T* f ^.^ ;. MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL AND HIS ANSWERS COMPLETE. PART 1. MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL, AS SHOWN BY JUDGE JERE S. BLACK, PROF. SWING, J. MONRO GIBSON, D.D., W. H. RYDER, D. D., RABBI WISE, BROOKE HERFORD, D. D., AND OTHERS. INCLUDING INGEKSOLL'S LECTURE, THE "MISTAKES OF MOSES." PART 3. MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL, AS SHOWN BY BISHOP CHENEY, CHAPLAIN MCCABE, REV.W. F. CRAFTS, ROBERT COLLYER, D.D., ARTHUR SWAZEY, D.D., FRED. PERRY POWERS, AND OTHERS. INCLUDING ALSO INGERSOLL'S LECTURE ON "SKULLS," And His Funeral Oration at His Brothers Grave, WITH COMMENTS ON THE SAME BY HENRY WARD BEECHER AND HON. ISAAC N. ARNOLD. PART 3. INGERSOLL'S NEW DEPARTURE. REPLIES TO HIS FAMOUS LECTURE, "WHAT SHALL WE DO TO BE SAVED?" BY PROF. DAVID SWING, BISHOP FALLOWS, DR. H. W. THOMAS, PROF. CURTIS, DR. LORIMER, DR. COURTNEY AND OTHERS. WITH THK LECTURE APPENDED. > AND INGERSOLL'S ANSWERS TO PROF. SWING, DR. THOMAS, AND OTHERS. EL>n EI) BY J. B. MeCLURE. CHICAGO: RHODES & McCL URE, PUBLISHERS. 1884. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1882, By J. B. McCtiURE & R. H. RHODES, In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington, D. C. A religious faith at present so generally pervades the civilized world that it seems almost amazing that any one should dare speak as Mr. Ingersoll does in his several lec- tures about the Bible. It is 'this singularity, no doubt, rather than intrinsic worth, which gives any significance that may attach to his words. That the Bible is in the least endangered is out of the question. It is too late now for that. The words herein cojn piled from good and able men, who have made the great Book, in its early language, import and history, a careful study for long years, will show how futile are Mr. Ingersoll's efforts in parading what he calls the " Mistakes of Moses," etc. Indeed, it would seem that, possibly Mr. I. is guilty of a mistaken identity, for he is severely accused of false assertions and misrepresentations concerning the real Moses. This reminds us of a " mis- take" which was made on a certain occasion by the celebra- ted Archbishop of Dublin, the gifted author of the work so widely known, entitled "The Study of Words." He was not in robust health at the time, and for many years had been apprehensive of paralysis. At a dinner in Dublin, given by the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, his grace sat. on the right of his hostess, the Duchess of Abercorn. In the midst of the dinner the compAny was startled by seeing the 2054895 4 rBKFACE. Archbishop rise from his seat, and still more startled to hear him exclaim in a dismal and sepulchral tone, " It has comet it has come!" " What has come, your Grace? " eagerly cried half a dozen voices from different parts of the table. " What I have been expecting for twenty years," solemnly answered the archbishop " a stroke of paralysis. I have been pinching myself for the last twenty miuutes, and find myself entirely without sensation." " Pardon me, my dear archbishop," said the duchess, looking up at him with a somewhat quizzical smile " par- don me for contradicting you, but it is / that you have been pinching!" Messrs. Gibson, Swing, Ryder and Ilerford, of Chicago, and Habbi Wise, of Cincinnati, whose replies are herein given, are too well known as scholars and divines, to require any introduction to a reading public. Their words are wise and timely, and are put on record in this form to show the weakness of modern infidelity and the stability of Divine Truth. J. B. PROF. SWING'S REPLY The Lawyer vs. The Philosopher Ingersoll's Pro- fessional Proclivities in Making a Part Equal to the Whole .8 Seven Mistakes of Moses Left Out! Injustice to Hebrew History 10 Swing Puts Himself in Ingersoll's Place and At- tacks the Seventeenth Century IIow it Works 13 Ingersoll's Narrowness Shuts Out God, Heaven and Immortality Infidel Dogmatism . . .15 In the World's Great Freedom of Choice, Ingersoll is Counted Out 18 DK. RYDER'S REPLY 21 Ingersoll's Unfairness Attributes to Moses State- ments not in the Bible . . . . .22 His Temporary Insanity occasioned by Heavy Rains Intellectually Submerged in the Deluge Dam- aging Blunders Ingersoll up the Wrong Moun- tain 24 Top-heavy Too Broad a Structure reared on a Too Narrow Base 27 Ingersoll's Inconsistency . , . . . 29 He Has No Poetry in His Soul ; ergo, etc. . . 31 Additional Misrepresentations .... 32 Dr. Ryder Propounds a Question . . . .34 -.5) f CONTENTS. PAGB Ingersoll Admits His Sad Need of Inspiration . 35 Ingersoll's " Religion of Humanity " All Right Ex- cept the Religion . - - -. . . . .37 Dr. Ryder Tells a Little Story for the sake of Illus- tration . . 39 DR. HERFORD'S REPLY . , ' . . . .41 The Ingersoll Paradox .. . ' . '.. 42 Ingersoll's Exaggerations and False Assertions . 43 Dr. Herford's Story of Moses, with an Apt Illustra- tion The Germinal Power of the Pentateuch . 46 The Mosaic Religion of Humanity . . .49 THE JEWISH RABBI'S REPLY 53 DR. GIBSON'S REPLY . . . , . . .61 Ingersoll Betrays His Ignorance .... 62 Harmony of Science and Genesis . . . .63 The Harmony of Genesis and Science Not the Result of Guess-work, but of Inspiration . 67 S~i 69 Nature . ' . . . . . . . 70 Man . 72 "Woman 73 Mistakes Respecting Labor and Death Corrected . 75 The Deluge and its Difficulties Not Universal Ararat originally a District (alas! Ingersoll calls it a High Mountain) Other Deluges . . 76 Faith in Jesus Christ the Essential Factor . . 80 Candor vs. Injustice Dr. Gibson's Pointed Sum- mary 81 WHAT DISTINGUISHED MEN SAY OF THE BIBLE . 85-96 IJTGERSOLL'S LECTURE, Entitled "THE MISTAKES OF MOSES," . . 07 JUDGE JERE 8. BLACK'S REPLY .... 119-128 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL AS SHOWN BY PROF. SWING, W. H. RYDER, D. D., BROOKE HERFORD, D. D., J. MONRO GIBSON, D. D., RABBI WISE, AND OTHERS. PROF. SWING'S REPLY. THIS discourse is not spoken regarding the man, Robert G. Ingersoll, but regarding the addresses which he is deliv- ering and is otherwise publishing. The man Ingersoll is said to be, in his private life, kind, neighborly, -humane, and in many ways an example which might be imitated with great profit by thousands who represent themselves as holding the Pagan or the Christian religion. But, were this author and lecturer a mean, wicked man, I should still be bound to consider his thoughts apart from the thinker just as we deal with Bacon's ideas apart from his moral qualities, and the politics of Alexander Hamilton apart from the infirmities of his moral sentiments. The intel> 8 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. lect of such an individual as the one before us is a thinking machine. It makes a survey of the religious landscape. Objects strike it that escape you and me. His eyes are not those of a preacher, not those of a bishop, nor those of an evangelist like Mr. Moody; not those of a moralist like Dymond or William Penn, nor those of Theodore Parker or Emerson, but they are a vision purely his own, and our task is limited to the inquiry what this peculiar sense dis- covers in our wide and varied world. The Lawyer vs. The Philosopher Ingersoll's Professional Proclivities in Making a Part equal to the 'Whole ! "We perceive at once that these addresses do not offer us any system of philosophy for woman, or child, or State, and therefore they cannot aspire to be any valuable Mentor to tell each young Telemachus how to live. They are the speeches of a lawyer retained by one client of a large case. Men trained in a profession come by degrees into the pro- fession's channel, and flow only in the one direction, and al- ways between the same banks. The master of a learned profession at last becomes its slave. He who follows faith- fully any calling wears at last a soul of that calling's shape. You remember the death scene of the poor old schoolmas- ter. He had assembled the boys and girls in the winter mornings anfl had dismissed them winter evenings after sundown, and had done this for fifty long years. One win- ter Monday he did not appear. Death had struck his old and feeble pulse; but, dying, his mind followed its beauti- ful but narrow river-bed, and his last words were: "It is growing dark the school is dismissed -let the girls pass out first." Very rarely does the man in the pulpit, or at the bar, or in statesmanship, escape this molding hand of his pursuit We are all clay in the hands of that potter PROF. SWING'S REPLY. fl whioh is called a pursuit. A pursuit is seldom an ocean of water; it is more commonly a canal. But if there be a class of men more modified than others in language and forms of speech, the lawyers compose such a class, for it is never their business to present both sides. It is their espe- cial duty so to arrange a part of the facts as that they shall seem to be the whole facts, and next to their power of pre- senting a cause must come their power to conceal all aspects unfavorable to their purpose. A philosopher must see and set forth at once both sides of all questions, but a lawyer must learn to see the one side of a case, for there is another man expressly employed to see the reverse of the shield. But few of us are philosophers. When we wish to exhibit something, we instantly cut off all light except that which will fall upon our goods. If we are to display only a yard of silk, we will veil the sun and move about to find the right position, and then light a little more gas, that the fields, and hills, and heavens may all withdraw, and permit us to see the fold of a bride's dress. Thus all the profes- sions, honored by being called learned, do more or less cut off the light from all things except the fabric that is being unfolded by their skillful fingers. Men of intense emotional power like Mr. Ingersoll, and men who, like him, have hearts as full of colors as a paint- er's shop, are wont, beyond common, to pour their passion upon one object rather than diffuse it all over the world. These can awaken, and entertain, and shake, and unsettle, but then, after all is over, we all must seek for final guides men who are calmer and who spread gentler tints with their brush. I am, therefore, of the opinion that none of us should follow any one man, but rather all men ; should seek that general impression, that wide-reaching common-sense, which knows little of ecstacy and little of despair. These 10 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. "Addresses " under notice are wonderful concentrations of Wit, and fun, and tears, and logic, but concentrations upon minor points. They are severe upon a little group of men, Upon literalists and old Popes, and old monks, but they do not weigh and measure fully the religion of such a being as Jesus Christ, nor touch the ideas and actions of the human race away from these fading forms of human nature. Seven Mistakes of Moses Left out! Injustice to Hebrew History. These addresses do injustice to the Hebrew history. A lawyer has a right to be one-sided and narrow when he is presenting the cause of his client, but when he is addressing a public upon a religious, or political, or social question, narrowness in his discourse must be considered an infirmity, or else an act of injustice. These speeches betray either nnconscions narrowness or willful injustice. But Mr. Inger- soll is the embodiment of sincerity, according to those who enjoy his acquaintance, and therefore we must conclude that the cast of his mind is such that it is led hither and thither by that narrowness which belongs no more to a high Calvinist than to a high infidel. If the lecture upon "Moses" had been more thoughtful, it would have con- fessed that there were several forms of the man " Moses," the historic " Moses," the Hebrew " Moses," and the Calvin- iatic " Moses ; " and then, after this concession, he might have assailed the " Calvinistic Moses." .... But if the addresses had been broad, and spoken for that larger audience called humanity, they would have asked us to mark the mistakes of the Moses of Hebrew times and of common history. But they did not dream of this. Stand- ing in the presence of one of the grandest figures of Egyp- PROF. SWING'S REPLY. 11 tian and Hebrew antiquity, Mr. Ingersoll failed to see this personage, and permitted nothing to come upon his field of vision except those sixteenth century theologians who dis- torted alike the mission of Moses and of Christ, and even of the Almighty. To set forth the mistakes of the historic " Moses " would not be any easy task. One doing this would be compelled to ask us to mark the blunders of a leader who planned freedom for slaves; who bore complain- ings from an ignorant people until he won the fame of unu- sual meekness, one who did in reality what infidels only have dreamed of doing living and dying for the people; the mistakes of one whose ten laws are still the fundamental ideas of a State, of one who organized a nation which lived and flourished for 1,500 years; thp mistakes of one who divested the idea of God of bestiality and began to clothe it with the notions of wisdom and justice, and even tenderness; the follies of one who established industry and education, and a higher form of religion, and gave the nation holding 'these virtues such an impulse that in the hour of dissolving it produced a Jesus Christ and the twelve Apostles; and thus did more in its death than Atheism could achieve in all the eons of geology. Seven mistakes of Moses left out! There is, it is true, a time and a place for irony, but after it has done its work amid the accidental of a time or a place, there remains yet much to be studied by the sober intellect and loved by the heart which really cares for the useful and the true. It is essentially a small matter that some poetic mind, some Froissart or some Herodotus, came along per- haps after the reigns of David and Solomon, and gathered up sail the truths of old Hebrew tradition, and all the legends, too, and wove them together, for out of such entanglements the essential ideas generally rise up just as noble pine trees at last rise up above the brambles and thickets at their base, J2 MISTAKES OF IXGERSOL^. and evermore stand in the full presence of rain, and air, and sun. Above the brambles and thorn of legend, at which the narrow eye may laugh, there rises up from the Mosaic soil a growth of moral truth that catches at last full sun- shine and full breeze; a growth that will long make a good shadow for the graves of Christian and infidel beneath. The errors of logend are so unimportant that even a Divine Book may carry them. It will thus appear that the method of the addresses is very defective. It is not a wide survey of a two-thousand- year period in human civilization, a period when the He- brews were making imperishable the good of the Egyptians who were dying from vices and despotism, but is only the ramble of a satirist having a sharp eye for defects and a most ready tongue. All the by -gone periods may be passed over in two manners. We may go forth for our laughter or for our pensiveness and wisdom. Juvenal saw old Rome full of dissolute men and women. Virgil saw it full of litera- ture. Tacitus found it not destitute of patriots and heroes; and when Juvenal found the husbands all debauchees, and the wives all hypocrites, there the most calm and elegant historians found the most excellent Agricola, and found a wife of spotless fame in the daughter Domitia. Thus in the very generations in which the lampoons of Juvenal found only vice, behold we see beauty and virtue in full bloom around the homes of Tacitus, and Agricola, and Pliny. Thus alii the fields of human thought lie open to the invasion of those who wish to mock, and of those who wish to admire. And beyond doubt when Mr. Ingersoll shall have uttered his last thought over the Mistakes of Moses, some other form of intellect could glean in the same field, and leave covered with the truths of Moses, a nobler and larger tablet. PROF. SWING'S REPLY. 