initial commit of ebook 38807HEADmain

1 files changed, 12311 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/38807.txt b/38807.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d381ebf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/38807.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,12311 @@
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll, Vol. 7
+(of 12), by Robert G. Ingersoll
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll, Vol. 7 (of 12)
+       Dresden Edition--Discussions
+
+Author: Robert G. Ingersoll
+
+Release Date: February 9, 2012 [EBook #38807]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ASCII
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WORKS OF INGERSOLL ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by David Widger
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+THE WORKS OF ROBERT G. INGERSOLL
+
+By Robert G. Ingersoll
+
+"EVERY BRAIN IS A FIELD WHERE NATURE SOWS THE SEEDS OF THOUGHT, AND THE
+CROP DEPENDS UPON THE SOIL."
+
+In Twelve Volumes, Volume VII.
+
+DISCUSSIONS
+
+Dresden Edition
+
+
+1900
+
+CONTENTS OF VOLUME VII.
+
+
+MY REVIEWERS REVIEWED.
+
+(1877.)
+
+Answer to San Francisco Clergymen--Definition of Liberty, Physical
+and Mental--The Right to Compel Belief--Woman the Equal of Man--The
+Ghosts--Immortality--Slavery--Witchcraft--Aristocracy of the
+Air--Unfairness of Clerical Critics--Force and Matter--Doctrine of
+Negation--Confident Deaths of Murderers--Childhood Scenes returned to
+by the Dying--Death-bed of Voltaire--Thomas Paine--The First
+Sectarians Were Heretics--Reply to Rev. Mr. Guard--Slaughter of
+the Canaanites--Reply to Rev. Samuel Robinson--Protestant
+Persecutions--Toleration--Infidelity and Progress--The
+Occident--Calvinism--Religious Editors--Reply to the Rev. Mr.
+Ijams--Does the Bible teach Man to Enslave his Brothers?--Reply to
+California _Christian Advocate_--Self-Government of French People at
+and Since the Revolution--On the Site of the Bastile--French
+Peasant's Cheers for Jesus Christ--Was the World created in Six
+Days--Geology--What is the Astronomy of the Bible?--The Earth the Centre
+of the Universe--Joshua's Miracle--Change of Motion into Heat--Geography
+and Astronomy of Cosmas--Does the Bible teach the Existence of
+that Impossible Crime called Witchcraft?--Saul and the Woman of
+Endor--Familiar Spirits--Demonology of the New Testament--Temptation of
+Jesus--Possession by Devils--Gadarene Swine Story--Test of Belief--Bible
+Idea of the Rights of Children--Punishment of the Rebellious
+Son--Jephthah's Vow and Sacrifice--Persecution of Job--The Gallantry
+of God--Bible Idea of the Rights of Women--Paul's Instructions to
+Wives--Permission given to Steal Wives--Does the Bible Sanction
+Polygamy and Concubinage?--Does the Bible Uphold and Justify Political
+Tyranny?--Powers that be Ordained of God--Religious Liberty of
+God--Sun-Worship punishable with Death--Unbelievers to be damned--Does
+the Bible describe a God of Mercy?--Massacre Commanded--Eternal
+Punishment Taught in the New Testament--The Plan of Salvation--Fall
+and Atonement Moral Bankruptcy--Other Religions--Parsee
+Sect--Brahmins--Confucians--Heretics and Orthodox.
+
+
+MY CHICAGO BIBLE CLASS.
+
+(1879.)
+
+Rev. Robert Collyer--Inspiration of the Scriptures--Rev. Dr.
+Thomas--Formation of the Old Testament--Rev. Dr. Kohler--Rev. Mr.
+Herford--Prof. Swing--Rev. Dr. Ryder.
+
+
+TO THE INDIANAPOLIS CLERGY.
+
+(1882.)
+
+Rev. David Walk--Character of Jesus--Two or Three Christs Described
+in the Gospels--Christ's Change of Opinions--Gospels Later than the
+Epistles--Divine Parentage of Christ a Late Belief--The Man Christ
+probably a Historical Character--Jesus Belittled by his Worshipers--He
+never Claimed to be Divine--Christ's Omissions--Difference between
+Christian and other Modern Civilizations--Civilization not Promoted
+by Religion--Inventors--French and American Civilization: How
+Produced--Intemperance and Slavery in Christian Nations--Advance due to
+Inventions and Discoveries--Missionaries--Christian Nations Preserved by
+Bayonet and Ball--Dr. T. B. Taylor--Origin of Life on this Planet--Sir
+William Thomson--Origin of Things Undiscoverable--Existence after
+Death--Spiritualists--If the Dead Return--Our Calendar--Christ and
+Christmas-The Existence of Pain--Plato's Theory of Evil--Will God do
+Better in Another World than he does in this?--Consolation--Life Not a
+Probationary Stage--Rev. D.O'Donaghue--The Case of Archibald Armstrong
+and Jonathan Newgate--Inequalities of Life--Can Criminals live a
+Contented Life?--Justice of the Orthodox God Illustrated.
+
+
+THE BROOKLYN DIVINES.
+
+(1883.)
+
+Are the Books of Atheistic or Infidel Writers Extensively
+Read?--Increase in the Number of Infidels--Spread of Scientific
+Literature--Rev. Dr. Eddy--Rev. Dr. Hawkins--Rev. Dr. Haynes--Rev.
+Mr. Pullman--Rev. Mr. Foote--Rev. Mr. Wells--Rev. Dr. Van Dyke--Rev.
+Carpenter--Rev. Mr. Reed--Rev. Dr. McClelland--Ministers Opposed to
+Discussion--Whipping Children--Worldliness as a Foe of the Church--The
+Drama--Human Love--Fires, Cyclones, and Other Afflictions as Promoters
+of Spirituality--Class Distinctions--Rich and Poor--Aristocracies--The
+Right to Choose One's Associates--Churches Social Affairs--Progress
+of the Roman Catholic Church--Substitutes for the Churches--Henry
+Ward Beecher--How far Education is Favored by the Sects--Rivals of the
+Pulpit--Christianity Now and One Hundred Years Ago--French Revolution
+produced by the Priests--Why the Revolution was a Failure--Infidelity
+of One Hundred Years Ago--Ministers not more Intellectual than a Century
+Ago--Great Preachers of the Past--New Readings of Old Texts--Clerical
+Answerers of Infidelity--Rev. Dr. Baker--Father Fransiola--Faith and
+Reason--Democracy of Kindness--Moral Instruction--Morality Born of Human
+Needs--The Conditions of Happiness--The Chief End of Man.
+
+
+THE LIMITATIONS OF TOLERATION.
+
+(1888.)
+
+Discussion between Col. Robert G. Ingersoll, Hon. Frederic R. Coudert,
+and ex-Gov. Stewart L. Woodford before the Nineteenth Century Club of
+New York--Propositions--Toleration not a Disclaimer but a Waiver of the
+Right to Persecute--Remarks of Courtlandt Palmer--No Responsibility for
+Thought--Intellectual Hospitality--Right of Free Speech--Origin of the
+term "Toleration"--Slander and False Witness--Nobody can Control his own
+Mind: Anecdote--Remarks of Mr. Coudert--Voltaire, Rousseau, Hugo, and
+Ingersoll--General Woodford's Speech--Reply by Colonel Ingersoll--A
+Catholic Compelled to Pay a Compliment to Voltaire--Responsibility for
+Thoughts--The Mexican Unbeliever and his Reception in the Other Country.
+
+
+A CHRISTMAS SERMON.
+
+(1891.)
+
+Christianity's Message of Grief--Christmas a Pagan Festival--Reply
+to Dr. Buckley--Charges by the Editor of the Christian Advocate--The
+Tidings of Christianity--In what the Message of Grief Consists--Fear
+and Flame--An Everlasting Siberia--Dr. Buckley's Proposal to Boycott the
+Telegram--Reply to Rev. J. M. King and Rev. Thomas Dixon, Jr. Cana Day
+be Blasphemed?--Hurting Christian feelings--For Revenue only What is
+Blasphemy?--Balaam's Ass wiser than the Prophet--The Universalists--Can
+God do Nothing for this World?--The Universe a Blunder if Christianity
+is true--The Duty of a Newspaper--Facts Not Sectarian--The Rev.
+Mr. Peters--What Infidelity Has Done--Public School System not
+Christian--Orthodox Universities--Bruno on Oxford--As to Public
+Morals--No Rewards or Punishments in the Universe--The Atonement
+Immoral--As to Sciences and Art--Bruno, Humboldt, Darwin--Scientific
+Writers Opposed by the Church--As to the Liberation of Slaves--As to
+the Reclamation of Inebriates--Rum and Religion--The Humanity
+of Infidelity--What Infidelity says to the Dying--The Battle
+Continued--Morality not Assailed by an Attack on Christianity--The
+Inquisition and Religious Persecution--Human Nature Derided by
+Christianity--Dr. DaCosta--"Human Brotherhood" as exemplified by
+the History of the Church--The Church and Science, Art and
+Learning----Astronomy's Revenge--Galileo and Kepler--Mrs. Browning:
+Science Thrust into the Brain of Europe--Our Numerals--Christianity and
+Literature--Institution's of Learning--Stephen Girard--James Lick--Our
+Chronology--Historians--Natural Philosophy--Philology--Metaphysical
+Research--Intelligence, Hindoo, Egyptian--Inventions--John
+Ericsson--Emancipators--Rev. Mr. Ballou--The Right of Goa to
+Punish--Rev. Dr. Hillier--Rev. Mr. Haldeman--George A. Locey--The "Great
+Physician"--Rev. Mr. Talmage--Rev. J. Benson Hamilton--How Voltaire
+Died--The Death-bed of Thomas Paine--Rev. Mr. Holloway--Original
+Sin--Rev. Dr. Tyler--The Good Samaritan a Heathen--Hospitals and
+Asylums--Christian Treatment of the Insane--Rev. Dr. Buckley--The
+North American Review Discussion--Judge Black, Dr. Field,
+Mr. Gladstone--Circulation of Obscene Literature--Eulogy of
+Whiskey--Eulogy of Tobacco--Human Stupidity that Defies the Gods--Rev.
+Charles Deems--Jesus a Believer in a Personal Devil--The Man Christ.
+
+
+SUICIDE OF JUDGE NORMILE.
+
+(1892.)
+
+Reply to the _Western Watchman_--Henry D'Arcy--Peter's
+Prevarication-Some Excellent Pagans-Heartlessness of a
+Catholic--Wishes do not Affect the Judgment--Devout Robbers--Penitent
+Murderers--Reverential Drunkards--Luther's Distich--Judge
+Normile--Self-destruction.
+
+
+IS SUICIDE A SIN?
+
+(1894.)
+
+Col. Ingersoll's First Letter in _The New York World_--Under what
+Circumstances a Man has the Right to take his Own Life--Medicine and the
+Decrees of God--Case of the Betrayed Girl--Suicides not Cowards--Suicide
+under Roman Law--Many Suicides Insane--Insanity Caused by Religion--The
+Law against Suicide Cruel and Idiotic--Natural and Sufficient Cause for
+Self-destruction--Christ's Death a Suicide--Col. Ingersoll's Reply to his
+Critics--Is Suffering the Work of God?--It is not Man's Duty to
+Endure Hopeless Suffering--When Suicide is Justifiable--The
+Inquisition--Alleged Cowardice of Suicides--Propositions
+Demonstrated--Suicide the Foundation of the Christian
+Religion--Redemption and Atonement--The Clergy on Infidelity
+and Suicide--Morality and Unbelief--Better injure yourself than
+Another--Misquotation by Opponents--Cheerful View the Best--The
+Wonder is that Men endure--Suicide a Sin (Interview in The New
+York Journal)--Causes of Suicide--Col. Ingersoll Does Not Advise
+Suicide--Suicides with Tracts or Bibles in their Pockets--Suicide a Sin
+(Interview in The New York Herald)--Comments on Rev. Alerle St. Croix
+Wright's Sermon--Suicide and Sanity (Interview in The York World)--As to
+the Cowardice of Suicide--Germany and the Prevalence of Suicide--Killing
+of Idiots and Defective Infants--Virtue, Morality, and Religion.
+
+
+IS AVARICE TRIUMPHANT?
+
+(1891.)
+
+Reply to General Rush Hawkins' Article, "Brutality and Avarice
+Triumphant"--Croakers and Prophets of Evil--Medical Treatment
+for Believers in Universal Evil--Alleged Fraud in Army
+Contracts--Congressional Extravagance--Railroad "Wreckers"--How
+Stockholders in Some Roads Lost Their Money--The Star-Route
+Trials--Timber and Public Lands--Watering Stock--The Formation
+of Trusts--Unsafe Hotels: European Game and Singing Birds--Seal
+Fisheries--Cruelty to Animals--Our Indians--Sensible and Manly
+Patriotism--Days of Brutality--Defence of Slavery by the Websters,
+Bentons, and Clays--Thirty Years' Accomplishment--Ennobling Influence of
+War for the Right--The Lady ana the Brakeman--American Esteem of Honesty
+in Business--Republics do not Tend to Official Corruption--This the Best
+Country in the World.
+
+
+A REPLY TO THE CINCINNATI GAZETTE AND CATHOLIC TELEGRAPH.
+
+(1878.)
+
+Defence of the Lecture on Moses--How Biblical Miracles are sought to
+be Proved--Some _Non Sequiturs_--A Grammatical Criticism--Christianity
+Destructive of Manners--Cuvier and Agassiz on Mosaic Cosmogony--Clerical
+Advance agents--Christian Threats and Warnings--Catholicism the Upas
+Tree--Hebrew Scholarship as a Qualification for Deciding Probababilities
+--Contradictions and Mistranslations of the Bible--Number of Errors in
+the Scriptures--The Sunday Question.
+
+
+AN INTERVIEW ON CHIEF JUSTICE COMEGYS.
+
+(1881.)
+
+Charged with Blasphemy in the State of Delaware--Can a Conditionless
+Deity be Injured?--Injustice the only Blasphemy--The Lecture
+in Delaware--Laws of that State--All Sects in turn Charged with
+Blasphemy--Heresy Consists in making God Better than he is Thought
+to Be--A Fatal Biblical Passage--Judge Comegys--Wilmington
+Preachers--States with Laws against Blasphemy--No Danger of Infidel
+Mobs--No Attack on the State of Delaware Contemplated--Comegys a
+Resurrection--Grand Jury's Refusal to Indict--Advice about the Cutting
+out of Heretics' Tongues--Objections to the Whipping-post--Mr. Bergh's
+Bill--One Remedy for Wife-beating.
+
+
+A REPLY TO REV. DRS. THOMAS AND LORIMER.
+
+(8882.)
+
+Solemnity--Charged with Being Insincere--Irreverence--Old Testament
+Better than the New--"Why Hurt our Feelings?"--Involuntary Action of
+the Brain--Source of our Conceptions of Space--Good and Bad--Right and
+Wrong--The Minister, the Horse and the Lord's Prayer--Men Responsible
+for their Actions--The "Gradual" Theory Not Applicable to
+the Omniscient--Prayer Powerless to Alter Results--Religious
+Persecution--Orthodox Ministers Made Ashamed of their
+Creed--Purgatory--Infidelity and Baptism Contrasted--Modern Conception
+of the Universe--The Golden Bridge of Life--"The Only Salutation"--The
+Test for Admission to Heaven--"Scurrility."
+
+
+A REPLY TO REV. JOHN HALL AND WARNER VAN NORDEN.
+
+(1892.)
+
+Dr. Hall has no Time to Discuss the subject of Starving
+Workers--Cloakmakers' Strike--Warner Van Norden of the Church Extension
+Society--The Uncharitableness of Organized Charity--Defence of the
+Cloakmakers--Life of the Underpaid--On the Assertion that Assistance
+encourages Idleness and Crime--The Man without Pity an Intellectual
+Beast--Tendency of Prosperity to Breed Selfishness--Thousands Idle
+without Fault--Egotism of Riches--Van Norden's Idea of Happiness--The
+Worthy Poor.
+
+
+A REPLY TO THE REV. DR. PLUMB.
+
+(1898.)
+
+Interview in a Boston Paper--Why should a Minister call this a "Poor"
+World?--Would an Infinite God make People who Need a Redeemer?--Gospel
+Gossip--Christ's Sayings Repetitions--The Philosophy of Confucius--Rev.
+Mr. Mills--The Charge of "Robbery"--The Divine Plan.
+
+
+A REPLY TO THE NEW YORK CLERGY ON SUPERSTITION.
+
+(1898.)
+
+Interview in the New York Journal--Rev. Roberts. MacArthur--A
+Personal Devil--Devils who held Conversations with Christ not simply
+personifications of Evil--The Temptation--The "Man of Straw"--Christ's
+Mission authenticated by the Casting Out of Devils--Spain--God
+Responsible for the Actions of Man--Rev. Dr. J. Lewis Parks--Rev. Dr. E.
+F. Moldehnke--Patience amidst the Misfortunes of Others--Yellow Fever
+as a Divine Agent--The Doctrine that All is for the Best--Rev. Mr.
+Hamlin--Why Did God Create a Successful Rival?--A Compliment by the
+Rev. Mr. Belcher--Rev. W. C. Buchanan--No Argument Old until it is
+Answered--Why should God Create sentient Beings to be Damned?--Rev. J.
+W. Campbell--Rev. Henry Frank--Rev. E. C.J. Kraeling on Christ and the
+Devil--Would he make a World like This?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+MY REVIEWERS REVIEWED.
+
+     * This lecture was delivered by Col. Ingersoll in San
+     Francisco Cal., June 27, 1877. It was a reply to various
+     clergymen of that city, who had made violent attacks upon
+     him after the delivery of his lectures, "The Liberty of Man,
+     Woman and Child," and "The Ghosts."
+
+
+I.
+
+AGAINST the aspersions of the pulpit and the religious press, I offer
+in evidence this magnificent audience. Although I represent but a small
+part of the holy cause of intellectual liberty, even that part shall not
+be defiled or smirched by a single personality. Whatever I say, I shall
+say because I believe it will tend to make this world grander, man
+nearer just, the father kinder, the mother more loving, the children
+more affectionate, and because I believe it will make an additional
+flower bloom in the pathway of every one who hears me.
+
+In the first place, what have I said? What has been my offence? What
+have I done? I am spoken of by the clergy as though I were a wolf that
+in the absence of the good shepherd had fattened upon his innocent
+flock. What have I said?
+
+I delivered a lecture entitled, "The Liberty of Man, Woman and
+Child." In that lecture I said that man was entitled to physical and
+intellectual liberty. I defined physical liberty to be the right to do
+right; the right to do anything that did not interfere with the real
+happiness of others. I defined intellectual liberty to be the right to
+think right, and the right to think wrong--provided you did your best to
+think right.
+
+This must be so, because thought is only an instrumentality by which we
+seek to ascertain the truth. Every man has the right to think, whether
+his thought is in reality right or wrong; and he cannot be accountable
+to any being for thinking wrong. There is upon man, so far as thought
+is concerned, the obligation to think the best he can, and to honestly
+express his best thought. Whenever he finds what is right, or what he
+honestly believes to be the right, he is less than a man if he fears to
+express his conviction before an assembled world.
+
+The right to do right is my definition of physical liberty. "The right
+of one human being ceases where the right of another commences." My
+definition of intellectual liberty is, the right to think, whether you
+think right or wrong, provided you do your best to think right.
+
+I believe in Liberty, Fraternity and Equality--the Blessed Trinity of
+Humanity.
+
+I believe in Observation, Reason and Experience--the Blessed Trinity of
+Science.
+
+I believe in Man, Woman and Child--the Blessed Trinity of Life and Joy.
+
+I have said, and still say, that you have no right to endeavor by force
+to compel another to think your way--that man has no right to compel his
+fellow-man to adopt his creed, by torture or social ostracism. I have
+said, and still say, that even an infinite God has and can have no right
+to compel by force or threats even the meanest of mankind to accept
+a dogma abhorrent to his mind. As a matter of fact such a power is
+incapable of being exercised. You may compel a man to say that he has
+changed his mind. You may force him to say that he agrees with you. In
+this way, however, you make hypocrites, not converts. Is it possible
+that a god wishes the worship of a slave? Does a god desire the homage
+of a coward? Does he really long for the adoration of a hypocrite? Is
+it possible that he requires the worship of one who dare not think? If I
+were a god it seems to me that I had rather have the esteem and love of
+one grand, brave man, with plenty of heart and plenty of brain, than
+the blind worship, the ignorant adoration, the trembling homage of a
+universe of men afraid to reason. And yet I am warned by the orthodox
+guardians of this great city not to think. I am told that I am in danger
+of hell; that for me to express my honest convictions is to excite the
+wrath of God. They inform me that unless I believe in a certain way,
+meaning their way, I am in danger of everlasting fire.
+
+There was a time when these threats whitened the faces of men with fear.
+That time has substantially passed away. For a hundred years hell has
+been gradually growing cool, the flames have been slowly dying out, the
+brimstone is nearly exhausted, the fires have been burning lower and
+lower, and the climate gradually changing. To such an extent has the
+change already been effected that if I were going there to-night I would
+take an overcoat and a box of matches.
+
+They say that the eternal future of man depends upon his belief. I deny
+it. A conclusion honestly arrived at by the brain cannot possibly be
+a crime; and the man who says it is, does not think so. The god who
+punishes it as a crime is simply an infamous tyrant. As for me, I would
+a thousand times rather go to perdition and suffer its torments with
+the brave, grand thinkers of the world, than go to heaven and keep the
+company of a god who would damn his children for an honest belief.
+
+The next thing I have said is, that woman is the equal of man; that she
+has every right that man has, and one more--the right to be protected,
+because she is the weaker. I have said that marriage should be an
+absolutely perfect partnership of body and soul; that a man should treat
+his wife like a splendid flower, and that she should fill his life with
+perfume and with joy. I have said that a husband had no right to be
+morose; that he had no right to assassinate the sunshine and murder the
+joy of life.
+
+I have said that when he went home he should go like a ray of light, and
+fill his house so full of joy that it would burst out of the doors and
+windows and illumine even the darkness of night. I said that marriage
+was the holiest, highest, the most sacred institution among men; that
+it took millions of years for woman to advance from the condition of
+absolute servitude, from the absolute slavery where the Bible found her
+and left her, up to the position she occupies at present. I have pleaded
+for the rights of woman, for the rights of wives, and what is more, for
+the rights of little children. I have said that they could be governed
+by affection, by love, and that my heart went out to all the children
+of poverty and of crime; to the children that live in the narrow streets
+and in the sub-cellars; to the children that run and hide when they hear
+the footsteps of a brutal father, the children that grow pale when
+they hear their names pronounced even by a mother; to all the little
+children, the flotsam and jetsam upon the wide, rude sea of life. I have
+said that my heart goes out to them one and all; I have asked fathers
+and mothers to cease beating their own flesh and blood. I have said to
+them, When your child does wrong, put your arms around him; let him feel
+your heart beat against his. It is easier to control your child with a
+kiss than with a club.
+
+For expressing these sentiments, I have been denounced by the religious
+press and by ministers in their pulpits as a demon, as an enemy of
+order, as a fiend, as an infamous man. Of this, however, I make no
+complaint. A few years ago they would have burned me at the stake and I
+should have been compelled to look upon their hypocritical faces through
+flame and smoke. They cannot do it now or they would. One hundred years
+ago I would have been burned, simply for pleading for the rights of men.
+Fifty years ago I would have been imprisoned. Fifty years ago my wife
+and my children would have been torn from my arms in the name of the
+most merciful God. Twenty-five years ago I could not have made a living
+in the United States at the practice of law; but I can now. I would not
+then have been allowed to express my thought; but I can now, and I will.
+And when I think about the liberty I now enjoy, the whole horizon is
+illuminated with glory and the air is filled with wings.
+
+I then delivered another lecture entitled "Ghosts," in which I sought to
+show that man had been controlled by phantoms of his own imagination;
+in which I sought to show these imps of darkness, these devils, had all
+been produced by superstition; in which I endeavored to prove that man
+had groveled in the dust before monsters of his own creation; in which I
+endeavored to demonstrate that the many had delved in the soil that the
+few might live in idleness, that the many had lived in caves and dens
+that the few might dwell in palaces of gold; in which I endeavored to
+show that man had received nothing from these ghosts except hatred,
+except ignorance, except unhappiness, and that in the name of phantoms
+man had covered the face of the world with tears. And for this, I have
+been assailed, in the name, I presume, of universal forgiveness. So far
+as any argument I have produced is concerned, it cannot in any way make
+the slightest difference whether I am a good or a bad man. It cannot in
+any way make the slightest difference whether my personal character is
+good or bad. That is not the question, though, so far as I am concerned,
+I am willing to stake the whole question upon that issue. That is not,
+however, the thing to be discussed, nor the thing to be decided. The
+question is, whether what I said is true.
+
+I did say that from ghosts we had obtained certain things--among other
+things a book known as the Bible. From the ghosts we received that
+book; and the believers in ghosts pretend that upon that book rests the
+doctrine of the immortality of the human soul. This I deny.
+
+Whether or not the soul is immortal is a fact in nature and cannot be
+changed by any book whatever. If I am immortal, I am. If am not, no book
+can render me so. It is no mure wonderful that I should live again than
+that I do live.
+
+The doctrine of immortality is not based upon any book. The foundation
+of that idea is not a creed. The idea of immortality, which, like a
+sea, has ebbed and flowed in the human heart, beating with its countless
+waves of hope and fear against the shores and rocks of fate and time,
+was not born of any book, was not born of a creed. It is not the child
+of any religion. It was born of human affection; and it will continue to
+ebb and flow beneath the mists and clouds of doubt and darkness as long
+as love kisses the lips of death. It is the eternal bow--Hope shining
+upon the tears of Grief.
+
+I did say that these ghosts taught that human slavery was right. If
+there is a crime beneath the shining stars it is the crime of enslaving
+a human being. Slavery enslaves not only the slave, but the master as
+well. When you put a chain upon the limbs of another, you put a fetter
+also upon your own brain. I had rather be a slave than a slaveholder.
+The slave can at least be just--the slaveholder cannot. I had rather be
+robbed than be a robber. I had rather be stolen from than to be a
+thief. I have said, and I do say, that the Bible upheld, sustained and
+sanctioned the institution of human slavery; and before I get through I
+will prove it.
+
+I said that to the same book we are indebted, to a great degree, for the
+doctrine of witchcraft. Relying upon its supposed sacred texts, people
+were hanged and their bodies burned for getting up storms at sea with
+the intent of drowning royal vermin. Every possible offence was punished
+under the name of witchcraft, from souring beer to high treason.
+
+I also said, and I still say, that the book we obtained from the ghosts,
+for the guidance of man, upheld the infamy of infamies, called polygamy;
+and I will also prove that. And the same book teaches, not political
+liberty, but political tyranny.
+
+I also said that the author of the book given us by the ghosts knew
+nothing about astronomy, still less about geology, still less, if
+possible, about medicine, and still less about legislation.
+
+This is what I have said concerning the aristocracy of the air. I am
+well aware that having said it I ought to be able to prove the truth
+of my words. I have said these things. No one ever said them in better
+nature than I have. I have not the slightest malice--a victor never
+felt malice. As soon as I had said these things, various gentlemen felt
+called upon to answer me. I want to say that if there is anything I like
+in the world it is fairness. And one reason I like it so well is that
+I have had so little of it. I can say, if I wish, extremely mean
+and hateful things. I have read a great many religious papers and
+discussions and think that I now know all the infamous words in our
+language. I know how to account for every noble action by a mean and
+wretched motive, and that, in my judgment, embraces nearly the entire
+science of modern theology. The moment I delivered a lecture upon "The
+Liberty of Man, Woman and Child," I was charged with having said that
+there is nothing back of nature, and that nature with its infinite arms
+embraces everything; and thereupon I was informed that I believed in
+nothing but matter and force, that I believed only in earth, that I did
+not believe in spirit. If by spirit you mean that which thinks, then I
+am a believer in spirit. If you mean by spirit the something that says
+"I," the something that reasons, hopes, loves and aspires, then I am a
+believer in spirit. Whatever spirit there is in the universe must be a
+natural thing, and not superimposed upon nature. All that I can say
+is, that whatever is, is natural. And there is as much goodness, in my
+judgment, as much spirit in this world as in any other; and you are just
+as near the heart of the universe here as you can be anywhere. One of
+your clergymen says in answer, as he supposes, to me, that there is
+matter and force and spirit. Well, can matter exist without force? What
+would keep it together? What would keep the finest possible conceivable
+atom together unless there was force? Can you imagine such a thing as
+matter without force? Can you conceive of force without matter? Can you
+conceive of force floating about attached to nothing? Can you possibly
+conceive of this? No human being can conceive of force without matter.
+"You cannot conceive of force being harnessed or hitched to matter as
+you would hitch horses to a carriage." You cannot. Now, what is spirit?
+They say spirit is the first thing that was. It seems to me, however, as
+though spirit was the blossom, the fruit of all, not the commencement.
+They say it was first. Very well. Spirit without force, a spirit without
+any matter--what would that spirit do? No force, no matter!--a spirit
+living in an infinite vacuum. What would such a spirit turn its
+particular attention to? This spirit, according to these theologians,
+created the world, the universe; and if it did, there must have been a
+time when it commenced to create; and back of that there must have
+been an eternity spent in absolute idleness. Now, is it possible that
+a spirit existed during an eternity without any force and without any
+matter? Is it possible that force could exist without matter or spirit?
+Is it possible that matter could exist alone, if by matter you mean
+something without force? The only answer I can give to all these
+questions is, I do not know. For my part, I do not know what spirit is,
+if there is any. I do not know what matter is, neither am I acquainted
+with the elements of force. If you mean by matter that which I can
+touch, that which occupies space, then I believe in matter. If you mean
+by force anything that can overcome weight, that can overcome what
+we call gravity or inertia; if you mean by force that which moves the
+molecules of matter, or the movement itself, then I believe in force.
+If you mean by spirit that which thinks and loves, then I believe in
+spirit. There is, however, no propriety in wasting any time about the
+science of metaphysics. I will give you my definition of metaphysics:
+Two fools get together; each admits what neither can prove, and
+thereupon both of them say, "hence we infer." That is all there is of
+metaphysics.
+
+These gentlemen, however, say to me that all my doctrine about the
+treatment of wives and children, all my ideas of the rights of man, all
+these are wrong, because I am not exactly correct as to my notion 01
+spirit. They say that spirit existed first, at least an eternity before
+there was any force or any matter. Exactly how spirit could act without
+force we do not understand. That we must take upon credit. How spirit
+could create matter without force is a serious question, and we are
+too reverent to press such an inquiry. We are bound to be satisfied,
+however, that spirit is entirely independent of force and matter, and
+any man who denies this must be "a malevolent and infamous wretch."
+
+Another reverend gentleman proceeds to denounce all I have said as the
+doctrine of negation. And we are informed by him--speaking I presume
+from experience--that negation is a poor thing to die by. He tells us
+that the last hours are the grand testing hours. They are the hours when
+atheists disown their principles and infidels bewail their folly--"that
+Voltaire and Thomas Paine wrote sharply against Christianity, but their
+death-bed scenes are too harrowing for recital"--He also states that
+"another French infidel philosopher tried in vain to fortify Voltaire,
+but that a stronger man than Voltaire had taken possession of him,
+and he cried 'Retire! it is you that have brought me to my present
+state--Begone! what a rich glory you have brought me.'" This, my
+friends, is the same old, old falsehood that has been repeated again and
+again by the lips of hatred and hypocrisy. There is not in one of these
+stories a solitary word of truth; and every intelligent man knows all
+these death-bed accounts to be entirely and utterly false. They
+are taken, however, by the mass of the church as evidence that all
+opposition to Christianity, so-called, fills the bed of the dying
+infidel and scoffer with serpents and scorpions. So far as my experience
+goes, the bad die in many instances as placidly as the good. I have
+sometimes thought that a hardened wretch, upon whose memory is engraved
+the record of nearly every possible crime, dies without a shudder,
+without a tremor, while some grand, good man, remembering during his
+last moments an unkind word spoken to a stranger, it may be in the
+heat of anger, dies with remorseful words upon his lips. Nearly every
+murderer who is hanged, dies with an immensity of nerve, but I never
+thought it proved that he had lived a good and useful life. Neither have
+I imagined that it sanctified the crime for which he suffered death.
+The fact is, that when man approaches natural death, his powers, his
+intellectual faculties fail and grow dim. He becomes a child. He has
+less and less sense. And just in proportion as he loses his reasoning
+powers, he goes back to the superstitions of his childhood. The scenes
+of youth cluster about him and he is again in the lap of his mother.
+Of this very fact, there is not a more beautiful description than that
+given by Shakespeare when he takes that old mass of wit and filth, Jack
+Falstaff, in his arms, and Mrs Quickly says: "A' made a finer end, and
+went away, an it had been my christom child; a' parted ev'n just between
+twelve and one, ev'n at the turning o' the tide; for after I saw him
+fumble with the sheets, and play with flowers, and smile upon his
+fingers' end, I knew there was but one way; for his nose was as sharp
+as a pen, and a' babbled of green fields." As the genius of Shakespeare
+makes Falstaff a child again upon sunny slopes, decked with daisies, so
+death takes the dying back to the scenes of their childhood, and they
+are clasped once more to the breasts of mothers. They go back, for the
+reason that nearly every superstition in the world has been sanctified
+by some sweet and placid mother. Remember, the superstition has never
+sanctified the mother, but the mother has sanctified the superstition.
+The young Mohammedan, who now lies dying upon some field of battle,
+thinks sweet and tender thoughts of home and mother, and will, as the
+blood oozes from his veins, repeat some holy verse from the blessed
+Koran. Every superstition in the world that is now held sacred has been
+made so by mothers, by fathers, by the recollections of home. I know
+what it has cost the noble, the brave, the tender, to throw away every
+superstition, although sanctified by the memory of those they loved.
+Whoever has thrown away these superstitions has been pursued by his
+fellow-men, From the day of the death of Voltaire the church has pursued
+him as though he had been the vilest criminal. A little over one hundred
+years ago, Catholicism, the inventor of instruments of torture, red with
+the innocent blood of millions, felt in its heartless breast the dagger
+of Voltaire. From that blow the Catholic Church never can recover. Livid
+with hatred she launched at her assassin the curse of Rome, and ignorant
+Protestants have echoed that curse. For myself, I like Voltaire, and
+whenever I think of that name, it is to me as a plume floating above
+some grand knight--a knight who rides to a walled city and demands
+an unconditional surrender. I like him. He was once imprisoned in the
+Bastile, and while in that frightful fortress--and I like to tell it--he
+changed his name. His name was Francois Marie Arouet. In his gloomy cell
+he changed this name to Voltaire, and when some sixty years afterward
+the Bastile was torn down to the very dust, "Voltaire" was the battle
+cry of the destroyers who did it. I like him because he did more for
+religious toleration than any other man who ever lived or died. I admire
+him because he did more to do away with torture in civil proceedings
+than any other man. I like him because he was always upon the side of
+justice, upon the side of progress. I like him in spite of his faults,
+because he had many and splendid virtues. I like him because his
+doctrines have never brought unhappiness to any country. I like him
+because he hated tyranny; and when he died he died as serenely as ever
+mortal died; he spoke to his servant recognizing him as a man. He said
+to him, calling him by name: "My friend, farewell." These were the last
+words of Voltaire. And this was the only frightful scene enacted at his
+bed of death. I like Voltaire, because for half a century he was the
+intellectual emperor of Europe. I like him, because from his throne at
+the foot of the Alps he pointed the finger of scorn at every hypocrite
+in Christendom.
+
+I will give to any clergyman in the city of San Francisco a thousand
+dollars in gold to substantiate the story that the death of Voltaire was
+not as peaceful as the coming of the dawn. The same absurd story is told
+of Thomas Paine. Thomas Paine was a patriot--he was the first man in
+the world to write these words: "The Free and Independent States of
+America." He was the first man to convince the American people that they
+ought to separate themselves from Great Britain. "His pen did as
+much, to say the least, for the liberty of America, as the sword of
+Washington." The men who have enjoyed the benefit of his heroic services
+repay them with slander and calumny. If there is in this world a crime,
+ingratitude is a crime. And as for myself, I am not willing to receive
+anything from any man without making at least an acknowledgment of my
+obligation. Y et these clergymen, whose very right to stand in their
+pulpits and preach, was secured to them by such men as Thomas Paine,
+delight in slandering the reputation of that great man. They tell their
+hearers that he died in fear,--that he died in agony, hearing devils
+rattle chains, and that the infinite God condescended to frighten a
+dying man. I will give one thousand dollars in gold to any clergyman
+in San Francisco who will substantiate the truth of the absurd stories
+concerning the death of Thomas Paine. There is not one word of truth in
+these accounts; not one word.
+
+Let me ask one thing, and let me ask it, if you please, in what is
+called a reverent spirit. Suppose that Voltaire and Thomas Paine, and
+Volney and Hume and Hobbes had cried out when dying "My God, My God, why
+hast thou forsaken me?" what would the clergymen of this city then have
+said?
+
+To resort to these foolish calumnies about the great men who have
+opposed the superstitions of the world, is in my judgment, unbecoming
+any intelligent man. The real question is not, who is afraid to die? The
+question is, who is right? The great question is not, who died right,
+but who lived right? There is infinitely more responsibility in living
+than in dying. The moment of death is the most unimportant moment of
+life. Nothing can be done then. You cannot even do a favor for a friend,
+except to remember him in your will. It is a moment when life ceases to
+be of value. While living, while you have health and strength, you
+can augment the happiness of your fellow-men; and the man who has made
+others happy need not be afraid to die. Yet these believers, as they
+call themselves, these believers who hope for immortality--thousands
+of them, will rob their neighbors, thousands of them will do numberless
+acts of injustice, when, according to their belief, the witnesses of
+their infamy will live forever; and the men whom they have injured and
+outraged, will meet them in every glittering star through all the ages
+yet to be.
+
+As for me, I would rather do a generous action, and read the record in
+the grateful faces of my fellow-men.
+
+These gentlemen who attack me are orthodox now, but the men who started
+their churches were heretics.
+
+The first Presbyterian was a heretic. The first Baptist was a heretic.
+The first Congregationalist was a heretic. The first Christian was
+denounced as a blasphemer. And yet these heretics, the moment they get
+numerous enough to be in the majority in some locality, begin to call
+themselves orthodox. Can there be any impudence beyond this?
+
+The first Baptist, as I said before, was a heretic; and he was the best
+Baptist that I have ever heard anything about. I always liked him. He
+was a good man--Roger Williams. He was the first man, so far as I know,
+in this country, who publicly said that the soul of man should be free.
+And it was a wonder to me that a man who had sense enough to say
+that, could think that any particular form of baptism was necessary to
+salvation. It does strike me that a man of great brain and thought could
+not possibly think the eternal welfare of a human being, the question
+whether he should dwell with angels, or be tossed upon eternal waves
+of fire, should be settled by the manner in which he had been baptized.
+That seems, to me so utterly destitute of thought and heart, that it is
+a matter of amazement to me that any man ever looked upon the ordinance
+of baptism as of any importance whatever. If we were at the judgment
+seat to-night, and the Supreme Being, in our hearing, should ask a man:
+
+"Have you been a good man?" and the man replied:
+
+"Tolerably good."
+
+"Did you love your wife and children?"
+
+"Yes."
+
+"Did you try and make them happy?"
+
+
+"Yes."
+
+"Did you try and make your neighbors happy?" "Yes, I paid my debts: I
+gave heaping measure, and I never cared whether I was thanked for it or
+not."
+
+Suppose the Supreme Being then should say:
+
+"Were you ever baptized?" and the man should reply:
+
+"I am sorry to say I never was."
+
+Could a solitary person of sense hear that question asked, by the
+Supreme Being, without laughing, even if he knew that his own case was
+to be called next?
+
+I happened to be in the company of six or seven Baptist elders--how I
+ever got into such bad company, I don't know,--and one of them asked
+what I thought about baptism. Well, I never thought much about it; did
+not know much about it; didn't want to say anything, but they insisted
+upon it. I said, "Well, I'll give you my opinion--with soap, baptism is
+a good thing."
+
+The Reverend Mr. Guard has answered me, as I am informed, upon several
+occasions. I have read the reports of his remarks, and have boiled them
+down. He said some things about me not entirely pleasant, which I do not
+wish to repeat. In his reply he takes the ground:
+
+_First_. That the Bible is not an immoral book, because he swore upon it
+or by it when he joined the Masons.
+
+_Second_. He excuses Solomon for all his crimes upon the supposition
+that he had softening of the brain, or a fatty degeneration of the
+heart.
+
+_Third._ That the Hebrews had the right to slay all the inhabitants of
+Canaan, according to the doctrine of the "survival of the fittest." He
+takes the ground that the destruction of these Canaanites, the ripping
+open of women with child by the sword of war, was an act of sublime
+mercy. He justifies a war of extermination; he applauds every act of
+cruelty and murder. He says that the Canaanites ought to have been
+turned from their homes; that men guilty of no crime except fighting for
+their country, old men with gray hairs, old mothers and little, dimpled,
+prattling children, ought to have been sacrificed upon the altar of war;
+that it was an act of sublime mercy to plunge the sword of religious
+persecution into the bodies of all, old and young. This is what the
+reverend gentleman is pleased to call mercy. If this is mercy let us
+have injustice. If there is in the heavens such a God I am sorry that
+man exists. All this, however, is justified upon the ground that God
+has the right to do as he pleases with the being he has created. This I
+deny. Such a doctrine is infamously false. Suppose I could take a stone
+and in one moment change it into a sentient, hoping, loving human being,
+would I have the right to torture it? Would I have the right to give it
+pain? No one but a fiend would either exercise or justify such a right.
+Even if there is a God who created us all he has no such right. Above
+any God that can exist, in the infinite serenity forever sits the figure
+of justice; and this God, no matter how great and infinite he may be, is
+bound to do justice.
+
+_Fourth._ That God chose the Jews and governed them personally for
+thousands of years, and drove out the Canaanites in order that his
+peculiar people might not be corrupted by the example of idolaters; that
+he wished to make of the Hebrews a great nation, and that, consequently,
+he was justified in destroying the original inhabitants of that country.
+It seems to me that the end hardly justified the means. According to the
+account, God governed the Jews personally for many ages and succeeded
+in civilizing them to that degree, that they crucified him the first
+opportunity they had. Such an administration can hardly be called a
+success.
+
+_Fifth._ The reverend gentleman seems to think that the practice of
+polygamy after all is not a bad thing when compared with the crime
+of exhibiting a picture of Antony and Cleopatra. Upon the corrupting
+influence of such pictures he descants at great length, and attacks with
+all the bitterness of the narrow theologian the masterpieces of art.
+Allow me to say one word about art. That is one of the most beautiful
+words in our language--Art. And it never seemed to me necessary for
+art to go in partnership with a rag. I like the paintings of Angelo, of
+Raffaelle. I like the productions of those splendid souls that put their
+ideas of beauty upon the canvas uncovered.
+
+     "There are brave souls in every land
+     Who worship nature, grand and nude,
+     And who with swift indignant hand
+     Tear off the fig leaves of the prude."
+
+_Sixth_. That it may be true that the Bible sanctions slavery, but that
+it is not an immoral book even if it does.
+
+I can account for these statements, for these arguments, only as
+the reverend gentleman has accounted for the sins of Solomon--"by a
+softening of the brain, or a fatty degeneration of the heart."
+
+It does seem to me that if I were a Christian, and really thought my
+fellow-man was going down to the bottomless pit; that he was going to
+misery and agony forever, it does seem to me that I would try and save
+him. It does seem to me, that instead of having my mouth filled with
+epithets and invectives; instead of drawing the lips of malice back from
+the teeth of hatred, it seems to me that my eyes would be filled with
+tears. It seems to me that I would do what little I could to reclaim
+him. I would talk to him and of him, in kindness. I would put the arms
+of affection about him. I would not speak of him as though he were a
+wild beast. I would not speak to him as though he were a brute. I would
+think of him as a man, as a man liable to eternal torture among the
+damned, and my heart would be filled with sympathy, not hatred--my eyes
+with tears, not scorn.
+
+If there is anything pitiable, it is to see a man so narrowed and
+withered by the blight and breath of superstition, as cheerfully to
+defend the most frightful crimes of which we have a record--a man so
+hardened and petrified by creed and dogma that he hesitates not to
+defend even the institution of human slavery--so lost to all sense of
+pity that he applauds murder and rapine as though they were acts of the
+loftiest self-denial.
+
+The next gentleman who has endeavored to answer what I have said, is the
+Rev. Samuel Robinson. This he has done in his sermon entitled "Ghosts
+against God or Ingersoll against Honesty." I presume he imagines himself
+to be the defendant in both cases.
+
+This gentleman apologized for attending an infidel lecture, upon the
+ground that he had to contribute to the support of a "materialistic
+demon." To say the least, this is not charitable. But I am satisfied.
+I am willing to exchange facts for epithets. I fare so much better than
+did the infidels in the olden time that I am more than satisfied. It is
+a little thing that I bear.
+
+The brave men of the past endured the instruments of torture. They were
+stretched upon racks; their feet were crushed in iron boots; they stood
+upon the shores of exile and gazed with tearful eyes toward home and
+native land. They were taken from their firesides, from their wives,
+from their children; they were taken to the public square; they were
+chained to stakes, and their ashes were scattered by the countless hands
+of hatred. I am satisfied. The disciples of fear cannot touch me.
+
+This gentlemen hated to contribute a cent to the support of a
+"materialistic demon." When I saw that statement I will tell you what I
+did. I knew the man's conscience must be writhing in his bosom to think
+that he had contributed a dollar toward my support, toward the support
+of a "materialistic demon." I wrote him a letter and I said:
+
+"My Dear Sir: In order to relieve your conscience of the crime of having
+contributed to the support of an unbeliever in ghosts, I hereby enclose
+the amount you paid to attend my lecture." I then gave him a little
+good advice. I advised him to be charitable, to be kind, and regretted
+exceedingly that any man could listen to one of my talks for an hour
+and a half and not go away satisfied that all men had the same right to
+think.
+
+This man denied having received the money, but it was traced to him
+through a blot on the envelope.
+
+This gentleman avers that everything that I said about persecution
+is applicable to the Catholic Church only. That is what he says. The
+Catholics have probably persecuted more than any other church, simply
+because that church has had more power, simply because it has been more
+of a church. It has to-day a better organization, and as a rule, the
+Catholics come nearer believing what they say about their church than
+other Christians do. Was it a Catholic persecution that drove the
+Puritan fathers from England? Was it not the storm of Episcopal
+persecution that filled the sails of the Mayflower? Was it not a
+Protestant persecution that drove the Ark and Dove to America? Let us be
+honest. Who went to Scotland and persecuted the Presbyterians? Who was
+it that chained to the stake that splendid girl by the sands of the
+sea for not saying "God save the king"? She was worthy to have been the
+mother of Caesar. She would not say "God save the king," but she would
+say "God save the king, if it be God's will." Protestants ordered her to
+say "God save the king," and no more. She said, "I will not," and they
+chained her to a stake in the sand and allowed her to be drowned by
+the rising of the inexorable tide. Who did this? Protestants. Who drove
+Roger Williams from Massachusetts? Protestants. Who sold white Quaker
+children into slavery? Protestants. Who cut out the tongues of Quakers?
+Who burned and destroyed men and women and children charged with
+impossible crimes? Protestants. The Protestants have persecuted exactly
+to the extent of their power. The Catholics have done the same.
+
+I want, however, to be just. The first people to pass an act of
+religious toleration in the New World were the Catholics of Maryland.
+The next were the Baptists of Rhode Island, led by Roger Williams.
+The Catholics passed the act of religious toleration, and after the
+Protestants got into power again in England, and also in the colony of
+Maryland, they repealed the law of toleration and passed another law
+declaring the Catholics from under the protection of all law.
+Afterward, the Catholics again got into power and had the generosity and
+magnanimity to re-enact the old law. And, so far as I know, it is the
+only good record upon the subject of religious toleration the Catholics
+have in this world, and I am always willing to give them credit for it.
+
+This gentleman also says that infidelity has done nothing for the world
+in the development of the arts and sciences. Does he not know that
+nearly every man who took a forward step was denounced by the church as
+a heretic and infidel? Does he not know that the church has in all ages
+persecuted the astronomers, the geologists, the logicians? Does he not
+know that even to-day the church slanders and maligns the foremost men?
+Has he ever heard of Tyndall, of Huxley? Is he acquainted with John
+W. Draper, one of the leading minds of the world? Did he ever hear of
+Auguste Comte, the great Frenchman? Did he ever hear of Descartes, of
+Laplace, of Spinoza? In short, has he ever heard of a man who took a
+step in advance of his time?
+
+Orthodoxy never advances. When it advances, it ceases to be orthodoxy
+and becomes heresy. Orthodoxy is putrefaction. It is intellectual
+cloaca; it cannot advance. What the church calls infidelity is simply
+free thought. Every man who really owns his own brain is, in the
+estimation of the church, an infidel.
+
+There is a paper published in this city called _The Occident_. The
+Editor has seen fit to speak of me, and of the people who have assembled
+to hear me, in the lowest, vilest and most scurrilous terms possible.
+I cannot afford to reply in the same spirit. He alleges that the people
+who assemble to hear me are the low, the debauched and the infamous.
+The man who reads that paper ought to read it with tongs. It is a
+Presbyterian sheet; and would gladly treat me as John Calvin treated
+Castalio. Castalio was the first minister in the history of Christendom
+who acknowledged the innocence of honest error, and John Calvin followed
+him like a sleuth-hound of perdition. He called him a "dog of Satan;"
+said that he had crucified Christ afresh; and pursued him to the very
+grave. The editor of this paper is still warming his hands at the fire
+that burned Servetus. He has in his heart the same fierce hatred of
+everything that is free. But what right have we to expect anything good
+of a man who believes in the eternal damnation of infants?
+
+There may have been sometime in the history of the world a worse
+religion than Old School Presbyterianism, but if there ever was, from
+cannibalism to civilization, I have never heard of it.
+
+I make a distinction between the members and the creed of that church. I
+know many who are a thousand times better than the creed--good, warm and
+splendid friends of mine. I would do anything in the world for them. And
+I have said to them a hundred times, "You are a thousand times better
+than your creed." But when you come down to the doctrine of the
+damnation of infants, it is the deformity of deformities. The editor
+of this paper is engaged in giving the world the cheerful doctrines of
+fore-ordination and damnation--those twin comforts of the Presbyterian
+creed, and warning them against the frightful effects of reasoning in
+any manner for themselves. He regards the intellectually free as the
+lowest, the vilest and the meanest, as men who wish to sin, as men
+who are longing to commit crime, men who are anxious to throw off all
+restraint.
+
+My friends, every chain thrown from the body puts an additional
+obligation upon the soul. Every man who is free, puts a responsibility
+upon his brain and upon his heart. You, who never want responsibility,
+give your souls to some church. You, who never want the feeling that you
+are under obligation to yourselves, give your souls away. But if you are
+willing to feel and meet responsibility; if you feel that you must give
+an account not only to yourselves but to every human being whom you
+injure, then you must be free. Where there is no freedom, there can be
+no responsibility.
+
+It is a mystery to me why the editors of religious papers are so
+malicious, why they endeavor to answer argument with calumny. Is it
+because they feel the sceptre slowly slipping from their hands? Is it
+the result of impotent rage? Is it because there is being written upon
+every orthodox brain a certificate of intellectual inferiority?
+
+This same editor assures his readers that what I say is not worth
+answering, and yet he devotes column after column of his journal to that
+very purpose. He states that I am no speaker, no orator; and upon the
+same page admits that he did not hear me, giving as a reason that he
+does not think it right to pay money for such a purpose. Recollect, that
+in a religious paper, a man who professes honesty, criticises a statue
+or a painting, condemns it, and at the end of the criticism says that he
+never saw it. He criticises what he calls the oratory of a man, and at
+the end says, "I never heard him, and I never saw him."
+
+As a matter of fact, I have never heard of any of these gentlemen who
+thought it necessary to hear what any man said in order to answer him.
+
+The next gentleman who answered me is the Rev. Mr. Ijams. And I must
+say, so far as I can see, in his argument, or in his mode of treatment,
+he is a kind and considerate gentleman. He makes several mistakes as
+to what I really said, but the fault I suppose must have been in the
+report. I am made to say in the report of his sermon, "There is no
+sacred place in all the universe." What I did say was, "There is no
+sacred place in all the universe of thought. There is nothing too holy
+to be investigated, nothing too divine to be understood. The fields of
+thought are fenceless, and without a wall." I say this to-night.
+
+Mr. Ijams also says that I had declared that man had not only the right
+to do right, but also the right to do wrong. What I really said was, man
+has the right to do right, and the right to think right, and the right
+to think wrong. Thought is a means of ascertaining truth, a mode by
+which we arrive at conclusions. And if no one has a right to think,
+unless he thinks right, he would only have the right to think upon
+self-evident propositions. In all respects, with the exception of these
+misstatements to which I have called your attention, so far as I can
+see, Mr. Ijams was perfectly fair, and treated me as though I had the
+ordinary rights of a human being. I take this occasion to thank him.
+
+A great many papers, a great many people, a good many ministers and a
+multitude of men, have had their say, and have expressed themselves
+with the utmost freedom. I cannot reply to them all. I can only reply to
+those who have made a parade of answering me. Many have said it is not
+worth answering, and then proceeded to answer. They have said, he has
+produced no argument, and then have endeavored to refute it. They have
+said it is simply the old straw that has been thrashed over and over
+again for years and years. If all I have said is nothing, if it is
+all idle and foolish, why do they take up the time of their fellow-men
+replying to me? Why do they fill their religious papers with criticisms,
+if all I have said and done reminds them, according to the Rev. Mr.
+Guard, of "some little dog barking at a railway train"? Why stop the
+train, why send for the directors, why hold a consultation and finally
+say, we must settle with that dog or stop running these cars?
+
+Probably the best way to answer them all, is to prove beyond cavil the
+truth of what I have said.
+
+
+DOES THE BIBLE TEACH MAN TO ENSLAVE HIS BROTHER?
+
+
+II.
+
+IF this "sacred" book teaches man to enslave his brother, it is not
+inspired. A god who would establish slavery is as cruel and heartless as
+any devil could be.
+
+"Moreover, of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you,
+of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which
+they begat in your land, and they shall be your possession.
+
+"And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you,
+to inherit them for a possession. They shall be your bondmen forever.
+
+"Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, _shall be_
+of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen
+and bondmaids."--Leviticus xxv.
+
+This is white slavery. This allows one white man to buy another, to buy
+a woman, to separate families and rob a mother of her child. This makes
+the whip upon the naked backs of men and women a legal tender for labor
+performed. This is the kind of slavery established by the most merciful
+God. The reason given for all this, is, that the persons whom they
+enslaved were heathen. You may enslave them because they are not
+orthodox. If you can find anybody who does not believe in me, the God
+of the Jews, you may steal his wife from his arms, and her babe from
+the cradle. If you can find a woman that does not believe in the Hebrew
+Jehovah, you may steal her prattling child from her breast. Can any one
+conceive of anything more infamous? Can any one find in the literature
+of this world more frightful words ascribed even to a demon? And all
+this is found in that most beautiful and poetic chapter known as the
+25th of Leviticus--from the Bible--from this sacred gift of God--this
+"Magna Charta of human freedom."
+
+2. "If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve; and in the
+seventh he shall go out free for nothing.
+
+3. "If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were
+married, then his wife shall go out with him.
+
+4. "If his master have given him a wife, and she hath borne him sons or
+daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall
+go out by himself.
+
+5. "And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and
+children; I w ill not go out free:
+
+6. "Then his master shall bring him unto the judges: he shall also bring
+him to the door, or unto the door-post; and his master shall bore his
+ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him forever."--_Exodus,
+xxi._
+
+The slave is allowed to have his liberty if he will give up his wife and
+children. He must remain in slavery for the sake of wife and child. This
+is another of the laws of the most merciful God. This God changes even
+love into a chain. Children are used by him as manacles and fetters,
+and wives become the keepers of prisons. Any man who believes that such
+hideous laws were made by an infinitely wise and benevolent God is, in
+my judgment, insane or totally depraved.
+
+These are the doctrines of the Old Testament. What is the doctrine
+of the New? What message had he who came from heaven's throne for the
+oppressed of earth? What words of sympathy, what words of cheer, for
+those who labored and toiled without reward? Let us see:
+
+"Servants, be obedient to them that are _your_ masters, according to
+the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto
+Christ."--_Ephesians, vi._
+
+This is the salutation of the most merciful God to a slave, to a woman
+who has been robbed of her child--to a man tracked by hounds through
+lonely swamps--to a girl with flesh torn and bleeding--to a mother
+weeping above an empty cradle.
+
+"Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the
+good and gentle, but also to the fro ward."--_I Peter ii., 18_.
+
+"For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure
+grief, suffering wrongfully."--_I Peter ii., 19_.
+
+It certainly must be an immense pleasure to God to see a man work
+patiently for nothing. It must please the Most High to see a slave with
+his wife and child sold upon the auction block. If this slave escapes
+from slavery and is pursued, how musical the baying of the bloodhound
+must be to the ears of this most merciful God. All this is simply
+infamous. On the throne of this universe there sits no such monster.
+
+"Servants, obey in all things your masters, according to the flesh; not
+with eye-service, as men pleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing
+God."--_Col. iii., 22_.
+
+The apostle here seems afraid that the slave would not work every moment
+that his strength permitted. He really seems to have feared that
+he might not at all times do the very best he could to promote the
+interests of the thief who claimed to own him. And speaking to all
+slaves, in the name of the Father of All, this apostle says: "Obey in
+all things your masters, not with eye-service, but with singleness of
+heart, fearing God." He says to them in substance, There is no way you
+can so well please God as to work honestly for a thief.
+
+1. "Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters
+worthy of all honor, that the name of God and _his_ doctrine be not
+blasphemed."
+
+Think of serving God by honoring a robber! Think of bringing the name
+and doctrine of God into universal contempt by claiming to own yourself!
+
+2. "And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them,
+because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are
+faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and
+exhort."
+
+That is to say, do not despise Christians who steal the labor of others.
+Do not hold in contempt the "faithful and beloved, partakers of the
+benefit," who turn the cross of Christ into a whipping post.
+
+3. "If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words
+_even_ to words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is
+according to godliness.
+
+4. "He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes
+of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,
+
+5. "Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the
+truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself."
+
+This seems to be the opinion the apostles entertained of the early
+abolitionists. Seeking to give human beings their rights, seeking to
+give labor its just reward, seeking to clothe all men with that divine
+garment of the soul, Liberty,--all this was denounced by the apostle as
+a simple strife of words, whereof cometh envy, railings, evil surmisings
+and perverse disputing, destitute of truth.
+
+6. "But godliness with contentment is great gain.
+
+7. "For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can
+carry nothing out.
+
+8. "And having food and raiment let us be therewith content."--_I Tim.,
+vi._
+
+This was intended to make a slave satisfied to hear the clanking of his
+chains. This is the reason he should never try to better his condition.
+He should be contented simply with the right to work for nothing. If
+he only had food and raiment, and a thief to work for, he should be
+contented. He should solace himself with the apostolic reflection, that
+as he brought nothing into the world, he could carry nothing out, and
+that when dead he would be as happily situated as his master.
+
+In order to show you what the inspired writer meant by the word
+_servant_, I will read from the 21st chapter of Exodus, verses 20 and
+21:
+
+"And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die
+under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
+
+"Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished:
+for he _is_ his money."
+
+Yet, notwithstanding these passages the _Christian Advocate_ says, "the
+Bible is the Magna Charta of our liberty."
+
+After reading that, I was not surprised by the following in the same
+paper:
+
+"We regret to record that Ingersoll is on a low plane of infidelity and
+atheism, not less offensive to good morals than have been the teachings
+of infidelity during the last century. France has been cursed with such
+teachings for a hundred years, and because of it, to-day her citizens
+are incapable of self-government."
+
+What was the condition of France a century ago? Were they capable of
+self-government then? For fourteen hundred years the common people of
+France had suffered. For fourteen hundred years they had been robbed
+by the altar and by the throne. They had been the prey of priests and
+nobles. All were exempt from taxation, except the common people. The
+cup of their suffering was full, and the French people arose in fury and
+frenzy, and tore the drapery from the altars of God, and filled the air
+with the dust of thrones.
+
+Surely, the slavery of fourteen centuries had not been produced by the
+teachings of Voltaire. I stood only a little while ago at the place
+where once stood the Bastile. In my imagination I saw that prison
+standing as it stood of yore. I could see it attacked by the populace.
+I could see their stormy faces and hear their cries. And I saw that
+ancient fortification of tyranny go down forever. And now where once
+stood the Bastile stands the Column of July. Upon its summit is a
+magnificent statue of Liberty, holding in one hand a banner, in the
+other a broken chain, and upon its shining forehead is the star of
+progress. There it stands where once stood the Bastile. And France is
+as much superior to what it was when Voltaire was born, as that statue,
+surmounting the Column of July, is more beautiful than the Bastile that
+stood there once with its cells of darkness, and its dungeons of horror.
+
+And yet we are now told that the French people have rendered themselves
+incapable of government, simply because they have listened to the voice
+of progress. There are magnificent men in France. From that country have
+come to the human race some of the grandest and holiest messages the ear
+of man has ever heard. The French people have given to history some
+of the most touching acts of self-sacrifice ever performed beneath the
+amazed stars.
+
+For my part, I admire the French people. I cannot forget the Rue San
+Antoine, nor the red cap of liberty. I can never cease to remember that
+the tricolor was held aloft in Paris, while Europe was in chains, and
+while liberty, with a bleeding breast, was in the Inquisition of Spain.
+And yet we are now told by a religious paper, that France is not capable
+of self-government. I suppose it was capable of self-government under
+the old regime, at the time of the massacre of St. Bartholomew. I
+suppose it was capable of self-government when women were seen yoked
+with cattle pulling plows. I suppose it was capable of self-government
+when all who labored were in a condition of slavery.
+
+In the old times, even among the priests, there were some good, some
+sincere and most excellent men. I have read somewhere of a sermon
+preached by one of these in the Cathedral of Notre Dame. This old
+priest, among other things, said that the soul of a beggar was as dear
+to God as the soul of the richest of his people, and that Jesus Christ
+died as much for a beggar as for a prince. One French peasant, rough
+with labor, cried out: "I propose three cheers for Jesus Christ." I like
+such things. I like to hear of them. I like to repeat them. Paris has
+been a kind of volcano, and has made the heavens lurid with its lava
+of hatred, but it has also contributed more than any other city to the
+intellectual development of man. France has produced some infamous
+men, among others John Calvin, but for one Calvin, she has produced a
+thousand benefactors of the human race.
+
+The moment the French people rise above the superstitions of the church,
+they will be in the highest sense capable of self-government. The moment
+France succeeds in releasing herself from the coils of Catholicism--from
+the shadows of superstition--from the foolish forms and mummeries of the
+church--from the intellectual tyranny of a thousand years--she will not
+only be capable of self-government, but will govern herself. Let the
+priests be usefully employed. We want no overseers of the mind; no
+slave-drivers for the soul. We cannot afford to pay hypocrites for
+depriving us of liberty. It is a waste of money to pay priests to
+frighten our children, and paralyze the intellect of women.
+
+
+WAS THE WORLD CREATED IN SIX DAYS?
+
+III.
+
+FOR hundreds of years it was contended by all Christians that the earth
+was made in six days, literal days of twenty-four hours each, and that
+on the seventh day the Lord rested from his labor. Geologists have
+driven the church from this position, and it is now claimed that the
+days mentioned in the Bible are periods of time. This is a simple
+evasion, not in any way supported by the Scriptures. The Bible
+distinctly and clearly says that the world was created in six days.
+There is not within its lids a clearer statement. It does not say six
+periods. It was made according to that book in six days:
+
+31. "And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very
+good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day."--_Genesis i_.
+
+1. "Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of
+them.
+
+2. "And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he
+rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
+
+3. "And God blessed the seventh day (not seventh period), and sanctified
+it; because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created
+and made."--_Genesis ii_.
+
+From the following passages it seems clear what was meant by the word
+days:
+
+15. "Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the Sabbath of
+rest, holy to the Lord: whosoever doeth any work in the Sabbath day, he
+shall surely be put to death."--Served him right!
+
+16. "Wherefore, the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to
+observe the Sabbath, throughout their generations, for a perpetual
+covenant.
+
+17. "It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever; for
+in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he
+rested and was refreshed.
+
+18. "And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with
+him upon Mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written
+with the finger of God."--_Exodus xxxi_.
+
+12. "Then spake Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord delivered up
+the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of
+Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon, and thou, Moon, in the valley
+of Ajalon.
+
+13. "And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had
+avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book
+of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven; and hasted not
+to go down about a whole day.
+
+14. "And there was no day like that before it or after it, that the
+Lord hearkened unto the voice of a man: for the Lord fought for
+Israel."--_Josh. x_.
+
+These passages must certainly convey the idea that this world was made
+in six days, not six periods. And the reason why they were to keep the
+Sabbath was because the Creator rested on the seventh day--not period.
+If you say six periods, instead of six days, what becomes of your
+Sabbath? The only reason given in the Bible for observing the Sabbath
+is that God observed it--that he rested from his work that day and was
+refreshed. Take this reason away and the sacredness of that day has no
+foundation in the Scriptures.
+
+
+WHAT IS THE ASTRONOMY OF THE BIBLE?
+
+IV.
+
+WHEN people were ignorant of all the sciences the Bible was understood
+by those who read it the same as by those who wrote it. From time to
+time discoveries were made that seemed inconsistent with the
+Scriptures. At first, theologians denounced the discoverers of all facts
+inconsistent with the Bible, as atheists and scoffers.
+
+The Bible teaches us that the earth is the centre of the universe; that
+the sun and moon and stars revolve around this speck called the earth.
+The men who discovered that all this was a mistake were denounced by
+the ignorant clergy of that day, precisely as the ignorant clergy of our
+time denounce the advocates of free thought. When the doctrine of the
+earth's place in the solar system was demonstrated; when persecution
+could no longer conceal the mighty truth, then it was that the church
+made an effort to harmonize the Scriptures with the discoveries of
+science. When the utter absurdity of the Mosaic account of creation
+became apparent to all thoughtful men, the church changed the reading of
+the Bible. Then it was pretended that the "days" of creation were vast
+periods of time. When it was shown to be utterly impossible that the sun
+revolved around the earth, then the account given by Joshua of the sun
+standing still for the space of a whole day, was changed into a figure
+of speech. It was said that Joshua merely conformed to the mode of
+speech common in his day; and that when he said the sun stood still, he
+merely intended to convey the idea that the earth ceased turning upon
+its axis. They admitted that stopping the sun could not lengthen the
+day, and for that reason it must have been the earth that stopped.
+But you will remember that the moon stood still in the valley of
+Ajalon--that the moon stayed until the people had avenged themselves
+upon their enemies.
+
+One would naturally suppose that the sun would have given sufficient
+light to enable the Jews to avenge themselves upon their enemies without
+any assistance from the moon. Of course, if the moon had not stopped,
+the relations between the earth and moon would have been changed.
+
+Is there a sensible man in the world who believes this wretched piece of
+ignorance? Is it possible that the religion of this nineteenth century
+has for its basis such childish absurdities? According to this account,
+what was the sun, or rather the earth, stopped for? It was stopped in
+order that the Hebrews might avenge themselves upon the Amorites. For
+the accomplishment of such a purpose the earth was made to pause. Why
+should an almost infinite force be expended simply for the purpose of
+destroying a handful of men? Why this waste of force? Let me explain.
