark all his\nenjoyments, however freely he may indulge in them. Though wine is\nforbidden in this life, he may drink of it _ad libitum_ in the next, and\nthe wine of Paradise doth not inebriate. He shall have perpetual youth,\nand as many children as he may desire. He shall be ravished with the\nsongs of the angel Israfeel, \u201cwhose heart-strings are a lute, and who\nhas the sweetest voice of all God\u2019s creatures.\u201d I really cannot go on;\nmy feelings are too much for me. I remember when young being taught to\nsing (or rather to squall; for my voice could never have been mistaken\nfor that of the angel Isr\u00e2feel, even by a frequenter of revival meetings\nor music halls):\n\n    \u201cI thank the goodness and the grace (grays?)\n            Which on my birth have smiled,\n    And made me in these Christian days (dace?)\n            A happy English child.\u2019*\n\nBut now that I am a man, this same consideration fills me with bitterest\nsorrow and anguish, so that I am ready to bellow:\n\n    I curse the evil and disgrace\n         Which have my birth defiled,\n    Who would have been in other case\n         A happy Muslim child!\n\nYea, when I contrast these glowing and glorious prospects held out to\nthe faithful by the Kur-\u00e2n, with the everlasting singing in white\nnight-gowns, amidst the howling of elders and composite beasts all over\neyes (what our Heine terms \u201call the menagerie of the Apocalypse\u201d), in\nadoration of a God like a jasper and sardine stone to look upon, and of\na Lamb with seven horns and seven eyes; then do I wring my hands and\nbeat my breast and tear my hair, sighing and sobbing, moaning and\ngroaning, weeping and lamenting most piteously\u2014Alas! and alas! and alas!\nwhy was I bom in a Christian land and reared for the Christian Heaven?\nWould that I had been born among the Muslims and brought up in the faith\nof El Isl\u00e2m! So should I be now looking forward (for from such a\ngenerous faith never, never would I have lapsed) unto a Paradise worthy\nof the name; revelling in anticipations of four-score thousand servants,\nuncloying courses of three hundred dishes, unlimited strong wine without\ninebriation, six-dozen wives of the refulgent celestial virgins, aging\nnot themselves, aging not me; perpetual youth, unsating and unexhausting\nraptures, for ever, and ever, and ever; and instead of having to sing my\nown throat hoarse, I should have the angel Isr\u00e2feel to sing for me. Ah,\ndear God! Thou most Compassionate! Thou most Bountiful! Thou to whom all\nthings are possible! grant that I may even yet be converted from a\ndoleful Christian infidel into a blessed Muslim true believer! O God the\nAll-merciful, save me from the terrors and tortures of our Sankey and\nMoody Christian heaven! O God the All-gracious, let me lie secure in the\narms of six-dozen hooreeyehs of Paradise of El Islam! Amen, and Amen.\n\n\n\n\nTHE CHRISTIAN WORLD AND THE SECULARIST\n\n\n(1876.)\n\nThe _Christian World_ of the 1st inst. has another note on the article\non \u201cSome Muslim Laws and Beliefs.\u201d As Mr. Foote responded to the first\nnote on behalf of the _Secularist_, I, as the author of the obnoxious\narticle, which was mainly mere compilation from the work of a Christian\nscholar and gentleman, may say a few words on my own behalf in reply to\nthe second, which is as follows:\u2014\n\n\u201cA correspondent writes:\u2014In your \u2018Notes by the Way\u2019 last week there is a\npainful, though not unseasonable, quotation from a writer on \u2018Muslim\nLaws and Beliefs.\u2019 This, as coming from a Secularist, is deplorable\nenough. It is very much more so that the late Viscount Amberley, a son\nof a veteran statesman, should in his \u2018Analysis of Religious Belief,\u2019\nwhich might indeed more justly be termed \u2018A Panegyric of all Heathen\nBeliefs, and a Travesty of that of the Christian,\u2019 have given a like\ndescription of the paradise of the Koran, and should have sneeringly\ntold us that the Christian Scriptures, in their pictures of the heavenly\nlife, \u2018_strangely overlook this enjoyment_\u2019 of \u2018ever virgins\u2019 never\ngrowing old, who are to \u2018supply the faithful with the pleasure of love\u2019\n(vide Vol. II., p. 200). This is but a specimen of the disdainful and\nderisive tone with which this writer, who at length leaves himself\nstranded in a region of the dreariest Atheism, continually speaks of\nthat Book which what he terms \u2018the illusions of our younger days\u2019 might\nhave taught him o respect.\u201d\n\nI do not doubt that the quotation was painful to the Christian\ncorrespondent, since it is always painful to have our lifelong\nprejudices shocked by those who have never shared them, or who have\nattained freedom from their yoke. One might give not a few quotations\nfrom any number of the _Christian World_ which would be very painful to\na pious Muslim. Nor do I doubt that the quotation was not unseasonable,\nfor quotations from the _Secularist_ must always be seasonable in an\ninfluential Christian periodical, when they tend to expand the Christian\nnarrowness, and show that there is much to be said in favor of other\nbeliefs. And I admit that, like many other things coming from a\nSecularist, it must have been deplorable enough to a Christian suckled\non the Bible, and assured in his unreflecting ignorance that it is the\none true word of the three-in-one true god. But the correspondent finds\nit very much more deplorable that a son of a veteran statesman should\nagree with the Secularist\u2014as if the sons of veteran statesmen were\nnaturally expected to be sunk deeper than other persons in the\nprevailing superstition. The correspondent who, we may presume, has\nalways been taught, and has never doubted, that all heathen beliefs are\nwholly devilish, and that the Christian belief is wholly divine, thinks\nthat Viscount Amberley\u2019s book is a panegyric of the former and a\ntravesty of the latter. If the unfortunate correspondent had the courage\nand intelligence to enter upon a real analysis of religious belief, he\nwould soon discover that he and his co-religionists have been all along\ntravestying every form of what they call heathenism. With amusing\nsimplicity he is astonished that Lord Amberley gives a like description\nof the paradise of the Kur-\u00e2n to that which I gave in the _Secularist_,\nas if he could have been accurate in giving any other, when mine was\ndrawn from one of the most careful and accurate of writers, the Oriental\nEnglishman, unequalled in his knowledge of Arabic literature and life!\nWhy, in the very week following the attack on the _Secularist_, the\n_Christian World\u2019s_ twin sister, the _Literary World_ (perhaps incited\nthereto by its study of our vilified paper), showed that it had been\nreading or dipping into Lane, by an article on him under the queer title\nof \u201cA Man of One Book,\u201d he being distinguished for three\u2014\u201cThe Manners\nand Customs of the Modem Egyptians,\u201d the translation of the \u201cArabian\nNights,\u201d with its peerless notes, and the monumental \u201cArabic Lexicon\u201d;\nand the said queerly-named article echoed the general praise of his\nthoroughness and accuracy, and repeated the statement of those who knew\nhim, that he was a deeply pious man. I am not concerned with the defence\nof Lord Amberley, and shall therefore not follow further the\ncorrespondent\u2019s remarks on his book, save to note that a man who says\nthat any such writer \u201cleaves himself stranded in a region of the\ndreariest Atheism,\u201d proves himself by this one phrase utterly\nincompetent to study that word or understand its subject matter; and, as\nignorant and incapable, had better confine himself to the Sunday-school,\nthe Young Men\u2019s Christian Association, the religious tea-meeting, and\nstreet-corner raving.\n\nIt may be as well to say something on my own account, in addition to the\nvigorous remarks of Mr. Foote, in reply to the first note of the\n_Christian World_, and vindication of the passage it impugned. And\nfirst, as to the Book of Revelation, which claims to be prophetic, and\nstands in our Bible as the work of St. John the Divine. Luther, indeed,\nwho was not afraid to pass an independent judgment, said, \u201cI look upon\nthe revelation as neither apostolic nor prophetic;\u201d but it is received\nas both by our English Protestants, and continually referred to by them\nas the record of a genuine and authentic vision. But I assert, without\nfear of contradiction, that if they had never known it, and some\nmissionary brought home an account of its marvels as belonging to the\nfaith of some Polynesian islanders, they would be filled with wonder and\ncompassion at the monstrous superstitions of those poor heathen\nbarbarians. Yes, Exeter Hall and the readers and writers of the\n_Christian World_ itself, would assuredly invoke help to enlighten the\ndegraded idolaters who believed in a heaven whose God was to look upon\nlike a jasper and a sardine; in the midst of whose throne, and round\nabout whose throne, were four beasts\u2014a lion, a calf, a man-faced\nmonster, an eagle\u2014each with six wings, and full of eyes before and\nbehind and within; which beasts never rested day nor night from saying,\n\u201cHoly, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty;\u201d and which, moreover, worshipped a\nlamb with seven horns and seven eyes\u2014a figment more extravagant than the\nmany-headed and many-armed idols of India. And so with the other\nenormities of the Apocalypse. Our civilised gentlemen of the _Christian\nWorld_ can only believe that they believe these things, because hallowed\nassociations and unreflecting faith blind their judgment to the obvious\nabsurdity of the imagery and the conspicuous non-fulfilment of the\nprophecy, which again and again claims to announce events then at hand,\nto come quickly.\n\nIn the next place I assert that the everlasting monotonous singing of\nthe praises of the lamb, the interminable senseless routine, is not a\nwhit more spiritual, while infinitely less alluring, than the\noccupations of the Mohammedan Paradise. If it be answered that\nenlightened Christians have nobler ideas of heaven, I reply that such\nanticipations are not warranted by the New Testament, and that\nmagnanimous Muslims have also nobler anticipations of paradise, for\nwhich there is warrant in the Kur-\u00e2n. And while on the subject of\nspirituality, I may remark that the pure monotheism of the Muslim and\nthe Jew is immensely more spiritual, as well as more rational, than the\nmonotritheism of the Christian, which not only deifies a man, but\njuggles with a so-called mystery that cannot be expressed in words\nwithout self-contradiction, cannot be conceived in thought, and, by the\nconfession of its own apologists, defies reason.\n\nAs to the \u201chysterical buffoonery,\u201d I have yet to learn that there is\nanything hysterical in a jolly burst of Rabelaisian laughter. And as to\nthe \u201cpoor hollow mockery,\u201d I can assure the writer in the _Christian\nWorld_ that the mockery was quite rich, sound and genuine in relation to\nthe Apocalypse of his idolised book and the popular Protestant Moody and\nSankey heaven. (By the bye, can anyone inform us whether Mr. Sankey is\nreally a Jew, and not a Christian Jew, as I have heard positively\nasserted on Hebrew authority?) As to the \u201cblasphemous irreverence\u201d and\nthe \u201chorrible and blasphemous invocation,\u201d I deny the possibility of\nblasphemy where there is no belief. A man may blaspheme that which he\naccounts worthy of reverence, because in speaking evil of it he violates\nhis own convictions and holiest feelings. But if for me there is no God,\nhow can I blaspheme him? Speaking contemptuously of him, I but contemn\nnothing. If the writer in the _Christian World_ were accused of\nblasphemy for reviling Jupiter and Venus, Brahma and Vishnu, Baal and\nMoloch, the Goddess of Reason and Mumbo Jumbo, he would reply, I cannot\nblaspheme false gods, meaning simply gods in whom he has no faith. Just\nso,\n\nI say that I cannot blaspheme the trinity-in-unity of the Christian,\nwhich to me is non-existent, absurd, impossible. It would be well for\nthe writers and readers of the _Christian World_ to ponder these things.\n\n\n\n\nTHE ATHANASIAN CREED\n\n\n(1865.)\n\nOn Christmas day, as on all other chief holidays of the year, the\nministers and congregations of our National Church have had the noble\nprivilege and pleasure of standing up and reciting the creed commonly\ncalled of St. Athanasius. The question of the authorship does not\nconcern us here, but a note of Gibbon (chapter 37) is so brief and\ncomprehensive that we may as well cite it:\u2014\u201cBut the three following\ntruths, however strange they may seem, are _now_ universally\nacknowledged. 1. St. Athanasius is not the author of the creed which is\nso frequently read in our churches. 2. It does not appear to have\nexisted within a century after his death. 3. It was originally composed\nin the Latin tongue, and consequently in the western provinces.\nGennadius, patriarch of Constantinople, was so much amazed by this\nextraordinary composition, that he frankly pronounced it to be the work\nof a drunken man.\u201d (This Gennadius, by the bye, is the same whom Gibbon\nmentions two or three times afterwards in the account of the siege and\nconquest of Constantinople by the Turks, a.d. 1453).\n\nWhoever elaborated the Creed, and whether he did it drunk or sober, the\nChurch of England has made it thoroughly her own by adoption.\n\nYet it must be admitted that many good churchmen, and perhaps even a few\nchurchwomen, have not loved this adopted child of their Holy Mother as\nwarmly as their duty commanded. The intelligently pious\n\nTillotson wishes Mother Church well rid of the bantling; and poor George\nthe Third himself, with all his immense genius for orthodoxy, could not\ntake kindly to it. He was willing enough to repeat all its expressions\nof theological faith\u2014in fact, their perfect nonsense, their obstinate\nirrationality, must have been exquisitely delightful to a brain such as\nhis; but he was not without a sort of vulgar manhood, even when\nworshipping in the Chapel Royal, and so rather choked at its\ndenunciations\u2014\u201cfor it do curse dreadful.\u201d He could keep the faith whole\nand undefiled by reason, yet did not like to assert that all who had\nbeen and were and should in future be in this particular less happy than\nhimself, must without doubt perish everlastingly.\n\nOn the other hand one of our most liberal Churchmen, Mr. Maurice, has\nargued that this creed is essentially merciful, and that its retention\nin the Book of Common Prayer is a real benefit. Mr. Maurice, however, as\nwe all know, interprets \u201cperish everlastingly\u201d into a meaning very\ndifferent from that which most members of the Church accept. And his\nopinions lose considerably in weight from the fact that no man save\nhimself can infer any one of them from any other. For example, if you\nare cheered up a bit by his notions as to \u201cEternal\u201d and \u201cEverlasting,\u201d\nyou are soon depressed again by his pervading woefulness. Of all the\nrulers we hear of\u2014the ex-king of Naples, the king of Prussia, the\nElector of Hesse-Cassel, Abraham Lincoln, and the Pope included\u2014the poor\nGod of Mr. Maurice is the most to be pitied: a God whose world is in so\ndeplorable a state that the good man who owns Him lives in a perpetual\nfever of anxiety and misery in endeavoring to improve it for Him.