19 Swing Puts Himself in Ingersoll's Place and Attacks the Seventeenth Century. How it Works! Permit me now, in imitation of the style of these addresses, to ask you to look at the seventeenth century: Why, it all drips in blood! Horror upon horrors! The King of Persia put to death some of the Koyal family and put out the eyes of all the rest even the eyes of infants. Russia begins her cruel oppression of Poland. Prussia, the hope of Europe, is desolated by war, which never lifted its black cloud for thirty years. In this wretched century came the massacre of Prague and the forcible banishment of 30,000 Protestant families. Allowing five persons to a family, it will thus ap- pear that 150,000 were driven from their homes and country. Further south, in France, a few years before, 700,000 Pro- testants had been murdered in twenty-four hours. After- ward came the licentious court of Louis XIV. ; while over in England noble men and women were being beheaded or otherwise slain in dreadful numbers. The beautiful Queen Mary is beheaded just as the century begins, and Essex is beheaded in its full opening. And in its close France re- enters the scene, revokes the edict of Nantes, and sen ds into exile 800,000 of her best citizens. Thus dragged along the seventeenth century, as it would seem, bleeding, and weeping, and gasping in perpetual dying. .What a picture! Amazing indeed, but narrow and false! I have been thinking only of the "mistakes " of a time. Just look at that century again with a wider survey and a happier heart, and lo! we see in it a matchless line of immortal worthies. There flourished Gustavus, laying the foundations of our liberty; there lived Grotius, writing down the holiest principles of duty; there we see Galileo IB venting the telescope, and beholding the starry sky; there 14 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. Bits Kepler finding the highest laws of astronomy; near these are the French preachers, Bossuet, Fenelon, and Mas- silon, whose fame has not been equaled; there, too, Pascal and Corneille. But this is not all. It is not one-third the splendor of that one epoch, for, cross the Channel, and behold yon meet Shakspeare, and Lord Bacon, and Milton, and Locke, and while these divine minds are composing their books, Cromwell is overthrowing despots, and a Republic springs up as by enchantment. Thus the seven- teenth century, which awhile ago seemed only a period that a kind heart might wish stricken from history, now comes back to us as the sublime dawn of poetry, and science, and eloquence, and liberty. The truth is we must move through the present and the past with both eyes wide open, and with a mind willing to know all and to draw a conclusion from the whole combined cloud of witnesses. The author of the addresses does not do this. lie does not make a wide survey nor draw conclu- sions from widely scattered facts; and hence, after he has spoken about the horrors of the Mosaic age, or of the church there remains that age or that church emptying rich treas- ures into the general civilization, purifying the barbarous ages, awaking the intellect, stimulating the arts, inspiring good works, elevating the life of the living, by setting "before man a God and a future existence. Our Christianity has a Hebrew origin. The sermon on the Mount was begun by Moses. The eloquence of Mr. Ingersoll is much like the art of Hogarth or John Leech, au acute, and witty, and interest- ing art, but very limited in its range. Hogarth was with- out a rival in his ability to picture the " mistakes" of mar- riage, and of a " Rake's Progress," the peculiarity of " Beer Lane" and "Gin Lane"; and his art was legitimate in its PROF. SWING'S REPLY. 15 field, but its field was narrow, and took no notice of the eternal beauty of things as painted by Rubens or Raphael. After Hogarth had said all he could see and believe about CJ marriage, there stood the holy relation in its historic great- ness, filling millions of homes with its peace and friend- ship, notwithstanding the mirth-provoking pencil. Thus the ideas of " Moses," and " Church," and " Heaven," and " God" lie before Mr. Ingersoll to be pictured by his skill- ful derision, but after the artist has drawn his little Puritanic Hebrew and his absurd Heaven, and has painted his little gods, and has limned his own Papal Heaven and Hell, another scene opens and there untarnished are the deep things of right and wrong, the immortal hopes of man, and a Heavenly Father which cannot be placed upon a jester's canvas. John Leech found the weak points in all English high and low life. The fashions, and sports, and entertainments, and the current politics, underwent for a generation the tor- ture of his pictures, his sketches, his cartoons, but the moment the laugh had ended, the homes of England, the happy social life of rich and poor, the learning and wisdom of her statesmen were back in their place just as the sun is in his place after a noisy thunderstorm has passed by. Ingersoll's Narrowness Shuts out God, Heaven and Immor- tality Infidel Dogmatism. This narrowness of survey which marks Mr. IngersolPs estimate of the Hebrew period and of the human Church, follows him in his thoughts about another life and the exist- ence of God. lie denies that any regard whatever should be paid to a second life. Heaven deserves no consider- ation at our hands. He says in his lecture on the Gods: " Reason, observation and experience have taught us 2 16 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. that happiness is the only good; that the time to be happy is now, and the way to be happy is to make others so. This is enough for us. In this belief we are content to live and die." Such assertions as these no broadly-reaching mind could make, for the broad mind, not knowing but that there may be a second life, having no positive information on that point, is bound to admit all that uncertainty, and that hope is a most lawful element in that strange mingling which makes up the soul. As Mr. Ingersoll does not know whence man came, so he knows not whither he goes, and therefore he must himself stand and permit others to stand in the presence of death as in the presence of a great mystery that, at least, should silence all dogmatism of priest or infideL The logic of the addresses may be fitted for the common jury, but they are too rude for man who is weeping his way along between birth and death. In some better hour the lawyer forgets his petit jury and addresses the human soul. On the title page of a recent volume he says in substance that: " The dream of irnrnor- tal life has always existed in the heart of man, and will remain there in all its matchless charms, born not of any book or creed, but out of human affection;" and being not born of reason and sense, he can but reject its hope; he is personally above being molded in thought, or action, by such a fable of the heart. In calling such a dream a fable, he is guilty of that very dogmatism which he so hates in Calvin and Edwards, for if Calvin was too certain that he knew God's will, Mr. Ingersoll is too certain that he knows God not to exist. It often happens that the dogmatism of the bigot must await its exact parallel in the dogmatism of the atheist. The ideas of a future life and a God are thus in these addresses rudely set aside as though this author had shown the real origin and destiny of the Uni- xvrise, and had found out the si.rret of the grave. PROF. SWING'S REPLY. 17 He would pay no attention to the idea of God. He would not be guilty of any worship in this life. He says: " If by any possibility the existence of a power superior to and independent of nature shall be demonstrated, there will be time enough to kneel. Until then let us stand erect." In such language we find only a perfect overthrow of the method of the human soul; for the soul has never dared wait for any such certainty in any of the paths before it. It has always been compelled to build tip before itself the largest possible motives and hopes, and then live for them and abide the consequences. It is wonderful that a man who will pluck a violet and draw delight from its tender color and still more delicate perfume, will sternly command the human race not to hold in its hands any flower of im- mortality, lest by chance its leaves may at last wither. If this idea of a future life should at last fail, which seems im- possible, the human heart will be all the purer and happier from having held all through these years a lily so sweet and so white. Logic cannot make such short work of the religious sen- timents. Mr. Ingersoll says: "If you can ever find a God, just let me know, and I shall kneel. Until then I shall stand erect." What injustice to that delicate form of rea- son, which has moved the world for perhaps 10,000 years! We do not propose to find God or a future life. What the world has found long since is the deep hope in a God, and the measureless hope that the dying loved ones of this world will meet in a land that is better. Nobody has come to the human race to let it know that a God has been found, but many have come to it saying: "My dear children, let us trust that all this matchless universe came from a Oeatcr, and that from him we also came." So many and so holy were these voices, and so responsive was the heart, that upon 18 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. this trust the living and the dying have knelt and have told their longings to the Invisible. The human race has not been haughty. It has been willing to kneel. Its heart ha& never been stone, nor its knees brass. It has stood erect in battle where liberty was to be won ; it has been as erect as an infidel when a bosorn was to be bared for arrows or bullets, or when the neck was to be unclothed for the fatal ax, but in moments of hope and longing it has bent willingly in hope and prayer. The advice of the Addresses not to kneel until you have reached and handled the Creator, is advice that civilization has always spurned, for it4ias woven all its gorgeous fabrics out of delicate probabilities, gossamer threads spun by the heart. Fame, and learning, and art, and happiness are all simple possibilities before each youth. He does not dare say, Make me sure of results, and I will gird myself for the present. He casts himself upon the bet- ter of two possibilities, and is borne along toward an un- known end. Thus has the human race dealt with the inti- mations of religion. It has cast itself upon the better hope, and, being at perfect liberty to espouse Atheism, has always repudiated it as being a paralysis of the soul, and a perfect reversal of the common logic of society. In the World's Great Freedom of Choice, Zngersoll is Coun- ted out ! The world has always been perfectly free to use the form of reasoning which Mr. Ingersoll suggests. No Westmin- ster Assembly, no Calvin compelled the human family from Old Egypt to Greece to think the universe had a Creator. The world has always been free to suppose that such seasons as day and night and spring arid summer, such creatures as the nightingale and man, such a star as the sun,, all came from mud and water and fire, mingling of their PROF. SWING'S REPLY. It own accord; but the world has had no wide use for such conclusions. Of its own free choice, it has avoided Atheism, and has never made up anywhere a civilization without dis- carding the idea of waiting for a demonstration, and with- out espousing the idea that all noble society reposes upon lofty hopes. Out of beautiful possibilities the soul's gar- ments are woven. It thus appears that the Addresses are defective as guides for any man's life or death. They constitute a bill of ex- ceptions against certain hard rulings in some local and igno- rant courts, but as pleadings in the great tribunal where the whole human family stands assembled, to" get the wisest decisions about duty and happiness, and the possibility of there being a God and a second life, the possible value of a hope for the dying they each and all fall far short. They see only the religion of some fanatic, and think it the religion of Jesus or of mankind. They see a God damning honest men, and conclude that is what is meant by Jehovah. They see a Heaven with some little sect in the midst of it, and speak as though they were what is meant by the immortality of man. They note the follies of the Puritans and Papists, and infer that if there were no religion in the world, there would be no bad judgment or bad passions. They fail, too, to mark the delicacy of man's practical logic, which is not iron-like, waiting for the absolute end of all doubt, but which is bending and hopeful, and stands ready forever to found immense motives, and society, and church, and homes upon the greater and better of two probabilities that lie within this world of cloud. They assert the adequacy of earthly happi- ness as an end of being, and fail to mark that earthly hap- piness has always depended upon high morals, and father, and mother, and child, and social life, and all mental de- velopment have found their full meaning, until a warm and 20 MISTAKES OF 1NGEHSOLL. broad religion has shed its cheering light. The human race cannot find its supreme good in having a few acres of ground, and in seeing the grass grow, and in hearing the birds sing. These make some days delightful indeed, but man, with his retinue of art, and statesmanship, and morals, and tempta- tions, and virtues, and joys, and sorrows, and partings, and death, demands the assumption of a God, and the expecta- tions of a resurrection from the dust. Under such a temple as society, the foundation must be deep. To those who read or hear these addresses of Mr. Inger- eoll, let me say : Hear them, read them if you wish, for they will show you what a sad caricature of Christianity was that which came down to us from the Dark Ages; but, having thus been taught by an enemy, then dismiss the laughter, and look at religion in the widest forms of its doctrine and experience. We are now warned daily not to follow parti- sans in politics, because they will eclipse a country by a little chair in office they will make a