+I strike my hands together. They feel a sudden Heat. Where did the heat
+come from? Motion has been changed into heat. You will remember that
+there can be no destruction of force. It disappears in one form only
+to reappear in another. The earth, rotating at the rate of one thousand
+miles an hour, was stopped. The motion of this vast globe would have
+instantly been changed into heat. It has been calculated by one of the
+greatest scientists of the present day that to stop the earth would
+generate as much heat as could be produced by burning a world as large
+as this of solid coal. And yet, all this force was expended for the
+paltry purpose of defeating a few poor barbarians. The employment of so
+much force for the accomplishment of so insignificant an object would
+be as useless as bringing all the intellect of a great man to bear in
+answering the arguments of the clergymen of San Francisco.
+
+The waste of that immense force in stopping the planets in their grand
+courses, for the purpose claimed, would be like using a Krupp gun to
+destroy an insect to which a single drop of water is "an unbounded
+world." How is it possible for men of ordinary intellect, not only to
+endorse such ignorant falsehoods, but to malign those who do not? Can
+anything be more debasing to the intellect of man than a belief in the
+astronomy of the Bible? According to the Scriptures, the world was
+made out of nothing, and the sun, moon, and stars, of the nothing that
+happened to be left. To the writers of the Bible the firmament was
+solid, and in it were grooves along which the stars were pushed by
+angels. From the Bible Cosmas constructed his geography and astronomy.
+His book was passed upon by the church, and was declared to be the truth
+concerning the subjects upon which he treated.
+
+This eminent geologist and astronomer, taking the Bible as his guide,
+found and taught: First, that the earth was flat; second, that it was a
+vast parallelogram; third, that in the middle there was a vast body
+of land, then a strip of water all around it, then a strip of land.
+He thought that on the outer strip of land people lived before the
+flood--that at the time of the flood, Noah in his Ark crossed the strip
+of water and landed on the shore of the country, in the middle of the
+world, where we now are. This great biblical scholar informed the true
+believers of his day that in the outer strip of land were mountains,
+around which the sun and moon revolved; that when the sun was on the
+side of the mountain next the land occupied by man, it was day, and when
+on the other side, it was night.
+
+Mr. Cosmas believed the Bible, and regarded Joshua as the most eminent
+astronomer of his day. He also taught that the firmament was solid, and
+that the angels pushed and drew the stars. He tells us that these angels
+attended strictly to their business, that each one watched the motions
+of all the others so that proper distances might always be maintained,
+and all confusion avoided. All this was believed by the gentlemen who
+made most of our religion. The great argument made by Cosmas to show
+that the earth must be flat, was the fact that the Bible stated that
+when Christ should come the second time, in glory, the whole world
+should see him. "Now," said Cosmas, "if the world is round, how could
+the people on the other side see the Lord when he comes?" This settled
+the question.
+
+These were the ideas of the fathers of the church. These men have been
+for centuries regarded as almost divinely inspired. Long after they had
+become dust they governed the world. The superstitions they planted,
+their descendants watered with the best and bravest blood. To maintain
+their ignorant theories, the brain of the world was dwarfed for a
+thousand years, and the infamous work is still being prosecuted.
+
+The Bible was regarded as not only true, but as the best of all truth.
+Any new theory advanced, was immediately examined in the light, or
+rather in the darkness, of revelation, and if according to that test it
+was false, it was denounced, and the person bringing it forward forced
+to recant. It would have been a far better course to have discovered
+every theory found to be in harmony with the Scriptures.
+
+And yet we are told by the clergy and religious press of this city, that
+the Bible is the foundation of all science.
+
+
+DOES THE BIBLE TEACH THE EXISTENCE OF THAT IMPOSSIBLE CRIME CALLED
+WITCHCRAFT?
+
+V.
+
+IT was said by Sir Thomas More that to give up witchcraft was to give
+up the Bible itself. This idea was entertained by nearly all the eminent
+theologians of a hundred years ago. In my judgment, they were right.
+To give up witchcraft is to give up, in a great degree at least, the
+supernatural. To throw away the little ghosts simply prepares the mind
+of man to give up the great ones. The founders of nearly all creeds, and
+of all religions properly so called, have taught the existence of good
+and evil spirits. They have peopled the dark with devils and the light
+with angels. They have crowded hell with demons and heaven with seraphs.
+The moment these good and evil spirits, these angels and fiends,
+disappear from the imaginations of men, and phenomena are accounted
+for by natural rather than by supernatural means, a great step has been
+taken in the direction of what is now known as materialism. While the
+church believes in witchcraft, it is in a greatly modified form. The
+evil spirits are not as plenty as in former times, and more phenomena
+are accounted for by natural means. Just to the extent that belief has
+been lost in spirits, just to that extent the church has lost its power
+and authority. When men ceased to account for the happening of any event
+by ascribing it to the direct action of good or evil spirits, and began
+to reason from known premises, the chains of superstition began to
+grow weak. Into such disrepute has witchcraft at last fallen that many
+Christians not only deny the existence of these evil spirits, but take
+the ground that no such thing is taught in the Scriptures. Let us see:
+
+"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."--_Exodus xxii., 18_.
+
+7. "Then said Saul unto his servants, Seek me a woman that hath a
+familiar spirit, that I may go to her, and enquire of her. And his
+servants said to him, Behold, there is a woman that hath a spirit at
+Endor.
+
+8. "And Saul disguised himself, and put on other raiment, and he went,
+and two men with him, and they came to the woman by night; and he said,
+I pray thee, divine unto me by the familiar spirit, and bring me him up,
+whom I shall name unto thee.
+
+9. "And the woman said unto him, Behold, thou knowest what Saul hath
+done, how he hath cut off those that have familiar spirits, and the
+wizards out of the land; wherefore, then, layest thou a snare for my
+life, to cause me to die?
+
+10. "And Saul sware to her by the Lord, saying, As the Lord liveth,
+there shall no punishment happen to thee for this thing.
+
+11. "Then said the woman, Whom shall I bring up unto thee? And he said,
+Bring me up Samuel.
+
+12. "And when the woman saw Samuel she cried with a loud voice: and the
+woman spake to Saul, saying, Why hast thou deceived me? for thou art
+Saul.
+
+13. "And the king said unto her, Be not afraid: for what sawest thou?
+And the woman said unto Saul, I saw gods ascending out of the earth.
+
+14. "And he said unto her, What form is he of? And she said, An old man
+cometh up; and he is covered with a mantle. And Saul perceived that
+it was Samuel, and he stooped with his face to the ground, and bowed
+himself.
+
+15. "And Samuel said to Saul, Why hast thou disquieted me to bring me
+up?"--2 Samuels xxviii.
+
+This reads very much like an account of a modern spiritual seance. Is
+it not one of the wonderful things of the world that men and women who
+believe this account of the witch of Endor, who believe all the miracles
+and all the ghost stories of the Bible, deny with all their force the
+truth of modern Spiritualism. So far as I am concerned, I would rather
+believe some one who has heard what he relates, who has seen what he
+tells, or at least thinks he has seen what he tells. I would rather
+believe somebody I know, whose reputation for truth is good among those
+who know him. I would rather believe these people than to take the words
+of those who have been in their graves for four thousand years, and
+about whom I know nothing.
+
+31 "Regard not them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after
+wizards, to be defiled by them; I am the Lord, your God."--_Leviticus
+xix_.
+
+6 "And the soul that turneth after such as have familiar spirits, and
+after wizards, I will even set my face against that soul, and will cut
+him off from among his people."--_Leviticus xx._
+
+10. "There shall not be found among you any one that useth divination,
+or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch,
+
+11. "Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or
+a necromancer.
+
+12. "For all that do these things are an abomination unto the
+Lord."--_Deut. xviii_.
+
+I have given you a few of the passages found in the Old Testament upon
+this subject, showing conclusively that the Bible teaches the existence
+of witches, wizards and those who have familiar spirits. In the New
+Testament there are passages equally strong, showing that the Savior
+himself was a believer in the existence of evil spirits, and in the
+existence of a personal devil. Nothing can be plainer than the teaching
+of the following:
+
+1. "Then was Jesus led up of the spirit into the wilderness to be
+tempted of the devil.
+
+2. "And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward
+an hungered.
+
+3. "And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of
+God, command that these stones be made bread.
+
+4. "But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread
+alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
+
+5. "Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on
+a pinnacle of the temple.
+
+6. "And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down:
+for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and
+in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy
+foot against a stone.
+
+7. "Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the
+Lord, thy God.
+
+8. "Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and
+sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them.
+
+9. "And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt
+fall down and worship me.
+
+10. "Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is
+written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou
+serve.
+
+11. "Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered
+unto him."--_Matt. iv._
+
+If this does not teach the existence of a personal devil, there is
+nothing within the lids of the Scriptures teaching the existence of
+a personal God. If this does not teach the existence of evil spirits,
+there is nothing in the Bible going to show that good spirits exist
+either in this world or the next.
+
+16. "When the even was come they brought unto him many that were
+possessed with devils: and he cast out the spirits with his word, and
+healed all that were sick."--_Matt. vii._
+
+1. "And they came over unto the other side of the sea, into the country
+of the Gadarenes.
+
+2. "And when he was come out of the ship, immediately there met him out
+of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit,
+
+3. "Who had his dwelling among the tombs; and no man could bind him, no,
+not with chains:
+
+4. "Because that he had been often bound with fetters and chains, and
+the chains had been plucked asunder by him, and the fetters broken in
+pieces: neither could any man tame him.
+
+5. "And always, night and day, he was in the mountains, and in the
+tombs, crying and cutting himself with stones.
+
+6. "But when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped him,
+
+7. "And cried with a loud voice, and said, What have I to do with thee,
+Jesus, thou son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God, that thou
+torment me not.
+
+8. "For he said unto him, Come out of the man, thou unclean spirit.
+
+9. "And he asked him, What is thy name? And he answered, saying, My name
+is Legion, for we are many.
+
+11. "Now, there was nigh unto the mountains a great herd of swine
+feeding.
+
+12. "And all the devils besought him, saying, Send us into the swine,
+that we may enter into them.
+
+13. "And forthwith Jesus gave them leave. And the unclean spirits went
+out, and entered into the swine; and the herd ran violently down a steep
+place into the sea, and they were about two thousand; and were choked in
+the sea."--_Mark v_.
+
+The doctrine of witchcraft does not stop here. The power of casting out
+devils was bequeathed by the Savior to his apostles and followers, and
+to all who might believe in him throughout all the coming time:
+
+17. "And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall
+they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues.
+
+18. "And they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly
+thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and they
+shall recover."--_Mark xvi._
+
+I would like to see the clergy who have been answering me, tested in
+this way: Let them drink poison, let them take up serpents, let them
+cure the sick by the laying on of hands, and I will then believe that
+they believe.
+
+I deny the witchcraft stories of the world. Witches are born in the
+ignorant, frightened minds of men. Reason will exorcise them. "They are
+tales told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
+These devils have covered the world with blood and tears. They have
+filled the earth with fear. They have filled the lives of children with
+darkness and horror. They have peopled the sweet world of imagination
+with monsters. They have made religion a strange mingling of fear and
+ferocity. I am doing what I can to reave the heavens of these monsters.
+For my part, I laugh at them all. I hold them all in contempt, ancient
+and modern, great and small.
+
+
+THE BIBLE IDEA OF THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN.
+
+VI.
+
+ALL religion has for its basis the tyranny of God and the slavery of
+man.
+
+18. "If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey
+the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they
+have chastened him, will not hearken unto them.
+
+19. "Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him
+out unto the elders of his city, and unto, the gate of his place.
+
+20. "And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is
+stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice, he is a glutton and
+a drunkard.
+
+21. "And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he
+die; so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall
+hear, and fear."--_Deut. xxi._
+
+Abraham was commanded to offer his son Isaac as a sacrifice. He
+proceeded to obey. And the boy, being then about thirty years of age,
+was not consulted. At the command of a phantom of the air, a man was
+willing to offer upon the altar his only son. And such was the slavery
+of children, that the only son had not the spirit to resist.
+
+Have you ever read the story of Jephthah?
+
+30 "And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the Lord, and said, If thou shalt
+without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hands,
+
+31. "Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my
+house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon,
+shall surely be the Lord's, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.
+
+32. "So Jephthah passed over unto the children of Ammon to fight against
+them; and the Lord delivered them into his hands.
+
+33. "And he smote them from Aroer, even till thou come to Minnith, even
+twenty cities, and unto the plain of the vineyards, with a very great
+slaughter. Thus the children of Ammon were subdued before the children
+of Israel.
+
+34."And Jephthah came to Mizpeh unto his house, and behold, his daughter
+came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances; and she was his only
+child; beside her he had neither son nor daughter.
+
+35. "And it came to pass, when he saw her, that he rent his clothes, and
+said, Alas, my daughter! thou hast brought me very low, and thou art one
+of them that trouble me: for I have opened my mouth unto the Lord, and I
+cannot go back....
+
+39. "And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned
+unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had
+vowed."--_Judges xi._
+
+Is there in the history of the world a sadder thing than this? What can
+we think of a father who would sacrifice his daughter to a demon God?
+And what can we think of a God who would accept such a sacrifice? Can
+such a God be worthy of the worship of man? I plead for the rights of
+children. I plead for the government of kindness and love. I plead
+for the republic of home, the democracy of the fireside. I plead for
+affection. And for this I am pursued by invective. For this I am called
+a fiend, a devil, a monster, by Christian editors and clergymen,
+by those who pretend to love their enemies and pray for those that
+despitefully use them.
+
+Allow me to give you another instance of affection related in the
+Scriptures. There was, it seems, a most excellent man by the name of
+Job. The Lord was walking up and down, and happening to meet Satan, said
+to him: "Are you acquainted with my servant Job? Have you noticed what
+an excellent man he is?" And Satan replied to him and said: "Why should
+he not be an excellent man--you have given him everything he wants? Take
+from him what he has and he will curse you." And thereupon the Lord gave
+Satan the power to destroy the property and children of Job. In a little
+while these high contracting parties met again; and the Lord seemed
+somewhat elated with his success, and called again the attention of
+Satan to the sinlessness of Job. Satan then told him to touch his body
+and he would curse him. And thereupon power was given to Satan over the
+body of Job, and he covered his body with boils. Yet in all this, Job
+did not sin with his lips.
+
+This book seems to have been written to show the excellence of patience,
+and to prove that at last God will reward all who will bear the
+afflictions of heaven with fortitude and without complaint. The sons and
+daughters of Job had been slain, and then the Lord, in order to reward
+Job, gave him other children, other sons and other daughters--not the
+same ones he had lost; but others. And this, according to the writer,
+made ample amends. Is that the idea we now have of love? If I have a
+child, no matter how deformed that child may be, and if it dies, nobody
+can make the loss to me good by bringing a more beautiful child. I want
+the one I loved and the one I lost.
+
+
+THE GALLANTRY OF GOD.
+
+VII.
+
+I HAVE said that the Bible is a barbarous book; that it has no respect
+for the rights of woman. Now I propose to prove it. It takes something
+besides epithets and invectives to prove or disprove anything. Let us
+see what the sacred volume says concerning the mothers and daughters of
+the human race.
+
+A man who does not in his heart of hearts respect woman, who has not
+there an altar at which he worships the memory of mother, is less than a
+man.
+
+11. "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
+
+12. "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the
+man, but to be in silence."
+
+The reason given for this, and the only reason that occurred to the
+sacred writer, was:
+
+13. "For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
+
+14. "And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the
+transgression.
+
+15. "Notwithstanding, she shall be saved in child-bearing, if they
+continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."--_1 Tim. ii._
+
+3. "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and
+the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God."
+
+That is to say, the woman sustains the same relation to the man that man
+does to Christ, and man sustains the same relation to Christ that Christ
+does to God.
+
+This places the woman infinitely below the man. And yet this barbarous
+idiocy is regarded as divinely inspired. How can any woman look other
+than with contempt upon such passages? How can any woman believe that
+this is the will of a most merciful God?
+
+7. "For a man, indeed, ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is
+the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man."
+
+And this is justified from the remarkable fact set forth in the next
+verse:
+
+8. "For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man."
+
+This same chivalric gentleman also says:
+
+9. "Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the
+man."--_1 Cor. xi._
+
+22. "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the
+Lord."
+
+Is it possible for abject obedience to go beyond this?
+
+23. "For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head
+of the Church, and he is the saviour of the body.
+
+24. "Therefore, as the Church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives
+be to their own husbands in everything."--_Eph. v._
+
+Even the Savior did not put man and woman upon an equality. A man could
+divorce his wife, but the wife could not divorce her husband.
+
+Every noble woman should hold such apostles and such ideas in contempt.
+According to the Old Testament, woman had to ask pardon and had to be
+purified from the crime of having born sons and daughters. To make love
+and maternity crimes is infamous.
+
+10. "When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the Lord
+thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them
+captive,
+
+11. "And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire
+unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife,
+
+12. "Then thou shalt bring her home to thy house; and she shall shave
+her head, and pare her nails."--_Deut. xxi_.
+
+This is barbarism, no matter whether it came from heaven or from hell,
+from a God or from a devil, from the golden streets of the New Jerusalem
+or from the very Sodom of perdition. It is barbarism complete and utter.
+
+
+DOES THE BIBLE SANCTION POLYGAMY AND CONCUBINAGE?
+
+VIII.
+
+READ the infamous order of Moses in the 31st chapter of Numbers--an
+order unfit to be reproduced in print--an order which I am unwilling
+to repeat. Read the 31 st chapter of Exodus. Read the 21 st chapter of
+Deuteronomy. Read the-life of Abraham, of David, of Solomon, of
+Jacob, and then tell me the sacred Bible does not teach polygamy and
+concubinage. All the languages of the world are insufficient to express
+the filth of polygamy. It makes man a beast--woman a slave. It destroys
+the fireside. It makes virtue an outcast. It makes home a lair of wild
+beasts. It is the infamy of infamies. Yet this is the doctrine of the
+Bible--a doctrine defended even by Luther and Melancthon. It is by the
+Bible that Brigham Young justifies the practice of this beastly horror.
+It takes from language those sweetest words, husband, wife, father
+mother, child and lover. It takes us back to the barbarism of animals,
+and leaves the heart a den in which crawl and hiss the slimy serpents
+of loathsome lust. Yet the book justifying this infamy is the book upon
+which rests the civilization of the nineteenth century. And because I
+denounce this frightful thing, the clergy denounce me as a demon, and
+the infamous _Christian Advocate_ says that the moral sentiment of
+this State ought to denounce this Illinois Catiline for his blasphemous
+utterances and for his base and debasing scurrility.
+
+
+DOES THE BIBLE UPHOLD AND JUSTIFY POLITICAL TYRANNY?
+
+IX.
+
+FOR my part, I insist that man has not only the capacity, but the right
+to govern himself. All political authority is vested in the people
+themselves, They have the right to select their officers and agents,
+and these officers and agents are responsible to the people. Political
+authority does not come from the clouds. Man should not be governed by
+the aristocracy of the air. The Bible is not a Republican or Democratic
+book. Exactly the opposite doctrine is taught. From that volume we learn
+that the people have no power whatever; that all power and political
+authority comes from on high, and that all the kings, all the potentates
+and powers, have been ordained of God; that all the ignorant and cruel
+kings have been placed upon the world's thrones by the direct act of
+Deity. The Scriptures teach us that the common people have but one
+duty--the duty of obedience. Let me read to you some of the political
+ideas in the great "Magna Charta" of human liberty.
+
+1. "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no
+power but of God; the powers that be are ordained of God.
+
+2. "Whosoever, therefore, resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance
+of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation."
+
+According to this, George III. was ordained of God. He was King of Great
+Britian by divine right, and by divine right was the lawful King of the
+American Colonies. The leaders in the Revolutionary struggle resisted
+the power, and according to these passages, resisted the ordinances of
+God; and for that resistance they are promised the eternal recompense of
+damnation.
+
+3. "For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt
+thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou
+shalt have praise of the same....
+
+5. "Wherefore, ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also
+for conscience sake.
+
+6. "For, for this cause pay ye tribute also; for they are God's
+ministers, attending continually upon this very thing."--_Romans, xiii._
+
+13. "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake;
+whether it be to the king as supreme.
+
+14. "Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the
+punishment of evil-doers, and for the praise of them that do well.
+
+15. "For so is the will of God."--_1 Pet. ii._
+
+Had these ideas been carried out, political progress in the world would
+have been impossible. Upon the necks of the people still would have been
+the feet of kings. I deny this wretched, this infamous doctrine.
+Whether higher powers are ordained of God or not, if those higher powers
+endeavor to destroy the rights of man, I for one shall resist. Whenever
+and wherever the sword of rebellion is drawn in support of a human
+right, I am a rebel. The despicable doctrine of submission to titled
+wrong and robed injustice finds no lodgment in the brain of a man.
+The real rulers are the people, and the rulers so-called are but the
+servants of the people. They are not ordained of any God. All political
+power comes from and belongs to man. Upon these texts of Scripture rest
+the thrones of Europe. For fifteen hundred years these verses have been
+repeated by brainless kings and heardess priests. For fifteen hundred
+years each one of these texts has been a bastile in which has been
+imprisoned the pioneers of progress. Each one of these texts has been
+an obstruction on the highway of humanity. Each one has been a
+fortification behind which have crouched the sainted hypocrites and the
+titled robbers. According to these texts, a robber gets his right to rob
+from God. And it is the duty of the robbed to submit. The thief gets his
+right to steal from God. The king gets his right to trample upon human
+liberty from God. I say, fight the king--fight the priest.
+
+
+THE RELIGIOUS LIBERTY OF GOD.
+
+X.
+
+THE Bible denounces religious liberty. After covering the world with
+blood, after having made it almost hollow with graves, Christians
+are beginning to say that men have a right to differ upon religious
+questions provided the questions about which they differ are not
+considered of great importance. The motto of the Evangelical Alliance
+is: "In non-essentials, Liberty; in essentials, Unity."
+
+The Christian world have condescended to say that upon all non-essential
+points we shall have the right to think for ourselves; but upon matters
+of the least importance, they will think and speak for us. In this they
+are consistent. They but follow the teachings of the God they worship.
+They but adhere to the precepts and commands of the sacred Scriptures.
+Within that volume there is no such thing as religious toleration.
+Within that volume there is not one particle of mercy for an
+unbeliever. For all who think for themselves, for all who are the owners
+of their own souls, there are threatenings, curses and anathemas. Any
+Christian who to-day exercises the least toleration is to that extent
+false to his religion. Let us see what the "Magna Charta" of liberty
+says upon this subject:
+
+6. "If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter,
+or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul,
+entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou
+hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers.
+
+7. "Namely of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh
+unto thee, or afar off from thee, from the one end of the earth even
+unto the other end of the earth.
+
+8. "Thou shalt not consent unto him; nor hearken unto him; neither shall
+thine eye pity him; neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal
+him.
+
+9. "But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him
+to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.
+
+10. "And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath
+sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God, which brought thee out
+of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage."--_Deut. xiii._
+
+That is the religious liberty of the Bible. If the wife of your bosom
+had said, "I like the religion of India better than the religion of
+Palestine," it was then your duty to kill her, and the merciful Most
+High--understand me, I do not believe in any merciful Most High--said:
+
+"Thou shalt not pity her but thou shalt surely kill; thy hand shall be
+the first upon her to put her to death."
+
+This I denounce as infamously infamous. If it is necessary to believe
+in such a God, if it is necessary to adore such a Deity in order to be
+saved, I will take my part joyfully in perdition. Let me read you a few
+more extracts from the "Magna Charta" of human liberty.
+
+2. "If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the Lord
+thy God giveth thee, man or woman that hath wrought wickedness in the
+sight of the Lord thy God, in transgressing his covenant,
+
+3. "And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the
+sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded.
+
+4. "And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired
+diligently, and behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such
+abomination is wrought in Israel.
+
+5. "Then shalt thou bring forth that man, or that woman, which have
+committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that
+woman, and shalt stone them with stones till they die."
+
+Under this law if the woman you loved had said: "Let us worship the sun;
+I am tired of this jealous and bloodthirsty Jehovah; let us worship the
+sun; let us kneel to it as it rises over the hills, filling the world
+with light and love, when the dawn stands jocund on the mountain's misty
+top; it is the sun whose beams illumine and cover the earth with verdure
+and with beauty; it is the sun that covers the trees with leaves, that
+carpets the earth with grass and adorns the world with flowers; I adore
+the sun because in its light I have seen your eyes; it has given to
+me the face of my babe; it has clothed my life with joy; let us in
+gratitude fall down and worship the glorious beams of the sun."
+
+For this offence she deserved not only death, but death at your hands:
+
+"Thine eye shall not pity her; neither shalt thou spare; neither shalt
+thou conceal her.
+
+"But thou shalt surely kill her: thy hand shall be the first upon her to
+put her to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.
+
+"And thou shalt stone her with stones that she die."
+
+For my part I had a thousand times rather worship the sun than a God who
+would make such a law or give such a command. This you may say is the
+doctrine of the Old Testament--what is the doctrine of the New?
+
+"He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; and he that believeth
+not shall be damned."
+
+That is the religious liberty of the New Testament. That is the "tidings
+of great joy."
+
+Every one of these words has been a chain upon the limbs, a whip upon
+the backs of men. Every one has been a fagot. Every one has been a
+sword. Every one has been a dungeon, a scaffold, a rack. Every one has
+been a fountain of tears. These words have filled the hearts of men with
+hatred. These words invented all the instruments of torture. These words
+covered the earth with blood.
+
+For the sake of argument, suppose that the Bible is an inspired book.
+If then, as is contended, God gave these frightful laws commanding
+religious intolerance to his chosen people, and afterward this same God
+took upon himself flesh, and came among the Jews and taught a different
+religion, and they crucified him, did he not reap what he had sown?
+
+
+DOES THE BIBLE DESCRIBE A GOD OF MERCY?
+
+XI.
+
+IS it possible to conceive of a more jealous, revengeful, changeable,
+unjust, unreasonable, cruel being than the Jehovah of the Hebrews? Is
+it possible to read the words said to have been spoken by this Deity,
+without a shudder? Is it possible to contemplate his character without
+hatred?
+
+"I will make mine arrows drunk with blood and my sword shall devour
+flesh."--_Deut. xxxii._
+
+Is this the language of an infinitely kind and tender parent to his
+weak, his wandering and suffering children?
+
+"Thy foot may be dipped in the blood of thine enemies, and the tongue of
+thy dogs in the same." _Psalms, lxviii._
+
+Is it possible that a God takes delight in seeing dogs lap the blood of
+his children?
+
+22. "And the Lord thy God will put out those nations before thee by
+little and little; thou mayest not consume them at once, lest the beasts
+of the field increase upon thee.
+
+23. "But the Lord thy God shall deliver them unto thee, and shall
+destroy them with a mighty destruction, until they be destroyed.
+
+24. "And he shall deliver their kings into thine hand, and thou shalt
+destroy their name from under heaven; there shall no man be able to
+stand before thee, until thou have destroyed them."--_Deut. vii._
+
+If these words had proceeded from the mouth of a demon, if they had been
+spoken by some enraged and infinitely malicious fiend, I should not have
+been surprised. But these things are attributed to a God of infinite
+mercy.
+
+40. "So Joshua smote all the country of the hills, and of the south,
+and of the vale, and of the springs, and all their kings; he left none
+remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord God of
+Israel commanded."--_Josh, x._
+
+14. "And all the spoil of these cities, and the cattle, the children of
+Israel took for a prey unto themselves; but every man they smote with
+the edge of the sword until they had destroyed them, neither left they
+any to breathe."--_Josh. xi._
+
+19. "There was not a city that made peace with the children of Israel,
+save the Hivites, the inhabitants of Gibeon; all other they took in
+battle.
+
+20. "For it was of the Lord to harden their hearts that they should come
+against Israel in battle, that he might destroy them utterly, and that
+they might have no favor, but that he might destroy them, as the Lord
+commanded Moses."--_Josh. xi._
+
+There are no words in our language with which to express the indignation
+I feel when reading these cruel and heartless words.
+
+"When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim
+peace unto it. And it shall be if it make thee answer of peace, and
+open unto thee, then it shall be that all the people therein shall be
+tributaries unto thee, and they shall serve thee. And if it will make no
+peace with thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shalt besiege
+it. And when the Lord thy God hath delivered it into thy hands, thou
+shalt smite every male thereof with the sword. But the women, _and the
+little ones_, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even the
+spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself, and thou shalt eat the
+spoil of thine enemies, which the Lord thy God hath given thee.
+
+"Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which are very far off from
+thee, which are not of the cities of these nations. But of the cities of
+these people which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance,
+thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth."
+
+These terrible instructions were given to an army of invasion. The men
+who were thus ruthlessly murdered were fighting for their homes, their
+firesides, for their wives and for their little children. Yet these
+things, by the clergy of San Francisco, are called acts of sublime
+mercy.
+
+All this is justified by the doctrine of the survival of the fittest.
+The Old Testament is filled with anathemas, with curses, with words of
+vengeance, of revenge, of jealousy, of hatred and of almost infinite
+brutality. Do not, I pray you, pluck from the heart the sweet flower
+of pity and trample it in the bloody dust of superstition. Do not, I
+beseech you, justify the murder of women, the assassination of dimpled
+babes. Do not let the gaze of the gorgon of superstition turn your
+hearts to stone.
+
+Is there an intelligent Christian in the world who would not with joy
+and gladness receive conclusive testimony to the effect that all the
+passages in the Bible upholding and sustaining polygamy and concubinage,
+political tyranny, the subjection of woman, the enslavement of children,
+establishing domestic and political tyranny, and that all the commands
+to destroy men, women and children, are but interpolations of kings
+and priests, made for the purpose of subjugating mankind through the
+instrumentality of fear? Is there a Christian in the world who would
+not think vastly more of the Bible if all these infamous things were
+eliminated from it?
+
+Surely the good things in that book are not rendered more sacred from
+the fact that in the same volume are found the frightful passages I have
+quoted. In my judgment the Bible should be read and studied precisely as
+we read and study any book whatever. The good in it should be preserved
+and cherished, and that which shocks the human heart should be cast
+aside forever.
+
+While the Old Testament threatens men, women and children with disease,
+famine, war, pestilence and death, there are no threatenings of
+punishment beyond this life. The doctrine of eternal punishment is a
+dogma of the New Testament. This doctrine, the most cruel, the most
+infamous of which the human mind can conceive, is taught, if taught at
+all, in the Bible--in the New Testament. One cannot imagine what the
+human heart has suffered by reason of the frightful doctrine of eternal
+damnation. It is a doctrine so abhorrent to every drop of my blood, so
+infinitely cruel, that it is impossible for me to respect either the
+head or heart of any human being who teaches or fears it. This
+doctrine necessarily subverts all ideas of justice. To inflict infinite
+punishment for finite crimes, or rather for crimes committed by finite
+beings, is a proposition so monstrous that I am astonished it ever
+found lodgment in the brain of man. Whoever says that we can be happy in
+heaven while those we loved on earth are suffering infinite torments in
+eternal fire, defames and calumniates the human heart.
+
+
+THE PLAN OF SALVATION.
+
+XII.
+
+WE are told, however, that a way has been provided for the salvation
+of all men, and that in this plan the infinite mercy of God is made
+manifest to the children of men. According to the great scheme of the
+atonement, the innocent suffers for the guilty in order to satisfy a
+law. What kind of law must it be that is satisfied with the agony of
+innocence? Who made this law? If God made it he must have known that the
+innocent would have to suffer as a consequence. The whole scheme is
+to me a medley of contradictions, impossibilities and theological
+conclusions. We are told that if Adam and Eve had not sinned in the
+Garden of Eden death never would have entered the world. We are further
+informed that had it not been for the devil, Adam and Eve would not
+have been led astray; and if they had not, as I said before, death
+never would have touched with its icy hand the human heart. If our first
+parents had never sinned, and death never had entered the world, you and
+I never would have existed. The earth would have been filled thousands
+of generations before you and I were born. At the feast of life, death
+made seats vacant for us. According to this doctrine, we are indebted
+to the devil for our existence. Had he not tempted Eve--no sin. If there
+had been no sin--no death. If there had been no death the world would
+have been filled ages before you and I were born. Therefore, we owe our
+existence to the devil. We are further informed that as a consequence of
+original sin the scheme called the atonement became necessary; and that
+if the Savior had not taken upon himself flesh and come to this atom
+called the earth, and if he had not been crucified for us, we should all
+have been cast forever into hell. Had it not been for the bigotry of
+the Jews and the treachery of Judas Iscariot, Christ would not have been
+crucified; and if he had not been crucified, all of us would have had
+our portion in the lake that burneth with eternal fire.
+
+According to this great doctrine, according to this vast and most
+wonderful scheme, we owe, as I said before, our existence to the devil,
+our salvation to Judas Iscariot and the bigotry of the Jews.
+
+So far as I am concerned, I fail to see any mercy in the plan of
+salvation. Is it mercy to reward a man forever in consideration of
+believing a certain thing, of the truth of which there is, to his mind,
+ample testimony? Is it mercy to punish a man with eternal fire simply
+because there is not testimony enough to satisfy his mind? Can there be
+such a thing as mercy in eternal punishment?
+
+And yet this same Deity says to me, "resist not evil; pray for those
+that despitefully use you; love your enemies, but I will eternally damn
+mine." It seems to me that even gods should practice what they preach.
+
+All atonement, after all, is a kind of moral bankruptcy. Under its
+provisions, man is allowed the luxury of sinning upon a credit. Whenever
+he is guilty of a wicked action he says, "charge it." This kind of
+bookkeeping, in my judgment, tends to breed extravagance in sin.
+
+The truth is, most Christians are better than their creeds; most creeds
+are better than the Bible, and most men are better than their God.
+
+
+OTHER RELIGIONS.
+
+XIII.
+
+WE must remember that ours is not the only religion. Man has in all ages
+endeavored to answer the great questions Whence? and Whither? He has
+endeavored to read his destiny in the stars, to pluck the secret of
+his existence from the night. He has questioned the spectres of his own
+imagination. He has explored the mysterious avenues of dreams. He
+has peopled the heavens with spirits. He has mistaken his visions for
+realities. In the twilight of ignorance he has mistaken shadows
+for gods. In all ages he has been the slave of misery, the dupe of
+superstition and the fool of hope. He has suffered and aspired.
+
+Religion is a thing of growth, of development. As we advance we throw
+aside the grosser and absurder forms of faith--practically at first by
+ceasing to observe them, and lastly, by denying them altogether. Every
+church necessarily by its constitution endeavors to prevent this natural
+growth or development. What has happened to other religions must happen
+to ours. Ours is not superior to many that have passed, or are passing
+away. Other religions have been lived for and died for by men as noble
+as ours can boast. Their dogmas and doctrines have, to say the least,
+been as reasonable, as full of spiritual grandeur, as ours.
+
+Man has had beautiful thoughts. Man has tried to solve these questions
+in all the countries of the world, and I respect all such men and women;
+but let me tell you one little thing. I want to show you that in other
+countries there is something.
+
+The Parsee sect of Persia say: A Persian saint ascended the three stairs
+that lead to heaven's gate, and knocked; a voice said: "Who is there?"
+"Thy servant, O God!" But the gates would not open. For seven years he
+did every act of kindness; again he came, and the voice said: "Who is
+there?" And he replied: "Thy slave, O God!" Yet the gates were shut. Yet
+seven other years of kindness, and the man again knocked; and the voice
+cried and said: "Who is there?" "Thyself, O God!" And the gates wide
+open flew.
+
+I say there is no more beautiful Christian poem than this.
+
+A Persian after having read our religion, with its frightful
+descriptions of perdition, wrote these words: "Two angels flying out
+from the blissful city of God--the angel of love and the angel of
+pity--hovered over the eternal pit where suffered the captives of
+hell. One smile of love illumined the darkness and one tear of pity
+extinguished all the fires." Has orthodoxy produced anything as
+generously beautiful as this? Let me read you this: Sectarians, hear
+this: Believers in eternal damnation, hear this: Clergy of America who
+expect to have your happiness in heaven increased by seeing me burning
+in hell, hear this:
+
+This is the prayer of the Brahmins--a prayer that has trembled from
+human lips toward heaven for more than four thousand years:
+
+"Never will I seek or receive private individual salvation. Never will
+I enter into final bliss alone. But forever and everywhere will I labor
+and strive for the final redemption of every creature throughout all
+worlds, and until all are redeemed. Never will I wrongly leave this
+world to sin, sorrow and struggle, but will remain and work and suffer
+where I am."
+
+Has the orthodox religion produced a prayer like this? See the infinite
+charity, not only for every soul in this world, but of all the shining
+worlds of the universe. Think of that, ye parsons who imagine that a
+large majority are going to eternal ruin.
+
+Compare it with the sermons of Jonathan Edwards, and compare it with the
+imprecation of Christ: "Depart ye cursed into everlasting fire prepared
+for the devil and his angels;" with the ideas of Jeremy Taylor, with the
+creeds of Christendom, with all the prayers of all the saints, and in no
+church except the Universalist will you hear a prayer like this.
+
+"When thou art in doubt as to whether an action is good or bad, abstain
+from it."
+
+Since the days of Zoroaster has there been any rule for human conduct
+given superior to this?
+
+Are the principles taught by us superior to those of Confucius? He was
+asked if there was any single word comprising the duties of man. He
+replied: "Reciprocity." Upon being asked what he thought of the
+doctrine of returning benefits for injuries, he replied: "That is not
+my doctrine. If you return benefits for injuries what do you propose
+for benefits? My doctrine is; For benefits return benefits; for injuries
+return justice without any admixture of revenge."
+
+To return good for evil is to pay a premium upon wickedness. I cannot
+put a man under obligation to do me a favor by doing him an injury.
+
+Now, to-day, right now, what is the church doing? What is it doing, I
+ask you honestly? Does it satisfy the craving hearts of the nineteenth
+century? Are we satisfied? I am not saying this except from the honesty
+of my heart. Are we satisfied? Is it a consolation to us now? Is it
+even a consolation when those we love die? The dead are so near and the
+promises are so far away. It is covered with the rubbish of the past.
+I ask you, is it all that is demanded by the brain and heart of the
+nineteenth century?
+
+We want something better; we want something grander; we want
+something that has more brain in it, and more heart in it. We want to
+advance--that is what we want; and you cannot advance without being a
+heretic--you cannot do it.
+
+Nearly all these religions have been upheld by persecution and
+bloodshed. They have been rendered stable by putting fetters upon the
+human brain. They have all, however, been perfectly natural productions,
+and under similar circumstances would all be reproduced. Only by
+intellectual development are the old superstitions outgrown. As only
+the few intellectually advance, the majority is left on the side of
+superstition, and remains there until the advanced ideas of the few
+thinkers become general; and by that time there are other thinkers still
+in advance.
+
+And so the work of development and growth slowly and painfully proceeds
+from age to age. The pioneers are denounced as heretics, and the
+heretics denounce their denouncers as the disciples of superstition
+and ignorance. Christ was a heretic. Herod was orthodox. Socrates was a
+blasphemer. Anytus worshiped all the gods. Luther was a skeptic, while
+the sellers of indulgences were the best of Catholics. Roger Williams
+was a heretic, while the Puritans who drove him from Massachusetts were
+all orthodox. Every step in advance in the religious history of the
+world has been taken by heretics. No superstition has been destroyed
+except by a heretic. No creed has been bettered except by a heretic.
+Heretic is the name that the orthodox laggard hurls at the disappearing
+pioneer. It is shouted by the dwellers in swamps to the people upon the
+hills. It is the opinion that midnight entertains of the dawn. It is
+what the rotting says of the growing. Heretic is the name that a stench
+gives to a perfume.
+
+With this word the coffin salutes the cradle. It is taken from the lips
+of the dead. Orthodoxy is a shroud--heresy is a banner. Orthodoxy is
+an epitaph--heresy is a prophecy. Orthodoxy is a cloud, a fog, a
+mist--heresy the star shining forever above the child of truth.
+
+I am a believer in the eternity of progress. I do not believe that Want
+will forever extend its withered hand, its wan and shriveled palms, for
+charity. I do not believe that the children will forever be governed by
+cruelty and brute force. I do not believe that poverty will dwell with
+man forever. I do not believe that prisons will forever cover the earth,
+or that the shadow of the gallows will forever fall upon the ground. I
+do not believe that injustice will sit forever upon the bench, or that
+malice and superstition will forever stand in the pulpit.
+
+I believe the time will come when there will be charity in every heart,
+when there will be love in every family, and when law and liberty and
+justice, like the atmosphere, will surround this world.
+
+We have worshiped the ghosts long enough. We have prostrated ourselves
+before the ignorance of the past.
+
+Let us stand erect and look with hopeful eyes toward the brightening
+future. Let us stand by our convictions. Let us not throw away our idea
+of justice for the sake of any book or of any religion whatever. Let us
+live according to our highest and noblest and purest ideal.
+
+By this time we should know that the real Bible has not been written.
+
+The real Bible is not the work of inspired men, or prophets, or
+apostles, or evangelists, or of Christs.
+
+Every man who finds a fact, adds, as it were, a word to this great
+book. It is not attested by prophecy, by miracles, or signs. It makes
+no appeal to faith, to ignorance, to credulity or fear. It has no
+punishment for unbelief, and no reward for hypocrisy. It appeals to man
+in the name of demonstration. It has nothing to conceal. It has no
+fear of being read, of being contradicted, of being investigated and
+understood. It does not pretend to be holy, or sacred; it simply claims
+to be true. It challenges the scrutiny of all, and implores every reader
+to verify every line for himself. It is incapable of being blasphemed.
+This book appeals to all the surroundings of man. Each thing that exists
+testifies to its perfection. The earth, with its heart of fire and
+crowns of snow; with its forests and plains, its rocks and seas; with
+its every wave and cloud; with its every leaf and bud and flower,
+confirms its every word, and the solemn stars, shining in the infinite
+abysses, are the eternal witnesses of its truth.
+
+Ladies and gentlemen you cannot tell how I thank you this evening; you
+cannot tell how I feel toward the intellectual hospitality of this great
+city by the Pacific sea. Ladies and gentlemen, I thank you--I thank you
+again and again, a thousand times.
+
+
+
+
+MY CHICAGO BIBLE CLASS.
+
+
+     * Chicago Times, 1879.
+
+To the Editor:--
+
+NOTHING is more gratifying than to see ideas that were received with
+scorn, flourishing in the sunshine of approval. Only a few weeks ago,
+I stated that the Bible was not inspired; that Moses was mistaken; that
+the "flood" was a foolish myth; that the Tower of Babel existed only in
+credulity; that God did not create the universe from nothing, that he
+did not start the first woman with a rib; that he never upheld slavery;
+that he was not a polygamist; that he did not kill people for making
+hair-oil; that he did not order his generals to kill the dimpled babes;
+that he did not allow the roses of love and the violets of modesty to
+be trodden under the brutal feet of lust; that the Hebrew language
+was written without vowels; that the Bible was composed of many books,
+written by unknown men; that all translations differed from each other;
+and that this book had filled the world with agony and crime.
+
+At that time I had not the remotest idea that the most learned clergymen
+in Chicago would substantially agree with me--in public. I have read
+the replies of the Rev. Robert Collyer, Dr. Thomas, Rabbi Kohler, Rev.
+Brooke Herford, Prof. Swing and Dr. Ryder, and will now ask them a few
+questions, answering them in their own words.
+
+First. Rev. Robert Collyer.
+
+_Question_. What is your opinion of the Bible? Answer. "It is a splendid
+book. It makes the noblest type of Catholics and the meanest bigots.
+Through this book men give their hearts for good to God, or for evil to
+the devil. The best argument for the intrinsic greatness of the book
+is that it can touch such wide extremes, and seem to maintain us in the
+most unparalleled cruelty, as well as the most tender mercy; that it can
+inspire purity like that of the great saints, and afford arguments in
+favor of polygamy. The Bible is the text book of ironclad Calvinism and
+sunny Universalism. It makes the Quaker quiet, and the Millerite crazy.
+It inspired the Union soldier to live and grandly die for the right, and
+Stonewall Jackson to live nobly, and die grandly for the wrong."
+
+_Question_. But, Mr. Collyer, do you really think that a book with as
+many passages in favor of wrong as right, is inspired?
+
+_Answer._ "I look upon the Old Testament as a rotting tree. When it
+falls it will fertilize a bank of violets."
+
+_Question_. Do you believe that God upheld slavery and polygamy? Do
+you believe that he ordered the killing of babes and the violation of
+maidens?
+
+_Answer._ "There is threefold inspiration in the Bible, the first,
+peerless and perfect, the word of God to man; _the second, simply and
+purely human, and then below this again, there is an inspiration born of
+an evil heart, ruthless and savage there and then as anything well can
+be_. A threefold inspiration, of heaven first, then of the earth, and
+then of hell, all in the same book, all sometimes in the same chapter,
+and then, besides, a great many things that need no inspiration."
+
+_Question_. Then after all you do not pretend that the Scriptures are
+really inspired?
+
+_Answer._ "The Scriptures make no such claim for themselves as the
+church makes for them. They leave me free to say this is false, or this
+is true. The truth even within the Bible, dies and lives, makes on this
+side and loses on that."
+
+_Question_. What do you say to the last verse in the Bible, where a
+curse is threatened to any man who takes from or adds to the book?
+
+_Answer._ "I have but one answer to this question, and it is: Let who
+will have written this, I cannot for an instant believe that it was
+written by a divine inspiration. Such dogmas and threats as these are
+not of God, but of man, and not of any man of a free spirit and heart
+eager for the truth, but a narrow man who would cripple and confine the
+human soul in its quest after the whole truth of God, and back those who
+have done the shameful things in the name of the most high."
+
+_Question_. Do you not regard such talk as "slang"?
+
+(Supposed) Answer. If an infidel had said that the writer of Revelation
+was narrow and bigoted, I might have denounced his discourse as "slang,"
+but I think that Unitarian ministers can do so with the greatest
+propriety.
+
+_Question_. Do you believe in the stories of the Bible, about Jael, and
+the sun standing still, and the walls falling at the blowing of horns?
+
+_Answer._ "They may be legends, myths, poems, or what they will, but
+they are not the word of God. So I say again, it was not the God and
+Father of us all, who inspired the woman to drive that nail crashing
+through the king's temple after she had given him that bowl of milk and
+bid him sleep in safety, but a very mean devil of hatred and revenge,
+that I should hardly expect to find in a squaw on the plains. It was not
+the ram's horns and the shouting before which the walls fell flat. If
+they went down at all, it was through good solid pounding. And not for
+an instant did the steady sun stand still or let his planet stand still
+while barbarian fought barbarian. He kept just the time then he keeps
+now. They might believe it who made the record. I do not. And since the
+whole Christian world might believe it, still we do not who gather in
+this church. A free and reasonable mind stands right in our way. Newton
+might believe it as a Christian, and disbelieve it as a philosopher.
+We stand then with the philosopher against the Christian, for we must
+believe what is true to us in the last test, and these things are not
+true."
+
+Second. Rev. Dr. Thomas.
+
+_Question_. What is your opinion of the Old Testament?
+
+_Answer._ "My opinion is that it is not one book, but many--thirty-nine
+books bound up in one. The date and authorship of most of these books
+are wholly unknown. The Hebrews wrote without vowels, and without
+dividing the letters into syllables, words, or sentences. The books
+were gathered up by Ezra. At that time only two of the Jewish tribes
+remained. All progress has ceased. In gathering up the sacred book,
+copyists exercised great liberty in making changes and additions."
+
+_Question_. Yes, we know all that, but is the Old Testament inspired?
+
+_Answer._ "There maybe the inspiration of art, of poetry, or oratory;
+of patriotism--and there are such inspirations. There are moments when
+great truths and principles come to men. They seek the man, and not the
+man them."
+
+_Question_. Yes, we all admit that, but is the Bible inspired?
+
+_Answer._ "But still I know of no way to convince anyone of spirit, and
+inspiration, and God, only as his reason may take hold of these things."
+
+_Question_. Do you think the Old Testament true?
+
+_Answer._ "The story of Eden may be an allegory. The history of the
+children of Israel may have mistakes."
+
+_Question_. Must inspiration claim infallibility? Answer. "It is a
+mistake to say that if you believe one part of the Bible you must
+believe all. Some of the thirty-nine books may be inspired, others not;
+or there may be degrees of inspiration."
+
+_Question_. Do you believe that God commanded the soldiers to kill the
+children and the married women, and save for themselves, the maidens, as
+recorded in _Numbers xxxi, 2_,
+
+Do you believe that God upheld slavery?
+
+Do you believe that God upheld polygamy?
+
+_Answer._ "The Bible may be wrong in some statements. God and right
+cannot be wrong. We must not exalt the Bible above God. It may be that
+we have claimed too much for the Bible, and thereby given not a little
+occasion for such men as Mr. Ingersoll to appear at the other extreme,
+denying too much."
+
+_Question_. What then shall be done?
+
+_Answer._ "We must take a middle ground. It is not necessary to believe
+that the bears devoured the forty-two children, nor that Jonah was
+swallowed by the whale."
+
+Third. Rev. Dr. Kohler.
+
+_Question_. What is your opinion about the Old Testament?
+
+_Answer._ "I will not make futile attempts of artificially interpreting
+the letter of the Bible so as to make it reflect the philosophical,
+moral and scientific views of our time. The Bible is a sacred record of
+humanity's childhood."
+
+_Question_. Are you an orthodox Christian?
+
+_Answer._ "No. Orthodoxy, with its face turned backward to a ruined
+temple or a dead Messiah, is fast becoming like Lot's wife, a pillar of
+salt."
+
+_Question_. Do you really believe the Old Testament was inspired?
+
+_Answer._ "I greatly acknowledge our indebtedness to men like Voltaire
+and Thomas Paine, whose bold denial and cutting wit were so instrumental
+in bringing about this glorious era of freedom, so congenial and
+blissful, particularly to the long-abused Jewish race."
+
+_Question_. Do you believe in the inspiration of the Bible?
+
+_Answer._ "Of course there is a destructive axe needed to strike down
+the old building in order to make room for the grander new. The divine
+origin claimed by the Hebrews for their national literature, was claimed
+by all nations for their old records and laws as preserved by the
+priesthood. As Moses, the Hebrew law-giver, is represented as having
+received the law from God on the holy mountain, so is Zoroaster the
+Persian, Manu the Hindoo, Minos the Cretan, Lycurgus the Spartan, and
+Numa the Roman."
+
+_Question_. Do you believe all the stories in the Bible?
+
+_Answer._ "All that can and must be said against them is that they have
+been too long retained around the arms and limbs of grown-up manhood, to
+check the spiritual progress of religion; that by Jewish ritualism and
+Christian dogmatism they became fetters unto the soul, turning the light
+of heaven into a misty haze to blind the eye, and even into a hell-fire
+of fanaticism to consume souls."
+
+_Question_. Is the Bible inspired?
+
+_Answer._ "True, the Bible is not free from errors, nor is any work of
+man and time. It abounds in childish views and offensive matter. I
+trust that it will in a time not far off be presented for common use in
+families, schools, synagogues and churches, in a refined shape, cleansed
+from all dross and chaff, and stumbling blocks in which the scoffer
+delights to dwell."
+
+Fourth. Rev. Mr. Herford.
+
+_Question_. Is the Bible true?
+
+_Answer._ "Ingersoll is very fond of saying 'The question is not, is
+the Bible inspired, but is it true?' That sounds very plausible, but you
+know as applied to _any ancient book_ it is simply nonsense."
+
+_Question_. Do you think the stories in the Bible exaggerated?
+
+_Answer._ "I dare say the numbers are immensely exaggerated."
+
+_Question_. Do you think that God upheld polygamy?
+
+_Answer._ "The truth of which simply is, that four thousand years ago
+polygamy existed among the Jews, as everywhere else on earth then, and
+even their prophets did not come to the idea of its being wrong. _But
+what is there to be indignant_ about in that?"
+
+_Question_. And so you really wonder why any man should be indignant
+at the idea that God upheld and sanctioned that beastliness called
+polygamy?
+
+_Answer._ "What is there to be indignant about in that?"
+
+
+Fifth. Prof. Swing.
+
+_Question_. What is your idea of the Bible?
+
+_Answer._ "I think it is a poem."
+
+
+Sixth. Rev. Dr. Ryder.
+
+_Question_. And what is your idea of the sacred Scriptures?
+
+_Answer._ "Like other nations, the Hebrews had their patriotic,
+descriptive, didactic and lyrical poems in the same varieties as other
+nations; but with them, unlike other nations, whatever may be the form
+of their poetry, it always possesses the characteristic of religion."
+
+_Question_. I suppose you fully appreciate the religious characteristics
+of the Song of Solomon.
+
+No answer.
+
+_Question_. Does the Bible uphold polygamy?
+
+_Answer._ "The law of Moses did not forbid it, but contained many
+provisions against its worst abuses, and such as were intended to
+restrict it within narrow limits."
+
+_Question_. So you think God corrected some of the worst abuses of
+polygamy, but preserved the institution itself?
+
+I might question many others, but have concluded not to consider those
+as members of my Bible Class who deal in calumnies and epithets.
+From the so-called "replies" of such ministers, it appears that while
+Christianity changes the heart, it does not improve the manners, and
+that one can get into heaven in the next world without having been a
+gentleman in this.
+
+It is difficult for me to express the deep and thrilling satisfaction
+I have experienced in reading the admissions of the clergy of Chicago.
+Surely, the battle of intellectual liberty is almost won, when ministers
+admit that the Bible is filled with ignorant and cruel mistakes;
+that each man has the right to think for himself, and that it is not
+necessary to believe the Scriptures in order to be saved. From the
+bottom of my heart I congratulate my pupils on the advance they have
+made, and hope soon to meet them on the serene heights of perfect
+freedom.
+
+Robert G. Ingersoll.
+
+Washington, D. C., May 7, 1879.
+
+
+
+
+TO THE INDIANAPOLIS CLERGY.
+
+
+     * The Iconoclast, Indianapolis, Indiana. 1883.
+
+THE following questions have been submitted to me by the Rev. David
+Walk, Dr. T. B. Taylor, the Rev. Myron W. Reed, and the Rev. D.
+O'Donaghue, of Indianapolis, with the request that I answer.
+
+_Question_. Is the Character of Jesus of Nazareth, as described in the
+Four Gospels, Fictional or Real?--Rev. David Walk.
+
+_Answer._ In all probability, there was a man by the name of Jesus
+Christ, who was, in his day and generation, a reformer--a man who was
+infinitely shocked at the religion of Jehovah--who became almost insane
+with pity as he contemplated the sufferings of the weak, the poor, and
+the ignorant at the hands of an intolerant, cruel, hypocritical, and
+bloodthirsty church. It is no wonder that such a man predicted the
+downfall of the temple. In all probability, he hated, at last, every
+pillar and stone in it, and despised even the "Holy of Holies." This
+man, of course, like other men, grew. He did not die with the opinion
+he held in his youth. He changed his views from time to time--fanned the
+spark of reason into a flame, and as he grew older his horizon extended
+and widened, and he became gradually a wiser, greater, and better man.
+
+I find two or three Christs described in the four Gospels. In some
+portions you would imagine that he was an exceedingly pious Jew. When he
+says that people must not swear by Jerusalem, because it is God's holy
+city, certainly no Pharisee could have gone beyond that expression.
+So, too, when it is recorded that he drove the money changers from the
+temple. This, had it happened, would have been the act simply of one who
+had respect for this temple and not for the religion taught in it.
+
+It would seem that, at first, Christ believed substantially in the
+religion of his time; that afterward, seeing its faults, he wished to
+reform it; and finally, comprehending it in all its enormity, he devoted
+his life to its destruction. This view shows that he "increased in
+stature and grew in knowledge."
+
+This view is also supported by the fact that, at first, according to
+the account, Christ distinctly stated that his gospel was not for
+the Gentiles. At that time he had altogether more patriotism than
+philosophy. In my own opinion, he was driven to like the Gentiles by
+the persecution he endured at home. He found, as every Freethinker now
+finds, that there are many saints not in churches and many devils not
+out.
+
+The character of Christ, in many particulars, as described in the
+Gospels, depends upon who wrote the Gospels. Each one endeavored to make
+a Christ to suit himself. So that Christ, after all, is a growth; and
+since the Gospels were finished, millions of men have been adding to and
+changing the character of Christ.
+
+There is another thing that should not be forgotten, and that is that
+the Gospels were not written until after the Epistles. I take it for
+granted that Paul never saw any of the Gospels, for the reason that he
+quotes none of them. There is also this remarkable fact: Paul quotes
+none of the miracles of the New Testament. He says not one word
+about the multitude being fed miraculously, not one word about the
+resurrection of Lazarus, nor of the widow's son. He had never heard of
+the lame, the halt, and the blind that had been cured; or if he had, he
+did not think these incidents of enough importance to be embalmed in an
+epistle.
+
+So we find that none of the early fathers ever quoted from the four
+Gospels. Nothing can be more certain than that the four Gospels were not
+written until after the Epistles, and nothing can be more certain than
+that the early Christians knew nothing of what we call the Gospels of
+Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. All these things have been growths. At
+first it was believed that Christ was a direct descendant from David. At
+that time the disciples of Christ, of course, were Jews. The Messiah was
+expected through the blood of David.--For that reason, the genealogy of
+Joseph, a descendant of David, was given. It was not until long after,
+that the idea came into the minds of Christians that Christ was the
+son of the Holy Ghost. If they, at the time the genealogy was given,
+believed that Christ was in fact the son of the Holy Ghost, why did they
+give the genealogy of Joseph to show that Christ was related to David?
+In other words, why should the son of God attempt to get glory out of
+the fact that he had in his veins the blood of a barbarian king? There
+is only one answer to this. The Jews expected the Messiah through
+David, and in order to prove that Christ was the Messiah, they gave the
+genealogy of Joseph. Afterward, the idea became popularized that
+Christ was the son of God, and then were interpolated the words "as
+was supposed" in the genealogy of Christ. It was a long time before the
+disciples became great enough to include the world in their scheme, and
+before they thought it proper to tell the "glad tidings of great joy"
+beyond the limits of Judea.
+
+My own opinion is that the man called Christ lived; but whether he
+lived in Palestine, or not, is of no importance. His life is worth its
+example, its moral force, its benevolence, its self-denial and heroism.
+It is of no earthly importance whether he changed water into wine or
+not. All his miracles are simply dust and darkness compared with what he
+actually said and actually did. We should be kind to each other whether
+Lazarus was raised or not. We should be just and forgiving whether
+Christ lived or not. All the miracles in the world are of no use to
+virtue, morality, or justice. Miracles belong to superstition, to
+ignorance, to fear and folly.
+
+Neither does it make any difference who wrote the Gospels. They are
+worth the truth that is in them and no more.
+
+The words of Paul are often quoted, that "all scripture is given by
+inspiration of God." Of course that could not have applied to anything
+written after that time. It could have applied only to the Scriptures
+then written and then known. It is perfectly clear that the four Gospels
+were not at that time written, and therefore this statement of Paul's
+does not apply to the four Gospels. Neither does it apply to anything
+written after that statement was written. Neither does it apply to that
+statement. If it applied to anything it was the Old Testament, and not
+the New.
+
+Christ has been belittled by his worshipers. When stripped of the
+miraculous; when allowed to be, not divine but divinely human, he will
+have gained a thousandfold in the estimation of mankind. I think of him
+as I do of Buddha, as I do of Confucius, of Epictetus, of Bruno. I place
+him with the great, the generous, the self-denying of the earth, and for
+the man Christ, I feel only admiration and respect. I think he was in
+many things mistaken. His reliance upon the goodness of God was perfect.
+He seemed to believe that his father in heaven would protect him. He
+thought that if God clothed the lilies of the field in beauty, if he
+provided for the sparrows, he would surely protect a perfectly just
+and loving man. In this he was mistaken; and in the darkness of death,
+overwhelmed, he cried out: "Why hast thou forsaken me?"
+
+I do not believe that Christ ever claimed to be divine; ever claimed to
+be inspired; ever claimed to work a miracle. In short, I believe that he
+was an honest man. These claims were all put in his mouth by others--by
+mistaken friends, by ignorant worshipers, by zealous and credulous
+followers, and sometimes by dishonest and designing priests. This has
+happened to all the great men of the world. All historical characters
+are, in part, deformed or reformed by fiction. There was a man by the
+name of George Washington, but no such George Washington ever existed
+as we find portrayed in history. The historical Caesar never lived. The
+historical Mohammed is simply a myth. It is the task of modern criticism
+to rescue these characters, and in the mass of superstitious rubbish to
+find the actual man. Christians borrowed the old clothes of the Olympian
+gods and gave them to Christ. To me, Christ the man is far greater than
+Christ the god.
+
+To me, it has always been a matter of wonder that Christ said nothing as
+to the obligation man is under to his country, nothing as to the rights
+of the people as against the wish and will of kings, nothing against the
+frightful system of human slavery--almost universal in his time. What
+he did not say is altogether more wonderful than what he did say. It is
+marvelous that he said nothing upon the subject of intemperance, nothing
+about education, nothing about philosophy, nothing about nature, nothing
+about art. He said nothing in favor of the home, except to offer a
+reward to those who would desert their wives and families. Of course,
+I do not believe that he said the words that were attributed to him, in
+which a reward is offered to any man who will desert his kindred. But if
+we take the account given in the four Gospels as the true account, then
+Christ did offer a reward to a father who would desert his children. It
+has always been contended that he was a perfect example of mankind, and
+yet he never married. As a result of what he did not teach in connection
+with what he did teach, his followers saw no harm in slavery, no harm
+in polygamy. They belittled this world and exaggerated the importance of
+the next. They consoled the slave by telling him that in a little while
+he would exchange his chains for wings. They comforted the captive by
+saying that in a few days he would leave his dungeon for the bowers
+of Paradise. His followers believed that he had said that "Whosoever
+believeth not shall be damned." This passage was the cross upon which
+intellectual liberty was crucified.
+
+If Christ had given us the laws of health; if he had told us how to
+cure disease by natural means; if he had set the captive free; if he had
+crowned the people with their rightful power; if he had placed the home
+above the church; if he had broken all the mental chains; if he had
+flooded all the caves and dens of fear with light, and filled the future
+with a common joy, he would in truth have been the Savior of this world.
+
+_Question_. How do you account for the difference between the Christian
+and other modern civilizations?
+
+_Answer._ I account for the difference between men by the difference in
+their ancestry and surroundings--the difference in soil, climate, food,
+and employment. There would be no civilization in England were it not
+for the Gulf Stream. There would have been very little here had it not
+been for the discovery of Columbus. And even now on this continent there
+would be but little civilization had the soil been poor. I might ask:
+How do you account for the civilization of Egypt? At one time that was
+the greatest civilization in the world. Did that fact prove that the
+Egyptian religion was of divine origin? So, too, there was a time when
+the civilization of India was beyond all others. Does that prove that
+Vishnu was a God? Greece dominated the intellectual world for centuries.
+Does that fact absolutely prove that Zeus was the creator of heaven and
+earth? The same may be said of Rome. There was a time when Rome governed
+the world, and yet I have always had my doubts as to the truth of the
+Roman mythology. As a matter of fact, Rome was far better than any
+Christian nation ever was to the end of the seventeenth century. A
+thousand years of Christian rule produced no fellow for the greatest
+of Rome. There were no poets the equals of Horace or Virgil, no
+philosophers as great as Lucretius, no orators like Cicero, no emperors
+like Marcus Aurelius, no women like the mothers of Rome.
+
+The civilization of a country may be hindered by a religion, but it
+has never been increased by any form of superstition. When America was
+discovered it had the same effect upon Europe that it would have, for
+instance, upon the city of Chicago to have Lake Michigan put the other
+side of it. The Mediterranean lost its trade. The centers of commerce
+became deserted. The prow of the world turned westward, and, as a
+result, France, England, and all countries bordering on the
+Atlantic became prosperous. The world has really been civilized by
+discoverers--by thinkers. The man who invented powder, and by that means
+released hundreds of thousands of men from the occupations of war, did
+more for mankind than religion. The inventor of paper--and he was not
+a Christian--did more than all the early fathers for mankind. The
+inventors of plows, of sickles, of cradles, of reapers; the inventors
+of wagons, coaches, locomotives; the inventors of skiffs, sail-vessels,
+steamships; the men who have made looms--in short, the inventors of
+all useful things--they are the civilizers taken in connection with the
+great thinkers, the poets, the musicians, the actors, the painters, the
+sculptors. The men who have invented the useful, and the men who have
+made the useful beautiful, are the real civilizers of mankind.
+
+The priests, in all ages, have been hindrances--stumbling-blocks. They
+have prevented man from using his reason. They have told ghost stories
+to courage until courage became fear. They have done all in their power
+to keep men from growing intellectually, to keep the world in a state of
+childhood, that they themselves might be deemed great and good and wise.
+They have always known that their reputation for wisdom depended upon
+the ignorance of the people.
+
+I account for the civilization of France by such men as Voltaire. He did
+good by assisting to destroy the church. Luther did good exactly in the
+same way. He did harm in building another church. I account, in part,
+for the civilization of England by the fact that she had interests
+greater than the church could control; and by the further fact that her
+greatest men cared nothing for the church. I account in part for the
+civilization of America by the fact that our fathers were wise enough,
+and jealous of each other enough, to absolutely divorce church and
+state. They regarded the church as a dangerous mistress--one not fit to
+govern a president. This divorce was obtained because men like Jefferson
+and Paine were at that time prominent in the councils of the people.
+There is this peculiarity in our country--the only men who can be
+trusted with human liberty are the ones who are not to be angels
+hereafter. Liberty is safe so long as the sinners have an opportunity to
+be heard.
+
+Neither must we imagine that our civilization is the only one in the
+world. They had no locks and keys in Japan until that country was
+visited by Christians, and they are now used only in those ports where
+Christians are allowed to enter. It has often been claimed that there
+is but one way to make a man temperate, and that is by making him
+a Christian; and this is claimed in face of the fact that Christian
+nations are the most intemperate in the world. For nearly thirteen
+centuries the followers of Mohammed have been absolute teetotalers--not
+one drunkard under the flag of the star and crescent. Wherever, in
+Turkey, a man is seen under the influence of liquor, they call him a
+Christian. You must also remember that almost every Christian nation
+has held slaves. Only a few years ago England was engaged in the slave
+trade. A little while before that our Puritan ancestors sold white
+Quaker children in the Barbadoes, and traded them for rum, sugar, and
+negro slaves. Even now the latest champion of Christianity upholds
+slavery, polygamy, and wars of extermination.
+
+Sometimes I suspect that our own civilization is not altogether perfect.
+When I think of the penitentiaries crammed to suffocation, and of the
+many who ought to be in; of the want, the filth, the depravity of the
+great cities; of the starvation in the manufacturing centers of Great
+Britain, and, in fact, of all Europe; when I see women working like
+beasts of burden, and little children deprived, not simply of education,
+but of air, light and food, there is a suspicion in my mind that
+Christian civilization is not a complete and overwhelming success.
+
+After all, I am compelled to account for the advance that we have made,
+by the discoveries and inventions of men of genius. For the future I
+rely upon the sciences; upon the cultivation of the intellect. I rely
+upon labor; upon human interests in this world; upon the love of wife
+and children and home. I do not rely upon sacred books, but upon good
+men and women. I do not rely upon superstition, but upon knowledge; not
+upon miracles, but upon facts; not upon the dead, but upon the living;
+and when we become absolutely civilized, we shall look back upon the
+superstitions of the world, not simply with contempt, but with pity.