\n\nWhat part of this creed shocks the pious who are shocked at all by it?\nSimply the comprehensive damnation it deals out to unbelievers,\nhalf-believers, and all except whole believers. For we do not hear that\nthe pious are shocked by the confession of theological or theoillogical\nfaith itself. Their reverence bows and kisses the rod, which we cool\noutsiders might fairly have expected to be broken up and flung out of\ndoors in a fury of indignation. Their sinful human nature is shocked on\naccount of their fellow-men; their divine religious nature is not\nshocked on account of their God: yet does not the creed use God as badly\nas man?\n\nA chemist secures some air, and analyses it into its ultimate\nconstituents, and states with precise numerals the proportions of\noxygen, nitrogen, and carbonic acid therein. Just so the author of this\ncreed secures the Divinity and analyses it into Father, Son, and Holy\nGhost, and just as precisely he reports the relations of these. A\nmathematician makes you a problem of a certain number divided into three\nparts in certain ratios to each other and to the sum, from which ratios\nyou are to deduce the sum and the parts. Just so the author of this\ncreed makes a riddle of his God, dividing him into three persons, from\nwhose inter-relations you are to deduce the Deity. An anatomist gets\nhold of a dead body and dissects it exposing the structure and functions\nof the brain, the lungs, the heart, etc. Just so the author of this\ncreed gets possession of the corpse of God (He died of starvation doing\nslop-work for Abstraction and Company; and the dead body was purveyed by\nthe well-known resurrectionist Priestcraft), and cuts it open and\nexpounds the generation and functions of its three principal organs. But\nthe chemist does not tell us that oxygen, nitrogen, and carbonic acid\nare three gases and yet one gas, that each of them is and is not common\nair, that they have each peculiar and yet wholly identical properties;\nthe mathematician does not tell us that each of the three parts of his\nwhole number is equal to the whole, and equal to each of the others, and\nyet less than the whole and unequal to either of the others; the\nanatomist does not tell us that brain and lungs and heart are each\ndistinct and yet all the same in substance, structure, and function, and\nthat each is in itself the whole body and at the same time is not: while\nthe author of this creed does tell us analogous contradictions of the\nthree members and the whole of his God. And the chemist, the\nmathematician, and the anatomist do not damn us (except, perhaps, by way\nof expletive at our stupidity) if we fail to understand and believe\ntheir enunciations; but the author of this creed very seriously and\nsolemnly damns to everlasting perdition all who cannot put faith in his.\nIn other words, the chemist, the mathematician and the anatomist try to\nbe as reasonable and tolerant as human nature can hope to be; while the\nauthor of this creed aims at and manages to reach an almost superhuman\nunreason and intolerance.\n\nGiving him the full benefit of this difference, the fact remains that in\nother respects he treats his subject just as they treat theirs. He, a\npious Christian, professing unbounded adoration and awe of his Divinity,\ncoolly analyses and makes riddles of and dissects this Divinity as if it\nwere a sample of air, a certain number, a dead body. This humble-minded\ndevotee, who knows so well that he is finite and that God is infinite,\nand that the finite cannot conceive, much less comprehend, much less\nexpress the infinite, yet expounds this Infinite with the most complete\nand complacent knowledge, turns it inside out and upside down, tells us\nall about it, cuts it up into three parts, and then glues it together\nagain with a glue that has the tenacity of atrocious wrongheadeduess\ninstead of the coherence of logic, puts his mark upon it, and says,\n\u201cThis is the only genuine thing in the God line. If you are taken in by\nany other, why, go and be damned;\u201d and having done all this, finishes by\nchanting \u201cGlory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy\nGhost!\u201d And the pious are not shocked by what they should abhor as\nhorrible sacrilege and blasphemy; they are shocked only by the \u201cGo, and\nbe damned,\u201d which is the prologue and epilogue of the blasphemy. Were\nthe damnatory clauses omitted, it appears that even the most devout\nworshippers could comfortably chant the \u201cGlory be to the Father, and to\nthe Son, and to the Holy Ghost\u201d immediately after they had been thus\ndegrading Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to the level and beneath the level\nof their low human understanding. And these very people are horrified by\nthe lack of veneration in Atheists and infidels! What infidel ever dealt\nwith God more contemptuously and blasphemously than this creed has dealt\nwith him? Can it be expected that sane and sensible men, who have\nout-grown the prejudices sucked in with their mothers\u2019 milk, will be\nreconverted to reverence a Deity whom his votaries dare to treat in this\nfashion?\n\nEre we conclude, it may be as well to anticipate a probable objection.\nIt may likely enough be urged that the author and reciters cf the creed\ndo not pretend to know the Deity so thoroughly as we have assumed, since\nthey avouch very early in the creed that the three persons of the\nGodhead are one and all incomprehensible. If the word incomprehensible,\nthus used, means (what it apparently meant in the author\u2019s mind)\nunlimited as to extension, just as the word eternal means unlimited as\nto time, the objection is altogether wide of the mark.. But even if the\nword incomprehensible be taken to mean (what it apparently means in the\nminds of most people who use the creed) beyond the comprehension or\ncapacity of the human intellect, still the objection is without force.\nFor in the same sense a tuft of grass, a stone, anything and everything\nin the world is beyond the capacity of the human intellect: the roots of\na tuft of grass strike as deeply into the incomprehensible as the\nmysteries of the Deity. Relatively this creed tells us quite as much\nabout God as ever the profoundest botanist can tell us about the grass;\nin fact, it tells relatively more, for it implies a knowledge of the\n_Final Cause_ of the subsistence of God, which no future botanist can\ntell or imply of the grass.\n\n\n\n\nOUR OBSTRUCTIONS\n\n\n(1877.)\n\nWalking along the Strand and Fleet Street and through the heart of the\nCity, noting the churches on the way\u2014high St. Martin\u2019s, St.\nMary-le-Strand, St. Clement Danes, the Cathedral, and the many still\nleft wedged in by offices in the narrowest and busiest streets, or lanes\nof London\u2014I am always reminded of the old wooden ships laid up \u201cin\nordinary,\u201d as one sees them at Plymouth and Portsmouth, and elsewhere.\nThe churches, like the ships, though not so surely, may have done good\nservice in their time; but their day is past, never to return. When we\nreflect on the subject, however, we find manifold differences between\nthe state of the churches and that of the ships. These are dismantled,\nunrigged and dismasted, passive white hulls ghostly on the waters, as it\nwere the phantoms of the old swift-winged and thunder-striking eagles of\nbattle. But the churches remain in all their pride, complete in\nequipment from lowest vault to topmost spire, even those which are shut\nsilent all the week, without the least pretence of use, and in which on\nSunday the droning and drowsy worship of a meagre congregation \u201crattles\nlike a withered kernel in a large shell.\u201d Again, the crews of the ships\nwere discharged as soon as these were put out of commission, while the\nfull crews of the churches, rectors, vicars, ushers, beadles, are kept\non at full pay, and saunter through the old exercises and parades as if\nthey were valiant effectives instead of dummies and shams. And this\ndeath-in-life of the churches is more dreary and doleful than the naked\ndeath of the ships.\n\nThese churches officially and effetely represent what is called the\nEnglish Reformation, the most ignoble in Europe; which, as Macaulay\nremarks, merely transferred the full cup from the hand of the Pope to\nthe hand of the King, spilling as little,as possible by the way. It is\ntrue that the State Church thus established, in spite of its illogical\nposition, boasted great men in its early days, inspired by patriotism as\nagainst Rome, with abounding faith for the mysteries, with firm belief\nin the Bible, with full confidence in metaphysical divinity. But now\nRome is formidable no longer, the mysteries are seen to be not only\nincomprehensible but self-contradictory, the Bible has been torn asunder\nby criticism, metaphysical divinity has been proved baseless; all the\nbest thought of the age abandons the Church and disregards its dogmas;\nit has great men no more, nor ever again will have. Its general\ncharacter is well hit off by Ruskin, himself a devoted Christian, in the\nphrase \u201cthe smooth proprieties of lowland Protestantism.\u201d\u2019 It may be\nworth while to quote a little more from him on this subject (\u201cModern\nPainters,\u201d part v., chap. 20, \u201cThe Mountain Glory\u201d)\u2014\u201cBut still the large\naspect of the matter is always, among Protestants, that formalism,\nrespectability, orthodoxy, caution and propriety, live by the slow\nstream that encircles the lowland abbey or cathedral; and that\nenthusiasm, poverty, vital faith and audacity of conduct, characterise\nthe pastor dwelling by the torrent side.\u201d And again: \u201cAmong the fair\narable lands of England and Belgium extends an orthodox Protestantism or\nCatholicism\u2014prosperous, creditable and drowsy; but it is among the\npurple moors of the highland border, the ravines of Mount Gen\u00e9vre, and\nthe crags of the Tyrol, that we shall find the simplest evangelical\nfaith and the purest Romanist practice.\u201d In other words, in religion the\nhighlander is enthusiastic and superstitious, the low-lander lukewarm\nand worldly. Thus our fat English Church still keeps to the text, \u201cBy\ngrace ye are saved;\u201d but its grace now is chiefly of deportment. It\nboasts that its clergy are gentlemen; and they may be, as a rule, in\nsociety, though we unbelievers seldom find them so in controversy; and\nit seems to be persuaded that we should continue to allow it several\nmillion pounds a year to keep up this supply of gentlemen, when every\nprofession, every trade shows gentlemen quite as good, with the\nadvantages of more intellect, more experience of life, more courage and\nmore sincerity.\n\nThere is indeed a section of the clergy full of zeal\u2014to restore the\npriesthood. How some of these gentlemen compound with their consciences\nin taking English pay and position for doing Romish work, is a standing\npuzzle to honest laymen untrained in casuistry. But as they do rank\nthemselves among the parsons of our State Church, their ecclesiastical\npretensions are even more ludicrous than they are outrageously arrogant.\nFor ever preaching up the authority and discipline of the Church, they\nare the first to rebel against it when it does not suit their whims.\nThus Mr. Tooth, of Hatcham, not only defies an Act of Parliament, but\nalso defies his bishop, and has plenty of abettors in doing both. I read\nin the _Daily News_: \u201cTwo of Mr. Tooth\u2019s supporters, whose letters we\nhave published, insist that the Public Worship Regulation Act is not law\nand is not binding on Churchmen, because it has never received the\nsanction of Convocation\u201d\u2014the said Convocation having about as much\ninfluence and authority in the country as a tavern discussion society.\n\nAgain: \u201cOne writer talks of the Church having been declared to be free\nfrom all civil jurisdiction in spiritual affairs by many successive\nSovereigns. We did not know that our Sovereigns had a right to make laws\nby Royal declarations, [and] not merely for their own time, but for all\ntime. According to these principles of constitutional government we have\nthree rival law-making powers in England\u2014the Parliament, with the\nSovereign for one; the Declaration of the Sovereign for another; and\nConvocation for a third. Of these Parliament would seem to be the\nweakest, for it cannot negative the proceedings of the other two; but\neither of these two can declare invalid what it has done.\u201d Can anything\nbe more absurd? Here is a State Church established by Parliament with\nthe sanction of the monarch, endowed with national endowments, liable to\nbe disestablished and disendowed by Parliament with the sanction of the\nmonarch; yet many of its ministers claim to be free from the authority\nof the State and Parliament to which it owes its existence and\nsubsistence! If they really desire such freedom, they can easily obtain\nit. They have but to sever their adulterous connexion with the State,\nrestoring to the nation the endowments they have so long misused, and\nthey will then be emancipated from all control, at liberty to teach what\ndoctrines and practise what ritual they please. But these\nsuper-spiritual clergy keep a desperate clutch on the revenues. If\nanything could be more absurd than the defiance of Parliament, it would\nbe the defiance of their ecclesiastical superiors by these champions of\nabsolute ecclesiastical subordination. His bishop inhibits Mr. Tooth,\nMr. Tooth coolly disregards the inhibition, and one who sympathises with\nhim calmly writes to the _Daily News_? \u201cConsidering how bishops have\nbeen appointed since the Reformation, it is hard to see why Mr. Tooth\nand your correspondents should even pretend to obey them.\u201d This is\nfrightful, and may well make even the hardened sceptic shudder. What! a\ngenuine successor of the Apostles (else the English Church has no\ngenuine priesthood) chosen by the Holy Ghost itself (in obedience to the\nrecommendation of the King or Queen) against his own humble wish (for he\ndeclared _Nolo Episcopari_); and English Churchmen need not even pretend\nto obey him! Such is the subordination of those who maintain the extreme\nauthority of the Church!\n\nJesus has told us that a house divided against itself cannot stand, and\nthe house of our State Church is divided against itself most savagely.\nBut as the factions, while opposed to each other in all else, thoroughly\nagree in adhering to their endowments and privileges, and with this\nobject shore up and buttress the edifice whose fall would be otherwise\nimminent, it behoves us to exert ourselves in bringing to the ground as\nspeedily as possible the unsure and dangerous building, and diverting\nthe immense funds misemployed in sustaining its uselessness to the real\nedification of the people. For as materially the Church of St. Mary is\nplanted silent, void and death-like in the midst of the living currents\nof the Strand, obstructing and breaking the broad stream into two narrow\narms, so intellectually and morally, in whatever channel our active life\nmay flow, we find a similar obstacle, and in all directions we meet one\ncry\u2014\u201cThe Church stops the way.