village outweigh a continent. These addresses of a talented lawyer warn us equally against trusting the partisans in religion the dim- eyed zeal which makes a Deity as small as their own hearts, a Bible as cold and as hard as adamant; but now, having been taught to shun partisans in politics and in Christi- anity, let us learn to resist one more form of partisan the partisan of an atheism and a hopeless grave. Let us at times laugh with him, let us admire his acuteness, let us confess the honesty of his life, but for our guides or ideas in the world spiritual let us seek some mountain of thought where the survey is broader, and tenderer, and more just, from which height no good lies concealed; but looking from which we can see the great landscape of the soul, some of it bathed in light, some of it lying in shadow, but all of it instructive and full of impressiveness. DB. RYDER'S REPLY. DR RYDER'S REPLY. IN the commencement of this review of Mr. Ingersoll's lecture upon " The Mistakes of Moses," I wish two things distinctly understood: First, that my controversy is not with the man, but with his address; and, second, that he has the same right to advocate his views as I have to advo- cate mine. On the question of religious liberty we are as one. Furthermore, I do not wonder that certain minds, having passed through peculiar experiences, become thoroughly disgusted with particular forms of theological thought. My only surprise is that more are not. Such material ideas of the Deity as are sometimes put forth in the name of Chris- tianity; such offensive literalizing as is sometimes applied to the future life, and such thoroughly untenable positions as are sometimes taken as to what the Scriptures actually we, has long been a fruitful cause of infidelity, and will continue to be so as long as they receive the indorsement of any branch of the Christian Church. But intensity of conviction may degenerate into preju- dice, and this prejudice practically unfits one to discuss the subject to which it relates. From what the distinguished lecturer says of himself, of his determination in every ad- dress he makes, no matter what the. topic, to denounce cer- tain views, and from the specimen of his work now brought 22 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. under review, I conclude that Col. ingersoll occupies just this position. While, t^'.en, the right to speak one's honest thought it thus frankly conceded, and the provocation to employ strong language in reference to certain theological opinions is also conceded, it will be admitted by all candid minds that cer- tain subjects from their very nature, and from interest which they involve, are to be treated with seriousness and fairness. If not BO treated, the influence of the discussion is almost certain to be harmful. The lecture under notice, though nominally on the errors of a particular character in the Old Testament, is virtually an assault upon all revealed religion, and especially that contained in the Bible. Ingersoll's Unfairness Attributes to Moses Statements not in the Bible. Now, my first position is this: Whoever publicly attacks the sacred books of the Christian world, and attempts to destroy faith in them, should treat the subject fairly. I re- gret to say that the lecture does not seem to me so to treat its great theme, but is, on the contrary, a conspicuous illus- tration of prejudice and unfairness. No small portion of the lecture is unworthy a reply. There is nothing to reply to. Of fair argument there is a lamentable lack, no incon- siderable portion of the time seems to have been spent in knocking over a man of straw of his own manufacture. If his lecture be regarded simply as an entertainment, it is a success, for the Colonel knows how to amuse an audience as well as the best; but if it were intended to be a fair and able discussion of an important subject, it is not simply a failure, but a failure so obvious as to leave no room for any other opinion. In proof of my statement that the lecture does not treat the topic which it professes to discuss fairly, I offer these specimens as evidence: DR. RYDER'S REPLY. 2S The first specimen is: Attributing to Moses language and statements not to be found in any of his writings. Speaking of Moses, he says: "The gentleman who wrote it (Genesis) begins by telling us that God made it (the world) out of nothing." And then he proceeds to ridicule the idea. But Moses says neither that nor anything like it. The lecturer thus misrepresents the very first sentence in the Pentateuch. What Moses says is, that "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." What he created them out of, or when "in the beginning" was, he does not say. The simple thought is that the heavens and the earth were not- self-evolved, but were created by the Omnipotent Jehovah. " You recollect," he says, " that the gods came down and made love to the daughters of men," etc. Where does Moses say that? Plenty of that kind of talk is Grecian and Roman mythology, but what has that to do with "The Mistakes of Moses?" "They built a tower (Babel) to reach the heavens and climb into the abodes of the gods." Another of the Colonel's mistakes. The Tower of Babel was not built for any such purpose. From the frequent references of this kind to the gods in connection with the religion of Moses, it looks as if the lecturer was not aware that the Jews were not particularly in favor of idolatry. Again he says: "There is not one word in the Old Testament about woman except words of shame and humiliation. It did not take the pains to record the death of the mother of us all. I have no respect for any book that does not treat woman as the equal of man." It is true that Moses does not record the death "of the mother of us all; " but it is also true that the first account of the burial of any person in the book of Genesis is that ef a woman, Sarah, the wife of Abraham. Moses simply M MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. says of Adam: "The father of us all," "And he died;" and in a similar summary manner are all the other men dis- posed of; but when it comes to this woman Sarah, a special lot has to be purchased for her, and secured to the family, 6O that her remains might not be disturbed; and even now in remembrance of the cave of the field in which she was buried, a certain part of our modern cemeteries is called Machpelah. By the side of this fact how does the declara- tion look that " there is not one word in the Old Testament about women, except words of shame and humiliation? n Suppose I turn the tables upon the lecturer, and say, I have no respect for any book that does not treat man as the equal of woman. My words, if applied to the Bible, would be hardly less libelous than his. His Temporary Insanity Occasioned by Heavy Rains Intellectually Submerged in the Deluge Damaging Blunders Ingersoll up the 'Wrong Mountain. My second specification is that he not only makes Moses ay what he does not say, but he frequently misrepresents what he does say. I name these particulars: First, in speak- ing of the flood, he gives the impression that, according to the Scriptural account, all the water that covered the earth and inundated it came out of the clouds in the form of rain. He says: "And then it began to rain, and it kept on rain- ing until the water went twenty-nine feet over the highest mountains. How deep were these waters? About five and a half miles. How long did it rain? Forty days. How much did it have to rain a day? About 800 feet." Now what are the facts ? In the verse which precedes the one which says, "And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights," we have this record, Gen., vii., ii. " In the 600th year of Noah's life, in the second month, the 17th day of DR. BY DEB'S BE PLY. 25 the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened." "Why did not the lecturer mention this statement of the " breaking up of the fountains of the great deep," which is generally supposed to refer to the upheaval or subsidance of some large body or bodies of land, perhaps to portions of this western continent, and is considered to have been the principal cause of the deluge? Why omit the supposed principal cause of the deluge, unless it was his purpose to make out a case without regard to the facts ? Furthermore, what authority has he for saying that the ark rested on the top of a mountain seventeen thousand feet high, and that the water upon the earth was " five and a half miles deep? " Has he committed the ignorant blunder of confounding Agri-Dagh with the hilly district to which the name was formerly applied? The lofty peak that now bears the name of Ararat has no such designation in Bib- lical history, and it is the name given to it in compara- tively modern times. The Bible record is: "Fifteen cubits upwards did the waters prevail." The Hebrew cubit is about twenty- two inches. If we may trust the conclusions of science, deluges have been no unusual events in the his- tory of this globe. Most of the land, if not all of it, no matter how high at present, has been at some time sub- merged. Whatever one may think about the accuracy of the narrative in reference to the building of the ark and the uses to which it was put, there is certainly no physical improbability in the statement that that part of the earth which was then above water was thoroughly inundated. Again, the gentleman makes merry over what he calls the " rib story," and imagines two persons before the bar of God, one believing the " rib story " and the other denying it The believer of it is accepted by the Judge as belonging 26 . MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. in Heaven, and the denier of it as belonging in Hell. And this he puts before the public as Bible doctrine as if any man of common sense, whether Jew or Gentile, ever defended so ridiculous a theory. As a further specimen of this unfair- ness, I present you this: " Do you believe the real God if there is one ever killed a man for making hair oil! And yet you find in the Pentateuch that God gave Muses a receipt for making hair oil to grease Aaron's beard; and said if anybody made the same hair oil he would be killed." There could hardly be written a more complete misrepre- sentation and perfect caricature of the whole subject than this. The reference in Scripture is to an anointing oil, to be applied, not simply to the persons of the priests, but to the fiacred vessels as well; and, thus anointed, they were set apart for what they regarded as holy uses. But if this cus- tom which Mr. Ingersoll seeks to hold up to ridicule, was simply Jewish, there would be some show or plausibility for talking about it as he does; but he has not even that to jus- tify his attack. For this custom of using anointing oils in connection with religions services, and sacred persons, and utensils, was common among the idolatrous nations, and even conspicuous among the rites of the Romans. And even now one often meets with the spirit of the same cus- tom. I do not know whether the Colonel is a member of the Masonic fraternity, but he must have seen representa- tives of that ancient Order pour out anointing oil upon the corner-stone of some building which they were engaged in laying. Why not ridicule that, and why not also ridicule the beautiful custom of that Order of dropping upon the uncovered coffin of a deceased member the little sprigs of evergreen that the brethren bear in their hands as they march around his open grave? It is easy to see that with reference to every such custom, however sacred, one who DR. RYDER'S REPLY. 27 takes the naked fact apart from its associations, may find abundant material for ridicule. But whether a fair-minded man will allow himself to treat any serious subject in that manner, is a question upon which there is no occasion that I should pronounce judgment. Mr. Ingersoll makes a sim- ilar blunder in what he says about the custom of sacrificing doves for the use of priests, since the practice did not exist among the Hebrews until hundreds of years after the event which he seeks to ridicule. Top-Heavy Too Broad a Structure Reared on a Too Nar- row Base. My third specification is, that he treats a particular inter- pretation of the Bible as the undisputed word of God. lie assumes that this or that is Bible doctrine because some- body may at some time have taught it, and then denounces the whole Bible as unworthy the respect of mankind. This feature of the address runs through the whole of it. But, in this respect, candor compels me to say his method is that of Thomas Paine in his "Age of Reason," and of a certain class, but not the better class, of so-called infidel writers. Mr. Paine reproved the world for believing what he showed to be unreasonable doctrines, and called upon the people to throw away their Bibles for teaching such sentiments; but it was Mr. Paine, and not the Bible that was in fault, for the doctrines which he shed so much ink to condemn are not taught in the Bible. Mr. Ingersoll's method is precisely the same. If he wishes to hold up to the contempt of mankind certain doctrines that some sect may have believed, or even does believe, let him announce his subject, keep to his text, and go ahead; but to go from place to place, exhorting the people everywhere to throw away their Bibles, under the pretense that these represent*- 28 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. of his are the undisputed word of God, is simply an outrage upon the Christian public, and unworthy any man who claims to be fair-minded. Mr. Ingersoll's references to the clergy disappoint me. He speaks of them as if they were a set of fools, and does not add that they are all graduates of prisons, and a pack of scoundrels generally. To which gentlemanly references we need only say, that in this slanderous speech he is guilty of the same offense against fairness and good breeding that is committed by any nominal Christian who, either through Windless or perversity, can see nothing good in the services of the distinguished infidels of history, and who, to preju- dice the public against them, resort to the mean subterfuge of misrepresenting their positions, and telling falsehoods about them. If any man, in an address before this com- munity, should treat the writings of Voltaire as shabbily as Mr. Ingersoll has treated the writings of Moses, and as to that, the entire Bible, the Colonel would have to go out- side the Psalms of David to find imprecations to express his contempt. His references to Andover have, of course, nothing to do with " The Mistakes of Moses," but they relate to an important subject, and are a pertinent illustra- tion of the eminent unfairness of the general address. This is what he says: "They have in Massachusetts, at a place called Andover, a kind of minister factory; and every Pro- fessor in that factory takes an oath in every five years that, so help him God, he will not during the next five years intellectually advance; and probably there is no oath he could easier keep. They believe the same creed they first taught when the foundation stone was laid, and now, when they send out a minister they brand him, as hardware from Birmingham and Sheffield. And every man who knows where he was educated knows his creed, knows every argu- ment of his creed, every book that he has read, and just DR. RYDER'S REPLY. 