+
+Neither do I rely upon missionaries to convert those whom we are pleased
+to call "the heathen." Honest commerce is the great civilizer. We
+exchange ideas when we exchange fabrics. The effort to force a religion
+upon the people always ends in war. Commerce, founded upon mutual
+advantage, makes peace. An honest merchant is better than a missionary.
+
+Spain was blessed with what is called Christian civilization, and yet,
+for hundreds of years, that government was simply an organized crime.
+When one pronounces the name of Spain, he thinks of the invasion of
+the New World, the persecution in the Netherlands, the expulsion of the
+Jews, and the Inquisition. Even to-day, the Christian nations of Europe
+preserve themselves from each other by bayonet and ball. Prussia has a
+standing army of six hundred thousand men, France a half million, and
+all their neighbors a like proportion. These countries are civilized.
+They are in the enjoyment of Christian governments--have their hundreds
+of a thousands of ministers, and the land covered with cathedrals and
+churches--and yet every nation is nearly beggared by keeping armies in
+the field. Christian kings have no confidence in the promises of each
+other. What they call peace is the little time necessarily spent in
+reloading their guns. England has hundreds of ships of war to protect
+her commerce from other Christians, and to force China to open her ports
+to the opium trade. Only the other day the Prime Minister of China, in
+one of his dispatches to the English government, used substantially the
+following language: "England regards the opium question simply as one of
+trade, but to China, it has a moral aspect." Think of Christian England
+carrying death and desolation to hundreds of thousands in the name of
+trade. Then think of heathen China protesting in the name of morality.
+At the same time England has the impudence to send missionaries to
+China.
+
+What has been called Christianity has been a disturber of the public
+peace in all countries and at all times. Nothing has so alienated
+nations, nothing has so destroyed the natural justice of mankind, as
+what has been known as religion. The idea that all men must worship the
+same God, believe the same dogmas, has for thousands of years plucked
+with bloody hands the flower of pity from the human heart.
+
+Our civilization is not Christian. It does not come from the skies.
+It is not a result of "inspiration." It is the child of invention, of
+discovery, of applied knowledge--that is to say, of science. When man
+becomes great and grand enough to admit that all have equal rights;
+when thought is untrammeled; when worship shall consist in doing
+useful things; when religion means the discharge of obligations to our
+fellow-men, then, and not until then, will the world be civilized.
+
+_Question_. Since Laplace and other most distinguished astronomers hold
+to the theory that the earth was originally in a gaseous state, and then
+a molten mass in which the germs, even, of vegetable or animal life,
+could not exist, how do you account for the origin of life on this
+planet without a "Creator"?--Dr. T. B. Taylor.
+
+_Answer._ Whether or not "the earth was originally in a gaseous state
+and afterwards a molten mass in which the germs of vegetable and animal
+life could not exist," I do not know. My belief is that the earth as it
+is, and as it was, taken in connection with the influence of the sun,
+and of other planets, produced whatever has existed or does exist on
+the earth. I do not see why gas would not need a "creator" as much as
+a vegetable. Neither can I imagine that there is any more necessity for
+some one to start life than to start a molten mass. There may be now
+portions of the world in which there is not one particle of vegetable
+life. It may be that on the wide waste fields of the Arctic zone
+there are places where no vegetable life exists, and there may be many
+thousand miles where no animal life can be found. But if the poles of
+the earth could be changed, and if the Arctic zone could be placed in a
+different relative position to the sun, the snows would melt, the hills
+would appear, and in a little while even the rocks would be clothed with
+vegetation. After a time vegetation would produce more soil, and in a
+few thousand years forests would be filled with beasts and birds.
+
+I think it was Sir William Thomson who, in his effort to account for the
+origin of life upon this earth, stated that it might have come from some
+meteoric stone falling from some other planet having in it the germs of
+life. What would you think of a farmer who would prepare his land and
+wait to have it planted by meteoric stones? So, what would you think
+of a Deity who would make a world like this, and allow it to whirl
+thousands and millions of years, barren as a gravestone, waiting for
+some vagrant comet to sow the seeds of life?
+
+I believe that back of animal life is the vegetable, and back of the
+vegetable, it may be, is the mineral. It may be that crystallization is
+the first step toward what we call life, and yet I believe life is back
+of that. In my judgment, if the earth ever was in a gaseous state, it
+was filled with life. These are subjects about which we know but little.
+How do you account for chemistry? How do you account for the fact that
+just so many particles of one kind seek the society of just so many
+particles of another, and when they meet they instantly form a glad and
+lasting union? How do you know but atoms have love and hatred? How
+do you know that the vegetable does not enjoy growing, and that
+crystallization itself is not an expression of delight? How do you know
+that a vine bursting into flower does not feel a thrill? We find sex in
+the meanest weeds--how can you say they have no loves?
+
+After all, of what use is it to search for a creator? The difficulty is
+not thus solved. You leave your creator as much in need of a creator as
+anything your creator is supposed to have created. The bottom of your
+stairs rests on nothing, and the top of your stairs leans upon nothing.
+You have reached no solution.
+
+The word "God" is simply born of our ignorance. We go as far as we can,
+and we say the rest of the way is "God." We look as far as we can,
+and beyond the horizon, where there is nought so far as we know but
+blindness, we place our Deity. We see an infinitesimal segment of a
+circle, and we say the rest is "God."
+
+Man must give up searching for the origin of anything. No one knows the
+origin of life, or of matter, or of what we call mind. The whence and
+the whither are questions that no man can answer. In the presence of
+these questions all intellects are upon a level. The barbarian knows
+exactly the same as the scientist, the fool as the philosopher. Only
+those who think that they have had some supernatural information pretend
+to answer these questions, and the unknowable, the impossible, the
+unfathomable, is the realm wholly occupied by the "inspired."
+
+We are satisfied that all organized things must have had a beginning,
+but we cannot conceive that matter commenced to be. Forms change,
+but substance remains eternally the same. A beginning of substance is
+unthinkable. It is just as easy to conceive of anything commencing to
+exist _without_ a cause as _with_ a cause. There must be something for
+cause to operate upon. Cause operating upon nothing--were such a thing
+possible--would produce nothing. There can be no relation between cause
+and nothing. We can understand how things can be arranged, joined or
+separated--and how relations can be changed or destroyed, but we cannot
+conceive of creation--of nothing being changed into something, nor of
+something being made--except from preexisting materials.
+
+_Question_. Since the universal testimony of the ages is in the
+affirmative of phenomena that attest the continued existence of
+man after death--which testimony is overwhelmingly sustained by the
+phenomena of the nineteenth century--what further evidence should
+thoughtful people require in order to settle the question, "Does death
+end all?"
+
+_Answer._ I admit that in all ages men have believed in spooks and
+ghosts and signs and wonders. This, however, proves nothing. Men have
+for thousands of ages believed the impossible, and worshiped the absurd.
+Our ancestors have worshiped snakes and birds and beasts. I do not admit
+that any ghost ever existed. I know that no miracle was ever performed
+except in imagination; and what you are pleased to call the "phenomena
+of the nineteenth century," I fear are on an exact equality with the
+phenomena of the Dark Ages.
+
+We do not yet understand the action of the brain. No one knows the
+origin of a thought. No one knows how he thinks, or why he thinks, any
+more than one knows why or how his heart beats. People, I imagine, have
+always had dreams. In dreams they often met persons whom they knew to be
+dead, and it may be that much of the philosophy of the present was born
+of dreams. I cannot admit that anything supernatural ever has happened
+or ever will happen. I cannot admit the truth of what you call the
+"phenomena of the nineteenth century," if by such "phenomena" you mean
+the reappearance of the dead. I do not deny the existence of a future
+state, because I do not know. Neither do I aver that there is one,
+because I do not know. Upon this question I am simply honest. I find
+that people who believe in immortality--or at least those who say they
+do--are just as afraid of death as anybody else. I find that the most
+devout Christian weeps as bitterly above his dead, as the man who says
+that death ends all. You see the promises are so far away, and the dead
+are so near. Still, I do not say that man is not immortal; but I do say
+that there is nothing in the Bible to show that he is. The Old
+Testament has not a word upon the subject--except to show us how we lost
+immortality. According to that book, man was driven from the Garden of
+Eden, lest he should put forth his hand and eat of the fruit of the tree
+of life and live forever. So the fact is, the Old Testament shows us
+how we lost immortality. In the New Testament we are told to seek for
+immortality, and it is also stated that "God alone hath immortality."
+
+There is this curious thing about Christians and Spiritualists: The
+Spiritualists laugh at the Christians for believing the miracles of
+the New Testament; they laugh at them for believing the story about the
+witch of Endor. And then the Christians laugh at the Spiritualists for
+believing that the same kind of things happen now. As a matter of fact,
+the Spiritualists have the best of it, because their witnesses are now
+living, whereas the Christians take simply the word of the dead--of
+men they never saw and of men about whom they know nothing. The
+Spiritualist, at least, takes the testimony of men and women that he can
+cross-examine. It would seem as if these gentlemen ought to make
+common cause. Then the Christians could prove their miracles by the
+Spiritualists, and the Spiritualists could prove their "phenomena" by
+the Christians.
+
+I believe that thoughtful people require some additional testimony in
+order to settle the question, "Does death end all?" If the dead return
+to this world they should bring us information of value.
+
+There are thousands of questions that studious historians and savants
+are endeavoring to settle--questions of history, of philosophy, of law,
+of art, upon which a few intelligent dead ought to be able to shed a
+flood of light. All the questions of the past ought to be settled. Some
+modern ghosts ought to get acquainted with some of the Pharaohs, and
+give us an outline of the history of Egypt. They ought to be able to
+read the arrow-headed writing and all the records of the past. The
+hieroglyphics of all ancient peoples should be unlocked, and thoughts
+and facts that have been imprisoned for so many thousand years should be
+released and once again allowed to visit brains. The Spiritualists ought
+to be able to give us the history of buried cities. They should clothe
+with life the dust of all the past. If they could only bring us valuable
+information; if they could only tell us about some steamer in distress
+so that succor could be sent; if they could only do something useful,
+the world would cheerfully accept their theories and admit their
+"facts." I think that thoughtful people have the right to demand such
+evidence. I would like to have the spirits give us the history of
+all the books of the New Testament and tell us who first told of the
+miracles. If they could give us the history of any religion, or nation,
+or anything, I should have far more confidence in the "phenomena of the
+nineteenth century."
+
+There is one thing about the Spiritualists I like, and that is, they are
+liberal. They give to others the rights they claim for themselves. They
+do not pollute their souls with the dogma of eternal pain. They do
+not slander and persecute even those who deny their "phenomena." But
+I cannot admit that they have furnished conclusive evidence that death
+does not end all. Beyond the horizon of this life we have not seen. From
+the mysterious beyond no messenger has come to me.
+
+For the whole world I would not blot from the sky of the future a single
+star. Arched by the bow of hope let the dead sleep.
+
+_Question_. How, when, where, and by whom was our present calendar
+originated,--that is "Anno Domini,"--and what event in the history of
+the nations does it establish as a fact, if not the birth of Jesus of
+Nazareth?
+
+_Answer._ I have already said, in answer to a question by another
+gentleman, that I believe the man Jesus Christ existed, and we now date
+from somewhere near his birth. I very much doubt about his having been
+born on Christmas, because in reading other religions, I find that that
+time has been celebrated for thousands of years, and the cause of it is
+this:
+
+About the 21st or 22d of December is the shortest day. After that the
+days begin to lengthen and the sun comes back, and for many centuries
+in most nations they had a festival in commemoration of that event. The
+Christians, I presume, adopted this day, and made the birth of Christ
+fit it. Three months afterward--the 21st of March--the days and nights
+again become equal, and the day then begins to lengthen. For centuries
+the nations living in the temperate zones have held festivals to
+commemorate the coming of spring--the yearly miracle of leaf, of bud
+and flower. This is the celebration known as Easter, and the Christians
+adopted that in commemoration of Christ's resurrection. So that, as a
+matter of fact, these festivals of Christmas and Easter do not even tend
+to show that they stand for or are in any way connected with the birth
+or resurrection of Christ. In fact the evidence is overwhelmingly the
+other way.
+
+While we are on the calendar business it may be well enough to say that
+we get our numerals from the Arabs, from whom also we obtained our ideas
+of algebra. The higher mathematics came to us from the same source.
+So from the Arabs we receive chemistry, and our first true notions of
+geography. They gave us also paper and cotton.
+
+Owing to the fact that the earth does not make its circuit in the exact
+time of three hundred and sixty-five days and a quarter, and owing to
+the fact that it was a long time before any near approach was made to
+the actual time, all calendars after awhile became too inaccurate for
+general use, and they were from time to time changed.
+
+Right here, it may be well enough to remark, that all the monuments and
+festivals in the world are not sufficient to establish an impossible
+event. No amount of monumental testimony, no amount of living evidence,
+can substantiate a miracle. The monument only proves the _belief_ of the
+builders.
+
+If we rely upon the evidence of monuments, calendars, dates, and
+festivals, all the religions on the earth can be substantiated. Turkey
+is filled with such monuments and much of the time wasted in such
+festivals. We celebrate the Fourth of July, but such celebration does
+not even tend to prove that God, by his special providence, protected
+Washington from the arrows of an Indian. The Hebrews celebrate what is
+called the Passover, but this celebration does not even tend to prove
+that the angel of the Lord put blood on the door-posts in Egypt. The
+Mohammedans celebrate to-day the flight of Mohammed, but that does not
+tend to prove that Mohammed was inspired and was a prophet of God.
+
+Nobody can change a falsehood to a truth by the erection of a monument.
+Monuments simply prove that people endeavor to substantiate truths and
+falsehoods by the same means.
+
+_Question_. Letting the question as to hell hereafter rest for the
+present, how do you account for the hell here--namely, the existence
+of pain? There are people who, by no fault of their own, are at this
+present time in misery. If for these there is no life to come, their
+existence is a mistake; but if there is a life to come, it may be that
+the sequel to the acts of the play to come will justify the pain and
+misery of this present time?--Rev. Myron W. Reed.
+
+_Answer._ There are four principal theories:
+
+_First_--That there is behind the universe a being of infinite power and
+wisdom, kindness, and justice.
+
+_Second_--That the universe has existed from eternity, and that it is
+the only eternal existence, and that behind it is no creator.
+
+_Third_--That there is a God who made the universe, but who is not
+all-powerful and who is, under the circumstances, doing the best he can.
+
+_Fourth_--That there is an all-powerful God who made the universe, and
+that there is also a nearly all-powerful devil, and this devil ravels
+about as fast as this God knits.
+
+By the last theory, as taught by Plato, it is extremely easy to account
+for the misery in this world. If we admit that there is a malevolent
+being with power enough, and with cunning enough, to frequently
+circumvent God, the problem of evil becomes solved so far as this world
+is concerned. But why this being was evil is still unsolved; why the
+devil is malevolent is still a mystery. Consequently you will have to go
+back of this world, on that theory, to account for the origin of evil.
+If this devil always existed, then, of course, the universe at one time
+was inhabited only by this God and this devil.
+
+If the third theory is correct, we can account for the fact that God
+does not see to it that justice is always done.
+
+If the second theory is true, that the universe has existed from
+eternity, and is without a creator, then we must account for the
+existence of evil and good, not by personalities behind the universe,
+but by the nature of things.
+
+If there is an infinitely good and wise being who created all, it seems
+to me that he should have made a world in which innocence should be a
+sufficient shield. He should have made a world where the just man should
+have nothing to fear.
+
+My belief is this: We are surrounded by obstacles. We are filled
+with wants. We must have clothes. We must have food. We must protect
+ourselves from sun and storm, from heat and cold. In our conflict with
+these obstacles, with each other, and with what may be called the forces
+of nature, all do not succeed. It is a fact in nature that like
+begets like; that man gives his constitution, at least in part, to his
+children; that weakness and strength are in some degree both hereditary.
+This is a fact in nature. I do not hold any god responsible for this
+fact--filled as it is with pain and joy. But it seems to me that an
+infinite God should so have arranged matters that the bad would not
+pass--that it would die with its possessor--that the good should
+survive, and that the man should give to his son, not the result of his
+vices, but the fruit of his virtues.
+
+I cannot see why we should expect an infinite God to do better in
+another world than he does in this. If he allows injustice to prevail
+here, why will he not allow the same thing in the world to come? If
+there is any being with power to prevent it, why is crime permitted? If
+a man standing upon the railway should ascertain that a bridge had been
+carried off by a flood, and if he also knew that the train was coming
+filled with men, women, and children; with husbands going to their
+wives, and wives rejoining their families; if he made no effort to
+stop that train; if he simply sat down by the roadside to witness the
+catastrophe, and so remained until the train dashed off the precipice,
+and its load of life became a mass of quivering flesh, he would be
+denounced by every good man as the most monstrous of human beings. And
+yet this is exactly what the supposed God does. He, if he exists, sees
+the train rushing to the gulf. He gives no notice. He sees the ship
+rushing for the hidden rock. He makes no sign. And he so constructed
+the world that assassins lurk in the air--hide even in the sunshine--and
+when we imagine that we are breathing the breath of life, we are taking
+into ourselves the seeds of death.
+
+There are two facts inconsistent in my mind--a martyr and a God.
+Injustice upon earth renders the justice of heaven impossible.
+
+I would not take from those suffering in this world the hope of
+happiness hereafter. My principal object has been to take away from them
+the fear of eternal pain hereafter. Still, it is impossible for me to
+explain the facts by which I am surrounded, if I admit the existence of
+an infinite Being. I find in this world that physical and mental evils
+afflict the good. It seems to me that I have the same reason to expect
+the bad to be rewarded hereafter. I have no right to suppose that
+infinite wisdom will ever know any more, or that infinite benevolence
+will increase in kindness, or that the justice of the eternal can
+change. If, then, this eternal being allows the good to suffer pain
+here, what right have we to say that he will not allow them to suffer
+forever?
+
+Some people have insisted that this life is a kind of school for the
+production of self-denying men and women--that is, for the production
+of character. The statistics show that a large majority die under five
+years of age. What would we think of a schoolmaster who killed the most
+of his pupils the first day? If this doctrine is true, and if manhood
+cannot be produced in heaven, those who die in childhood are infinitely
+unfortunate.
+
+I admit that, although I do not understand the subject, still, all pain,
+all misery may be for the best. I do not know. If there is an infinitely
+wise Being, who is also infinitely powerful, then everything that
+happens must be for the best. That philosophy of special providence,
+going to the extreme, is infinitely better than most of the Christian
+creeds. There seems to be no half-way house between special providence
+and atheism. You know some of the Buddhists say that when a man commits
+murder, that is the best thing he could have done, and that to be
+murdered was the best thing that could have happened to the killed. They
+insist that every step taken is the necessary step and the best step;
+that crimes are as necessary as virtues, and that the fruit of crime and
+virtue is finally the same.
+
+But whatever theories we have, we have at last to be governed by the
+facts. We are in a world where vice, deformity, weakness, and disease
+are hereditary. In the presence of this immense and solemn truth rises
+the religion of the body. Every man should refuse to increase the misery
+of this world. And it may be that the time will come when man will be
+great enough and grand enough utterly to refrain from the propagation
+of disease and deformity, and when only the healthy will be fathers
+and mothers. We do know that the misery in this world can be lessened;
+consequently I believe in the religion of this world. And whether there
+is a heaven or hell here, or hereafter, every good man has enough to
+do to make this world a little better than it is. Millions of lives are
+wasted in the vain effort to find the origin of things, and the destiny
+of man. This world has been neglected. We have been taught that life
+should be merely a preparation for death.
+
+To avoid pain we must know the conditions of health. For the
+accomplishment of this end we must rely upon investigation instead
+of faith, upon labor in place of prayer. Most misery is produced by
+ignorance. Passions sow the seeds of pain.
+
+_Question_. State with what words you can comfort those who have, by
+their own fault, or by the fault of others, found this life not worth
+living?
+
+_Answer._ If there is no life beyond this, and so believing I come to
+the bedside of the dying--of one whose life has been a failure--a "life
+not worth living," I could at least say to such an one, "Your failure
+ends with your death. Beyond the tomb there is nothing for you--neither
+pain nor misery, neither grief nor joy." But if I were a good orthodox
+Christen, then I would have to say to this man, "Your life has been a
+failure; you have not been a Christian, and the failure will be extended
+eternally; you have not only been a failure for a time, but you will be
+a failure forever."
+
+Admitting that there is another world, and that the man's life had been
+a failure in this, then I should say to him, "If you live again, you
+will have the eternal opportunity to reform. There will be no time, no
+date, no matter how many millions and billions of ages may have passed
+away, at which you will not have the opportunity of doing right."
+
+Under no circumstances could I consistently say to this man: "Although
+your life has been a failure; although you have made hundreds and
+thousands of others suffer; although you have deceived and betrayed the
+woman who loved you; although you have murdered your benefactor; still,
+if you will now repent and believe a something that is unreasonable
+or reasonable to your mind, you will, at the moment of death, be
+transferred to a world of eternal joy." This I could not say. I would
+tell him, "If you die a bad man here, you will commence the life to
+come with the same character you leave this. Character cannot be made by
+another for you. You must be the architect of your own." There is to me
+unspeakably more comfort in the idea that every failure ends here, than
+that it is to be perpetuated forever.
+
+How can a Christian comfort the mother of a girl who has died without
+believing in Christ? What doctrine is there in Christianity to wipe away
+her tears? What words of comfort can you offer to the mother whose brave
+boy fell in defence of his country, she knowing and you knowing, that
+the boy was not a Christian, that he did not believe in the Bible, and
+had no faith in the blood of the atonement? What words of comfort have
+you for such fathers and for such mothers?
+
+To me, there is no doctrine so infinitely absurd as the idea that this
+life is a probationary state--that the few moments spent here decide the
+fate of a human soul forever. Nothing can be conceived more merciless,
+more unjust. I am doing all I can to destroy that doctrine. I want, if
+possible, to get the shadow of hell from the human heart.
+
+Why has any life been a failure here? If God is a being of infinite
+wisdom and kindness, why does he make failures? What excuse has infinite
+wisdom for peopling the world with savages? Why should one feel grateful
+to God for having made him with a poor, weak and diseased brain; for
+having allowed him to be the heir of consumption, of scrofula, or of
+insanity? Why should one thank God, who lived and died a slave?
+
+After all, is it not of more importance to speak the absolute truth?
+Is it not manlier to tell the fact than to endeavor to convey comfort
+through falsehood? People must reap not only what they sow, but what
+others have sown. The people of the whole world are united in spite of
+themselves.
+
+Next to telling a man, whose life has been a failure, that he is to
+enjoy an immortality of delight--next to that, is to assure him that a
+place of eternal punishment does not exist.
+
+After all, there are but few lives worth living in any great and
+splendid sense. Nature seems filled with failure, and she has made no
+exception in favor of man. To the greatest, to the most successful,
+there comes a time when the fevered lips of life long for the cool,
+delicious kiss of death--when, tired of the dust and glare of day, they
+hear with joy the rustling garments of the night.
+
+Archibald Armstrong and Jonathan Newgate were fast friends. Their views
+in regard to the question of a future life, and the existence of a God,
+were in perfect accord. They said:
+
+"'We know so little about these matters that we are not justified in
+giving them any serious consideration. Our motto and rule of life shall
+be for each one to make himself as comfortable as he can, and enjoy
+every pleasure within his reach, not allowing himself to be influenced
+at all by thoughts of a future life.'
+
+"Both had some money. Archibald had a large amount. Once upon a time
+when no human eye saw him--and he had no belief in a God--Jonathan stole
+every dollar of his friend's wealth, leaving him penniless. He had no
+fear, no remorse; no one saw him do the deed. He became rich, enjoyed
+life immensely, lived in contentment and pleasure, until in mellow old
+age he went the way of all flesh. Archibald fared badly. The odds were
+against him.
+
+"His money was gone. He lived in penury and discontent, dissatisfied with
+mankind and with himself, until at last, overcome by misfortune, and
+depressed by an incurable malady, he sought rest in painless suicide."
+
+_Question_. What are we to think of the rule of life laid down by these
+men? Was either of them inconsistent or illogical? Is there no remedy to
+correct such irregularities?--Rev. D. O'Donaghue.
+
+_Answer._ The Rev. Mr. O'Donaghue seems to entertain strange ideas as
+to right and wrong. He tells us that Archibald Armstrong and Jonathan
+Newgate concluded to make themselves as comfortable as they could and
+enjoy every pleasure within their reach, and the Rev. Mr. O'Donaghue
+states that one of the pleasures within the reach of Mr. Newgate was to
+steal what little money Mr. Armstrong had. Does the reverend gentleman
+think that Mr. Newgate made or could make himself comfortable in that
+way? He tells us that Mr. Newgate "had no remorse,"--that he "became
+rich and enjoyed life immensely,"--that he "lived in contentment and
+pleasure, until, in mellow old age, he went the way of all flesh."
+
+Does the reverend gentleman really believe that a man can steal without
+fear, without remorse? Does he really suppose that one can enjoy the
+fruits of theft, that a criminal can live a contented and happy life,
+that one who has robbed his friend can reach a mellow and delightful old
+age? Is this the philosophy of the Rev. Mr. O'Donaghue?
+
+And right here I may be permitted to ask, Why did the Rev. Mr.
+O'Donaghue's God allow a thief to live without fear, without remorse, to
+enjoy life immensely and to reach a mellow old age? And why did he allow
+Mr. Armstrong, who had been robbed, to live in penury and discontent,
+until at last, overcome by misfortune, he sought rest in suicide? Does
+the Rev. Mr. O'Donaghue mean to say that if there is no future life it
+is wise to steal in this? If the grave is the eternal home, would the
+Rev. Mr. O'Donaghue advise people to commit crimes in order that they
+may enjoy this life? Such is not my philosophy. Whether there is a God
+or not, truth is better than falsehood. Whether there is a heaven or
+hell, honesty is always the best policy. There is no world, and can be
+none, where vice can sow the seed of crime and reap the sheaves of joy.
+
+According to my view, Mr. Armstrong was altogether more fortunate than
+Mr. Newgate. I had rather be robbed than to be a robber, and I had
+rather be of such a disposition that I would be driven to suicide by
+misfortune than to live in contentment upon the misfortunes of
+others. The reverend gentleman, however, should have made his question
+complete--he should have gone the entire distance. He should have added
+that Mr. Newgate, after having reached a mellow old age, was suddenly
+converted, joined the church, and died in the odor of sanctity on the
+very day that his victim committed suicide.
+
+But I will answer the fable of the reverend gentleman with a fact.
+
+A young man was in love with a girl. She was young, beautiful, and
+trustful. She belonged to no church--knew nothing about a future
+world--basked in the sunshine of this. All her life had been filled with
+gentle deeds. The tears of pity had sanctified her cheeks. She
+believed in no religion, worshiped no God, believed no Bible, but loved
+everything. Her lover in a fit of jealous rage murdered her. He was
+tried; convicted; a motion for a new trial overruled and a pardon
+refused. In his cell, in the shadow of death, he was converted--he
+became a Catholic. With the white lips of fear he confessed to a priest.
+He received the sacrament.
+
+He was hanged, and from the rope's end winged his way to the realms of
+bliss. For months the murdered girl had suffered all the pains and pangs
+of hell.
+
+The poor girl will endure the agony of the damned forever, while her
+murderer will be ravished with angelic chant and song. Such is the
+justice of the orthodox God.
+
+Allow me to use the language of the reverend gentleman: "Is there no
+remedy to correct such irregularities?"
+
+As long as the idea of eternal punishment remains a part of the
+Christian system, that system will be opposed by every man of heart and
+brain. Of all religious dogmas it is the most shocking, infamous,
+and absurd. The preachers of this doctrine are the enemies of human
+happiness; they are the assassins of natural joy. Every father, every
+mother, every good man, every loving woman, should hold this doctrine in
+abhorrence; they should refuse to pay men for preaching it; they should
+not build churches in which this infamy is taught; they should teach
+their little children that it is a lie; they should take this horror
+from childhood's heart--a horror that makes the cradle as terrible as
+the coffin.
+
+
+
+
+THE BROOKLYN DIVINES.
+
+
+     * Brooklyn Union, 1883.
+
+
+_Question_. The clergymen who have been interviewed, almost unanimously
+have declared that the church is suffering very little from the
+skepticism of the day, and that the influence of the scientific writers,
+whose opinions are regarded as atheistic or infidel, is not great; and
+that the books of such writers are not read as much as some people think
+they are. What is your opinion with regard to that subject?
+
+_Answer._ It is natural for a man to defend his business, to stand by
+his class, his caste, his creed. And I suppose this accounts for
+the ministers all saying that infidelity is not on the increase. By
+comparing long periods of time, it is very easy to see the progress that
+has been made. Only a few years ago men who are now considered quite
+orthodox would have been imprisoned, or at least mobbed, for heresy.
+Only a few years ago men like Huxley and Tyndall and Spencer and
+Darwin and Humboldt would have been considered as the most infamous of
+monsters.
+
+Only a few years ago science was superstition's hired man. The
+scientific men apologized for every fact they happened to find. With hat
+in hand they begged pardon of the parson for finding a fossil, and asked
+the forgiveness of God for making any discovery in nature. At that
+time every scientific discovery was something to be pardoned. Moses was
+authority in geology, and Joshua was considered the first astronomer of
+the world. Now everything has changed, and everybody knows it except
+the clergy. Now religion is taking off its hat to science. Religion is
+finding out new meanings for old texts. We are told that God spoke in
+the language of the common people; that he was not teaching any science;
+that he allowed his children not only to remain in error, but kept them
+there. It is now admitted that the Bible is no authority on any question
+of natural fact; it is inspired only in morality, in a spiritual way.
+All, except the Brooklyn ministers, see that the Bible has ceased to be
+regarded as authority. Nobody appeals to a passage to settle a dispute
+of fact. The most intellectual men of the world laugh at the idea of
+inspiration. Men of the greatest reputations hold all supernaturalism in
+contempt. Millions of people are reading the opinions of men who combat
+and deny the foundation of orthodox Christianity. Humboldt stands higher
+than all the apostles. Darwin has done more to change human thought
+than all the priests who have existed. Where there was one infidel
+twenty-five years ago, there are one hundred now. I can remember when I
+would be the only infidel in the town. Now I meet them thick as autumn
+leaves; they are everywhere. In all the professions, trades, and
+employments, the orthodox creeds are despised. They are not simply
+disbelieved; they are execrated. They are regarded, not with
+indifference, but with passionate hatred. Thousands and hundreds of
+thousands of mechanics in this country abhor orthodox Christianity.
+Millions of educated men hold in immeasurable contempt the doctrine of
+eternal punishment. The doctrine of atonement is regarded as absurd
+by millions. So with the dogma of imputed guilt, vicarious virtue, and
+vicarious vice. I see that the Rev. Dr. Eddy advises ministers not to
+answer the arguments of infidels in the pulpit, and gives this wonderful
+reason: That the hearers will get more doubts from the answer than from
+reading the original arguments. So the Rev. Dr. Hawkins admits that he
+cannot defend Christianity from infidel attacks without creating more
+infidelity. So the Rev. Dr. Haynes admits that he cannot answer the
+theories of Robertson Smith in popular addresses. The only minister who
+feels absolutely safe on this subject, so far as his congregation is
+concerned, seems to be the Rev. Joseph Pullman. He declares that the
+young people in his church don't know enough to have intelligent doubts,
+and that the old people are substantially in the same condition. Mr.
+Pullman feels that he is behind a breastwork so strong that other
+defence is unnecessary. So the Rev. Mr. Foote thinks that infidelity
+should never be refuted in the pulpit. I admit that it never has been
+successfully done, but I did not suppose so many ministers admitted the
+impossibility. Mr. Foote is opposed to all public discussion. Dr. Wells
+tells us that scientific atheism should be ignored; that it should not
+be spoken of in the pulpit. The Rev, Dr. Van Dyke has the same feeling
+of security enjoyed by Dr. Pullman, and he declares that the great
+majority of the Christian people of to-day know nothing about current
+infidel theories. His idea is to let them remain in ignorance; that it
+would be dangerous for the Christian minister even to state the position
+of the infidel; that, after stating it, he might not, even with the help
+of God, successfully combat the theory. These ministers do not agree.
+Dr. Carpenter accounts for infidelity by nicotine in the blood. It is
+all smoke.
+
+He thinks the blood of the human family has deteriorated. He thinks
+that the church is safe because the Christians read. He differs with his
+brothers Pullman and Van Dyke. So the Rev. George E. Reed believes that
+infidelity should be discussed in the pulpit. He has more confidence in
+his general and in the weapons of his warfare than some of his
+brethren. His confidence may arise from the fact that he has never had a
+discussion. The Rev. Dr. McClelland thinks the remedy is to stick by the
+catechism; that there is not now enough of authority; not enough of the
+brute force; thinks that the family, the church, and the state ought to
+use the rod; that the rod is the salvation of the world; that the rod is
+a divine institution; that fathers ought to have it for their children;
+that mothers ought to use it. This is a part of the religion of
+universal love. The man who cannot raise children without whipping them
+ought not to have them. The man who would mar the flesh of a boy or girl
+is unfit to have the control of a human being. The father who keeps
+a rod in his house keeps a relic of barbarism in his heart. There
+is nothing reformatory in punishment; nothing reformatory in fear.
+Kindness, guided by intelligence, is the only reforming force. An appeal
+to brute force is an abandonment of love and reason, and puts father and
+child upon a savage equality; the savageness in the heart of the father
+prompting the use of the rod or club, produces a like savageness in the
+victim; The old idea that a child's spirit must be broken is infamous.
+All this is passing away, however, with orthodox Christianity. That
+children are treated better than formerly shows conclusively the
+increase of what is called infidelity. Infidelity has always been a
+protest against tyranny in the state, against intolerance in the church,
+against barbarism in the family. It has always been an appeal for light,
+for justice, for universal kindness and tenderness.
+
+_Question_. The ministers say, I believe, Colonel, that worldliness is
+the greatest foe to the church, and admit that it is on the increase?
+
+_Answer._ I see that all the ministers you have interviewed regard
+worldliness as the great enemy of the church. What is worldliness? I
+suppose worldliness consists in paying attention to the affairs of this
+world; getting enjoyment out of this life; gratifying the senses, giving
+the ears music, the eyes painting and sculpture, the palate good food;
+cultivating the imagination; playing games of chance; adorning the
+person; developing the body; enriching the mind; investigating the facts
+by which we are surrounded; building homes; rocking cradles; thinking;
+working; inventing; buying; selling; hoping--all this, I suppose, is
+worldliness. These "worldly" people have cleared the forests, plowed
+the land, built the cities, the steamships, the telegraphs, and
+have produced all there is of worth and wonder in the world. Yet the
+preachers denounce them. Were it not for "worldly" people how would the
+preachers get along? Who would build the churches? Who would fill the
+contribution boxes and plates, and who (most serious of all questions)
+would pay the salaries? It is the habit of the ministers to belittle men
+who support them--to slander the spirit by which they live. "It is as
+though the mouth should tear the hand that feeds it." The nobility of
+the Old World hold the honest workingman in contempt, and yet are so
+contemptible themselves that they are willing to live upon his labor.
+And so the minister pretending to be spiritual--pretending to be a
+spiritual guide--looks with contempt upon the men who make it possible
+for him to live. It may be said by "worldliness" they only mean
+enjoyment--that is, hearing music, going to the theater and the opera,
+taking a Sunday excursion to the silvery margin of the sea. Of course,
+ministers look upon theaters as rival attractions, and most of their
+hatred is born of business views. They think people ought to be driven
+to church by having all other places closed. In my judgment the theater
+has done good, while the church has done harm. The drama never has
+insisted upon burning anybody. Persecution is not born of the stage. On
+the contrary, upon the stage have forever been found impersonations
+of patriotism, heroism, courage, fortitude, and justice, and these
+impersonations have always been applauded, and have been represented
+that they might be applauded. In the pulpit, hypocrites have been
+worshiped; upon the stage they have been held up to derision and
+execration. Shakespeare has done far more for the world than the Bible.
+The ministers keep talking about spirituality as opposed to worldliness.
+Nothing can be more absurd than this talk of spirituality. As though
+readers of the Bible, repeaters of texts, and sayers of prayers were
+engaged in a higher work than honest industry. Is there anything higher
+than human love? A man is in love with a girl, and he has determined to
+work for her and to give his life that she may have a life of joy. Is
+there anything more spiritual than that--anything higher? They marry. He
+clears some land. He fences a field. He builds a cabin; and she, of this
+hovel, makes a happy home. She plants flowers, puts a few simple things
+of beauty upon the walls. This is what the preachers call "worldliness."
+Is there anything more spiritual? In a little while, in this cabin, in
+this home, is heard the drowsy rhythm of the cradle's rock, while
+softly floats the lullaby upon the twilight air. Is there anything more
+spiritual, is there anything more infinitely tender than to see husband
+and wife bending, with clasped hands, over a cradle, gazing upon the
+dimpled miracle of love? I say it is spiritual to work for those you
+love; spiritual to improve the physical condition of mankind--for he who
+improves the physical condition improves the mental. I believe in the
+plowers instead of the prayers. I believe in the new firm of "Health &
+Heresy" rather than the old partnership of "Disease & Divinity," doing
+business at the old sign of the "Skull & Crossbones." Some of the
+ministers that you have interviewed, or at least one of them, tells
+us the cure for worldliness. He says that God is sending fires, and
+cyclones, and things of that character for the purpose of making people
+spiritual; of calling their attention to the fact that everything in
+this world is of a transitory nature. The clergy have always had great
+faith in famine, in affliction, in pestilence. They know that a man is
+a thousand times more apt to thank God for a crust or a crumb than for
+a banquet. They know that prosperity has the same effect on the average
+Christian that thick soup has, according to Bumble, on the English
+pauper: "It makes 'em impudent." The devil made a mistake in not
+doubling Job's property instead of leaving him a pauper. In prosperity
+the ministers think that we forget death and are too happy. In the arms
+of those we love, the dogma of eternal fire is for the moment forgotten.
+According to the ministers, God kills our children in order that we
+may not forget him. They imagine that the man who goes into Dakota,
+cultivates the soil and rears him a little home, is getting too
+"worldly." And so God starts a cyclone to scatter his home and the limbs
+of wife and children upon the desolate plains, and the ministers in
+Brooklyn say this is done because we are getting too "worldly." They
+think we should be more "spiritual;" that is to say, willing to live
+upon the labor of others; willing to ask alms, saying, in the meantime,
+"It is more blessed to give than to receive." If this is so, why not
+give the money back? "Spiritual" people are those who eat oatmeal and
+prunes, have great confidence in dried apples, read Cowper's "Task" and
+Pollok's "Course of Time," laugh at the jokes in _Harper's Monthly_,
+wear clothes shiny at the knees and elbows, and call all that has
+elevated the world "beggarly elements."
+
+_Question_. Some of the clergymen who have been interviewed admit
+that the rich and poor no longer meet together, and deprecate the
+establishment of mission chapels in connection with the large and
+fashionable churches.
+
+_Answer._ The early Christians supposed that the end of the world was
+at hand. They were all sitting on the dock waiting for the ship. In the
+presence of such a belief what are known as class distinctions could not
+easily exist. Most of them were exceedingly poor, and poverty is a bond
+of union. As a rule, people are hospitable in the proportion that they
+lack wealth. In old times, in the West, a stranger was always welcome.
+He took in part the place of the newspaper. He was a messenger from the
+older parts of the country. Life was monotonous. The appearance of the
+traveler gave variety. As people grow wealthy they grow exclusive. As
+they become educated there is a tendency to pick their society. It is
+the same in the church. The church no longer believes the creed, no
+longer acts as though the creed were true. If the rich man regarded the
+sermon as a means of grace, as a kind of rope thrown by the minister
+to a man just above the falls; if he regarded it as a lifeboat, or as
+a lighthouse, he would not allow his coachman to remain outside. If
+he really believed that the coachman had an immortal soul, capable of
+eternal joy, liable to everlasting pain, he would do his utmost to make
+the calling and election of the said coachman sure. As a matter of fact
+the rich man now cares but little for servants. They are not included
+in the scheme of salvation, except as a kind of job lot. The church
+has become a club. It is a social affair, and the rich do not care to
+associate in the week days with the poor they may happen to meet at
+church. As they expect to be in heaven together forever, they can afford
+to be separated here. There will certainly be time enough there to
+get acquainted. Another thing is the magnificence of the churches. The
+church depends absolutely upon the rich. Poor people feel out of place
+in such magnificent buildings. They drop into the nearest seat; like
+poor relations, they sit on the extreme edge of the chair. At the table
+of Christ they are below the salt.
+
+They are constantly humiliated. When subscriptions are asked for they
+feel ashamed to have their mite compared with the thousands given by the
+millionaire. The pennies feel ashamed to mingle with the silver in the
+contribution plate. The result is that most of them avoid the church.
+It costs too much to worship God in public. Good clothes are necessary,
+fashionably cut. The poor come in contact with too much silk, too
+many jewels, too many evidences of what is generally assumed to be
+superiority.
+
+_Question_. Would this state of affairs be remedied if, instead of
+churches, we had societies of ethical culture? Would not the rich there
+predominate and the poor be just as much out of place?
+
+_Answer._ I think the effect would be precisely the same, no matter what
+the society is, what object it has, if composed of rich and poor. Class
+distinctions, to a greater or less extent, will creep in--in fact, they
+do not have to creep in. They are there at the commencement, and they
+are born of the different conditions of the members.
+
+These class distinctions are not always made by men of wealth. For
+instance, some men obtain money, and are what we call snobs. Others
+obtain it and retain their democratic principles, and meet men according
+to the law of affinity, or general intelligence, on intellectual
+grounds, for instance.
+
+There is not only the distinction produced by wealth and power,
+but there are the distinctions born of intelligence, of culture, of
+character, of end, object, aim in life. No one can blame an honest
+mechanic for holding a wealthy snob in utter contempt. Neither can any
+one blame respectable poverty for declining to associate with arrogant
+wealth. The right to make the distinction is with all classes, and with
+the individuals of all classes. It is impossible to have any society
+for any purpose--that is, where they meet together--without certain
+embarrassments being produced by these distinctions. Nowt for instance,
+suppose there should be a society simply of intelligent and cultured
+people. There, wealth, to a great degree, would be disregarded. But,
+after all, the distinction that intelligence draws between talent and
+genius is as marked and cruel as was ever drawn between poverty and
+wealth. Wherever the accomplishment of some object is deemed of such
+vast importance that, for the moment, all minor distinctions are
+forgotten, then it is possible for the rich and poor, the ignorant and
+intelligent, to act in concert. This happens in political parties, in
+time of war, and it has also happened whenever a new religion has been
+founded. Whenever the rich wish the assistance of the poor, distinctions
+are forgotten. It is upon the same principle that we gave liberty to the
+slave during the Civil war, and clad him in the uniform of the nation;
+we wanted him, we needed him; and, for the time, we were perfectly
+willing to forget the distinction of color. Common peril produces pure
+democracy. It is with societies as with individuals. A poor young man
+coming to New York, bent upon making his fortune, begins to talk about
+the old fogies; holds in contempt many of the rules and regulations of
+the trade; is loud in his denunciation of monopoly; wants competition;
+shouts for fair play, and is a real democrat. But let him succeed;
+let him have a palace in Fifth Avenue, with his monogram on spoons and
+coaches; then, instead of shouting for liberty, he will call for more
+police. He will then say: "We want protection; the rabble must be put
+down." We have an aristocracy of wealth. In some parts of our country an
+aristocracy of literature--men and women who imagine themselves writers
+and who hold in contempt all people who cannot express commonplaces in
+the most elegant diction--people who look upon a mistake in grammar as
+far worse than a crime. So, in some communities we have an aristocracy
+of muscle. The only true aristocracy, probably, is that of kindness.
+Intellect, without heart, is infinitely cruel; as cruel as wealth
+without a sense of justice; as cruel as muscle without mercy. So that,
+after all, the real aristocracy must be that of goodness where the
+intellect is directed by the heart.
+
+_Question_. You say that the aristocracy of intellect is quite as cruel
+as the aristocracy of wealth--what do you mean by that?
+
+_Answer._ By intellect, I mean simply intellect; that is to say, the
+aristocracy of education--of simple brain--expressed in innumerable
+ways--in invention, painting, sculpture, literature. And I meant to say
+that that aristocracy was as cruel as that of simple arrogant wealth.
+After all, why should a man be proud of something given him by
+nature--something that he did not earn, did not produce--something that
+he could not help? Is it not more reasonable to be proud of wealth which
+you have accumulated than of brain which nature gave you? And, to carry
+this idea clearly out, why should we be proud of anything? Is there any
+proper occasion on which to crow? If you succeed, your success crows for
+you; if you fail, certainly crowing is not in the best of taste. And why
+should a man be proud of brain? Why should he be proud of disposition or
+of good acts?
+
+_Question_. You speak of the cruelty of the intellect, and yet, of
+course, you must recognize the right of every one to select his own
+companions. Would it be arrogant for the intellectual man to prefer the
+companionship of people of his own class in preference to commonplace
+and unintelligent persons?
+
+_Answer._ All men should have the same rights, and one right that
+every man should have is to associate with congenial people. There are
+thousands of good men whose society I do not covet. They may be stupid,
+or they may be stupid only in the direction in which I am interested,
+and may be exceedingly intelligent as to matters about which I care
+nothing. In either case they are not congenial. They have the right to
+select congenial company; so have I. And while distinctions are thus
+made, they are not cruel; they are not heartless. They are for the
+good of all concerned, spring naturally from the circumstances, and
+are consistent with the highest philanthropy. Why we notice these
+distinctions in the church more than we do in the club is that the
+church talks one way and acts another; because the church insists that a
+certain line of conduct is essential to salvation, and that every human
+being is in danger of eternal pain. If the creed were true, then, in
+the presence of such an infinite verity, all earthly distinctions should
+instantly vanish. Every Christian should exert himself for the salvation
+of the soul of a beggar with the same degree of earnestness that he
+would show to save a king. The accidents of wealth, education, social
+position, should be esteemed as naught, and the richest should gladly
+work side by side with the poorest. The churches will never reach the
+poor as long as they sell pews; as long as the rich members wear their
+best clothes on Sunday. As long as the fashions of the drawing-room
+are taken to the table of the last supper, the poor will remain in the
+highways and hedges. Present fashion is more powerful than faith. So
+long as the ministers shut up their churches, and allow the poor to go
+to hell in summer; as long as they leave the devil without a competitor
+for three months in the year, the churches will not materially impede
+the march of human progress. People often, unconsciously and without any
+malice, say something or do something that throws an unexpected light
+upon a question. The other day, in one of the New York comic papers,
+there was a picture representing the foremost preachers of the country
+at the seaside together. It was regarded as a joke that they could enjoy
+each others society. These ministers are supposed to be the apostles of
+the religion of kindness. They tell us to love even our enemies, and
+yet the idea that they could associate happily together is regarded as
+a joke! After all, churches are like other institutions, they have to
+be managed, and they now rely upon music and upon elocution rather than
+upon the gospel. They are becoming social affairs. They are giving up
+the doctrine of eternal punishment, and have consequently lost their
+hold. The orthodox churches used to tell us there was to be a fire,
+and they offered to insure; and as long as the fire was expected
+the premiums were paid and the policies were issued. Then came the
+Universalist Church, saying that there would be no fire, and yet
+asking the people to insure. For such a church there is no basis. It
+undoubtedly did good by its influence upon other churches. So with the
+Unitarian. That church has no basis for organization; no reason, because
+no hell is threatened, and heaven is but faintly promised. Just as the
+churches have lost their belief in eternal fire, they have lost their
+influence, and the reason they have lost their belief is on account
+of the diffusion of knowledge. That doctrine is becoming absurd and
+infamous. Intelligent people are ashamed to broach it. Intelligent
+people can no longer believe it. It is regarded with horror, and the
+churches must finally abandon it, and when they do, that is the end of
+the church militant.
+
+_Question_. What do you say to the progress of the Roman Catholic
+Church, in view of the fact that they have not changed their belief, in
+any particular, in regard to future punishment?
+
+_Answer._ Neither Catholicism nor Protestantism will ever win another
+battle. The last victory of Protestantism was won in Holland. Nations
+have not been converted since then. The time has passed to preach
+with sword and gun, and for that reason Catholicism can win no
+more victories. That church increases in this country mostly from
+immigration. Catholicism does not belong to the New World. It is at war
+with the idea of our Government, antagonistic to true republicanism, and
+is in every sense anti-American. The Catholic Church does not control
+its members. That church prevents no crime. It is not in favor of
+education. It is not the friend of liberty. In Europe it is now used
+as a political power, but here it dare not assert itself. There are
+thousands of good Catholics. As a rule they probably believe the creed
+of the church. That church has lost the power to anathematize. It can
+no longer burn. It must now depend upon other forces--upon persuasion,
+sophistry, ignorance, fear, and heredity.
+
+_Question_. You have stated your objections to the churches, what would
+you have to take their place?
+
+_Answer._ There was a time when men had to meet together for the purpose
+of being told the law. This was before printing, and for hundreds and
+hundreds of years most people depended for their information on what
+they heard. The ear was the avenue to the brain. There was a time, of
+course, when Freemasonry was necessary, so that a man could carry, not
+only all over his own country, but to another, a certificate that he
+was a gentleman; that he was an honest man. There was a time, and it was
+necessary, for the people to assemble. They had no books, no papers, no
+way of reaching each other. But now all that is changed. The daily
+press gives you the happenings of the world. The libraries give you
+the thoughts of the greatest and best. Every man of moderate means can
+command the principal sources of information. There is no necessity for
+going to the church and hearing the same story forever. Let the minister
+write what he wishes to say. Let him publish it. If it is worth buying,
+people will read it. It is hardly fair to get them in a church in
+the name of duty and there inflict upon them a sermon that under no
+circumstances they would read. Of course, there will always be meetings,
+occasions when people come together to exchange ideas, to hear what a
+man has to say upon some questions, but the idea of going fifty-two days
+in a year to hear anybody on the same subject is absurd.
+
+_Question_. Would you include a man like Henry Ward Beecher in that
+statement?
+
+_Answer._ Beecher is interesting just in proportion that he is not
+orthodox, and he is altogether more interesting when talking against his
+creed. He delivered a sermon the other day in Chicago, in which he takes
+the ground that Christianity is kindness, and that, consequently, no
+one could be an infidel. Every one believes in kindness, at least
+theoretically. In that sermon he throws away all creed, and comes to
+the conclusion that Christianity is a life, not an aggregation of
+intellectual convictions upon certain subjects. The more sermons like
+that are preached, probably the better. What I intended was the eternal
+repetition of the old story: That God made the world and a man, and
+then allowed the devil to tempt him, and then thought of a scheme
+of salvation, of vicarious atonement, 1500 years afterwards; drowned
+everybody except Noah and his family, and afterward, when he failed
+to civilize the Jewish people, came in person and suffered death, and
+announced the doctrine that all who believed on him would be saved,
+and those who did not, eternally lost. Now, this story, with occasional
+references to the patriarchs and the New Jerusalem, and the exceeding
+heat of perdition, and the wonderful joys of Paradise, is the average
+sermon, and this story is told again, again, and again, by the same men,
+listened to by the same people without any effect except to tire the
+speaker and the hearer. If all the ministers would take their texts from
+Shakespeare; if they would read every Sunday a selection from some of
+the great plays, the result would be infinitely better. They would all
+learn something; the mind would be enlarged, and the sermon would appear
+short. Nothing has shown more clearly the intellectual barrenness of
+the pulpit than baccalaureate sermons lately delivered. The dignified
+dullness, the solemn stupidity of these addresses has never been
+excelled. No question was met. The poor candidates for the ministry were
+given no new weapons. Armed with the theological flintlock of a century
+ago, they were ordered to do battle for doctrines older than their
+weapons. They were told to rely on prayer, to answer all arguments by
+keeping out of discussions, and to overwhelm the skeptic by ignoring
+the facts. There was a time when the Protestant clergy were in favor
+of education; that is to say, education enough to make a Catholic a
+Protestant, but not enough to make a Protestant a philosopher. The
+Catholics are also in favor of education enough to make a savage a
+Catholic, and there they stop. The Christian should never unsettle his
+belief. If he studies, if he reads, he is in danger. A new idea is a
+doubt; a doubt is the threshold of infidelity. The young ministers are
+warned against inquiry. They are educated like robins; they swallow
+whatever is thrown in the mouth, worms or shingle-nails, it makes no
+difference, and they are expected to get their revenge by treating
+their flocks precisely as the professors treated them. The creeds of
+the churches are being laughed at. Thousands of young men say nothing,
+because they do not wish to hurt the feelings of mothers and maiden
+aunts.
+
+Thousands of business men say nothing, for fear it may interfere with
+trade. Politicians keep quiet for fear of losing influence. But when you
+get at the real opinions of people, a vast majority have outgrown the
+doctrines of orthodox Christianity. Some people think these things good
+for women and children, and use the Lord as an immense policeman to keep
+order. Every day ministers are uttering a declaration of independence.
+They are being examined by synods and committees of ministers, and they
+are beginning everywhere to say that they do not regard this life as a
+probationary stage; that the doctrine of eternal punishment is too bad;
+that the Bible is, in many things, foolish, absurd, and infamous; that
+it must have been written by men. And the people at large are beginning
+to find that the ministers have kept back the facts; have not told the
+history of the Bible; have not given to their congregations the latest
+advices, and so the feeling is becoming almost general that orthodox
+Christianity has outlived its usefulness. The church has a great deal
+to contend with. The scientific men are not religious. Geology laughs at
+Genesis, and astronomy has concluded that Joshua knew but very little of
+the motions of heavenly bodies. Statesmen do not approve of the laws
+of Moses; the intellect of the world is on the other side. There is
+something besides preaching on Sunday. The newspaper is the rival of the
+pulpit. Nearly all the cars are running on that blessed day. Steamers
+take hundreds of thousands of excursionists. The man who has been at
+work all the week seeks the sight of the sea, and this has become so
+universal that the preacher is following his example. The flock has
+ceased to be afraid of the wolf, and the shepherd deserts the sheep. In
+a little while all the libraries will be open--all the museums. There
+will be music in the public parks; the opera, the theater. And what
+will churches do then? The cardinal points will be demonstrated to empty
+pews, unless the church is wise enough to meet the intellectual demands
+of the present.
+
+_Question_. You speak as if the influences working against Christianity
+to-day will tend to crush it out of existence. Do you think that
+Christianity is any worse off now than it was during the French
+Revolution, when the priests were banished from the country and
+reason was worshiped; or in England, a hundred years ago, when Hume,
+Bolingbroke, and others made their attacks upon it?
+
+_Answer._ You must remember that the French Revolution was produced by
+Catholicism; that it was a reaction; that it went to infinite extremes;
+that it was a revolution seeking revenge. It is not hard to understand
+those times, provided you know the history of the Catholic Church.
+The seeds of the French Revolution were sown by priests and kings. The
+people had suffered the miseries of slavery for a thousand years, and
+the French Revolution came because human nature could bear the wrongs
+no longer. It was something not reasoned; it was felt. Only a few acted
+from intellectual convictions. The most were stung to madness, and were
+carried away with the desire to destroy. They wanted to shed blood, to
+tear down palaces, to cut throats, and in some way avenge the wrongs of
+all the centuries. Catholicism has never recovered--it never will. The
+dagger of Voltaire struck the heart; the wound was mortal. Catholicism
+has staggered from that day to this.
+
+It has been losing power every moment. At the death of Voltaire there
+were twenty millions less Catholics than when he was born. In the French
+Revolution muscle outran mind; revenge anticipated reason. There
+was destruction without the genius of construction. They had to use
+materials that had been rendered worthless by ages of Catholicism.
+
+The French Revolution was a failure because the French people were a
+failure, and the French people were a failure because Catholicism
+had made them so. The ministers attack Voltaire without reading him.
+Probably there are not a dozen orthodox ministers in the world who have
+read the works of Voltaire. I know of no one who has. Only a little
+while ago, a minister told me he had read Voltaire. I offered him one
+hundred dollars to repeat a paragraph, or to give the title, even, of
+one of Voltaire's volumes. Most ministers think he was an atheist. The
+trouble with the infidels in England a hundred years ago was that they
+did not go far enough. It may be that they could not have gone further
+and been allowed to live. Most of them took the ground that there was
+an infinite, all-wise, beneficent God, creator of the universe, and that
+this all-wise, beneficent God certainly was too good to be the author of
+the Bible. They, however, insisted that this good God was the author of
+nature, and the theologians completely turned the tables by showing
+that this god of nature was in the pestilence and plague business,
+manufactured earthquakes, overwhelmed towns and cities, and was, of
+necessity, the author of all pain and agony. In my judgment, the Deists
+were all successfully answered. The god of nature is certainly as bad as
+the God of the Old Testament. It is only when we discard the idea of a
+deity, the idea of cruelty or goodness in nature, that we are able
+ever to bear with patience the ills of life. I feel that I am neither
+a favorite nor a victim. Nature neither loves nor hates me. I do not
+believe in the existence of any personal god. I regard the universe as
+the one fact, as the one existence--that is, as the absolute thing. I am
+a part of this. I do not say that there is no God; I simply say that I
+do not believe there is. There may be millions of them. Neither do I say
+that man is not immortal. Upon that point I admit that I do not know,
+and the declarations of all the priests in the world upon that subject
+give me no light, and do not even tend to add to my information on
+the subject, because I know that they know that they do not know. The
+infidelity of a hundred years ago knew nothing, comparatively speaking,
+of geology; nothing of astronomy; nothing of the ideas of Lamarck and
+Darwin; nothing of evolution; nothing, comparatively speaking, of other
+religions; nothing of India, that womb of metaphysics; in other
+words, the infidels of a hundred years ago knew the creed of orthodox
+Christianity to be false, but had not the facts to demonstrate it. The
+infidels of to-day have the facts; that is the difference. A hundred
+years ago it was a guessing prophecy; to-day it is the fact and
+fulfillment. Everything in nature is working against superstition
+to-day. Superstition is like a thorn in the flesh, and everything, from
+dust to stars, is working together to destroy the false. The smallest
+pebble answers the greatest parson. One blade of grass, rightly
+understood, destroys the orthodox creed.
+
+_Question_. You say that the pews will be empty in the future unless
+the church meets the intellectual demands of the present. Are not the
+ministers of to-day, generally speaking, much more intellectual than
+those of a hundred years ago, and are not the "liberal" views in regard
+to the inspiration of the Bible, the atonement, future punishment, the
+fall of man, and the personal divinity of Christ which openly prevail in
+many churches, an indication that the church is meeting the demands of
+many people who do not care to be classed as out-and-out disbelievers in
+Christianity, but who have advanced views on those and other questions?
+
+_Answer._ As to the first part of this question, I do not think the
+ministers of to-day are more intellectual than they were a hundred years
+ago; that is, I do not think they have greater brain capacity, but
+I think on the average, the congregations have a higher amount. The
+amelioration of orthodox Christianity is not by the intelligence in the
+pulpit, but by the brain in the pews. Another thing: One hundred years
+ago the church had intellectual honors to bestow. The pulpit opened
+a career. Not so now. There are too many avenues to distinction and
+wealth--too much worldliness. The best minds do not go into the pulpit.
+Martyrs had rather be burned than laughed at. Most ministers of to-day
+are not naturally adapted to other professions promising eminence.
+There are some great exceptions, but those exceptions are the ministers
+nearest infidels. Theodore Parker was a great man. Henry Ward Beecher
+is a great man--not the most consistent man in the world--but he is
+certainly a man of mark, a remarkable genius. If he could only get rid
+of the idea that Plymouth Church is necessary to him--after that time
+he would not utter an orthodox word. Chapin was a man of mind. I might
+mention some others, but, as a rule, the pulpit is not remarkable
+for intelligence. The intelligent men of the world do not believe in
+orthodox Christianity. It is to-day a symptom of intellectual decay. The
+conservative ministers are the stupid ones. The conservative professors
+are those upon whose ideas will be found the centuries' moss, old red
+sandstone theories, pre-historic silurian. Now, as to the second part
+of the question: The views of the church are changing, the clergy of
+Brooklyn to the contrary, notwithstanding. Orthodox religion is a kind
+of boa-constrictor; anything it can not dodge it will swallow. The
+church is bound to have something for sale that somebody wants to buy.
+According to the pew demand will be the pulpit supply. In old times the
+pulpit dictated to the pews. Things have changed. Theology is now run on
+business principles. The gentleman who pays for the theories insists
+on having them suit him. Ministers are intellectual gardeners, and
+they must supply the market with such religious vegetables as the
+congregations desire. Thousands have given up belief in the inspiration
+of the Bible, the divinity of Christ, the atonement idea and original
+sin. Millions believe now, that this is not a state of probation; that
+a man, provided he is well off and has given liberally to the church, or
+whose wife has been a regular attendant, will, in the next world, have
+another chance; that he will be permitted to file a motion for a new
+trial. Others think that hell is not as warm as it used to be supposed;
+that, while it is very hot in the middle of the day, the nights are
+cool; and that, after all, there is not so much to fear from the future.
+They regard the old religion as very good for the poor, and they give
+them the old ideas on the same principle that they give them their old
+clothes. These ideas, out at the elbows, out at the knees, buttons off,
+somewhat raveled, will, after all, do very well for paupers. There is a
+great trade of this kind going on now--selling old theological clothes
+to the colored people in the South. All I have said applies to all
+churches. The Catholic Church changes every day. It does not change its
+ceremonies; but the spirit that begot the ceremonies, the spirit that
+clothed the skeleton of ceremony with the flesh and blood and throb of
+life and love, is gone. The spirit that built the cathedrals, the spirit
+that emptied the wealth of the world into the lap of Rome, has turned in
+another direction. Of course, the churches are all going to endeavor to
+meet the demands of the hour. They will find new readings for old texts.
+They will re-punctuate and re-parse the Old Testament. They will find
+that "flat" meant "a little rounding;" that "six days" meant "six long
+times;" that the word "flood" should have been translated "dampness,"
+"dew," or "threatened rain;" that Daniel in the lion's den was an
+historical myth; that Samson and his foxes had nothing to do with
+this world. All these things will be gradually explained and made to
+harmonize with the facts of modern science. They will not change the
+words of the creed; they will simply give "new meanings and the highest
+criticism to-day is that which confesses and avoids. In other words, the
+churches will change as the people change. They will keep for sale that
+which can be sold. Already the old goods are being "marked down." If,
+however, the church should fail, why then it must go. I see no reason,
+myself, for its existence. It apparently does no good; it devours
+without producing; it eats without planting, and is a perpetual burden.
+It teaches nothing of value. It misleads, mystifies, and misrepresents.
+It threatens without knowledge and promises without power. In my
+judgment, the quicker it goes the better for all mankind. But if it
+does not go in name, it must go in fact, because it must change; and,
+therefore, it is only a question of time when it ceases to divert from
+useful channels the blood and muscle of the world.
+
+_Question_. You say that in the baccalaureate sermons delivered lately
+the theological students were told to answer arguments by keeping out
+of discussion. Is it not the fact that ministers have of late years
+preached very largely on scientific disbelief, agnosticism, and
+infidelity, so much so as to lead to their being reprimanded by some of
+their more conservative brethren?
+
+_Answer._ Of course there are hundreds of thousands of ministers
+perpetually endeavoring to answer infidelity. Their answers have done so
+much harm that the more conservative among the clergy have advised them
+to stop. Thousands have answered me, and their answers, for the most
+part, are like this: Paine was a blackguard, therefore the geology of
+Genesis is on a scientific basis. We know the doctrine of the atonement
+is true, because in the French Revolution they worshiped reason. And
+we know, too, all about the fall of man and the Garden of Eden because
+Voltaire was nearly frightened to death when he came to die. These are
+the usual arguments, supplemented by a few words concerning myself.
+And, in my view, they are the best that can be made. Failing to answer
+a man's argument, the next best thing is to attack his character. "You
+have no case," said an attorney to the plaintiff. "No matter," said the
+plaintiff, "I want you to give the defendant the devil."
+
+_Question_. What have you to say to the Rev. Dr. Baker's statement that
+he generally buys five or six tickets for your lectures and gives them
+to young men, who are shocked at the flippant way in which you are said
+to speak of the Bible?
+
+_Answer._ Well, as to that, I have always wondered why I had such
+immense audiences in Brooklyn and New York. This tends to clear away
+the mystery. If all the clergy follow the example of Dr. Baker, that
+accounts for the number seeking admission. Of course, Dr. Baker would
+not misrepresent a thing like that, and I shall always feel greatly
+indebted to him, shall hereafter regard him as one of my agents, and
+take this occasion to return my thanks. He is certainly welcome to all
+the converts to Christianity made by hearing me. Still, I hardly think
+it honest in young men to play a game like that on the doctor.
+
+_Question_. You speak of the eternal repetition of the old story of
+Christianity and say that the more sermons like the one Mr. Beecher
+preached lately the better. Is it not the fact that ministers, at the
+present time, do preach very largely on questions of purely moral,
+social, and humanitarian interest, so much so, indeed, as to provoke
+criticism on the part of the secular newspaper press?
+
+_Answer._ I admit that there is a general tendency in the pulpit to
+preach about things happening in this world; in other words, that the
+preachers themselves are beginning to be touched with worldliness.
+They find that the New Jerusalem has no particular interest for persons
+dealing in real estate in this world. And thousands of people are
+losing interest in Abraham, in David, Haggai, and take more interest
+in gentlemen who have the cheerful habit of living. They also find
+that their readers do not wish to be reminded perpetually of death and
+coffins; and worms and dust and gravestones and shrouds and epitaphs
+and hearses, biers, and cheerful subjects of that character. That they
+prefer to hear the minister speak about a topic in which they have a
+present interest, and about which something cheerful can be said.
+In fact, it is a relief to hear about politics, a little about art,
+something about stocks or the crops, and most ministers find it
+necessary to advertise that they are going to speak on something that
+has happened within the last eighteen hundred years, and that, for
+the time being, Shadrach, Meshech, and Abednego will be left in the
+furnace. Of course, I think that most ministers are reasonably honest.
+Maybe they don't tell all their doubts, but undoubtedly they are
+endeavoring to make the world better, and most of the church members
+think that they are doing the best that can be done. I am not
+criticising their motives, but their methods. I am not attacking the
+character or reputation of ministers, but simply giving my ideas,
+avoiding anything personal. I do not pretend to be very good, nor very
+bad---just fair to middling.
+
+_Question_. You say that Christians will not read for fear that they
+will unsettle their belief. Father Fransiola (Roman Catholic) said in
+the interview I had with him: "If you do not allow man to reason you
+crush his manhood. Therefore, he has to reason upon the credibility of
+his faith, and through reason, guided by faith, he discovers the truth,
+and so satisfies his wants."
+
+_Answer._ Without calling in question the perfect sincerity of Father
+Fransiola, I think his statement is exactly the wrong end to. I do not
+think that reason should be guided by faith; I think that faith should
+be guided by reason. After all, the highest possible conception of faith
+would be the science of probabilities, and the probable must not be
+based on what has not happened, but upon what has; not upon something
+we know nothing about, but the nature of the things with which we are
+acquainted. The foundation we must know something about, and whenever we
+reason, we must have something as a basis, something secular, something
+that we think we know. About these facts we reason, sometimes by
+analogy, and we say thus and so has happened, therefore thus and so may
+happen. We do not say thus and so _may_ happen, therefore something else
+_has_ happened. We must reason from the known to the unknown, not from
+the unknown to the known. This Father admits that if you do not allow a
+man to reason you crush his manhood. At the same time he says faith must
+govern reason. Who makes the faith? The church. And the church tells the
+man that he must take the faith, reason or no reason, and that he
+may afterward reason, taking the faith as a fact. This makes him an
+intellectual slave, and the poor devil mistakes for liberty the right
+to examine his own chains. These gentlemen endeavor to satisfy their
+prisoners by insisting that there is nothing beyond the walls.