\u201d\n\nBut when we have removed the obstacle, when we have blasted it as the\nAmericans recently blasted that other rock of Hell-gate, clearing the\nentrance to New York\u2019s noble harbor, we shall find another and a more\ninveterate obstacle fronting us\u2014a Book. A book seems but a slight thing\nto bar the way; but multiplied by millions and millions, and desperately\ndefended as divine and infallible by legions of zealots, it constitutes\na far more formidable barricade than the stoutest church of stone. The\nvarious sects of Nonconformists, who all join with us in attacking the\nState Church, will all join the Churchmen to maintain against us their\ncommon fetish, the Bible. Regarding this as a human production, there is\nmuch of it which we highly esteem; but regarded as the word of God, it\nworks far more evil than good, and the evil is ever increasing while the\ngood decreases; for the revelations of science grow ever more clear, and\nmen must more and more strain their consciences and sophisticate their\nintellects in order to believe that they believe in the super-human\ncharacter of the book which reason and science show to be so thoroughly\nhuman. We are told by men whom we respect that, considered historically,\nChristianity and the other great religions merit better treatment than\nwe are wont to accord them. Certainly they merit better treatment than\nis accorded them by those who crudely brand them all alike, in all their\ndoctrines and legends and ritual, as the mere inventions of priestcraft\nfostered by kingcraft and statecraft. But we are far from committing\nourselves to such an impeachment, not less monstrous than the most\nmonstrous superstition it assails. We freely recognise the naturalness\nof these religions in the past, their genuine consonance with the\ncommunities wherein they arose and prevailed; the sincerity and truth\nand nobleness formulated, however erroneously, in many of their dogmas,\nembodied, however imperfectly, in many of their myths; but we see that\ntheir day is gone by; we cannot allow the past, which was the real\nchildhood and youth of mankind, to dominate the present, which is its\nriper age; we discern that the errors of the dogmas and the fiction of\nthe myths are now so obvious and incontestable that to revere them as\nfaultless and authentic is a gross self-delusion. When we say\u2014\u201cThe tree\nis dead; cut it down, why cumbereth it the ground?\u201d we do not imply that\nit never bore good fruit. On the other hand, when we admit that it once\nbore good fruit, we do not imply that it is not now dead and an\nencumbrance to the ground. It is precisely because we do consider these\nold faiths historically, because we fully recognise their early\nefficiency and vigor, that we can thoroughly realise their decrepitude\nand dissolution. And taking western Christianity in particular, both the\nRoman embodied in Mary and the Protestant embodied in Jesus, we affirm\nthat it has no longer real life, but only the \u201cghastly affectation of\nlife.\u201d Reason and science have disembowelled it, have removed its heart\nand its brain. It is ready for the historical embalmer. Its great part\nin the drama of human life is played out; it is still kept above ground,\nits life still asserted, because large numbers would lose much by the\nfrank acknowledgement of its decease, and other large numbers who cannot\nbring themselves to face the fact of its death, persist in hoping\nagainst hope that the lifelessness is hut a swoon or a cataleptic fit,\nfrom which it will yet awaken with renewed strength. We, however, dare\nto see what we cannot help seeing, we venture to avow the fact which is\nbeyond fair dispute. Doubtless the living man did brave work in his\ntime; but shall we therefore bow down worshipping his mummy, and keep it\nfrom its sepulchre, and continue to allot immense revenues to his army\nof servitors who have now no service to render? No; the sooner we bury\nthe corpse and send the servitors about their business the better for us\nand for them.\n\nThus far I think all Secularists will go with me. But for many, perhaps\nthe majority of us, who are not only Secularists, but Republicans, there\nis a third great obstacle, the Throne, which is now little else than a\ncostly sham. Yet, sham as it is, it is still strong to obstruct, being\nencompassed and fortified by the power of the nobles, the power of the\nclergy, the power of the wealthy, the degraded and degrading\nsnobbishness of the middle and lower middle classes. The artisans and\nlaborers generally, as we know, care nothing for it or are distinctly\nhostile. We have had some great monarchs, though the greatest we ever\nhad was crown-less, and we can yield to monarchy in the past something\nof such historical respect as we yield to Christianity. But who that is\nnot a very serf by nature can feel any genuine respect for monarchy as\nwe have it in these days? when the main duty of the King or Queen is to\ncountersign the decrees of Parliament; a duty which the Lord Chancellor\nor the Speaker could perform just as well and with more promptitude. One\nneed not dwell on the character of the reigning house, which, brought\nignobly to the throne, has been consistently ignoble from the first\nuntil the accession of her present Most Gracious Majesty. A much nobler\nroyal family would be just as superfluous now as the present we have\noutgrown the need of a paternal or guardian king. Nor is the question of\nprinciple really affected by the fact that this ignoble family, like\nother species of the lower animals, is excessively prolific, and that\nevery prince or princess born of it, costs us several thousands a year.\nWe should not grudge the money for service rendered; the gravamen of our\nimpeachment is that no monarch now can render service of value. The\neffective energy of our monarchy in these days is well symbolised in the\nprocedure at the opening of Parliament\u2014royal carriages without royal\noccupants; royal life-guards with no royal life to guard; a royal robe\nspread on a vacant throne; the Lord Chancellor reading a royal speech\ncomposed by responsible ministers. Her Majesty during fourteen long\nyears has been doing her best to teach us how well we can get on without\na monarch, and how stupid we are therefore to keep one at a great\nexpense. We may find something venerable in the throne when put aside\nand conserved simply as a curious relic of the past; we find it merely\nabsurd while retained for useless use, a pretentious seat with no one to\nsit in it. As Th\u00e9ophile says: \u201c_Si rien nest plus beau que l\u2019antique,\nest plus laid que le surann\u00e9._\u201d\n\n\n\n\nMR. KINGSLEY\u2019S CONVERTITES\n\n\n(1865.)\n\nReaders can scarcely have forgotten the amusing \u201cturn-up\u201d between the\nRev. Mr. Kingsley and the Rev. Dr. Newman, in which the latter got the\nformer \u201cinto Chancery,\u201d and punished him so pitilessly. While reading\nthe \u201cApologia pro Vit\u00e2 Sua,\u201d one naturally reflected now and then upon\nthe opinions, as stated in the books, of Dr. Newman\u2019s antagonist; and\nthe fight grew more and more comically exquisite as one gradually learnt\nthe thorough agreement at bottom of the two who were struggling so\nfiercely at top. When I speak of Mr. Kingsley\u2019s books, I mean his novels\nand romances, all of which (except the one not yet completely published)\nI have duly read and enjoyed. As for certain collections of sermons, a\ndialogue for loose thinkers, a _jeu d\u2019esprit_ on the Pentateuch,\ntogether with various trifles by way of lectures on history and\nphilosophy, I confess that none of these have I ever even attempted to\nperuse. To palliate this sin of omission I can only urge the high\nprobability that a man of Mr. Kingsley\u2019s character must find much more\nvigorous and ample expression in a free and easy novel than in any\ndidactic or argumentative treatise, with its wearisome requirements of\nconsecutiveness and cramping limitations of logic. I now ask the leaders\nof the _National Reformer_ to accompany me in a general review of his\nromances, because I think that such a review will develop two or three\nfacts seldom noticed in the critiques\u2014whether friendly or adverse\u2014that\nabound upon his writings. Especially, I think that it will be found that\nthe popular phrases, \u201cMuscular Christianity\u201d and \u201cBroad Church,\u201d by no\nmeans sufficiently characterise his religious tendency; and that, with\nall the superficial unlikeness, almost amounting to perfect contrast\nbetween him and Dr. Newman, the opponents as religious men are\nfundamentally alike in this\u2014that their respective creeds satisfy, or\nappear to satisfy, in the same manner the same peculiarly intense want\nin their several natures.\n\nIn every one of Mr. Kingsley\u2019s romances there is a chief personage, more\nor less naturally good but decidedly godless at the beginning,\ngod-fearing and saintly at the end. Some of the romances have each two\nor three of these convertites, the throes of whose regeneration are the\nprincipal \u201cmotives\u201d of the most striking scenes, and may be thus fairly\nsaid to furnish the plot and passion of the book. My present object is\nnot aesthetic, and I therefore need not argue the question whether\nnarratives thus constructed can have any claim to rank as genuine works\nof art. With the melancholy Jaques in \u201cAs You Like It,\u201d I believe:\n\n    Out of these Convertites\n    There is much matter to be heard and learned\u2014\n\nso will stay \u201cto see no pastime, I,\u201d but run through the stories of\nthese conversions, touching only the most salient points.\n\nAlton Locke, when adolescent, is a very poor tailor, a poet whose verses\nare far more vigorous than his character, a chartist, a sceptic. He\nmadly falls in love with a Dean\u2019s daughter, and through the patronage of\nthe Dean himself, gets a volume of poems published. As the fiercest of\nthe rhymes have been soothed out of this volume by the decorous Dean,\nRadical friends forward to young Locke a pair of plush-breeches\u2014fitting\ntestimonial to the flunkeyism conspicuous in the omissions. He is\nimprisoned for inciting a rustic mob to a Chartist outbreak, confounds\nthe prison chaplain by sporting the latest novelties in heresy direct\nfrom Germany, shares when released in the delirium of the memorable\ntenth of April, finds that the lady of his love is to be married to his\ncousin, and consummates the long orgy of excitement with a desperate\nfever. The Dean had directed his attention to the study of natural\nhistory; hence the frenzy of the fever takes a zoological turn, and he\nundergoes therein marvellous transmigrations through a series of\nantediluvian monsters; awaking at last to sane consciousness (_sane\ncomparatively, he is never quite in his right senses, poor fellow_) to\nfind himself nursed by a young widow, the dean\u2019s elder daughter, who\nsoothes him with ladings from Tennyson. She has very recently lost her\nhusband, who was merely a brilliant nobleman, and she herself a\nConvertite; in a few days the modest Alton is hinting at a declaration\nto her. She will not marry him, nor indeed any other man, but she sends\nhim out to South America on a special poetical mission. On the voyage\nthither he dies, a believer, regenerate, leaving as legacy to his\nfriends and the world at large a war-song of the Church (ferociously)\nMilitant. What has converted him?\u2014the plush breeches? the crash of the\ntenth of April? the loss of his first lady love? the reading of the\n\u201cLotus-eaters?\u201d the delirious Fugue of Fossils? Some or all of these it\nmust be supposed; for weak though he was, he surely could not have been\nseriously influenced by the comical caricatures of Socratic dialectics,\nwhich the Dean sometimes played with him in lieu of chess or backgammon.\n\nNext comes Yeast, whose great Convertite is Lancelot Smith. He is\nintroduced to us as fresh from Cambridge, a stalwart gallant fellow of\ngreat abilities, rather debauched, but discontented with his debauchery,\nand utterly without fixed creed. An accident confines him long to the\nhouse of the Squire whom he is visiting. During his convalescence he\nbecomes a lover of one of the Squire\u2019s daughters\u2014a young lady whose\nvernacular name is Argemone, and who is herself rapidly growing a\nperfect saint. He also becomes the friend of a gamekeeper who reads\nCarlyle, writes poetry, and has experienced special religious\nillumination. Lancelot then loses all his fortune by the failure of his\nuncle\u2019s bank, and loses his sweetheart by the sulphuretted-hydrogen\nfever; turns street-porter for the nonce to earn a bit of bread, and\nfinally goes off one knows not whither; an excellent fervid Christian,\nafter playing through several bewildering pages a wild burlesque of the\nPlatonic dialogue with a personage so mysterious that I prefer not to\nattempt a description of him. What has converted Lancelot? The loss of\nhis money and the death of his sweetheart seem to have been the main\ninfluences. For although he was stunned with calamity, I will not deem\nhim so stupefied as to think that he was made a believer by the\nunintelligible dialogue.\n\nThen follows Hypatia. And here I may remark that I am unable to concur\nin what seems the general opinion\u2014namely, that Mr. Kingsley intended his\nheroine to represent the character of the Hypatia of history. Although\nliving in the same city at the same period, both lecturing on\nphilosophy, and both ultimately murdered by Christian mobs; it appears\nto me that, as women, the two Hypatias differed so much from each other\nthat no one having heard them talk for five minutes could have the\nslightest doubt as to which was which. History and Mr. Kingsley have\neach composed an acrostic on this lovely name, and with the same _bouts\nrimes_; but the body (and the spirit) of the one poem is extremely\nunlike the body (and the spirit) of the other. Mr. Kingsley proffers us\nan ancient cup and a flask, Greek-lettered \u201cWine of Cyprus\u201d; we commence\nto drink solemnly and devoutly, but\u2014O most miserable mockery! it is\nindubitable brandy and water. Well may he call this an old foe with a\nnew face! The Kingsley Hypatia is not altogether, but is very nearly a\nConvertite; so nearly that he would certainly have made her altogether\none, had not the _bouts rime\u2019s_ been too well known for alteration. Her\nbest pupil (of whom more anon) abandons her, she begins to love a\nbeautiful young Greek monk, and yet (that philosophy may have the help\nof worldly power in its mortal duel with Christianity) consents to marry\nthe Prefect of Alexandria, whom she very justly despises. While\nmiserable with the consciousness of how low she is stooping to conquer,\nshe is fascinated or mesmerised by an old Jewish hag, and crouches in a\nsort of fetish worship to what she thinks a statue of Apollo, said\nstatue being represented by the handsome monk. In the agony of shame\nwhich follows her discovery of this cheat she performs a short parody of\nthe Socratic dialogue in concert with the pupil who had left her and who\nhas returned a Christian, and at last, when going to the lecture hall\n(where murder shall prevent her from ever lecturing more) she confesses\nto a certain longing for Christianity. Why? She was wretched,\nhumiliated, defeated, weary; she had staked all on the red, and had\nlost\u2014what more natural than a yearning to try the black? And this\ncharacter is published and generally received for the Hypatia of\nhistory!