28 what be amounts to intellectually, and knows that he will shrink and shrivel and become more and more stupid day after day until he meets with death." My personal sympathy with the Andover Theological School is not, as you may suppose, very deep and ardent. I respect the generosity and self-sacrifice of the five nobk minds one of whom was a woman that founded the insti- tution in 1807, and the aid which it has given to liberal and exact scholarship. On the whole, I do not like the rule to which Mr. Ingersoll refers. Probably many of those in charge of the institution do not. I understand it to be a custom con- tingent upon certain endowments made long ago, and which is observed as a matter of form. But the rule is not fairly open to the objection that Mr. Ingersoll makes against it First, it simply relates to the theological professors, and does not concern the students. Second, it compels no man to take it who does not wish to. The University says, in effect, we believe in certain doctrines; we desire the instruc- tion of this institution to be in accordance with these ideas. Can you conscientiously teach them? If so, we wish you; if not, we do not wish you. But if you come to us, you are not compelled to remain, but can go where you will, and when you will, and teach what you please; but so long as yon remain in the service of this institution we expect you to carry out the purposes of its founders. "What is there in this that is particularly narrow and dementing? But the Colonel repudiates his own positions. He says: " The com- mon school is the bread of life, but there should be nothing taught in the school except what somebody knows; any- thing else should not be maintained by a system of general taxation." Ingersoll's Inconsistency! ( But, let us inquire, who is to decide "what somebody knows? " Practically, the answer is, the people, or their 30 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. representatives, in school boards, committees, etc. They select the text- books, and they expect instructors whom they engage to follow them, for the text-books are assumed to embody what is true on the subjects to which they relate. What would the lecturer say of a teacher in one of our public schools who should to-day teach the rejected doctrine that the sun revolves about the earth? What, but this: turn him out and put some one in his place who teaches the truth which, being interpreted, means, teaches according to the authorized text- books. Why, on the very occasion of the lecture itself, after the Colonel had denounced And-jver for pledging loyalty to certain doctrines, and which act he characterizes as so harmful to freedom of thought, he him- self demands of the people whom he is addressing that they will never support a certain form of doctrine, nor give money to aid in building any church in which they are taught. His language is: "I would have every one who hears me swear that he will never contribute another dollar to build another church in which is taught such infamous lies." Mark you, not simply a pledge for five years, but they are never to change their views. My friends, is there no such thing as consistency in belief? Is one a bigot because he says, This is what I believe, and this, therefore, I defend? Are these men to be ridiculed and assailed, and only those who shirk such responsibility to be held up as patterns and guides? Brethren, I am not speaking of some sophomoric oration, but about the deliberate thought of a man who has made himself famous in this line of labor, and of whom our townsman who gracefully introduced him said, " a man who does his own thinking, and who thinks before he says." Now, of every such man it is safe to say, he knows that organization is essential to the welfare of society, and is perfectly consistent with liberty of thought. The free- thinkers of this country are organized as well as others; DR. RYDER'S REPLY. 81 it is their right to be if they have anything to teach or defend. A Christian combination, against which some peo- ple hurl their anathemas, is simply the grouping together of those who have a similar mind and purpose, the better to do this work which they have in common. Of course there has been in connection with some of these denominations a fearful amount of bigotry. When we come to that topic we are quite at home. Bigotry is no friend of ours: we owe him no service. The denomination which this church rep- resents has received from the dominant sects about us a / pretty large share of persecution and abuse. But, for all that, we do not propose to follow the lecturer's example and call our brethren hard names, simply because they apply such epithets to us. He Has no Poetry in His Soul ; Ergo, etc. My fourth specification is, that he misrepresents the wri- tings of Moses, and, as to that, the entire Bible, by treating its metaphoric language as literal statements. Think of a man, in this age of light, speaking of ;he pic- tured representation of the Old Testament in this way: " They believed that an angel could take a lever, raise a window, and let out the desired quantity of moisture. I find out in the Psalms that he bowed the heavens and came down." I wonder if the gentleman can see anything but mere literalism in this passage? "As the mountains round about Jerusalem, so the Lord is round about His people from henceforth, even forever." Like other nations, the Hebrews have 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. Even their patriotic songs are a part of their religion. The Jews have taught the world its devotional poetry. If there is to be 3 82 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. found anywhere conceptions of the Deity and of the universe more remarkable for their sublimity and grandeur than are met with in the sacred books of the Jews, I know not where to look for them. Certainly when they are compared with the religious poems of other countries, most nearly contem- poraneous, as those of Homer and Hesiod, they are so vastly superior as to lead to the belief that, if the poets of idola trous Greece drew their inspiration from human genius and learning, those of Judea had a higher illumination. Additional Misrepresentations. My fifth specification is, that the representation given in the lecture of the Hebrews as a people, is almost wholly in- correct, both as to the work undertaken by them and the effect of that work upon mankind. We have no disposition to shut our eyes to the ignorance, cruelty and superstition of the Hebrew race in the early periods of their history. There was but little in them that gave the promise of a great nation when Moses led them out of Egypt. They were low in the scale of civilization. Many of the things done by them we cannot justify, and we are not required to do so. But what arrests our atten- tion is, that almost from the first they show a gradual im- provement in their condition, and finally reach that proud pre-eminence when Jerusalem became the Athens of its day. There are two points of view from which to judge of the early history of any' people: one is, to compare it with that of contemporary nations, and the other is, to compare it with our own time. It is manifest that the former is the proper basis of judgment. Consider, then, as already inti- mated, who the people were that Moses thus led out of Egypt. Reflect that they were but children in intelligence, and that the higher forms of thought had but little influence over them; and that if they were held to the law of duty, DR. RYDER'S REPLY. 83 and organized into a nation, it must be by such material forms and simple customs as they could comprehend. Re- flect, furthermore, that these people had been brought up in the midst of idolatry, and that in leaving Egypt they did not get away from its influences, but that, wherever they went, they were assailed by it; that idolatry was almost the universal form of worship, and that it was a m ighty task to educate these people in the doctrine of the one only living and true God, and hold them to it. Reflect, furthermore, that to secure this end much might then be done which, under the circumstances, would be at least excusable, that should not be done now. Fairness requires that we con- sider whether the custom originated with the Jews them- selves, and what was its spirit and purpose. Prominent mention is made in the lecture of polygamy in connection with the Jew, and one would infer from what he says that the custom of pluralitv of wives originated v I / O with them, and that it was a custom peculiar to them. This is his language: "Is there a woman here who believes in the institution of polygamy? Is there a man here who believes in that infamy? You say 'no, we do not.' Then you are better than your God was 4,000 years ago. Four thousand years ago he believed in it, taught it, and upheld it." The facts appear to be these: Polygamy has existed from time immemorial. Even in the Homeric age of the Greeks it prevailed to some extent, and, though not known in republican Rome, it practically prevailed under the Empire, owing to the prevalence of divorce; but in what we call the Eastern nations the custom has been almost universal, being sanctioned by all religions, including that of Mohammedanism. In this regard the Hebrews, to a cer- . tain extent, followed the prevalent custom viz: the law of Moses did not forbid it, but did contain many provisions against its worst abuses, and such as were intended to 84 MISTAKES OF INGEBSOLL. restrict it within narrow limits; and, aa the spirit of the Hebrew religion advanced the civilization of the nation, the practice more and more fell into disuse, until it finally died out; and in the glimpses of Jewish life which the New Testament gives us, there are no traces of it discernible. Since the Hebrew race the world over, for some 2,000 years, has as much as any other people discountenanced such practices, though still firmly believing in Moses as the prophet of God, it is clear that they do not consider polyg- amy any part of the Jewish system, but a custom permit- ted for a season because so universally practiced by the surrounding nations. Doctor Ryder Propounds a Question. But just here comes in a question of high importance. If there is nothing in Judaism to exalt woman and every reference to her in their sacred books is one of " humiliation and shame " how happens it that the Jews discarded the custom of polygamy some two thousand years ago, while the practice still prevails among the nations of the East, and notably in Mohammedanism, which, in so many respects, takes the external form of Judaism? The truth is, that great injustice has been done to the real religion of the Hebrews, by both Christians and unbelievers. We have judged it too exclusively by the Mosaic law, and the mere letter of it at that Real Judaism is not the Old Testament, but that which has come out of it the result of its growth, and the expansion of its inherent forces. Long before the advent of our Lord the Mosaic law had virtually given way to the Jewish religion, and it is that religion, the spirit of which in the beginning so largely came from the great law-giver himself that has had three thousand years of existence to certify its right to live, and which to-day assigns it a most honorable place among the religions of humanity. And in DR. RYDER'S PEPLY. 86 dismissing this branch of our subject, it seems pertinent to inquire, where did Moses obtain his religious ideas? The. Egyptians had reached high advancement in the arts and sciences in the time of Moses, but their degradation in refer- ence to religion is unmistakable. It is said of Moses that he " was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and was mighty in words and deeds; " and he was no doubt greatly aided by what he had learned from them, but it seems too evident to admit of discussion that he did not get his religious ideas from that source. Whence came they? But, whatever may be our answer to this question, there can be, it seems to me, but one opinion as to the respect due to the illustrious religious leader who has made upon the race so profound an impression for good. The five specifications now before you cover the evidence we offer of the correctness of our general proposition, viz.: that the address upon " The Mistakes of Moses," is a con- spicuous illustration of prejudice and unfairness. Ingersoll Admits His Sad Need of Inspiration. Col. Ingersoll uses this language: " Nothing needs inspir- ation but a falsehood or a mistake. A fact never went into partnership with a miracle." " A fact will fit every other fact in the universe, and that is how you can tell whether or not it is a tact." Suppose we test this rule. How about good and evil, truth and error, the mysterious and the evi- dent, divine sovereignty and human freedom, heat and cold, art and asceticism, economy and benevolence, government and freedom, each of which is an undisputed fact, but each two facts that we thus group together no more fit each other than the centripetal and centrifugal forces, which, acting in opposite directions, hold the universe together? My friends, there is a recognizable distinction between the knowable and unknqwable. But the line that separates the two it 86 . MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. not sharply defined. The border land between them seem* sometimes near and at other times very far away. The realm beyond the knowable is the realm of mystery, and out of it come some of the most potential forces that sway our lives. What we call the knowable is those things that can be demonstrated can be proved to be true by a prac- tical method. But consider how small a portion of our real life is covered by any such form of real evidence. For neither our affections, nor our tastes, nor our judgments, nor our beliefs, nor our ambitions, nor the higher expres- sions of our moral natures, can be thus demonstrated. They do not in any way depend upon the classification of facts in nature, but are cognizable by our consciousness, and are so widely operative in our daily life, that it almost seems as if what we call the knowable never touches us at all. Science has nothing to say about, or to do with, either morals, religion, benevolence, duty, or inspiration. The sources of life, the cause of thought, of affection, passion, hope, and love, are all incomprehensible to science, and will remain so till the end of time. " There is no science of the eoul, any more than there is a prayer in mathematics." How utterly, then, does one misapprehend and misstate the real facts of human experience, who teaches that " nothing needs inspiration but a falsehood, or a mistake," and that one is to accept nothing as true which cannot be demonstrated. How much wiser and how much better are the