+
+_Question_. You criticise the church for not encouring the poor to
+mingle with the rich, and yet you defend the right of a man to choose
+his own company. Are not these same distinctions made by non-confessing
+Christians in real life, and will not there always be some greater,
+richer, wiser, than the rest?
+
+_Answer._ I do not blame the church because there are these distinctions
+based on wealth, intelligence, and culture. What I blame the church for
+is pretending to do away with these distinctions. These distinctions in
+men are inherent; differences in brain, in race, in blood, in education,
+and they are differences that will eternally exist--that is, as long as
+the human race exists. Some will be fortunate, some unfortunate, some
+generous, some stingy, some rich, some poor. What I wish to do away with
+is the contempt and scorn and hatred existing between rich and poor. I
+want the democracy of kindness--what you might call the republicanism of
+justice. I do not have to associate with a man to keep from robbing him.
+I can give him his rights without enjoying his company, and he can give
+me my rights without inviting me to dinner. Why should not poverty have
+rights? And has not honest poverty the right to hold dishonest wealth in
+contempt, and will it not do it, whether it belongs to the same church
+or not? We cannot judge men by their wealth, or by the position they
+hold in society. I like every kind man; I hate every cruel one. I like
+the generous, whether they are poor or rich, ignorant or cultivated. I
+like men that love their families, that are kind to their wives,
+gentle with their children, no matter whether they are millionaires or
+mendicants. And to me the blossom of benevolence, of charity, is the
+fairest flower, no matter whether it blooms by the side of a hovel, or
+bursts from a vine climbing the marble pillar of a palace. I respect no
+man because he is rich; I hold in contempt no man because he is poor.
+
+_Question_. Some of the clergymen say that the spread of infidelity is
+greatly exaggerated; that it makes more noise and creates more notice
+than conservative Christianity simply on account of its being outside of
+the accepted line of thought.
+
+_Answer._ There was a time when an unbeliever, open and pronounced, was
+a wonder. At that time the church had great power; it could retaliate;
+it could destroy. The church abandoned the stake only when too many men
+objected to being burned. At that time infidelity was clad not simply in
+novelty, but often in fire. Of late years the thoughts of men have been
+turned, by virtue of modern discoveries, as the result of countless
+influences, to an investigation of the foundation of orthodox religion.
+Other religions were put in the crucible of criticism, and nothing was
+found but dross. At last it occurred to the intelligent to examine our
+own religion, and this examination has excited great interest and great
+comment. People want to hear, and they want to hear because they have
+already about concluded themselves that the creeds are founded in error.
+
+Thousands come to hear me because they are interested in the question,
+because they want to hear a man say what they think. They want to hear
+their own ideas from the lips of another. The tide has turned, and the
+spirit of investigation, the intelligence, the intellectual courage
+of the world is on the other side. A real good old-fashioned orthodox
+minister who believes the Thirty-nine articles with all his might, is
+regarded to-day as a theological mummy, a kind of corpse acted upon by
+the galvanic battery of faith, making strange motions, almost like those
+of life--not quite.
+
+_Question_. How would you convey moral instruction from youth up, and
+what kind of instruction would you give?
+
+_Answer._ I regard Christianity as a failure. Now, then, what is
+Christianity? I do not include in the word "Christianity" the average
+morality of the world or the morality taught in all systems of religion;
+that is, as distinctive Christianity. Christianity is this: A belief in
+the inspiration of the Scriptures, the atonement, the life, death, and
+resurrection of Christ, an eternal reward for the believers in Christ,
+and eternal punishment for the rest of us. Now, take from Christianity
+its miracles, its absurdities of the atonement and fall of man and
+the inspiration of the Scriptures, and I have no objection to it as
+I understand it. I believe, in the main, in the Christianity which I
+suppose Christ taught, that is, in kindness, gentleness, forgiveness.
+I do not believe in loving enemies; I have pretty hard work to love my
+friends. Neither do I believe in revenge. No man can afford to keep
+the viper of revenge in his heart. But I believe in justice, in
+self-defence. Christianity--that is, the miraculous part--must be
+abandoned. As to morality--morality is born, is born of the instinct of
+self-preservation. If man could not suffer, the word "conscience" never
+would have passed his lips. Self-preservation makes larceny a crime.
+Murder will be regarded as a bad thing as long as a majority object to
+being murdered. Morality does not come from the clouds; it is born of
+human want and human experience. We need no inspiration, no inspired
+work. The industrious man knows that the idle has no right to rob him of
+the product of his labor, and the idle man knows that he has no right to
+do it. It is not wrong because we find it in the Bible, but I presume
+it was put in the Bible because it is wrong. Then, you find in the Bible
+other things upheld that are infamous. And why? Because the writers of
+the Bible were barbarians, in many things, and because that book is a
+mixture of good and evil. I see no trouble in teaching morality without
+miracle. I see no use of miracle. What can men do with it? Credulity is
+not a virtue. The credulous are not necessarily charitable. Wonder
+is not the mother of wisdom. I believe children should be taught to
+investigate and to reason for themselves, and that there are facts
+enough to furnish a foundation for all human virtue. We will take two
+families; in the one, the father and mother are both Christians,
+and they teach their children their creed; teach them that they are
+naturally totally depraved; that they can only hope for happiness in
+a future life by pleading the virtues of another, and that a certain
+belief is necessary to salvation; that God punishes his children
+forever. Such a home has a certain atmosphere. Take another family; the
+father and mother teach their children that they should be kind to each
+other because kindness produces happiness; that they should be gentle;
+that they should be just, because justice is the mother of joy. And
+suppose this father and mother say to their children: "If you are happy
+it must be as a result of your own actions; if you do wrong you must
+suffer the consequences. No Christ can redeem you; no savior can suffer
+for you. You must suffer the consequences of your own misdeeds. If you
+plant you must reap, and you must reap what you plant." And suppose
+these parents also say: "You must find out the conditions of happiness.
+You must investigate the circumstances by which you are surrounded. You
+must ascertain the nature and relation of things so that you can act
+in accordance with known facts, to the end that you may have health and
+peace." In such a family, there would be a certain atmosphere, in my
+judgment, a thousand times better and purer and sweeter than in the
+other. The church generally teaches that rascality pays in this
+world, but not in the next; that here virtue is a losing game, but the
+dividends will be large in another world. They tell the people that they
+must serve God on credit, but the devil pays cash here. That is not my
+doctrine. My doctrine is that a thing is right because it pays, in the
+highest sense. That is the reason it is right. The reason a thing is
+wrong is because it is the mother of misery. Virtue has its reward here
+and now. It means health; it means intelligence, contentment, success.
+Vice means exactly the opposite. Most of us have more passion than
+judgment, carry more sail than ballast, and by the tempest of passion
+we are blown from port, we are wrecked and lost. We cannot be saved
+by faith or by belief. It is a slower process: We must be saved by
+knowledge, by intelligence--the only lever capable of raising mankind.
+
+_Question_. The shorter catechism, Colonel, you may remember says "that
+man's chief end is to glorify God and enjoy him forever." What is your
+idea of the chief end of man?
+
+_Answer._ It has always seemed a little curious to me that joy should
+be held in such contempt here, and yet promised hereafter as an eternal
+reward. Why not be happy here, as well as in heaven. Why not have joy
+here? Why not go to heaven now--that is, to-day? Why not enjoy the
+sunshine of this world, and all there is of good in it? It is bad
+enough; so bad that I do not believe it was ever created by a beneficent
+deity; but what little good there is in it, why not have it? Neither do
+I believe that it is the end of man to glorify God. How can the
+Infinite be glorified? Does he wish for reputation? He has no equals, no
+superiors. How can he have what we call reputation? How can he achieve
+what we call glory? Why should he wish the flattery of the average
+Presbyterian? What good will it do him to know that his course has been
+approved of by the Methodist Episcopal Church? What does he care, even,
+for the religious weeklies, or the presidents of religious colleges?
+I do not see how we can help God, or hurt him. If there be an infinite
+Being, certainly nothing we can do can in any way affect him. We can
+affect each other, and therefore man should be careful not to sin
+against man. For that reason I have said a hundred times, injustice is
+the only blasphemy. If there be a heaven I want to associate there with
+the ones who have loved me here. I might not like the angels and the
+angels might not like me. I want to find old friends. I do not care to
+associate with the Infinite; there could be no freedom in such society.
+I suppose I am not spiritual enough, and am somewhat touched with
+worldliness. It seems to me that everybody ought to be honest enough
+to say about the Infinite "I know nothing of eternal joy, I have no
+conception about another world, I know nothing." At the same time, I am
+not attacking anybody for believing in immortality. The more a man can
+hope, and the less he can fear, the better. I have done what I could to
+drive from the human heart the shadow of eternal pain. I want to put out
+the fires of an ignorant and revengeful hell.
+
+
+
+
+THE LIMITATIONS OF TOLERATION.
+
+
+     * A discussion between Col. Robert G. Ingersoll, Hon.
+     Frederic R. Coudert, Ex-Gov. Stewart L. Woodford, before the
+     Nineteenth Century Club of New York, at the Metropolitan
+     Opera House, May 8, 1888. The points for discussion, as
+     submitted in advance, were the following propositions:
+
+Colonel Ingersoll's Opening.
+
+Ladies, Mr. President and Gentlemen:
+
+I AM here to-night for the purpose of defending your right to differ
+with me. I want to convince you that you are under no compulsion to
+accept my creed; that you are, so far as I am concerned, absolutely free
+to follow the torch of your reason according to your conscience; and I
+believe that you are civilized to that degree that you will extend to me
+the right that you claim for yourselves.
+
+
+First. Thought is a necessary natural product--the result of what is
+called impressions made through the medium of the senses upon the brain,
+not forgetting the Fact of heredity.
+
+Second. No human being is accountable to any being-human or divine--for
+his thoughts.
+
+Third. Human beings have a certain interest in the thoughts of each
+other, and one who undertakes to tell his thoughts should be honest.
+
+Fourth. All have an equal right to express their thoughts upon all
+subjects.
+
+Fifth. For one man to say to another, "I tolerate you," is an assumption
+of authority--not a disclaimer, but a waiver, of the right to persecute.
+
+Sixth. Each man has the same right to express to the whole world his
+ideas, that the rest of the world have to express their thoughts to him.
+
+Courtlandt Palmer, Esq., President of the Club, in introducing Mr.
+Ingersoll, among other things said:
+
+"The inspiration of the orator of the evening seems to be that of the
+great Victor Hugo, who uttered the august saying, 'There shall be no
+slavery of the mind.'
+
+"When I was in Paris, about a year ago, I visited the tomb of Victor
+Hugo. It was placed in a recess in the crypt of the Pantheon. Opposite
+it was the tomb of Jean Jacques Rousseau. Near by, in another recess, was
+the memorial statue of Voltaire; and I felt, as I looked at these three
+monuments, that had Colonel Ingersoll been born in France, and had he
+passed in his long life account, the acclaim of the liberal culture of
+France would have enlarged that trio into a quartette.
+
+"Colonel Ingersoll has appeared in several important debates in print,
+notably with Judge Jeremiah S. Black formerly Attorney-General of the
+United States: lately in the pages of The North American Review with the
+Rev. Dr. Henry M. Field, and last but not least the Right Hon. William
+E Gladstone, England's greatest citizen, has taken up the cudgel against
+him in behalf of his view of Orthodoxy To-night, I believe-for the first
+time, the colonel has consented to appear in a colloquial discussion. I
+have now the honor to introduce this distinguished orator."
+
+I admit, at the very threshold, that every human being thinks as he
+must; and the first proposition really is, whether man has the right to
+think. It will bear but little discussion, for the reason that no man
+can control his thought. If you think you can, what are you going to
+think to-morrow? What are you going to think next year? If you can
+absolutely control your thought, can you stop thinking?
+
+The question is, Has the will any power over the thought? What is
+thought? It is the result of nature--of the outer world--first upon the
+senses--those impressions left upon the brain as pictures of things in
+the outward world, and these pictures are transformed into, or produce,
+thought; and as long as the doors of the senses are open, thoughts will
+be produced. Whoever looks at anything in nature, thinks. Whoever hears
+any sound--or any symphony--no matter what--thinks. Whoever looks upon
+the sea, or on a star, or on a flower, or on the face of a fellow-man,
+thinks, and the result of that look is an absolute necessity. The
+thought produced will depend upon your brain, upon your experience, upon
+the history of your life.
+
+One who looks upon the sea, knowing that the one he loved the best had
+been devoured by its hungry waves, will have certain thoughts; and he
+who sees it for the first time, will have different thoughts. In other
+words, no two brains are alike; no two lives have been or are or ever
+will be the same. Consequently, nature cannot produce the same effect
+upon any two brains, or upon any two hearts.
+
+The only reason why we wish to exchange thoughts is that we are
+different. If we were all the same, we would die dumb. No thought would
+be expressed after we found that our thoughts were precisely alike. We
+differ--our thoughts are different. Therefore the commerce that we call
+conversation.
+
+Back of language is thought. Back of language is the desire to express
+our thought to another. This desire not only gave us language--this
+desire has given us the libraries of the world. And not only the
+libraries; this desire to express thought, to show to others the
+splendid children of the brain, has written every book, formed every
+language, painted every picture, and chiseled every statue--this desire
+to express our thought to others, to reap the harvest of the brain.
+
+If, then, thought is a necessity, "it follows as the night the day"
+that there is, there can be, no responsibility for thought to any being,
+human or divine.
+
+A camera contains a sensitive plate. The light flashes upon it, and the
+sensitive plate receives a picture. Is it in fault, is it responsible,
+for the picture? So with the brain. An image is left on it, a picture
+is imprinted there. The plate may not be perfectly level--it may be too
+concave, or too convex, and the picture may be a deformity; so with the
+brain. But the man does not make his own brain, and the consequence is,
+if the picture is distorted it is not the fault of the brain.
+
+We take then these two steps: first, thought is a necessity; and second,
+the thought depends upon the brain.
+
+Each brain is a kind of field where nature sows with careless hands
+the seeds of thought. Some brains are poor and barren fields, producing
+weeds and thorns, and some are like the tropic world where grow the palm
+and pine--children of the sun and soil.
+
+You read Shakespeare. What do you get out of Shakespeare? All that your
+brain is able to hold. It depends upon your brain. If you are great--if
+you have been cultivated--if the wings of your imagination have been
+spread--if you have had great, free, and splendid thoughts--'r you have
+stood upon the edge of things--if you have had the courage to meet all
+that can come--you get an immensity from Shakespeare. If you have lived
+nobly--if you have loved with every drop of your blood and every fibre
+of your being--if you have suffered--if you have enjoyed--then you get
+an immensity from Shakespeare. But if you have lived a poor, little,
+mean, wasted, barren, weedy life--you get very little from that immortal
+man.
+
+So it is from every source in nature--what you get depends upon what you
+are.
+
+Take then the second step. If thought is a necessity, there can be
+no responsibility for thought. And why has man ever believed that his
+fellow-man was responsible for his thought?
+
+Everything that is, everything that has been, has been naturally
+produced. Man has acted as, under the same circumstances, we would have
+acted; because when you say "under the circumstances," it is the same as
+to say that you would do exactly as they have done.
+
+There has always been in men the instinct of self-preservation. There was
+a time when men believed, and honestly believed, that there was above
+them a God. Sometimes they believed in many, but it will be sufficient
+for my illustration to say, one. Man believed that there was in the sky
+above him a God who attended to the affairs of men. He believed that
+that God, sitting upon his throne, rewarded virtue and punished vice. He
+believed also, that that God held the community responsible for the sins
+of individuals. He honestly believed it. When the flood came, or when
+the earthquake devoured, he really believed that some God was filled
+with anger--with holy indignation--at his children. He believed it, and
+so he looked about among his neighbors to see who was in fault, and if
+there was any man who had failed to bring his sacrifice to the altar,
+had failed to kneel, it may be to the priest, failed to be present in
+the temple, or had given it as his opinion that the God of that tribe
+or of that nation was of no use, then, in order to placate the God, they
+seized the neighbor and sacrificed him on the altar of their ignorance
+and of their fear.
+
+They believed when the lightning leaped from the cloud and left its
+blackened mark upon the man, that he had done something--that he had
+excited the wrath of the gods.
+
+And while man so believed, while he believed that it was necessary, in
+order to defend himself, to kill his neighbor--he acted simply according
+to the dictates of his nature.
+
+What I claim is that we have nov-advanced far enough not only to
+think, but to know, that the conduct of man has nothing to do with the
+phenomena of nature. We are now advanced far enough to absolutely know
+that no man can be bad enough and no nation infamous enough to cause an
+earthquake. I think we have got to that point that we absolutely
+know that no man can be wicked enough to entice one of the bolts from
+heaven--that no man can be cruel enough to cause a drought--and that you
+could not have infidels enough on the earth to cause another flood.
+I think we have advanced far enough not only to say that, but to
+absolutely know it--I mean people who have thought, and in whose minds
+there is something like reasoning.
+
+We know, if we know anything, that the lightning is just as apt to hit
+a good man as a bad man. We know it. We know that the earthquake is just
+as liable to swallow virtue as to swallow vice. And you know just as
+well as I do that a ship loaded with pirates is just as apt to outride
+the storm as one crowded with missionaries. You know it.
+
+I am now speaking of the phenomena of nature. I believe, as much as
+I believe that I live, that the reason a thing is right is because it
+tends to the happiness of mankind. I believe, as much as I be-believe
+that I live, that on the average the good man is not only the happier
+man, but that no man is happy who is not good.
+
+If then we have gotten over that frightful, that awful superstition--we
+are ready to enjoy hearing the thoughts of each other.
+
+I do not say, neither do I intend to be understood as saying, that there
+is no God. All I intend to say is, that so far as we can see, no man
+is punished, no nation is punished by lightning, or famine, or storm.
+Everything happens to the one as to the other.
+
+Now, let us admit that there is an infinite God. That has nothing to do
+with the sinlessness of thought--nothing to do with the fact that no man
+is accountable to any being, human or divine, for what he thinks. And
+let me tell you why.
+
+If there be an infinite God, leave him to deal with men who sin against
+him. You can trust him, if you believe in him. He has the power. He has
+a heaven full of bolts. Trust him. And now that you are satisfied that
+the earthquake will not swallow you, or the lightning strike you, simply
+because you tell your thoughts, if one of your neighbors differs with
+you, and acts improperly or thinks or speaks improperly of your God,
+leave him with your God--he can attend to him a thousand times better
+than you can, He has the time. He lives from eternity to eternity. More
+than that, he has the means. So that, whether there be this Being or
+not, you have no right to interfere with your neighbor.
+
+The next proposition is, that I have the same right to express my
+thought to the whole world, that the whole world has to express its
+thought to me.
+
+I believe that this realm of thought is not a democracy, where
+the majority rule; it is not a republic. It is a country with one
+inhabitant. This brain is the world in which my mind lives, and my mind
+is the sovereign of that realm. We are all kings, and one man balances
+the rest of the world as one drop of water balances the sea. Each soul
+is crowned. Each soul wears the purple and the tiara; and only those are
+good citizens of the intellectual world who give to every other human
+being every right that they claim for themselves, and only those are
+traitors in the great realm of thought who abandon reason and appeal to
+force.
+
+If now I have got out of your minds the idea that you must abuse your
+neighbors to keep on good terms with God, then the question of religion
+is exactly like every question--I mean of thought, of mind--I have
+nothing to say now about action.
+
+Is there authority in the world of art? Can a legislature pass a law
+that a certain picture is beautiful, and can it pass a law putting in
+the penitentiary any impudent artistic wretch who says that to him it is
+not beautiful? Precisely the same with music. Our ears are not all
+the same; we are not touched by the same sounds--the same beautiful
+memories* do not arise. Suppose you have an authority in music? You may
+make men, it may be, by offering them office or by threatening them with
+punishment, swear that they all like that tune--but you never will
+know till the day of your death whether they do or not. The moment you
+introduce a despotism in the world of thought, you succeed in making
+hypocrites--and you get in such a position that you never know what your
+neighbor thinks.
+
+So in the great realm of religion, there can be no force. No one can be
+compelled to pray. No matter how you tie him down, or crush him down on
+his face or on his knees, it is above the power of the human race to put
+in that man, by force, the spirit of prayer. You cannot do it. Neither
+can you compel anybody to worship a God. Worship rises from the heart
+like perfume from a flower. It cannot obey; it cannot do that which
+some one else commands. It must be absolutely true to the law of its
+own nature. And do you think any God would be satisfied with compulsory
+worship? Would he like to see long rows of poor, ignorant slaves on
+their terrified knees repeating words without a soul--giving him what
+you might call the shucks of sound? Will any God be satisfied with
+that? And so I say, we must be as free in one department of thought as
+another.
+
+Now, I take the next step, and that is, that the rights of all are
+absolutely equal.
+
+I have the same right to give you my opinion that you have to give me
+yours. I have no right to compel you to hear, if you do not want to. I
+have no right to compel you to speak if you do not want to. If you do
+not wish to know my thought, I have no right to force it upon you.
+
+The next thing is, that this liberty of thought, this liberty of
+expression, is of more value than any other thing beneath the stars. Of
+more value than any religion, of more value than any government, of more
+value than all the constitutions that man has written and all the laws
+that he has passed, is this liberty--the absolute liberty of the human
+mind. Take away that word from language, and all other words become
+meaningless sounds, and there is then no reason for a man being and
+living upon the earth.
+
+So then, I am simply in favor of intellectual hospitality--that is all.
+You come to me with a new idea. I invite you into the house. Let us see
+what you have. Let us talk it over. If I do not like your thought, I
+will bid it a polite "good day." If I do like it, I will say: "Sit down;
+stay with me, and become a part of the intellectual wealth of my world."
+That is all.
+
+And how any human being ever has had the impudence to speak against the
+right to speak, is beyond the power of my imagination. Here is a man
+who speaks--who exercises a right that he, by his speech, denies. Can
+liberty go further than that? Is there any toleration possible beyond
+the liberty to speak against liberty--the real believer in free speech
+allowing others to speak against the right to speak? Is there any
+limitation beyond that?
+
+So, whoever has spoken against the right to speak has admitted that he
+violated his own doctrine. No man can open his mouth against the freedom
+of speech without denying every argument he may put forward. Why? He is
+exercising the right that he denies. How did he get it? Suppose there
+is one man on an island. You will all admit now that he would have the
+right to do his own thinking. You will all admit that he has the right
+to express his thought. Now, will somebody tell me how many men would
+have to emigrate to that island before the original settler would lose
+his right to think and his right to express himself?
+
+If there be an infinite Being--and it is a question that I know nothing
+about--you would be perfectly astonished to know how little I do know on
+that subject, and yet I know as much as the aggregated world knows, and
+as little as the smallest insect that ever fanned with happy wings the
+summer air--if there be such a Being, I have the same right to think
+that he has simply because it is a necessity of my nature--because I
+cannot help it. And the Infinite would be just as responsible to the
+smallest intelligence living in the infinite spaces--he would be just
+as responsible to that intelligence as that intelligence can be to him,
+provided that intelligence thinks as a necessity of his nature.
+
+There is another phrase to which I object--"toleration." "The limits
+of toleration." Why say "toleration"? I will tell you why. When
+the thinkers were in the minority--when the philosophers were
+vagabonds--when the men with brains furnished fuel for bonfires--when
+the majority were ignorantly orthodox--when they hated the heretic as a
+last year's leaf hates a this year's bud--in that delightful time
+these poor people in the minority had to say to ignorant power, to
+conscientious rascality, to cruelty born of universal love: "Don't kill
+us; don't be so arrogantly meek as to burn us; tolerate us." At that
+time the minority was too small to talk about rights, and the great big
+ignorant majority when tired of shedding blood, said: "Well, we will
+tolerate you; we can afford to wait; you will not live long, and when
+the Being of infinite compassion gets hold of you we will glut our
+revenge through an eternity of joy; we will ask you every now and then,
+'What is your opinion now?'"
+
+Both feeling absolutely sure that infinite goodness would have his
+revenge, they "tolerated" these thinkers, and that word finally took
+the place almost of liberty. But I do not like it. When you say "I
+tolerate," you do not say you have no right to punish, no right to
+persecute. It is only a disclaimer for a few moments and for a few
+years, but you retain the right. I deny it.
+
+And let me say here to-night--it is your experience, it is mine--that
+the bigger a man is the more charitable he is; you know it. The more
+brain he has, the more excuses he finds for all the world; you know it.
+And if there be in heaven an infinite Being, he must be grander than any
+man; he must have a thousand times more charity than the human heart can
+hold, and is it possible that he is going to hold his ignorant children
+responsible for the impressions made by nature upon their brain? Let us
+have some sense.
+
+There is another side to this question, and that is with regard to the
+freedom of thought and expression in matters pertaining to this world.
+
+No man has a right to hurt the character of a neighbor. He has no right
+to utter slander. He has no right to bear false witness. He has no right
+to be actuated by any motive except for the general good--but the
+things he does here to his neighbor--these are easily defined and easily
+punished. All that I object to is setting up a standard of authority in
+the world of art, the world of beauty, the world of poetry, the world
+of worship, the world of religion, and the world of metaphysics. That is
+what I object to; and if the old doctrines had been carried out, every
+human being that has benefited this world would have been destroyed.
+If the people who believe that a certain belief is necessary to insure
+salvation had had control of this world, we would have been as ignorant
+to-night as wild beasts. Every step in advance has been made in spite of
+them. There has not been a book of any value printed since the invention
+of that art--and when I say "of value," I mean that contained new
+and splendid truths--that was not anathematized by the gentlemen who
+believed that man is responsible for his thought. Every step has been
+taken in spite of that doctrine.
+
+Consequently I simply believe in absolute liberty of mind. And I have no
+fear about any other world--not the slightest. When I get there, I will
+give my honest opinion of that country; I will give my honest thought
+there; and if for that I lose my soul, I will keep at least my
+self-respect.
+
+A man tells me a story. I believe it, or disbelieve it. I cannot help
+it. I read a story--no matter whether in the original Hebrew, or whether
+it has been translated. I believe it or I disbelieve it. No matter
+whether it is written in a very solemn or a very flippant manner--I have
+my idea about its truth. And I insist that each man has the right to
+judge that for himself, and for that reason, as I have already said, I
+am defending your right to differ with me--that is all. And if you do
+differ with me, all that it proves is that I do not agree with you.
+There is no man that lives to-night beneath the stars--there is no
+being--that can force my soul upon its knees, unless the reason is
+given. I will be no slave. I do not care how big my master is, I am just
+as small, if a slave, as though the master were small. It is not the
+greatness of the master that can honor the slave. In other words, I
+am going to act according to my right, as I understand it, without
+interfering with any other human being. And now, if you think--any of
+you, that you can control your thought, I want you to try it. There is
+not one here who can by any possibility think, only as he must.
+
+You remember the story of the Methodist minister who insisted that he
+could control his thoughts. A man said to him, "Nobody can control his
+own mind." "Oh, yes, he can," the preacher replied. "My dear sir," said
+the man, "you cannot even say the Lord's Prayer without thinking of
+something else." "Oh, yes, I can." "Well, if you will do it, I will give
+you that horse, the best riding horse in this county." "Well, who is to
+judge?" said the preacher. "I will take your own word for it, and if you
+say the Lord's Prayer through without thinking of anything else, I will
+give you that horse." So the minister shut his eyes and began: "Our
+Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy
+will be done,"--"I suppose you will throw in the saddle and bridle?"
+
+I say to you to-night, ladies and gentlemen, that I feel more interest
+in the freedom of thought and speech than in all other questions,
+knowing, as I do, that it is the condition of great and splendid
+progress for the race; remembering, as I do, that the opposite idea has
+covered the cheek of the world with tears; remembering, and knowing, as
+I do, that the enemies of free thought and free speech have covered this
+world with blood. These men have filled the heavens with an infinite
+monster; they have filled the future with fire and flame, and they have
+made the present, when they have had the power, a perdition. These men,
+these doctrines, have carried fagots to the feet of philosophy. These
+men, these doctrines, have hated to see the dawn of an intellectual day.
+These men, these doctrines, have denied every science, and denounced and
+killed every philosopher they could lay their bloody, cruel, ignorant
+hands upon.
+
+And for that reason, I am for absolute liberty of thought, everywhere,
+in every department, domain, and realm of the human mind.
+
+
+REMARKS OF MR. COUDERT.
+
+_Ladies and Gentlemen and Mr. President_: It is not only "the sense of
+the church" that I am lacking now, I am afraid it is any sense at all;
+and I am only wondering how a reasonably intelligent being--meaning
+myself--could in view of the misfortune that befell Mr. Kernan, have
+undertaken to speak to-night.
+
+This is a new experience. I have never sung in any of Verdi's operas--I
+have never listened to one through--but I think I would prefer to try
+all three of these performances rather than go on with this duty which,
+in a vain moment of deluded vanity, I heedlessly undertook.
+
+I am in a new field here. I feel very much like the master of a ship
+who thinks that he can safely guide his bark. (I am not alluding to the
+traditional bark of St. Peter, in which I hope that I am and will always
+be, but the ordinary bark that requires a compass and a rudder and a
+guide.) And I find that all these ordinary things, which we generally
+take for granted, and which are as necessary to our safety as the air
+which we breathe, or the sunshine that we enjoy, have been quietly,
+pleasantly, and smilingly thrown overboard by the gentleman who has just
+preceded me.
+
+Carlyle once said--and the thought came to me as the gentleman was
+speaking--"A Comic History of England!"--for some wretch had just
+written such a book--(talk of free thought and free speech when men do
+such things!)--"A Comic History of England!" The next thing we shall
+hear of will be "A Comic History of the Bible!" I think we have heard
+the first chapter of that comic history to-night; and the only comfort
+that I have--and possibly some other antiquated and superannuated
+persons of either sex, if such there be within my hearing--is that
+such things as have seemed to me charmingly to partake of the order of
+blasphemy, have been uttered with such charming bonhomie, and received
+with such enthusiastic admiration, that I have wondered whether we are
+in a Christian audience of the nineteenth century, or in a possible
+Ingersollian audience of the twenty-third.
+
+And let me first, before I enter upon the very few and desultory
+remarks, which are the only ones that I can make now and with which I
+may claim your polite attention--let me say a word about the comparison
+with which your worthy President opened these proceedings.
+
+There are two or three things upon which I am a little sensitive: One,
+aspersions upon the land of my birth--the city of New York; the next,
+the land of my fathers; and the next, the bark that I was just speaking
+of.
+
+Now your worthy President, in his well-meant efforts to exhibit in the
+best possible style the new actor upon his stage, said that he had seen
+Victor Hugo's remains, and Voltaire's, and Jean Jacques Rousseau's, and
+that he thought the niche might well be filled by Colonel Ingersoll.
+If that had been merely the expression of a natural desire to see him
+speedily annihilated, I might perhaps in the interests of the Christian
+community have thought, but not said, "Amen!" (Here you will at once
+observe the distinction I make between free thought and free speech!)
+
+I do not think, and I beg that none of you, and particularly the
+eloquent rhetorician who preceded me, will think, that in anything I may
+say I intend any personal discourtesy, for I do believe to some extent
+in freedom of speech upon a platform like this. Such a debate as this
+rises entirely above and beyond the plane of personalities.
+
+I suppose that your President intended to compare Colonel Ingersoll to
+Voltaire, to Hugo and to Rousseau. I have no retainer from either of
+those gentlemen, but for the reason that I just gave you, I wish to
+defend their memory from what I consider a great wrong. And so I do not
+think--with all respect to the eloquent and learned gentleman--that he
+is entitled to a place in that niche. Voltaire did many wrong things.
+He did them for many reasons, and chiefly because he was human.
+But Voltaire did a great deal to build up. Leaving aside his noble
+tragedies, which charmed and delighted his audiences, and dignified the
+stage, throughout his work was some effort to ameliorate the condition
+of the human race. He fought against torture; he fought against
+persecution; he fought against bigotry; he clamored and wrote against
+littleness and fanaticism in every way, and he was not ashamed when he
+entered upon his domains at Fernay, to erect a church to the God of
+whom the most our friend can say is, "I do not know whether he exists or
+not."
+
+Rousseau did many noble things, but he was a madman, and in our
+day would probably have been locked up in an asylum and treated by
+intelligent doctors. His works, however, bear the impress of a religious
+education, and if there be in his works or sayings anything to parallel
+what we have heard tonight--whether a parody on divine revelation, or a
+parody upon the prayer of prayers--I have not seen it.
+
+Victor Hugo has enriched the literature of his day with prose and poetry
+that have made him the Shakespeare of the nineteenth century--poems as
+deeply imbued with a devout sense of responsibility to the Almighty as
+the writings of an archbishop or a cardinal. He has left the traces
+of his beneficent action all over the literature of his day, of his
+country, and of his race.
+
+All these men, then, have built up something. Will anyone, the most
+ardent admirer of Colonel Ingersoll, tell me what he has built up?
+
+To go now to the argument. The learned gentleman says that freedom of
+thought is a grand thing. Unfortunately, freedom of thought exists. What
+one of us would not put manacles and fetters upon his thoughts, if he
+only could? What persecution have any of us suffered to compare with the
+involuntary recurrence of these demons that enter our brain--that bring
+back past events that we would wipe out with our tears, or even with
+our blood--and make us slaves of a power unseen but uncontrollable and
+uncontrolled? Is it not unworthy of so eloquent and intelligent a man to
+preach before you here to-night that thought must always be free?
+
+When in the history of the world has thought ever been fettered? If
+there be a page in history upon which such an absurdity is written, I
+have failed to find it.
+
+Thought is beyond the domain of man. The most cruel and arbitrary ruler
+can no more penetrate into your bosom and mine and extract the inner
+workings of our brain, than he can scale the stars or pull down the sun
+from its seat. Thought must be free. Thought is unseen, unhandled and
+untouched, and no despot has yet been able to reach it, except when the
+thoughts burst into words. And therefore, may we not consider now, and
+say, that liberty of word is what he wants, and not liberty of thought,
+which no one has ever gainsaid, or disputed?
+
+Liberty of speech!--and the gentleman generously tells us, "Why, I only
+ask for myself what I would cheerfully extend to you. I wish you to be
+free; and you can even entertain those old delusions which your mothers
+taught, and look with envious admiration upon me while I scale the giddy
+heights of Olympus, gather the honey and approach the stars and tell
+you how pure the air is in those upper regions which you are unable to
+reach."
+
+Thanks for his kindness! But I think that it is one thing for us to
+extend to him that liberty that he asks for--the liberty to destroy--and
+another thing for him to give us the liberty which we claim--the liberty
+to conserve.
+
+Oh, destruction is so easy, destruction is so pleasant! It marks the
+footsteps all through our life. The baby begins by destroying his bib;
+the older child by destroying his horse, and when the man is grown up
+and he joins the regiment with the latent instinct that when he gets a
+chance he will destroy human life.
+
+This building cost many thousand days' work. It was planned by more or
+less skillful architects (ignorant of ventilation, but well-meaning).
+Men lavished their thought, and men lavished their sweat for a pittance,
+upon this building. It took months and possibly years to build it and to
+adorn it and to beautify it. And yet, as it stands complete tonight with
+all of you here in the vigor of your life and in the enjoyment of such
+entertainment as you may get here this evening, I will find a dozen
+men who with a few pounds of dynamite will reduce it and all of us to
+instant destruction.
+
+The dynamite man may say to me, "I give you full liberty to build and
+occupy and insure, if you will give me liberty to blow up." Is that a
+fair bargain? Am I bound in conscience and in good sense to accept it?
+Liberty of speech! Tell me where liberty of speech has ever existed.
+There have been free societies, England was a free country. France has
+struggled through crisis after crisis to obtain liberty of speech. We
+think we have liberty of speech, as we understand it, and yet who would
+undertake to say that our society could live with liberty of speech?
+We have gone through many crises in our short history, and we know that
+thought is nothing before the law, but the word is an act--as guilty at
+times as the act of killing, or burglary, or any of the violent crimes
+that disgrace humanity and require the police.
+
+A word is an act--an act of the tongue; and why should my tongue go
+unpunished, and I who wield it mercilessly toward those who are weaker
+than I, escape, if my arm is to be punished when I use it tyrannously?
+Whom would you punish for the murder of Desdemona--is it Iago, or
+Othello? Who was the villain, who was the criminal, who deserved the
+scaffold--who but free speech? Iago exercised free speech. He poisoned
+the ear of Othello and nerved his arm and Othello was the murderer--but
+Iago went scot free. That was a word.
+
+"Oh," says the counsel, "but that does not apply to individuals; be
+tender and charitable to individuals." Tender and charitable to men if
+they endeavor to destroy all that you love and venerate and respect!
+
+Are you tender and charitable to me if you enter my house, my castle,
+and debauch my children from the faith that they have been taught? Are
+you tender and charitable to them and to me when you teach them that I
+have instructed them in falsehood, that their mother has rocked them in
+blasphemy, and that they are now among the fools and the witlings of the
+world because they believe in my precepts? Is that the charity that you
+speak of? Heaven forbid that liberty of speech such as that, should ever
+invade my home or yours!
+
+We all understand, and the learned gentleman will admit, that his
+discourse is but an eloquent apology for blasphemy. And when I say this,
+I beg you to believe me incapable of resorting to the cheap artifice
+of strong words to give point to a pointless argument, or to offend
+a courteous adversary. I think if I put it to him he would, with
+characteristic candor, say, "Yes, that is what I claim--the liberty to
+blaspheme; the world has outgrown these things; and I claim to-day, as I
+claimed a few months ago in the neighboring gallant little State of New
+Jersey, that while you cannot slander man, your tongue is free to revile
+and insult man's maker." New Jersey was behind in the race for progress,
+and did not accept his argument. His unfortunate client was convicted
+and had to pay the fine which the press--which is seldom mistaken--says
+came from the pocket of his generous counsel.
+
+The argument was a strong one; the argument was brilliant, and was able;
+and I say now, with all my predilections for the church of my fathers,
+and for your church (because it is not a question of our differences,
+but it is a question whether the tree shall be torn up by the roots, not
+what branches may bear richer fruit or deserve to be lopped off)--I say,
+why has every Christian State passed these statutes against blasphemy?
+Turning into ridicule sacred things--firing off the Lord's Prayer as
+you would a joke from Joe Miller or a comic poem--that is what I mean by
+blasphemy. If there is any other or better definition, give it me, and I
+will use it.
+
+Now understand. All these States of ours care not one fig what our
+religion is. Behave yourselves properly, obey the laws, do not require
+the intervention of the police, and the majesty of your conscience will
+be as exalted as the sun. But the wisest men and the best men--possibly
+not so eloquent as the orator, but I may say it without offence to
+him--other names that shine brightly in the galaxy of our best men, have
+insisted and maintained that the Christian faith was the ligament that
+kept our modern society together, and our laws have said, and the laws
+of most of our States say, to this day, "Think what you like, but do
+not, like Samson, pull the pillars down upon us all."
+
+If I had anything to say, ladies and gentlemen, it is time that I should
+say it now. My exordium has been very long, but it was no longer than
+the dignity of the subject, perhaps, demanded.
+
+Free speech we all have. Absolute liberty of speech we never had. Did we
+have it before the war? Many of us here remember that if you crossed an
+imaginary line and went among some of the noblest and best men that ever
+adorned this continent, one word against slavery meant death. And if you
+say that that was the influence of slavery, I will carry you to Boston,
+that city which numbers within its walls as many intelligent people to
+the acre as any city on the globe--was it different there?
+
+Why, the fugitive, beaten, blood-stained slave, when he got there, was
+seized and turned back; and when a few good and brave men, in defence
+of free speech, undertook to defend the slave and to try and give him
+liberty, they were mobbed and pelted and driven through the city. You
+may say, "That proves there was no liberty of speech." No; it proves
+this: that wherever, and wheresoever, and whenever, liberty of speech is
+incompatible with the safety of the State, liberty of speech must fall
+back and give way, in order that the State may be preserved.
+
+First, above everything, above all things, the safety of the people is
+the supreme law. And if rhetoricians, anxious to tear down, anxious to
+pluck the faith from the young ones who are unable to defend it, come
+forward with nickel-plated platitudes and commonplaces clothed in
+second-hand purple and tinsel, and try to tear down the temple, then
+it is time, I shall not say for good men--for I know so few they make a
+small battalion--but for good women, to come to the rescue.
+
+
+GENERAL WOODFORD'S SPEECH.
+
+Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen>: At this late hour, I could not
+attempt--even if I would--the eloquence of my friend Colonel Ingersoll;
+nor the wit and rapier-like sarcasm of my other valued friend Mr.
+Coudert. But there are some things so serious about this subject that
+we discuss to-night, that I crave your pardon if, without preface, and
+without rhetoric, I get at once to what from my Protestant standpoint
+seems the fatal logical error of Mr. Inger-soll's position.
+
+Mr. Ingersoll starts with the statement--and that I may not, for I could
+not, do him injustice, nor myself injustice, in the quotation, I will
+give it as he stated it--he starts with this statement: that thought is
+a necessary natural product, the result of what we call impressions made
+through the medium of the senses upon the brain.
+
+Do you think that is thought? Now stop--turn right into your own
+minds--is that thought? Does not will power take hold? Does not reason
+take hold? Does not memory take hold, and is not thought the action of
+the brain based upon the impression and assisted or directed by manifold
+and varying influences?
+
+Secondly, our friend Mr. Ingersoll says that no human being is
+accountable to any being, human or divine, for his thought.
+
+He starts with the assumption that thought is the inevitable impression
+burnt upon the mind at once, and then jumps to the conclusion that there
+is no responsibility. Now, is not that a fair logical analysis of what
+he has said?
+
+My senses leave upon my mind an impression, and then my mind, out
+of that impression, works good or evil. The glass of brandy, being
+presented to my physical sense, inspires thirst--inspires the thought
+of thirst--inspires the instinct of debauchery. Am I not accountable for
+the result of the mind given me, whether I yield to the debauch, or rise
+to the dignity of self-control?
+
+Every thing of sense leaves its impression upon the mind. If there be no
+responsibility anywhere, then is this world blind chance. If there be
+no responsibility anywhere, then my friend deserves no credit if he
+be guiding you in the path of truth, and I deserve no censure if I be
+carrying you back into the path of superstition. Why, admit for a moment
+that a man has no control over his thought, and you destroy absolutely
+the power of regenerating the world, the power of improving the world.
+The world swings one way, or it swings the other. If it be true that in
+all these ages we have come nearer and nearer to a perfect liberty, that
+is true simply and alone because the mind of man through reason, through
+memory, through a thousand inspirations and desires and hopes, has ever
+tended toward better results and higher achievements.
+
+No accountability? I speak not for my friend, but I recognize that I
+am accountable to myself; I recognize that whether I rise or fall, that
+whether my life goes upward or downward, I am responsible to myself. And
+so, in spite of all sophistry, so in spite of all dream, so in spite
+of all eloquence, each woman, each man within this audience is
+responsible--first of all to herself and himself--whether when bad
+thoughts, when passion, when murder, when evil come into the heart or
+brain he harbors them there or he casts them out.
+
+I am responsible further--I am responsible to my neighbor. I know that I
+am my neighbor's keeper, I know that as I touch your life, as you touch
+mine, I am responsible every moment, every hour, every day, for my
+influence upon you. I am either helping you up, or I am dragging you
+down; you are either helping me up or you are dragging me down--and you
+know it. Sophistry cannot get away from this; eloquence cannot seduce us
+from it. You know that if you look back through the record of your life,
+there are lives that you have helped and lives that you have hurt. You
+know that there are lives on the downward plane that went down because
+in an evil hour you pushed them; you know, perhaps with blessing, lives
+that have gone up because you have reached out to them a helping
+hand. That responsibility for your neighbor is a responsibility and an
+accountability that you and I cannot avoid or evade.
+
+I believe one thing further: that because there is a creation there is a
+Creator. I believe that because there is force, there is a Projector of
+force; because there is matter, there is spirit. I reverently believe
+these things. I am not angry with my neighbor because he does not; it
+may be that he is right, that I am wrong; but if there be a Power
+that sent me into this world, so far as that Power has given me wrong
+direction, or permitted wrong direction, that Power will judge me
+justly. So far as I disregard the light that I have, whatever it
+may be--whether it br light of reason, light of conscience, light of
+history--so far as I do that which my judgment tells me is wrong, I am
+responsible and I am accountable.
+
+Now the Protestant theory, as I understand it, is simply this: It would
+vary from the theory as taught by the mother church--it certainly swings
+far away from the theory as suggested by my friend; I understand the
+Protestant theory to be this: That every man is responsible to himself,
+to his neighbor, and to his God, for his thought. Not for the first
+impression--but for that impression, for that direction and result which
+he intelligently gives to the first impression or deduces from it. I
+understand that the Protestant idea is this: that man may think--we know
+he will think--for himself; but that he is responsible for it. That a
+man may speak his thought, so long as he does not hurt his neighbor. He
+must use his own liberty so that he shall not injure the well-being of
+any other one--so that when using this liberty, when exercising this
+freedom, he is accountable at the last to his God. And so Protestantism
+sends me into the world with this terrible and solemn responsibility.
+
+It leaves Mr. Ingersoll free to speak his thought at the bar of his
+conscience, before the bar of his fellow-man, but it holds him in the
+inevitable grip of absolute responsibility for every light word idly
+spoken.
+
+God grant that he may use that power so that he can face that
+responsibility at the last!
+
+It leaves to every churchman liberty to believe and stand by his church
+according to his own conviction.
+
+It stands for this; the absolute liberty of each individual man to
+think, to write, to speak, to act, according to the best light within
+him; limited as to his fellows, by the condition that he shall not use
+that liberty so as to injure them; limited in the other direction, by
+those tremendous laws which are laws in spite of all rhetoric, and in
+spite of all logic.
+
+If I put my finger into the fire, that fire burns. If I do a wrong, that
+wrong remains. If I hurt my neighbor, the wrong reacts upon myself. If
+I would try to escape what you call judgment, what you call penalty, I
+cannot escape the working of the inevitable-law that follows a cause by
+effect; I cannot escape that inevitable law--not the creation of
+some dark monster flashing through the skies--but, as I believe, the
+beneficent creation which puts into the spiritual life the same control
+of law that guides the material life, which wisely makes me responsible,
+that in the solemnity of that responsibility I am bound to lift my
+brother up and never to drag my brother down.
+
+
+REPLY OF COLONEL INGERSOLL.
+
+The first gentleman who replied to me took the ground boldly that
+expression is not free--that no man has the right to express his real
+thoughts--and I suppose that he acted in accordance with that idea. How
+are you to know whether he thought a solitary thing that he said, or
+not? How is it possible for us to ascertain whether he is simply the
+mouthpiece of some other? Whether he is a free man, or whether he says
+that which he does not believe, it is impossible for us to ascertain.
+
+He tells you that I am about to take away the religion of your mothers.
+I have heard that said a great many times. No doubt Mr. Coudert has
+the religion of his mother, and judging from the argument he made, his
+mother knew at least as much about these questions as her son. I believe
+that every good father and good mother wants to see the son and the
+daughter climb higher upon the great and splendid mount of thought than
+they reached.
+
+You never can honor your father by going around swearing to his
+mistakes. You never can honor your mother by saying that ignorance is
+blessed because she did not know everything. I want to honor my parents
+by finding out more than they did.
+
+There is another thing that I was a little astonished at--that Mr.
+Coudert, knowing that he would be in eternal felicity with his harp in
+his hand, seeing me in the world of the damned, could yet grow envious
+here to-night at my imaginary monument.
+
+And he tells you--this Catholic--that Voltaire was an exceedingly good
+Christian compared with me. Do you know I am glad that I have compelled
+a Catholic--one who does not believe he has the right to express his
+honest thoughts--to pay a compliment to Voltaire simply because he
+thought it was at my expense?
+
+I have an almost infinite admiration for Voltaire; and when I hear that
+name pronounced, I think of a plume floating over a mailed knight--I
+think of a man that rode to the beleaguered City of Catholicism and
+demanded a surrender--I think of a great man who thrust the dagger of
+assassination into your Mother Church, and from that wound she never
+will recover.
+
+One word more. This gentleman says that children are destructive--that
+the first thing they do is to destroy their bibs. The gentleman, I
+should think from his talk, has preserved his!
+
+They talk about blasphemy. What is blasphemy? Let us be honest with each
+other. Whoever lives upon the unpaid labor of others is a blasphemer.
+Whoever slanders, maligns, and betrays is a blasphemer. Whoever denies
+to others the rights that he claims for himself is a blasphemer.
+
+Who is a worshiper? One who makes a happy home--one who fills the
+lives of wife and children with sunlight--one who has a heart where
+the flowers of kindness burst into blossom and fill the air with
+perfume--the man who sits beside his wife, prematurely old and wasted,
+and holds her thin hands in his and kisses them as passionately and
+loves her as truly and as rapturously as when she was a bride--he is a
+worshiper--that is worship.
+
+And the gentleman brought forward as a reason why we should not have
+free speech, that only a few years ago some of the best men in the
+world, if you said a word in favor of liberty, would shoot you down.
+What an argument was that! They were not good men. They were
+the whippers of women and the stealers of babes--robbers of the
+trundlebed--assassins of human liberty. They knew no better, but I do
+not propose to follow the example of a barbarian because he was honestly
+a barbarian.
+
+So much for debauching his family by telling them that his precepts
+are false. If he has taught them as he has taught us to-night, he has
+debauched their minds. I would be honest at the cradle. I would not
+tell a child anything as a certainty that I did not know. I would be
+absolutely honest.
+
+But he says that thought is absolutely free--nobody can control thought.
+Let me tell him: Superstition is the jailer of the mind. You can so
+stuff a child with superstition that its poor little brain is a bastile
+and its poor little soul a convict. Fear is the jailer of the mind, and
+superstition is the assassin of liberty.
+
+So when anybody goes into his family and tells these great and shining
+truths, instead of debauching his children they will kill the snakes
+that crawl in their cradles. Let us be honest and free.
+
+And now, coming to the second gentleman. He is a Protestant. The
+Catholic Church says: "Don't think; pay your fare; this is a through
+ticket, and we will look out for your baggage." The Protestant Church
+says: "Read that Bible for yourselves; think for yourselves; but if you
+do not come to a right conclusion you will be eternally damned." Any
+sensible man will say, "Then I won't read it--I'll believe it without
+reading it." And that is the only way you can be sure you will believe
+it; don't read it.
+
+Governor Woodford says that we are responsible for our thoughts. Why?
+Could you help thinking as you did on this subject? No, Could you help
+believing the Bible? I suppose not. Could you help believing that story
+of Jonah? Certainly not--it looks reasonable in Brooklyn.
+
+I stated that thought was the result of the impressions of nature upon
+the mind through the medium of the senses. He says you cannot have
+thought without memory. How did you get the first one?
+
+Of course I intended to be understood--and the language is clear--that
+there could be no thought except through the impressions made upon the
+brain by nature through the avenues called the senses. Take away the
+senses, how would you think then? If you thought at all, I think you
+would agree with Mr. Coudert.
+
+Now, I admit--so we need never have a contradiction about it--I admit
+that every human being is responsible to the person he injures. If he
+injures any man, woman, or child, or any dog, or the lowest animal that
+crawls, he is responsible to that animal, to that being--in other words,
+he is responsible to any being that he has injured.
+
+But you cannot injure an infinite Being, if there be one. I will tell
+you why. You cannot help him, and you cannot hurt him. If there be an
+infinite Being, he is conditionless--he does not want anything--he has
+it. You cannot help anybody that does not want something--you cannot
+help him. You cannot hurt anybody unless he is a conditioned being
+and you change his condition so as to inflict a harm. But if God be
+conditionless, you cannot hurt him, and you cannot help him. So do
+not trouble yourselves about the Infinite. All our duties lie within
+reach--all our duties are right here; and my religion is simply this:
+
+_First_. Give to every other human being every right that you claim for
+yourself.
+
+_Second_. If you tell your thought at all, tell your honest thought. Do
+not be a parrot--do not be an instrumentality for an organization. Tell
+your own thought, honor bright, what you think.
+
+My next idea is, that the only possible good in the universe is
+happiness. The time to be happy is now. The place to be happy is here.
+The way to be happy is to try and make somebody else so.
+
+My good friend General Woodford--and he is a good man telling the best
+he knows--says that I will be accountable at the bar up yonder. I am
+ready to settle that account now, and expect to be, every moment of my
+life--and when that settlement comes, if it does come, I do not believe
+that a solitary being can rise and say that I ever injured him or her.
+
+But no matter what they say. Let me tell you a story, how we will settle
+if we do get there.
+
+You remember the story told about the Mexican who believed that his
+country was the only one in the world, and said so. The priest told
+him that there was another country where a man lived who was eleven or
+twelve feet high, that made the whole world, and if he denied it, when
+that man got hold of him he would not leave a whole bone in his body.
+But he denied it. He was one of those men who would not believe further
+than his vision extended.
+
+So one day in his boat, he was rocking away when the wind suddenly arose
+and he was blown out of sight of his home. After several days he was
+blown so far that he saw the shores of another country. Then he said,
+"My Lord; I am gone! I have been swearing all my life that there was no
+other country, and here it is!" So he did his best--paddled with what
+little strength he had left, reached the shore, and got out of his boat.
+Sure enough, there came down a man to meet him about twelve feet high.
+The poor little wretch was frightened almost to death, so he said to the
+tall man as he saw him coming down: "Mister, whoever you are, I denied
+your existence--I did not believe you lived; I swore there was no such
+country as this; but I see I was mistaken, and I am gone. You are going
+to kill me, and the quicker you do it the better and get me out of my
+misery. Do it now!"
+
+The great man just looked at the little fellow, and said nothing, till
+he asked, "What are you going to do with me, because over in that other
+country I denied your existence?" "What am I going to do with you?" said
+the supposed God. "Now that you have got here, if you behave yourself I
+am going to treat you well."
+
+
+
+
+A CHRISTMAS SERMON.
+
+
+     * This is the famous Christmas Sermon written by Colonel
+     Ingersoll and printed in the Evening Telegram, on December
+     19,1891.
+
+
+I.
+
+THE good part of Christmas is not always Christian--it is generally
+Pagan; that is to say, human, natural.
+
+Christianity did not come with tidings of great joy, but with a message
+of eternal grief. It came with the threat of everlasting torture on its
+lips. It meant war on earth and perdition hereafter.
+
+It taught some good things--the beauty of love and kindness in man. But
+as a torch-bearer, as a bringer of joy, it has been a failure. It has
+given infinite consequences to the acts of finite beings, crushing the
+soul with a responsibility too great for mortals to bear. It has filled
+the future with fear and flame, and made God the keeper of an eternal
+penitentiary, destined to be the home of nearly all the sons of men. Not
+satisfied with that, it has deprived God of the pardoning power.
+
+In answer to this "Christmas Sermon" the Rev. Dr. J. M. Buckley, editor
+of the Christian Advocate, the recognized organ of the Methodist
+Church, wrote an article, calling upon the public to boycott the Evening
+Telegram for publishing such a "sermon."
+
+This attack was headed "Lies That Are Mountainous." The Telegram
+promptly accepted the issue raised by Dr. Buckley and dared him to do
+his utmost. On the very same day it published an answer from Colonel
+Ingersoll that echoed throughout America.'
+
+And yet it may have done some good by borrowing from the Pagan world the
+old festival called Christmas.
+
+Long before Christ was born the Sun-God triumphed over the powers
+of Darkness. About the time that we call Christmas the days begin
+perceptibly to lengthen. Our barbarian ancestors were worshipers of the
+sun, and they celebrated his victory over the hosts of night. Such a
+festival was natural and beautiful. The most natural of all religions is
+the worship of the sun. Christianity adopted this festival. It borrowed
+from the Pagans the best it has.
+
+I believe in Christmas and in every day that has been set apart for joy.
+We in America have too much work and not enough play. We are too much
+like the English.
+
+I think it was Heinrich Heine who said that he thought a blaspheming
+Frenchman was a more pleasing object to God than a praying Englishman.
+We take our joys too sadly. I am in favor of all the good free days--the
+more the better.
+
+Christmas is a good day to forgive and forget--a good day to throw away
+prejudices and hatreds--a good day to fill your heart and your house,
+and the hearts and houses of others, with sunshine.
+
+R. G Ingersoll.
+
+
+COL. INGERSOLL'S REPLY TO Dr. BUCKLEY.
+
+II.
+
+WHENEVER an orthodox editor attacks an unbeliever, look out for
+kindness, charity and love.
+
+The gentle editor of the _Christian Advocate_ charges me with having
+written three "gigantic falsehoods," and he points them out as follows:
+_First_--"Christianity did not come with tidings of great joy? but with
+a message of eternal grief."
+
+_Second_--"It [Christianity] has filled the future with fear and flame,
+and made God the keeper of an eternal penitentiary, destined to be the
+home of nearly all the sons of men."
+
+_Third_--"Not satisfied with that, it [Christianity] has deprived God of
+the pardoning power."
+
+Now, let us take up these "gigantic falsehoods" in their order and see
+whether they are in accord with the New Testament or not--whether they
+are supported by the creed of the Methodist Church.
+
+I insist that Christianity did not come with tidings of great joy, but
+with a message of eternal grief.
+
+According to the orthodox creeds, Christianity came with the tidings
+that the human race was totally depraved, and that all men were in a
+lost condition, and that all who rejected or failed to believe the new
+religion, would be tormented in eternal fire.
+
+These were not "tidings of great joy."
+
+If the passengers on some great ship were told that the ship was to be
+wrecked, that a few would be saved and that nearly all would go to
+the bottom, would they talk about "tidings of great joy"? It is to be
+presumed that Christ knew what his mission was, and what he came for.
+He says: "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I came not to
+send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against
+his father, and the daughter against her mother." In my judgment, these
+are not "tidings of great joy."
+
+Now, as to the message of eternal grief:
+
+"Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye
+cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels."
+
+"And these shall go away into everlasting punishment; but the righteous
+[meaning the Methodists] into life eternal."
+
+"He that believeth not shall be damned."
+
+"He that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God
+abideth on him."
+
+"Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul;
+but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in
+hell."
+
+"And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up forever and ever."
+
+Knowing, as we do, that but few people have been believers, that during
+the last eighteen hundred years not one in a hundred has died in the
+faith, and that consequently nearly all the dead are in hell, it can
+truthfully be said that Christianity came with a message of eternal
+grief.
+
+Now, as to the second "gigantic falsehood," to the effect that
+Christianity filled the future with fear and flame, and made God the
+keeper of an eternal penitentiary, destined to be the home of nearly all
+the sons of men.
+
+In the Old Testament there is nothing about punishment in some other
+world, nothing about the flames and torments of hell. When Jehovah
+killed one of his enemies he was satisfied. His revenge was glutted
+when the victim was dead. The Old Testament gave the future to sleep and
+oblivion. But in the New Testament we are told that the punishment
+in another world is everlasting, and that "the smoke of their torment
+ascendeth up forever and ever."
+
+This awful doctrine, these frightful texts, filled the future with
+fear and flame. Building on these passages, the orthodox churches have
+constructed a penitentiary, in which nearly all the sons of men are
+to be imprisoned and tormented forever, and of this prison God is the
+keeper. The doors are opened only to receive.
+
+The doctrine of eternal punishment is the infamy of infamies. As I have
+often said, the man who believes in eternal torment, in the justice of
+endless pain, is suffering from at least two diseases--petrifaction of
+the heart and putrefaction of the brain.
+
+The next question is whether Christianity has deprived God of the
+pardoning power.
+
+The Methodist Church and every orthodox church teaches that this life
+is a period of probation; that there is no chance given for reformation
+after death; that God gives no opportunity to repent in another world.
+
+This is the doctrine of the Christian world. If this dogma be true, then
+God will never release a soul from hell--the pardoning power will never
+be exercised.
+
+How happy God will be and how happy all the saved will be, knowing
+that billions and billions of his children, of their fathers, mothers,
+brothers, sisters, wives, and children are convicts in the eternal
+dungeons, and that the words of pardon will never be spoken!
+
+Yet this is in accordance with the promise contained in the New
+Testament, of happiness here and eternal joy hereafter, to those who
+would desert brethren or sisters, or father or mother, or wife or
+children.
+
+It seems to me clear that Christianity did not bring "tidings of great
+joy," but that it came with a "message of eternal grief"--that it did
+"fill the future with fear and flame," that it did make God "the keeper
+of an eternal penitentiary," that the penitentiary "was destined to be
+the home of nearly all the sons of men," and that "it deprived God of
+the pardoning power."
+
+Of course you can find passages full of peace, in the Bible, others of
+war--some filled with mercy, and others cruel as the fangs of a wild
+beast.
+
+According to the Methodists, God has an eternal prison--an everlasting
+Siberia. There is to be an eternity of grief, of agony and shame.
+
+What do I think of what the Doctor says about the _Telegram_ for having
+published my Christmas sermon?
+
+The editor of the _Christian Advocate_ has no idea of what intellectual
+liberty means. He ought to know that a man should not be insulted
+because another man disagrees with him.
+
+What right has Dr. Buckley to disagree with Cardinal Gibbons, and what
+right has Cardinal Gibbons to disagree with Dr. Buckley? The same right
+that I have to disagree with them both.
+
+I do not warn people against reading Catholic or Methodist papers or
+books. But I do tell them to investigate for themselves--to stand by
+what they believe to be true, to deny the false, and, above all things,
+to preserve their mental manhood. The good Doctor wants the _Telegram_
+destroyed--wants all religious people to unite for the purpose of
+punishing the _Telegram_--because it published something with which the
+reverend Doctor does not agree, or rather that does not agree with the
+Doctor.
+
+It is too late. That day has faded in the West of the past. The doctor
+of theology has lost his power. Theological thunder has lost its
+lightning--it is nothing now but noise, pleasing those who make it and
+amusing those who hear.
+
+The _Telegram_ has nothing to fear. It is, in the highest sense, a
+newspaper--wide-awake, alive, always on time, good to its friends, fair
+with its enemies, and true to the public.
+
+What have I to say to the Doctor's personal abuse?
+
+Nothing. A man may call me a devil, or the devil, or he may say that I
+am incapable of telling the truth, or that I tell lies, and yet all this
+proves nothing. My arguments remain unanswered.
+
+I cannot afford to call Dr. Buckley names, I have good mental manners.
+The cause I represent (in part) is too great, too sacred, to be stained
+by an ignorant or a malicious personality.
+
+I know that men do as they must with the light they have, and so I
+say--More light!
+
+
+III.
+
+THE Rev. James M. King--who seems to have taken this occasion to become
+known--finds fault because "blasphemous utterances concerning Christmas"
+were published in the _Telegram_, and were allowed "to greet the eyes of
+innocent children and pure women."
+
+How is it possible to blaspheme a day? One day is not, in and of itself,
+holier than another--that is to say, two equal spaces of time are
+substantially alike. We call a day "good" or "bad" according to what
+happens in the day. A day filled with happiness, with kind words, with
+noble deeds, is a good day. A day filled with misfortunes and anger and
+misery we call a bad day. But how is it possible to blaspheme a day?
+
+A man may or may not believe that Christ was born on the 2 5th of
+December, and yet he may fill that day, so far as he is concerned,
+with good thoughts and words and deeds. Another may really believe
+that Christ was born on that day, and yet do his worst to make all
+his friends unhappy. But how can the rights of what are called "clean
+families" be violated by reading the honest opinions of others as to
+whether Christmas is kept in honor of the birth of Christ, or in honor
+of the triumph of the sun over the hosts of darkness? Are Christian
+families so weak intellectually that they cannot bear to hear the other
+side? Or is their case so weak that the slightest evidence overthrows
+it? Why do all these ministers insist that it is ill-bred to even raise
+a question as to the truth of the improbable, or as to the improbability
+of the impossible?
+
+A minister says to me that I am going to hell--that I am bound to be
+punished forever and ever--and thereupon I say to him: "There is no
+hell you are mistaken; your Bible is not inspired; no human being is to
+suffer agony forever;" and thereupon, with an injured look, he asks me
+this question: "Why do you hurt my feelings?" It does not occur to him
+that I have the slightest right to object to his sentence of eternal
+grief.
+
+Does the gentleman imagine that true men and pure women cannot differ
+with him? There are many thousands of people who love and honor the
+memory of Jesus Christ, who yet have not the slightest belief in his
+divine origin, and who do not for one moment imagine that he was other
+than a good and heroic man. And there are thousands of people who
+admire the character of Jesus Christ who do not believe that he ever
+existed--who admire the character of Christ as they admire Imogen, or
+Per-dita, not believing that any of the characters mentioned actually
+lived.
+
+And it may be well enough here to state that no human being hates any
+really good man or good woman--that is, no human being hates a man known
+to be good--a woman known to be pure and good. No human being hates a
+lovable character.
+
+It is perfectly easy for any one with the slightest imagination to
+understand how other people differ from him. I do not attribute a bad
+motive to a man simply because he disagrees with me. I do not say that a
+man is a Christian or a Mohammedan "for revenue only." I do not say that
+a man joins the Democratic party simply for office, or that he marches
+with the Republicans simply for position. I am willing to hear his
+reasons--with his motives I have nothing to do.
+
+Mr. King imagines that I have denounced Christianity "for revenue
+only." Is he willing to admit that we have drifted so far from orthodox
+religion that the way to make money is to denounce Christianity? I can
+hardly believe, for joy, that liberty of thought has advanced so far.
+I regret exceedingly that there is not an absolute foundation for his
+remark. I am indeed sorry that it is possible in this world of ours for
+any human being to make a living out of the ignorance and fear of his
+fellow-men. Still, it gives me great hope for the future to read, even
+in this ignorant present, that there is one man, and that man myself,
+who advocates human liberty--the absolute enfranchisement of the
+soul--and does it "for revenue"--because this charge is such a splendid
+compliment to my fellow-men.
+
+Possibly the remark of the Rev. Mr. King will be gratifying to the
+_Telegram_ and will satisfy that brave and progressive sheet that it is
+in harmony with the intelligence of the age.
+
+My opinion is that the _Telegram_ will receive the praise of enlightened
+and generous people.
+
+Personally I judge a man not so much by his theories as by his practice,
+and I would much rather meet on the desert--were I about to perish for
+want of water--a Mohammedan who would give me a drink than a Christian
+who would not; because, after all is said and done, we are compelled to
+judge people by their actions.
+
+I do not know what takes place in the invisible world called the brain,
+inhabited by the invisible something we call the mind. All that takes
+place there is invisible and soundless. This mind, hidden in this brain,
+masked by flesh, remains forever unseen, and the only evidence we
+can possibly have as to what occurs in that world, we obtain from the
+actions of the man, of the woman. By these actions we judge of the
+character, of the soul. So I make up my mind as to whether a man is good
+or bad, not by his theories, but by his actions.
+
+Under no circumstances can the expression of an honest opinion, couched
+in becoming language, amount to blasphemy. And right here it may be well
+enough to inquire: What is blasphemy?
+
+A man who knowingly assaults the true, who knowingly endeavors to stain
+the pure, who knowingly maligns the good and noble, is a blasphemer. A
+man who deserts the truth because it is unpopular is a blasphemer. He
+who runs with the hounds knowing that the hare is in the right is a
+blasphemer.
+
+In the soul of every man, or in the temple inhabited by the soul, there
+is one niche in which can be found the statue of the ideal. In
+the presence of this statue the good man worships--the bad man
+blasphemes--that is to say, he is not true to the ideal.