\n\nBut the great Convertite of this romance is the pupil already mentioned,\nthe renegade Jew, Raphael Ben Ezra. In the prime of life, wealthy, the\nfavorite comrade of the Prefect, superlatively gifted with that subtle\nHebrew clearness, which, swayed by a strong will and intense self-love,\ncan scarcely be distinguished from genius, we find him in the opening\nchapters already as used up as the old King Solomon of Ecclesiastes,\nhaving exhausted all excitements of wine, women, and philosophy, all\nvoluptuousness, physical and intellectual. Desperate with _ennui_, he\nabandons Hypatia, casts away his wealth (how many Jews do the same!),\nbarters clothes with a beggar, and sets out to wander the world with an\namiable British bull-bitch (afterwards the happy mother of nine sweet\ninfants) for his sole guide, philosopher and friend. The chapter wherein\nhis Pyrrhonism disported itself \u201con the floor of the bottomless\u201d seems\nto have been, in great measure, borrowed from the talk of one Babbalanja\nin Herman Melville\u2019s \u201cMardi;\u201d perhaps, however, both were borrowed\ndirect from Jean Paul\u2019s gigantic grotesque, \u201cTitan.\u201d Becoming involved\nin the meshes of the great war in Africa\u2014that revolt of Heraclian\nagainst Honorius which Gibbon treats with such contemptuous brevity in\nhis thirty-first chapter\u2014he is nearly killed himself, saves an old\nofficer from death and soon falls in love with this officer\u2019s daughter.\nHe reads about this time certain epistles, and infers therefrom that\nSaul of Tarsus was one of the finest gentlemen that ever lived. Also,\nwhile the guest of good Bishop Synesius, he hears Saint Augustine\npreach, and engages with him in long discussions, fortunately\nunreported. Returning to Alexandria, he almost converts Hypatia, sees\nher murdered, sharpens his tongue on Cyril the primate, and leaves again\nto marry his saintly sweetheart, and end his lire as quite a model\nChristian. What has converted him? His love for the young Christian? the\ngentlemanly character of Paul\u2019s Epistles? the bull-bitch with her\nninefold litter, like Shakespere\u2019s nightmare? the murder of Hypatia by\nthe Christians, who rent, and tore and shred her living body to\nfragments? Or was it mere satiety and weariness of thinking\u2014the\nweariness which leads so many who thought freely when young to find a\nresting-place in the bosom of the Church as they get old?\n\nIn \u201cWestward, Ho!\u201d the great conversion is of Ayacanorah. But as this is\na conversion not merely religious but also moral, social and\nintellectual, a conversion from barbarism to civilisation, it does not\ncome fairly into the class I am describing. Two incidents in the\nromance, however, must not be passed over. The first occurs in the\nLotus-eating chapter. Will Para-combe tired, as well he may be, of\nwandering about savage America in search of El Dorado, blindly refuses\nto see that it is his chief end as man to continue wandering until El\nDorado is found and the captain has glutted his heart with vengeance on\nthe Spaniards; and Will gives such excellent reasons for staying in the\nbeautiful spot where he is, with the beautiful and affectionate native\nwoman whom he is willing and anxious to marry in the most legal mode\nattainable, that Captain Amyas Leigh, who has been urging him onward\nwith true Kingsleyan diffidence and mildness, finds himself dumbfounded.\nBut valuable logical assistance is at hand. A jaguar like a bar of iron\nplunges on poor Will, and he and his arguments are settled on the spot.\nAmyas thanks God for this special interposition of providence in his\nfavor. And the man who wrote the adventure of Amyas can sneer at the\nfaith of a Catholic like Dr. Newman! The other incident is the\nconversion of Amyas from his diabolical hatred of the Spaniards in\ngeneral, and of the Don with whom Rose had eloped in particular. A\nlightning-flash strikes him blind, and he thereupon repents him of his\nhatred and desire of revenge, and, moreover, has a vision of the Don\ndrowned with his sunken galleon, who assures him that his hatred was\nwithout just cause. These are the true Kingsleyan dialectics; these, and\nnot those burlesques of what Plato wrote and Socrates spoke, and Mr.\nKingsley is no more able to conduct than I am to lead on the violin like\nHerr Joachim, a great concerted composition of Beethoven. Let a jaguar\nloose into your opponent\u2019s syllogistic premises, blind him with a\nlightning-flash that he may see the truth and have clear vision of the\nright way. Yet Mr. Kingsley has undoubtedly read about a tower in Siloam\nthat fell, and what Joshua Bar-Joseph said of the people killed by this\naccident.\n\nLastly, we have \u201cTwo Years Ago,\u201d whose great Convertite is Tom Thumal.\nTom is one of the jolliest of characters, true as steel, tough as oak,\nquick and deft for all emergencies, a compact mass of common sense, and\ncourage, and energy, living in the most godless state, He is not a\nheathen\u2014he is more godless yet; for a heathen has something of wood or\nstone which serves him for a deity. In the Saga of Saint Olaf (in that\ngreat and glorious work \u201cThe Heims-kringla\u201d) we read how this pious and\nterrible king going to his last battle was asked by two brothers, who\nwere freebooters, for permission to fight in his ranks. But although\nthese and their followers were \u201ctall\u201d men, and the king was in sore need\nof recruits, he would not accept their services unless they believed in\nChrist. Whereupon they answered that they saw no special need of the\nhelp of the \u201cWhite Christ\u201d; that they had been hitherto wont to believe\nin themselves and their own luck, and with this belief had managed to\npull through very well, and thought they could do the same for the\nfuture. Ultimately, these excellent fellows did consent to be baptised\nand called Christians\u2014not from any religious motive, alas! but only\nbecause of a \u201cshtrong wakeness\u201d they had for taking part in a set\nbattle. Tom Thurnal has just as much, and as little, religion as these\nhad. After wandering all over the world in all sorts of capacities, he\ncomes back to be shipwrecked on the Cornish coast, and is the only one\non board saved. While he is being dragged up the beach senseless, his\nbelt of money\u2014the fruit of a season at the Australian\ndiggings\u2014disappears; and he resolves to settle in the village, in order\nto discover it or the thief. Here he falls in love with the village\nschoolmistress, a sweet mystical devotee, whom he rather suspects of\nstealing his gold, and whom he defends from one ruffian in order to\ngrossly insult her himself. In the village Tom is doctor, and, when the\ncholera comes, he is assisted in bringing the village through it by this\nsaintly schoolmistress, and a pious Major, and a fervid High Church\nparson. At the breaking out of the Crimean War, Tom gets charged with a\nsecret mission to the East. Somewhere in Turkey, in Asia, an imbecile\nSheikh or Pasha whom he is endeavoring to serve, mistakes his man\u0153uvres,\nand keeps him in captivity for a year or two. From this imprisonment he\ncomes home crushed and abject, \u201cafraid in passing a house that it would\nfall and smother him,\u201d etc., marries his sweetheart and ends a model\nChristian. What has converted him? Simply, it appears, the year or two\nof solitary confinement\u2014which took all the pith and manhood out of him.\nThis last case, the work of Mr. Kingsley in the full maturity of his\npowers, is the most flagrant of all.\n\nIf I have not summed up these cases fairly, the novels and romances in\nquestion are in everybody\u2019s hands to convict me of the unfairness. I\nhave simply sketched the leading points as they remain in my memory, not\nreferring to the books again to pick out what would best serve my\npurpose. It is not my fault if the personages, who looked so great and\ngrandiose in the flowing and ample draperies of romance, do not strip\nwell for anatomy.\n\nNow, what is common to all these cases of conversion? This: that the\ncharacters become religious, not when healthy, but when diseased; the\nreligion in every case is exhibited as a drug for the sick, not as\nwholesome food for the healthy. While you are sane, well and hearty,\ndoing your work in the world deftly, sound in mind, and wind, and limb,\nand fairly prosperous, you have no need of this religion\u2014you can get\nthrough the world very well without it. But when your fortune is lost,\nyour sweetheart dead or married to another, your courage cowed, your\nheart broken, your mind diseased, your self-respect humiliated, then you\nlong for and embrace Christianity (or whatever religion is dominant\naround you): it is a soft pillow for the aching head, a tender couch for\nthe bruised body, a flattering nurse for the desolate invalid. I can\nscarcely add that it is a medicine for the sickness, for its medicinal\nvirtues are hardly shown; but it is, at any rate, as we read of its\neffects in these books, a narcotic and an anodyne for restlessness and\npain. It is a religion to die with, not to live with. All these things,\nso soothing and beneficial to the invalid, are nauseous and noxious to\nthe healthy.\n\nA man could no more live vigorous life on such religion than he could\nlive vigorous life couched tenderly, pillowed softly, nursed\nassiduously, and drugged with narcotics and anodyne all the days of his\nlife.\n\nIs the religious world willing to accept this view of religion? It would\nseem so by the remarkable popularity of these books. This view may be\ncorrect or incorrect, wise or foolish; at any rate, it is strangely at\nvariance with the view commonly ascribed to \u201cMuscular Christians,\u201d and\nstrangely identical with that which Dr. Newman explicitly avows in the\nmost eloquent pages of his \u201cApologia.\u201d People generally consider\n\u201cMuscular Christianity\u201d as a clever and cheerful improvement on the old\nsolemn ascetic Christianity, as a doctrine which fully recognises the\ngoodness of the common world and common worldly life, as a liberal\ncultus which does not sacrifice body to soul any more than soul to body,\nbut is at once gymnastic and spiritualistic in its \u201cexercises\u201d; a vague\nnotion is abroad that, whereas the early religion of Christ and his\napostles was of sorrow and suffering, this, its latest development, is a\nreligion of happiness and health; in short, it is believed that\n\u201cMuscular Christianity\u201d has added the Gospel(1) of the body and this\nlife to the primitive Gospel of the soul and the next life: and yet the\nmost popular and vigorous writer of this new school, after exhausting a\nvery fertile imagination in the suggestion of methods and modes by which\ngodless sinners may be converted to godliness, has absolutely found no\nother process effectual than this of showering upon them misfortunes,\nhumiliations, afflictions, calamities (such as do not in real life fall\nupon one human being in a thousand, and working results such as they\nwould not work in one real human being out of ten thousand); until\nhealth and hope, self-respect and the capacity for sane joy are\naltogether destroyed in them, the manhood and womanhood overwhelmed and\ncrushed out of them; after which he brings in these miserable wrecks and\nrelics of what were once men and women as all that he can contribute to\nthe extension of the Church, which ought to be the cheerful congregation\nof wholesome men and women throughout the world, the richest flower and\nripest fruit of humanity. If the Church of the future is to be composed\nof creatures like Mr. Kingsley\u2019s Convertites, Westminster Abbey must be\nturned into a Grand Chartreuse, and St. Paul\u2019s into an Hospital for\nIncurables, and the metropolitan Cathedral of England must be Bedlam.\n\n    1. The Gospel of the body and this life has been powerfully\n    preached in the most explicit terms on the Continent. In England\n    we have been too prudish to advocate it so clearly, although it\n    is, of course, essential to the most enlightened Positivism and\n    Secularism. That much-abused book the \u201cElements of Social\n    Science\u201d preaches it with more thoroughness, knowledge and\n    ability than any other English work I have met with. I do not\n    pretend to be wise enough to judge this book, and so far as I\n    can judge it, I differ from it in many respects; but on the\n    broad question of the spirit in which it is written, I do not\n    fear to assert that no honest and intelligent man can find\n    pruriency and impurity in it, without he brings the pruriency\n    and impurity in his own heart and mind to the study of it. I can\n    understand ascetic Christians abhorring it, I can understand\n    timid Freethinkers being frightened by it because they are\n    timid; but I cannot understand men who claim to be bold and\n    honest Freethinkers avoiding it as an unholy thing merely\n    because of the subjects it treats, without reference to the mode\n    of treatment, and without sympathy for the admirable motives\n    which manifestly incited the author. He may well say with the\n    most brilliant and daring of all who have preached this Gospel\n    of the body in our age (this Gospel which is so sorely needed to\n    complement and modify the exclusive Gospel of the soul\u2014this\n    Gospel which Plato preached along with the other, while Jesus\n    preached the other only), he may well say with Heine\n\n    Doch die Castraten Klagten,\n    A\u00efs ich meine Stimm\u2019 erhob;\n    Sie Klagten und sie sagten;\n    Ich sange veil zu grob.\n\n\n\n\nTHE PRIMATE ON THE CHURCH AND THE WORLD\n\n\n(1876.)\n\nThe Archbishop of Canterbury is making his second quadrennial visitation\nto his diocese, and delivering an elaborate Charge to the clergy, in\nseven instalments. Of these the first two are reported at considerable\nlength in the _Times_ of the 27th and 28th inst., a couple of columns of\nsmall print being given to each. The _Times_ has moreover generously\nvouchsafed a leading article of encouragement and approval on each; and\nsurely the State Church ought to be proud of such lofty patronage, and\nLambeth Palace ought to be very grateful to Printing House Square. The\n_Daily News_ could only spare half a column for the first; and the\n_Daily Telegraph_, whose exuberant Christianity, hot and strong as\nboiling rancid oil, amazes the world on every great festival of the\nChurch, showed its estimate of the importance of our Primate\u2019s manifesto\nby allotting to it eight or nine lines of small print at the foot of a\ncolumn\u2014a pickpocket in a police-court gets as much notice.\n\nLet us glance down the _Times_\u2019 reports, pausing at anything worth a\nnote if not by its intrinsic value yet on account of the position of the\nspeaker:\u2014\n\n\u201cI wish to set before you some thoughts as to the particular duties,\nwhich at this time devolve upon the Established Church as the National\nChurch of this country. In the days in which we live some even hesitate\nto assign to us the position of a National Church. A National Church is\na national protest for God and for Christ, for goodness and for truth;\nand if we of this National Church are not making this national protest,\nno one else certainly makes one. No other body in this country can claim\nthat commanding influence over the thought of the age, which by God\u2019s\nblessing is assigned to us. No other religious body in the country has\neither that connection with the State, or if that be thought a small\nmatter, that power of influencing the whole nation which, thank God, is\nstill reserved to us.\u201d\n\nIt will be noticed that the Archbishop in his definition of a National\nChurch has humbly copied the unorthodox Matthew Arnold, who in his\naddress to London clergymen at Sion College, (reviewed in the\n_Secularist_ of April 8) declared with an exquisitely humorous gravity\nthat he regarded the Church of England as _a great national society for\nthe promotion of goodness!