words of St. Au- gustine, when he says: " God exists more truly than he can be thought of; He can be thought of more truly than he can be spoken of." For myself, I reverently believe that the Bible contains a revelation from God. 1 say contains a revelation from God, not that it is in itself such a revela- tion, for the Bible, as such, was not revealed. The inspira- tion that breathes through its pages is of some of the things written, but not of all; the inspiration is rather of the DR. RYDER'S REP^Y. 91 thought, purpose, the leadings of God, than of the letter in which they are expressed. There is, to my mind, no appeal from the words of Christ once satisfied that he uttered the sayings which are attributed to Him in the Gospels, and they are, to me at least, infallibly true, and literally " the words of eternal life." Ingersoll'a " Religion of Humanity " All Right Except the Religion. The influence of such an address is to completely destroy the religious faith which the people now have, and give them nothing in return. It is true Mr. Ingersoll commends to his hearers " the religion of humanity." But what does he mean by it? The answer is, he means simply Atheism, which is virtually the rejection of all religion, since it is the denial of the being of God himself. Now with God dethroned, the name religion has no further use. What, then, is the religion of humanity to those who deny the existence of God, and leave everything either to chance or in- exorable law? One might infer from the assumption of these Atheistic teachers that free-thinkers are the only people who have any religion of humanity, or who practice it. The general impression made by the Colonel's lecture is that Christians are a bad lot mean, hypocritical, demented kind of folks; and that bright and progressive people, such as " have brains " (though it does not require a large supply of that article to qualify one to ridicule another person's religion) and " do their own thinking," reject all such absurdities as revealed religion, and are governed by some sort of a higher law. Now that this view of human nature, so complimentary and congenial, withal, is " quite taking" is very likely true. One likes to be patted on the back in this way, and be called " progressive," and not hide-bound like those old 88 MISTAKES OF IXGERSOLL. fogies, and stupid theological graduates, and owlish minis- ters, and such sort of folks. But somehow it does not seem to stay upon the public stomach after it is taken. For this i< just the kind of talk in which noisy infidels have indulged for the past 300 years. "Christianity is virtually extinct," they say, " and now we are to have a new order of tilings." But, for some reason, Christianity does not die, ;aud the world moves forward in much the old way." The truth is, some things seem very well as declamation ihat utterly elude you when you attempt to embody them in vital forms. As theories they look \vell, but in practice th'ey are worthless. They are as beautiful as foam and just as substantial. Where are the monuments of free religion? In the struggle for religious liberty in France I recognize the powerful influence of Voltaire; and an advocacy of a true democracy in this country, very few, if any, did more by their pen than Thomas Paine; but, aside from these general benefits to society, where are the testimonies of the work they wrought? What did they do for the more per- fect organization of society, and for the elevation and purity of the public morals? I repeat, where are the mon- uments of this free religion? Has it nothing to show in its own behalf but slanderous assertions? And has its most distinguished advocate in this country degenerated into a jesting scoffer? Who built the institutions of learning throughout the Christian world, and who supports them? Who organized the institutions of charity, and who sustains them? I repeat, this "religion of humanity," whatever that may be, does well enough to talk about, but, somehow, when there is solid work to be done nobody wants it, and somehow, nobody seems to do or pay much towards sup- porting it. The leading universities in Germany that did so much forty years ago in disseminating Rationalism are now comparatively empty, while those of the religious DR. RYDER'S REPLY. 89 schools are patronized. To-day every prominent university iu Germany except that in Heidelberg is controlled in the interests of revealed religion, and Heidelberg has but very few theological students left. And, if one may judge of the effects of teaching by the deportment of those taught, it will be, I think, nearly the unanimous opinion of travelers that they are very badly instructed, for a prominent part of the business of the students of that institution seems to be to get up quarrels with each other and with the public, and fight duels. The truth is, that the sober second thought of the thinking world has shut its " colossal shears" upon the theories of Bauer, Strauss, and Renan, and no wisdom of man will ever reunite the dissevered fragments. Dr. Ryder tells a Little Story for the Sake of Illustration. How strange it is that nearly all the world should be such simpletons, and that human nature persists in exploding all these fine theories that have no real religion in them. But then, you know, some people are wise in their own conceits. Let me relate an incident: " An eminent lawyer had in court a very clear case. After presenting an array of testi- mony, law, and precedents that he thought was unanswer- able, he submitted his case. To his utter astonishment, the Judge, who was bigotedly and dogmatically on the opposite side in prejudice, decided every point of the case against him. After he had recovered from his amazement, he arose and proceeded to read Blackstone and leading jurists, the statute law, and judicial decisions, flatly contradicting the decision of the Court. The Judge pompously interrupted him with: 'That will do you no good; the mind of the court is made up; cannot change it.' The lawyer replied: ' I have no expectation of changing the opinion of the court. I do not question the infallibility and the infallible accuracy of its decision. I only want to show what consum- 40 MISTAKES OF INQERSOLL. mate fools Blackstone, Kent, and all jurists, our legislators, and all the judges, except the judge of this court, must have been.'" Friends of humanity, lovers of the truth as it is in Jesus, can we afford to trifle with such a momentous issue as this! Is there nothing sacred, nothing but the mere husk of things in which it is safe for us to place our faith? Is there no per- manent joy this side the grave, and only the blackness of darkness beyond? Is the religion in which so many millions trust simply a delusion, and the God whom we adore merely a myth? If so, why are we in this world, and what is this world! What is anything for but to lure us into disap- pointment? Nay, we believe in God, the Father everlasting, and in Jesus Christ, His Son. In the love which They awaken, we desire to live; and in the trust which They inspire, we hope to die. DR. UERFORD'S REPLY. 41 DR. HERFORD'S REPLY. ALL through my life I have felt a very deep sympathy for those who have become alienated from Christianity by the irrational and unworthy things often taught in its name. It seems such a miserable, gratuitous loss, as if there was not enough to make even the purest faith often dim and doubtful without it being made more so by the follies of those who should strengthen men in it ! But so it is. And of course one cannot expect men in that strong reaction to be very discriminating in what they attack. But there are limits! A man is not absolved from the duty of thinking and speaking fairly by having come to reject the popular opinions of society. Now it seems to me that this recent lecture of Col. Ingersoll's overpasses all just limits. I frankly own its brilliant eloquence, its irresistible humor, and the passionate impulses of tender human sympathy which flash out in it. I can quite understand many being carried along by these. But afterward has to come the sober thinking and the honest questioning. What does it amount to? Are its positions true? Are its arguments fair? It seems to me that they are glaringly the opposite. The whole test that he applies to his subject is a mistake; the way in which he applies it is not even moderately just; its representations are one-sided; its illustrations are carica- ture. And the worst of all is that there is no sign even of any desire or attempt to be fai** 42 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. The Ingersoll Paradox. The first of Col. Ingersoll's mistakes, is in the whole point of view in which he places the Bible in order to make it the easier target for his wit. He starts by repudiating any idea of its having been written by God's inspiration; and yet all through talks as if God were responsible for it as if God had said this and threatened that and becomes quite heroic in his declaration that God may damn him, but he won't believe such things! When once inspiration is put aside, such declarations are mere clap-trap! When you look through all this, .you find that in reality he simply regards the Bible as the work, the ideas of men. Very well; then take it so, and judge it fairly in that light! If the book of Genesis is, as Col. Ingersoll believes, the writings and the ideas of ancient men, then do not attack it> because the ideas are not those of men to-day. But that is what he is con- stantly doing. He is very fond of saying, "The question is not, is it inspired, but is it true?" That sounds very plaus- ible, but you know, as applied to any ancient book, it is simply nonsense. It is a test which you don't apply to any other ancient book in the world. You do not try Homer's " Iliad " by the test of whether it is true. When a clay tablet is dug up at Nineveh, or a papyrus is found in some mummy-wrappings, you don't ask, Is it true? and if not, throw it away. The question about all such things is not, "Are they true?" but "Are they genuine relics and repre- sentations of the thought of the ancient world?" By-and- by indeed will come the question, how far any records or statements in such ancient writings can be taken to throw light on actual history how far their statements are alle- gorical or poetical, or mere ancient tradition? Well and good. And by all means let those questions be applied to Genesis; apply them just as you would to any other ancient DR. BERFORD'S REPLY. 48 writings; but in the name of common fairness don't pick it to pieces by a minute verbal criticism, and a strained liber- ality which would only be justifiable on the ground of its being verbally inspired. That is a mistake which may be merely a mental confusion, but a graver one lies beyond. Ingersoll's Exaggerations and False Assertions. Mr. Ingersoll not only applies a kind of test to the book of Genesis which he would not think of applying to any other book, but he does not even apply his own test fairly. He stands upon the very letter, but he constantly misrep- resents and twists the letter. He exaggerates, makes things worse than they are; if he can make a bad meaning anyhow he does so. He says: "The gentleman that wrote Genesis begins by telling us that God made the universe out of nothing." It does not say so. It simply says: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." A little further on he makes great fun of the grass being created on the second day, while the sun was not created till the third day, so that the grass was growing without having " ever been touched by a gleam of light." Yet right before him were these words, at the beginning of all: " And God said, let there be light, and there was light." Of course, the whole idea is that of the world's childhood, but why strain a point to make it ridiculous? It is a far worse perversion where he says: "You will find by reading the second chap- ter that God tried to palm off on Adam a beast as his help- meet." Now there is absolutely no justification for such a representation. The whole thing is a gratuitious invention of his own. These are small verbal matters, but they show the utter unscrupulousness with which those ancient tradi- tions are exaggerated and distorted to make better point for his ridicule. And then, even in larger things, he cannot be decently 44 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. fair, though the explaining truth may lie on the very sur- face. He quotes the first part of the command against mak- ing any graven image, and then goes off into one of its tirades about that being a law which was "the death of all art " among the Jews. JSTot a word about the closing part of the command really the essence of it: " Thou shalt not bow down to them, nor worship them ! " Why, even if it were as he implies, that Moses utterly prohibited all the art of sculpture, the making of idols being merely one part, still, which was of most importance to the world that the Jews should have cultivated art a little more, or that they should, even at the cost of art altogether, be kept from idolatry? But then Mr. Ingersoll is not even true in his fact. The command was only understood as a command against idol- making, not against other forms of sculpture, and the best proof of this is that they did have other forms of sculpture even in Moses' time, and later had art of no ignoble kind. Even there in the wilderness we read how the sacred ark was by Moses' command shadowed over by the images of two cherubim, with outstretched wings made of pure gold, and the candlestick was made with branches which were shaped like almonds, alternately a bud and a flower. And later, when Solomon built the temple, we not only read of two similar cherubim, but of colossal size, extending their wings over the shrine, but also that " he carved all the walls of the house round about with carved figures of cherubim and palm- trees and open flowers; " while in his own palace we read of sculptured pillars, with pomegranate capitals, and images of oxen and lions, round the great brazen "laver." Or, take his representation of Christians thinking of Heaven as a place where their happiness will be enhanced by seeing the tortures of the damned. Here he rises to the height of his most fiery indignation. And it is a horrible idea. But then, who holds it who preaches it? It is an DR. HER FORD'S REPLY. 