+
+A man who slanders a pure woman or an honest man is a blasphemer. So,
+too, a man who does not give the honest transcript of his mind is
+a blasphemer. If a man really thinks the character of Jehovah, as
+portrayed in the Old Testament, is good, and he denounces Jehovah as
+bad, he is a blasphemer. If he really believes that the character of
+Jehovah, as portrayed in the Old Testament, is bad, and he pronounces it
+good, he is a blasphemer and a coward.
+
+All laws against "blasphemy" have been passed by the numerically strong
+and intellectually weak. These laws have been passed by those who,
+finding no help in logic, appealed to the legislature.
+
+Back of all these superstitions you will find some self-interest. I do
+not say that this is true in every case, but I do say that if priests
+had not been fond of mutton, lambs never would have been sacrificed to
+God. Nothing was ever carried to the temple that the priest could not
+use, and it always so happened that God wanted what his agents liked.
+
+Now, I will not say that all priests have been priests "for revenue
+only," but I must say that the history of the world tends to show that
+the sacerdotal class prefer revenue without religion to religion without
+revenue.
+
+I am much obliged to the Rev. Mr. King for admitting that an infidel
+has a right to publish his views at his own expense, and with the utmost
+cheerfulness I accord that right to a Christian. The only thing I have
+ever objected to is the publication of his views at the expense of
+others.
+
+I cannot admit, however, that the ideas contained in what is known as
+the Christmas Sermon are "revolting to a vast majority of the people who
+give character to the community in which we live." I suppose that a
+very large majority of men and women who disagree with me are perfectly
+satisfied that I have the right to disagree with them, and that I do not
+disagree with them to any greater degree than they disagree with me.
+And I also imagine that a very large majority of intelligent people are
+perfectly willing to hear the other side.
+
+I do not regard religious opinions or political opinions as exotics that
+have to be kept under glass, protected from the frosts of common sense
+or the tyrannous north wind of logic. Such plants are hardly worth
+preserving. They certainly ought to be hardy enough to stand the climate
+of free discussion, and if they cannot, the sooner they die the better.
+
+I do not think there was anything blasphemous or impure in the words
+published by, the _Telegram_. The most that can possibly be said against
+them, calculated to excite the prejudice of Christians, is that they
+were true--that they cannot be answered except by abuse.
+
+It is not possible, in this day and generation, to stay the rising flood
+of intellectual freedom by keeping the names of thinkers out of print.
+The church has had the field for eighteen hundred years. For most
+of this time it has held the sword and purse of the world. For many
+centuries it controlled colleges and universities and schools. It had
+within its gift wealth and honor. It held the keys, so far as this world
+is concerned, of heaven and hell--that is to say, of prosperity and
+misfortune. It pursued its enemies even to the grave. It reddened the
+scaffold with the best blood, and kept the sword of persecution wet
+for many centuries. Thousands and thousands have died in its dungeons.
+Millions of reputations have been blasted by its slanders. It has made
+millions of widows and orphans, and it has not only ruled this world,
+but it has pretended to hold the keys of eternity, and under this
+pretence it has sentenced countless millions to eternal flames.
+
+At last the spirit of independence rose against its monstrous
+assumptions. It has been growing some-what weaker. It has been for many
+years gradually losing its power. The sword of the state belongs now
+to the people. The partnership between altar and throne has in many
+countries been dissolved. The adulterous marriage of church and state
+has ceased to exist. Men are beginning to express their honest thoughts.
+In the arena where speech is free, superstition is driven to the wall.
+Man relies more and more on the facts in nature, and the real priest is
+the interpreter of nature. The pulpit is losing its power. In a little
+while religion will take its place with astrology, with the black art,
+and its ministers will take rank with magicians and sleight-of-hand
+performers.
+
+With regard to the letter of the Rev. Thomas Dixon, Jr., I have but
+little to say.
+
+I am glad that he believes in a free platform and a free press--that he,
+like Lucretia Mott, believes in "truth for authority, and not authority
+for truth." At the same time I do not see how the fact that I am not a
+scientist has the slightest bearing upon the question; but if there is
+any fact that I have avoided or misstated, then I wish that fact to be
+pointed out. I admit also, that I am a "sentimentalist"--that is, that I
+am governed, to a certain extent, by sentiment--that my mind is so that
+cruelty is revolting and that mercy excites my love and admiration. I
+admit that I am so much of "a sentimentalist" that I have no love for
+the Jehovah of the Old Testament, and that it is impossible for me
+to believe a creed that fills the prison house of hell with countless
+billions of men, women and children.
+
+I am also glad that the reverend gentleman admits that I have "stabbed
+to the heart hundreds of superstitions and lies," and I hope to stab
+many, many more, and if I succeed in stabbing all lies to the
+heart there will be no foundation left for what I called "orthodox"
+Christianity--but goodness will survive, justice will live, and the
+flower of mercy will shed its perfume forever.
+
+When we take into consideration the fact that the Rev. Mr. Dixon is a
+minister and believes that he is called upon to deliver to the people a
+divine message, I do not wonder that he makes the following assertion:
+"If God could choose Balaam's ass to speak a divine message, I do not
+see why he could not utilize the Colonel." It is natural for a man to
+justify himself and to defend his own occupation. Mr. Dixon, however,
+will remember that the ass was much superior to the prophet of God, and
+that the argument was all on the side of the ass. And, furthermore, that
+the spiritual discernment of the ass far exceeded that of the prophet.
+It was the ass who saw the angel when the prophet's eye was dim. I
+suggest to the Rev. Mr. Dixon that he read the account once more, and he
+will find:--
+
+_First_, that the ass _first_ saw the angel of the Lord; _second_, that
+the prophet Balaam was cruel, unreasonable, and brutal; _third_, that
+the prophet so lost his temper that he wanted to kill the innocent
+ass, and the ass, not losing her temper, reasoned with the prophet and
+demonstrated not only her intellectual but her moral superiority. In
+addition to all this the angel of the Lord had to open the eyes of the
+prophet--in other words, had to work a miracle--in order to make the
+prophet equal to the ass, and not only so, but rebuked him for his
+cruelty. And this same angel admitted that without any miracle whatever
+the ass saw him--the angel--showing that the spiritual discernment of
+the ass in those days was far superior to that of the prophet.
+
+I regret that the Rev. Mr. King loses his temper and that the Rev. Mr.
+Dixon is not quite polite.
+
+All of us should remember that passion clouds the judgment, and that he
+who seeks for victory loses sight of the cause.
+
+And there is another thing: He who has absolute confidence in the
+justice of his position can afford to be good-natured. Strength is the
+foundation of kindness; weakness is often malignant, and when argument
+fails passion comes to the rescue.
+
+Let us be good-natured. Let us have respect for the rights of each
+other.
+
+The course pursued by the _Telegram_ is worthy of all praise. It has not
+only been just to both sides, but it has been--as is its custom--true to
+the public.
+
+Robert G. Ingersoll.
+
+
+INGERSOLL AGAIN ANSWERS HIS CRITICS.
+
+IV.
+
+_To the Editor of the Evening Telegram _:
+
+SOME of the gentlemen who have given their ideas through the columns of
+the _Telegram_ have wandered from the questions under discussion. It may
+be well enough to state what is really in dispute.
+
+I was called to account for having stated that Christianity did not
+bring "tidings of great joy," but a message of eternal grief--that it
+filled the future with fear and flame--made God the keeper of an eternal
+penitentiary, in which most of the children of men were to be imprisoned
+forever, and that, not satisfied with that, it had deprived God of the
+pardoning power.
+
+These statements were called "mountainous lies" by the Rev. Dr.
+Buckley, and because the _Telegram_ had published the "Christmas Sermon"
+containing these statements, he insisted that such a paper should not be
+allowed in the families of Christians or of Jews--in other words, that
+the _Telegram_ should be punished, and that good people should refuse to
+allow that sheet to come into their homes.
+
+It will probably be admitted by all fair-minded people that if the
+orthodox creeds be true, then Christianity was and is the bearer of a
+message of eternal grief, and a large majority of the human race are to
+become eternal convicts, and God has deprived himself of the pardoning
+power. According to those creeds, no word of mercy to any of the lost
+can ever fall from the lips of the Infinite.
+
+The Universalists deny that such was or is the real message of
+Christianity. They insist that all are finally to be saved. If that
+doctrine be true, then I admit that Christianity came with "tidings of
+great joy."
+
+Personally I have no quarrel with the Univer-salist Church. I have no
+quarrel with any creed that expresses hope for all of the human race.
+I find fault with no one for filling the future with joy--for dreaming
+splendid dreams and for uttering splendid prophecies. I do not object
+to Christianity because it promises heaven to a few, but because it
+threatens the many with perdition.
+
+It does not seem possible to me that a God who loved men to that degree
+that he died that they might be saved, abandons his children the moment
+they are dead. It seems to me that an infinite God might do something
+for a soul after it has reached the other world.
+
+Is it possible that infinite wisdom can do no more than is done for a
+majority of souls in this world?
+
+Think of the millions born in ignorance and filth, raised in poverty and
+crime. Think of the millions who are only partially developed in this
+world. Think of the weakness of the will, of the power of passion. Think
+of the temptations innumerable. Think, too, of the tyranny of man, of
+the arrogance of wealth and position, of the sufferings of the weak--and
+can we then say that an infinite God has done, in this world, all
+that could be done for the salvation of his children? Is it not barely
+possible that something may be done in another world? Is there nothing
+left for God to do for a poor, ignorant, criminal human soul after it
+leaves this world? Can God do nothing except to pronounce the sentence
+of eternal pain?
+
+I insist that if the orthodox creed be true, Christianity did not come
+with "tidings of great joy," but that its message was and is one of
+eternal grief.
+
+If the orthodox creed be true, the universe is a vast blunder--an
+infinite crime. Better, a thousand times, that every pulse of life
+should cease--better that all the gods should fall palsied from their
+thrones, than that the creed of Christendom should be true.
+
+There is another question and that involves the freedom of the press.
+
+The _Telegram_ has acted with the utmost fairness and with the highest
+courage. After all, the American people admire the man who takes
+his stand and bravely meets all comers. To be an instrumentality of
+progress, the press must be free. Only the free can carry a torch.
+Liberty sheds light.
+
+The editor or manager of a newspaper occupies a public position, and
+he must not treat his patrons as though they were weak and ignorant
+children. He must not, in the supposed interest of any ism, suppress the
+truth--neither must he be dictated to by any church or any society of
+believers or unbelievers. The _Telegram_, by its course, has given
+a certificate of its manliness, and the public, by its course, has
+certified that it appreciates true courage.
+
+All Christians should remember that facts are not sectarian, and that
+the sciences are not bound by the creeds. We should remember that there
+are no such things as Methodist mathematics, or Baptist botany, or
+Catholic chemistry. The sciences are secular. .
+
+The Rev. Mr. Peters seems to have mistaken the issues--and yet, in some
+things, I agree with him. He is certainly right when he says that "Mr.
+Buckley's cry to boycott the Telegram is unmanly and un-American," but I
+am not certain that he is right when he says that it is un-Christian.
+
+The church has not been in the habit of pursuing enemies with kind
+words and charitable deeds. To tell the truth, it has always been rather
+relentless. It has preached forgiveness, but it has never forgiven.
+There is in the history of Christendom no instance where the church has
+extended the hand of friendship to a man who denied the truth of its
+creed.
+
+There is in the church no spirit--no climate--of compromise. In the
+nature of things there can be none, because the church claims that it
+is absolutely right--that there is only one road leading to heaven.
+It demands unconditional surrender. It will not bear contradiction.
+It claims to have the absolute truth. For these reasons it cannot
+consistently compromise, any more than a mathematician could change the
+multiplication table to meet the view of some one who should deny that
+five times five are twenty-five.
+
+The church does not give its opinion--it claims to know--it demands
+belief. Honesty, industry, generosity count for nothing in the absence
+of belief. It has taught and still teaches that no man can reach heaven
+simply through good and honest deeds. It believes and teaches that the
+man who relies upon himself will be eternally punished--and why should
+the church forgive a man whom it thinks its God is waiting somewhat
+impatiently to damn?
+
+The Rev. Mr. Peters asks--and probably honestly thinks that the
+questions are pertinent to the issues involved--"What has infidelity
+done for the world? What colleges, hospitals, and schools has it
+founded? What has it done for the elevation of public morals?" And he
+inquires what science or art has been originated by infidelity. He asks
+how many slaves it has liberated, how many inebriates it has reclaimed,
+how many fallen women it has restored, and what it did for the relief
+of the wounded and dying soldiers; and concludes by asking what life it
+ever assisted to higher holiness, and what death it has ever cheered.
+
+Although these questions have nothing whatever to do with the matters
+under discussion, still it may be well enough to answer them.
+
+It is cheerfully admitted that hospitals and asylums have been built
+by Christians in Christian countries, and it is also admitted that
+hospitals and asylums have been built in countries not Christian; that
+there were such institutions in China thousands of years before Christ
+was born, and that many centuries before the establishment of any
+orthodox church there were asylums on the banks of the Nile--asylums for
+the old, the poor, the infirm--asylums for the blind and for the insane,
+and that the Egyptians, even of those days, endeavored to cure insanity
+with kindness and affection. The same is true of India and probably of
+most ancient nations.
+
+There has always been more or less humanity in man--more or less
+goodness in the human heart. So far as we know, mothers have always
+loved their children. There must always have been more good than evil,
+otherwise the human race would have perished. The best things in the
+Christian religion came from the heart of man. Pagan lips uttered
+the sublimest of truths, and all ages have been redeemed by honesty,
+heroism, and love.
+
+But let me answer these questions in their order.
+
+_First_--As to the schools.
+
+It is most cheerfully admitted that the Catholics have always been
+in favor of education--that is to say, of education enough to make a
+Catholic out of a heathen. It is also admitted that Protestants have
+always been in favor of enough education to make a Protestant out of a
+Catholic. Many schools and many colleges have been established for the
+spread of what is called the Gospel and for the education of the clergy.
+Presbyterians have founded schools for the benefit of their creed.
+The Methodists have established colleges for the purpose of making
+Methodists. The same is true of nearly all the sects. As a matter of
+fact, these schools have in many important directions hindered rather
+than helped the cause of real education. The pupils were not taught to
+investigate for themselves. They were not allowed to think. They were
+told that thought is dangerous. They were stuffed and crammed with
+creeds--with the ideas of others. Their credulity was applauded and
+their curiosity condemned. If all the people had been educated in these
+sectarian schools, all the people would have been far more ignorant
+than they are. These schools have been, and most of them still are, the
+enemies of higher education, and just to the extent that they are under
+the control of theologians they are hindrances, and just to the extent
+that they have become secularized they have been and are a benefit.
+
+Our public-school system is not Christian. It is secular. Yet I admit
+that it never could have been established without the assistance of
+Christians--neither could it have been supported without the assistance
+of others. But such is the value placed upon education that people of
+nearly all denominations, and of nearly all religions, and of nearly all
+opinions, for the most part agree that the children of a nation should
+be educated by the nation. Some religious people are opposed to these
+schools because they are not religious--because they do not teach some
+creed--but a large majority of the people stand by the public schools
+as they are. These schools are growing better and better, simply because
+they are growing less and less theological, more and more secular.
+
+Infidelity, or agnosticism, or free thought, has insisted that only that
+should be taught in schools which somebody knows or has good reason to
+believe.
+
+The greatest professors in our colleges to-day are those who have the
+least confidence in the supernatural, and the schools that stand highest
+in the estimation of the most intelligent are those that have drifted
+farthest from the orthodox creeds. Free thought has always been and ever
+must be the friend of education. Without free thought there can be no
+such thing--in the highest sense--as a school. Unless the mind is free,
+there are no teachers and there are no pupils, in any just and splendid
+sense.
+
+The church has been and still is the enemy of education, because it has
+been in favor of intellectual slavery, and the theological schools have
+been what might be called the deformatories of the human mind.
+
+For instance: A man is graduated from an orthodox university. In this
+university he has studied astronomy, and yet he believes that Joshua
+stopped the sun. He has studied geology, and yet he asserts the truth
+of the Mosaic cosmogony. He has studied chemistry, and yet believes that
+water was turned into wine. He has been taught the ordinary theory of
+cause and effect, and at the same time he thoroughly believes in the
+miraculous multiplication of loaves and fishes. Can such an institution,
+with any propriety, be called a seat of learning? Can we not say of such
+a university what Bruno said of Oxford: "Learning is dead and Oxford is
+its widow."
+
+Year after year the religious colleges are improving--simply because
+they are becoming more and more secular, less and less theological.
+Whether infidelity has founded universities or not, it can truthfully be
+said that the spirit of investigation, the spirit of free thought, the
+attitude of mental independence, contended for by those who are called
+infidels, have made schools useful instead of hurtful.
+
+Can it be shown that any infidel has ever raised his voice against
+education? Can there be found in the literature of free thought one
+line against the enlightenment of the human race? Has free thought ever
+endeavored to hide or distort, a fact? Has it not always appealed to the
+senses--to demonstration? It has not said, "He that hath ears to hear,
+let him hear," but it has said, "He that hath brains to think, let him
+think."
+
+The object of a school should be to ascertain truth in every direction,
+to the end that man may know the conditions of happiness--and every
+school should be absolutely free. No teacher should be bound by anything
+except a perceived fact. He should not be the slave of a creed, engaged
+in the business of enslaving others.
+
+So much for schools.
+
+
+Second--As to public morals.
+
+Christianity teaches that all offences can be forgiven. Every church
+unconsciously allows people to commit crimes on a credit. I do not
+mean by this that any church consciously advocates immorality. I
+most cheerfully admit that thousands and thousands of ministers are
+endeavoring to do good--that they are pure, self-denying men, trying
+to make this world better. But there is a frightful defect in their
+philosophy. They say to the bank cashier: You must not steal, you must
+not take a dollar--larceny is wrong, it is contrary to all law, human
+and divine--but if you do steal every cent in the bank, God will as
+gladly, quickly forgive you in Canada as he will in the United States.
+On the other hand, what is called infidelity says: There is no being in
+the universe who rewards, and there is no being who punishes--every act
+has its consequences. If the act is good, the consequences are good; if
+the act is bad, the consequences are bad; and these consequences must be
+borne by the actor. It says to every human being: You must reap what
+you sow. There is no reward, there is no punishment, but there are
+consequences, and these consequences are the invisible and implacable
+police of nature. They cannot be avoided. They cannot be bribed. No
+power can awe them, and there is not gold enough in the world to make
+them pause. Even a God cannot induce them to release for one instant
+their victim.
+
+This great truth is, in my judgment, the gospel of morality. If all
+men knew that they must inevitably bear the consequences of their own
+actions--if they absolutely knew that they could not injure another
+without injuring themselves, the world, in my judgment, would be far
+better than it is.
+
+Free thought has attacked the morality of what is called the atonement.
+The innocent should not suffer for the guilty, and if the innocent
+does suffer for the guilty, that cannot by any possibility justify the
+guilty. The reason a thing is wrong is because it, in some way, causes
+the innocent to suffer. This being the very essence of wrong, how can
+the suffering of innocence justify the guilty? If there be a world of
+joy, he who is worthy to enter that world must be willing to carry his
+own burdens in this.
+
+So much for morality.
+
+
+Third--As to sciences and art.
+
+I do not believe that we are indebted to Christianity for any science.
+I do not remember that one science is mentioned in the New Testament.
+There is not one word, so far as I remember, about education--nothing
+about any science, nothing about art. The writers of the New Testament
+seem to have thought that the world was about coming to an end. This
+world was to be sacrificed absolutely to the next. The affairs of this
+life were not worth speaking of. All people were exhorted to prepare at
+once for the other life.
+
+The sciences have advanced in the proportion that they did not interfere
+with orthodox theology. To the extent that they were supposed to
+interfere with theology they have been obstructed and denounced.
+Astronomy was found to be inconsistent with the Scriptures, and the
+astronomers were imprisoned and despised. Geology contradicted the
+Mosaic account, and the geologists were denounced and persecuted. Every
+step taken in astronomy was taken in spite of the church, and every fact
+in geology had to fight its way. The same is true as to the science of
+medicine. The church wished to cure disease by necromancy, by charm and
+prayer, and with the bones of the saints. The church wished man to
+rely entirely upon God--that is to say, upon the church--and not upon
+himself. The physician interfered with the power and prosperity of the
+priest, and those who appealed to physicians were denounced as lacking
+faith in God. This state of things existed even in the Old Testament
+times. A king failed to send for the prophets, but sent for a physician,
+and then comes this piece of grim humor: "And Asa slept with his
+fathers."
+
+The great names in science are not those of recognized saints.
+
+Bruno--one of the greatest and bravest of men--greatest of all
+martyrs--perished at the stake, because he insisted on the existence of
+other worlds and taught the astronomy of Galileo.
+
+Humboldt--in some respects the wisest man known to the scientific
+world--denied the existence of the supernatural and "the truths of
+revealed religion," and yet he revolutionized the thought of his day and
+left a legacy of intellectual glory to the race.
+
+Darwin--greatest of scientists--so great that our time will probably
+be known as "Darwin's Century"--had not the slightest confidence in any
+possible phase of the so-called supernatural. This great man left the
+creed of Christendom without a foundation. He brought as witnesses
+against the inspiration of the Scriptures such a multitude of facts,
+such an overwhelming amount of testimony, that it seems impossible to
+me that any unprejudiced man can, after hearing the testimony, remain
+a believer in evangelical religion. He accomplished more than all the
+schools, colleges, and universities that Christianity has founded. He
+revolutionized the philosophy of the civilized world.
+
+The writers who have done most for science have been the most bitterly
+opposed by the church. There is hardly a valuable book in the libraries
+of the world that cannot be found on the "Index Expurgatorius." Kant
+and Fichte and Spinoza were far above and beyond the orthodox-world.
+Voltaire did more for freedom than any other man, and yet the church
+denounced him with a fury amounting to insanity--called him an atheist,
+although he believed not only in God, but in special providence. He was
+opposed to the church--that is to say, opposed to slavery, and for that
+reason he was despised.
+
+And what shall I say of D'Holbach, of Hume, of Buckle, of Draper,
+of Haeckel, of Buechner, of Tyndall and Huxley, of Auguste Comte, and
+hundreds and thousands of others who have filled the scientific world
+with light and the heart of man with love and kindness?
+
+It may be well enough, in regard to art, to say that Christianity is
+indebted to Greece and Rome for its highest conceptions, and it may be
+well to add that for many centuries Christianity did the best it could
+to destroy the priceless marbles of Greece and Rome. A few were buried,
+and in that way were saved from Christian fury.
+
+The same is true of the literature of the classic world. A few fragments
+were rescued, and these became the seeds of modern literature. A few
+statues were preserved, and they are to-day models for all the world.
+
+Of course it will be admitted that there is much art in Christian lands,
+because, in spite of the creeds, Christians, so-called, have turned
+their attention to this world. They have beautified their homes, they
+have endeavored to clothe themselves in purple and fine linen. They have
+been forced from banquets or from luxury by the difficulty of camels
+going through the eyes of needles or the impossibility of carrying water
+to the rich man. They have cultivated this world, and the arts have
+lived. Did they obey the precepts that they find in their sacred
+writings there would be no art, they would "take no thought for the
+morrow," they would "consider the lilies of the field."
+
+
+Fourth--As to the liberation of slaves.
+
+It was exceedingly unfortunate for the Rev. Mr. Peters that he spoke of
+slavery. The Bible upholds human slavery--white slavery. The Bible was
+quoted by all slaveholders and slave-traders. The man who went to Africa
+to steal women and children took the Bible with him. He planted himself
+firmly on the Word of God. As Whittier says of Whitefield:
+
+     "He bade the slave ship speed from coast to coast,
+     Fanned by the wings of the Holy Ghost."
+
+So when the poor wretches were sold to the planters, the planters
+defended their action by reading the Bible. When a poor woman was sold,
+her children torn from her breast, the auction block on which she stood
+was the Bible; the auctioneer who sold her quoted the Scriptures; the
+man who bought her repeated the quotations, and the ministers from
+the pulpit said to the weeping woman, as her child was carried away:
+"Servants, be obedient unto your masters."
+
+Freethinkers in all ages have been opposed to slavery. Thomas Paine
+did more for human liberty than any other man who ever stood upon the
+western world. The first article he ever wrote in this country was one
+against the institution of slavery. Freethinkers have also been in favor
+of free bodies. Freethinkers have always said "free hands," and the
+infidels, the wide world over, have been friends of freedom.
+
+
+Fifth--As to the reclamation of inebriates.
+
+Much has been said, and for many years, on the subject of
+temperance--much has been uttered by priests and laymen--and yet there
+seems to be a subtle relation between rum and religion. Scotland is
+extremely orthodox, yet it is not extremely temperate. England is
+nothing if not religious, and London is, par excellence, the
+Christian city of the world, and yet it is the most intemperate. The
+Mohammedans--followers of a false prophet--do not drink.
+
+
+Sixth--As to the humanity of infidelity.
+
+Can it be said that people have cared for the wounded and dying only
+because they were orthodox?
+
+Is it not true that religion, in its efforts to propagate the creed of
+forgiveness by the sword, has caused the death of more than one hundred
+and fifty millions of human beings? Is it not true that where the church
+has cared for one orphan it has created hundreds? Can Christianity
+afford to speak of war?
+
+The Christian nations of the world to-day are armed against each
+other. In Europe, all that can be gathered by taxation--all that can be
+borrowed by pledging the prosperity of the future--the labor of those
+yet unborn--is used for the purpose of keeping Christians in the field,
+to the end that they may destroy other Christians, or at least prevent
+other Christians from destroying them. Europe is covered with churches
+and fortifications, with temples and with forts--hundreds of thousands
+of priests, millions of soldiers, countless Bibles and countless
+bayonets--and that whole country is oppressed and impoverished for the
+purpose of carrying on war. The people have become deformed by labor,
+and yet Christianity boasts of peace.
+
+
+Seventh--"And what death has infidelity ever cheered?"
+
+Is it possible for the orthodox Christian to cheer the dying when the
+dying is told that there is a world of eternal pain, and that he, unless
+he has been forgiven, is to be an eternal convict? Will it cheer him to
+know that, even if he is to be saved, countless millions are to be lost?
+Is it possible for the Christian religion to put a smile upon the face
+of death?
+
+On the other hand, what is called infidelity says to the dying: What
+happens to you will happen to all. If there be another world of joy, it
+is for all. If there is another life, every human being will have the
+eternal opportunity of doing right--the eternal opportunity to live, to
+reform, to enjoy. There is no monster in the sky. There is no Moloch who
+delights in the agony of his children. These frightful things are savage
+dreams.
+
+Infidelity puts out the fires of hell with the tears of pity.
+
+Infidelity puts the seven-hued arch of Hope over every grave.
+
+Let us then, gentlemen, come back to the real questions under
+discussion. Let us not wander away.
+
+Robert G. Ingersoll.
+
+Jan'y 9, 1891.
+
+
+INGERSOLL CONTINUES THE BATTLE.
+
+V.
+
+NO one objects to the morality of Christianity.
+
+The industrious people of the world--those who have anything--are, as
+a rule, opposed to larceny; a very large majority of people object to
+being murdered, and so we have laws against larceny and murder. A large
+majority of people believe in what they call, or what they understand
+to be, justice--at least as between others. There is no very great
+difference of opinion among civilized people as to what is or is not
+moral.
+
+It cannot truthfully be said that the man who attacks Buddhism attacks
+all morality. He does not attack goodness, justice, mercy, or anything
+that tends in his judgment to the welfare of mankind; but he attacks
+Buddhism. So one attacking what is called Christianity does not attack
+kindness, charity, or any virtue. He attacks something that has been
+added to the virtues. He does not attack the flower, but what he
+believes to be the parasite.
+
+If people, when they speak of Christianity, include the virtues common
+to all religions, they should not give Christianity credit for all the
+good that has been done. There were millions of virtuous men and women,
+millions of heroic and self-denying souls before Christianity was known.
+
+It does not seen possible to me that love, kindness, justice, or
+charity ever caused any one who possessed and practiced these virtues
+to persecute his fellow-man on account of a difference of belief. If
+Christianity has persecuted, some reason must exist outside of the
+virtues it has inculcated. If this reason--this cause--is inherent in
+that something else, which has been added to the ordinary virtues, then
+Christianity can properly be held accountable for the persecution. Of
+course back of Christianity is the nature of man, and, primarily, it may
+be responsible.
+
+Is there anything in Christianity that will account for such
+persecutions--for the Inquisition? It certainly was taught by the church
+that belief was necessary to salvation, and it was thought at the same
+time that the fate of man was eternal punishment; that the state of man
+was that of depravity, and that there was but one way by which he could
+be saved, and that was through belief--through faith. As long as this
+was honestly believed, Christians would not allow heretics or infidels
+to preach a doctrine to their wives, to their children, or to themselves
+which, in their judgment, would result in the damnation of souls.
+
+The law gives a father the right to kill one who is about to do great
+bodily harm to his son. Now, if a father has the right to take the life
+of a man simply because he is attacking the body of his son, how much
+more would he have the right to take the life of one who was about to
+assassinate the soul of his son!
+
+Christians reasoned in this way. In addition to this, they felt that
+God would hold the community responsible if the community allowed
+a blasphemer to attack the true religion. Therefore they killed the
+freethinker, or rather the free talker, in self-defence.
+
+At the bottom of religious persecution is the doctrine of self-defence;
+that is to say, the defence of the soul. If the founder of Christianity
+had plainly said: "It is not necessary to believe in order to be saved;
+it is only necessary to do, and he who really loves his fellow-men, who
+is kind, honest, just and charitable, is to be forever blest"--if he had
+only said that, there would probably have been but little persecution.
+
+If he had added to this: "You must not persecute in my name. The
+religion I teach is the Religion of Love--not the Religion of Force and
+Hatred. You must not imprison your fellow-men. You must not stretch them
+upon racks, or crush their bones in iron boots. You must not flay them
+alive. You must not cut off their eyelids, or pour molten lead into
+their ears. You must treat all with absolute kindness. If you cannot
+convert your neighbor by example, persuasion, argument, that is the end.
+You must never resort to force, and, whether he believes as you do or
+not, treat him always with kindness"--his followers then would not have
+murdered their fellows in his name.
+
+If Christ was in fact God, he knew the persecutions that would be
+carried on in his name; he knew the millions that would suffer death
+through torture; and yet he died without saying one word to prevent what
+he must have known, if he were God, would happen.
+
+All that Christianity has added to morality is worthless and useless.
+Not only so--it has been hurtful. Take Christianity from morality and
+the useful is left, but take morality from Christianity and the useless
+remains.
+
+Now, falling back on the old assertion, "By its fruits we may know
+Christianity," then I think we are justified in saying that, as
+Christianity consists of a mixture of morality and _something else_, and
+as morality never has persecuted a human being, and as Christianity has
+persecuted millions, the cause of the persecution must be the _something
+else_ that was added to morality.
+
+I cannot agree with the reverend gentleman when he says that
+"Christianity has taught mankind the priceless value and dignity of
+human nature." On the other hand, Christianity has taught that the
+whole human race is by nature depraved, and that if God should act
+in accordance with his sense of justice, all the sons of men would be
+doomed to eternal pain. Human nature has been derided, has been held up
+to contempt and scorn, all our desires and passions denounced as wicked
+and filthy.
+
+Dr. Da Costa asserts that Christianity has taught mankind the value of
+freedom. It certainly has not been the advocate of free thought; and
+what is freedom worth if the mind is to be enslaved?
+
+Dr. Da Costa knows that millions have been sacrificed in their efforts
+to be free; that is, millions have been sacrificed for exercising their
+freedom as against the church.
+
+It is not true that the church "has taught and established the fact of
+human brotherhood." This has been the result of a civilization to which
+Christianity itself has been hostile.
+
+Can we prove that "the church established human brotherhood" by
+banishing the Jews from Spain; by driving out the Moors; by the tortures
+of the Inquisition; by butchering the Covenanters of Scotland; by the
+burning of Bruno and Servetus; by the persecution of the Irish; by
+whipping and hanging Quakers in New England; by the slave trade; and by
+the hundreds of wars waged in the name of Christ?
+
+We all know that the Bible upholds slavery in its very worst and most
+cruel form; and how it can be said that a religion founded upon a Bible
+that upholds the institution of slavery has taught and established the
+fact of human brotherhood, is beyond my imagination to conceive.
+
+Neither do I think it true that "we are indebted to Christianity for the
+advancement of science, art, philosophy, letters and learning."
+
+I cheerfully admit that we are indebted to Christianity for some
+learning, and that the human mind has been developed by the discussion
+of the absurdities of superstition. Certainly millions and millions have
+had what might be called mental exercise, and their minds may have
+been somewhat broadened by the examination, even, of these absurdities,
+contradictions, and impossibilities. The church was not the friend of
+science or learning when it burned Vanini for writing his "Dialogues
+Concerning Nature." What shall we say of the "Index Expurgatorius"? For
+hundreds of years all books of any particular value were placed on the
+"Index," and good Catholics forbidden to read them. Was this in favor of
+science and learning?
+
+That we are indebted to Christianity for the advancement of science
+seems absurd. What science? Christianity was certainly the enemy of
+astronomy, and I believe that it was Mr. Draper who said that astronomy
+took her revenge, so that not a star that glitters in all the heavens
+bears a Christian name.
+
+Can it be said that the church has been the friend of geology, or of any
+true philosophy? Let me show how this is impossible.
+
+The church accepts the Bible as an inspired book. Then the only object
+is to find its meaning, and if that meaning is opposed to any result
+that the human mind may have reached, the meaning stands and the result
+reached by the mind must be abandoned.
+
+For hundreds of years the Bible was the standard, and whenever
+anything was asserted in any science contrary to-the Bible, the church
+immediately denounced the scientist. I admit the standard has been
+changed, and ministers are very busy, not trying to show that science
+does not agree with the Bible, but that the Bible agrees with science.
+
+Certainly Christianity has done little for art. The early Christians
+destroyed all the marbles of Greece and Rome upon which they could lay
+their violent hands; and nothing has been produced by the Christian
+world equal to the fragments that were accidentally preserved. There
+have been many artists who were Christians; but they were not artists
+because they were Christians; because there have been many Christians
+who were not artists. It cannot be said that art is born of any creed.
+The mode of expression may be determined, and probably is to a certain
+degree, by the belief of the artist; but not his artistic perception and
+feeling.
+
+So, Galileo did not make his discoveries because he was a Christian,
+but in spite of it. His Bible was the other way, and so was his creed.
+Consequently, they could not by any possibility have assisted him.
+Kepler did not discover or announce what are known as the "Three Laws"
+because he was a Christian; but, as I said about Galileo, in spite of
+his creed.
+
+Every Christian who has really found out and demonstrated and clung to
+a fact inconsistent with the absolute inspiration of the Scriptures, has
+done so certainly without the assistance of his creed.
+
+Let me illustrate this: When our ancestors were burning each other to
+please God; when they were ready to destroy a man with sword and
+flame for teaching the rotundity of the world, the Moors in Spain were
+teaching geography to their children with brass globes. So, too, they
+had observatories and knew something of the orbits of the stars.
+
+They did not find out these things because they were Mohammedans, or
+on account of their belief in the impossible. They were far beyond the
+Christians, intellectually, and it has been very poetically said by Mrs.
+Browning, that "Science was thrust into the brain of Europe on the point
+of a Moorish lance."
+
+From the Arabs we got our numerals, making mathematics of the higher
+branches practical. We also got from them the art of making cotton
+paper, which is almost at the foundation of modern intelligence. We
+learned from them to make cotton cloth, making cleanliness possible in
+Christendom.
+
+So from among people of different religions we have learned many useful
+things; but they did not discover them on account of their religion.
+
+It will not do to say that the religion of Greece was true because the
+Greeks were the greatest sculptors. Neither is it an argument in favor
+of monarchy that Shakespeare, the greatest of men, was born and lived in
+a monarchy.
+
+Dr. Da Costa takes one of the effects of a general cause, or of a vast
+number of causes, and makes it the cause, not only of other effects,
+but of the general cause. He seems to think that all events for
+many centuries, and especially all the good ones, were caused by
+Christianity.
+
+As a matter of fact, the civilization of our time is the result of
+countless causes with which Christianity had little to do, except by way
+of hindrance.
+
+Does the Doctor think that the material progress of the world was caused
+by this passage: "Take no thought for the morrow"?
+
+Does he seriously insist that the wealth of Christendom rests on this
+inspired declaration: "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye
+of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven"?
+
+The Rev. Mr. Peters, in answer, takes the ground that the Bible has
+produced the richest and most varied literature the world has ever seen.
+
+This, I think, is hardly true. Has not most of modern literature
+been produced in spite of the Bible? Did not Christians, for many
+generations, take the ground that the Bible was the only important book,
+and that books differing from the Bible should be destroyed?
+
+If Christianity--Catholic and Protestant--could have had its way, the
+works of Voltaire, Spinoza, Hume, Paine, Humboldt, Darwin, Haeckel,
+Spencer, Comte, Huxley, Tyndall, Draper, Goethe, Gibbon, Buckle and
+Buechner would not have been published. In short, the philosophy that
+enlightens and the fiction that enriches the brain would not exist.
+
+The greatest literature the world has ever seen is, in my judgment, the
+poetic--the dramatic; that is to say, the literature of fiction in its
+widest sense. Certainly if the church could have had control, the plays
+of Shakespeare never would have been written; the literature of the
+stage could not have existed; most works of fiction, and nearly all
+poetry, would have perished in the brain. So I think it hardly fair to
+say that "the Bible has produced the richest and most varied literature
+the world has ever seen."
+
+Thousands of theological books have been written on thousands of
+questions of no possible importance. Libraries have been printed on
+subjects not worth discussing--not worth thinking about--and that will,
+in a few years, be regarded as puerile by the whole world.
+
+Mr. Peters, in his enthusiasm, asks this question:
+
+"Who raised our great institutions of learning? Infidels never a stone
+of them!"
+
+Stephen Girard founded the best institution of learning, the best
+charity, the noblest ever founded in this or any other land; and under
+the roof built by his wisdom and his wealth many thousands of orphans
+have been reared, clothed, fed and educated, not only in books, but in
+avocations, and become happy and useful citizens. Under his will
+there has been distributed to the poor, fuel to the value of more than
+$500,000; and this distribution goes on year after year.
+
+One of the best observatories in the world was built by the generosity
+of James Lick, an infidel. I call attention to these two cases simply
+to show that the gentleman is mistaken, and that he was somewhat carried
+away by his zeal.
+
+So, too, Mr. Peters takes the ground that "we are indebted to
+Christianity for our chronology."
+
+According to Christianity this world has been peopled about six thousand
+years. Christian chronology gives the age of the first man, and then
+gives the line from father to son down to the flood, and from the flood
+down to the coming of Christ, showing that men have been upon the earth
+only about six thousand years. This chronology is infinitely absurd, and
+I do not believe that there is an intelligent, well-educated Christian
+in the world, having examined the subject, who will say that the
+Christian chronology is correct.
+
+Neither can it, I think, truthfully be said that "we are indebted
+to Christianity for the continuation of history." The best modern
+historians of whom I have any knowledge are Voltaire, Hume, Gibbon,
+Buckle and Draper.
+
+Neither can I admit that "we are indebted to Christianity for natural
+philosophy."
+
+I do not deny that some natural philosophers have also been Christians,
+or, rather, that some Christians have been natural philosophers to the
+extent that their Christianity permitted. But Lamarck and Humboldt and
+Darwin and Spencer and Haeckel and Huxley and Tyndall have done far more
+for natural philosophy than they have for orthodox religion.
+
+Whoever believes in the miraculous must be the enemy of natural
+philosophy. To him there is something above nature, liable to interfere
+with nature. Such a man has two classes of ideas in his mind, each
+inconsistent with the other. To the extent that he believes in the
+supernatural he is incapacitated for dealing with the natural, and to
+that extent fails to be a philosopher. Philosophy does not include the
+caprice of the Infinite. It is founded on the absolute integrity and
+invariability of nature.
+
+Neither do I agree with the reverend gentleman when he says that "we are
+indebted to Christianity for our knowledge of philology."
+
+The church taught for a long time that Hebrew was the first language and
+that other languages had been derived from that; and for hundreds and
+hundreds of years the efforts of philologists were arrested simply
+because they started with that absurd assumption and believed in the
+Tower of Babel.
+
+Christianity cannot now take the credit for "metaphysical research." It
+has always been the enemy of metaphysical research. It never has said
+to any human being, "Think!" It has always said, "Hear!" It does not
+ask anybody to investigate. It lays down certain doctrines as absolutely
+true, and, instead of asking investigation, it threatens every
+investigator with eternal pain. Metaphysical research is destroying what
+has been called Christianity, and Christians have always feared it.
+
+This gentleman makes another mistake, and a very common one. This is his
+argument: Christian countries are the most intelligent; therefore they
+owe that intelligence to Christianity. Then the next step is taken.
+Christianity, being the best, having produced these results, must have
+been of divine origin.
+
+Let us see what this proves. There was a time when Egypt was the first
+nation in the world. Could not an Egyptian, at that time have used the
+same arguments that Mr. Peters uses now, to prove that the religion
+of Egypt was divine? Could he not then have said: "Egypt is the most
+intelligent, the most civilized and the richest of all nations; it has
+been made so by its religion; its religion is, therefore, divine"?
+
+So there was a time when a Hindoo could have made the same argument.
+Certainly this argument could have been made by a Greek. It could have
+been repeated by a Roman. And yet Mr. Peters will not admit that the
+religion of Egypt was divine, or that the mythology of Greece was true,
+or that Jupiter was in fact a god.
+
+Is it not evident to all that if the churches in Europe had been
+institutions of learning; if the domes of cathedrals had been
+observatories; if priests had been teachers of the facts in nature, the
+world would have been far in advance of what it is to-day?
+
+Countries depend on something besides their religion for progress.
+Nations with a good soil can get along quite well with an exceedingly
+poor religion; and no religion yet has been good enough to give wealth
+or happiness to human beings where the climate and soil were bad and
+barren.
+
+Religion supports nobody. It has to be supported. It produces no wheat,
+no corn; it ploughs no land; it fells no forests. It is a perpetual
+mendicant. It lives on the labor of others, and then has the arrogance
+to pretend that it supports the giver.
+
+Mr. Peters makes this exceedingly strange statement: "Every discovery in
+science, invention and art has been the work of Christian men. Infidels
+have contributed their share, but never one of them has reached the
+grandeur of originality."
+
+This, I think, so far as invention is concerned, can be answered with
+one name--John Ericsson, one of the profoundest agnostics I ever met.
+
+I am almost certain that Humboldt and Goethe were original. Darwin was
+certainly regarded as such.
+
+I do not wish to differ unnecessarily with Mr. Peters, but I have some
+doubts about Morse having been the inventor of the telegraph.
+
+Neither can I admit that Christianity abolished slavery. Many of
+the abolitionists in this country were infidels; many of them were
+Christians. But the church itself did not stand for liberty. The
+Quakers, I admit, were, as a rule, on the side of freedom. But the
+Christians of New England persecuted these Quakers, whipped them from
+town to town, lacerated their naked backs, and maimed their bodied, not
+only, but took their lives.
+
+Mr. Peters asks: "What name is there among the world's emancipators
+after which you cannot write the name 'Christian?'" Well, let me give
+him a few--Voltaire, Jefferson, Paine, Franklin, Lincoln, Darwin.
+
+Mr. Peters asks: "Why is it that in Christian countries you find the
+greatest amount of physical and intellectual liberty, the greatest
+freedom of thought, speech, and action?"
+
+Is this true of all? How about Spain and Portugal? There is more
+infidelity in France than in Spain, and there is far more liberty in
+France than in Spain.
+
+There is far more infidelity in England than there was a century ago,
+and there is far more liberty than there was a century ago. There is far
+more infidelity in the United States than there was fifty years ago, and
+a hundred infidels to-day where there was one fifty years ago; and there
+is far more intellectual liberty, far greater freedom of speech and
+action, than ever before.
+
+A few years ago Italy was a Christian country to the fullest extent.
+Now there are a thousand times more liberty and a thousand times less
+religion.
+
+Orthodoxy is dying; Liberty is growing.
+
+Mr. Ballou, a grandson, or grand-nephew, of Hosea Ballou, seems to have
+wandered from the faith. As a rule, Christians insist that when one
+denies the religion of Christian parents he is an exceedingly bad man,
+but when he denies the religion of parents not Christians, and becomes a
+Christian, that he is a very faithful, good and loving son.
+
+Mr. Ballou insists that God has the same right to punish us that Nature
+has, or that the State has. I do not think he understands what I have
+said. The State ought not to punish for the sake of punishment. The
+State may imprison, or inflict what is called punishment, first, for its
+own protection, and, secondly, for the reformation of the punished. If
+no one could do the State any injury, certainly the State would have
+no right to punish under the plea of protection; and if no human being
+could by any possibility be reformed, then the excuse of reformation
+could not be given.
+
+Let us apply this: If God be infinite, no one can injure him. Therefore
+he need not punish anybody or damn anybody or burn anybody for his
+protection.
+
+Let us take another step. Punishment being justified only on two
+grounds--that is, the protection of society and the reformation of the
+punished--how can eternal punishment be justified? In the first place,
+God does not punish to protect himself, and, in the second place, if the
+punishment is to be forever, he does not punish to reform the punished.
+What excuse then is left?
+
+Let us take still another step. If, instead of punishment, we say
+"consequences," and that every good man has the right to reap the good
+consequences of good actions, and that every bad man must bear the
+consequences of bad actions, then you must say to the good: If you stop
+doing good you will lose the harvest. You must say to the bad: If you
+stop doing bad you need not increase your burdens. And if it be a fact
+in Nature that all must reap what they sow, there is neither mercy nor
+cruelty in this fact, and I hold no God responsible for it. The trouble
+with the Christian creed is that God is described as the one who gives
+rewards and the one who inflicts eternal pain.
+
+There is still another trouble. This God, if infinite, must have known
+when he created man, exactly who would be eternally damned. What right
+had he to create men, knowing that they were to be damned?
+
+So much for Mr. Ballou.
+
+The Rev. Dr. Hillier seems to reason in a kind of circle. He takes the
+ground, in the first place, that "infidelity, Christianity, science, and
+experience all agree, without the slightest tremor of uncertainty, in
+the inexorable law that whatsoever a man sows that shall he also reap."
+He then takes the ground that, "if we wish to be rid of the harvest, we
+must not sow the seed; if we would avoid the result, we must remove the
+cause; the only way to be rid of hell is to stop doing evil; that this,
+and this only, is the way to abolish an eternal penitentiary."
+
+Very good; but that is not the point. The real thing under discussion
+is this: Is this life a state of probation, and if a man fails to live
+a good life here, will he have no opportunity for reformation in
+another world, if there be one? Can he cease to do evil in the eternal
+penitentiary? and if he does, can he be pardoned--can he be released?
+
+It is admitted that man must bear the consequences of his acts. If the
+consequences are good, then the acts are good. If the consequences are
+bad, the acts are bad. Through experience we find that certain acts tend
+to unhappiness and others to happiness.
+
+Now, the only question is whether we have wisdom enough to live in
+harmony with our conditions here; and if we fail here, will we have an
+opportunity of reforming in another world? If not, then the few years
+that we live here determine whether we shall be angels or devils
+forever.
+
+It seems to me, if there be another life, that in that life men may do
+good, and men may do evil; and if they may do good it seems to me that
+they may reform.
+
+I do not see why God, if there be one, should lose all interest in his
+children, simply because they leave this world and go where he is. Is
+it possible that an infinite God does all for his children here, in this
+poor ignorant world, that it is possible for him to do, and that if he
+fails to reform them here, nothing is left to do except to make them
+eternal convicts?
+
+The Rev. Mr. Haldeman mistakes my position. I do not admit that "an
+infinite God, as revealed in Nature, has allowed men to grow up
+under conditions which no ordinary mortal can look at in all their
+concentrated agony and not break his heart."
+
+I do not confess that God reveals himself in Nature as an infinite God,
+without mercy. I do not admit that there is an infinite Being anywhere
+responsible for the agonies and tears, for the barbarities and horrors
+of this life. I cannot believe that there is in the universe a Being
+with power to prevent these things. I hold no God responsible. I
+attribute neither cruelty nor mercy to Nature. Nature neither weeps
+nor rejoices. I cannot believe that this world, as it now is, as it has
+been, was created by an infinitely wise, powerful, and benevolent
+God. But it is far better that we should all go down "with souls
+unsatisfied" to the dreamless grave, to the tongueless silence of the
+voiceless dust, than that countless millions of human souls should
+suffer forever.
+
+Eternal sleep is better than eternal pain. Eternal punishment is eternal
+revenge, and can be inflicted only by an eternal monster.
+
+Mr. George A. Locey endeavors to put his case in an extremely small
+compass, and satisfies himself with really one question, and that is:
+"If a man in good health is stricken with disease, is assured that a
+physician can cure him, but refuses to take the medicine and dies, ought
+there to be any escape?"
+
+He concludes that the physician has done his duty; that the patient was
+obdurate and suffered the penalty.
+
+The application he makes is this:
+
+"The Christian's 'tidings of great joy' is the message that the Great
+Physician tendered freely. Its acceptance is a cure certain, and a
+life of eternal happiness the reward. If the soul accepts, are they not
+tidings of great joy; and if the soul rejects, is it not unreasonable on
+the part of Colonel Ingersoll to try and sneak out and throw the blame
+on God?"
+
+The answer to this seems easy. The cases are not parallel. If an
+infinite God created us all, he knew exactly what we would do. If he
+gave us free will it does not change the result, because he knew how we
+would use the free will.
+
+Now, if he knew that billions upon billions would refuse to take the
+remedy, and consequently would suffer eternal pain, why create them?
+There would have been much less misery in the world had he left them
+dust.
+
+What right has a God to make a failure? Why should he change dust into
+a sentient being, knowing that that being was to be the heir of endless
+agony?
+
+If the supposed physician had created the patient who refused to take
+the medicine, and had so created him that he knew he would refuse to
+take it, the cases might be parallel.
+
+According to the orthodox creed, millions are to be damned who never
+heard of the medicine or of the "Great Physician."
+
+There is one thing said by the Rev. Mr. Talmage that I hardly think
+he could have intended. Possibly there has been a misprint. It is the
+following paragraph:
+
+"Who" (speaking of Jesus) "has such an eye to our need; such a lip to
+kiss away our sorrow; such a hand to snatch us out of the fire; _such
+a foot to trample our enemies_; such a heart to embrace all our
+necessities?"
+
+What does the reverend gentleman mean by "_such a foot to trample our
+enemies_"?
+
+This, to me, is a terrible line. But it is in accordance with the
+history of the church. In the name of its founder it has "trampled on
+its enemies," and beneath its cruel feet have perished the noblest of
+the world.
+
+The Rev. J. Benson Hamilton, of Brooklyn, comes into this discussion
+with a great deal of heat and considerable fury. He states that
+"Infidelity is the creed of prosperity, but when sickness or trouble or
+sorrow comes he" (meaning the infidel) "does not paw nor mock nor cry
+'Ha! ha!' He sneaks and cringes like a whipped cur, and trembles and
+whines and howls."
+
+The spirit of Mr. Hamilton is not altogether admirable. He seems to
+think that a man establishes the truth of his religion by being brave,
+or demonstrates its falsity by trembling in the presence of death.
+
+Thousands of people have died for false religions and in honor of false
+gods. Their heroism did not prove the truth of the religion, but it did
+prove the sincerity of their convictions.
+
+A great many murderers have been hanged who exhibited on the scaffold
+the utmost contempt of death; and yet this courage exhibited by dying
+murderers has never been appealed to in justification of murder.
+
+The reverend gentleman tells again the story of the agonies endured by
+Thomas Paine when dying; tells us that he then said that he wished his
+work had been thrown into the fire, and that if the devil ever had any
+agency in any work he had in the writing of that book (meaning "The Age
+of Reason,") and that he frequently asked the Lord Jesus to have mercy
+upon him.
+
+Of course there is not a word of truth in this story. Its falsity has
+been demonstrated thousands and thousands of times, and yet ministers of
+the Gospel go right on repeating it just the same.
+
+So this gentleman tells us that Voltaire was accustomed to close his
+letters with the words, "Crush the wretch!" (meaning Christ). This is
+not so. He referred to superstition, to religion, not to Christ.
+
+This gentleman also says that "Voltaire was the prey of anguish and
+dread, alternately supplicating and blaspheming God; that he complained
+that he was abandoned by God; that when he died his friends fled from
+the room, declaring the sight too terrible to be endured."
+
+There is not one word of truth in this. Everybody who has read the life
+of Voltaire knows that he died with the utmost serenity.
+
+Let me tell you how Voltaire died.
+
+He was an old man of eighty-four. He had been surrounded by the comforts
+of life. He was a man of wealth--of genius. Among the literary men of
+the world he stood first. God had allowed him to have the appearance of
+success. His last years were filled with the intoxication of flattery.
+He stood at the summit of his age. The priests became anxious. They
+began to fear that God would forget, in a multiplicity of business, to
+make a terrible example of Voltaire.
+
+Toward the last of May, 1788, it was whispered in Paris that Voltaire
+was dying. Upon the fences of expectation gathered the unclean birds of
+superstition, impatiently waiting for their prey.
+
+"Two days before his death his nephew went to seek the Cure of St.
+Sulpice and the Abbe Gautier, and brought them into his uncle's
+sick-chamber, who was informed that they were there.
+
+"'Ah, well,' said Voltaire; 'give them my compliments and my thanks.'
+
+"The abbe spoke some words to Voltaire, exhorting him to patience. The
+Cure of St. Sulpice then came forward, having announced himself, and
+asked Voltaire, lifting his voice, if he acknowledged the divinity of
+our Lord Jesus Christ. The sick man pushed one of his hands against the
+cure's coif shoving him back, and cried, turning abruptly to the other
+side:
+
+"'Let me die in peace!'
+
+"The cure seemingly considered his person soiled and his coif dishonored
+by the touch of the philosopher. He made the nurse give him a little
+brushing and went out with the Abbe Gautier.
+
+"He expired," says Wagniere, "on the 30th of May, 1788, at about a
+quarter past eleven at night, with the most perfect tranquillity.
+
+"Ten minutes before his last breath he took the hand of Morand, his
+_valet-de-chambre_, who was watching by him, pressed it and said:
+'Adieu, my dear Morand. I am gone!'
+
+"These were his last words."
+
+From this death, so simple and serene, so natural and peaceful--from
+these words so utterly destitute of cant or dramatic touch--all the
+frightful pictures, all the despairing utterances have been drawn and
+made. From these materials, and from these alone, have been constructed
+all the shameless calumnies about the death of this great and wonderful
+man.
+
+Voltaire was the intellectual autocrat of his time. From his throne at
+the foot of the Alps he pointed the finger of scorn at every hypocrite
+in Europe. He was the pioneer of his century. He was the assassin
+of superstition. Through the shadows of faith and fable; through the
+darkness of myth and miracle; through the midnight of Christianity;
+through the blackness of bigotry; past cathedral and dungeon; past rack
+and stake; past altar and throne, he carried, with chivalric hands, the
+sacred torch of Reason.
+
+Let me also tell you about the death of Thomas Paine. After the
+publication of his "Rights of Man" and "The Age of Reason", every
+falsehood that malignity could coin and malice pass, was given to the
+world. On his return to America, although Thomas Jefferson, another
+infidel, was President, it was hardly safe for Paine to appear in the
+public streets.
+
+Under the very flag he had helped to put in heaven, his rights were not
+respected. Under the Constitution that he had first suggested, his life
+was insecure. He had helped to give liberty to more than three millions
+of his fellow-citizens, and they were willing to deny it unto him.
+
+He was deserted, ostracized, shunned, maligned and cursed. But he
+maintained his integrity. He stood by the convictions of his mind, and
+never for one moment did he hesitate or waver. He died almost alone.
+
+The moment he died the pious commenced manufacturing horrors for his
+death-bed. They had his chamber filled with devils rattling chains,
+and these ancient falsehoods are certified to by the clergy even of the
+present day.
+
+The truth is that Thomas Paine died as he had lived. Some ministers
+were impolite enough to visit him against his will. Several of them he
+ordered from his room. A couple of Catholic priests, in all the meekness
+of arrogance, called that they might enjoy the agonies of the dying
+friend of man. Thomas Paine, rising in his bed, the few moments of
+expiring life fanned into flame by the breath of indignation, had the
+goodness to curse them both.
+
+His physician, who seems to have been a meddling fool, just as the cold
+hand of Death was touching the patriot's heart, whispered in the dulled
+ear of the dying man: "Do you believe, or do you wish to believe, that
+Jesus Christ is the Son of God?"
+
+And the reply was: "I have no wish to believe on that subject."
+
+These were the last remembered words of Thomas Paine. He died as
+serenely as ever mortal passed away. He died in the full possession of
+his mind, and on the brink and edge of death proclaimed the doctrines of
+his life.
+
+Every philanthropist, every believer in human liberty, every lover of
+the great Republic, should feel under obligation to Thomas Paine for the
+splendid services rendered by him in the darkest days of the American
+Revolution. In the midnight of Valley Forge, "The Crisis" was the first
+star that glittered in the wide horizon of despair.
+
+We should remember that Thomas Paine was the first man to write these
+words: "The United States of America."
+
+The Rev. Mr. Hamilton seems to take a kind of joy in imagining what
+infidels will suffer when they come to die, and he writes as though he
+would like to be present.
+
+For my part I hope that all the sons and daughters of men will die in
+peace; that they will pass away as easily as twilight fades to night.
+
+Of course when I said that "Christianity did not bring tidings of great
+joy, but a message of eternal grief," I meant orthodox Christianity; and
+when I said that "Christianity fills the future with fire and flame,
+and made God the keeper of an eternal penitentiary, in which most of
+the children of men were to be imprisoned forever," I was giving what I
+understood to be the Evangelical belief on that subject.
+
+If the churches have given up the doctrine of eternal punishment, then
+for one I am delighted, and I shall feel that what little I have done
+toward that end has not been done in vain.
+
+The Rev. Mr. Hamilton, enjoying my dying agony in imagination, says:
+"Let the world wait but for a few years at the most, when Death's icy
+fingers feel for the heartstrings of the boaster, and, as most of his
+like who have gone before him have done, he will sing another strain."
+
+How shall I characterize the spirit that could prompt the writing of
+such a sentence?
+
+The reverend gentleman "loves his enemies," and yet he is filled with
+glee when he thinks of the agonies I shall endure when Death's icy
+fingers feel for the strings of my heart! Yet I have done him no harm.
+
+He then quotes, as being applicable to me, a passage from the prophet
+Isaiah, commencing: "The vile person will speak villainy."
+
+Is this passage applicable only to me?
+
+The Rev. Mr. Holloway is not satisfied with the "Christmas Sermon."
+For his benefit I repeat, in another form, what the "Christmas Sermon"
+contains:
+
+If orthodox Christianity teaches that this life is a period of
+probation, that we settle here our eternal destiny, and that all who
+have heard the Gospel and who have failed to believe it are to be
+eternally lost, then I say that Christianity did not "bring tidings of
+great joy," but a Message of Eternal Grief. And if the orthodox churches
+are still preaching the doctrine of Endless Pain, then I say it would be
+far better if every church crumbled into dust than that such preaching
+and such teaching should be continued.
+
+It would be far better yet, however, if the ministers could be converted
+and their congregations enlightened.
+
+I admit that the orthodox churches preach some things beside hell; but
+if they do not believe in the eternity of punishment they ought publicly
+to change their creeds.
+
+I admit, also, that the average minister advises his congregation to be
+honest and to treat all with kindness, and I admit that many of these
+ministers fail to follow their own advice when they make what they call
+"replies" to me.
+
+Of course there are many good things about the church. To the extent
+that it is charitable, or rather to the extent that it causes charity,
+it is good. To the extent that it causes men and women to lead moral
+lives it is good. But to the extent that it fills the future with fear
+it is bad. To the extent that it convinces any human being that there is
+any God who not only can, but will, inflict eternal torments on his own
+children, it is bad.
+
+And such teaching does tend to blight humanity. Such teaching does
+pollute the imagination of childhood. Such teaching does furrow the
+cheeks of the best and tenderest with tears..Such teaching does rob old
+age of all its joy, and covers every cradle with a curse!
+
+The Rev. Mr. Holloway seems to be extremely familiar with God. He says:
+"God seems to have delayed his advent through all the ages to give unto
+the world the fullest opportunity to do all that the human mind could
+suggest for the weal of the race."
+
+According to this gentleman, God just delayed his advent for the purpose
+of seeing what the world would do, _knowing all the time exactly what
+would be done_.
+
+Let us make a suggestion: If the orthodox creed be true, then all people
+became tainted or corrupted or depraved, or in some way spoiled by what
+is known as "Original Sin."
+
+According to the Old Testament, these people kept getting worse and
+worse. It does not seem that Jehovah made any effort to improve them,
+but he patiently waited for about fifteen hundred years without having
+established any church, without having given them a Bible, and then he
+drowned all but eight persons.
+
+Now, those eight persons were also depraved. The taint of Original Sin
+was also in their blood.
+
+It seems to me that Jehovah made a mistake. He should also have killed
+the remaining eight, and started new, kept the serpent out of his
+garden, and furnished the first pair with a Bible and the Presbyterian
+Confession of Faith.
+
+The Rev. Dr. Tyler takes it for granted that all charity and goodness
+are the children of Christianity. This is a mistake. All the virtues
+were in the world long before Christ came. Probably Mr. Tyler will be
+convinced by the words of Christ himself. He will probably remember
+the story of the Good Samaritan, and if he does he will see that it is
+exactly in point. The Good Samaritan was not a Hebrew. He was not one
+of "the chosen people." He was a poor, "miserable heathen," who knew
+nothing about the Jehovah of the Old Testament, and who had never heard
+of the "scheme of salvation." And yet, according to Christ, he was far
+more charitable than the Levites--the priests of Jehovah, the highest
+of "the chosen people." Is it not perfectly plain from this story that
+charity was in the world before Christianity was established?
+
+A great deal has been said about asylums and hospitals, as though the
+Christians are entitled to great credit on that score. If Dr. Tyler
+will read what is said in the British Encyclopaedia, under the head of
+"Mental Diseases," he will find that the Egyptians treated the insane
+with the utmost kindness, and that they called reason back to its throne
+by the voice of music; that the temples were resorted to by crowds of
+the insane; and that "whatever gifts of nature or productions of art
+were calculated to impress the imagination were there united. Games
+and recreations were instituted in the temples. Groves and gardens
+surrounded these holy retreats. Gayly decorated boats sometimes
+transported patients to breathe the pure breezes of the Nile."
+
+So in ancient Greece it is said that "from the hands of the priest the
+cure of the disordered mind first passed into the domain of medicine,
+with the philosophers. Pythagoras is said to have employed music for the
+cure of mental diseases. The order of the day for his disciples exhibits
+a profound knowledge of the relations of body and mind. The early
+morning was divided between gentle exercise, conversation and music.
+Then came conversation, followed by gymnastic exercise and a temperate
+diet. Afterward, a bath and supper with a sparing allowance of wine;
+then reading, music and conversation concluded the day."
+
+So "Asclepiades was celebrated for his treatment of mental disorders.
+He recommended that bodily restraint should be avoided as much as
+possible." It is also stated that "the philosophy and arts of Greece
+spread to Rome, and the first special treatise on insanity is that
+of Celsus, which distinguishes varieties of insanity and their proper
+treatment."
+
+"Over the arts and sciences of Greece and Rome the errors and ignorance
+of the Middle Ages gradually crept, until they enveloped them in a cloud
+worse than Egyptian darkness. The insane were again consigned to the
+miracle-working-ordinances of o o priests or else totally neglected.
+Idiots and imbeciles were permitted to go clotheless and homeless. The
+frantic and furious were chained in lonesome dungeons and exhibited
+for money, like wild beasts. The monomaniacs became, according to
+circumstance, the objects of superstitious horror or reverence. They
+were regarded as possessed with demons and subjected either to priestly
+exorcism, or cruelly destroyed as wizards and witches. This cruel
+treatment of the insane continued with little or no alleviation down to
+the end of the last century in all the civilized countries of Europe."
+
+Let me quote a description of these Christian asylums.
+
+"Public asylums indeed existed in most of the metropolitan cities of
+Europe, but the insane were more generally, if at all troublesome,
+confined in jails, where they were chained in the lowest dungeons or
+made the butts and menials of the most debased criminals. In public
+asylums the inmates were confined in cellars, isolated in cages, chained
+to floors or walls. These poor victims were exhibited to the public like
+wild beasts. They were often killed by the ignorance and brutality of
+their keepers."
+
+I call particular attention to the following paragraph: "Such was the
+state of the insane generally throughout Europe at the commencement of
+this century. Such it continued to be in England so late as 1815 and
+in Ireland as 1817, as revealed by the inquiries of parliamentary
+commissions in those years respectively."
+
+Dr. Tyler is entirely welcome to all the comfort these facts can give.
+
+Not only were the Greeks and Romans and Egyptians far in advance of
+the Christians in the treatment of the mentally diseased, but even the
+Mohammedans were in advance of the Christians about 700 years, and in
+addition to this they treated their lunatics with great kindness.
+
+The temple of Diana of Ephesus was a refuge for insolvent debtors, and
+the Thesium was a refuge for slaves.
+
+Again, I say that hundreds of years before the establishment of
+Christianity there were in India not only hospitals and asylums for
+people, but even for animals. The great mistake of the Christian clergy
+is that they attribute all goodness to Christianity. They have always
+been engaged in maligning human nature--in attacking the human heart--in
+efforts to destroy all natural passions.
+
+Perfect maxims for the conduct of life were uttered and repeated in
+India and China hundreds and hundreds of years before the Christian
+era. Every virtue was lauded and every vice denounced. All the good that
+Christianity has in it came from the human heart. Everything in that
+system of religion came from this world; and in it you will find not
+only the goodness of man, but the imperfections of man--not only the
+love of man, but the malice of man.
+
+Let me tell you why the Christians for so many centuries neglected
+or abused the insane. They believed the New Testament, and honestly
+supposed that the insane were filled with devils.
+
+In regard to the contest between Dr. Buckley, who, as I understand it,
+is a doctor of theology--and I should think such theology stood in need
+of a doctor--and the _Telegram_, I have nothing to say. There is only
+one side to that contest; and so far as the Doctor heretofore criticised
+what is known as the "Christmas Sermon," I have answered him, leaving
+but very little to which I care to reply in his last article.
+
+Dr. Buckley, like many others, brings forward names instead of
+reasons--instead of arguments. Milton, Pascal, Elizabeth Fry, John
+Howard, and Michael Faraday are not arguments. They are only names;
+and, instead of giving the names, Dr. Buckley should give the reasons
+advanced by those whose names he pronounces.
+
+Jonathan Edwards may have been a good man, but certainly his theology
+was infamous. So Father Mathew was a good man, but it was impossible
+for him to be good enough to convince Dr. Buckley of the doctrine of the
+"Real Presence."
+
+Milton was a very good man, and he described God as a kind of
+brigadier-general, put the angels in uniform and had regular battles;
+but Milton's goodness can by no possibility establish the truth of his
+poetical and absurd vagaries.
+
+All the self-denial and goodness in the world do not even tend to prove
+the existence of the supernatural or of the miraculous. Millions
+and millions of the most devoted men could not, by their devotion,
+substantiate the inspiration of the Scriptures.
+
+There are, however, some misstatements in Dr. Buckley's article that
+ought not to be passed over in silence.