_ But the Archbishop is really too loose in\nhis imitation of this charitable definition bestowed by a man of\nletters. He says: \u201cA National Church is a national protest for God and\nfor Christ;\u201d according to which, Mohammedanism, Brahmanism, and\nBuddhism, as the national churches of several countries, are so many\nnational protests for God and Christ. We do not expect a mere Primate in\nthese days to write with the precision of an accomplished literary man,\nbut we do think that he ought to be somewhat less inaccurate than this.\nHowever, it is to the last two sentences quoted that I would\nparticularly call attention. The Church of England has a commanding\ninfluence over the thought of the age! It has the power of influencing\nthe whole nation! Here be truly astonishing announcements. The thought\nof the age in our country is embodied in such persons as Spencer and\nDarwin, Huxley and Tyndall, Carlyle and Browning, George Eliot and\nGeorge Meredith; and what a commanding influence the State Church has\nover these! As for its influence over the whole nation, is it not the\nfact that a large portion of the educated classes, and the great bulk 01\nthe artisans, are either sceptical or indifferent, and that more than a\nhalf of the shopkeepers are Nonconformists bent on Disestablishment and\nDisendowment? The Archbishop has made a most unlucky start.\n\nPassing over some commonplace and common-sense remarks on the duties of\nthe clergy, we come to the following:\u2014\n\n\u201cThis is an age in which there is a great deal of uneasy thought\nseething throughout the nation. It is a time when, more than any other,\nserious and earnest learning is required to meet the wants of those\namong whom we live. Let us be thankful that the arrangements of\ncathedral bodies do provide quiet places where men may follow a studious\ncourse, and cause their light to be seen throughout the land, guiding\nthe thought of those who are in need of guidance in this anxious age.\u201d\n\nAdmitting the truth of the opening sentences we may add that in every\nage since the supremacy of the Church was first shaken by the invention\nof printing, the recovery of the Greek and Latin classics, and the\nrevival of science, there has been a great deal of uneasy thought\nseething throughout this nation and every other nation in Christendom,\nand that age by age this seething has scalded more and more pitilessly\nthe dogmas, the Scriptures, and the authority of the Church, whose\nHebrew old clothes, as Carlyle fitly calls them, must soon be literally\nboiled to rags. We may also freely admit that the arrangements of\nCathedral bodies do provide quiet places where men may follow a studious\ncourse; but we ask, how many of them really pursue it? How many of them\ncause their light to shine throughout the land? How many guide the\nthought of those who need guidance in this anxious age? Is it not as\nnotorious as it is disgraceful to the Church, that, with few exceptions,\nthe canons and other dignitaries make scarcely any contribution to the\nthought, or scholarship, or science of the age, in return for the large\nleisure and ample stipends with which they are endowed? These stalled\ncanons may ruminate much, even like stalled oxen, but what nourishment\ndo we get from the rumination of the former? Look through lists of\nstandard works, of really important works, published during the last\nquarter of a century, and see how few of them, even in theology and\nkindred departments, have come from the \u201clearned leasure\u201d of our rich\ncathedrals.\n\nIf there is one thing more closely connected than any other with true\nreligion, that thing is money. Always the most spiritual exhortations\nand speculations end in very practical appeals to the pockets\u2014of course\nthe pockets of the laity. We are reminded what Paul Louis Courier said\nof the clergy in his day: \u201cThey have need of good examples and will find\nthem amongst us. But if we are stronger than they as to the commandments\nof God, they in their turn have the advantage of us in respect to the\ncommandments of the Church, which they remember better than we, and of\nwhich the principal is, I believe, to give all we have for heaven. \u2018You\nask me,\u2019 said that worthy preacher Barlette, \u2018how to get to Paradise?\nThe bells of the convent tell you: Giving, giving, giving,\u2019 The Latin of\nthe monk is charming: \u201cVos qu\u0153ritis a me, fratres carissimi, quomodo\nitur ad paradisupi? Hoc dicunt vobis campance monasterii, dando, dando,\ndando\u201d Very early in his discourse does our Primate ring this favorite\nchime of all church bells, but with a noble disinterestedness, a\nmagnanimous depreciation:\u2014\n\n\u201cWe may think lightly of the vast sums of money which of late years have\nbeen poured into the treasury of the Established Church for the\nre-edification of our buildings; we may think lightly even of the vast\nsums which have been contributed by the members of our Church for the\ninstruction of our poorer brethren, thinking that, after all, it is not\nthe silver and the gold, but the precious doctrine of the Lord Jesus\nChrist, and the purity and holiness which attend the true profession of\nthat doctrine on which we have to rest our claims. But still even the\noutward signs of the influence which God has given us are not to be\ndespised.\u201d\n\n\u201cWe may think lightly of the vast sums of money!\u201d we, the archbishop\nwith \u00a315,000 a year and a palace rent-free, and the members of the\nCathedral body of Canterbury each with our several hundreds a year and\nour snug residences! Very lightly, no doubt! But \u201cstill even the outward\nsigns of the influence which God has given us are not to be despised.\u201d\nHow unworldly, how humble, is our right reverend father in God; it is a\npity that his voice here has such a twang of Pecksniff and Uriah Heap. I\nreally believe that he is too much of a gentleman to speak in this tone\nwith his natural voice; it is that fatal falsetto of the pulpit. Well,\nin sober truth, these Churchmen had better not despise the outward signs\nof their influence, for there is an abundant lack of inward ones. And\ndiscreetly do they boast of the re-edification of their buildings, for\nedification or re-edification of their congregations, alas, there is\nlittle or none whereof to boast. Having rang this preliminary diffident\nchime of Dando dando, dando, the Archbishop revels in riotous peals to\nthe same words before concluding:\u2014\n\n\u201cDepend upon it a country that produces in a short time \u00a330,000,000 [sic\nin _Times; Daily News_, \u2018three millions\u2019] to restore the outward fabric\nof our churches, will not fail to respond to any appeal when made for\nthe funds which may be wanted to assist those who otherwise cannot\nprovide themselves with a due education that they may be fitted for the\nministry. Another matter which I think presses upon us is this. Is it\nnot desirable something should be done to provide the means of passing\ntheir last days in comfort, for those worn out in the service of Christ?\nHere again I feel confident that an appeal to the wealthy of this\ncountry would be answered at once if those who have the leisure\u2014none\nmore fit than the dignitaries of our cathedral churches\u2014were to take up\nthis question, and to our existing charities might well be added some\nmeans of supplementing the resources and meeting the wants of the poorer\nclergy. I visited yesterday the Clergy Orphan School. I was informed\nthat that school was perfectly full\u2014more full than it had ever been\nbefore\u2014and still there were twice as many applicants for admission as\nthere were places to admit them to. Does not this show it is very\ndesirable we should all of us direct our efforts to see that the charity\nof our fellow-Churchmen should be appealed to, to assist in the\neducation of the orphan children of our clergy, and not only the orphan\nchildren?\u201d\n\nOur fellow Christians, the laymen, having laid for us three million\ngolden eggs in a short time (the lavish geese!) will not fail to give us\nmore to educate young men for the ministry; and more yet to pension our\nworn-out clergy; and more yet again to educate the children, orphan and\nnot orphan, of our clergy. We archbishop and bishops, dean and chapter,\nare so poor, so poor, so very very poor, that we can do nothing at all\nfor any of these miserable clerical critters; the whole revenues of our\nState Church are so insignificant that they are quite inadequate to\nprovide decently for its ministers! But we know well that our dear,\ngood, stupid, unedified lay brethren and sisters will give all the\nout-door relief we have the impudence to ask; will educate our young and\npension our old; marching ever briskly heavenwards to that cheerfulest\nchurch chime: Giving, giving, giving; Dando, dando, dando! Does not our\nArchbishop rival or outrival that worthy preaching monk, Barlette? Here\nI must pause, but shall have to return again to the Charge, which\nthreatens to be a heavy charge indeed to the purses of the richer and\nmore foolish members of our impoverished State Church.\n\n\n\n\nSPIRITISM IN THE POLICE COURT\n\n\n(1876.)\n\nWe have just had a couple of professional \u201cmediums\u201d in the police\ncourts, and it is to be heartily hoped that all their colleagues of any\nnotoriety will soon be submitted to the same searching test, and duly\nrewarded according to their merits. At Huddersfield the Rev. Francis\nWard Monck, formerly a minister at Bristol, was cleverly caught out by\nMr. Lodge, a woollen merchant and amateur conjurer, who at the close of\na private seance offered to do all the \u201cDoctor\u201d had done, and insisted\non seeing his \u201cparaphernalia.\u201d The Doctor protested with profuse\nvirtuous indignation, but his detecter was firm. At length this reverend\nmedium took refuge in his own bedroom and locked himself in, and while\nthe profane sceptics were besieging the door he managed to escape from\nthe window by the help of a sheet. In his sore haste he left behind him\nsome of the \u201cparaphernalia,\u201d whose existence he had so indignantly\ndenied, including \u201cspirit hands\u201d and prepared musical boxes. He took out\na warrant against Mr. Lodge for the recovery of these precious articles,\nand was met by a counter-warrant issued by the chief constable under the\nVagrant Act, for using subtle craft means and devices to deceive and\nimpose on certain of her Majesty\u2019s subjects; he being charged with thus\ndefrauding one person of \u00a320, while Mr. Heppleston, a general dealer, in\nwhose house the exposure took place, had paid him \u00a34 for two s\u00e9ances,\nthe prisoner assuring him that the manifestations were genuine, and were\nproduced by spiritual agency. The prisoner\u2019s solicitor said that the\nVagrant Act did not apply to a gentleman in the position of Dr. Monck,\nwho kept his carriage and yacht at Bristol. We may admit that the\napplication of the Vagrant Act is an awkward and round-about mode of\ndealing with such cases, and the sooner Parliament in its great wisdom\nprovides a more direct and effectual remedy, the better; nor could a\nstronger argument for its provisions be adduced than the fact, if fact\nit be, that this reverend medium by the illicit production of spirits\nvery much below proof, has been getting money enough to keep a carriage\nand yacht. When the Huddersfield magistrates remanded him for a week at\nthe request of the chief constable, offering to accept bail, himself in\n\u00a3250, and two sureties in \u00a3100 each, the bail was not forthcoming; and\nthe prisoner made a high-minded and pathetic appeal to the bench,\n\u201casking them not to make him suffer the indignity of incarceration in\nthe police-cells; he said he had forsaken everything to follow this\ncalling, believing in his inmost soul that it was right.\u201d So far as I\ncan see, a convicted burglar or manufacturer of counterfeit coin, might\nwith as good reason make just such an appeal; pleading pathetically that\nhe had forsaken everything to follow this calling, affirming nobly that\nhe believed in his inmost soul that it was right; while as to the jemmy\nand the skeleton keys, or the moulds and the battery, which had been\nseized in his possession, they were manifestly for purely scientific\nexperimental investigations\u2014exactly as were the spirit-hands affixed to\nwires and the musical boxes of the Rev. \u201cDoctor\u201d Monck.\n\nThe London case of \u201cDoctor\u201d Slade, is too well known to require being\ndetailed here. As his fee was a sovereign, well-off people having much\ntime to kill with any excitement, and empty heads to fill with any\nnonsense (much the same sort of silly people as those for whom some\nWest-end High Church is the half-way house to the Pro-Cathedral), must\nhave been his most numerous visitors. Thus Society with a capital S took\ngreat interest in him, and our penny daily press, always ready to pander\nto Society, and to the snobbery of its readers who are not in Society\nbut ever on their knees worshipping it\u2014our penny daily press furnished\nfull reports of the proceedings. Mr. Flowers, the magistrate at Bow\nStreet Police Court gave a written judgment on the case, sentencing the\n\u201cDoctor\u201d to three months\u2019 imprisonment with hard labor in the House of\nCorrection; which sentence to the credit of our common sense, sadly\ndiscredited by much that came out on the trial, was received with some\napplause, and Mr. Lewis the prosecuting solicitor was cheered by a large\ncrowd on leaving the court. Of course, there being money to back the\n\u201cmedium,\u201d notice of appeal was given, and bail accepted\u2014the defendant in\n\u00a3200, and two sureties of \u00a3100 each.\n\nIn the course of the defence there was read from the _Spiritualist_ an\naccount of a sitting with Slade by Mr. Serjeant Cox, who, as Mr. Flowers\nobserved, would, if an appeal were raised, be one of the judges of that\nappeal. The said account, after relating various wonders, concludes\nthus: \u201cI offer no opinion on the causes of the phenomena, for I have\nformed none. If they be genuine, it is impossible to exaggerate their\ninterest and importance. If they be an imposture it is equally important\nthat the trick should be exposed in the only way in which trickery can\nbe explained\u2014by doing the same thing, and showing how it is done.\u201d Now\nthis, at any rate, seems to show judicial fairness if not judicial\nsagacity; and is beyond blame, as having been written before the learned\nSerjeant (unless warned by the spirits) could have had any expectation\nof being called upon to deliver a legal judgment on the matter. But\nafter Mr. Flowers had passed sentence, and the appeal had been raised,\nthis same Serjeant Cox, having become a prospective judge of the case,\nopened the third session of the Psychological Society of Great Britain,\nwhereof he is president, and which, under such a president, will\ndoubtless do a vast deal for the science of psychology. According to the\nreport of the _Standard_ of Friday the 3rd inst., much of the address of\nthis admirable judge and philosophical president \u201cwas an indictment of\nmaterialist scientists for their attitude towards psycho-logy, and on\nthis point he said the most important event of the year in relation to\npsychology had been the recent prosecution. Of the true motive for that\nproceeding there could be no doubt. The pretence of public interests was\ntransparent.