4i idea of Heaven that was prevalent among one sect of Chris- tians a century ago. But even they have not preached it for a century. And yet he says, without a word of limita- tion, " This is the Christian view of Heaven," and makes a powerful appeal to his hearers not to give a "dollar to any man to preach that falsehood." Why, there is not a church in all the land where he could find a man preaching that to give his dollar to; no, not even if the person were only i stump politician, turned preacher in the slack season be- tween campaigns. And the same of his representation of the attitude of Christianity toward those who do not believe in the early traditions of Genesis. He represents Christianity as teach- ing that any man who does not believe the " rib story " will go to Hell, however good he was in other respects. Is that an honest representation? Why, even if all orthodoxy preached that, orthodoxy is not all of Christianity. Ha Col. Ingersoll ever heard of Channing and Parker and Starr King? Are the bodies of the Unitarian church, the T:ii- versalists, the Christians, the Quakers, not worth a passing word? Did he not know when he put that champion joke about the " rib story " that he was representing as the teach- ing of the churches what many entire churches, and the best men in all churches, never have held, nor preached, nor countenanced in any way? Yet he comes rampaging into the field, with a whoop and a yell, brandishing his shillclah, defying Christianity, calling ministers "owls " and " idiots," and swooping round as if he were the first who had found out a little common sense about the Bible! But after all, the real matter at issue is not as to this or that exaggerated or unfair criticism of the Old Testament, but has it any real, substantial worth? It has. It gives us the origin of the world's noblest religious faith; it shows us the purest faith of to-day in its first roots in the far-off ancient world; 46 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. and so I think it strengthens our conviction that that faith is not a temporary or isolated thing that may be mistaken, but part of that long development of man which surelr corresponds to the truth and fact of the universe. Dr. Herford's Story of Moses, with an Apt Illustration The Germinal Power of the Pentateuch. When I hear people treating the Pentateuch as something they would like to see done away, I cannot help wishing that it could be dug up afresh in these days of curious research into the past. Why, suppose that the Jews had no such books; and had not known anything of their origin except a vague tradition of some sort of migration under one Moses, and curiously fitting to this the Egyptian tradi- tion which is, you know, that some thirteen hundred years before Christ a great multitude of people had gone out of Egypt led by an Egyptian priest, who taught them many things contrary to the Egyptian religion, and afterward changed his name to Moses. Well, supposing then these books of the Pentateuch should be discovered somewhere why, the world would go wild over them. What would it matter whether it could be settled that Moses did or did not write them or that possibly they were really not writ- ten till centuries after, and only preserved what was believed about him at that later date still the fact would remain that they take us by traditions, at any rate, so much further back into the past, and show us there one of the very noblest stories of the world; for that is what the story of Moses is. Take off all the discount you will for exaggeration I dare say the numbers are immensely exaggerated suppose the idea of his having been led by God speaking to him to have been only his own intense consciousness of what was best, ascribed to God ; suppose the idea of his having been helped by miracles to have been only his own reverent DR. HEPFORD'S REPLY. 47 impression, ascribing every trouble that came on Egypt, and every favoring circumstance to his own people, to some purposed and direct help from God; all that does not touch the essence of the story of Moses! There it stands how those Hebrews through many generations had sunk into the Pariah and Helot class of that great rich Egyptian civiliz- ation; and how at last this Moses rose up, to rally them to a mighty effort to get right away into some other land. He had been somehow brought up among the Egyptians, trained in the sacred city, educated among the priests an adopted son of Pharaoh's daughter but he had given it all up, identified himself with his down-trodden people, and at last won for them the liberty to go! And they went out out into the great desert waste. What does it matter that the tradition of their numbers got perhaps enormously exagger- ated ? If there were only a hundredth part thirty thousand instead of three millions in all there were quite enough to task their leaders fortitude to its utmost; and through those books we have at least very living glimpses of him, in his efforts to keep them from grumbling and getting disheart- ened; in his efforts to keep them true to his simple teach- ing of the one Almighty God; in his lonely hours when he was listening for the eternal word, and shaping his best thoughts which he believed came to him from God, into laws for his people. And there is the great fact, you know however he did it he did guide and lead them through that long migration, and at last brought them to the land from which their fathers had gone out long before, and bade them go in and possess it! And that multitude whom he led out of Egypt a race of slaves, servile with long oppression, at every difficulty talking of going back, he had in that forty years knit into a brave, hardy, fierce race who did go in and possess the land and became the progenitors of one of the world'i noblest races. That is the story of Moses 4 48 MISTAKES OF JNOEfiSOLL. just the barest skeleton of it taking one, the largest, most unmistakable features; and I say again there is no finer story in history. And what will you say of a man who will make fun of it? Why, what would you think of a man who would go around the country, making fierce fun of Abraham Lincoln, holding up his gaunt, lank figure to ridicule, burlesquing his speeches, denouncing as lies some of those quaint little anecdotes, and holding him up as a fool and an idiot I And yet that glorious work that makes Lincoln's name dear not to Americans only but to the lovers of freedom and of man in every nation that work of his was only the modern counterpart of what Moses did in the morning of the world! But the Pentateuch is most valuable, not for the light it throws upon the origin of a people, but for the light it throws upon the origin of ideas. In the teachings of Moses, in the religion of that little migrating tribe, by-and-by fighting for its foothold in Palestine, we have the begin- ings of those thoughts from which have sprung the three greatest, most living religions of the world Judaism, Christianity and Mahommedanism. Granted, the begin- nings are only rude, is that any reason for making fun of them? What would you think of a man who should take one of those rude urns that they dig out of the mound build- er's graves and put it side by side with some beautiful porce- lain of to-day, and scoff and sneer at those early dwellers on the earth because the best decoration they could make was a few rude scratches in the clay with their flint-knives? Already, even so far off, the idea of one Almighty God, that which the priests of Egypt held as a sacred mystery if they did hold it that leader of the- Hebrews taught his people as the truth for all, and the truth to be kept ever- more before them. Already, too, in the old world, where every race shaped out its thought of God in some idol form, DR. HERFORD'S REPLY. 41 that leader was giving them as the second of his great com- mands that they should make no idol images at all to wor- ship. Already, too, they had that idea of a God of Right- eousness ! True, their idea of righteousness was not yet very high, but the best they knew they ascribed to God. Where in all the ancient world will you find such a description of Deity as that which Moses brought with him out of the soli- tudes of Sinai? "The Lord; the Lord God, merciful and gracious, long suffering and abundant in goodness and truth; keeping mercy for thousands, bearing with iniquity, transgression and sin, but that will by no means clear the guilty." The Mosaic Religion of Humanity. Nor is this divine side of that old Hebrew religion all. Mr. Ingersoll is very strong on- the religion of humanity. Indeed, that is the only real religion, he says. Well, where did the religion of humanity begin ? Why, it began there among those same old Hebrews. The religion of a truer thought of God and of a better thought of man went to- gether even in their beginnings, as they did afterward when they both reached their culmination together in Christ, with His great teaching of love to God and love to man. Mr. Ingersoll, however, has nothing but the bitterest contempt for the morality of the Pentateuch, because it is behind the morality of to-day ! " See, you are better than four God," he cries; "for four thousand years ago He be- lieved in polygamy, and you don't! " 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 do not come to the idea of its being wrong. But what is there to be indignant about in that? Simply men whom Mr. Ingeraoll regards, in other lectures, as having come up from the brutes had then got only so far 50 MISTAKES OF 1SGKRSOLL. in their ideas of marriage. But if their religion is a good one, what do you expect to find it doing? Altogether al- tering, even so early, the marriage relation, or purifying and elevating it? Surely this is all we can look for, and this we find. I know that Mr. Ingersoll says: "There is not one word about woman in the Old Testament, except the words of shame and humiliation." Well, though he says he has read the Bible over again this year, I can only conclude he has read it very hurriedly and slightly, for not only are there such passages as that of Naomi and Ruth, the Shunamite woman, Hannah, the mother of Samuel, and that most beautiful picture at the close of the book of Prov- erbs of a good wife, but I think that throughout woman is spoken of in the Bible, not as the slave, but as the compan- ion and the helpmate. The " wise-hearted women " share the work of making that goodliest of the tents which was in the desert wanderings to be the tabernacle; Miriam, the sister of Moses, holds the place of a prophetess, and other prophet- esses we read of; and the whole law of marriage in the Penta- teuch, with its stern punishment of death for adultery, either on the part of man as well as woman, shows the process of elevation towards that higher law of one wife and one husband which had become universal by the time of Christ. Or take the slavery question again. Slavery was univer- sal in the ancient world. Men had not come anywhere to a sense of any inherent wrongfulness in it for a thousand years or two after the time of Moses. But mark where this finer humanity of the Mosaic religion comes in; it al- ready brings glimpses of the idea of an inalienable right to liberty though not a perfect sight of it. The law of the Pentateuch abounds with laws about the relation of master and slave, which, as compared with what we know of slavery, e. g., among the Greeks and Romans a thousand years later, were simply a marvel of noble humanized thought DR. HERFORD'S REPLY. 51 And then as to the general tone and character of that Mosaic law. Mr. Ingersoll pooh-poohs the Ten Command- ments as merely what men knew before; knew all along. But such a law as this: " Thou shalt not have in thy bag v O divers weights, a great and a small; but thou shalt have a perfect and just weight a perfect and just measure shalt thou have for all that do such things, and all that do un- righteously, are an abomination unto the Lord thy God;" and this: " If a man shall steal an ox or a sheep he shall restore five oxen for an ox and four sheep for a sheep; " and this: "Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger as for one of your own country, for I am the Lord your God; " and this: "Thou shalt not oppress an hired servant that is poor and needy whether he be of thy breth- ren, or of the strangers that are in the land; at his day thou shalt give him his hire; neither shall the sun go down upon it, for he is poor and setteth his heart upon it." There is a good deal of the religion of humanity about these, isn't there? And other laws come in here and there with such a kind consideration for poverty and need. When a man har- vested he must not reap the corners of his field, nor gather up the gleanings, and if he forgot a sheaf and left it in the field he must not go again and fetch it. " Thou shalt leave them for the poor and the stranger." And this: " When a man hath taken a new wife he shall not go out to war neither shall he be charged with any business; but he shall be free at home one year and shall cheer up his wife whom he hath taken." And even in regard to war in which cer- tainly they were fierce enough what a gleam of kindness comes in in that command that when they were besieging a city they must not cut down the fruit trees about it for their war purposes, but only trees that they knew were not for fruit. Why, I might go on for an hour quoting these 62 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. more merciful laws and showing you the large, grand thoughts of duty that pervade that whole system which the Jews believed had been given to them by Moses. But there is nothing really to fear. For the moment many may be led to throw the Bible away, and to give up religion as the weak nonsense he so scornfully proclaims it. Religion will abide in the heart of man. And the Bible will stand because in it we have the accumulated utterance of religion in its best beginnings and along its noblest line of development. THE JEWISH RABBI'S REPLY. THE JEWISH RABBI'S REPLY. WE need not pray for Col. Robert Ingersoll's soul, for he ways he has none; and in this instance we are bound to be- lieve him, as he is judge, jury and witness in the case; and there may be men without souls, as there are some without conscience, others without reason, and quite a number with- out principle. The first man of whom the Bible says that he prayed, was Abraham. He prayed for Abimelech. But Col. Ingersoll, we suspect, is not smitten with that disease. He prayed for the wicked people of Sodom and Gomorrah, to which class belongs no American citizen, of course, as " Mitchell's Geography" substantially proves. Jacob prayed when his brother Esau approached him with an armed force; and the Colonel has come to us unarmed, and without any force except a few harmless agents of the Boston Lecture Bureau, who take the money, show the show, and depart in peace. Moses prayed for his sister Miriam when she was leprous, but Mr. Ingersoll is no woman, and his excellent exterior betokens no leprosy. Joshua p rayed to make the sun and moon stand still, but Mr. Ingersoll is .neither the greater nor the lesser light, and to the best of our knowledge nobody wants him to stand still at any place. Speaking of imagination, it reminds me that Col. Inger- soll said he could not imagine the existence of a God. Im- agine God! Any professor of philosophy would faint if he was told that illogical expression. How can God be im- 54 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. agined? Perhaps one of Mr. Ingersoll's manufactured goda could be imagined in a disorderly imagination, as only phys- ical objects of nature or combinations thereof could be im- agined nothing else. What kind of a god would that be which could be