+
+The first is to the effect that I was invited to write an article for
+the _North American Review_, Judge Jeremiah Black to reply, and that
+Judge Black was improperly treated.
+
+Now, it is true that I was invited to write an article, and did write
+one; but I did not know at the time who was to reply. It is also true
+that Judge Black did reply, and that my article and his reply appeared
+in the same number of the _Review._
+
+Dr. Buckley alleges that the _North American Review_ gave me an
+opportunity to review the Judge, but denied to Judge Black an
+opportunity to respond. This is without the slightest foundation in
+fact. Mr. Metcalf, who at that time was manager of the _Review_, is
+still living and will tell the facts. Personally I had nothing to do
+with it, one way or the other. I did not regard Judge Black's reply as
+formidable, and was not only willing that he should be heard again, but
+anxious that he should.
+
+So much for that.
+
+As to the debate, with Dr. Field and Mr. Gladstone, I leave them to say
+whether they were or were not fairly treated. Dr. Field, by his candor,
+by his fairness, and by the manly spirit he exhibited won my respect and
+love.
+
+Most ministers imagine that any man who differs from them is a
+blasphemer. This word seems to leap unconsciously from their lips.
+They cannot imagine that another man loves liberty as much and with
+as sincere devotion as they love God. They cannot imagine that another
+prizes liberty above all gods, even if gods exist. They cannot imagine
+that any mind is so that it places Justice above all persons, a mind
+that cannot conceive even of a God who is not bound to do justice.
+
+If God exists, above him, in eternal calm, is the figure of Justice.
+
+Neither can some ministers understand a man who regards Jehovah and
+Jupiter as substantially the same, with this exception--that he thinks
+far more of Jupiter, because Jupiter had at least some human feelings.
+
+I do not understand that a man can be guilty of blasphemy who states his
+honest thoughts in proper language, his object being, not to torture
+the feelings of others, but simply to give his thought--to find and
+establish the truth.
+
+Dr. Buckley makes a charge that he ought to have known to be without
+foundation. Speaking of myself, he said: "In him the laws to prevent the
+circulation of obscene publications through the mails have found their
+most vigorous opponent."
+
+It is hardly necessary for me to say that this is untrue. The facts are
+that an effort was made to classify obscene literature with what the
+pious call "blasphemous and immoral works." A petition was forwarded to
+Congress to amend the law so that the literature of Freethought could
+not be thrown from the mails, asking that, if no separation could be
+made, the law should be repealed.
+
+It was said that I had signed this petition, and I certainly should have
+done so had it been presented to me. The petition was absolutely proper.
+
+A few years ago I found the petition, and discovered that while it bore
+my name it had never been signed by me. But for the purposes of this
+answer I am perfectly willing that the signature should be regarded as
+genuine, as there is nothing in the petition that should not have been
+granted.
+
+The law as it stood was opposed by the Liberal League--but not a member
+of that society was in favor of the circulation of obscene literature;
+but they did think that the privacy of the mails had been violated, and
+that it was of the utmost importance to maintain the inviolability of
+the postal service.
+
+I disagreed with these people, and favored the destruction of obscene
+literature not only, but that it be made a criminal offence to send it
+through the mails. As a matter of fact I drew up resolutions to that
+effect that were passed. Afterward they were changed, or some others
+were passed, and I resigned from the League on that account.
+
+Nothing can be more absurd than that I was, directly or indirectly, or
+could have been, interested in the circulation of obscene publications
+through the mails; and I will pay a premium of $1,000 a word for
+each and every word I ever said or wrote in favor of sending obscene
+publications through the mails.
+
+I might use much stronger language. I might follow the example of
+Dr. Buckley himself. But I think I have said enough to satisfy all
+unprejudiced people that the charge is absurdly false.
+
+Now, as to the eulogy of whiskey. It gives me a certain pleasure to read
+that even now, and I believe the readers of the _Telegram_ would like to
+read it once more; so here it is:
+
+"I send you some of the most wonderful whiskey that ever drove the
+skeleton from a feast or painted landscapes in the brain of man. It is
+the mingled souls of wheat and corn. In it you will find the sunshine
+and the shadow that chased each other over the billowy fields; the
+breath of June; the carol of the lark; the dews of night; the wealth
+of summer and autumn's rich content, all golden with imprisoned light.
+Drink it and you will hear the voices of men and maidens singing the
+'Harvest Home,' mingled with the laughter of children. Drink it and you
+will feel within your blood the star-lit dawns, the dreamy, tawny dusks
+of many perfect days. For forty years this liquid joy has been within
+the happy staves of oak, longing to touch the lips of men."
+
+I re-quote this for the reason that Dr. Buckley, who is not very
+accurate, made some mistakes in his version.
+
+Now, in order to show the depth of degradation to which I have sunk in
+this direction, I will confess that I also wrote a eulogy of tobacco,
+and here it is:
+
+"Nearly four centuries ago Columbus, the adventurous, in the blessed
+island of Cuba, saw happy people with rolled leaves between their lips.
+Above their heads were little clouds of smoke. Their faces were serene,
+and in their eyes was the autumnal heaven of content. These people were
+kind, innocent, gentle and loving.
+
+"The climate of Cuba is the friendship of the earth and air, and of this
+climate the sacred leaves were born--the leaves that breed in the mind
+of him who uses them the cloudless, happy days in which they grew.
+
+"These leaves make friends, and celebrate with gentle rites the vows of
+peace. They have given consolation to the world. They are the companions
+of the lonely--the friends of the imprisoned, of the exile, of workers
+in mines, of fellers of forests, of sailors on the desolate seas. They
+are the givers of strength and calm to the vexed and wearied minds of
+those who build with thought and dream the temples of the soul.
+
+"They tell of hope and rest. They smooth the wrinkled brows of
+pain--drive fears and strange misshapen dreads from out the mind and
+fill the heart with rest and peace. Within their magic warp and woof
+some potent gracious spell imprisoned lies, that, when released by fire,
+doth softly steal within the fortress of the brain and bind in sleep the
+captured sentinels of care and grief.
+
+"These leaves are the friends of the fireside, and their smoke, like
+incense, rises from myriads of happy homes. Cuba is the smile of the
+sea."
+
+There are some people so constituted that there is no room in the heaven
+of their minds for the butterflies and moths of fancy to spread their
+wings. Everything is taken in solemn and stupid earnest. Such men would
+hold Shakespeare responsible for what Falstaff said about "sack," and
+for Mrs. Quickly's notions of propriety.
+
+There is an old Greek saying which is applicable here: "In the presence
+of human stupidity, even the gods stand helpless."
+
+John Wesley, founder of the Methodist Church, lacked all sense of humor.
+He preached a sermon on "The Cause and Cure of Earthquakes." He insisted
+that they were caused by the wickedness of man, and that the only way to
+cure them was to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.
+
+The man who does not carry the torch of Humor is always in danger of
+falling into the pit of Absurdity.
+
+The Rev. Charles Deems, pastor of the Church of the Strangers,
+contributes his part to the discussion.
+
+He took a text from John, as follows: "He that committeth sin is of the
+devil, for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose
+the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the
+devil."
+
+According to the orthodox creed of the Rev. Dr. Deems all have committed
+sin, and consequently all are of the devil. The Doctor is not a
+metaphysician. He does not care to play at sleight of hand with words.
+He stands on bed-rock, and he asserts that the devil is no Persian myth,
+but a personality, who works unhindered by the limitations of a physical
+body, and gets human personalities to aid him in his works.
+
+According to the text, it seems that the devil was a sinner from the
+beginning. I suppose that must mean from his beginning, or from the
+beginning of things. According to Dr. Deems' creed, his God is the
+Creator of all things, and consequently must have been the Creator of
+the devil. According to the Scriptures the devil is the father of lies,
+and Dr. Deems' God is the father of the devil--that is to say, the
+grandfather of lies. This strikes me as almost "blasphemous."
+
+The Doctor also tells us "that Jesus believed as much in the personality
+of the devil as in that of Herod or Pilate or John or Peter."
+
+That I admit. There is not the slightest doubt, if the New Testament be
+true, that Christ believed in a personal devil--a devil with whom he had
+conversations; a devil who took him to the pinnacle of the Temple and
+endeavored to induce him to leap to the earth below.
+
+Of course he believed in a personal devil. Not only so; he believed
+in thousands of personal devils. He cast seven devils out of Mary
+Magdalene. He cast a legion of devils out of the man in the tombs, or,
+rather, made a bargain with these last-mentioned devils that they might
+go into a drove or herd of swine, if they would leave the man.
+
+I not only admit that Christ believed in devils, but he believed that
+some devils were deaf and dumb, and so declared.
+
+Dr. Deems is right, and I hope he will defend against all comers the
+integrity of the New Testament.
+
+The Doctor, however, not satisfied exactly with what he finds in the New
+Testament, draws a little on his own imagination. He says:
+
+"The devil is an organizing, imperial intellect, vindictive, sharp,
+shrewd, persevering, the aim of whose works is to overthrow the
+authority of God's law."
+
+How does the Doctor know that the devil has an organizing, imperial
+intellect? How does he know that he is vindictive and sharp and shrewd
+and persevering?
+
+If the devil has an "imperial intellect," why does he attempt the
+impossible?
+
+Robert Burns shocked Scotland by saying of the devil, or, rather, to the
+devil, that he was sorry for him, and hoped he would take a thought and
+mend.
+
+Dr. Deems has gone far in advance of Burns. For a clergyman he seems
+to be exceedingly polite. Speaking of the "Arch Enemy of God"--of
+that "organizing, imperial intellect who is seeking to undermine the
+church"--the Doctor says:
+
+"The devil may be conceded to be sincere."
+
+It has been said:
+
+"An honest God is the noblest work of man," and it may now be added: A
+sincere devil is the noblest work of Dr. Deems.
+
+But, with all the devil's smartness, sharpness, and shrewdness, the
+Doctor says that he "cannot write a book; that he cannot deliver
+lectures" (like myself, I suppose), "edit a newspaper" (like the editor
+of the _Telegram_), "or make after-dinner speeches; but he can get his
+servants to do these things for him."
+
+There is one thing in the Doctor's address that I feel like correcting
+(I quote from the _Telegram's_ report):
+
+"Dr. Deems showed at length how the Son of God, the Christ of the
+Bible--_not the Christ of the lecture platform caricatures_--is
+operating to overcome all these works."
+
+I take it for granted that he refers to what he supposes I have said
+about Christ, and, for fear that he may not have read it, I give it
+here:
+
+"And let me say here, once for all, that for the man Christ I have
+infinite respect. Let me say, once for all, that the place where man has
+died for man, is holy ground. And let me say, once for all, that to that
+great and serene man I gladly pay, the tribute of my admiration and my
+tears. He was a reformer in his day. He was an infidel in his time. He
+was regarded as a blasphemer, and his life was destroyed by hypocrites,
+who have, in all ages, done what they could to trample freedom and
+manhood out of the human mind. Had I lived at that time I would have
+been his friend, and should he come again he will not find a better
+friend than I will be. That is for the man. For the theological creation
+I have a different feeling."
+
+I have not answered each one who has attacked by name. Neither have I
+mentioned those who have agreed with me. But I do take this occasion to
+thank all, irrespective of their creeds, who have manfully advocated the
+right of free speech, and who have upheld the _Telegram_ in the course
+it has taken.
+
+I thank all who have said a kind word for me, and I also feel quite
+grateful to those who have failed to say unkind words. Epithets are
+not arguments. To abuse is not to convince. Anger is stupid and malice
+illogical.
+
+And, after all that has appeared by way of reply, I still insist that
+orthodox Christianity did not come with "tidings of great joy," but with
+a message of eternal grief.
+
+Robert G. Ingersoll.
+
+New York, February 5, 1892.
+
+
+
+
+SUICIDE OF JUDGE NORMILE.
+
+
+     *A reply to the Western Watchman, published in the St. Louis
+     Globe Democrat, Sept. 1, 1892.
+
+_Question_. Have you read an article in the _Western Watchman_, entitled
+"Suicide of Judge Normile"? If so, what is your opinion of it?
+
+_Answer._ I have read the article, and I think the spirit in which it
+is written is in exact accord with the creed, with the belief, that
+prompted it.
+
+In this article the writer speaks not only of Judge Normile, but of
+Henry D'Arcy, and begins by saying that a Catholic community had been
+shocked, but that as a matter of fact the Catholics had no right "to
+feel special concern in the life or death of either," for the reason,
+"that both had ceased to be Catholics, and had lived as infidels and
+scoffers."
+
+According to the Catholic creed all infidels and scoffers are on
+the direct road to eternal pain; and yet, if the _Watchman_ is to be
+believed, Catholics have no right to have special concern for the fate
+of such people, even after their death.
+
+The church has always proclaimed that it was seeking the lost--that
+it was trying in every way to convert the infidels and save the
+scoffers--that it cared less for the ninety-nine sheep safe in the fold
+than for the one that had strayed. We have been told that God so loved
+infidels and scoffers, that he came to this poor world and gave his life
+that they might be saved. But now we are told by the _Western Watchman_
+that the church, said to have been founded by Christ, has no right to
+feel any special concern about the fate of infidels and scoffers.
+
+Possibly the _Watchman_ only refers to the infidels and scoffers who
+were once Catholics.
+
+If the New Testament is true, St. Peter was at one time a Christian;
+that is to say, a good Catholic, and yet he fell from grace and not only
+denied his Master, but went to the extent of swearing that he did not
+know him; that he never had made his acquaintance. And yet, this same
+Peter was taken back and became the rock on which the Catholic Church is
+supposed to rest.
+
+Are the Catholics of St. Louis following the example of Christ, when
+they publicly declare that they care nothing for the fate of one who
+left the church and who died in his sins?
+
+The _Watchman_, in order to show that it was simply doing its duty, and
+was not actuated by hatred or malice, assures us as follows: "A warm
+personal friendship existed between D'Arcy and Normile and the managers
+of this paper." What would the _Watchman_ have said if these men had
+been the personal enemies of the managers of that paper? Two warm
+personal friends, once Catholics, had gone to hell; but the managers
+of the _Watchman_, "warm personal friends" of the dead, had no right to
+feel any special concern about these friends in the flames of perdition.
+One would think that pity had changed to piety.
+
+Another wonderful statement is that "both of these men determined to go
+to hell, if there was a hell, and to forego the joys of heaven, if there
+was a heaven."
+
+Admitting that heaven and hell exist, that heaven is a good place, and
+that hell, to say the least, is, and eternally will be, unpleasant, why
+should any sane man unalterably determine to go to hell? It is hard to
+think of any reason, unless he was afraid of meeting those Catholics in
+heaven who had been his "warm personal friends" in this world. The truth
+is that no one wishes to be unhappy in this or any other country. The
+truth is that Henry D'Arcy and Judge Normile both became convinced that
+the Catholic Church is of human origin, that its creed is not true, that
+it is the enemy of progress, and the foe of freedom. It may be that
+they were in part led to these conclusions by the conduct of their "warm
+personal friends."
+
+It is claimed that these men, Henry D'Arcy and Judge Normile "studied"
+to convince themselves "that there was no God, that they went back to
+Paganism and lived among the ancients," and "that they soon revelled
+in the grossness of Paganism." If they went back to Paganism, they
+certainly found plenty of gods. The Pagans filled heaven and earth with
+deities. The Catholics have only three, while the Pagans had hundreds.
+And yet there were some very good Pagans. By associating with Socrates
+and Plato one would not necessarily become a groveling wretch. Zeno was
+not altogether abominable. He would compare favorably, at least, with
+the average pope. Aristotle was not entirely despicable, although wrong,
+it may be, in many things. Epicurus was temperate, frugal and serene. He
+perceived the beauty of use, and celebrated the marriage of virtue and
+joy. He did not teach his disciples to revel in grossness, although his
+maligners have made this charge. Cicero was a Pagan, and yet he uttered
+some very sublime and generous sentiments. Among other things, he said
+this: "When we say that we should love Romans, but not foreigners, we
+destroy the bond of universal brotherhood and drive from our hearts
+charity and justice."
+
+Suppose a Pagan had written about "two warm personal friends" of his,
+who had joined the Catholic Church, and suppose he had said this:
+"Although our two warm personal friends have both died by their own
+hands, and although both have gone to the lowest hell, and are now
+suffering inconceivable agonies, we have no right to feel any special
+concern about them or about their sufferings; and, to speak frankly, we
+care nothing for their agonies, nothing for their tears, and we mention
+them only to keep other Pagans from joining that blasphemous and
+ignorant church. Both of our friends were raised as Pagans, both were
+educated in our holy religion, and both had read the works of our
+greatest and wisest authors, and yet they fell into apostasy, and
+studied day and night, in season and out of season, to convince
+themselves that a young carpenter of Palestine was in fact, Jupiter,
+whom we call Stator, the creator, the sustainer and governor of all."
+
+It is probable that the editor of the _Watchman_ was perfectly
+conscientious in his attack on the dead. Nothing but a sense of
+religious duty could induce any man to attack the character of a "warm
+personal friend," and to say that although the friend was in hell, he
+felt no special concern as to his fate.
+
+The _Watchman_ seems to think that it is hardly probable or possible
+that a sane Catholic should become an infidel. People of every religion
+feel substantially in this way. It is probable that the Mohammedan is
+of the opinion that no sane believer in the religion of Islam could
+possibly become a Catholic. Probably there are no sane Mohammedans. I do
+not know.
+
+Now, it seems to me, that when a sane Catholic reads the history of
+his church, of the Inquisition, of centuries of flame and sword, of
+philosophers and thinkers tortured, flayed and burned by the "Bride of
+God," and of all the cruelties of Christian years, he may reasonably
+come to the conclusion that the Church of Rome is not the best possible
+church in this, the best possible of all worlds.
+
+It would hardly impeach his sanity if, after reading the history of
+superstition, he should denounce the Hierarchy, from priest to pope. The
+truth is, the real opinions of all men are perfectly honest no matter
+whether they are for or against the Catholic creed. All intelligent
+people are intellectually hospitable. Every man who knows something of
+the operations of his own mind is absolutely certain that his wish has
+not, to his knowledge, influenced his judgment. He may admit that his
+wish has influenced his speech, but he must certainly know that it has
+not affected his judgment.
+
+In other words, a man cannot cheat himself in a game of solitaire and
+really believe that he has won the game. No matter what the appearance
+of the cards may be, he knows whether the game was lost or won. So, men
+may say that their judgment is a certain way, and they may so affirm in
+accordance with their wish, but neither the wish, nor the declaration
+can affect the real judgment. So, a man must know whether he believes a
+certain creed or not, or, at least, what the real state of his mind
+is. When a man tells me that he believes in the supernatural, in the
+miraculous, and in the inspiration of the Scriptures, I take it for
+granted that he is telling the truth, although it seems impossible to me
+that the man could reach that conclusion. When another tells me that he
+does not know whether there is a Supreme Being or not, but that he does
+not believe in the supernatural, and is perfectly satisfied that the
+Scriptures are for the most part false and barbarous, I implicitly
+believe every word he says.
+
+I admit cheerfully that there are many millions of men and women who
+believe what to me seems impossible and infinitely absurd; and,
+undoubtedly, what I believe seems to them equally impossible.
+
+Let us give to others the liberty which we claim for ourselves.
+
+The _Watchman_ seems to think that unbelief, especially when coupled
+with what they call "the sins of the flesh," is the lowest possible
+depth, and tells us that "robbers may be devout," "murderers penitent,"
+and "drunkards reverential."
+
+In some of these statements the _Watchman_ is probably correct. There
+have been "devout robbers." There have been gentlemen of the highway,
+agents of the road, who carried sacred images, who bowed, at holy
+shrines for the purpose of securing success. For many centuries the
+devout Catholics robbed the Jews. The devout Ferdinand and Isabella
+were great robbers. A great many popes have indulged in this theological
+pastime, not to speak of the rank and file. Yes, the _Watchman_ is
+right. There is nothing in robbery that necessarily interferes with
+devotion.
+
+There have been penitent murderers, and most murderers, unless impelled
+by a religious sense of duty to God, have been penitent. David, with
+dying breath, advised his son to murder the old friends of his father.
+He certainly was not penitent. Undoubtedly Torquemada murdered without
+remorse, and Calvin burned his "warm personal friend" to gain the
+applause of God. Philip the Second was a murderer, not penitent, because
+he deemed it his duty. The same may be said of the Duke of Alva, and of
+thousands of others.
+
+Robert Burns was not, according to his own account, strictly virtuous,
+and yet I like him better than I do those who planned and carried into
+bloody execution the massacre of St. Bartholomew.
+
+Undoubtedly murderers have been penitent. A man in California cut the
+throat of a woman, although she begged for mercy, saying at the same
+time that she was not prepared to die. He cared nothing for her prayers.
+He was tried, convicted and sentenced to death. He made a motion for
+a new trial. This was denied. He appealed to the governor, but the
+executive refused to interfere. Then he became penitent and experienced
+religion. On the scaffold he remarked that he was going to heaven; that
+his only regret was that he would not meet the woman he had murdered,
+as she was not a Christian when she died. Undoubtedly murderers can be
+penitent.
+
+An old Spaniard was dying. He sent for a priest to administer the last
+sacraments of the church. The priest told him that he must forgive all
+his enemies. "I have no enemies," said the dying man, "I killed the last
+one three weeks ago." Undoubtedly murderers can be penitent.
+
+So, I admit that drunkards have been pious and reverential, and I might
+add, honest and generous.
+
+Some good Catholics and some good Protestants have enjoyed a hospitable
+glass, and there have been priests who used the blood of the grape for
+other than a sacramental purpose. Even Luther, a good Catholic in his
+day, a reformer, a Doctor of Divinity, gave to the world this couplet:
+
+     "Who loves not woman, wine and song,
+     Will live a fool his whole life long."
+
+The _Watchman_, in effect, says that a devout robber is better than an
+infidel; that a penitent murderer is superior to a freethinker, in the
+sight of God.
+
+Another curious thing in this article is that after sending both men to
+hell, the _Watchman_ says: "As to their moral habits we know nothing."
+
+It may then be taken for granted, if these "warm personal friends" knew
+nothing against the dead, that their lives were, at least, what the
+church calls moral. We know, if we know anything, that there is no
+necessary connection between what is called religion and morality.
+Certainly there were millions of moral people, those who loved mercy
+and dealt honestly, before the Catholic Church existed. The virtues were
+well known, and practiced, before a triple crown surrounded the cunning
+brain of an Italian Vicar of God, and before the flames of the _Auto da
+fe_ delighted the hearts of a Christian mob. Thousands of people died
+for the right, before the wrong organized the infallible church.
+
+But why should any man deem it his duty or feel it a pleasure to say
+harsh and cruel things of the dead? Why pierce the brow of death with
+the thorns of hatred? Suppose the editor of the _Watchman_ had died, and
+Judge Normile had been the survivor, would the infidel and scoffer have
+attacked the unreplying dead?
+
+Henry D'Arcy I did not know; but Judge Normile was my friend and I
+was his. Although we met but a few times, he excited my admiration and
+respect. He impressed me as being an exceedingly intelligent man, well
+informed on many subjects, of varied reading, possessed of a clear and
+logical mind, a poetic temperament, enjoying the beautiful things in
+literature and art, and the noble things in life. He gave his opinions
+freely, but without the least arrogance, and seemed perfectly willing
+that others should enjoy the privilege of differing with him. He was, so
+far as I could perceive, a gentleman, tender of the feelings of others,
+free and manly in his bearing, "of most excellent fancy," and a most
+charming and agreeable companion.
+
+According, however, to the _Watchman_, such a man is far below a "devout
+robber" or a "penitent murderer." Is it possible that an assassin like
+Ravillac is far better than a philosopher like Voltaire; and that all
+the Catholic robbers and murderers who retain their faith, give greater
+delight to God than the Humboldts, Haeckels and Darwins who have filled
+the world with intellectual light?
+
+Possibly the Catholic Church is mistaken. Possibly the _Watchman_ is in
+error, and possibly there may be for the erring, even in another world,
+some asylum besides hell.
+
+Judge Normile died by his own hand. Certainly he was not afraid of
+the future. He was not appalled by death. He died by his own hand. Can
+anything be more pitiful--more terrible? How can a man in the flowing
+tide and noon of life destroy himself? What storms there must have
+been within the brain; what tempests must have raved and wrecked; what
+lightnings blinded and revealed; what hurrying clouds obscured and hid
+the stars; what monstrous shapes emerged from gloom; what darkness fell
+upon the day; what visions filled the night; how the light failed; how
+paths were lost; how highways disappeared; how chasms yawned; until one
+thought--the thought of death--swift, compassionate and endless--became
+the insane monarch of the mind.
+
+Standing by the prostrate form of one who thus found death, it is far
+better to pity than to revile--to kiss the clay than curse the man.
+
+The editor of the _Watchman_ has done himself injustice. He has not
+injured the dead, but the living.
+
+I am an infidel--an unbeliever--and yet I hope that all the children of
+men may find peace and joy. No matter how they leave this world, from
+altar or from scaffold, crowned with virtue or stained with crime, I
+hope that good may come to all.
+
+R. G. Ingersoll.
+
+
+
+
+IS SUICIDE A SIN?
+
+
+     * These letters were published in the New York World, 1894.
+
+Col. Ingersoll's First Letter.
+
+I DO not know whether self-killing is on the increase or not. If it
+is, then there must be, on the average, more trouble, more sorrow,
+more failure, and, consequently, more people are driven to despair. In
+civilized life there is a great struggle, great competition, and many
+fail. To fail in a great city is like being wrecked at sea. In the
+country a man has friends; he can get a little credit, a little help,
+but in the city it is different. The man is lost in the multitude. In
+the roar of the streets, his cry is not heard. Death becomes his only
+friend. Death promises release from want, from hunger and pain, and so
+the poor wretch lays down his burden, dashes it from his shoulders and
+falls asleep.
+
+To me all this seems very natural. The wonder is that so many endure and
+suffer to the natural end, that so many nurse the spark of life in huts
+and prisons, keep it and guard it through years of misery and want;
+support it by beggary, by eating the crust found in the gutter, and to
+whom it only gives days of weariness and nights of fear and dread. Why
+should the man, sitting amid the wreck of all he had, the loved ones
+dead, friends lost, seek to lengthen, to preserve his life? What can the
+future have for him?
+
+Under many circumstances a man has the right to kill himself. When life
+is of no value to him, when he can be of no real assistance to others,
+why should a man continue? When he is of no benefit, when he is a burden
+to those he loves, why should he remain? The old idea was that God made
+us and placed us here for a purpose and that it was our duty to remain
+until he called us. The world is outgrowing this absurdity. What
+pleasure can it give God to see a man devoured by a cancer; to see the
+quivering flesh slowly eaten; to see the nerves throbbing with pain? Is
+this a festival for God? Why should the poor wretch stay and suffer? A
+little morphine would give him sleep--the agony would be forgotten and
+he would pass unconsciously from happy dreams to painless death.
+
+If God determines all births and deaths, of what use is medicine and why
+should doctors defy with pills and powders, the decrees of God? No one,
+except a few insane, act now according to this childish superstition.
+Why should a man, surrounded by flames, in the midst of a burning
+building, from which there is no escape, hesitate to put a bullet
+through his brain or a dagger in his heart? Would it give God pleasure
+to see him burn? When did the man lose the right of self-defence?
+
+So, when a man has committed some awful crime, why should he stay and
+ruin his family and friends? Why should he add to the injury? Why should
+he live, filling his days and nights, and the days and nights of others,
+with grief and pain, with agony and tears?
+
+Why should a man sentenced to imprisonment for life hesitate to still
+his heart? The grave is better than the cell. Sleep is sweeter than the
+ache of toil. The dead have no masters.
+
+So the poor girl, betrayed and deserted, the door of home closed against
+her, the faces of friends averted, no hand that will help, no eye that
+will soften with pity, the future an abyss filled with monstrous shapes
+of dread and fear, her mind racked by fragments of thoughts like clouds
+broken by storm, pursued, surrounded by the serpents of remorse, flying
+from horrors too great to bear, rushes with joy through the welcome door
+of death.
+
+Undoubtedly there are many cases of perfectly justifiable suicide--cases
+in which not to end life would be a mistake, sometimes almost a crime.
+
+As to the necessity of death, each must decide for himself. And if a man
+honestly decides that death is best--best for him and others--and acts
+upon the decision, why should he be blamed?
+
+Certainly the man who kills himself is not a physical coward. He may
+have lacked moral courage, but not physical. It may be said that some
+men fight duels because they are afraid to decline. They are between two
+fires--the chance of death and the certainty of dishonor, and they take
+the chance of death. So the Christian martyrs were, according to their
+belief, between two fires--the flames of the fagot that could burn but
+for a few moments, and the fires of God, that were eternal. And they
+chose the flames of the fagot.
+
+Men who fear death to that degree that they will bear all the pains and
+pangs that nerves can feel, rather than die, cannot afford to call the
+suicide a coward. It does not seem to me that Brutus was a coward or
+that Seneca was. Surely Antony had nothing left to live for. Cato was
+not a craven. He acted on his judgment. So with hundreds of others who
+felt that they had reached the end---that the journey was done, the
+voyage was over, and, so feeling, stopped. It seems certain that the man
+who commits suicide, who "does the thing that ends all other deeds,
+that shackles accident and bolts up change" is not lacking in physical
+courage.
+
+If men had the courage, they would not linger in prisons, in almshouses,
+in hospitals; they would not bear the pangs of incurable disease, the
+stains of dishonor; they would not live in filth and want, in poverty
+and hunger, neither would they wear the chain of slavery. All this can
+be accounted for only by the fear of death or "of something after."
+
+Seneca, knowing that Nero intended to take his life, had no fear. He
+knew that he could defeat the Emperor. He knew that "at the bottom of
+every river, in the coil of every rope, on the point of every dagger,
+Liberty sat and smiled." He knew that it was his own fault if he allowed
+himself to be tortured to death by his enemy. He said: "There is
+this blessing, that while life has but one entrance, it has exits
+innumerable, and as I choose the house in which I live, the ship in
+which I will sail, so will I choose the time and manner of my death."
+
+To me this is not cowardly, but manly and noble. Under the Roman law
+persons found guilty of certain offences were not only destroyed,
+but their blood was polluted and their children became outcasts. If,
+however, they died before conviction their children were saved. Many
+committed suicide to save their babes. Certainly they were not cowards.
+Although guilty of great crimes they had enough of honor, of manhood,
+left to save their innocent children. This was not cowardice.
+
+Without doubt many suicides are caused by insanity. Men lose their
+property. The fear of the future overpowers them. Things lose
+proportion, they lose poise and balance, and in a flash, a gleam of
+frenzy, kill themselves. The disappointed in love, broken in heart--the
+light fading from their lives--seek the refuge of death.
+
+Those who take their lives in painful, barbarous ways--who mangle their
+throats with broken glass, dash themselves from towers and roofs, take
+poisons that torture like the rack--such persons must be insane. But
+those who take the facts into account, who weigh the arguments for and
+against, and who decide that death is best--the only good--and then
+resort to reasonable means, may be, so far as I can see, in full
+possession of their minds.
+
+Life is not the same to all--to some a blessing, to some a curse, to
+some not much in any way. Some leave it with unspeakable regret, some
+with the keenest joy and some with indifference.
+
+Religion, or the decadence of religion, has a bearing upon the number
+of suicides. The fear of God, of judgment, of eternal pain will stay the
+hand, and people so believing will suffer here until relieved by natural
+death. A belief in eternal agony beyond the grave will cause such
+believers to suffer the pangs of this life. When there is no fear of the
+future, when death is believed to be a dreamless sleep, men have
+less hesitation about ending their lives. On the other hand, orthodox
+religion has driven millions to insanity. It has caused parents to
+murder their children and many thousands to destroy themselves and
+others.
+
+It seems probable that all real, genuine orthodox believers who kill
+themselves must be insane, and to such a degree that their belief is
+forgotten. God and hell are out of their minds.
+
+I am satisfied that many who commit suicide are insane, many are in the
+twilight or dusk of insanity, and many are perfectly sane.
+
+The law we have in this State making it a crime to attempt suicide is
+cruel and absurd and calculated to increase the number of successful
+suicides. When a man has suffered so much, when he has been so
+persecuted and pursued by disaster that he seeks the rest and sleep of
+death, why should the State add to the sufferings of that man? A man
+seeking death, knowing that he will be punished if he fails, will take
+extra pains and precautions to make death certain.
+
+This law was born of superstition, passed by thoughtlessness and
+enforced by ignorance and cruelty.
+
+When the house of life becomes a prison, when the horizon has shrunk and
+narrowed to a cell, and when the convict longs for the liberty of death,
+why should the effort to escape be regarded as a crime?
+
+Of course, I regard life from a natural point of view. I do not take
+gods, heavens or hells into account. My horizon is the known, and my
+estimate of life is based upon what I know of life here in this world.
+People should not suffer for the sake of supernatural beings or for
+other worlds or the hopes and fears of some future state. Our joys, our
+sufferings and our duties are here.
+
+The law of New York about the attempt to commit suicide and the law
+as to divorce are about equal. Both are idiotic. Law cannot prevent
+suicide. Those who have lost all fear of death, care nothing for law and
+its penalties. Death is liberty, absolute and eternal.
+
+We should remember that nothing happens but the natural. Back of every
+suicide and every attempt to commit suicide is the natural and efficient
+cause. Nothing happens by chance. In this world the facts touch each
+other. There is no space between--no room for chance. Given a certain
+heart and brain, certain conditions, and suicide is the necessary
+result. If we wish to prevent suicide we must change conditions. We must
+by education, by invention, by art, by civilization, add to the value
+of the average life. We must cultivate the brain and heart--do away with
+false pride and false modesty. We must become generous enough to help
+our fellows without degrading them. We must make industry--useful work
+of all kinds--honorable. We must mingle a little affection with our
+charity--a little fellowship. We should allow those who have sinned to
+really reform. We should not think only of what the wicked have done,
+but we should think of what we have wanted to do. People do not hate the
+sick. Why should they despise the mentally weak--the diseased in brain?
+
+Our actions are the fruit, the result, of circumstances--of
+conditions--and we do as we must.
+
+This great truth should fill the heart with pity for the failures of our
+race.
+
+Sometimes I have wondered that Christians denounced the suicide; that
+in olden times they buried him where the roads crossed, drove a stake
+through his body, and then took his property from his children and gave
+it to the State.
+
+If Christians would only think, they would see that orthodox religion
+rests upon suicide--that man was redeemed by suicide, and that without
+suicide the whole world would have been lost.
+
+If Christ were God, then he had the power to protect himself from the
+Jews without hurting them. But instead of using his power he allowed
+them to take his life.
+
+If a strong man should allow a few little children to hack him to death
+with knives when he could easily have brushed them aside, would we not
+say that he committed suicide?
+
+There is no escape. If Christ were, in fact, God, and allowed the
+Jews to kill him, then he consented to his own death--refused, though
+perfectly able, to defend and protect himself, and was, in fact, a
+suicide.
+
+We cannot reform the world by law or by superstition. As long as there
+shall be pain and failure, want and sorrow, agony and crime, men and
+women will untie life's knot and seek the peace of death.
+
+To the hopelessly imprisoned--to the dishonored and despised--to those
+who have failed, who have no future, no hope--to the abandoned, the
+brokenhearted, to those who are only remnants and fragments of men and
+women--how consoling, how enchanting is the thought of death!
+
+And even to the most fortunate, death at last is a welcome deliverer.
+Death is as natural and as merciful as life. When we have journeyed
+long--when we are weary--when we wish for the twilight, for the dusk,
+for the cool kisses of the night--when the senses are dull--when
+the pulse is faint and low--when the mists gather on the mirror
+of memory--when the past is almost forgotten, the present hardly
+perceived--when the future has but empty hands--death is as welcome as a
+strain of music.
+
+After all, death is not so terrible as joyless life. Next to eternal
+happiness is to sleep in the soft clasp of the cool earth, disturbed by
+no dream, by no thought, by no pain, by no fear, unconscious of all and
+forever.
+
+The wonder is that so many live, that in spite of rags and want, in
+spite of tenement and gutter, of filth and pain, they, limp and stagger
+and crawl beneath their burdens to the natural end. The wonder is
+that so few of the miserable are brave enough to die--that so many are
+terrified by the "something after death"--by the spectres and phantoms
+of superstition.
+
+Most people are in love with life. How they cling to it in the arctic
+snows--how they struggle in the waves and currents of the sea--how they
+linger in famine--how they fight disaster and despair! On the crumbling
+edge of death they keep the flag flying and go down at last full of hope
+and courage.
+
+But many have not such natures. They cannot bear defeat. They are
+disheartened by disaster. They lie down on the field of conflict and
+give the earth their blood.
+
+They are our unfortunate brothers and sisters. We should not curse or
+blame--we should pity. On their pallid faces our tears should fall.
+
+One of the best men I ever knew, with an affectionate wife, a charming
+and loving daughter, committed suicide. He was a man of generous
+impulses. His heart was loving and tender. He was conscientious, and
+so sensitive that he blamed himself for having done what at the time he
+thought was wise and best. He was the victim of his virtues. Let us be
+merciful in our judgments.
+
+All we can say is that the good and the bad, the loving and the
+malignant, the conscientious and the vicious, the educated and the
+ignorant, actuated by many motives, urged and pushed by circumstances
+and conditions--sometimes in the calm of judgment, sometimes in
+passion's storm and stress, sometimes in whirl and tempest of
+insanity--raise their hands against themselves and desperately put out
+the light of life.
+
+Those who attempt suicide should not be punished. If they are insane
+they should if possible be restored to reason; if sane, they should be
+reasoned with, calmed and assisted.
+
+R. G. Ingersoll.
+
+
+COL. INGERSOLL'S REPLY TO HIS CRITICS.
+
+IN the article written by me about suicide the ground was taken that
+"under many circumstances a man has the right to kill himself."
+
+This has been attacked with great fury by clergymen, editors and
+the writers of letters. These people contend that the right of
+self-destruction does not and cannot exist. They insist that life is the
+gift of God, and that he only has the right to end the days of men; that
+it is our duty to bear the sorrows that he sends with grateful patience.
+Some have denounced suicide as the worst of crimes--worse than the
+murder of another.
+
+The first question, then, is:
+
+Has a man under any circumstances the right to kill himself?
+
+A man is being slowly devoured by a cancer--his agony is intense--his
+suffering all that nerves can feel. His life is slowly being taken.
+Is this the work of the good God? Did the compassionate God create the
+cancer so that it might feed on the quiverering flesh of this victim?
+
+This man, suffering agonies beyond the imagination to conceive, is of no
+use to himself. His life is but a succession of pangs. He is of no use
+to his wife, his children, his friends or society. Day after day he is
+rendered unconscious by drugs that numb the nerves and put the brain to
+sleep.
+
+Has he the right to render himself unconscious? Is it proper for him to
+take refuge in sleep?
+
+If there be a good God I cannot believe that he takes pleasure in the
+sufferings of men--that he gloats over the agonies of his children. If
+there be a good God, he will, to the extent of his power, lessen the
+evils of life.
+
+So I insist that the man being eaten by the cancer--a burden to himself
+and others, useless in every way--has the right to end his pain and pass
+through happy sleep to dreamless rest.
+
+But those who have answered me would say to this man: "It is your duty
+to be devoured. The good God wishes you to suffer. Your life is the gift
+of God. You hold it in trust and you have no right to end it. The cancer
+is the creation of God and it is your duty to furnish it with food."
+
+Take another case: A man is on a burning ship, the crew and the rest
+of the passengers have escaped--gone in the lifeboats--and he is left
+alone. In the wide horizon there is no sail, no sign of help. He cannot
+swim. If he leaps into the sea he drowns, if he remains on the ship he
+burns. In any event he can live but a few moments.
+
+Those who have answered me, those who insist that under no circumstances
+a man has the right to take his life, would say to this man on the deck,
+"Remain where you are. It is the desire of your loving, heavenly Father
+that you be clothed in flame--that you slowly roast--that your eyes be
+scorched to blindness and that you die insane with pain. Your life is
+not your own, only the agony is yours."
+
+I would say to this man: Do as you wish. If you prefer drowning to
+burning, leap into the sea. Between inevitable evils you have the right
+of choice. You can help no one, not even God, by allowing yourself to be
+burned, and you can injure no one, not even God, by choosing the easier
+death.
+
+Let us suppose another case:
+
+A man has been captured by savages in Central Africa. He is about to
+be tortured to death. His captors are going to thrust splinters of pine
+into his flesh and then set them on fire. He watches them as they make
+the preparations. He knows what they are about to do and what he is
+about to suffer. There is no hope of rescue, of help. He has a vial of
+poison. He knows that he can take it and in one moment pass beyond their
+power, leaving to them only the dead body.
+
+Is this man under obligation to keep his life because God gave it, until
+the savages by torture take it? Are the savages the agents of the good
+God? Are they the servants of the Infinite? Is it the duty of this man
+to allow them to wrap his body in a garment of flame? Has he no right to
+defend himself? Is it the will of God that he die by torture? What would
+any man of ordinary intelligence do in a case like this? Is there room
+for discussion?
+
+If the man took the poison, shortened his life a few moments, escaped
+the tortures of the savages, is it possible that he would in another
+world be tortured forever by an infinite savage?
+
+Suppose another case: In the good old days, when the Inquisition
+flourished, when men loved their enemies and murdered their friends,
+many frightful and ingenious ways were devised to touch the nerves of
+pain.
+
+Those who loved God, who had been "born twice," would take a fellow-man
+who had been convicted of "heresy," lay him upon the floor of a dungeon,
+secure his arms and legs with chains, fasten him to the earth so that
+he could not move, put an iron vessel, the opening downward, on his
+stomach, place in the vessel several rats, then tie it securely to his
+body. Then these worshipers of God would wait until the rats, seeking
+food and liberty, would gnaw through the body of the victim.
+
+Now, if a man about to be subjected to this torture, had within his hand
+a dagger, would it excite the wrath of the "good God," if with one quick
+stroke he found the protection of death?
+
+To this question there can be but one answer.
+
+In the cases I have supposed it seems to me that each person would have
+the right to destroy himself. It does not seem possible that the man was
+under obligation to be devoured by a cancer; to remain upon the ship and
+perish in flame; to throw away the poison and be tortured to death by
+savages; to drop the dagger and endure the "mercies" of the church.
+
+If, in the cases I have supposed, men would have the right to take their
+lives, then I was right when I said that "under many circumstances a man
+has a right to kill himself."
+
+_Second_.--I denied that persons who killed themselves were physical
+cowards. They may lack moral courage; they may exaggerate their
+misfortunes, lose the sense of proportion, but the man who plunges the
+dagger in his heart, who sends the bullet through his brain, who leaps
+from some roof and dashes himself against the stones beneath, is not and
+cannot be a physical coward.
+
+The basis of cowardice is the fear of injury or the fear of death, and
+when that fear is not only gone, but in its place is the desire to die,
+no matter by what means, it is impossible that cowardice should exist.
+The suicide wants the very thing that a coward fears. He seeks the very
+thing that cowardice endeavors to escape.
+
+So, the man, forced to a choice of evils, choosing the less is not a
+coward, but a reasonable man.
+
+It must be admitted that the suicide is honest with himself. He is to
+bear the injury; if it be one. Certainly there is no hypocrisy, and just
+as certainly there is no physical cowardice.
+
+Is the man who takes morphine rather than be eaten to death by a cancer
+a coward?
+
+Is the man who leaps into the sea rather than be burned a coward? Is
+the man that takes poison rather than be tortured to death by savages or
+"Christians" a coward?
+
+_Third_.--I also took the position that some suicides were sane; that
+they acted on their best judgment, and that they were in full possession
+of their minds. Now, if under some circumstances, a man has the right to
+take his life, and, if, under such circumstances, he does take his life,
+then it cannot be said that he was insane.
+
+Most of the persons who have tried to answer me have taken the ground
+that suicide is not only a crime, but some of them have said that it
+is the greatest of crimes. Now, if it be a crime, then the suicide must
+have been sane. So all persons who denounce the suicide as a criminal
+admit that he was sane. Under the law, an insane person is incapable of
+committing a crime. All the clergymen who have answered me, and who have
+passionately asserted that suicide is a crime, have by that assertion
+admitted that those who killed themselves were sane.
+
+They agree with me, and not only admit, but assert that "some who have
+committed suicide were sane and in the full possession of their minds."
+
+It seems to me that these three propositions have been demonstrated to
+be true: _First_, that under some circumstances a man has the right
+to take his life; _second_, that the man who commits suicide is not a
+physical coward, and, _third_, that some who have committed suicide were
+at the time sane and in full possession of their minds.
+
+_Fourth_.--I insisted, and still insist, that suicide was and is the
+foundation of the Christian religion.
+
+I still insist that if Christ were God he had the power to protect
+himself without injuring his assailants--that having that power it was
+his duty to use it, and that failing to use it he consented to his own
+death and was guilty of suicide.
+
+To this the clergy answer that it was self-sacrifice for the redemption
+of man, that he made an atonement for the sins of believers. These ideas
+about redemption and atonement are born of a belief in the "fall
+of man," on account of the sins of our first "parents," and of the
+declaration that "without the shedding of blood there is no remission of
+sin." The foundation has crumbled. No intelligent person now believes in
+the "fall of man"--that our first parents were perfect, and that their
+descendants grew worse and worse, at least until the coming of Christ.
+
+Intelligent men now believe that ages and ages before the dawn of
+history, man was a poor, naked, cruel, ignorant and degraded savage,
+whose language consisted of a few sounds of terror, of hatred and
+delight; that he devoured his fellow-man, having all the vices, but
+not all the virtues of the beasts; that the journey from the den to the
+home, the palace, has been long and painful, through many centuries
+of suffering, of cruelty and war; through many ages of discovery,
+invention, self-sacrifice and thought.
+
+Redemption and atonement are left without a fact on which to rest. The
+idea that an infinite God, creator of all worlds, came to this grain
+of sand, learned the trade of a carpenter, discussed with Pharisees and
+scribes, and allowed a few infuriated Hebrews to put him to death that
+he might atone for the sins of men and redeem a few believers from
+the consequences of his own wrath, can find no lodgment in a good and
+natural brain.
+
+In no mythology can anything more monstrously unbelievable be found.
+
+But if Christ were a man and attacked the religion of his times because
+it was cruel and absurd; if he endeavored to found a religion of
+kindness, of good deeds, to take the place of heartlessness and
+ceremony, and if, rather than to deny what he believed to be right and
+true, he suffered death, then he was a noble man--a benefactor of his
+race. But if he were God there was no need of this. The Jews did not
+wish to kill God. If he had only made himself known all knees would have
+touched the ground. If he were God it required no heroism to die. He
+knew that what we call death is but the opening of the gates of eternal
+life. If he were God there was no self-sacrifice. He had no need to
+suffer pain. He could have changed the crucifixion to a joy.
+
+Even the editors of religious weeklies see that there is no escape from
+these conclusions--from these arguments--and so, instead of attacking
+the arguments, they attack the man who makes them.
+
+_Fifth_.--I denounced the law of New York that makes an attempt to
+commit suicide a crime.
+
+It seems to me that one who has suffered so much that he passionately
+longs for death should be pitied, instead of punished--helped rather
+than imprisoned.
+
+A despairing woman who had vainly sought for leave to toil, a woman
+without home, without friends, without bread, with clasped hands, with
+tear-filled eyes, with broken words of prayer, in the darkness of night
+leaps from the dock, hoping, longing for the tearless sleep of
+death. She is rescued by a kind, courageous man, handed over to the
+authorities, indicted, tried, convicted, clothed in a convict's garb and
+locked in a felon's cell.
+
+To me this law seems barbarous and absurd, a law that only savages would
+enforce.
+
+_Sixth_.--In this discussion a curious thing has happened. For several
+centuries the clergy have declared that while infidelity is a very good
+thing to live by, it is a bad support, a wretched consolation, in the
+hour of death. They have in spite of the truth, declared that all
+the great unbelievers died trembling with fear, asking God for mercy,
+surrounded by fiends, in the torments of despair. Think of the thousands
+and thousands of clergymen who have described the last agonies of
+Voltaire, who died as peacefully as a happy child smilingly passes from
+play to slumber; the final anguish of Hume, who fell into his last sleep
+as serenely as a river, running between green and shaded banks, reaches
+the sea; the despair of Thomas Paine, one of the bravest, one of the
+noblest men, who met the night of death untroubled as a star that meets
+the morning.
+
+At the same time these ministers admitted that the average murderer
+could meet death on the scaffold with perfect serenity, and could
+smilingly ask the people who had gathered to see him killed to meet him
+in heaven.
+
+But the honest man who had expressed his honest thoughts against the
+creed of the church in power could not die in peace. God would see to it
+that his last moments should be filled with the insanity of fear--that
+with his last breath he should utter the shriek of remorse, the cry for
+pardon.
+
+This has all changed, and now the clergy, in their sermons answering me,
+declare that the atheists, the freethinkers, have no fear of death--that
+to avoid some little annoyance, a passing inconvenience, they gladly
+and cheerfully put out the light of life. It is now said that infidels
+believe that death is the end--that it is a dreamless sleep--that it is
+without pain--that therefore they have no fear, care nothing for gods,
+or heavens or hells, nothing for the threats of the pulpit, nothing for
+the day of judgment, and that when life becomes a burden they carelessly
+throw it down.
+
+The infidels are so afraid of death that they commit suicide.
+
+This certainly is a great change, and I congratulate myself on having
+forced the clergy to contradict themselves.
+
+_Seventh_.--The clergy take the position that the atheist, the
+unbeliever, has no standard of morality--that he can have no real
+conception of right and wrong. They are of the opinion that it is
+impossible for one to be moral or good unless he believes in some Being
+far above himself.
+
+In this connection we might ask how God can be moral or good unless he
+believes in some Being superior to himself?
+
+What is morality? It is the best thing to do under the circumstances.
+What is the best thing to do under the circumstances? That which will
+increase the sum of human happiness--or lessen it the least. Happiness
+in its highest, noblest form, is the only good; that which increases
+or preserves or creates happiness is moral--that which decreases it, or
+puts it in peril, is immoral.
+
+It is not hard for an atheist--for an unbeliever--to keep his hands
+out of the fire. He knows that burning his hands will not increase his
+well-being, and he is moral enough to keep them out of the flames.
+
+So it may be said that each man acts according to his intelligence--so
+far as what he considers his own good is concerned. Sometimes he is
+swayed by passion, by prejudice, by ignorance--but when he is really
+intelligent, master of himself, he does what he believes is best for
+him. If he is intelligent enough he knows that what is really good for
+him is good for others--for all the world.
+
+It is impossible for me to see' why any belief in the supernatural is
+necessary to have a keen perception of right and wrong. Every man who
+has the capacity to suffer and enjoy, and has imagination enough to give
+the same capacity to others, has within himself the natural basis of
+all morality. The idea of morality was born here, in this world, of the
+experience, the intelligence of mankind. Morality is not of supernatural
+origin. It did not fall from the clouds, and it needs no belief in
+the supernatural, no supernatural promises or threats, no supernatural
+heavens or hells to give it force and life. Subjects who are governed
+by the threats and promises of a king are merely slaves. They are not
+governed by the ideal, by noble views of right and wrong. They are
+obedient cowards, controlled by fear, or beggars governed by rewards--by
+alms.
+
+Right and wrong exist in the nature of things. Murder was just as
+criminal before as after the promulgation of the Ten Commandments.
+
+_Eighth_.--The clergy take the position that the atheist, the
+unbeliever, has no standard of morality--that he can have no real
+conception of right and wrong. They are of the opinion that it is
+impossible for one to be moral or good unless he believes in some Being
+far above himself.
+
+In this connection we might ask how God can be moral or good unless he
+believes in some Being superior to himself?
+
+What is morality? It is the best thing to do under the circumstances.
+What is the best thing to do under the circumstances? That which will
+increase the sum of human happiness--or lessen it the least. Happiness
+in its highest, noblest form, is the only good; that which increases
+or preserves or creates happiness is moral--that which decreases it, or
+puts it in peril, is immoral.
+
+It is not hard for an atheist--for an unbeliever--to keep his hands
+out of the fire. He knows that burning his hands will not increase his
+well-being, and he is moral enough to keep them out of the flames.
+
+So it may be said that each man acts according to his intelligence--so
+far as what he Considers his own good is concerned. Sometimes he is
+swayed by passion, by prejudice, by ignorance--but when he is really
+intelligent, master of himself, he does what he believes is best for
+him. If he is intelligent enough he knows that what is really good for
+him is food for others--for all the world.
+
+It is impossible for me to see why any belief in the supernatural is
+necessary to have a keen perception of right and wrong. Every man who
+has the capacity to suffer and enjoy, and has imagination enough to give
+the same capacity to others, has within himself the natural basis of
+all morality. The idea of morality was born here, in this world, of the
+experience, the intelligence of mankind. Morality is not of supernatural
+origin. It did not fall from the clouds, and it needs no belief in
+the supernatural, no supernatural promises or threats, no supernatural
+heavens or hells to give it force and life. Subjects who are governed
+by the threats and promises of a king are merely slaves. They are not
+governed by the ideal, by noble views of right and wrong. They are
+obedient cowards, controlled by fear, or beggars governed by rewards--by
+alms.
+
+Right and wrong exist in the nature of things.
+
+Murder was just as criminal before as after the promulgation of the Ten
+Commandments.
+
+_Eighth_.--Many of the clergy, some editors and some writers of
+letters who have answered me, have said that suicide is the worst of
+crimes--that a man had better murder somebody else than himself. One
+clergyman gives as a reason for this statement that the suicide dies in
+an act of sin, and therefore he had better kill another person. Probably
+he would commit a less crime if he would murder his wife or mother.
+
+I do not see that it is any worse to die than to live in sin. To say
+that it is not as wicked to murder another as yourself seems absurd.
+The man about to kill himself wishes to die. Why is it better for him to
+kill another man, who wishes to live?
+
+To my mind it seems clear that you had better injure yourself than
+another. Better be a spendthrift than a thief. Better throw away your
+own money than steal the money of another--better kill yourself if you
+wish to die than murder one whose life is full of joy.
+
+The clergy tell us that God is everywhere, and that it is one of the
+greatest possible crimes to rush into his presence. It is wonderful
+how much they know about God and how little about their fellow-men.
+Wonderful the amount of their information about other worlds and how
+limited their knowledge is of this.
+
+There may or may not be an infinite Being. I neither affirm nor deny. I
+am honest enough to say that I do not know. I am candid enough to admit
+that the question is beyond the limitations of my mind. Yet I think I
+know as much on that subject as any human being knows or ever knew, and
+that is--nothing. I do not say that there is not another world, another
+life; neither do I say that there is. I say that I do not know. It seems
+to me that every sane and honest man must say the same. But if there is
+an infinitely good God and another world, then the infinitely good
+God will be just as good to us in that world as he is in this. If this
+infinitely good God loves his children in this world, he will love them
+in another. If he loves a man when he is alive, he will not hate him the
+instant he is dead.
+
+If we are the children of an infinitely wise and powerful God, he knew
+exactly what we would do--the temptations that we could and could not
+withstand--knew exactly the effect that everything would have upon us,
+knew under what circumstances we would take our lives--and produced
+such circumstances himself. It is perfectly apparent that there are many
+people incapable by nature of bearing the burdens of life, incapable of
+preserving their mental poise in stress and strain of disaster, disease
+and loss, and who by failure, by misfortune and want, are driven to
+despair and insanity, in whose darkened minds there comes like a flash
+of lightning in the night, the thought of death, a thought so strong,
+so vivid, that all fear is lost, all ties broken, all duties, all
+obligations, all hopes forgotten, and naught remains except a fierce and
+wild desire to die. Thousands and thousands become moody, melancholy,
+brood upon loss of money, of position, of friends, until reason
+abdicates and frenzy takes possession of the soul. If there be an
+infinitely wise and powerful God, all this was known to him from the
+beginning, and he so created things, established relations, put in
+operation causes and effects, that all that has happened was the
+necessary result of his own acts.
+
+_Ninth_.--Nearly all who have tried to answer what I said have been
+exceedingly careful to misquote me, and then answer something that I
+never uttered. They have declared that I have advised people who were in
+trouble, somewhat annoyed, to kill themselves; that I have told men who
+have lost their money, who had failed in business, who were not good in
+health, to kill themselves at once, without taking into consideration
+any duty that they owed to wives, children, friends, or society.
+
+No man has a right to leave his wife to fight the battle alone if he
+is able to help. No man has a right to desert his children if he can
+possibly be of use. As long as he can add to the comfort of those he
+loves, as long as he can stand between wife and misery, between child
+and want, as long as he can be of any use, it is his duty to remain.
+
+I believe in the cheerful view, in looking at the sunny side of things,
+in bearing with fortitude the evils of life, in struggling against
+adversity, in finding the fuel of laughter even in disaster, in having
+confidence in to-morrow, in finding the pearl of joy among the flints
+and shards, and in changing by the alchemy of patience even evil things
+to good. I believe in the gospel of cheerfulness, of courage and good
+nature.
+
+Of the future I have no fear. My fate is the fate of the world--of
+all that live. My anxieties are about this life, this world. About the
+phantoms called gods and their impossible hells, I have no care, no
+fear.
+
+The existence of God I neither affirm nor deny, I wait. The immortality
+of the soul I neither affirm nor deny. I hope--hope for all of the
+children of men. I have never denied the existence of another world, nor
+the immortality of the soul. For many years I have said that the idea
+of immortality, that like a sea has ebbed and flowed in the human heart,
+with its countless waves of hope and fear beating against the shores and
+rocks of time and fate, was not born of any book, nor of any creed, nor
+of any religion. It was born of human affection, and it will continue to
+ebb and flow beneath the mists and clouds of doubt and darkness as long
+as love kisses the lips of death.
+
+What I deny is the immortality of pain, the eternity of torture.
+
+After all, the instinct of self-preservation is strong. People do not
+kill themselves on the advice of friends or enemies. All wish to be
+happy, to enjoy life; all wish for food and roof and raiment, for
+friends, and as long as life gives joy, the idea of self-destruction
+never enters the human mind.
+
+The oppressors, the tyrants, those who trample on the rights of others,
+the robbers of the poor, those who put wages below the living point, the
+ministers who make people insane by preaching the dogma of eternal pain;
+these are the men who drive the weak, the suffering and the helpless
+down to death.
+
+It will not do to say that God has appointed a time for each to die. Of
+this there is, and there can be, no evidence. There is no evidence that
+any god takes any interest in the affairs of men--that any sides with
+the right or helps the weak, protects the innocent or rescues the
+oppressed. Even the clergy admit that their God, through all ages, has
+allowed his friends, his worshipers, to be imprisoned, tortured and
+murdered by his enemies. Such is the protection of God. Billions of
+prayers have been uttered; has one been answered? Who sends plague,
+pestilence and famine? Who bids the earthquake devour and the volcano to
+overwhelm?
+
+_Tenth_.--Again, I say that it is wonderful to me that so many men, so
+many women endure and carry their burdens to the natural end; that so
+many, in spite of "age, ache and penury," guard with trembling hands the
+spark of life; that prisoners for life toil and suffer to the last; that
+the helpless wretches in poorhouses and asylums cling to life; that the
+exiles in Siberia, loaded with chains, scarred with the knout, live
+on; that the incurables, whose every breath is a pang, and for whom the
+future has only pain, should fear the merciful touch and clasp of death.
+
+It is but a few steps at most from the cradle to the grave; a short
+journey. The suicide hastens, shortens the path, loses the afternoon,
+the twilight, the dusk of life's day; loses what he does not want, what
+he cannot bear. In the tempest of despair, in the blind fury of madness,
+or in the calm of thought and choice, the beleaguered soul finds the
+serenity of death.
+
+Let us leave the dead where nature leaves them. We know nothing of any
+realm that lies beyond the horizon of the known, beyond the end of life.
+Let us be honest with ourselves and others. Let us pity the suffering,
+the despairing, the men and women hunted and pursued by grief and shame,
+by misery and want, by chance and fate until their only friend is death.
+
+Robert G. Ingersoll.
+
+
+SUICIDE A SIN.
+
+     * New York Journal, 1805. An Interview.
+
+_Question_. Do you think that what you have written about suicide has
+caused people to take their lives?
+
+_Answer._ No, I do not. People do not kill themselves because of the
+ideas of others. They are the victims of misfortune.
+
+_Question_. What do you consider the chief cause of suicide?
+
+_Answer._ There are many causes. Some individuals are crossed in love,
+others are bankrupt in estate or reputation, still others are diseased
+in body and frequently in mind. There are a thousand and one causes that
+lead up to the final act.
+
+_Question_. Do you consider that nationality plays a part in these
+tragedies?
+
+_Answer._ No, it is a question of individuals. There are those whose
+sorrows are greater than they can bear. These sufferers seek the peace
+of death.
+
+_Question_. Do you, then, advise suicide?
+
+_Answer._ No, I have never done so, but I have said, and still say, that
+there are circumstances under which it is justifiable for a person to
+take his life.
+
+_Question_. What do you think of the law which prohibits
+self-destruction?
+
+_Answer._ That it is absurd and ridiculous. The other day a man was
+tried before Judge Goff for having tried to kill himself. I think he
+pleaded guilty, and the Judge, after speaking of the terrible crime of
+the poor wretch, sentenced him to the penitentiary for two years.
+This was an outrage; infamous in every way, and a disgrace to our
+civilization.
+
+_Question_. Do you believe that such a law will prevent the frequency of
+suicides?
+
+_Answer._ By no means. After this, persons in New York who have made up
+their minds to commit suicide will see to it that they succeed.
+
+_Question_. Have your opinions been in any way modified since your first
+announcement of them?
+
+_Answer._ No, I feel now as I have felt for many years. No one can
+answer my articles on suicide, because no one can satisfactorily refute
+them. Every man of sense knows that a person being devoured by a cancer
+has the right to take morphine, and pass from agony to dreamless sleep.
+So, too, there are circumstances under which a man has the right to end
+his pain of mind.
+
+_Question_. Have you seen in the papers that many who have killed
+themselves have had on their persons some article of yours on suicide?
+
+_Answer._ Yes, I have read such accounts, but I repeat that I do not
+think these persons were led to kill themselves by reading the articles.
+Many people who have killed themselves were found to have Bibles or
+tracts in their pockets.
+
+_Question_. How do you account for the presence of the latter?
+
+_Answer._ The reason of this is that the theologians know nothing.
+The pious imagine that their God has placed us here for some wise and
+inscrutable purpose, and that he will call for us when he wants us. All
+this is idiotic. When a man is of no use to himself or to others, when
+his days and nights are filled with pain and sorrow, why should he
+remain to endure them longer?
+
+
+SUICIDE A SIN.
+
+     * New York Herald, 1897. An Interview.
+
+COL. ROBERT G. INGERSOLL was seen at his house and asked if he had read
+the Rev. Merle St. Croix Wright's sermon.
+
+_Answer._ Yes. I have read the sermon, and also an interview had with
+the reverend gentleman.
+
+Long ago I gave my views about suicide, and I entertain the same views
+still. Mr. Wright's sermon has stirred up quite a commotion among the
+orthodox ministers. This commotion may always be expected when anything
+sensible comes from a pulpit. Mr. Wright has mixed a little common
+sense with his theology, and, of course this has displeased the truly
+orthodox.
+
+Sense is the bitterest foe that theology has. No system of supernatural
+religion can outlive a good dose of real good sense. The orthodox
+ministers take the ground that an infinite Being created man, put him
+on the earth and determined his days. They say that God desires every
+person to live until he, God, calls for his soul. They insist that
+we are all on guard and must remain so until relieved by a higher
+power--the superior officer.
+
+The trouble with this doctrine is that it proves too much. It proves
+that God kills every person who dies as we say, "according to nature."
+It proves that we ought to say, "according to God." It proves that God
+sends the earthquake, the cyclone, the pestilence, for the purpose of
+killing people. It proves that all diseases and all accidents are his
+messengers, and that all who do not kill themselves, die by the act,
+and in accordance with the will of God. It also shows that when a man is
+murdered, it is in harmony with, and a part of the divine plan. When God
+created the man who was murdered, he knew that he would be murdered, and
+when he made the man who committed the murder, he knew exactly what he
+would do. So that the murder was the act of God.
+
+Can it be said that God intended that thousands should die of famine and
+that he, to accomplish his purpose, withheld the rain? Can we say that
+he intended that thousands of innocent men should die in dungeons and on
+scaffolds?
+
+Is it possible that a man, "slowly being devoured by a cancer," whose
+days and nights are filled with torture, who is useless to himself and
+a burden to others, is carrying out the will of God? Does God enjoy
+his agony? Is God thrilled by the music of his moans--the melody of his
+shrieks?
+
+This frightful doctrine makes God an infinite monster, and every human
+being a slave; a victim. This doctrine is not only infamous but it is
+idiotic. It makes God the only criminal in the universe.
+
+Now, if we are governed by reason, if we use our senses and our minds,
+and have courage enough to be honest; if we know a little of the world's
+history, then we know--if we know anything--that man has taken his
+chances, precisely the same as other animals. He has been destroyed
+by heat and cold, by flood and fire, by storm and famine, by countless
+diseases, by numberless accidents. By his intelligence, his cunning, his
+strength, his foresight, he has managed to escape utter destruction. He
+has defended himself. He has received no supernatural aid. Neither has
+he been attacked by any supernatural power. Nothing has ever happened in
+nature as the result of a purpose to benefit or injure the human race.
+
+Consequently the question of the right or wrong of suicide is not in any
+way affected by a supposed obligation to the Infinite.
+
+All theological considerations must be thrown aside because we see and
+know that the laws of life are the same for all living things--that when
+the conditions are favorable, the living multiply and life lengthens,
+and when the conditions are unfavorable, the living decrease and life
+shortens. We have no evidence of any interference of any power superior
+to nature. Taking into consideration the fact that all the duties and
+obligations of man must be to his fellows, to sentient beings, here in
+this world, and that he owes no duty and is under no obligation to any
+phantoms of the air, then it is easy to determine whether a man under
+certain circumstances has the right to end his life.
+
+If he can be of no use to others--if he is of no use to himself--if
+he is a burden to others--a curse to himself--why should he remain? By
+ending his life he ends his sufferings and adds to the well-being
+of others. He lessens misery and increases happiness. Under such
+circumstances undoubtedly a man has the right to stop the pulse of pain
+and woo the sleep that has no dream.
+
+I do not think that the discussion of this question is of much
+importance, but I am glad that a clergyman has taken a natural and a
+sensible position, and that he has reasoned not like a minister, but
+like a man.
+
+When wisdom comes from the pulpit I am delighted and surprised. I feel
+then that there is a little light in the East, possibly the dawn of a
+better day.
+
+I congratulate the Rev. Mr. Wright, and thank him for his brave and
+philosophic words.
+
+There is still another thing. Certainly a man has the right to avoid
+death, to save himself from accident and disease. If he has this right,
+then the theologians must admit that God, in making his decrees, took
+into consideration the result of such actions. Now, if God knew that
+while most men would avoid death, some would seek it, and if his decrees
+were so made that they would harmonize with the acts of those who would
+avoid death, can we say that he did not, in making his decrees, take
+into consideration the acts of those who would seek death? Let us
+remember that all actions, good, bad and indifferent, are the necessary
+children of conditions--that there is no chance in the natural world in
+which we live.
+
+So, we must keep in mind that all real opinions are honest, and that all
+have the same right to express their thoughts. Let us be charitable.
+
+When some suffering wretch, wild with pain, crazed with regret, frenzied
+with fear, with desperate hand unties the knot of life, let us have
+pity--Let us be generous.