\u201d To a mere layman the words of this judicial Serjeant read\nvery much like a reckless libel. Perhaps only a lawyer can properly\nappreciate them. \u201cThe object really sought was plain enough. It was not\nto punish Dr. Slade, but to discredit through him all psychological\nphenomena, the proof of whose existence was destruction to the doctrines\nof materialism.... Whether Dr. Slade was or was not guilty, the trial\nhad had the unlooked-for effect [!] of directing the attention of the\nwhole public to the fact that phenomena were asserted to exist... which\nswept away now and for ever _the dark and debasing doctrines of the\nmaterialists_.\u201d After which, according to the same report, a Mr. Dunlop,\nwith admirable gravity, whether sincere or ironical, expressed a high\nopinion of the judicial mind of the president! and said that he felt\nsure that if the appeal in the Slade case came before Mr. Serjeant Cox,\nhe would give as dispassionate a decision as if he had had no previous\nknowledge of the circumstances!! For myself, as a mere unlearned layman,\nI can only ask in astonishment, Is this Serjeant Cox, with his indecent\npartizanship and wild personal imputations, fit to sit in judgment\u2014I\nwill not say on this Slade business\u2014but on any case at all which\nrequires impartiality and discretion?\n\n\u201cThe dark and debasing doctrines of the materialists\u201d! Can anything be\ndarker and more debasing in a so-called civilised time and country than\nthis Spiritism has proved itself from the beginning until bow? I have\nyet to learn that the whole of its world of spirits, now for many years\nat the beck and call of countless mediums, professional and private, has\never dictated or written a single great sentence, revealed a single\ngreat truth\u2014discovered a single important fact. Nothing but the\ndreamiest drivel, or delirium, the most wretched and imbecile juggling\ntricks, with all sorts of evasions, and deceptions and lies! Mr. Wallace\nhimself, one of the few good men it has got hold of by some weak place\nin their minds, in his evidence for Slade said \u201cthat he attached no\nimportance to the subject-matter of a message, but only to its being\nwritten intelligibly, the subject-matter seldom being of any value.\u201d And\nfor seldom he might fairly have said never. The truth is the truth,\nwhether dark or bright, debasing or ennobling; but if we are called upon\nto consider a theory in these aspects, what, I ask again, can be more\ndark and debasing than this, that we live after death to rap and turn\ntables, play villainous snatches on light musical instruments, write\nbadly-spelt balderdash, dictate ungrammatical imbecilities or lies,\ngrasp hands and jog knees\u2014all for the profit of showmen and the\nhysterical wonder of fools? Who would not prefer annihilation to such a\ndegraded and idiotic immortality? Shakespeare, Bacon, Byron, Shelley,\nand countless others who on earth were splendid geniuses, have been\ncalled from their spheres by knaves or dupes, for what?\u2014to show\nthemselves reduced to the hideous state of Swift\u2019s Struldbrugs. The only\nfamous character I have heard of, not intellectually degraded since\ndeath, was Bucephalus (see _Secularist_, number 40), who told the\ncompany that he still took great interest in literary pursuits,\nparticularly in connection with education; Bucephalus, whose name\ndoubtless suggested an ancient philosopher to the shrewd medium, having\nbeen the war-horse of Alexander the Great!\n\nWe are compelled to accuse the religion which has been so long dominant\namong us, of fostering the state of mind which welcomes these miserable\nmarvels instead of rejecting them with scorn. The Bible with its Witch\nof Endor, its recognition of witchcraft, its magicians, its angels\nreleasing the Apostles, its doctrines of the supernatural, its abounding\nmiracles, has saturated the people with superstitiousness, whose evil\neffects Science can but slowly counteract. And of those who have ceased\nto submit themselves to the Bible, the larger number are still infected\nwith its non-natural spirit; having renounced one set of irrational\nmarvels, they yearn more or less consciously for another to replace it.\nIn this connection, the point on which Mr. Flower\u2019s judgment turned is\nvery significant, and its significance is increased by the approval of\nour most Christian press: \u201c_I must decide according to the well-known\ncourse of nature._\u201d This is exactly what Science demands. Carry out\nhonestly and thoroughly the application of this rule to the miracles of\nthe Bible, from the speaking serpent, to the birth, resurrection and\nascension of Jesus, and what sentence must be passed upon them? The Bow\nStreet Magistrate has given us a really excellent, concise, practical\nmaxim of rethought. When a Christian comes with his supernatural dogmas\nand non-natural occurrences, one has but to answer on the judicial\nauthority of Mr. Flowers: \u201cI must decide according to the well-known\ncourse of nature.\u201d\n\n\n\n\nA COMMISSION OF INQUIRY ON ROYALTY\n\n\n(1876.)\n\nThe subjects for our solemn consideration are the seclusion of her Most\nGracious Majesty, and the complaints thereanent published in several\nrespectable journals. In order to investigate the matter thoroughly, we\nconstituted ourselves (the unknown number x) into a special Commission\nof Inquiry. We are happy to state that the said Commission has concluded\nits arduous labors, and now presents its report within a week of its\nappointment; surely the most prompt and rapid of commissions. The cause\nof this celerity we take to be the fact that the Commissioners were\nunsalaried; we being unanimously of opinion that had we received good\npay for the inquiry throughout the period of our session, we could have\nprolonged it with certain benefit, if not to the public yet to\nourselves, for a great number of years. If, therefore, you want a\nCommission to do its work rapidly vote no money for it. And do not fear\nthat the most headlong haste in gathering evidence and composing the\nreport will diminish the value of such report; for when a Commission has\nlasted for years or months it generally rises in a quite different state\nof the subject matter from that in which it first sat, and the report\nmust be partly obsolete, partly a jumble of anachronisms. In brief, it\nmay be fairly affirmed as a general rule that no Commission of Inquiry\nis of any value at all; the appointment of one being merely a dodge by\nwhich people who don\u2019t want to act on what they and everybody else see\nquite well with their naked eyes, set a number of elderly gentlemen to\npore upon it with spectacles and magnifying glasses until dazed and\nstupid with poring, in the hope that this process will last so long that\nere it is finished the public will have forgotten the matter altogether.\nAnd now for the result of our inquiries on this subject, which is not\nonly immensely important, but is even sacred to our loyal hearts.\n\nA West-end tradesman complains bitterly that through the absence of the\nCourt from Buckingham Palace, and the diminished number and splendor of\nroyal pomps and entertainments, the \u201cSeason\u201d is for him a very poor\nseason indeed. The Commissioners, find that the said tradesman (whose\nknowledge seems-limited to a knowledge of his business, supposing he\nknows that) is remarkably well off; and consider that West-end tradesmen\nhave no valid vested interest in Royalty and the Civil List, that at the\nworst they do-a capital trade with the aristocracy and wealthy classes\n(taking good care that the punctual and honest shall amply overpay their\nlosses by the unpunctual and dishonest); that if they are not satisfied\nwith the West-end, they had better try the East-end, and see how that\nwill suit them; and, in short, that this tradesman is not worth\nlistening to.\n\nNumerous fashionable and noble people (principally ladies) complain that\nthey have no Court to shine, in. The Commissioners think that they shine\na great deal too much already, and in the most wasteful manner, gathered\ntogether by hundreds, light glittering on light; and that if they really\nwant to shine beneficially in a court there are very many very dark\ncourts in London where the light of their presence would be most\nwelcome.\n\nIt is complained on behalf of their Royal Highnesses the Prince and\nPrincess of Wales that they have to perform many of the duties of\nroyalty without getting a share of the royal allowance. The\nCommissioners think that if the necessary expenses of the heir to the\nthrone are really too heavy for his modest, income, and are increased by\nthe performance of royal duties, he had better send in yearly a bill to\nhis Mamma for expenses incurred on her account, and a duplicate of the\nsame to the Chancellor to the Exchequer; so that in every Budget the\namount of the Civil List shall be equitably divided between her Majesty\nand her Majesty\u2019s eldest son, doubtless to their common satisfaction.\n\nIt is complained on behalf of various foreign royal or ruling personages\nthat while they in their homes treat generously the visiting members of\nour royal family, they are treated very shabbily when visiting here. The\nCommissioners think that Buckingham Palace, being seldom or never wanted\nby the Queen, and very seldom wanted for the reception of the English\nCourt, should be at all times open for such royal or ruling visitors;\nthat a Lord Chamberlain, or other such noble domestic servant should be\ndetailed to attend on them, and see to their hospitable treatment in all\nrespects; and that to cover the expenditure on their account a fair\ndeduction should be made from her Majesty\u2019s share of the Civil List,\nwhich deduction, being equitable her Majesty would no doubt view with\nextreme pleasure.\n\nIt is complained on the part of her Majesty\u2019s. Ministers, that when they\nwant the royal assent and signature to important Acts of Parliament,\nthey have to lose a day or two and undergo great fatigue (which is\npeculiarly hard on men who are mostly aged, and all overworked) in\ntravelling to and from Osborne or Balmoral. The Commissioners think the\nremedy plain and easy, as in the two preceding cases. Let a law be\npassed assuming that absence, like silence, gives, consent; so that\nwhenever her Majesty is not in town, the Speaker of the Commons or the\nLord Chancellor, or other great officer of State, be empowered to seal\nand sign in her name, and generally to perform any of her real and royal\nduties, on the formal demand of the Ministry, who always (and not the\nQueen) are responsible to Parliament and the country for all public\nacts.\n\nA taxpayer complains that for fourteen years her Majesty has been\npunctually drawing all moneys allotted to support the royal dignity,\nwhile studiously abstaining from all, or nearly all, the hospitalities\nand other expensive functions incident to the support of the said\ndignity. The Commissioners consider that her Majesty is perchance\nbenefiting the country more (and may be well aware of the fact) by\ntaking her money for doing nothing than if she did something for it;\nthat if she didn\u2019t take the said money, somebody else would (as for\ninstance, were she to abdicate, the Prince of Wales, become King, would\nwant and get at least as much); so that while our Government remains as\nit is, the complaint of the said taxpayer is foolish.\n\nAnother Taxpayer, who must be a most mean-minded fellow, a stranger to\nall sacred sympathies and hallowed emotions, says: \u201cIf a washerwoman,\nbeing stupified by the death of her husband, neglected her business for\nmore than a week or two, she would certainly lose her custom or\nemployment, and not all the sanctity of conjugal grief (about which\nreverential journalists gush) would make people go on paying her for\ndoing nothing; and if this washerwoman had money enough of her own to\nlive on comfortably, people would call her shameless and miserly if she\nasked for or accepted payment while doing nothing; and if this\nwasherwoman had a large family of boys and girls around her, and shut\nherself up to brood upon her husband\u2019s death for even three or four\nmonths, people would reckon her mad with selfish misery. The\nCommissioners (as soon as they recover from the stupefaction of horror\ninto which this blasphemy has thrown them) consider and reply that there\ncan be no proper comparison of a Queen and a washerwoman, and that\nnobody would think of instituting one, except a brute, a Republican, an\nAtheist, a Communist, a, fiend in human form; that anyhow if, as this\nwretch says, a washerwoman would be paid for a week or two without\nworking, in consideration of her conjugal affliction, it is plain that a\nQueen, who (it will be universally allowed) is at least a hundred\nthousand times as good as a washerwoman, is therefore entitled to at\nleast a hundred thousand times the \u201cweek or two\u201d of salary without\nperformance of duty\u2014that is, to at least 1,923 or 3,846 years, whereas\nthis heartless and ribald reprobate himself only complains that our\nbeloved Sovereign has done nothing for her wage throughout \u201cfourteen\nyears.\u201d The Commissioners therefore eject this complainant with\nineffable scorn; and only wish they knew his name and address, that they\nmight denounce him for prosecution to the Attorney-General.\n\nA Malthusian (whatever kind of creature that may be) complains that her\nMajesty has set an example of uncontrolled fecundity to the nation and\nthe royal family, which, besides being generally immoral, is likely, at\nthe modest estimate of \u00a36,000 per annum per royal baby, to lead to the\nutter ruin of the realm in a few generations. The Commissioners, after\nprofound and prolonged consideration, can only remark that they do not\nunderstand the complaint any better than the name (which they do not\nunderstand at all) of the \u201cMalthusian;\u201d that they have always been led\nto believe that a large family is a great honor to a legitimately united\nman and woman; and that, finally, they beg to refer the Malthusian to\nthe late Prince Consort.\n\nA devotedly loyal Royalist (who unfortunately does not give the name and\naddress of his curator) complains that her Majesty, by doing nothing\nexcept receive her Civil List, is teaching the country that it can get\non quite as well without a monarch as with one, and might therefore just\nas well, and indeed very much better, put the amount of the Civil List\ninto its own pocket and call itself a Republic. The Commissioners remark\nthat this person seems the most rational of the whole lot of\ncomplainants (most rational, not for his loyalty, but most rational as\nto the grounds of his complaint, from his own point of view; in\naccordance with the dictum, \u201cA madman reasons rightly from wrong\npremises; a fool wrongly from right ones,\u201d) and that his surmise is very\nprobably correct\u2014namely, that her Majesty is really a Republican in\nprinciple, but not liking (as is perfectly natural in her position) to\npublicly profess and advocate opinions so opposed to the worldly\ninterests of all her friends and relatives, has been content to further\nthese opinions practically for fourteen years past by her conduct,\nwithout saying a word on the subject. The Commissioners, however, find\none serious objection to this surmise in the fact that if her Majesty is\nreally a Republican at heart, she must wish to exclude the Prince of\nWales from the Throne; while it seems to them that the intimate\nknowledge she must have of his wisdom and virtues (not to speak of her\nmotherly affection) cannot but make her feel that no greater blessing\ncould come to the nation after her death than his reigning over it. As\nthis is the only complaint which the Commissioners find at once\nwell-founded and not easy to remedy, they are happy to know that it is\nconfined to the very insignificant class of persons who are \u201cdevotedly\nloyal Royalists.