submitted to the imagination of a man with- out a soul? It must be the miniature or pocket edition of an idol, made by man, such as Col. Ingersoll purchases and exhibits to amuse tall babies. It must be that sort of far- cical gods which he describes in his burlesques. He is not the iirst quack who would not take his own medicines, although he is certainly among reasoners the first who would imagine Deity, for none tries to imagine that which reason only can grasp; none will permit himself to be led astray by imagination where pure reflection only can reach the aim. The perversion of ideas springs from a mistake about Moses. A god or gods have been fabricated at the expense of Moses, until each little priest had his own snug little god that could be used as the Crusader's emblem or the license of the auto-da-fe, to massacre and glut in human gore, or the frail woman's last resort of love to make honest men out of rogues, pure souls out of the dregs of hell. The god or gods variously depicted, miscellaneously described, and promiscuously applied become objects of imagination, hence also of the farce. The mistake is that Moses was charged with all the follies of theological jugglers and sophistical bummers. The God whom Moses taught is emphatically the God whom no man can see and live, the Great I Am, who is the I, the Ego, the, Subject of the Universe, the law, the life, the love and the intellect of the cosmos, the Eternal Jehovah, essence itself, and the absolute substance, in whom all things are as all objects of a man's tender love are in his aonl, of whom all things came and into whom all return. This is not a God fabricated by man, hence He could not THE JEWISH RAUBI'S REPLY, 55 be imagined by man, as no man can imagine a being supe- rior to himself. This is the God taught by Moses; the other gods may be subjected to farce and ribaldry, while the true Deity is too sublime even for the pyrotechnical displays of Mr. Ingersoll's disentangled humor. It is a mistake about Moses which feeds his boiler to tweedle the rusted think- apparatus of twaddlers. The God of Moses is too great for Mr. Ingersoll; he only deals in gods which can be imag- ined, and in speaking of mistakes of Moses he reverently passes by the God of Moses. The man is not as bad as his reputation. I maintain that Col. Robert Ingersoll is not half as bad as his reputation. The man was persecuted by his country- men, was defeated in his political aspirations by church- members, and thinks the Presbyterians have done it. lie is a man of prominent talents, belonging to the better class; all on account of the Presbyterians, he was teased, perse- cuted, and wounded in his pride, and so he became a public lecturer. But business is business; if one wants to make money he must know how. He could imagine that people go to the circus to see the clown, to the theater to laugh over the comedian. People want fun to be amused, alcohol to force the blood to the brain, to fill up the vacuum. He could see that earnest men who reason on principles would not take with the masses. Aware of his own talents as a humorist and an orator, of the scarcity of humorists in this country, and the plenitude of slang, low comedy, and uncul- tivated taste, he could only choose the career which he did choose a career of ribaldry, to laugh over everything holy, to sneer alike at human follies, frailties, virtue and piety; and as a business man he has chosen well he makes plenty of money and hurts nobody. A moral effect he will never have upon anybody, because there is no moral force in his burlesque. He is no Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, no 56 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. Voltaire, Strauss, Feuerbach, or even a Heinrich Heine, because he lacks the research, the erudition, the systematical learning, and the moral backbone of either of them. He will not set Rome on fire in order to sing from his balcony the destruction of Troy; he lacks the fire and the torch. It is all pyrotechnical ribaldry, which sweeps away many a con- sumptive superstition and laughs many a prejudice out of existence; but truth takes care of itself. Let the man alone; he is better than his reputation. You think, perhaps, I ought to be very angry, because the gentleman spoke of the mistakes of Moses, and ridiculed the great lawgiver of the Jews. Let me tell you first, any- thing over which you laugh leaves no particular impression behind. That which goes not though the avenues of reason or the depth of the moral sentiment in a short time proves effectless. Scorn is a terrible weapon to achieve moment- ary success, but it is worse than worthless after a second sober thought or a healthy action of the feelings. Then let me say, the theology of Moses is certainly beyond the reach of Col. Ingersoll, for he is no reasoner; he can spit, but he could not think with philosophical minds. He never studied through or even read any of the philosophical systems of Germany, England, or France; nor has he the ability to do it. He is no naturalist of any description, has never troubled himself about any specialty thereof, and so he talks about matters and things in general as is the American custom, what the Germans call Wurst-pkttosophie, good enough as jokes or for beer-house reasonings. When he speaks of the infinite he becomes too ludicrous for any- thing, especially for men of thought to make anything out of it He will not upset the theology of Moses. The law of Moses is also secured against the Colonel's possible attacks. He will commence no trouble with his Blackstone or Hugo Grotius, or the other writers on law THE JEWISH RABBFS REPLY. 57 who maintain that all law rests upon the Mosaic legisla- tion. Thirty-five hundred years of history, and the common consent of the civilized world at this end of the nineteenth century, are a little too much for any man to upset. He says he could write a better Decalogue than Moses did, but that is said only he is not going to do it; he will not even add a category of law to the ten. Well, then, if he is not the man to attack successfully the theology or jurisprudence of Moses, I have no cause to ob ject to his lectures. He ridicules Bible stories, but that concerns literalists only, not us. If all the stories of the Pentateuch be ridiculed, denied, or otherwise disposed of, it does not change an iota in the jurisprudence or theology of Moses". Let the literalists take up that part; it does not concern us so very much. Here, again, is a point which makes me feel bad and badly disposed to the eloquent humorist. Why does he continu- ally repeat that which others have said often before him; why does he not hit upon something original? He re- hearses old rags in new shoddy, and that is unworthy of a man who has any pride about him. He does sometimes worse than that; he ignores his opponents, which no honest man must do. He speaks a long yarn about the history of creation, always assuming an air of originality, without having the honesty of mentioning even Dr. J. W. Dawson's work, " The Origin of the World," which upsets his whole twaddle. It is dishonest to make people believe that a thing said is indisputable, when it has been completely upset He appeals to the apotheosis of labor to impeach Moses, because it said in the Genesis that God cursed man. " In the sweat of thy brow shalt thou eat bread;" and labor is a blessing to man. Did all Socialists clap hands? If not, 88 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. some must have thought this is the language of a dema- gogue, who is either a hypocrite or a self-deluded man. La- bor and hard labor are two different things, and the " sweat of thy brow " po nts to hard labor, which rests like a curse upon the poor man, and is the severest punishment imposed on the criminal condemned to hard labor. He talks about the creation of woman like an ignorant man who has not the remotest idea of the difficulties among biologists, considering the differentiation of man and the origin of sexes. So he talks about the littleness of the ark and smites Charles Darwin in the face, instead of saying this proves Darwin's theory on the origin of species. He scoffs at the God who destroyed His own children and undertakes to teach the Colonel of Peoria how lie should educate his. It all depends upon what kind of children one wishes to bring up. Usually every parent brings up his own kind. God wanted them to bring up God-like children, and when they would not do it, he got them out of the way in preference to destroying human freedom or perpetuating wickedness. If it is only to bring up such children as Rob- ert Ingersoll, of Peoria, 111., no such stringency is necessary. Musquashes grow spontaneously in abundance. Then he speaks about 600 pigeons a day for three priests, and does not know that there were no pigeons in the wilderness, and the Mosaic sacrificial polity was not introduced till Joshua had taken the Land of Canaan, and then there were more priests than there are to-day humorists in America, for Joshua gave them quite a number of cities, and I would not be astonished if those American humorists could eat more pigeons than they can do good in this world. But what is the use to speak of the mistakes of Moses? Speak of the mistakes about Moses. Did Moses write th e Genesis? Says Col. Ingersoll, "I do not know;" and he does not know a great many other things. Did Moses wri te THE JEWISH RABBI'S REPLY. 59 the historical portions of the Pentateuch? Says the Illinois Colonel again, "I do not know." If he has written all that, did the translators and commentators which the Colonel read represent correctly the ideas of Moses? " Do n't know," gays the Colonel. If those writers do represent the matter correctly, have those points which, the Colonel ridicules never been discussed and refuted? " Do n't know," says the Colonel; and decent men must not curse; still they are permitted to say, " Why do you talk of matters of which you know so preciously little? That is all excusable, however, in this case. The humorous and eloquent gentleman is out on a lecture tour, and wants to succeed. This can be done by reckless ribaldry only. It makes no difference whether Hell or gods, Devil or Moses, Pope or Presbyterian church anything that will pay must be pressed into the service. The Colonel's field is small; he has no great choice of sub- jects, and he must take the first best to ridicule it and make it pay. He has that particular talent, and could not do the same work in another field. He cannot criticise Aristotle and Emanuel Kant and make it pay, because he cannot read them. He cannot ridicule Carlyle or Stuart Mill, because he cannot understand them. So he picks up some small stories which the children know, and dishes them up in his own humoristic way for the amusement of big babies. The man understands his business to the T. I tell you, he is not as bad as his reputation. I beg a thou- sand pardons of Col. Robert Ingersoll if I have wronged him. I did not mean to make fun of him any way. [ Pbotngrtpbed by DE. GIBSON'S REPLY. DR GIBSON'S REPLY.' UNHAPPILY, the attention of Bible students has been al- most exclusively directed to certain difficulties. These dif- ficulties all arise, as it seems to me, from three sources, and the Bible is not to blame for any of them. First source: treating the passage as if it were history, whereas it is apoc- alypse. Second source: taking it as intended to teach sci- ence, especially astronomical and geological science. Third source of difficulty : the mistakes of translators. For exam- ple, the unfortunate word firmament continually comes to the front as one of the " mistakes of Moses." Strange that a Latin word should be a mistake of Moses! Did Moses know Latin ? Did he ever write the letters f, i, r, m, etc, 1 Not only is the word '' firmament " not in the Hebrew Bible, but it does not represent the Hebrew word at all. The word firmament means something strong, solid. The Hebrew word for which it is an unfortunate translation, signifies something that is very thin, extended, spread out; just the best word that could be chosen to signify the at- mosphere. Then there is the word "whales," that Professor Huxley made so merry over a year ago. But the Hebrew does not say whales. The Hebrew word refers to great sea monsters, and is just the very best word the Hebrew language affords to describe such animals as the plesiosanrus and ichthyo- saurus and other creatures that abounded in the time prob- Portions of this reply recently aprmnred In the dally press signed " CAKDOB: * other portions were selected by the Editor from his new work, just published by Randolph A Co., New York, enmied "The Agce Before Moses." 62 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. ably referred to there. Let us only guard against these three sources of error, and we shall not find many diffi- culties. If we would only avoid the mistakes of Moses' critics, we would not show our ignorance by talking about the mistakes of Moses. We have said that almost everybody knows about the difficulties, but how few are there comparatively that know about the wonderful harmonies ? So much is said and writ- ten about the difficulties, that many have the idea that the narrative is full of difficulties nothing but difficulties in it nothing that agrees with science as we know it now; whereas, when we look at it, we find the correspondencies most wonderful all the way through. Let us look at a few of them. And first, the absence of dates. The fact is very noteworthy that there is such abundance of space left for the long periods, not till quite recently demanded by science. And this does not depend on any theory of day-periods; for those who still hold to the literal days, find all the room re- quired before the first day is mentioned. Not six thousand years ago, but " in the beginning." How grand and how true in its vagueness Another negative characteristic worth noticing here is the absence of details where none are needed. For example, there is almost nothing said in detail about the heavens. What is said about the heavens in addition to the bare fact of creation, is only in reference to the^ earth, as, for exam- ple, when the sun and moon are treated of, not as separate worlds, but only in their relation to this earth as giving light to it and affording measurements of time. 1 here is no attempt to dra^ in the spectroscope! i Ingersoll Betrays His Ignorance. A certain infidel lately seemed to think he had /nade a point against the Bible by remarking that the autLor ol' it DR. GIBSON'S HE PLY. 63 bad compressed the astronomy of the universe into five words. Just think of the ignorance this betrays. It pro- ceeds on the assumption that. the author of this apocalypse intended to teach the world the astronomy of the universe; and then, of course, it would have been a very foolish thing for him to discuss the whole subject in live words. Whereas, in this very reticence we have a note of truth. If this work had been the work of some mere cosmogonist, some theo- rist as to the origin of