+
+
+SUICIDE AND SANITY.
+
+     * New York Press, 1897. An Interview.
+
+_Question_. Is a suicide necessarily insane? was the first question, to
+which Colonel Ingersoll replied:
+
+_Answer._ No. At the same time I believe that a great majority of
+suicides are insane. There are circumstances under which suicide is
+natural, sensible and right. When a man is of no use to himself, when he
+can be of no use to others, when his life is filled with agony, when the
+future has no promise of relief, then I think he has the right to cast
+the burden of life away and seek the repose of death.
+
+_Question_. Is a suicide necessarily a coward?
+
+_Answer._ I cannot conceive of cowardice in connection with suicide. Of
+nearly all things death is the most feared. And the man who voluntarily
+enters the realm of death cannot properly be called a coward. Many men
+who kill themselves forget the duties they owe to others--forget their
+wives and children. Such men are heartless, wicked, brutal; but they are
+not cowards.
+
+_Question_. When is the suicide of the sane justifiable?
+
+_Answer._ To escape death by torture; to avoid being devoured by a
+cancer; to prevent being a burden on those you love; when you can be of
+no use to others or to yourself; when life is unbearable; when in all
+the horizon of the future there is no star of hope.
+
+_Question_. Do you believe that any suicides have been caused or
+encouraged by your declaration three years ago that suicide sometimes
+was justifiable?
+
+_Answer._ Many preachers talk as though I had inaugurated, invented,
+suicide, as though no one who had not read my ideas on suicide had ever
+taken his own life. Talk as long as language lasts, you cannot induce
+a man to kill himself. The man who takes his own life does not go to
+others to find reasons or excuses.
+
+_Question_. On the whole is the world made better or worse by suicides?
+
+_Answer._ Better by some and poorer by others.
+
+_Question_. Why is it that Germany, said to be the most educated of
+civilized nations, leads the world in suicides?
+
+_Answer._ I do not know that Germany is the most educated; neither do I
+know that suicide is more frequent there than in all other countries. I
+know that the struggle for life is severe in Germany, that the laws
+are unjust, that the government is oppressive, that the people are
+sentimental, that they brood over their troubles and easily become
+hopeless.
+
+_Question_. If suicide is sometimes justifiable, is not killing of born
+idiots and infants hopelessly handicapped at birth equally so?
+
+_Answer._ There is no relation between the questions--between suicides
+and killing idiots. Suicide may, under certain circumstances, be right
+and killing idiots may be wrong; killing idiots may be right and suicide
+may be wrong. When we look about us, when we read interviews with
+preachers about Jonah, we know that all the idiots have not been killed.
+
+_Question_. Should suicide be forbidden by law?
+
+_Answer._ No. A law that provides for the punishment of those who
+attempt to commit suicide is idiotic. Those who are willing to meet
+death are not afraid of law. The only effect of such a law would be to
+make the person who had concluded to kill himself a little more careful
+to succeed.
+
+_Question_. What is your belief about virtue, morality and religion?
+
+_Answer._ I believe that all actions that tend to the well-being of
+sentient beings are virtuous and moral. I believe that real religion
+consists in doing good. I do not believe in phantoms. I believe in
+the uniformity of nature; that matter will forever attract matter in
+proportion to mass and distance; that, under the same circumstances,
+falling bodies will attain the same speed, increasing in exact
+proportion to distance; that light will always, under the same
+circumstances, be reflected at the same angle; that it will always
+travel with the same velocity; that air will forever be lighter than
+water, and gold heavier than iron; that all substances will be true
+to their natures; that a certain degree of heat will always expand the
+metals and change water into steam; that a certain degree of cold will
+cause the metals to shrink and change water into ice; that all atoms
+will forever be in motion; that like causes will forever produce like
+effects, that force will be overcome only by force; that no atom
+of matter will ever be created or destroyed; that the energy in the
+universe will forever remain the same, nothing lost, nothing gained;
+that all that has been possible has happened, and that all that will be
+possible will happen; that the seeds and causes of all thoughts, dreams,
+fancies and actions, of all virtues and all vices, of all successes
+and all failures, are in nature; that there is in the universe no power
+superior to nature; that man is under no obligation to the imaginary
+gods; that all his obligations and duties are to be discharged and done
+in this world; that right and wrong do not depend on the will of an
+infinite Being, but on the consequences of actions, and that these
+consequences necessarily flow from the nature of things. I believe that
+the universe is natural.
+
+
+
+
+IS AVARICE TRIUMPHANT?
+
+
+     *A reply to General Rush Hawkins' article, "Brutality and
+     Avarice Triumphant," published in the North American Review,
+     June, 1891.
+
+THERE are many people, in all countries, who seem to enjoy individual
+and national decay. They love to prophesy the triumph of evil. They
+mistake the afternoon of their own lives for the evening of the world.
+To them everything has changed. Men are no longer honest or brave, and
+women have ceased to be beautiful. They are dyspeptic, and it gives them
+the greatest pleasure to say that the art of cooking has been lost.
+
+For many generations many of these people occupied the pulpits. They
+lifted the hand of warning whenever the human race took a step in
+advance. As wealth increased, they declared that honesty and goodness
+and self-denial and charity were vanishing from the earth. They doubted
+the morality of well-dressed people--considered it impossible that the
+prosperous should be pious. Like owls sitting on the limbs of a dead
+tree, they hooted the obsequies of spring, believing it would come no
+more.
+
+There are some patriots who think it their duty to malign and slander
+the land of their birth. They feel that they have a kind of Cassandra
+mission, and they really seem to enjoy their work. They honestly believe
+that every kind of crime is on the increase, that the courts are
+all corrupt, that the legislators are bribed, that the witnesses are
+suborned, that all holders of office are dishonest; and they feel like a
+modern Marius sitting amid the ruins of all the virtues.
+
+It is useless to endeavor to persuade these people that they are wrong.
+They do not want arguments, because they will not heed them. They need
+medicine. Their case is not for a philosopher, but for a physician.
+
+General Hawkins is probably right when he says that some fraudulent
+shoes, some useless muskets, and some worn-out vessels were sold to the
+Government during the war; but we must remember that there were millions
+and millions of as good shoes as art and honesty could make, millions of
+the best muskets ever constructed, and hundreds of the most magnificent
+ships ever built, sold to the Government during the same period. We must
+not mistake an eddy for the main stream. We must also remember another
+thing: there were millions of good, brave, and patriotic men to wear the
+shoes, to use the muskets, and to man the ships.
+
+So it is probably true that Congress was extravagant in land subsidies
+voted to railroads; but that this legislation was secured by bribery
+is preposterous. It was all done in the light of noon. There is not the
+slightest evidence tending to show that the general policy of hastening
+the construction of railways through the Territories of the United
+States was corruptly adopted--not the slightest. At the same time,
+it may be that some members of Congress were induced by personal
+considerations to vote for such subsidies. As a matter of fact, the
+policy was wise, and through the granting of the subsidies thousands
+of miles of railways were built, and these railways have given to
+civilization vast territories which otherwise would have remained
+substantially useless to the world. Where at that time was a wilderness,
+now are some of the most thriving cities in the United States--a
+great, an industrious, and a happy population. The results have
+justified the action of Congress.
+
+It is also true that some railroads have been "wrecked" in the United
+States, but most of these wrecks have been the result of competition. It
+is the same with corporations as with individuals--the powerful combine
+against the weak. In the world of commerce and business is the great
+law of the survival of the strongest. Railroads are not eleemosynary
+institutions. They have but little regard for the rights of one another.
+Some fortunes have been made by the criminal "wrecking" of roads, but
+even in the business of corporations honesty is the best policy, and the
+companies that have acted in accordance with the highest standard, other
+things being equal, have reaped the richest harvest.
+
+Many railways were built in advance of a demand; they had to develop the
+country through which they passed. While they waited for immigration,
+interest accumulated; as a result foreclosure took place; then
+reorganization. By that time the country had been populated; towns were
+springing up along the line; increased business was the result. On the
+new bonds and the new stock the company paid interest and dividends.
+Then the ones who first invested and lost their money felt that they had
+been defrauded.
+
+So it is easy to say that certain men are guilty of crimes--easy
+to indict the entire nation, and at the same time impossible to
+substantiate one of the charges. Everyone who knows the history of
+the Star-Route trials knows that nothing was established against the
+defendants, knows that every effort was made by the Government to
+convict them, and also knows that an unprejudiced jury of twelve men,
+never suspected of being improperly influenced, after having heard
+the entire case, pronounced the defendants not guilty. After this, of
+course, any one can say, who knows nothing of the evidence and who cares
+nothing for the facts, that the defendants were all guilty.
+
+It may also be true that some settlers in the far West have taken timber
+from the public lands, and it may be that it was a necessity. Our laws
+and regulations were such that where a settler was entitled to take up a
+certain amount of land he had to take it all in one place; he could not
+take a certain number of acres on the plains and a certain number of
+acres in the timber. The consequence was that when he settled upon
+the land--the land that he could cultivate--he took the timber that he
+needed from the Government land, and this has been called stealing. So I
+suppose it may be said that the cattle stole the Government's grass and
+possibly drank the Government's water.
+
+It will also be admitted with pleasure that stock has been "watered" in
+this country. And what is the crime or practice known as watering stock?
+
+For instance, you have a railroad one hundred miles long, worth, we will
+say, $3,000,000--able to pay interest on that sum at the rate of six per
+cent. Now, we all know that the amount of stock issued has nothing to do
+with the value of the thing represented by the stock. If there was
+one share of stock representing this railroad, it would be worth three
+million dollars, whether it said on its face it was one dollar or one
+hundred dollars. If there were three million shares of stock issued on
+this property, they would be worth one dollar apiece, and, no matter
+whether it said on this stock that each share was a hundred dollars or a
+thousand dollars, the share would be worth one dollar--no more, no less.
+If any one wishes to find the value of stock, he should find the value
+of the thing represented by the stock. It is perfectly clear that, if a
+pie is worth one dollar, and you cut it into four pieces, each piece is
+worth twenty-five cents; and if you cut it in a thousand pieces, you do
+not increase the value of the pie.
+
+If, then, you wish to find the value of a share of stock, find its
+relation to the thing represented by all the stock.
+
+It can also be safely admitted that trusts have been formed. The reason
+is perfectly clear. Corporations are like individuals--they combine.
+Unfortunate corporations become socialistic, anarchistic, and cry out
+against the abuses of trusts. It is natural for corporations to defend
+themselves--natural for them to stop ruinous competition by a profitable
+pool; and when strong corporations combine, little corporations suffer.
+It is with corporations as with fishes--the large eat the little; and it
+may be that this will prove a public benefit in the end. When the large
+corporations have taken possession of the little ones, it may be that
+the Government will take possession of them--the Government being the
+largest corporation of them all.
+
+It is to be regretted that all houses are not fireproof; but certainly
+no one imagines that the people of this country build houses for the
+purpose of having them burned, or that they erect hotels having in view
+the broiling of guests. Men act as they must; that is to say, according
+to wants and necessities. In a new country the buildings are cheaper
+than in an old one, money is scarcer, interest higher, and consequently
+people build cheaply and take the risks of fire. They do not do this
+on account of the Constitution of the United States, or the action of
+political parties, or the general idea that man is entitled to be free.
+In the hotels of Europe it may be that there is not as great danger of
+fire as of famine.
+
+The destruction of game and of the singing birds is to be greatly
+regretted, not only in this country, but in all others. The people
+of America have been too busy felling forests, ploughing fields, and
+building houses, to cultivate, to the highest degree, the aesthetic side
+of their natures. Nature has been somewhat ruthless with us. The storms
+of winter breasted by the Western pioneer, the whirlwinds of summer,
+have tended, it may be, to harden somewhat the sensibilities; in
+consequence of which they have allowed their horses and cattle to bear
+the rigors of the same climate.
+
+It is also true that the seal-fisheries are being destroyed, in the
+interest of the present, by those who care nothing for the future. All
+these things are to be deprecated, are to be spoken against; but we
+must not hint, provided we are lovers of the Republic, that such things
+are caused by free institutions.
+
+General Hawkins asserts that "Christianity has neither preached nor
+practiced humanity towards animals," while at the same time "Sunday
+school children by hundreds of thousands are taught what a terrible
+thing it is to break the Sabbath;" that "museum trustees tremble with
+pious horror at the suggestion of opening the doors leading to the
+collections on that day," and that no protests have come "from lawmakers
+or the Christian clergy." Few people will suspect me of going out of my
+way to take care of Christianity or of the clergy. At the same time, I
+can afford to state the truth. While there is not much in the Bible with
+regard to practicing humanity toward animals, there is at least this:
+"The merciful man is merciful to his beast." Of course, I am not
+alluding now to the example set by Jehovah when he destroyed the cattle
+of the Egyptians with hailstones and diseases on account of the sins of
+their owners.
+
+In regard to the treatment of animals Christians have been much like
+other people.
+
+So, hundreds of lawmakers have not only protested against cruelty to
+animals, but enough have protested against it to secure the enactment of
+laws making cruelty toward animals a crime. Henry Bergh, who did as much
+good as any man who has lived in the nineteenth century, was seconded
+in his efforts by many of the Christian clergy not only, but by hundreds
+and thousands of professing Christians--probably millions. Let us be
+honest.
+
+It is true that the clergy are apt to lose the distinction between
+offences and virtues, to regard the little as the important--that is to
+say, to invert the pyramid.
+
+It is true that the Indians have been badly treated. It is true that the
+fringe of civilization has been composed of many low and cruel men. It
+is true that the red man has been demoralized by the vices of the white.
+It is a frightful fact that, when a superior race meets an inferior, the
+inferior imitates only the vices of the superior, and the superior those
+of the inferior. They exchange faults and failings. This is one of the
+most terrible facts in the history of the human race.
+
+Nothing can be said to justify our treatment of the Indians. There is,
+however, this shadow of an excuse: In the old times, when we lived along
+the Atlantic, it hardly occurred to our ancestors that they could ever
+go beyond the Ohio; so the first treaty with the Indians drove them back
+but a few miles. In a little while, through immigration, the white race
+passed the line, and another treaty was made, forcing the Indians still
+further west; yet the tide of immigration kept on, and in a little while
+again the line was passed, the treaty violated. Another treaty was
+made, pushing the Indians still farther toward the Pacific, across the
+Illinois, across the Mississippi, across the Missouri, violating at
+every step some treaty made; and each treaty born of the incapacity of
+the white men who made it to foretell the growth of the Republic.
+
+But the author of "Brutality and Avarice Triumphant" made a great
+mistake when he selected the last thirty years of our national life as
+the period within which the Americans have made a change of the national
+motto appropriate, and asserted that now there should be in place of the
+old motto the words, "Plundering Made Easy."
+
+Most men believe in a sensible and manly patriotism. No one should be
+blind to the defects in the laws and institutions of his country. He
+should call attention to abuses, not for the purpose of bringing his
+country into disrepute, but that the abuses may cease and the defects
+be corrected. He should do what he can to make his country great,
+prosperous, just, and free. But it is hardly fair to exaggerate the
+faults of your country for the purpose of calling attention to your own
+virtues, or to earn the praise of a nation that hates your own. This is
+what might be called wallowing in the gutter of reform.
+
+The thirty years chosen as the time in which we as a nation have passed
+from virtue to the lowest depths of brutality and avarice are, in fact,
+the most glorious years in the life of this or of any other nation.
+
+In 1861 slavery was, in a legal sense at least, a national institution.
+It was firmly imbedded in the Federal Constitution. The Fugitive Slave
+Law was in full force and effect. In all the Southern and in nearly all
+of the Northern States it was a crime to give food, shelter, or raiment
+to a man or woman seeking liberty by flight. Humanity was illegal,
+hospitality a misdemeanor, and charity a crime. Men and women were sold
+like beasts. Mothers were robbed of their babes while they stood under
+our flag. All the sacred relations of life were trampled beneath the
+bloody feet of brutality and avarice. Besides, so firmly was slavery
+fixed in law and creed, in statute and Scripture, that the tongues of
+honest men were imprisoned. Those who spoke for the slave were mobbed by
+Northern lovers of the "Union."
+
+Now, it seems to me that those were the days when the motto could
+properly have been, "Plundering Made Easy." Those were the days of
+brutality, and the brutality was practiced to the end that we might make
+money out of the unpaid labor of others.
+
+It is not necessary to go into details as to the cause of the then
+condition; it is enough to say that the whole nation, North and South,
+was responsible. There were many years of compromise, and thousands of
+statesmen, so-called, through conventions and platforms, did what they
+could to preserve slavery and keep the Union. These efforts corrupted
+politics, demoralized our statesmen, polluted our courts, and poisoned
+our literature. The Websters, Bentons, and Clays mistook temporary
+expedients for principles, and really thought that the progress of
+the world could be stopped by the resolutions of a packed political
+convention. Yet these men, mistaken as they really were, worked and
+wrought unconsciously in the cause of human freedom. They believed that
+the preservation of the Union was the one important thing, and that it
+could not be preserved unless slavery was protected--unless the North
+would be faithful to the bargain as written in the Constitution. For
+the purpose of keeping the nation true to the Union and false to itself,
+these men exerted every faculty and all their strength. They exhausted
+their genius in showing that slavery was not, after all, very bad,
+and that disunion was the most terrible calamity that could by any
+possibility befall the nation, and that the Union, even at the price of
+slavery, was the greatest possible blessing. They did not suspect that
+slavery would finally strike the blow for disunion. But when the time
+came and the South unsheathed the sword, the teachings of these men as
+to the infinite value of the Union gave to our flag millions of brave
+defenders.
+
+Now, let us see what has been accomplished during the thirty years of
+"Brutality and Avarice."
+
+The Republic has been rebuilt and reunited, and we shall remain one
+people for many centuries to come. The Mississippi is nature's protest
+against disunion. The Constitution of the United States is now the
+charter of human freedom, and all laws inconsistent with the idea that
+all men are entitled to liberty have been repealed. The black man knows
+that the Constitution is his shield, that the laws protect him, that our
+flag is his, and the black mother feels that her babe belongs to her.
+Where the slave-pen used to be you will find the schoolhouse. The dealer
+in human flesh is now a teacher; instead of lacerating the back of a
+child, he develops and illumines the mind of a pupil.
+
+There is now freedom of speech. Men are allowed to utter their thoughts.
+Lips are no longer sealed by mobs. Never before in the history of our
+world has so much been done for education.
+
+The amount of business done in a country on credit is the measure of
+confidence, and confidence is based upon honesty. So it may truthfully
+be said that, where a vast deal of business is done on credit, an
+exceedingly large per cent. of the people are regarded as honest. In our
+country a very large per cent. of contracts are faithfully fulfilled.
+Probably there is no nation in the world where so much business is
+done on credit as in the United States. The fact that the credit of the
+Republic is second to that of no other nation on the globe would seem to
+be at least an indication of a somewhat general diffusion of honesty.
+
+The author of "Brutality and Avarice Triumphant" seems to be of the
+opinion that our country was demoralized by the war. They who fight for
+the right are not degraded--they are ennobled. When men face death and
+march to the mouths of the guns for a principle, they grow great; and if
+they come out of the conflict, they come with added moral grandeur; they
+become better men, better citizens, and they love more intensely than
+ever the great cause for the success of which they put their lives in
+pawn.
+
+The period of the Revolution produced great men. After the great victory
+the sons of the heroes degenerated, and some of the greatest principles
+involved in the Revolution were almost forgotten.
+
+During the Civil war the North grew great and the South was educated.
+Never before in the history of mankind was there such a period of moral
+exaltation. The names that shed the brightest, the whitest light on
+the pages of our history became famous then. Against the few who were
+actuated by base and unworthy motives let us set the great army that
+fought for the Republic, the millions who bared their breasts to
+the storm, the hundreds and hundreds of thousands who did their duty
+honestly, nobly, and went back to their wives and children with no
+thought except to preserve the liberties of themselves and their
+fellow-men.
+
+Of course there were some men who did not do their duty--some men false
+to themselves and to their country. No one expects to find sixty-five
+millions of saints in America. A few years ago a lady complained to the
+president of a Western railroad that a brakeman had spoken to her with
+great rudeness. The president expressed his regret at the incident, and
+said among other things: "Madam, you have no idea how difficult it is
+for us to get gentlemen to fill all those places."
+
+It is hardly to be expected that the American people should excel all
+others in the arts, in poetry, and in fiction. We have been very busy
+taking possession of the Republic. It is hard to overestimate the
+courage, the industry, the self-denial it has required to fell the
+forests, to subdue the fields, to construct the roads, and to build the
+countless homes. What has been done is a certificate of the honesty and
+industry of our people.
+
+It is not true that "one of the unwritten mottoes of our business morals
+seem to say in the plainest phraseology possible: 'Successful wrong is
+right.'" Men in this country are not esteemed simply because they are
+rich; inquiries are made as to how they made their money, as to how
+they use it. The American people do not fall upon their knees before the
+golden calf; the worst that can be said is that they think too much
+of the gold of the calf--and this distinction is seen by the calves
+themselves.
+
+Nowhere in the world is honesty in business esteemed more highly than
+here. There are millions of business men--merchants, bankers, and men
+engaged in all trades and professions--to whom reputation is as dear as
+life.
+
+There is one thing in the article "Brutality and Avarice Triumphant"
+that seems even more objectionable than the rest, and that is the
+statement, or, rather, the insinuation, that all the crimes and the
+shortcomings of the American people can be accounted for by the fact
+that our Government is a Republic. We are told that not long ago a
+French official complained to a friend that he was compelled to employ
+twenty clerks to do the work done by four under the empire, and on being
+asked the reason answered: "It is the Republic." He was told that, as
+he was the head of the bureau, he could prevent the abuse, to which he
+replied: "I know I have the power; but I have been in this position for
+more than thirty years, and am now too old to learn another occupation,
+and I _must_ make places for the friends of the deputies." And then it
+is added by General Hawkins: "_And so it is here_."
+
+It seems to me that it cannot be fairly urged that we have abused the
+Indians because we contend that all men have equal rights before the
+law, or because we insist that governments derive their just powers from
+the consent of the governed. The probability is that a careful reading
+of the history of the world will show that nations under the control of
+kings and emperors have been guilty of some cruelty. To account for the
+bad we do by the good we believe, is hardly logical. Our virtues should
+not be made responsible for our vices.
+
+Is it possible that free institutions tend to the demoralization of men?
+Is a man dishonest because he is a man and maintains the rights of men?
+In order to be a moral nation must we be controlled by king or emperor?
+Is human liberty a mistake? Is it possible that a citizen of the great
+Republic attacks the liberty of his fellow-citizens? Is he willing to
+abdicate? Is he willing to admit that his rights are not equal to the
+rights of others? Is he, for the sake of what he calls morality, willing
+to become a serf, a servant or a slave?
+
+Is it possible that "high character is impracticable" in this Republic?
+Is this the experience of the author of "Brutality and Avarice
+Triumphant"? Is it true that "intellectual achievement pays no
+dividends"? Is it not a fact that America is to-day the best market in
+the world for books, for music, and for art?
+
+There is in our country no real foundation for these wide and sweeping
+slanders. This, in my judgment, is the best Government, the best
+country, in the world. The citizens of this Republic are, on the
+average, better clothed and fed and educated than any other people. They
+are fuller of life, more progressive, quicker to take advantage of
+the forces of nature, than any other of the children of men. Here
+the burdens of government are lightest, the responsibilities of the
+individual greatest, and here, in my judgment, are to be worked out the
+most important problems of social science.
+
+Here in America is a finer sense of what is due from man to man than
+you will find in other lands. We do not cringe to those whom chance has
+crowned; we stand erect.
+
+Our sympathies are strong and quick. Generosity is almost a national
+failing. The hand of honest want is rarely left unfilled. Great
+calamities open the hearts and hands of all.
+
+Here you will find democracy in the family--republicanism by the
+fireside. Say what you will, the family is apt to be patterned after the
+government. If a king is at the head of the nation, the husband imagines
+himself the monarch of the home. In this country we have carried into
+the family the idea on which the Government is based. Here husbands and
+wives are beginning to be equals.
+
+The highest test of civilization is the treatment of women and children.
+By this standard America stands first among nations.
+
+There is a magnitude, a scope, a grandeur, about this country--an
+amplitude--that satisfies the heart and the imagination. We have our
+faults, we have our virtues, but our country is the best.
+
+No American should ever write a line that can be sneeringly quoted by an
+enemy of the great Republic.
+
+Robert G. Ingersoll.
+
+
+
+
+A REPLY TO THE CINCINNATI GAZETTE AND CATHOLIC TELEGRAPH.
+
+     * The Cincinnati Gazette, 1878. An Interview.
+
+
+_Question_. Colonel, have you noticed the criticisms made on your
+lectures by the _Cincinnati Gazette_ and the _Catholic Telegraph_?
+
+_Answer._ I have read portions of the articles.
+
+_Question_. What do you think of them?
+
+_Answer._ Well, they are hardly of importance enough to form a distinct
+subject of thought.
+
+_Question_. Well, what do you think of the attempted argument of the
+_Gazette_ against your lecture on Moses?
+
+_Answer._ The writer endeavors to show that considering the ignorance
+prevalent four thousand years ago, God did as well as one could
+reasonably expect; that God at that time did not have the advantage
+of telescope, microscope, and spectrum, and that for this reason a
+few mistakes need not excite our special wonder. He also shows that,
+although God was in favor of slavery he introduced some reforms; but
+whether the reforms were intended to perpetuate slavery or to help the
+slave is not stated. The article has nothing to do with my position. I
+am perfectly willing to admit that there is a land called Egypt; that
+the Jews were once slaves; that they got away and started a little
+country of their own. All this may be true without proving that they
+were miraculously fed in the wilderness, or that water ran up hill, or
+that God went into partnership with hornets or snakes. There may have
+been a man by the name of Moses without proving that sticks were turned
+into snakes.
+
+A while ago a missionary addressed a Sunday school. In the course of
+his remarks he said that he had been to Mount Ararat, and had brought
+a stone from the mountain. He requested the children to pass in line
+before him so that they could all get a look at this wonderful stone.
+After they had all seen it he said: "You will as you grow up meet people
+who will deny that there ever was a flood, or that God saved Noah and
+the animals in the ark, and then you can tell them that you know better,
+because you saw a stone from the very mountain where the ark rested."
+
+That is precisely the kind of argument used in the _Gazette_. The
+article was written by some one who does not quite believe in the
+inspiration of the Scriptures himself, and were it not for the fear of
+hell, would probably say so.
+
+I admit that there was such a man as Mohammed, such a city as Mecca,
+such a general as Omar, but I do not admit that God made known his will
+to Mohammed in any substantial manner. Of course the _Gazette_ would
+answer all this by saying that Mohammed did exist, and that therefore
+God must have talked with him. I admit that there was such a general
+as Washington, but I do not admit that God kept him from being shot. I
+admit that there is a portrait of the Virgin Mary in Rome, but I do not
+admit that it shed tears. I admit that there was such a man as Moses,
+but I do not admit that God hunted for him in a tavern to kill him. I
+admit that there was such a priest as St. Denis, but I do not admit
+that he carried his head in his hand, after it was cut off, and swam the
+river, and put his head on again and eventually recovered. I admit
+that the article appeared in the _Gazette_, but I do not admit that it
+amounted to anything whatever.
+
+_Question_. Did you notice what the _Catholic Telegraph_ said about your
+lecture being ungrammatical?
+
+_Answer._ Yes; I saw an extract from it. In the _Catholic Telegraph_
+occurs the following: "The lecture was a failure as brilliant as
+Ingersoll's flashes of ungrammatical rhetoric." After making this
+statement with the hereditary arrogance of a priest, after finding fault
+with my "ungrammatical rhetoric" he then writes the following sentence:
+"It could not boast neither of novelty in argument or of attractive
+language." After this, nothing should be noticed that this gentleman
+says on the subject of grammar.
+
+In this connection it may be proper for me to say that nothing is more
+remarkable than the fact that Christianity destroys manners. With one
+exception, no priest has ever written about me, so far as I know, except
+in an arrogant and insolent manner. They seem utterly devoid of the
+usual amenities of life. Every one who differs with them is vile,
+ignorant and malicious. But, after all, what can you expect of a
+gentleman who worships a God who will damn dimpled babes to an eternity
+of fire, simply because they were not baptized.
+
+_Question_. This Catholic writer says that the oldest page of history
+and the newest page of science are nothing more than commentaries on the
+Mosaic Record. He says the Cosmogony of Moses has been believed in, and
+has been received as the highest truth by the very brightest names in
+science. What do you think of that statement?
+
+_Answer._ I think it is without the least foundation in fact, and is
+substantially like the gentleman's theology, depending simply upon
+persistent assertion.
+
+I see he quotes Cuvier as great authority. Cuvier denied that the fossil
+animals were in any way related to the animals now living, and believed
+that God had frequently destroyed all life upon the earth and then
+produced other forms. Agassiz was the last scientist of any standing who
+ventured to throw a crumb of comfort to this idea.
+
+_Question_. Do you mean to say that all the great living scientists
+regard the Cosmogony of Moses as a myth?
+
+_Answer._ I do. I say this: All men of science and men of sense look
+upon the Mosaic account as a simple myth. Humboldt, who stands in the
+same relation to science that Shakespeare did to the drama, held this
+opinion. The same is held by the best minds in Germany, by Huxley,
+Tyndall and Herbert Spencer in England, by John W. Draper and others
+in the United States. Whoever agrees with Moses is some poor frightened
+orthodox gentleman afraid of losing his soul or his salary, and as a
+rule, both are exceedingly small.
+
+_Question_. Some people say that you slander the Bible in saying that
+God went into partnership with hornets, and declare that there is no
+such passage in the Bible.
+
+_Answer._ Well, let them read the twenty-eighth verse of the
+twenty-third chapter of Exodus, "And I will send hornets before thee,
+which shall drive out the Hivite, the Canaanite and the Hittite from
+before thee."
+
+_Question_. Do you find in lecturing through the country that your ideas
+are generally received with favor?
+
+_Answer._ Astonishingly so. There are ten times as many freethinkers
+as there were five years ago. In five years more we will be in the
+majority.
+
+_Question_. Is it true that the churches, as a general thing, make
+strong efforts, as I have seen it stated, to prevent people from going
+to hear you?
+
+_Answer._ Yes; in many places ministers have advised their congregations
+to keep away, telling them I was an exceedingly dangerous man. The
+result has generally been a full house, and I have hardly ever failed to
+publicly return my thanks to the clergy for acting as my advance agents.
+
+_Question_. Do you ever meet Christian people who try to convert you?
+
+_Answer._ Not often. But I do receive a great many anonymous letters,
+threatening me with the wrath of God, and calling my attention to the
+uncertainty of life and the certainty of damnation. These letters are
+nearly all written in the ordinary Christian spirit; that is to say,
+full of hatred and impertinence.
+
+_Question_. Don't you think it remarkable that the _Telegraph_, a
+Catholic paper, should quote with extravagant praise, an article from
+such an orthodox sheet as the _Gazette_?
+
+_Answer._ I do not. All the churches must make common cause. All
+superstitions lead to Rome; all facts lead to science. In a few
+years all the churches will be united. This will unite all forms of
+liberalism. When that is done the days of superstition, of arrogance,
+of theology, will be numbered. It is very laughable to see a Catholic
+quoting scientific men in favor of Moses, when the same men would have
+taken great pleasure in swearing that the Catholic Church was the
+worst possible organization. That church should forever hold its peace.
+Wherever it has had authority it has destroyed human liberty. It reduced
+Italy to a hand organ, Spain to a guitar, Ireland to exile, Portugal to
+contempt. Catholicism is the upas tree in whose shade the intellect of
+man has withered. The recollection of the massacre of St. Bartholomew
+should make a priest silent, and the recollection of the same massacre
+should make a Protestant careful.
+
+I can afford to be maligned by a priest, when the same party denounces
+Garibaldi, the hero of Italy, as a "pet tiger" to Victor Emmanuel. I
+could not afford to be praised by such a man. I thank him for his abuse.
+
+_Question_. What do you think of the point that no one is able to judge
+of these things unless he is a Hebrew scholar?
+
+_Answer._ I do not think it is necessary to understand Hebrew to decide
+as to the probability of springs gushing out of dead bones, or of
+the dead getting out of their graves, or of the probability of ravens
+keeping a hotel for wandering prophets. I hardly think it is necessary
+even to be a Greek scholar to make up my mind as to whether devils
+actually left a person and took refuge in the bodies of swine. Besides,
+if the Bible is not properly translated, the circulation ought to stop
+until the corrections are made. I am not accountable if God made a
+revelation to me in a language that he knew I never would understand. If
+he wishes to convey any information to my mind, he certainly should do
+it in English before he eternally damns me for paying no attention to
+it.
+
+_Question_. Are not many of the contradictions in the Bible owing to
+mistranslations?
+
+_Answer._ No. Nearly all of the mistranslations have been made to help
+out the text. It would be much worse, much more contradictory had it
+been correctly translated. Nearly all of the _mistakes_, as Mr. Weller
+would say, have been made for the purposes of harmony.
+
+_Question_. How many errors do you suppose there are?
+
+_Answer._ Well, I do not know. It has been reported that the American
+Bible Society appointed a committee to hunt for errors, and the said
+committee returned about twenty-four to twenty-five thousand. And
+thereupon the leading men said, to correct so many errors will destroy
+the confidence of the common people in the sacredness of the Scriptures.
+Thereupon it was decided not to correct any. I saw it stated the other
+day that a very prominent divine charged upon the Bible Society that
+they knew they were publishing a book full of errors.
+
+_Question_. What is your opinion of the Bible anyhow?
+
+_Answer._ My first objection is, it is not true.
+
+Second.--It is not inspired.
+
+Third.--It upholds human slavery.
+
+Fourth.--It sanctions concubinage.
+
+Fifth.--It commands the most infamously cruel acts of war, such as the
+utter destruction of old men and little children.
+
+Sixth.--After killing fathers, mothers and brothers, it commands the
+generals to divide the girls among the soldiers and priests. Beyond
+this, infamy has never gone. If any God made this order I am opposed to
+him.
+
+Seventh.--It upholds human sacrifice, or, at least, seems to, from the
+following:
+
+"Notwithstanding no devoted thing that a man shall devote unto the Lord
+of all that he hath, both of _man_ and _beast_, and of the field of his
+possession, shall be sold or redeemed; every devoted thing is most holy
+unto the Lord."
+
+"None devoted, which shall be devoted, of men, shall be redeemed; but
+shall surely be put to death." (Twenty-seventh Chapter of Leviticus,
+28th and 29th verses.)
+
+Eighth.--Its laws are absurd, and the punishments cruel and unjust.
+Think of killing a man for making hair oil! Think of killing a man for
+picking up sticks on Sunday!
+
+Ninth.--It upholds polygamy.
+
+Tenth.--It knows nothing of astronomy, nothing of geology, nothing of
+any science whatever.
+
+Eleventh.--It is opposed to religious liberty, and teaches a man to kill
+his own wife if she differs with him on religion; that is to say, if he
+is orthodox. There is no book in the world in which can be found so much
+that is thoroughly despicable and infamous. Of course there are some
+good passages, some good sentiments. But they are, at least in the Old
+Testament, few and far between.
+
+Twelfth.--It treats woman like a beast, and man like a slave. It fills
+heaven with tyranny, and earth with hypocrisy and grief.
+
+_Question_. Do you think any book inspired?
+
+_Answer._ No. I do not think any book is inspired. But, if it had been
+the intention of this God to give to man an inspired book, he should
+have waited until Shakespeare's time, and used Shakespeare as the
+instrument. Then there never would have been any doubt as to the
+inspiration of the book. There is more beauty, more goodness, more
+intelligence in Shakespeare than in all the sacred books of this world.
+
+_Question_. What do you think as a freethinker of the Sunday question in
+Cincinnati?
+
+_Answer._ I think that it is a good thing to have a day of recreation, a
+day of rest, a day of joy, not a day of dyspepsia and theology. I am
+in favor of operas and theaters, music and happiness on Sunday. I am
+opposed to all excesses on any day. If the clergy will take half
+the pains to make the people intelligent that they do to make them
+superstitious, the world will soon have advanced so far that it can
+enjoy itself without excess. The ministers want Sunday for themselves.
+They want everybody to come to church because they can go no where
+else. It is like the story of a man coming home at three o'clock in the
+morning, who, upon being asked by his wife how he could come at such a
+time of night, replied, "The fact is, every other place is shut up." The
+orthodox clergy know that their churches will remain empty if any other
+place remains open. Do not forget to say that I mean orthodox churches,
+orthodox clergy, because I have great respect for Unitarians and
+Universalists.
+
+
+
+
+AN INTERVIEW ON CHIEF JUSTICE COMEGYS.
+
+
+     * Brooklyn Eagle, 1881.
+
+_Question_. I understand, Colonel Ingersoll, that you have been indicted
+in the State of Delaware for the crime of blasphemy?
+
+_Answer._ Well, not exactly indicted. The Judge, who, I believe, is the
+Chief Justice of the State, dedicated the new court-house at Wilmington
+to the service of the Lord, by a charge to the grand jury, in which he
+almost commanded them to bring in a bill of indictment against me, for
+what he was pleased to call the crime of blasphemy. Now, as a matter
+of fact, there can be no crime committed by man against God, provided
+always that a correct definition of the Deity has been given by
+the orthodox churches. They say that he is infinite. If so, he is
+conditionless. I can injure a man by changing his conditions. Take
+from a man water, and he perishes of thirst; take from him air, and
+he suffocates; he may die from too much, or too little heat. That is
+because he is a conditioned being. But if God is conditionless,
+he cannot in any way be affected by what anybody else may do; and,
+consequently, a sin against God is as impossible as a sin against the
+principle of the lever or inclined plane. This crime called blasphemy
+was invented by priests for the purpose of defending doctrines not able
+to take care of themselves. Blasphemy is a kind of breastwork behind
+which hypocrisy has crouched for thousands of years. Injustice is the
+only blasphemy that can be committed, and justice is the only true
+worship. Man can sin against man, but not against God. But even if man
+could sin against God, it has always struck me that an infinite being
+would be entirely able to take care of himself without the assistance of
+a Chief Justice. Men have always been violating the rights of men, under
+the plea of defending the rights of God, and nothing, for ages, was so
+perfectly delightful to the average Christian as to gratify his revenge,
+and get God in his debt at the same time. Chief Justice Comegys has
+taken this occasion to lay up for himself what he calls treasures in
+heaven, and on the last great day he will probably rely on a certified
+copy of this charge. The fact that he thinks the Lord needs help
+satisfies me that in that particular neighborhood I am a little ahead.
+
+The fact is, I never delivered but one lecture in Delaware. That
+lecture, however, had been preceded by a Republican stump speech; and,
+to tell you the truth, I imagine that the stump speech is what a Yankee
+would call the heft of the offence. It is really hard for me to tell
+whether I have blasphemed the Deity or the Democracy. Of course I have
+no personal feeling whatever against the Judge. In fact he has done me
+a favor. He has called the attention of the civilized world to certain
+barbarian laws that disfigure and disgrace the statute books of most
+of the States. These laws were passed when our honest ancestors were
+burning witches, trading Quaker children to the Barbadoes for rum and
+molasses, branding people upon the forehead, boring their tongues with
+hot irons, putting one another in the pillory, and, generally, in the
+name of God, making their neighbors as uncomfortable as possible. We
+have outgrown these laws without repealing them. They are, as a matter
+of fact, in most communities actually dead; but in some of the States,
+like Delaware, I suppose they could be enforced, though there might be
+trouble in selecting twelve men, even in Delaware, without getting one
+man broad enough, sensible enough, and honest enough, to do justice. I
+hardly think it would be possible in any State to select a jury in the
+ordinary way that would convict any person charged with what is commonly
+known as blasphemy.
+
+All the so-called Christian churches have accused each other of being
+blasphemers, in turn. The Catholics denounced the Presbyterians as
+blasphemers, the Presbyterians denounced the Baptists; the Baptists, the
+Presbyterians, and the Catholics all united in denouncing the Quakers,
+and they all together denounced the Unitarians--called them blasphemers
+because they did not acknowledge the divinity of Jesus Christ--the
+Unitarians only insisting that three infinite beings were not necessary,
+that one infinite being could do all the business, and that the other
+two were absolutely useless. This was called blasphemy.
+
+Then all the churches united to call the Universalists blasphemers.
+I can remember when a Uni-versalist was regarded with a thousand times
+more horror than an infidel is to-day. There is this strange thing about
+the history of theology--nobody has ever been charged with blasphemy
+who thought God bad. For instance, it never would have excited any
+theological hatred if a man had insisted that God would finally damn
+everybody. Nearly all heresy has consisted in making God better than the
+majority in the churches thought him to be. The orthodox Christian never
+will forgive the Univer-salist for saying that God is too good to damn
+anybody eternally. Now, all these sects have charged each other with
+blasphemy, without anyone of them knowing really what blasphemy is. I
+suppose they have occasionally been honest, because they have mostly
+been ignorant. It is said that Torquemada used to shed tears over the
+agonies of his victims and that he recommended slow burning, not because
+he wished to inflict pain, but because he really desired to give the
+gentleman or lady he was burning a chance to repent of his or her sins,
+and make his or her peace with God previous to becoming a cinder.
+
+The root, foundation, germ and cause of nearly all religious persecution
+is the idea that some certain belief is necessary to salvation. If
+orthodox Christians are right in this idea, then persecution of all
+heretics and infidels is a duty. If I have the right to defend my body
+from attack, surely I should have a like right to defend my soul. Under
+our laws I could kill any man who was endeavoring, for example, to take
+the life of my child. How much more would I be justified in killing
+any wretch who was endeavoring to convince my child of the truth of a
+doctrine which, if believed, would result in the eternal damnation of
+that child's soul?
+
+If the Christian religion, as it is commonly understood, is true, no
+infidel should be allowed to live; every heretic should be hunted
+from the wide world as you would hunt a wild beast. They should not
+be allowed to speak, they should not be allowed to poison the minds of
+women and children; in other words, they should not be allowed to empty
+heaven and fill hell. The reason I have liberty in this country is
+because the Christians of this country do not believe their doctrine.
+The passage from the Bible, "Go ye into all the world and preach the
+Gospel to every creature," coupled with the assurance that, "Whosoever
+believeth and is baptized shall be saved, and whoso believeth not shall
+be damned," is the foundation of most religious persecution. Every
+word in that passage has been fire and fagot, whip and sword, chain
+and dungeon. That one passage has probably caused more agony among men,
+women and children, than all the passages of all other books that
+were ever printed. Now, this passage was not in the book of Mark when
+originally written, but was put there many years after the gentleman who
+evolved the book of Mark from his inner consciousness, had passed
+away. It was put there by the church--that is to say, by hypocrisy and
+priestly craft, to bind the consciences of men and force them to come
+under ecclesiastical and spiritual power; and that passage has been
+received and believed, and been made binding by law in most countries
+ever since.
+
+What would you think of a law compelling a man to admire Shakespeare, or
+calling it blasphemy to laugh at Hamlet? Why is not a statute necessary
+to uphold the reputation of Raphael or of Michael Angelo? Is it possible
+that God cannot write a book good enough and great enough and grand
+enough not to excite the laughter of his children? Is it possible that
+he is compelled to have his literary reputation supported by the State
+of Delaware?
+
+There is another very strange thing about this business. Admitting that
+the Bible is the work of God, it is not any more his work than are the
+sun, the moon and the stars or the earth, and if for disbelieving this
+Bible we are to be damned forever, we ought to be equally damned for
+a mistake in geology or astronomy. The idea of allowing a man to go
+to heaven who swears that the earth is flat, and damning a fellow who
+thinks it is round, but who-has his honest doubts about Joshua, seems to
+me to be perfectly absurd. It seems to me that in this view of it, it
+is just as necessary to be right on the subject of the equator as on the
+doctrine of infant baptism.
+
+_Question_. What was in your judgment the motive of Judge Comegys? Is he
+a personal enemy of yours? Have you ever met him? Have you any idea what
+reason he had for attacking you?
+
+_Answer._ I do not know the gentleman, personally. Outside of the
+political reason I have intimated, I do not know why he attacked me. I
+once delivered a lecture entitled "What must we do to be Saved?" in the
+city of Wilmington, and in that lecture I proceeded to show, or at
+least tried to show, that Matthew, Mark and Luke knew nothing about
+Christianity, as it is understood in Delaware; and I also endeavored to
+show that all men have an equal right to think, and that a man is only
+under obligations to be honest with himself, and with all men, and that
+he is not accountable for the amount of mind that he has been endowed
+with--otherwise it might be Judge Comegys himself would be damned--but
+that he is only accountable for the use he makes of what little mind
+he has received. I held that the safest thing for every man was to be
+absolutely honest, and to express his honest thought. After the delivery
+of this lecture various ministers in Wilmington began replying, and
+after the preaching of twenty or thirty sermons, not one of which,
+considered as a reply, was a success, I presume it occurred to these
+ministers that the shortest and easiest way would be to have me indicted
+and imprisoned.
+
+In this I entirely agree with them. It is the old and time-honored way.
+I believe it is, as it always has been, easier to kill two infidels than
+to answer one; and if Christianity expects to stem the tide that is
+now slowly rising over the intellectual world, it must be done by brute
+force, and by brute force alone. And it must be done pretty soon,
+or they will not have the brute force. It is doubtful if they have a
+majority of the civilized world on their side to-day. No heretic ever
+would have been burned if he could have been answered. No theologian
+ever called for the help of the law until his logic gave out.
+
+I suppose Judge Comegys to be a Presbyterian. Where did he get his right
+to be a Presbyterian? Where did he get his right to decide which creed
+is the correct one? How did he dare to pit his little brain against the
+word of God? He may say that his father was a Presbyterian. But what
+was his grandfather? If he will only go back far enough he will, in all
+probability, find that his ancestors were Catholics, and if he will go
+back a little farther still, that they were barbarians; that at one time
+they were naked, and had snakes tattooed on their bodies. What right
+had they to change? Does he not perceive that had the savages passed the
+same kind of laws that now exist in Delaware, they could have prevented
+any change in belief? They would have had a whipping-post, too, and they
+would have said: "Any gentleman found without snakes tattooed upon his
+body shall be held guilty of blasphemy;" and all the ancestors of this
+Judge, and of these ministers, would have said, Amen!
+
+What right had the first Presbyterian to be a Presbyterian? He must have
+been a blasphemer first. A small dose of pillory might have changed
+his religion. Does this Judge think that Delaware is incapable of
+any improvement in a religious point of view? Does he think that the
+Presbyterians of Delaware are not only the best now, but that they will
+forever be the best that God can make? Is there to be no advancement?
+Has there been no advancement? Are the pillory and the whipping-post to
+be used to prevent an excess of thought in the county of New Castle? Has
+the county ever been troubled that way? Has this Judge ever had symptoms
+of any such disease? Now, I want it understood that I like this Judge,
+and my principal reason for liking him is that he is the last of his
+race. He will be so inundated with the ridicule of mankind that no
+other Chief Justice in Delaware, or anywhere else, will ever follow his
+illustrious example. The next Judge will say: "So far as I am concerned,
+the Lord may attend to his own business, and deal with infidels as he
+may see proper." Thus great good has been accomplished by this Judge,
+which shows, as Burns puts it, "that a pot can be boiled, even if the
+devil tries to prevent it."
+
+_Question_. How will this action of Delaware, in your opinion, affect
+the other States?
+
+_Answer._ Probably a few other States needed an example exactly of this
+kind. New Jersey, in all probability, will say: "Delaware is perfectly
+ridiculous," and yet, had Delaware waited awhile, New Jersey might have
+done the same thing. Maryland will exclaim: "Did you ever see such a
+fool!" And yet I was threatened in that State. The average American
+citizen, taking into consideration the fact that we are blest, or
+cursed, with about one hundred thousand preachers, and that these
+preachers preach on the average one hundred thousand sermons a
+week--some of which are heard clear through--will unquestionably hold
+that a man who happens to differ with all these parsons, ought to have
+and shall have the privilege of expressing his mind; and that the one
+hundred thousand clergymen ought to be able to put down the one man who
+happens to disagree with them, without calling on the army or navy to do
+it, especially when it is taken into consideration that an infinite
+God is already on their side. Under these circumstances, the average
+American will say: "Let him talk, and let the hundred thousand preachers
+answer him to their hearts' content." So that in my judgment the result
+of the action of Delaware will be: First, to liberalize all other
+States, and second, finally to liberalize Delaware itself. In many of
+the States they have the same idiotic kind of laws as those found in
+Delaware--with the exception of those blessed institutions for the
+spread of the Gospel, known as the pillory and the whipping-post. There
+is a law in Maine by which a man can be put into the penitentiary
+for denying the providence of God, and the day of judgment. There are
+similar laws in most of the New England States. One can be imprisoned in
+Maryland for a like offence.
+
+In North Carolina no man can hold office that has not a certain
+religious belief; and so in several other of the Southern States.
+In half the States of this Union, if my wife and children should be
+murdered before my eyes, I would not be allowed in a court of justice
+to tell who the murderer was. You see that, for hundreds of years,
+Christianity has endeavored to put the brand of infamy on every
+intellectual brow.
+
+_Question_. I see that one objection to your lectures urged by Judge
+Comegys on the grand jury is, that they tend to a breach of the
+peace--to riot and bloodshed.
+
+_Answer._ Yes; Judge Comegys seems to be afraid that people who love
+their enemies will mob their friends. He is afraid that those disciples
+who, when smitten on one cheek turn the other to be smitten also, will
+get up a riot. He seems to imagine that good Christians feel called upon
+to violate the commands of the Lord in defence of the Lord's reputation.
+If Christianity produces people who cannot hear their doctrines
+discussed without raising mobs, and shedding blood, the sooner it is
+stopped being preached the better.
+
+There is not the slightest danger of any infidel attacking a Christian
+for His belief, and there never will be an infidel mob for such a
+purpose. Christians can teach and preach their views to their hearts'
+content. They can send all unbelievers to an eternal hell, if it gives
+them the least pleasure, and they may bang their Bibles as long as their
+fists last, but no infidel will be in danger of raising a riot to stop
+them, or put them down by brute force, or even by an appeal to the
+law, and I would advise Judge Comegys, if he wishes to compliment
+Christianity, to change his language and say that he feared a breach of
+the peace might be committed by the infidels--not by the Christians. He
+may possibly have thought that it was my intention to attack his State.
+But I can assure him, that if ever I start a warfare of that kind,
+I shall take some State of my size. There is no glory to be won in
+wringing the neck of a "Blue Hen!"
+
+_Question_. I should judge, Colonel, that you are prejudiced against the
+State of Delaware?
+
+_Answer._ Not by any means. Oh, no! I know a great many splendid people
+in Delaware, and since I have known more of their surroundings, my
+admiration for them has increased. They are, on the whole, a very good
+people in that State. I heard a story the other day: An old fellow in
+Delaware has been for the last twenty or thirty years gathering peaches
+there in their season--a kind of peach tramp. One day last fall, just as
+the season closed, he was leaning sadly against a tree, "Boys!" said he,
+"I'd like to come back to Delaware a hundred years from now." The boys
+asked, "What for?" The old fellow replied: "Just to see how damned
+little they'd get the baskets by that time." And it occurred to me that
+people who insist that twenty-two quarts make a bushel, should be as
+quiet as possible on the subject of blasphemy.
+
+
+AN INTERVIEW ON CHIEF JUSTICE COMEGYS.
+
+
+     * Chicago Times, Feb. 14, 1881.
+
+_Question_. Have you read Chief Justice Comegys' compliments to you
+before the Delaware grand jury?
+
+_Answer._ Yes, I have read his charge, in which he relies upon the law
+passed in 1740. After reading his charge it seemed to me as though he
+had died about the date of the law, had risen from the dead, and had
+gone right on where he had left off. I presume he is a good man, but
+compared with other men, is something like his State when compared with
+other States.
+
+A great many people will probably regard the charge of Judge Comegys
+as unchristian, but I do not. I consider that the law of Delaware is in
+exact accord with the Bible, and that the pillory, the whip-ping-post,
+and the suppression of free speech are the natural fruit of the Old and
+New Testament.
+
+Delaware is right. Christianity can not succeed, can not exist, without
+the protection of law. Take from orthodox Christianity the protection
+of law, and all church property would be taxed like other property. The
+Sabbath would be no longer a day devoted to superstition. Everyone
+could express his honest thought upon every possible subject. Everyone,
+notwithstanding his belief, could testify in a court of justice. In
+other words, honesty would be on an equality with hypocrisy.
+Science would stand on a level, so far as the law is concerned, with
+superstition. Whenever this happens the end of orthodox Christianity
+will be near.
+
+By Christianity I do not mean charity, mercy, kindness, forgiveness. I
+mean no natural virtue, because all the natural virtues existed and had
+been practiced by hundreds and thousands of millions before Christ was
+born. There certainly were some good men even in the days of Christ in
+Jerusalem, before his death.
+
+By Christianity I mean the ideas of redemption, atonement, a good man
+dying for a bad man, and the bad man getting a receipt in full. By
+Christianity I mean that system that insists that in the next world a
+few will be forever happy, while the many will be eternally miserable.
+Christianity, as I have explained it, must be protected, guarded, and
+sustained by law. It was founded by the sword that is to say, by physical
+force,--and must be preserved by like means.
+
+In many of the States of the Union an infidel is not allowed to testify.
+In the State of Delaware, if Alexander von Humboldt were living, he
+could not be a witness, although he had more brains than the State of
+Delaware has ever produced, or is likely to produce as long as the laws
+of 1740 remain in force. Such men as Huxley, Tyndall and Haeckel could
+be fined and imprisoned in the State of Delaware, and, in fact, in many
+States of this Union.
+
+Christianity, in order to defend itself, puts the brand of infamy on
+the brow of honesty. Christianity marks with a letter "C," standing for
+"convict" every brain that is great enough to discover the frauds. I
+have no doubt that Judge Comegys is a good and sincere Christian. I
+believe that he, in his charge, gives an exact reflection of the Jewish
+Jehovah. I believe that every word he said was in exact accord with
+the spirit of orthodox Christianity. Against this man personally I have
+nothing to say. I know nothing of his character except as I gather it
+from this charge, and after reading the charge I am forced simply to
+say, Judge Comegys is a Christian.
+
+It seems, however, that the grand jury dared to take no action,
+notwithstanding they had been counseled to do so by the Judge. Although
+the Judge had quoted to them the words of George I. of blessed memory;
+although he had quoted to them the words of Lord Mansfield, who became
+a Judge simply because of his hatred of the English colonists, simply
+because he despised liberty in the new world; notwithstanding the fact
+that I could have been punished with insult, with imprisonment, and with
+stripes, and with every form of degradation; notwithstanding that only a
+few years ago I could have been branded upon the forehead, bored through
+the tongue, maimed and disfigured, still, such has been the advance even
+in the State of Delaware, owing, it may be, in great part to the one
+lecture delivered by me, that the grand jury absolutely refused to
+indict me.
+
+The grand jury satisfied themselves and their consciences simply by
+making a report in which they declared that my lecture had "no parallel
+in the habits of respectable vagabondism" that I was "an arch-blasphemer
+and reviler of God and religion," and recommended that should I ever
+attempt to lecture again I should be taught that in Delaware blasphemy
+is a crime punishable by fine and imprisonment. I have no doubt that
+every member of the grand jury signing this report was entirely honest;
+that he acted in exact accord with what he understood to be the demand
+of the Christian religion. I must admit that for Christians, the report
+is exceedingly mild and gentle.
+
+I have now in the house, letters that passed between certain bishops in
+the fifteenth century, in which they discussed the propriety of cutting
+out the tongues of heretics before they were burned. Some of the bishops
+were in favor of and some against it. One argument for cutting out their
+tongues which seemed to have settled the question was, that unless the
+tongues of heretics were cut out they might scandalize the gentlemen
+who were burning them, by blasphemous remarks during the fire. I would
+commend these letters to Judge Comegys and the members of the grand
+jury.
+
+I want it distinctly understood that I have nothing against Judge
+Comegys or the grand jury. They act as 'most anybody would, raised in
+Delaware, in the shadow of the whipping-post and the pillory. We
+must remember that Delaware was a slave State; that the Bible
+became extremely dear to the people because it upheld that peculiar
+institution. We must remember that the Bible was the block on which
+mother and child stood for sale when they were separated by the
+Christians of Delaware. The Bible was regarded as the title-pages to
+slavery, and as the book of all books that gave the right to masters to
+whip mothers and to sell children.
+
+There are many offences now for which the punishment is whipping and
+standing in the pillory; where persons are convicted of certain crimes
+and sent to the penitentiary, and upon being discharged from the
+penitentiary are furnished by the State with a dark jacket plainly
+marked on the back with a large Roman "C," the letter to be of a light
+color. This they are to wear for six months after being discharged,
+and if they are found at any time without the dark jacket and the
+illuminated "C" they are to be punished with twenty lashes upon the bare
+back. The object, I presume, of this law, is to drive from the State all
+the discharged convicts for the benefit of New Jersey, Pennsylvania and
+Maryland--that is to say, other Christian communities. A cruel people
+make cruel laws.
+
+The objection I have to the whipping-post is that it is a punishment
+which cannot be inflicted by a gentleman. The person who administers the
+punishment must, of necessity, be fully as degraded as the person who
+receives it. I am opposed to any kind of punishment that cannot be
+administered by a gentleman. I am opposed to corporal punishment
+everywhere. It should be taken from the asylums and penitentiaries, and
+any man who would apply the lash to the naked back of another is beneath
+the contempt of honest people.
+
+_Question_. Have you seen that Henry Bergh has introduced in the New
+York Legislature a bill providing for whipping as a punishment for
+wife-beating?
+
+_Answer._ The objection I have mentioned is fatal to Mr. Bergh's bill.
+He will be able to get persons to beat wife-beaters, who, under the
+same circumstances, would be wife-beaters themselves. If they are not
+wife-beaters when they commence the business of beating others, they
+soon will be. I think that wife-beating in great cities could be stopped
+by putting all the wife-beaters at work at some government employment,
+the value of the work, however, to go to the wives and children. The
+trouble now is that most of the wife-beating is among the extremely
+poor, so that the wife by informing against her husband, takes the last
+crust out of her own mouth. If you substitute whipping or flogging for
+the prison here, you will in the first place prevent thousands of wives
+from informing, and in many cases, where the wife would inform, she
+would afterward be murdered by the flogged brute. This brute would
+naturally resort to the same means to reform his wife that the State
+had resorted to for the purpose of reforming him. Flogging would beget
+flogging. Mr. Bergh is a man of great kindness of heart. When he reads
+that a wife has been beaten, he says the husband deserves to be beaten
+himself. But if Mr. Bergh was to be the executioner, I imagine you could
+not prove by the back of the man that the punishment had been inflicted.
+
+Another good remedy for wife-beating is the abolition of the Catholic
+Church. We should also do away with the idea that a marriage is a
+sacrament, and that there is any God who is rendered happy by seeing a
+husband and wife live together, although the husband gets most of his
+earthly enjoyment from whipping his wife. No woman should live with
+a man a moment after he has struck her. Just as the idea of liberty
+enlarges, confidence in the whip and fist, in the kick and blow, will
+diminish. Delaware occupies toward freethinkers precisely the same
+position that a wife-beater does toward the wife. Delaware knows that
+there are no reasons sufficient to uphold Christianity, consequently
+these reasons are supplemented with the pillory and the whipping-post.
+The whipping-post is considered one of God's arguments, and the pillory
+is a kind of moral suasion, the use of which fills heaven with a kind
+of holy and serene delight. I am opposed to the religion of brute force,
+but all these frightful things have grown principally out of a belief in
+eternal punishment and out of the further idea that a certain belief is
+necessary to avoid eternal pain.
+
+If Christianity is right, Delaware is right. If God will damn every body
+forever simply for being intellectually honest, surely he ought to
+allow the good people of Delaware to imprison the same gentleman for two
+months. Of course there are thousands and thousands of good people in
+Delaware, people who have been in other States, people who have listened
+to Republican speeches, people who have read the works of scientists,
+who hold the laws of 1740 in utter abhorrence; people who pity Judge
+Comegys and who have a kind of sympathy for the grand jury.
+
+You will see that at the last election Delaware lacked only six or seven
+hundred of being a civilized State, and probably in 1884 will stand
+redeemed and regenerated, with the laws of 1740 expunged from the
+statute book. Delaware has not had the best of opportunities. You must
+remember that it is next to New Jersey, which is quite an obstacle
+in the path of progress. It is just beyond Maryland, which is another
+obstacle. I heard the other day that God originally made oysters with
+legs, and afterward took them off, knowing that the people of Delaware
+would starve to death before they would run to catch anything. Judge
+Comegys is the last judge who will make such a charge in the United
+States. He has immortalized himself as the last mile-stone on that road.
+He is the last of his race. No more can be born. Outside of this he
+probably was a very clever man, and it may be, he does not believe
+a word he utters. The probability is that he has underestimated the
+intelligence of the people of Delaware. I am afraid to think that he is
+entirely honest, for fear that I may underestimate him intellectually,
+and overestimate him morally. Nothing could tempt me to do this man
+injustice, though I could hardly add to the injury he has done himself.
+He has called attention to laws that ought to be repealed, and to
+lectures that ought to be repeated. I feel in my heart that he has done
+me a great service, second only to that for which I am indebted to the
+grand jury. Had the Judge known me personally he probably would have
+said nothing. Should I have the misfortune to be arrested in his State
+and sentenced to two months of solitary confinement, the Judge having
+become acquainted with me during the trial, would probably insist on
+spending most of his time in my cell. At the end of the two months he
+would, I think, lay himself liable to the charge of blasphemy, providing
+he had honor enough to express his honest thought. After all, it is
+all a question of honesty. Every man is right. I cannot convince myself
+there is any God who will ever damn a man for having been honest. This
+gives me a certain hope for the Judge and the grand jury.
+
+For two or three days I have been thinking what joy there must have been
+in heaven when Jehovah heard that Delaware was on his side, and remarked
+to the angels in the language of the late Adjt. Gen. Thomas: "The eyes
+of all Delaware are upon you."
+
+
+
+
+A REPLY TO REV. DRS. THOMAS AND LORIMER.
+
+
+     * Col. Ingersoll filled McVickor's Theatre again yesterday
+     afternoon, when he answered the question "What Must We Do to
+     Be Saved?" But before doing so he replied to the recent
+     criticisms of city clergymen on his "Talmagian Theology"--
+     Chicago Tribune, Nov. 27, 1882.
+
+_Ladies and Gentlemen_:
+
+WHEREVER I lecture, as a rule, some ministers think it their duty to
+reply for the purpose of showing either that I am unfair, or that I am
+blasphemous, or that I laugh. And laughing has always been considered
+by theologians as a crime. Ministers have always said you will have no
+respect for our ideas unless you are solemn. Solemnity is a condition
+precedent to believing anything without evidence. And if you can only
+get a man solemn enough, awed enough, he will believe anything.
+
+In this city the Rev. Dr. Thomas has made a few remarks, and I may say
+by way of preface that I have always held him in the highest esteem. He
+struggles, according to his statement, with the problem of my sincerity,
+and he about half concludes that I am not sincere. There is a little
+of the minister left in Dr. Thomas. Ministers always account for a
+difference of opinion by attacking the motive. Now, to him, it makes no
+difference whether I am sincere or insincere; the question is, Can my
+argument be answered? Suppose you could prove that the maker of the
+multiplication table held mathematics in contempt; what of it? Ten times
+ten would be a hundred still.
+
+My sincerity has nothing to do with the force of the argument--not the
+slightest. But this gentleman begins to suspect that I am doing what
+I do for the sake of applause. What a commentary on the Christian
+religion, that, after they have been preaching it for sixteen or
+eighteen hundred years, a man attacks it for the sake of popularity--a
+man attacks it for the purpose of winning applause! When I commenced to
+speak upon this subject there was no appreciable applause; most of my
+fellow-citizens differed with me; and I was denounced as though I had
+been a wild beast. But I have lived to see the majority of the men and
+women of intellect in the United States on my side; I have lived to see
+the church deny her creed; I have lived to see ministers apologize in
+public for what they preached; and a great and glorious work is going
+on until, in a little while, you will not find one of them, unless it
+is some old petrifaction of the red-stone period, who will admit that
+he ever believed in the Trinity, in the Atonement, or in the doctrine of
+Eternal Agony. The religion preached in the pulpits does not satisfy the
+intellect of America, and if Dr. Thomas wishes to know why people go
+to hear infidelity it is this: Because they are not satisfied with the
+orthodox Christianity of the day. That is the reason. They are beginning
+to hold it in contempt.
+
+But this gentleman imagines that I am insincere because I attacked
+certain doctrines of the Bible. I attacked the doctrine of eternal pain.
+I hold it in infinite and utter abhorrence. And if there be a God in
+this universe who made a hell; if there be a God in this universe who
+denies to any human being the right of reformation, then that God is not
+good, that God is not just, and the future of man is infinitely dark. I
+despise that doctrine, and I have done what little I could to get that
+horror from the cradle, that horror from the hearts of mothers, that
+horror from the hearts of husbands and fathers, and sons, and brothers,
+and sisters. It is a doctrine that turns to ashes all the humanities of
+life and all the hopes of mankind. I despise it.
+
+And the gentleman also charges that I am wanting in reverence. I admit
+here to-day that I have no reverence for a falsehood. I do not care how
+old it is, and I do not care who told it, whether the men were inspired
+or not. I have no reverence for what I believe to be false, and in
+determining what is false I go by my reason. And whenever another man
+gives me an argument I examine it. If it is good I follow it. If it is
+bad I throw it away. I have no reverence for any book that upholds human
+slavery. I despise such a book. I have no reverence for any book that
+upholds or palliates the infamous institution of polygamy. I have no
+reverence for any book that tells a husband to kill his wife if she
+differs with him upon the subject of religion. I have no reverence for
+any book that defends wars of conquest and extermination. I have
+no reverence for a God that orders his legions to slay the old and
+helpless, and to whet the edge of the sword with the blood of mothers
+and babes. I have no reverence for such a book; neither have I any
+reverence for the author of that book. No matter whether he be God or
+man, I have no reverence. I have no reverence for the miracles of the
+Bible. I have no reverence for the story that God allowed bears to tear
+children in pieces. I have no reverence for the miraculous, but I have
+reverence for the truth, for justice, for charity, for humanity, for
+intellectual liberty, and for human progress.
+
+I have the right to do my own thinking. I am going to do it. I have
+never met any minister that I thought had brain enough to think for
+himself and for me too. I do my own. I have no reverence for barbarism,
+no matter how ancient it may be, and no reverence for the savagery of
+the Old Testament; no reverence for the malice of the New. And let me
+tell you here to-night that the Old Testament is a thousand times better
+than the New. The Old Testament threatened no vengeance beyond the
+grave. God was satisfied when his enemy was? dead. It was reserved for
+the New Testament--it was reserved for universal benevolence--to rend
+the veil between time and eternity and fix the horrified gaze of man
+upon the abyss of hell. The New Testament is just as much worse than the
+Old, as hell is worse than sleep. And yet it is the fashion to say that
+the Old Testament is bad and that the New Testament is good. I have no
+reverence for any book that teaches a doctrine contrary to my reason;
+no reverence for any book that teaches a doctrine contrary to my heart;
+and, no matter how old it is, no matter how many have believed it, no
+matter how many have died on account of it, no matter how many live for
+it, I have no reverence for that book, and I am glad of it.