\u201d\n\nThe Commissioners thus feel themselves bound to report that all the\ncomplaints they have heard against our beloved and gracious Sovereign\n(except the one last cited, which is of no importance) are without\nfoundation, or frivolous, or easily remedied, and that our beloved and\ngracious Sovereign (whom may Heaven long preserve!) could not do better\nthan she is now doing, in doing nothing.\n\nBut in order to obviate such complaints, which do much harm, whether ill\nor well founded, and which especially pain the delicate susceptibilities\nof all respectable men and women, the Commissioners have thought it\ntheir duty to draw up the following project of a Constitution, not to\ncome into force until the death of our present beloved and gracious\nSovereign (which may God, if so it please Him, long avert!), and to be\nmodified in its details according to the best wisdom of our national\nHouse of Palaver.\n\n\n\n\nDraft\n\n\nWhereas it is treasonable to talk of dethroning a monarch, but there can\nbe no disloyalty in preventing a person not yet a monarch from becoming\none:\n\nAnd whereas it is considered by very many, and seems proved by the\nexperience of the last ---- years that the country can do quite well\nwithout a monarch, and may therefore save the extra expense of monarchy:\n\nAnd whereas it is calculated that from the accession of George I. of\nblessed memory until the decease of the most beloved of Queens,\nVictoria, a period of upwards of a century and a half, the Royal Family\nof the House of Guelph have received full and fair payment in every\nrespect for their generous and heroic conduct in coming to occupy the\nthrone and other high places of this kingdom, and in saving us from the\nunconstitutional Stuarts:\n\nAnd whereas the said Stuarts may now be considered extinct, and thus no\nlonger dangerous to this realm: And whereas the said Royal Family of the\nHouse of Guelph is so prolific that the nation cannot hope to support\nall the members thereof for a long period to come in a royal manner:\n\nAnd whereas the Dukes of this realm are accounted liberal and courteous\ngentlemen:\n\nAnd whereas the constitution of our country is so far Venetian that it\ncannot but be improved in harmony and consistency by being made more\nVenetian still:\n\nBe it enacted, etc., That the Throne now vacant through the\never-to-be-deplored death of her late most gracious Majesty shall remain\nvacant. That the mem-ers of what has been hitherto the Royal Family keep\nall the property they have accumulated, the nation resuming from them\nall grants of sinecures and other salaried appointments. That no member\nof the said Family be eligible for any public appointment whatever for\nat least one hundred years. That the Dukes in the order of their\nseniority shall act as Doges (with whatever title be considered the\nbest) year and year about, under penalty of large fines in cases of\nrefusal, save when such refusal is supported by clear proof of poverty\n(being revenue under a settled minimum), imbecility, brutality, or other\nserious disqualification. That no members of a ducal family within a\ncertain degree of relationship to the head of the house be eligible for\nany public appointment whatever; the head of the house being eligible\nfor the Dogeship only. That the duties of the Doge be simply to seal and\nsign Acts of Parliament, proclamations, etc., when requested to do so by\nthe Ministry; and to exercise hospitality to royal or ruling and other\nrepresentatives of foreign countries, as well as to distinguished\nnatives. That a fair and even excessive allowance be made to the Doge\nfor the expenses of his year of office. That the royal palaces be\nofficial residences of the Doge. That the Doge be free from all\npolitical responsibility as from all political power; but be responsible\nfor performing liberally and courteously the duties of hospitality, so\nthat Buckingham Palace shall not contrast painfully with the Mansion\nHouse. Etc., etc.\n\nGod preserve the Doge!\n\nThe Commission of Inquiry having thus triumphantly vindicated our\nbeloved and gracious Sovereign against the cruel aspersions of people in\ngeneral, and having moreover drafted a plan for obviating such\naspersions against any British King or Queen in future, ends its Report,\nand dissolves itself, with humble thankfulness to God Almighty whose\ngrace alone has empowered it to conclude its arduous labors so speedily,\nand with results so incalculably beneficial.\n\nP. S.\u2014Since the above report was drawn up, that ardent English patriot\nand loyalist, Benjamin Disraeli, being by the grace of God and the late\nEarl of Derby Prime Minister of this realm, has proposed that Parliament\nshall enable her Most Gracious Majesty to assume the additional title of\nEmpress of India, and Parliament has so far humbly assented. Being sore\npressed by many cantankerous persons to give valid reasons for this\nchange, he has given reasons many and weighty; such as the earnest\ndesire of the princes and people of India, which desire has been so\nabundantly expressed that the expressions thereof cannot be produced\nlest they should overwhelm Parliament and destroy the balance of the\nworld in general; then the imposing authority of \u201cWhitaker\u2019s Almanack,\u201d\na dissenting minister and a school-girl aged twelve: and lastly the\nnecessity of such a title for scaring all the Russias from India. But I\nbelieve that in deference to the well-known modesty of her Most Gracious\nMajesty he has not produced the most cogent reason of all, which is that\nfor her wonderful and continual goodness during the past fourteen years\nin abstaining from the active functions of royalty, thus not only doing\nno mischief but preparing us for a Republic de jure by habituating us to\na Republic _de facto_, she merits a great reward; and that, as she has\nalready more money than she knows what to do with, this reward of royal\nvirtue can most fittingly be rendered by her grateful subjects promoting\nher to the rank of Empress. And it should be noted that whereas the old\ntitle of Queen has a certain strength and stability in the habitudes if\nnot in the affections of the people, the new fangled title of Empress\nhas no such support, so that in assuming it our beloved monarch is but\nworking consistently and resolutely toward the great end of her reign,\nthe speedy abolition of monarchy and establishment of a Republic.\n\n\n\n\nA BIBLE LESSON ON MONARCHY\n\n\n(1876.)\n\nThe old theory of \u201cThe right divine of kings to govern wrong,\u201d and the\nmuch-quoted text, \u201cFear God and honor the king,\u201d seem to have impressed\nmany good people with the notion that the Bible is in favor of monarchy.\nBut \u201cking\u201d in the text plainly has the general meaning of \u201cruler,\u201d and\nwould be equally applicable to the President of a Republic. In Romans\nxiii. 1\u20143, we read: \u201cLet every soul be subject unto the higher powers.\nFor there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of\nGod. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of\nGod: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For\nrulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil.\u201d Without\nstopping to discuss the bold assertion in the last sentence, we may\nremark that the real teaching of this passage is that Christians ought\nto be indifferent to politics, quietly accepting whatever government\nthey find in power; for if the powers that be are ordained of God, or in\nother words, if might is right, all forms of government are equally\nentitled to obedience so long as they actually exist. Of course\nChristians are not now, and for the most part have not been for\ncenturies, really indifferent to politics, because for the most part\nthey now are and long have been Christians only in name; but it is easy\nto understand from the New Testament itself why the first Christians\nnaturally were thus indifferent, and why Christianity has never afforded\nany political inspiration. Nothing can be clearer to one who reads the\nNew Testament honestly and without prejudice than the fact that Christ\nand his apostles believed that the end of the world was at hand. Thus in\nMatt, xxiv., Jesus after foretelling the coming to judgment of the son\nof man in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory, when the\nangels shall gather the elect from the four winds, adds, v. 34, \u201cVerily\nI say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be\nfulfilled.\u201d This is repeated in almost the same words in Mark xiii., and\nLuke xxi., and a careful reading of the Epistles shows that their\nwriters were profoundly influenced by this prophecy. But with the world\ncoming to an end so soon, it would be as absurd to take any interest in\nits politics as for a traveller stopping two or three days in an inn to\nconcern himself self with schemes for rebuilding it, when about to leave\nfor a far country where he intends settling for life. If therefore we\nwant any political guidance from the Holy Scriptures, we must go to the\nOld Testament, not to the New.\n\nNow the first lesson on Monarchy, which we remember made us think even\nin childhood, is the fable of the trees electing a king, told by Jotham,\nthe son of Gideon, in Judges ix. The trees in the process of this\nelection showed a judgment much superior to that which men usually show\nin such a business. It is true that they did not select first the most\nstrong and stalwart of trees, the cedar or the oak, but they had the\ngood sense to choose the most sweet-natured and bountiful, the olive,\nthen the fig, then the vine. But the bountiful trees thus chosen had\ngood sense too, and would not forsake the fatness and the sweetness and\nthe wine which cheereth God and man, to rule over their fellow trees.\nThen the poor trees, like a jilted girl who marries in spleen the first\nscamp she comes across, asked the bramble to be their king; and that\nbarren good-for-nothing of course accepted eagerly the crown which the\nnoble and generous had refused, and called upon the trees to put their\ntrust in its scraggy shadow, \u201cand if not, let fire come out of the\nbramble, and devour the cedars of Lebanon.\u201d Young as we were when this\nfable first caught our attention, we mused a good deal over it, and even\nthen began to learn that those most eager for supremacy, the most\nforward candidates in elections, are nearly always brambles, not olives\nor fig-trees or vines; and that the first thought of a bramble, when\nmade ruler over its betters, is naturally to destroy with fire the\ncedars of Lebanon.\n\nBut God himself in the case of the Israelites has vouchsafed to us a\nvery clear judgment on the question of Monarchy. In the remarkable\nconstitution for that people which he gave to Moses, he did not include\na king, and Israel remained without a king for more years than it is\nworth while endeavoring to count here. We read, 1 Samuel viii., how \u201cAll\nthe elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel\nunto Hamah, and said unto him, Behold thou art old, and thy sons walk\nnot in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.\nBut the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge\nus. And Samuel prayed unto the Lord. And the Lord said unto Samuel,\nHearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for\nthey have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should\nnot reign over them.\n\n\u201c... Now therefore hearken unto their voice: how-beit yet protest\nsolemnly unto them, and show them the manner of the king that shall\nreign over them.\u201d Some students of the Bible may have thought that God\u2019s\nsevere condemnation of the Israelites for wanting a king arose chiefly\nfrom wounded pride, from the fact that they had rejected him, and we\ncannot affirm that this feeling did not inflame his anger, for he\nhimself has said that he is a jealous God; but the protest which he\norders Samuel to make, and the exposition of the common evils of\nkingship, prove clearly that God did not (and therefore, of course, does\nnot) approve this form of government. And, indeed, it is plain that if\nhe had approved it, he would have given it to his chosen people at\nfirst. For although divines have termed the form of government under\nwhich the Jews lived before the kings a theocracy, God did not then rule\nimmediately, but always through the medium of a high-priest or judge,\nand could have governed through the medium of a king had he thought it\nwell so to do. And he who reads the history of the Jews under the\nJudges, as contained in the Book of Judges, and especially the\nnarratives in chapters xvii. to xxi. which illustrate the condition of\nJewish society in those days when \u201cthere was no king in Israel: every\nman did that which was right in his own eyes,\u201d will see that God must\nhave thought a Monarchy very vile and odious indeed when he was angry at\nthe request for it, and implied that it was actually worse than that\ngovernment by Judges alternated with bondage under neighboring tribes\nwhich the theologians call a theocracy. Samuel warned the people of what\na king would do, and doubtless thought he was warning them of the worst,\nbut kings have far outstripped all that the prophet could foresee. The\nking, he said, will take your sons to be his warriors and servants; and\nwill take your daughters to be confectionaries, and cooks, and bakers.\nThis was the truth, and nothing but the truth, but it was not the whole\ntruth; for the sons have been taken to be far worse than mere warriors\nand servants, and the daughters for much viler purposes than cooking and\nbaking. Samuel goes on: \u201cAnd he will take your fields, and your\nvineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to\nhis servants\u201d\u2014when he does not keep them for himself might have been\nadded. \u201cAnd he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards,\nand give to his officers, and to his servants.\u201d Surely much more than a\ntenth, O Samuel! We will not quote the remainder of this wise warning.\nLike most wise warnings it was ineffectual; the foolish people insisted\non having a king, and in the following chapters we read how Saul the Son\nof Kish, going forth to seek his father\u2019s asses, found his own subjects.