+
+Dr. Thomas seems to think that I should approach these things with
+infinite care, that I should not attack slavery, or polygamy,
+or religious persecution, but that I should "mildly
+suggest"--mildly,--should not hurt anybody's feelings. When I go to
+church the ministers tell me I am going to hell. When I meet one I tell
+him, "There is no hell," and he says: "What do you want to hurt our
+feelings for?" He wishes me mildly to suggest that the sun and moon did
+not stop, that may be the bears only frightened the children, and that,
+after all, Lot's wife was only scared. Why, there was a minister in this
+city of Chicago who imagined that his congregation were progressive,
+and, in his pulpit, he said that he did not believe the story of Lot's
+wife--said that he did not think that any sensible man would believe
+that a woman was changed into salt; and they tried him, and the
+congregation thought he was entirely too fresh. And finally he went
+before that church and admitted that he was mistaken, and owned up to
+the chloride of sodium, and said: "I not only take the Bible _cum grano
+salis_, but with a whole barrelful."
+
+My doctrine is, if you do not believe a thing, say so, say so; no need
+of going away around the bush and suggesting may be, perhaps, possibly,
+peradventure. That is the ministerial way, but I do not like it.
+
+I am also charged with making an onslaught upon the good as well as the
+bad. I say here today that never in my life have I said one word against
+honesty, one word against liberty, one word against charity, one word
+against any institution that is good. I attack the bad, not the good,
+and I would like to have some minister point out in some lecture or
+speech that I have delivered, one word against the good, against the
+highest happiness of the human race.
+
+I have said all I was able to say in favor of justice, in favor of
+liberty, in favor of home, in favor of wife and children, in favor of
+progress, and in favor of universal kindness; but not one word in favor
+of the bad, and I never expect to.
+
+Dr. Thomas also attacks my statement that the brain thinks in spite of
+us.
+
+Doesn't it? Can any man tell what he is going to think to-morrow? You
+see, you hear, you taste, you feel, you smell--these are the avenues by
+which Nature approaches the brain, the consequence of this is thought,
+and you cannot by any possibility help thinking.
+
+Neither can you determine what you will think. These impressions are
+made independently of your will. "But," says this reverend doctor,
+"Whence comes this conception of space?" I can tell him. There is such
+a thing as matter. We conceive that matter occupies room--space--and,
+in our minds, space is simply the opposite of matter. And it comes
+naturally--not supernaturally.
+
+Does the gentleman contend there had to be a revelation of God for us to
+conceive of a place where there is nothing? We know there is something.
+We can think of the opposite of something, and therefore we say space.
+"But," says this gentleman, "Where do we get the idea of good and bad?"
+I can tell him; no trouble about that. Every man has the capacity to
+enjoy and the capacity to suffer--every man. Whenever a man enjoys
+himself he calls that good; whenever he suffers he calls that bad.
+The animals that are useful to him he calls good; the poisonous, the
+hurtful, he calls bad. The vegetables that he can eat and use he calls
+good; those that are of no use except to choke the growth of the good
+ones, he calls bad. When the sun shines, when everything in nature is
+out that ministers to him, he says "this is good;" when the storm comes
+and blows down his hut, when the frost comes and lays down his crop,
+he says "this is bad." And all phenomena that affect men well he calls
+good; all that affect him ill he calls bad.
+
+Now, then, the foundation of the idea of right and wrong is the effect
+in nature that we are capable of enjoying or capable of suffering. That
+is the foundation of conscience; and if man could not suffer, if man
+could not enjoy, we never would have dreamed of the word conscience; and
+the words right and wrong never could have passed human lips. There are
+no supernatural fields. We get our ideas from experience--some of them
+from our forefathers, many from experience. A man works--food does not
+come of itself. A man works to raise it, and, after he has worked in
+the sun and heat, do you think it is necessary that he should have a
+revelation from heaven before he thinks that he has a better right to it
+than the man who did not work? And yet, according to these gentlemen,
+we never would have known it was wrong to steal had not the Ten
+Commandments been given from Mount Sinai.
+
+You go into a savage country where they never heard of the Bible, and
+let a man hunt all day for game, and finally get one little bird, and
+the hungry man that staid at home endeavor to take it from him, and you
+would see whether he would need a direct revelation from God in order
+to make up his mind who had the better right to that bird. Our ideas of
+right and wrong are born of our surroundings, and if a man will think
+for a moment he will see it. But they deny that the mind thinks in spite
+of us. I heard a story of a man who said, "No man can think of one thing
+a minute, he will think of something else." Well, there was a little
+Methodist preacher. He said he could think of a thing a minute--that he
+could say the Lord's Prayer and never think of another thing. "Well,"
+said the man, "I'll tell you what I will do. There is the best
+road-horse in the country. I will give you that horse if you will just
+say the Lord's Prayer, and not think of another thing." And the little
+fellow shut up his eyes: "Our Father which art in Heaven, Hallowed be
+thy name. Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done--I suppose you will throw
+in the saddle and bridle?"
+
+I have always insisted, and I shall always insist, until I find some
+fact in Nature correcting the statement, that Nature sows the seeds of
+thought--that every brain is a kind of field where the seeds are sown,
+and that some are very poor, and some are very barren, and some are very
+rich. That is my opinion.
+
+Again he asks: "If one is not responsible for his thought, why is any
+one blamed for thinking as he does?" It is not a question of blame, it
+is a question of who is right--a question of who is wrong. Admit that
+every one thinks exactly as he must, that does not show that his thought
+is right; that does not show that his thought is the highest thought.
+Admit that every piece of land in the world produces what it must; that
+does not prove that the land covered with barren rocks and a little moss
+is just as good as the land covered with wheat or corn; neither does it
+prove that the mind has to act as the wheat or the corn; neither does it
+prove that the land had any choice as to what it would produce. I hold
+men responsible not for their thoughts; I hold men responsible for their
+actions. And I have said a thousand times: Physical liberty is this--the
+right to do anything that does not interfere with another--in other
+words, to act right; and intellectual liberty is this--the right to
+think right, and the right to think wrong, provided you do your best to
+think right. I have always said it, and I expect to say it always.
+
+The reverend gentleman is also afflicted with the gradual theory. I
+believe in that theory.
+
+If you will leave out inspiration, if you will leave out the direct
+interference of an infinite God, the gradual theory is right. It is a
+theory of evolution.
+
+I admit that astronomy has been born of astrology, that chemistry came
+from the black art; and I also contend that religion will be lost in
+science. I believe in evolution. I believe in the budding of the seed,
+the shining of the sun, the dropping of the rain; I believe in the
+spreading and the growing; and that is as true in every other department
+of the world as it is in vegetation. I believe it; but that does not
+account for the Bible doctrine. We are told we have a book absolutely
+inspired, and it will not do to say God gradually grows. If he is
+infinite now, he knows as much as he ever will. If he has been always
+infinite, he knew as much at the time he wrote the Bible as he knows
+to-day; and, consequently, whatever he said then must be as true now
+as it was then. You see they mix up now a little bit of philosophy with
+religion--a little bit of science with the shreds and patches of the
+supernatural.
+
+Hear this: I said in my lecture the other day that all the clergymen in
+the world could not get one drop of rain out of the sky. I insist on it.
+All the prayers on earth cannot produce one drop of rain. I also said
+all the clergymen of the world could not save one human life. They tried
+it last year. They tried it in the United States. The Christian world
+upon its knees implored God to save one life, and the man died. The man
+died! Had the man recovered the whole church would have claimed that it
+was in answer to prayer. The man having died, what does the church say
+now? What is the answer to this? The Rev. Dr. Thomas says: "There is
+prayer and there is rain." Good. "Can he that is himself or any one else
+say there is no possible relation between one and the other?" I do. Let
+us put it another way. There is rain and there is infidelity; can any
+one say there is no possible relation between the two? How does Dr.
+Thomas know that he is not indebted to me for this year's crops? And yet
+this gentleman really throws out the idea that there is some possible
+relation between prayer and rain, between rain and health; and he tells
+us that he would have died twenty-five years ago had it not been for
+prayer. I doubt it. Prayer is not a medicine. Life depends upon certain
+facts--not upon prayer. All the prayer in the world cannot take the
+place of the circulation of the blood. All the prayer in the world is
+no substitute for digestion. All the prayer in the world cannot take the
+place of food; and whenever a man lives by prayer you will find that he
+eats considerable besides. It will not do. Again: This reverend Doctor
+says: "Shall we say that all the love of the unseen world"--how does he
+know there is any love in the unseen world? "and the love of God"--how
+does he know there is any love in God? "heed not the cries and tears of
+earth?"
+
+I do not know; but let the gentleman read the history of religious
+persecution. Let him read the history of those who were put in dungeons,
+of those who lifted their chained hands to God and mingled prayer with
+the clank of fetters; men that were in the dungeons simply for loving
+this God, simply for worshiping this God. And what did God do? Nothing.
+The chains remained upon the limbs of his worshipers. They remained in
+the dungeons built by theology, by malice, and hatred; and what did God
+do? Nothing. Thousands of men were taken from their homes, fagots were
+piled around their bodies; they were consumed to ashes, and what did
+God do? Nothing. The sword of extermination was unsheathed, hundreds and
+thousands of men, women and children perished. Women lifted their hands
+to God and implored him to protect their children, their daughters; and
+what did God do?
+
+Nothing. Whole races were enslaved, and the cruel lash was put upon the
+naked back of toil. What did God do? Nothing. Children were sold from
+the arms of mothers. All the sweet humanities of life were trodden
+beneath the brutal foot of creed; and what did God do? Nothing. Human
+beings, his children, were tracked through swamps by bloodhounds; and
+what did God do? Nothing. Wild storms sweep over the earth and the
+shipwrecked go down in the billows; and what does God do? Nothing. There
+come plague and pestilence and famine. What does God do? Thousands
+and thousands perish. Little children die upon the withered breasts of
+mothers; and what does God do? Nothing.
+
+What evidence has Dr. Thomas that the cries and tears of man have ever
+touched the heart of God? Let us be honest. I appeal to the history
+of the world; I appeal to the tears, and blood, and agony, and
+imprisonment, and death of hundreds and millions of the bravest and
+best. Have they ever touched the heart of the Infinite? Has the hand of
+help ever been reached from heaven? I do not know; but I do not believe
+it.
+
+Dr. Thomas tells me that is orthodox Christianity. What right has he
+to tell what is orthodox Christianity? He is a heretic. He had too much
+brain to remain in the Methodist pulpit. He had a doubt--and a doubt is
+born of an idea. And his doctrine has been declared by his own church
+to be unorthodox. They have passed on his case and they have found him
+unconstitutional. What right has he to state what is orthodox? And here
+is what he says: "Christianity"--orthodox Christianity I suppose
+he means--"teaches, concerning the future world, that rewards and
+punishments are carried over from time to eternity; that the principles
+of the government of God are the same there as here; that character, and
+not profession determines destiny; and that Humboldt, and Dickens, and
+all others who have gone and shall go to that world shall receive their
+just rewards; that souls will always be in the place in which for the
+time, be it now or a million years hence, they are fitted. That is what
+Christianity teaches."
+
+If it does, never will I have another word to say against Christianity.
+It never has taught it. Christianity--orthodox Christianity--teaches
+that when you draw your last breath you have lost the last opportunity
+for reformation. Christianity teaches that this little world is the
+eternal line between time and eternity, and if you do not get religion
+in this life, you will be eternally damned in the next. That is
+Christianity. They say: "Now is the accepted time." If you put it off
+until you die, that is too late; and the doctrine of the Christian world
+is that there is no opportunity for reformation in another world. The
+doctrine of orthodox Christianity is that you must believe on the Lord
+Jesus Christ here in this life, and it will not do to believe on him in
+the next world. You must believe on him here and that if you fail here,
+God in his infinite wisdom will never give you another chance. That
+is orthodox Christianity; and according to orthodox Christianity, the
+greatest, the best and the sublimest of the world are now in hell. And
+why is it that they say it is not orthodox Christianity? I have made
+them ashamed of their doctrine. When I called to their attention the
+fact that such men as Darwin, such men as Emerson, Dickens, Longfellow,
+Laplace, Shakespeare, and Humboldt, were in hell, it struck them all at
+once that the company in heaven would not be very interesting with such
+men left out.
+
+And now they begin to say: "We think the Lord will give those men
+another chance." I have succeeded in my mission beyond my most sanguine
+expectations. I have made orthodox ministers deny their creeds; I have
+made them ashamed of their doctrine--and that is glory enough. They will
+let me in, a few years after I am dead. I admit that the doctrine that
+God will treat us as we treat others--I admit that is taught by Matthew,
+Mark, and Luke; but it is not taught by the Orthodox church. I want that
+understood. I admit also that Dr. Thomas is not orthodox, and that he
+was driven out of the church because he thought God too good to damn
+men forever without giving them the slightest chance. Why, the Catholic
+Church is a thousand times better than your Protestant Church upon that
+question. The Catholic Church believes in purgatory--that is, a place
+where a fellow can get a chance to make a motion for a new trial.
+
+Dr. Thomas, all I ask of you is to tell all that you think. Tell
+your congregation whether you believe the Bible was written by divine
+inspiration. Have the courage and the grandeur to tell your people
+whether, in your judgment, God ever upheld slavery.
+
+Do not shrink. Do not shirk. Tell your people whether God ever upheld
+polygamy. Do not shrink. Tell them whether God was ever in favor of
+religious persecution. Stand right to it. Then tell your people whether
+you honestly believe that a good man can suffer for a bad one and the
+bad one get the credit. Be honor bright. Tell what you really think
+and there will not be as much difference between you and myself as you
+imagine.
+
+The next gentleman, I believe, is the Rev. Dr. Lorimer. He comes to the
+rescue, and I have an idea of his mental capacity from the fact that he
+is a Baptist. He believes that the infinite God has a choice as to the
+manner in which a man or babe shall be dampened. This gentleman
+regards modern infidelity as "pitifully shallow" as to its intellectual
+conceptions and as to its philosophical views of the universe and of
+the problems regarding man's place in it and of his destiny. "Pitifully
+shallow!"
+
+What is the modern conception of the universe? The modern conception
+is that the universe always has been and forever will be. The modern
+conception of the universe is that it embraces within its infinite arms
+all matter, all spirit, all forms of force, all that is, all that has
+been, all that can be. That is the modern conception of this universe.
+And this is called "pitiful."
+
+What is the Christian conception? It is that all the matter in the
+universe is dead, inert, and that back of it is a Jewish Jehovah who
+made it, and who is now engaged in managing the affairs of this world.
+And they even go so far as to say that that Being made experiments in
+which he signally failed. That Being made man and woman and put them in
+a garden and allowed them to become totally depraved. That Being of
+infinite wisdom made hundreds and millions of people when he knew he
+would have to drown them. That Being peopled a planet like this with
+men, women and children, knowing that he would have to consign most of
+them to eternal fire. That is a pitiful conception of the universe. That
+is an infamous conception of the universe. Give me rather the conception
+of Spinoza, the conception of Humboldt, of Darwin, of Huxley, of Tyndall
+and of every other man who has thought. I love to think of the whole
+universe together as one eternal fact. I love to think that everything
+is alive; that crystallization is itself a step toward joy. I love to
+think that when a bud bursts into blossom it feels a thrill. I love to
+have the universe full of feeling and full of joy, and not full of
+simple dead, inert matter, managed by an old bachelor for all eternity.
+
+Another thing to which this gentleman objects is that I propose
+to banish such awful thoughts as the mystery of our origin and our
+relations to the present and to the possible future from human thought.
+
+I have never said so. Never. I have said, One world at a time. Why? Do
+not make yourself miserable about another. Why? Because I do not know
+anything about it, and it may be good. So do not worry. That is all. Y
+or do not know where you are going to land. It may be the happy port of
+heaven. Wait until you get there. It will be time enough to make trouble
+then. This is what I have said. I have said that the golden bridge of
+life from gloom emerges, and on shadow rests. I do not know. I admit it.
+Life is a shadowy strange and winding road on which we travel for a few
+short steps, just a little way from the cradle with its lullaby of love,
+to the low and quiet wayside inn where all at last must sleep, and where
+the only salutation is "Good-Night!" Whether there is a good morning I
+do not know, but I am willing to wait.
+
+Let us think these high and splendid thoughts. Let us build palaces for
+the future, but do not let us spend time making dungeons for men who
+happen to differ from us. I am willing to take the conceptions of
+Humboldt and Darwin, of Haeckel and Spinoza, and I am willing to compare
+their splendid conceptions with the doctrine embraced in the Baptist
+creed. This gentleman has his ideas upon a variety of questions, and he
+tells me that, "No one has a right to say that Dickens, Longfellow, and
+Darwin are castaways!" Why not? They were not Christians. They did
+not believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. They did not believe in the
+inspiration of the Scriptures. And, if orthodox religion be true, they
+are castaways. But he says: "No one has the right to say that orthodoxy
+condemns to perdition any man who has struggled toward the right, and
+who has tried to bless the earth he is raised on." That is what I say,
+but that is not what orthodoxy says. Orthodoxy says that the best man
+in the world, if he fails to believe in the existence of God, or in the
+divinity of Christ, will be eternally lost. Does it not say it? Is there
+an orthodox minister in this town now who will stand up and say that an
+honest atheist can be saved? He will not. Let any preacher say it, and
+he will be tried for heresy.
+
+I will tell you what orthodoxy is. A man goes to the day of judgment,
+and they cross-examine him, and they say to him:
+
+"Did you believe the Bible?"
+
+"No."
+
+"Did you belong to the church?"
+
+"No."
+
+"Did you take care of your wife and children?"
+
+"Yes?"
+
+"Pay your debts?"
+
+"Yes."
+
+"Love your country?"
+
+"Yes."
+
+"Love the whole world?"
+
+"Yes."
+
+"Never made anybody unhappy?"
+
+"Not that I know of. If there is any man or woman that I ever wronged
+let them stand up and say so. That is the kind of man I am; but," said
+he, "I did not believe the Bible. I did not believe in the divinity
+of Jesus Christ, and, to tell you the truth, I did not believe in the
+existence of God. I now find I was mistaken; but that was my doctrine."
+Now, I want to know what, according to the orthodox church, is done with
+that man?
+
+He is sent to hell.
+
+That is their doctrine.
+
+Then the next fellow comes. He says:
+
+"Where did you come from?"
+
+And he looks off kind of stiffly, with his head on one side and he says:
+
+"I came from the gallows. I was just hung."
+
+"What were you hung for?"
+
+"Murdering my wife. She wasn't a Christian either, she got left. The day
+I was hung I was washed in the blood of the Lamb."
+
+That is Christianity. And they say to him: "Come in! Let the band play!"
+
+That is orthodox Christianity. Every man that is hanged--there is a
+minister there, and the minister tells him he is all right. All he has
+to do is just to believe on the Lord.
+
+Another objection this gentleman has, and that is that I am scurrilous.
+Scurrilous! And the gentleman, in order to show that he is not
+scurrilous, calls infidels, "donkeys, serpents, buzzards." That is
+simply to show that he is not scurrilous.
+
+Dr. Lorimer is also of the opinion that the mind thinks independently of
+the will; and I propose to prove by him that it does. He is the last
+man in the world to controvert that doctrine--the last man. In spite of
+himself his mind absorbed the sermon of another man, and he repeated it
+as his own. I am satisfied he is an honest man; consequently his mind
+acted independently of his will, and he furnishes the strongest evidence
+in favor of my position that it is possible to conceive. I am infinitely
+obliged to him for the testimony he has unconsciously offered.
+
+He also takes the ground that infidelity debases a man and renders him
+unfit for the discharge of the highest duties pertaining to life, and
+that we show the greatest shallowness when we endeavor to overthrow
+Calvinism. What is Calvinism? It is the doctrine that an infinite God
+made millions of people, knowing that they would be damned. I have
+answered that a thousand times. I answer it again. No God has a right to
+make a mistake, and then damn the mistake. No God has a right to make
+a failure, and a man who is to be eternally damned is not a conspicuous
+success. No God has a right to make an investment that will not finally
+pay a dividend.
+
+The world is getting better, and the ministers, all your life and all
+mine, have been crying out from the pulpit that we are all going wrong,
+that immorality was stalking through the land, that crime was about to
+engulf the world, and yet, in spite of all their prophecies, the world
+has steadily grown better, and there is more justice, more charity, more
+kindness, more goodness, and more liberty in the world to-day than
+ever before. And there is more infidelity in the world to-day than ever
+before.
+
+
+
+
+A REPLY TO REV. JOHN HALL AND WARNER VAN NORDEN.
+
+
+     * The attention of the Morning Advertiser readers was, in the
+     issue of February 27th, called to two sets of facts
+     transpiring contemporaneously in this city. One was the
+     starving condition of four hundred cloakmakers who had
+     struck because they could not live on reduced wages.
+     Arbitration had failed; two hundred of the number, seeing
+     starvation staring them in the face, were forced to give up
+     the fight, and the remaining number continued to do battle
+     for higher wages
+
+     While these cloakmakers were in the extremity of
+     destitution, millionaires were engaged in subscribing to a
+     fund "for the extension of the church." The extension
+     committee, received at the home of Jay Gould, had met with
+     such signal success as to cause comment throughout the city.
+     The host subscribed ten thousand dollars, his daughter
+     twenty-five hundred and the assembled guests sums ranging
+     between five hundred and one thousand. The Morning
+     Advertiser made inquiry as to whether any of the money
+     contributed for the extension of the church would find its
+     way into the pockets of the hungry cloakmakers.
+
+     Dr. John Hall said he did not have time to discuss the
+     matter of aiding the needy poor, as there were so many other
+     things that demanded his immediate attention.
+
+     Mr. Warner Van Norden, Treasurer of the Church Extension
+     Committee, was seen at his office in the North American
+     Bank, of which institution he is President.
+
+     He took the view that the cloakmakers had brought their
+     trouble upon themselves, and it was not the duty of the
+     charitable to extend to them direct aid.
+
+     Generally speaking, he was not in favor of helping the poor
+     and needy of the city, save in the way employed by the
+     church.
+
+     "The experience of centuries, said he, "teaches us that the
+     giving of alms to the poor only encourage them in their
+     idleness and their crimes. The duty of the church is to save
+     men's a souls, and to minister to their bodies incidentally.
+
+     "It is best to teach people to rely upon their own
+     resources. If the poor felt that they could get material
+     help, they would want it always. In these days if a man or
+     woman can't get along it's their own fault. There is my
+     typewriter. She was brought up in a tenement house. Now she
+     gets two dollars a day, and dresses better than did the
+     lords and ladies of other times. You'll find that where
+     people are poor, it's their own fault.
+
+     "After all, happiness does not lie in the enjoyment of
+     material things--it is the soul that makes life worth
+     living. You should come to our Working Girls' Club and see
+     this fact illustrated. There you will see girls who have
+     been working all day, singing hymns and following the leader
+     in prayer."
+
+     Don't you think there are many worthy poor in this city who
+     need material help?" was asked.
+
+     "No, sir; I do not," said Mr. Van Norden. "If a man or woman
+     wants money, they should work for It."
+
+     "But is employment always to be had?"
+
+     "I think it is by Americans. You'll find that most of the
+     people out of work are those who are not adapted to the
+     conditions of this country.
+
+Colonel Robert Ingersoll was asked what he thought of such
+philosophy.--New York Morning Advertiser, March 10,1892.
+
+_Question_. Have you read the article in the Morning Advertiser entitled
+"Workers Starving"?
+
+_Answer._ I have read it, and was greatly surprised at the answers made
+to the reporter of the Advertiser.
+
+_Question_. What do you think of the remarks of the Rev. John Hall and
+by Mr. Warner Van Norden, Treasurer of the "Church Extension Committee"?
+
+_Answer._ My opinion is that Dr. Hall must have answered under some
+irritation, or that the reporter did not happen to take down all he
+said. It hardly seems probable that Dr. Hall should have said that he
+had no time to discuss the matter of aiding the needy poor, giving as a
+reason that there were so many other things that demanded his immediate
+attention. The church is always insisting that it is, above all things,
+a charitable institution; that it collects and distributes many millions
+every year for the relief of the needy, and it is always quoting: "Sell
+that thou hast and give to the poor." It is hard to imagine anything of
+more importance than to relieve the needy, or to succor the oppressed.
+Of course, I know that the church itself produces nothing, and that it
+lives on contributions; but its claim is that it receives from those who
+are able to give, and gives to those who are in urgent need.
+
+I have sometimes thought, that the most uncharitable thing in the
+world is an organized charity. It seems to have the peculiarities of a
+corporation, and becomes as soulless as its kindred. To use a very old
+phrase, it generally acts like "a beggar on horseback."
+
+Probably Dr. Hall, in fact, does a great deal for the poor, and I
+imagine that he must have been irritated or annoyed when he made the
+answer attributed to him in the _Advertiser_. The good Samaritan may
+have been in a hurry, but he said nothing about it. The Levites
+that passed by on the other side seemed to have had other business.
+Understand me, I am saying nothing against Dr. Hall, but it does seem
+to me that there are few other matters more important than assisting our
+needy fellow-men.
+
+_Question_. What do you think of Mr. Warner Van Norden's sentiments as
+expressed to the reporter?
+
+_Answer._ In the first place, I think he is entirely mistaken. I do not
+think the cloakmakers brought their trouble upon themselves. The wages
+they receive were and are insufficient to support reasonable human
+beings. They work for almost nothing, and it is hard for me to
+understand why they live at all, when life is so expensive and death so
+cheap. All they can possibly do is to earn enough one day to buy food
+to enable them to work the next. Life with them is a perpetual struggle.
+They live on the edge of death. Under their feet they must feel the side
+of the grave crumbling, and thus they go through, day by day, month by
+month, year by year. They are, I presume, sustained by a hope that is
+never realized.
+
+Mr. Van Norden says that he is not in favor of helping the poor and
+needy of the city, save in the way employed by the church, and that the
+experience of centuries teaches us that the giving of alms to the poor
+only encourages them in their idleness and their crimes.
+
+Is Mr. Van Norden ready to take the ground that when Christ said: "Sell
+that thou hast and give to the poor," he intended to encourage idleness
+and crime?
+
+Is it possible that when it was said, "It is better to give than to
+receive," the real meaning was, It is better to encourage idleness and
+crime than to receive assistance?
+
+For instance, a man falls into the water. Why should one standing on the
+shore attempt to rescue him? Could he not properly say: "If all who fall
+into the water are rescued, it will only encourage people to fall into
+the water; it will make sailors careless, and persons who stand on
+wharves, will care very little whether they fall in or not. Therefore,
+in order to make people careful who have not fallen into the water,
+let those in the water drown." In other words, why should anybody
+be assisted, if assistance encourages carelessness, or idleness, or
+negligence?
+
+According to Mr. Van Norden, charity is out of place in this world,
+kindness is a mistake, and hospitality springs from a lack of
+philosophy. In other words, all should take the consequences of their
+acts, not only, but the consequences of the acts of others.
+
+If I knew this doctrine to be true, I should still insist that men
+should be charitable on their own account. A man without pity, no matter
+how intelligent he may be, is at best only an intellectual beast, and
+if by withholding all assistance we could finally people the world
+with those who are actually self-supporting, we would have a population
+without sympathy, without charity--that is to say, without goodness. In
+my judgment, it would be far better that none should exist.
+
+Mr. Van Norden takes the ground that the duty of the church is to save
+men's souls, and to minister to their bodies incidentally. I think that
+conditions have a vast deal to do with morality and goodness. If you
+wish to change the conduct of your fellow-men, the first thing to do is
+to change their conditions, their surroundings; in other words, to help
+them to help themselves--help them to get away from bad influences, away
+from the darkness of ignorance, away from the temptations of poverty and
+want, not only into the light intellectually, but into the climate of
+prosperity. It is useless to give a hungry man a religious tract, and it
+is almost useless to preach morality to those who are so situated that
+the necessity of the present, the hunger of the moment, overrides every
+other consideration. There is a vast deal of sophistry in hunger, and a
+good deal of persuasion in necessity.
+
+Prosperity is apt to make men selfish. They imagine that because they
+have succeeded, others and all others, might or may succeed. If any man
+will go over his own life honestly, he will find that he has not always
+succeeded because he was good, or that he has always failed because
+he was bad. He will find that many things happened with which he had
+nothing to do, for his benefit, and that, after all is said and done, he
+cannot account for all of his successes by his absolute goodness. So,
+if a man will think of all the bad things he has done--of all the bad
+things he wanted to do--of all the bad things he would have done had he
+had the chance, and had he known that detection was impossible, he will
+find but little foundation for egotism.
+
+_Question_. What do you say to this language of Mr. Van Norden. "It is
+best to teach people to rely upon their own resources. If the poor felt
+that they could get material help they would want it always, and in this
+day, if a man and woman cannot get along, it is their own fault"?
+
+_Answer._ All I can say is that I do not agree with him. Often there are
+many more men in a certain trade than there is work for such men. Often
+great factories shut down, leaving many thousands out of employment. You
+may say that it was the fault of these men that they learned that trade;
+that they might have known it would be overcrowded; so you may say it
+was the fault of the capitalist to start a factory in that particular
+line, because he should have known that it was to be overdone.
+
+As no man can look very far into the future, the truth is it was
+nobody's fault, and without fault thousands and thousands are thrown out
+of employment. Competition is so sharp, wages are so small, that to be
+out of employment for a few weeks means want. You cannot say that this
+is the fault of the man who wants bread. He certainly did not wish to go
+hungry; neither did he deliberately plan a failure. He did the best he
+could. There are plenty of bankers who fail in business, not because
+they wish to fail; so there are plenty of professional men who cannot
+make a living, yet it may not be their fault; and there are others who
+get rich, and it may not be by reason of their virtues.
+
+Without doubt, there are many people in the city of New York who
+cannot make a living. Competition is too sharp; life is too complex;
+consequently the percentage of failures is large. In savage life there
+are few failures, but in civilized life there are many. There are many
+thousands out of work and out of food in Berlin to-day. It can hardly be
+said to be their fault. So there are many thousands in London, and every
+other great city of the world. You cannot account for all this want by
+saying that the people who want are entirely to blame.
+
+A man gets rich, and he is often egotistic enough to think that his
+wealth was the result of his own unaided efforts; and he is sometimes
+heartless enough to say that others should get rich by following his
+example.
+
+Mr. Van Norden states that he has a typewriter who gets two dollars a
+day, and that she dresses better than the lords and ladies did of olden
+times. He must refer to the times of the Garden of Eden. Out of two
+dollars a day one must live, and there is very little left for gorgeous
+robes. I hardly think a lady is to be envied because she receives two
+dollars a day, and the probability is that the manner in which she
+dresses on that sum--having first deducted the expenses of living--is
+not calculated to excite envy.
+
+The philosophy of Mr. Van Norden seems to be concentrated into this
+line: "Where people are poor it is their own fault." Of course this is
+the death of all charity.
+
+We are then informed by this gentleman that "happiness does not lie in
+the enjoyment of material things--that it is the soul that makes life
+worth living."
+
+Is it the soul without pity that makes life worth living? Is it the soul
+in which the blossom of charity has never shed its perfume that makes
+life so desirable? Is it the soul, having all material things, wrapped
+in the robes of prosperity, and that says to all the poor: It is your
+own fault; die of hunger if you must--that makes life worth living?
+
+It may be asked whether it is worth while for such a soul to live.
+
+If this is the philosophy of Mr. Van Norden, I do not wish to visit his
+working girls' club, or to "hear girls who have been working all day
+singing hymns and following the leader in prayer." Why should a soul
+without pity pray? Why should any one ask God to be merciful to the poor
+if he is not merciful himself? For my own part, I would rather see
+poor people eat than to hear them pray. I would rather see them clothed
+comfortably than to see them shivering, and at the same time hear them
+sing hymns.
+
+It does not seem possible that any man can say that there are no worthy
+poor in this city who need material help. Neither does it seem possible
+that any man can say to one who is starving that if he wants money he
+must work for it. There are hundreds and thousands in this city willing
+to work who can find no employment. There are good and pure women
+standing between their children and starvation, living in rooms
+worse than cells in penitentiaries--giving their own lives to their
+children--hundreds and hundreds of martyrs bearing the cross of every
+suffering, worthy of the reverence and love of mankind. So there are men
+wandering about these streets in search of work, willing to do anything
+to feed the ones they love.
+
+Mr. Van Norden has not done himself justice. I do not believe that he
+expresses his real sentiments. But, after all, why should we expect
+charity in a church that believes in the dogma of eternal pain? Why
+cannot the rich be happy here in their palaces, while the poor suffer
+and starve in huts, when these same rich expect to enjoy heaven forever,
+with all the unbelievers in hell? Why should the agony of time interfere
+with their happiness, when the agonies of eternity will not and cannot
+affect their joy? But I have nothing against Dr. John Hall or Mr. Van
+Norden--only against their ideas.
+
+
+
+
+A REPLY TO THE REV. DR. PLUMB.
+
+
+     * Boston, 1898.
+
+_Question_. Last Sunday the Rev. Dr. Plumb paid some attention to the
+lecture which you delivered here on the 23rd of October. Have you read a
+report of it, and what have you to say?
+
+_Answer._ Dr. Plumb attacks not only myself, but the Rev. Mr. Mills. I
+do not know the position that Mr. Mills takes, but from what Dr.
+Plumb says, I suppose that he has mingled a little philosophy with his
+religion and some science with his superstition. Dr. Plumb appears to
+have successfully avoided both. His manners do not appear to me to be of
+the best. Why should he call an opponent coarse and blasphemous, simply
+because he does not happen to believe as he does? Is it blasphemous to
+say that this "poor" world never was visited by a Redeemer from Heaven,
+a majestic being--unique--peculiar--who "trod the sea and hushed the
+storm and raised the dead"? Why does Dr. Plumb call this world a "poor"
+world? According to his creed, it was created by infinite wisdom,
+infinite goodness and infinite power. How dare he call the work of such
+a being "poor"?
+
+Is it not blasphemous for a Boston minister to denounce the work of the
+Infinite and say to God that he made a "poor" world? If I believed
+this world had been made by an infinitely wise and good Being, I should
+certainly insist that this is not a poor world, but, on the contrary,
+a perfect world. I would insist that everything that happens is for the
+best. Whether it looks wise or foolish to us, I would insist that the
+fault we thought we saw, lies in us and not in the infinitely wise and
+benevolent Creator.
+
+Dr. Plumb may love God, but he certainly regards him as a poor mechanic
+and a failure as a manufacturer. There Dr. Plumb, like all religious
+preachers, takes several things for granted; things that have not been
+established by evidence, and things which in their nature cannot be
+established.
+
+He tells us that this poor world was visited by a mighty Redeemer from
+Heaven. How does he know? Does he know where heaven is? Does he know
+that any such place exists? Is he perfectly sure that an infinite God
+would be foolish enough to make people who needed a redeemer?
+
+He also says that this Being "trod the sea, hushed the storm and raised
+the dead." Is there any evidence that this Being trod the sea? Any more
+evidence than that Venus rose from the foam of the ocean? Any evidence
+that he hushed the storm any more than there is that the storm comes
+from the cave of AEolus? Is there any evidence that he raised the dead?
+How would it be possible to prove that the dead were raised? How
+could we prove such a thing if it happened now? Who would believe
+the evidence? As a matter of fact, the witnesses themselves would
+not believe and could not believe until raising of the dead became so
+general as to be regarded as natural.
+
+Dr. Plumb knows, if he knows anything, that gospel gossip is the only
+evidence he has, or anybody has, that Christ trod the sea, hushed the
+storm and raised the dead. He also knows, if he knows anything, that
+these stories were not written until Christ himself had been dead for at
+least four generations. He knows also that these accounts were written
+at a time when the belief in miracles was almost universal, and
+when everything that actually happened was regarded of no particular
+importance, and only the things that did not happen were carefully
+written out with all the details.
+
+So Dr. Plumb says that this man who hushed the storm "spake as never man
+spake." Did the Doctor ever read Zeno? Zeno, who denounced human slavery
+many years before Christ was born? Did he ever read Epicurus, one of the
+greatest of the Greeks? Has he read anything from Buddha? Has he read
+the dialogues between Arjuna and Krishna? If he has, he knows that every
+great and splendid utterance of Christ was uttered centuries before he
+lived. Did he ever read Lao-tsze? If he did--and this man lived many
+centuries before the coming of our Lord--he knows that Lao-tsze said "we
+should render benefits for injuries. We should love our enemies, and
+we should not resist evil." So it will hardly do now to say that Christ
+spake as never man spake, because he repeated the very things that other
+men had said.
+
+So he says that I am endeavoring to carry people back to a dimly groping
+Socrates or a vague Confucius. Did Dr. Plumb ever read Confucius? Only a
+little while ago a book was published by Mr. For-long showing the origin
+of the principal religion and the creeds that have been taught. In this
+book you will find the cream of Buddha, of Christ, of Zoroaster, and you
+will also find a few pages devoted to the philosophy of Confucius; and
+after you have read the others, then read what Confucius says, and you
+will find that his philosophy rises like a monolith touching the clouds,
+while the creeds and sayings of the others appear like heaps of stone or
+piles of rubbish. The reason of this is that Confucius was not simply
+a sentimentalist. He was not controlled entirely by feeling, but he had
+intelligence--a great brain in which burned the torch of reason. Read
+Confucius, and you will think that he must have known the sciences of
+to-day; that is to say, the conclusions that have been reached by modern
+thinkers. It could have been easily said of Confucius in his day that he
+spake as never man had spoken, and it may be that after you read him
+you will change your mind just a little as to the wisdom and the
+intelligence contained in many of the sayings of our Lord.
+
+Dr. Plumb charges that Mr. Mills is trying to reconstruct theology.
+Whether he is right in this charge I do not know, but I do know that I
+am not trying to reconstruct theology. I am endeavoring to destroy it.
+I have no more confidence in theology than I have in astrology or in
+the black art. Theology is a science that exists wholly independent of
+facts, and that reaches conclusions without the assistance of evidence.
+It also scorns experience and does what little it can to do away with
+thought.
+
+I make a very great distinction between theology and real religion. I
+can conceive of no religion except usefulness. Now, here we are, men
+and women in this world, and we have certain faculties, certain senses.
+There are things that we can ascertain, and by developing our brain we
+can avoid mistakes, keep a few thorns out of our feet, a few thistles
+out of our hands, a few diseases from our flesh. In my judgment, we
+should use all our senses, gathering information from every possible
+quarter, and this information should be only used for the purpose of
+ascertaining the facts, for finding out the conditions of well-being, to
+the end that we may add to the happiness of ourselves and fellows.
+
+In other words, I believe in intellectual veracity and also in mental
+hospitality. To me reason is the final arbiter, and when I say reason,
+I mean my reason. It may be a very poor light, the flame small and
+flickering, but, after all, it is the only light I have, and never with
+my consent shall any preacher blow it out.
+
+Now, Dr. Plumb thinks that I am trying to despoil my fellow-men of their
+greatest inheritance; that is to say, divine Christ. Why do you call
+Christ good? Is it because he was merciful? Then why do you put him
+above mercy? Why do you call Christ good? Is it because he was just? Why
+do you put him before justice? Suppose it should turn out that no such
+person as Christ ever lived. What harm would that do justice or mercy?
+Wouldn't the tear of pity be as pure as now, and wouldn't justice,
+holding aloft her scales, from which she blows even the dust of
+prejudice, be as noble, as admirable as now? Is it not better to love,
+justice and mercy than to love a name, and when you put a name above
+justice, above mercy, are you sure that you are benefiting your
+fellow-men?
+
+If Dr. Plumb wanted to answer me, why did he not take my argument
+instead of my motive? Why did he not point out my weakness instead
+of telling the consequences that would follow from my action? We have
+nothing to do with the consequences. I said that to believe without
+evidence, or in spite of evidence, was superstition. If that definition
+is correct, Dr. Plumb is a superstitious man, because he believes at
+least without evidence. What evidence has he that Christ was God? In
+the nature of things, how could he have evidence? The only evidence
+he pretends to have is the dream of Joseph, and he does not know that
+Joseph ever dreamed the dream, because Joseph did not write an account
+of his dream, so that Dr. Plumb has only hearsay for the dream, and the
+dream is the foundation of his creed.
+
+Now, when I say that that is superstition, Dr. Plumb charges me with
+being a burglar--a coarse, blasphemous burglar--who wishes to rob
+somebody of some great blessing. Dr. Plumb would not hesitate to tell a
+Mohammedan that Mohammed was an impostor. He would tell a Mormon in
+Utah that Joseph Smith was a vulgar liar and that Brigham Young was
+no better. In other words, if in Turkey, he would be a coarse and
+blasphemous burglar, and he would follow the same profession in Utah. So
+probably he would tell the Chinese that Confucius was an ignorant
+wretch and that their religion was idiotic, and the Chinese priest would
+denounce Dr. Plumb as a very coarse and blasphemous burglar, and Dr.
+Plumb would be perfectly astonished that a priest could be so low, so
+impudent and malicious.
+
+Of course my wonder is not excited. I have become used to it.
+
+If Dr. Plumb would think, if he would exercise his imagination a
+little and put himself in the place of others, he would think, in all
+probability, better things of his opponents. I do not know Dr. Plumb,
+and yet I have no doubt that he is a good and sincere man; a little
+superstitious, superficial, and possibly, mingled with his many virtues,
+there may be a little righteous malice.
+
+The Rev. Mr. Mills used to believe as Dr. Plumb does now, and I suppose
+he has changed for reasons that were sufficient for him. So I believe
+him to be an honest, conscientious man, and so far as I am concerned, I
+have no objection to Mr. Mills doing what little he can to get all the
+churches to act together. He may never succeed, but I am not responsible
+for that.
+
+So I have no objection to Dr. Plumb preaching what he believes to be the
+gospel. I admit that he is honest when he says that an infinitely good
+God made a poor world; that he made man and woman and put them in the
+Garden of Eden, and that this same God before that time had manufactured
+a devil, and that when he manufactured this devil, he knew that he would
+corrupt the man and woman that he had determined to make; that he could
+have defeated the devil, but that for a wise purpose, he allowed his
+Satanic Majesty to succeed; that at the time he allowed him to succeed,
+he knew that in consequence of his success that he (God) in about
+fifteen or sixteen hundred years would be compelled to drown the whole
+world with the exception of eight people. These eight people he kept for
+seed. At the time he kept them for seed, he knew that they were totally
+depraved, that they were saturated with the sin of Adam and Eve, and
+that their children would be their natural heirs. He also knew at the
+time he allowed the devil to succeed, that he (God), some four thousand
+years afterward, would be compelled to be born in Palestine as a babe,
+to learn the carpenter's trade, and to go about the country for three
+years preaching to the people and discussing with the rabbis of his
+chosen people, and he also knew that these chosen people--these people
+who had been governed and educated by him, to whom he had sent a
+multitude of prophets, would at that time be so savage that they would
+crucify him, although he would be at that time the only sinless being
+who had ever stood upon the earth. This he knew would be the effect of
+his government, of his education of his chosen people. He also knew at
+the time he allowed the devil to succeed, that in consequence of that
+success a vast majority of the human race would become eternal convicts
+in the prison of hell.
+
+All this he knew, and yet Dr. Plumb insists that he was and is
+infinitely wise, infinitely powerful and infinitely good. What would
+this God have done if he had lacked wisdom, or power, or goodness?
+
+Of all the religions that man has produced, of all the creeds of
+savagery, there is none more perfectly absurd than Christianity.
+
+
+
+
+A REPLY TO THE NEW YORK CLERGY ON SUPERSTITION.
+
+
+     * New York Journal, 1898. An Interview.
+
+_Question_. Have you followed the controversy, or rather, the interest
+manifested in the letters to the _Journal_ which have followed your
+lecture of Sunday, and what do you think of them?
+
+_Answer._ I have read the letters and reports that have been published
+in the _Journal_. Some of them seem to be very sincere, some not quite
+honest, and some a little of both.
+
+The Rev. Robert S. MacArthur takes the ground that very many Christians
+do not believe in a personal devil, but are still Christians. He states
+that they hold that the references in the New Testament to the devil
+are simply to personifications of evil, and do not apply to any personal
+existence. He says that he could give the names of a number of pastors
+who hold such views. He does not state what his view is. Consequently, I
+do not know whether he is a believer in a personal devil or not.
+
+The statement that the references in the New Testament to a devil
+are simply to personifications of evil, not applying to any personal
+existence, seems to me utterly absurd.
+
+The references to devils in the New Testament are certainly as good and
+satisfactory as the references to angels. Now, are the angels referred
+to in the New Testament simply personifications of good, and are there
+no such personal existences? If devils are only personifications of
+evil, how is it that these personifications of evil could hold arguments
+with Jesus Christ? How could they talk back? How could they publicly
+acknowledge the divinity of Christ? As a matter of fact, the best
+evidences of Christ's divinity in the New Testament are the declarations
+of devils. These devils were supposed to be acquainted with supernatural
+things, and consequently knew a God when they saw one, whereas the
+average Jew, not having been a citizen of the celestial world, was
+unable to recognize a deity when he met him.
+
+Now, these personifications of evil, as Dr. Mac-Arthur calls them, were
+of various kinds. Some of them were dumb, while others could talk, and
+Christ said, speaking of the dumb devils, that they were very difficult
+to expel from the bodies of men; that it required fasting and prayer to
+get them out. Now, did Christ mean that these dumb devils did not exist?
+That they were only "personifications of evil"?
+
+Now, we are also told in the New Testament that Christ was tempted
+by the devil; that is, by a "personification of evil," and that this
+personification took him to the pinnacle of the temple and tried to
+induce him to jump off. Now, where did this personification of evil come
+from? Was it an actual existence? Dr. MacArthur says that it may not
+have been. Then it did not come from the outside of Christ. If it
+existed it came from the inside of Christ, so that, according to
+MacArthur, Christ was the creator of his own devil.
+
+I do not know that I have a right to say that this is Dr. MacArthur's
+opinion, as he has wisely refrained from giving his opinion. I hope some
+time he will tell us whether he really believes in a devil or not, or
+whether he thinks all allusions and references to devils in the New
+Testament can be explained away by calling the devils "personifications
+of evil." Then, of course, he will tell us whether it was a
+"personification of evil" that offered Christ all the kingdoms of the
+world, and whether Christ expelled seven "personifications of evil" from
+Mary Magdalene, and how did they come to count these "personifications
+of evil"? If the devils, after all, are only "personifications of evil,"
+then, of course, they cannot be numbered. They are all one. There may
+be different manifestations, but, in fact, there can be but one, and yet
+Mary Magdalene had seven.
+
+Dr. MacArthur states that I put up a man of straw, and then vigorously
+beat him down. Now, the question is, do I attack a man of straw? I take
+it for granted that Christians to some extent, at least, believe in
+their creeds. I suppose they regard the Bible as the inspired word
+of God; that they believe in the fall of man, in the atonement, in
+salvation by faith, in the resurrection and ascension of Christ. I
+take it for granted that they believe these things. Of course, the only
+evidence I have is what they say. Possibly that cannot be depended upon.
+They may be dealing only in the "personification of truth."
+
+When I charge the orthodox Christians with believing these things, I am
+told that I am far behind the religious thinking of the hour, but after
+all, this "man of straw" is quite powerful. Prof. Briggs attacked this
+"man of straw," and the straw man turned on him and put him out. A
+preacher by the name of Smith, a teacher in some seminary out in Ohio,
+challenged this "man of straw," and the straw man put him out.
+
+Both these reverend gentlemen were defeated by the straw man, and if the
+Rev. Dr. MacArthur will explain to his congregation, I mean only explain
+what he calls the "religious thinking of the hour," the "straw man" will
+put him out too.
+
+Dr. MacArthur finds fault with me because I put into the minds of
+representative thinkers of to-day the opinions of medieval monks, which
+leading religious teachers long ago discarded. Will Dr. MacArthur have
+the goodness to point out one opinion that I have put into the minds
+of representative thinkers--that is, of orthodox thinkers--that any
+orthodox religious teacher of to-day has discarded? Will he have the
+kindness to give just one?
+
+In my lecture on "Superstition" I did say that to deny the existence
+of evil spirits, or to deny the existence of the devil, is to deny the
+truth of the New Testament; and that to deny the existence of these imps
+of darkness is to contradict the words of Jesus Christ. I did say that
+if we give up the belief in devils we must give up the inspiration of
+the Old and New Testaments, and we must give up the divinity of Christ.
+Upon that declaration I stand, because if devils do not exist, then
+Jesus Christ was mistaken, or we have not in the New Testament a true
+account of what he said and of what he pretended to do. If the New
+Testament gives a true account of his words and pretended actions, then
+he did claim to cast out devils. That was his principal business. That
+was his certificate of divinity, casting out devils. That authenticated
+his mission and proved that he was superior to the hosts of darkness.
+
+Now, take the devil out of the New Testament, and you also take the
+veracity of Christ; with that veracity you take the divinity; with that
+divinity you take the atonement, and when you take the atonement, the
+great fabric known as Christianity becomes a shapeless ruin.
+
+Now, let Dr. Mac Arthur answer this, and answer it not like a minister,
+but like a man. Ministers are unconsciously a little unfair. They have
+a little tendency to what might be called a natural crook. They become
+spiritual when they ought to be candid. They become a little ingenious
+and pious when they ought to be frank; and when really driven into
+a corner, they clasp their hands, they look upward, and they cry
+"_Blasphemy!_" I do not mean by this that they are dishonest. I simply
+mean that they are illogical.
+
+Dr. MacArthur tells us also that Spain is not a representative of
+progressive religious teachers. I admit that. There are no progressive
+religious teachers in Spain, and right here let me make a remark. If
+religion rests on an inspired revelation, it is incapable of progress.
+It may be said that year after year we get to understand it better, but
+if it is not understood when given, why is it called a "revelation"?
+There is no progress in the multiplication table. Some men are better
+mathematicians than others, but the old multiplication table remains the
+same. So there can be no progress in a revelation from God.
+
+Now, Spain--and that is the great mistake, the great misfortune--has
+remained orthodox. That is to say, the Spaniards have been true to
+their superstition. Of course the Rev. Dr. MacArthur will not admit that
+Catholicism is Christianity, and I suppose that the pope would hardly
+admit that a Baptist is a very successful Christian. The trouble with
+Spain is, and the trouble with the Baptist Church is, that neither of
+them has progressed to any great extent.
+
+Now, in my judgment, what is called religion must grow better as man
+grows better, simply because it was produced by man and the better man
+is, the nearer civilized he is, the better, the nearer civilized,
+will be what he calls his religion; and if the Baptist religion has
+progressed, it is a demonstration that it was not originally founded on
+a revelation from God.
+
+In my lecture I stated that we had no right to make any distinction
+between the actions of infinite wisdom and goodness, and that if God
+created and governs this world we ought to thank him, if we thanked him
+at all, for all that happens; that we should thank him just as heartily
+for famine and cyclone as for sunshine and harvest, and that if
+President McKinley thanked God for the victory at Santiago, he also
+should have thanked him for sending the yellow fever.
+
+I stand by these words. A finite being has no right to make any
+distinction between the actions of the infinitely good and wise. If God
+governs this world, then everything that happens is the very best that
+could happen. When A murders B, the best thing that could happen to A is
+to be a murderer and the best thing that could have happened to B was
+to be murdered. There is no escape from this if the world is governed by
+infinite wisdom and goodness.
+
+It will not do to try and dodge by saying that man is free. This God who
+made man and made him free knew exactly how he would use his freedom,
+and consequently this God cannot escape the responsibility for the
+actions of men. He made them. He knew exactly what they would do. He is
+responsible.
+
+If I could turn a piece of wood into a human being, and I knew that he
+would murder a man, who is the real murderer? But if Dr. MacArthur would
+think as much as he preaches, he would come much nearer agreeing with
+me.
+
+The Rev. Dr. J. Lewis Parks is very sorry that he cannot discuss
+Ingersoll's address, because to do so would be dignifying Ingersoll. Of
+course I deeply regret the refusal of Dr. J. Lewis Parks to discuss the
+address. I dislike to be compelled to go to the end of my life without
+being dignified. At the same time I will forgive the Rev. Dr. J. Lewis
+Parks for not answering me, because I know that he cannot.
+
+The Rev. Dr. Moldehnke, whose name seems chiefly made of consonants,
+denounces me as a scoffer and as illogical, and says that Christianity
+is not founded upon the devil, but upon Christ. He further says that
+we do not believe in such a thing as a devil in human form, but we know
+that there is evil, and that evil we call the devil. He hides his head
+under the same leaf with Dr. MacArthur by calling the devil evil.
+
+Now, is this gentleman willing to say that all the allusions to the
+devil in the Old and New Testaments can be harmonized with the idea that
+the devil is simply a personification of evil? Can he say this and say
+it honestly?
+
+But the Rev. Dr. Moldehnke, I think, seems to be consistent; seems to go
+along with the logic of his creed. He says that the yellow fever, if it
+visited our soldiers, came from God, and that we should thank God for
+it. He does not say the soldiers should thank God for it, or that those
+who had it should thank God for it, but that we should thank God for it,
+and there is this wonderful thing about Christianity. It enables us
+to bear with great fortitude, with a kind of sublime patience, the
+misfortunes of others.
+
+He says that this yellow fever works out God's purposes. Of course I am
+not as well acquainted with the Deity as the Rev. Moldehnke appears to
+be. I have not the faintest idea of what God's purposes are. He works,
+even according to his messengers, in such a mysterious way, that with
+the little reason I have I find it impossible to follow him. Why God
+should have any purpose that could be worked out with yellow fever, or
+cholera, or why he should ever ask the assistance of tapeworms, or go in
+partnership with cancers, or take in the plague as an assistant, I have
+never been able to understand. I do not pretend to know. I admit my
+ignorance, and after all, the Rev. Dr. Moldehnke may be right. It may be
+that everything that happens is for the best. At the same time, I do not
+believe it.
+
+There is a little old story on this subject that throws some light on
+the workings of the average orthodox mind.
+
+One morning the son of an old farmer came in and said to his father,
+"One of the ewe lambs is dead."
+
+"Well," said the father; "that is all for the best. Twins never do very
+well, any how."
+
+The next morning the son reported the death of the other lamb, and the
+old man said, "Well, that is all for the best; the old ewe will have
+more wool."
+
+The next morning the son said, "The old ewe is dead."
+
+"Well," replied the old man; "that may be for the best, but I don't see
+it this morning."
+
+The Rev. Mr. Hamlin has the goodness to say that my influence is on
+the wane. This is an admission that I have some, for which I am greatly
+obliged to him. He further states that all my arguments are easily
+refuted, but fails to refute them on the ground that such refutation
+might be an advertisement for me.
+
+Now, if Mr. Hamlin would think a little, he would see that there are
+some things in the lecture on "Superstition" worth the while even of a
+Methodist minister to answer.
+
+Does Mr. Hamlin believe in the existence of the devil? If he does, will
+he Have the goodness to say who created the devil? He may say that God
+created him, as he is the creator of all. Then I ask Mr. Hamlin this
+question: Why did God create a successful rival? When God created the
+devil, did he not know at that time that he was to make this world? That
+he was to create Adam and Eve and put them in the Garden of Eden, and
+did he not know that this devil would tempt this Adam and Eve? That
+in consequence of that they would fall? That in consequence of that
+he would have to drown all their descendants except eight? That in
+consequence of that he himself would have to be born into this world as
+a Judean peasant? That he would have to be crucified and suffer for
+the sins of these people who had been misled by this devil that he
+deliberately created, and that after all he would be able only to save a
+few Methodists?
+
+Will the Rev. Mr. Hamlin have the goodness to answer this? He can
+answer it as mildly as he pleases, so that in any event it will be no
+advertisement for him.
+
+The Rev. Mr. F. J. Belcher pays me a great compliment, for which I
+now return my thanks. He has the goodness to say, "Ingersoll in many
+respects is like Voltaire." I think no finer compliment has been paid me
+by any gentleman occupying a pulpit, for many years, and again I thank
+the Rev. Mr. Belcher.
+
+The Rev. W. D. Buchanan, does not seem to be quite fair. He says that
+every utterance of mine impresses men with my insincerity, and that
+every argument I bring forward is specious, and that I spend my time in
+ringing the changes on arguments that have been answered over and over
+again for hundreds of years.
+
+Now, Dr. Buchanan should remember that he ought not to attack motives;
+that you cannot answer an argument by vilifying the man who makes it.
+You must answer not the man, but the argument.
+
+Another thing this reverend gentleman should remember, and that is that
+no argument is old until it has been answered. An argument that has not
+been answered, although it has been put forward for many centuries, is
+still as fresh as a flower with the dew on its breast. It never is old
+until it has been answered.
+
+It is well enough for this gentleman to say that these arguments have
+been answered, and if they have and he knows that they have, of course
+it will be but a little trouble to him to repeat these answers.
+
+Now, my dear Dr. Buchanan, I wish to ask you some questions. Do you
+believe in a personal devil? Do you believe that the bodies of men and
+women become tenements for little imps and goblins and demons? Do you
+believe that the devil used to lead men and women astray? Do you believe
+the stories about devils that you find in the Old and New Testaments?
+
+Now, do not tell me that these questions have been answered long ago.
+Answer them now. And if you say the devil does exist, that he is
+a person, that he is an enemy of God, then let me ask you another
+question: Why should this devil punish souls in hell for rebelling
+against God? Why should the devil, who is an enemy of God, help punish
+God's enemies? This may have been answered many times, but one more
+repetition will do but little harm.
+
+Another thing: Do you believe in the eternity of punishment? Do you
+believe that God is the keeper of an eternal prison, the doors of which
+open only to receive sinners, and do you believe that eternal punishment
+is the highest expression of justice and mercy?
+
+If you had the power to change a stone into a human being, and you
+knew that that human being would be a sinner and finally go to hell and
+suffer eternal torture, would you not leave it stone? And if, knowing
+this, you changed the stone into a man, would you not be a fiend?
+Now, answer this fairly. I want nothing spiritual; nothing with the
+Presbyterian flavor; just good, honest talk, and tell us how that is.
+
+I say to you that if there is a place of eternal torment or misery for
+any of the children of men--I say to you that your God is a wild beast,
+an insane fiend, whom I abhor and despise with every drop of my blood.
+
+At the same time you may say whether you are up, according to Dr. Mac
+Arthur, with the religious thinking of the hour.
+
+The Rev. J. W. Campbell I rather like. He appears to be absolutely
+sincere. He is orthodox--true blue. He believes in a devil; in an
+acting, thinking devil, and a clever devil. Of course he does not think
+this devil is as stout as God, but he is quicker; not quite as wise, but
+a little more cunning.
+
+According to Mr. Campbell, the devil is the bunco steerer of the
+universe--king of the green goods men; but, after all, Mr. Campbell will
+not admit that if this devil does not exist the Christian creeds all
+crumble, but I think he will admit that if the devil does not exist,
+then Christ was mistaken, or that the writers of the New Testament did
+not truthfully give us his utterances.
+
+Now, if Christ was mistaken about the existence of the devil, may be he
+was mistaken about the existence of God. In other words, if Christ
+made a mistake, then he was ignorant. Then we cannot say he was divine,
+although ignorance has generally believed in divinity. So I do not see
+exactly how Mr. Campbell can say that if the devil does not exist the
+Christian creeds do not crumble, and when I say Christian creeds I mean
+orthodox creeds. Is there any orthodox Christian creed without the devil
+in it?
+
+Now, if we throw away the devil we throw away original sin, the fall
+of man, and we throw away the atonement. Of this arch the devil is the
+keystone. Remove him, the arch falls.
+
+Now, how can you say that an orthodox Christian creed remains intact
+without crumbling when original sin, the fall of man, the atonement and
+the existence of the devil are all thrown aside?
+
+Of course if you mean by Christianity, acting like Christ, being
+good, forgiving, that is another matter, but that is not Christianity.
+Orthodox Christians say that a man must believe on Christ, must have
+faith, and that to act as Christ did, is not enough; that a man who acts
+exactly as Christ did, dying without faith, would go to hell. So when
+Mr. Campbell speaks of a Christian, I suppose he means an orthodox
+Christian.
+
+Now, Dr. Campbell not only knows that the devil exists, but he knows
+a good deal about him. He knows that he can assume every conceivable
+disguise or shape; that he can go about like a roaring lion; that at
+another time he is a god of this world; on another occasion a dragon,
+and in the afternoon of the same day may be Lucifer, an angel of light,
+and all the time, I guess, a prince of lies. So he often assumes the
+disguise of the serpent.
+
+So the Doctor thinks that when the devil invited Christ into the
+wilderness to tempt him, that he adopted some disguise that made him
+more than usually attractive. Does the Doctor think that Christ could
+not see through the disguise? Was it possible for the devil with a mask
+to fool God, his creator? Was it possible for the devil to tempt Christ
+by offering him the kingdoms of the earth when they already belonged to
+Christ, and when Christ knew that the devil had no title, and when the
+devil knew that Christ knew that he had no title, and when the devil
+knew that Christ knew that he was the devil, and when the devil knew
+that he was Christ? Does the reverend gentleman still think that it was
+the disguise of the devil that tempted Christ?
+
+I would like some of these questions answered, because I have a very
+inquiring mind.
+
+So Mr. Campbell tells us--and it is very good and comforting of
+him--that there is a time coming when the devil shall deceive the
+nations no more. He also tells us that God is more powerful than the
+devil, and that he is going to put an end to him.
+
+Will Mr. Campbell have the goodness to tell me why God made the devil?
+If he is going to put an end to him why did he start him? Was it not a
+waste of raw material to make him? Was it not unfair to let this devil,
+so powerful, so cunning, so attractive, into the Garden of Eden, and put
+Adam and Eve, who were then scarcely half dry, within his power, and not
+only Adam and Eve within his power, but their descendants, so that the
+slime of the serpent has been on every babe, and so that, in consequence
+of what happened in the Garden of Eden, flames will surround countless
+millions in the presence of the most merciful God?
+
+Now, it may be that the Rev. Dr. Campbell can explain all these things.
+He may not care to do it for my benefit, but let him think of his own
+congregation; of the lambs he is protecting from the wolves of doubt and
+thought.
+
+The Rev. Henry Frank appears to be a man of exceedingly good sense; one
+who thinks for himself, and who has the courage of his convictions. Of
+course I am sorry that he does not agree with me, but I have become used
+to that, and so I thank him for the truths he utters.
+
+He does not believe in the existence of a personal devil, and I guess by
+following him up we would find that he did not believe in the existence
+of a personal God, or in the inspiration of the Scriptures. In fact,
+he tells us that he has given up the infallibility of the Bible. At the
+same time, he says it is the most perfect compendium of religious and
+moral thought. In that I think he is a little mistaken. There is a vast
+deal of irreligion in the Bible, and there is a good deal of immoral
+thought in the Bible; but I agree with him that it is neither inspired
+nor infallible.
+
+The Rev. E. C. J. Kraeling, pastor of the Zion Lutheran Church, declares
+that those who do not believe in a personal God do not believe in a
+personal Satan, and _vice versa_. The one, he says, necessitates the
+other. In this I do not think he is quite correct. I think many people
+believe in a personal God who do not believe in a personal devil, but I
+know of none who do believe in a personal devil who do not also believe
+in a personal God. The orthodox generally believe in both of them, and
+for many centuries Christians spoke with great respect of the devil.
+They were afraid of him.
+
+But I agree with the Rev. Mr. Kraeling when he says that to deny a
+personal Satan is to deny the infallibility of God's word. I agree with
+this because I suppose by "God's word" he means the Bible.
+
+He further says, and I agree with him, that a "Christian" needs no
+scientific argument on which to base his belief in the personality of
+Satan. That certainly is true, and if a Christian does need a scientific
+argument it is equally true that he never will have one.
+
+You see this word "Science" means something that somebody knows; not
+something that somebody guesses, or wishes, or hopes, or believes, but
+something that somebody knows.
+
+Of course there cannot be any scientific argument proving the existence
+of the devil. At the same time I admit, as the Rev. Mr. Kraeling says,
+and I thank him for his candor, that the Bible does prove the existence
+of the devil from Genesis to the. Apocalypse, and I do agree with him
+that the "revealed word" teaches the existence of a personal devil,
+and that all truly orthodox Christians believe that there is a personal
+devil, and the Rev. Mr. Kraeling proves this by the fall of man, and he
+proves that without this devil there could be no redemption for the
+evil spirits; so he brings forward the temptation of Christ in the
+wilderness. At the same time that Mr. Kraeling agrees with me as to what
+the Bible says, he insists that I bring no arguments, that I blaspheme,
+and then he drops into humor and says that if any further arguments are
+needed to prove the existence of the devil, that I furnish them.
+
+How a man believing the creed of the orthodox Mr. Kraeling can have
+anything like a sense of humor is beyond even my imagination.
+
+Now, I want to ask Mr. Kraeling a few questions, and I will ask him
+the same questions that I ask all orthodox people in my lecture on
+"Superstition."
+
+Now, Mr. Kraeling believes that this world was created by a being of
+infinite wisdom, power and goodness, and that the world he created has
+been governed by him.
+
+Now, let me ask the reverend gentleman a few plain questions, with
+the request that he answer them without mist or mystery. If you, Mr.
+Kraeling, had the power to make a world, would you make an exact copy of
+this? Would you make a man and woman, put them in a garden, knowing that
+they would be deceived, knowing that they would fall? Knowing that all
+the consequences believed in by orthodox Christians would follow from
+that fall? Would you do it? And would you make your world so as to
+provide for earthquakes and cyclones? Would you create the seeds of
+disease and scatter them in the air and water? Would you so arrange
+matters as to produce cancers? Would you provide for plague and
+pestilence? Would you so make your world that life should feed on life,
+that the quivering flesh should be torn by tooth and beak and claw?
+Would you?
+
+Now, answer fairly. Do not quote Scripture; just answer, and be honest.
+
+Would you make different races of men? Would you make them of different
+colors, and would you so make them that they would persecute and enslave
+each other? Would you so arrange matters that millions and millions
+should toil through many generations, paid only by the lash on the back?
+Would you have it so that millions and millions of babes would be sold
+from the breasts of mothers? Be honest, would you provide for religious
+persecution? For the invention and use of instruments of torture? Would
+you see to it that the rack was not forgotten, and that the fagot was
+not overlooked or unlighted? Would you make a world in which the wrong
+would triumph? Would you make a world in which innocence would not be
+a shield? Would you make a world where the best would be loaded with
+chains? Where the best would die in the darkness of dungeons? Where the
+best would make scaffolds sacred with their blood?
+
+Would you make a world where hypocrisy and cunning and fraud should
+represent God, and where meanness would suck the blood of honest
+credulity?
+
+Would you provide for the settlement of all difficulties by war? Would
+you so make your world that the weak would bear the burdens, so that
+woman would be a slave, so that children would be trampled upon as
+though they were poisonous reptiles? Would you fill the woods with wild
+beasts? Would you make a few volcanoes to overwhelm your children? Would
+you provide for earthquakes that would swallow them? Would you make them
+ignorant, savage, and fill their minds with all the phantoms of horror?
+Would you?
+
+Now, it will only take you a few moments to answer these questions, and
+if you say you would, then I shall be satisfied that you believe in the
+orthodox God, and that you are as bad as he. If you say you would not, I
+will admit that there is a little dawn of intelligence in your brain.
+
+At the same time I want it understood with regard to all these
+ministers that I am a friend of theirs. I am trying to civilize their
+congregations, so that the congregations may allow the ministers to
+develop, to grow, to become really and truly intelligent. The process is
+slow, but it is sure.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll, Vol.
+7 (of 12), by Robert G. Ingersoll
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WORKS OF INGERSOLL ***
+
+***** This file should be named 38807.txt or 38807.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        http://www.gutenberg.org/3/8/8/0/38807/
+
+Produced by David Widger
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+http://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+http://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
+To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.