\n\nThe condemnation of Monarchy by God, as we read it in this instance, is\nso thorough and general that we feel bound to add a few words on an\nexceptional case in which a king is highly extolled in the Scriptures,\nwithout any actions being recorded of him, as in the instances of David\nand Solomon, to nullify the praise. The king in question was\nMelchizedek, King of Salem, and priest of the most high God, who met\nAbram returning from the defeat of the four kings and blessed him, and\nto whom Abram gave tithes of all, as we read in Genesis xiv. But this\nshort notice of Melchizedek in Genesis does not by any means suggest to\nus the full wonderfulness of his character, though we naturally conclude\nfrom it that he was indeed an important personage to whom Abram gave\ntithes of all. The New Testament, however, comes to our aid, and for\nonce gives us a most valuable political lesson, though the inspired\nwriter was far from thinking of political instruction when he wrote the\npassage. In Hebrews vi., 20, and vii., 1 to 3, we read: \u201cJesus, made an\nHigh Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. For this\nMelchisedec, King of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham\nreturning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him; to whom also\nAbraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of\nrighteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is King of\npeace; without father, without mother, without descent, having neither\nbeginning of days nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God;\nabideth a priest continually.\u201d Now he to whom Jesus is compared, and who\nis like the Son of God, is clearly the noblest of characters; and\ntherefore, as the history in the first book of Samuel teaches us that\nMonarchy is generally to be avoided, these fine verses from the Epistle\nto the Hebrews delineate for us the exceptional king whose reign is to\nbe desired.\n\nThe delineation is quite masterly, for a few lines give us\ncharacteristics which cannot be overlooked or mistaken. This model\nmonarch must be a priest of the most high God\u2014a king of righteousness\nand king of peace; without father, without mother, without descent,\nhaving neither beginning of days nor end of life; but made like unto the\nSon of God. Whenever and wherever such a gentleman is met with, we would\nadvise even the most zealous Republicans to put him forthwith upon the\nthrone. But in the absence of such a gentleman we can hardly do wrong if\nwe follow the good advice of Samuel dictated by God Almighty, and manage\nwithout any Monarch.\n\n\n\n\nPRINCIPAL TULLOCH ON PERSONAL IMMORTALITY\n\n\n[two excerpts.]\n\n(1877.)\n\nDr. Tulloch has the sense to perceive and the candor to acknowledge that\neven to those who have not any faith in God or Immortality, death need\nnot be terrible, and often is not; that they may be resigned or\npeaceful, and meet the inevitable with a calm front; that they may be\neven glad to be done with the struggle of existence. Of course this is\nno news to us who have stood at the bedside of dying Materialists and\nAtheists, or are familiar with trustworthy well-authenticated accounts\nof the last hours of such persons. Still it is encouraging to find a\ndistinguished and influential minister openly recognising the facts,\ninstead of distorting them with the old contemptible pious fictions,\nagain and again repeated after being again and again refuted. But Dr.\nTulloch considers that only the light of the higher life in Christ can\nglorify death. It would have been well had he been more specific as to\nthis higher life and the glory it casts on death. If they are as\ndescribed at length in the only authoritative Christian Scripture on the\nsubject, the Book of Revelation, it seems to me that the life is\nanything but high, and radiates anything but glory. However, tastes\ndiffer, and man is a queer fellow; and there may actually exist many\npeople who would prefer to annihilation a sort of everlasting Moody and\nSankey meeting, and would even regard this as celestial beatitude.\nConcerning such I will only say with Goethe, I hope I shan\u2019t go to\nheaven with that lot! Yet these are not quite the lowest of the low in\nour civilised Christendom; or are there not many who look forward with\ncomplacency and even enthusiasm to a life beyond death, wherein they\nshall be largely employed in rapping tables, jogging arms and scrawling\nilliterate nonsense? Dr. Tulloch, in quoting St. Paul, seems to forget\nthat he was writing of himself and his fellow Christians, to whom his\nwords were thoroughly applicable; not of mankind in general, to whom\nthey were not, and by the construction of the sentence could not be. \u201cIf\nin this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most\nmiserable;\u201d we, the Christians. And why would they be of all men the\nmost miserable? Clearly because, in obedience to the injunctions of\ntheir Master, they had cut themselves off from this world that they\nmight secure the next; had renounced wealth, honor, society, enjoyment,\nall interest in art, science, literature, all political and national\naspirations, and had courted obloquy and persecution; so that if the\nnext life should turn out to be a mockery, a delusion and a snare, they\nwere of all men the most miserable, being the most miserably deluded.\nThose poor simple early Christians (on the showing, true or false, of\nthe books all Christians revere as sacred and divine), having only Jesus\nand his apostles to instruct them, had not reached that lofty mercantile\nwisdom which made the late Mr. Binney one of the most popular preachers\nin our pious and mercantile country, when he solved the problem of _How\nto Make the Best of Both Worlds_. Of other-worldliness they indeed had\nenough and to spare; but they lacked the large modern grasp which\ncombines and intermingles it with an equal measure of this worldliness.\n\u201cThey didn\u2019t know everything down in Judee;\u201d and St. Paul, though fairly\nintelligent and cultivated for his benighted time, was in a deplorable\nneed of some lessons from Weigh-house Chapel.\n\nWhen the worthy Principal says that men cannot find strength or comfort\nin what has been called the Religion of Humanity, and that they crave a\npersonal life, is he aware that he has descended from the highlands of\nmorality and truth to the lowest lowlands of Paley and Binney\nexpediency? Is he aware that he is moreover begging the question, making\nthe monstrous assumption that men must get what they crave? I call this\nthe childish lollipop attraction of religion, so absurd as to be really\nbeneath the contempt of full-grown men and women. Just as young ones\nwould look forward to having the free range as long as they liked (which\nthey would interpret for ever and ever) of shops full of sweeties, so\nthose big babies, our dear simple Christian brethren, look forward to\ntheir Lubberland of eternal bliss, in singing Glory! Glory! Glory! Their\nclaim to it is purely the infant\u2019s, because they would like it. Their\nmouths water, they lick their lips, they gurgle luxuriously with the\nforetaste: \u201cOh, we shall be so \u2019ap-\u2019ap-\u2019appy! Canaan is a happy place;\nwe\u2019ll go to the land of Canaan!\u201d And usually these beatific adult babies\nare creatures such as an intelligent man would be ashamed to bring into\nthe world, much more a God. You can\u2019t endure an hour of their society\nhere, and they pester you to come and spend eternity with them! I am\nreally sorry to find Dr. Tulloch in such company.\n\nIn conclusion, I ask the reader to note especially the preacher\u2019s avowal\nthat his faith in personal immortality has no warrant from Nature, no\nwarrant from Science; nay, more, that the suggestions of scientific\nanalysis \u201cmockingly sift the sources of life only to hint our\nmortality.\u201d There is indeed no temper of mockery in Science, but its\nsoberest deductions may well seem to mock with a terrible derision the\ninordinate greed and self-conceit of men, who, because they profess an\nunscientific and unnatural faith, have lost all sense of proportion\nbetween their infinitesimal selves and the infinite Universe.\n\n\n\n\nTHE ESTABLISHED CHURCH\n\n\nIts Real As Distinguished From Its Apparent Strength\n\n(1862.)\n\nIn discussions with \u201cInfidels,\u201d Churchmen are very ready with the taunt,\n\u201cYou are but a handful of\u2019 fanatics. Nearly the whole intellect of the\nnation is for us and against you.\u201d In general the taunt is merely\nparried by a \u201cWhat matter, if _we_ are right?\u201d whereas it should also be\nretorted by a counter-thrust of denial. For, in truth, but a very small\npart of the intellect of the nation\u2014_i.e._, intellect in the only sense\nin which it is of importance\u2014_active_ intellect, is devoted to the\nEstablishment or even to the Establishment and the so-called Dissenters\ncombined. If they only are the true soldiers of the Church militant whom\nshe spiritually feeds and equips for the warfare of life, and who are\nloyal to her with their whole heart and mind, how many legions must be\ndeducted from the armies gathered round her banners before we can fairly\nestimate her actual power in the field! Should Jesus come to eliminate\nhis true followers from the multitudes of professing Christians, as\nGideon selected his, three hundred from the two and thirty thousand\nIsraelites, let us consider whom he would reject.\n\n_First_, all the cowards and hypocrites who simply cling to what appears\nthe dominant party, and who would therefore call themselves Atheists\nwere Atheism in the ascendant; a vile brood, the incumbrance and\ndisgrace of every cause they adopt; \u201chateful to God and to the enemies\nof God\u201d; of whom even to write is not pleasant.\n\n_Secondly_, the indifferent through lack of vitality; men of tepid heart\nand inert brain, who are incapable of any strong sane affection. I use\nthe word _sane_ because these creatures have intense self-love, which in\nits essence is insane; and because also they may be frenzied by the\ndrunkenness of fanaticism, in which state they can die as devotedly as\nthey can murder atrociously. The adhesion of these also I count no gain\nto any cause.\n\n_Thirdly_, the indifferent through excess of vitality, including the\nmost eminent \u201cpractical\u201d men, soldiers, sailors, lawyers, engineers,\nstatesmen. These, applying their whole energies to their several\nprofessions, rarely trouble themselves with theological any more than\nwith other extraneous matters, but passively acquiesce in whatever creed\nmay be prevalent around them. Their real church is the world; their real\nworship is labor; and they no more add to the strength of their nominal\nchurch than did the _savants_ to that of Napoleon\u2019s army in Egypt\u2014those\n_savants_ whom the wise Napoleon always ordered (with the donkeys) to\nthe centre whenever an attack was expected. To these must be added all\nthe men whom we call fine animals, who enjoy such a red-blooded life in\nthis world that they are not subject to bilious forebodings of another.\nSome classes of the most famous men\u2014the poets, philosophers, doctors,\nphysicists, mathematicians\u2014are commanded by their very vocations to\nthink seriously on some of the great theological questions, and\ntherefore, whether ranged for or against the Church, count for\nsomething. The reader must ask his memory whether their weight in the\nbalance has preponderated for orthodoxy or for heterodoxy. The statesmen\nI have counted among the indifferent, because their support of religion,\nin whatever form, has been almost universally no more than political.\n\n_Fourthly_, the supersubtle, including laymen and divines of first-rate\ntalent; who cannot help delighting in the exercise of their skill of\nfence, and who instinctively feel that it is much harder to champion any\nexisting institution than to attack it, and naturally (like all\nunconquerable knights-errant) prefer the most difficult _devoir_. Their\nadhesion to the Church, therefore, though seeming to strengthen it,\nreally proclaims its weakness. Macaulay tells us how Halifax, the\nTrimmer, always joined the losing side.\n\n_Fifthly_, the supremely reverential, including the very best of the\nlaymen and divines; men whose lofty reason is drowned in a yet deeper\nfaith, as mountain-peaks high as the highest in air are said to be\nsubmerged in the abysses of the Atlantic. In many cases these might be\nranked in the preceding class; for it is a general rule that the more\nreverence, the more subtlety. They see\u2014how clearly!\u2014the flaws and\nimperfections of their Church, they even realise the danger of its total\nfall; but they cannot tear themselves away from the venerable building\nwherein all their forefathers worshipped, in whose consecrated precincts\nall their forefathers were buried in hopes of a happy resurrection;\nwhose chants were the rapturous music and whose windows were the\nheavenly glories of their pure childhood; whose prayers they repeated\nnight after night and morning after morning at their mother\u2019s knee. Can\nthey leave this, with all its treasured holiness of antiquity for some\nnew bold glaring erection, wherein men certainly congregate ta talk\nabout God, but which might just as well be used as a warehouse or a\nmanufactory? No; rather than leave it they will believe, they will force\nthemselves to believe, that some miraculous renovation is at hand, or\nthat (as the structure was certainly raised by God) God will uphold it\nin spite of the law of gravitation. These are the men who keep the\nChurch from falling into insignificance, but they are not essentially\nhers. It is not she alone whom they could thus worship. Had they been\nbrought up idolators, idolatry must have retained almost the same\ninfluence over spirits so reverentially humble, so loving and pure.\n\nAnd here it may be remarked that one can scarcely conceive a Church so\nfrail and gloomy and even vile, but that a fervent soul and a strong\nintellect could fortify it with argument, adorn it with the gold and\njewels of imagination, illustrate its dark altars and vivify its dead\nidols with the burning fire of spirituality, until it should be far more\nnoble and mighty and splendid than ever was aspired to by the majority\nof men. But mark, such men as these of whom I speak do not derive their\nreligiousness from, but really bestow it upon the Church in which they\npray. She is subject and indebted to them, not they to her. She does not\nnourish them, they nourish her. She is the statue, they are Pygmalion.\nAnd they are indeed idolators, for they worship a creation of their own\nsouls. Perhaps Pygmalion himself fell down and adored his flushed and\nbreathing statue, thinking her, with artist-reverence, nothing less than\na transformation of Venus Urania. When one thinks of certain noble men\nand women\u2014as Maurice and Kingsley, Ruskin and the Browning\u2014devoting\nthemselves in spite of themselves to an effete faith, one is sadly\nreminded of poor Abishag the Shunammite wasting and withering her\nhealthful youth to cherish old worn-out David, \u201cwho knew her not,\u201d who\ncould fill her with no new life, and who was, despite her cherishing, so\ncertainly near death. He had been a great king in his time, but now his\ntime was past, and as it was now the maiden\u2019s spring-time, he should\nhave left her to live her proper life.\n\nBut when all these are separated from the host, who are left to whom we\nmay point in answer to Emerson\u2019s question, \u201cIn Christendom, where is the\nChristian?\u201d Strictly speaking there has never been but one Christian\u2014the\nman Christ Jesus. But I would give the title to those who thoroughly\nbelieve the Bible after having investigated it to the best of their\npower, who find its doctrines completely satisfy them, and who sincerely\nendeavor to act up to those doctrines. How many of such are there? I\nhave known perhaps half a dozen. Has any reader known many more? Will\nany one dare assert that they are more numerous in England than the\nequally sincere Secularists or Atheists? I scarcely think any honest and\nthoughtful person will.\n\nFINIS.","title":"Satires and Profanities","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":61154}