the universe, he would have been sure to have given us a great deal of information about the stars. But a prophet of the Lord has nothing to do with astrono- my as such. All that he has to do Math the stars is to make it clear that the most distant orbs of light are included in the domain of the Great Supreme, and this he can do as well in five words as in five thousand; and so, wisely avoiding all detail, he simply says, "He made the stars also." There was danger that men might suppose some power resident in these distant stars distinct from the power that ruled the earth. He would have them to understand that the same God that rules over this little earth, rules to the uttermost bounds of the great universe. And this great truth he lays on immovable foundations by the sublimely simple words, " He made the stars also." But passing from that which is merely negative, see how many positive harmonies there are. Harmony of Science and Genesis. First, there is the fact of a beginning. The old infidel objection used to be that " all things have continued as they were from the beginning of the creation." Nobody pre- tends to take that position now that science points so clearly to beginnings of everything. You can trace back man to his beginning in the geological cycles. You can trace back mammals to their beginning; birds, fishes, insects to their beginnings; vegetation to its beginning; rocks to their 5 64 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. beginning. The general fact of a genesis is immovably established by science. Secondly, u The heavens and the earth." Note the order Though almost nothing is said about the heavens, yet what is said is not at all in conflict with what we now know about them. We know now that the earth is not the center of the universe. Look forward to Genesis iv. 2, and you will find the transition to the reverse order quite appropriate there, as we shall see in the next lecture; but here, where the genesis of all things, the origin of the universe, is the subject, it is not the earth and the heavens, but " in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Thirdly, there is the original chaos. " The earth was without form and void." Turn to the early pages of any good modern scientific book, that attempts to set forth the genesis of the earth from a scientific standpoint, and you will find just this condition described. Observe, too, in passing, how carefully the statement is limited to the earth. The universe was not chaotic then. Fourthly, the work of creation is not a simultaneous, but an extended one. If the author had been guessing or theorizing, he would have been much more likely to hit on the idea of simultaneous, than successive creation. But the idea of successive creation is now proved by science to be true. Fifthly, there is a progressive development, and yet not a continuous progression without any drawbacks. There are evenings and mornings; just what science tells us of the ages of the past. Here it is worth whita perhaps to notice the careful use of the word " created." An objec- tion has been made to the want of continuity in the so-called orthodox doctrine of creation, the orthodox doctrine being supposed to be that of fresh creation at every point. Hut the Bible is not responsible for many " fresh creations." DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 65 The word " created " is only used three times in the record. First, as applied to the original creation of the universe, possibly in the most embryonic state. " In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Next, in connec- tion with the introduction of life (v. 2), and last, in refer- ence to the creation of man (v. 27). In no other place is anything said about direct creation. ' It is rather making, appointing, ordering, saying " Let there be." " Let the waters bring forth," etc. Now, is it not a significant fact that these three points where, and where alone, the idea of absolute creation is introduced, are just the three points at which the great apostles of continuity find it impossible to make their connections? You will not find any one that is able to show any other origin for the spirit of man than the Creator Himself. You cannot find any one that is able te show any other origin of animal life than the Creator Him- self. There have been very strenuous efforts made a great many times to show that the living may originate from the not-living; but all these efforts have failed. And the origin of matter is just as mysterious as the origin of life. No other origin can be even conceived of the primal matter of the universe than the fiat of the great Creator. Thus we find the word "creation" used just at the times when modern science tells us it is most appropriate. Sixthly, the progression is from the lower to the higher. An inventor would have been much more likely to guess that man was created first, and afterward the other creatures subordinate to him. But the record begins at the bottom ef the scale and goes up, step by step, to the top: again, just what geology tells us. All these are great general correspondencies; but we might, Seventhly, go into details and find harmonies even there, all the way through. Take the fact of light appearing on the first day. The Hebrew word for " light " is wide enough 66 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL. to cover the associated phenomena of heat and electricity, and are not these the primal forces of the universe? Again, it used to be a standard difficulty with sceptics that light was said to exist before the sun was visible from the earth. Science here has come to the rescue, and who doubts it now? It is very interesting to see a distinguished geologist like Dana using this very fact that light is said to have existed before the sun shone upon the earth as a proof of the divine origin of this document, on the ground that no one would have guessed what must have seemed so unlikely then. So much for the progress toward the Bible which science has made since the day when a sceptical writer said of the Mosaic narrative, " It would still be correct enough in great principles were it not for one individual oversight and one unlucky blunder! " the oversight being the solid firmament (whose oversight?), and the blunder, light apart from the sun (whose blunder?). I have spoken already about the words " created " and " made," in relation to the discriminating use of them. This word raqia, too, how admirable it is to 'express the tenuity of our atmosphere, especially as contrasted with the clumsy words used by the enlightened Greeks (stereoma) the noble Romans (firmamentum), and even by learned Englishmen of the nineteenth century (firmament)! And not to dwell on mere words, as we well might, look at the general order of creation: vegetation before animal life, birds and fishes before mammals, and all the lower animals before man. Is not that just the order you find in geology? More particularly, while man is last he is not created on a separate day. He comes in on the sixth day along with the highr animals, yet not in the beginning, but toward the close of the period. Again, just what geology tells us. DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 91 The Harmony of Genesis and Science, not the Result of Guess Work, but of Inspiration. These are only some of the many wonderful harmonies between this old revelation and modern science. I would Like to see the doctrine of chances applied to this problem, to determine what probability there would be of a mere guesser or inventor hitting upon so many things that cor- respond with what modern science reveals. I don't believe there would be one chance in a million! Is it not far harder for a sensible man to believe that this wonderful apocalypse is the fruit of ignorance and guess-work, than that it is the product of inspiration? It is simply absurd to imagine that an ignorant man could have guessed so hap- pily. Nay, more. Let any of the scientific men of to-day set themselves down to write out a history of creation in a space no larger than that occupied by the first chapter of Genesis and I do not believe they could improve on it at all. And if they did succeed in producing anything that would pass for the present, in all probability in ten years it would be out of date. Our apocalypse of creation is not only bet- ter than could be expected of an uninspired man in the days of the world's ignorance, but it is better than Tyndall, or Huxley, or Haeckel could do yet. If they think not, let them take a single sheet of paper and try ! .... It is of great importance to remember that the sym- bolism attaches to the form, and not to the substance of the history. To call this whole story of the Fall a mere alle- gory, is to take away from it all historical reality. Let us distinguish carefully between the reality of the history, which is a very important thing, and the literality of it, which is of minor importance. It is very unfortunate that so much time is often spent upon the mere letter, regardless of the warning of the great apostle: "The letter killeth, 68 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. but the spirit giveth life. This accounts for nine-tenths of the difficulties people have about it. Suppose a person, seeing a cocoanut for the first time, and being told it was good for food, should spend all his time gnawing away at the shell, and never get at the kernel. No wonder of his verdict should be, it is not fit to eat. So you will find that most of the people who have insuperable difficulties with the Bible are those who are busying themselves all the time about the shell and never get hold of the kernel. If they could only seize the kernel they would so readily see the beauty and enjoy the taste, and find the use of it; and then, perhaps, they would begin to see some beauty and some usefulness in the shell too. " The letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life." A very good illustration of this is found in the fifteenth ferse of the third chapter, where we read about " the seed of the woman bruising the head of the serpent." The iiter- alists get nothing more out of it than a declaration that in time to come serpents will annoy the descendants of Eve by biting at their heels, and on the other hand, the descendants of Eve will destroy serpents by crushing their heads! The mere shell of the thing manifestly. The reality, as pictured there, is of a great conflict to go on throughout all these ages of development; a great conflict between the forces of good on the one hand, and the forces of evil on the other. Of this conflict the issue is not doubtful. There is to be serious trouble all the while from the force? of evil, but in the end these forces will be crushed. There is One coming a descendant of this same woman, called here " the seed of the woman " who will at last " bruise the head of the serpent," and gain the victory, and bring in that glorious era when sin and suffering and pain and death shall have all rolled away into the past. There is a great deal more than this in that wonderful verse more than we would Uti. GIBSON'S REPLY. 69 have time to tell though we spent a whole hour on it We only refer to it now as a'n illustration. And now, what matters it whether you take the "ser- pent " that tempted Eve to be a real and literal serpent, or the mere (phenomenal) form of a serpent assumed by the Spirit of Evil for the purpose ? or even whether the serpent form is connected with the old style of pictorial representa- tion ? All that is minor and subordinate. There is no use of wasting time on it. All we want to be sure of is the truth, that there was a tempter, an evil spirit, that in a seductive form tempted our first parents and they fell. Let us by all means ^beware of allowing our time to be frittered away by mere trivial questions of the letter, instead of mak- ing it our great aim to see and to seize the great spiritual truths set forth in this old and simple record. There are many who represent this book of the Genera- tions as a second edition of the Genesis, or separate account of the creation ; and of course they find difficulty in compar- ing the two. All their difficulty, as we shall see, comes from their not understanding the passage as a whole, their not perceiving what it was intended to teach. It will help us to meet this difficulty if we follow the same order of ideas as in the exposition of Genesis i., viz.: God, Nature, Man. In all we shall find marked differences. But these differences, in- stead of presenting any difficulty, will have their reason made abundantly manifest. God. First, then, there is a different name for God introduced here. All through the Genesis it has been "God said," " God made," " God created." Now it is invariably, " Je- hovah God " (LORD God in our version). And this is the only continuous passage in the Bible where the combination is used. How is this explained? Very easily. In the 70 MISTAKES OF INGEKSOLL. apocalypse of the Genesis, God makes Himself known sim- ply as Creator. Sin has not yet entered, and so the idea of salvation has no place. In this passage sin is coming in, and along with it the promise of salvation. Now the name Jehovah is always connected with the idea of salvation. It is the covenant name. It is the name which indicates God's special relation to His people, as their Saviour and Redeemer. This name is introduced now, because God is about to make Himself known in anew character. -He ap- peared in Genesis simply as Creator. He appears now in the book of the Generations as Redeemer; and so we get the name Jehovah in place of the name God. But lest any one should suppose from the change of name that there is any change in the person; lest any one suppose that He who is to redeem us from sin and death, is a different being from Him who created the heavens and the earth, the two names are now combined Jehovah God. The combination is retained throughout the entire narrative of the Fall to make the identification sure. Thereafter either name is used by itself without danger of error. Nature. Look next at the way in which Nature is spoken of here. When you look at it aright, you find there is no repetition. Nature in the Genesis is universal nature. God created all things. But here, nature comes in, as it has to do immedi- ately with Adam. Now see the effect of this. It at once removes difficulties, which many speak of as of great mag- nitude. In the first place, it is not the whole earth that is now spoken of, but a very limited district. Our attention is narrowed down to Eden, and the environs of Eden, a limi- ted district in a particular part of the earth. Hence the difficulty about there not being rain in the district (" earth ") DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 71 disappears. Let me here remind you once or all that the Hebrew word for earth and for land or district is the same. See Gen. xii., 1., where the word is twice used, translated "country" and "land." Again, it is not the vegetable kingdom as a whole that is referred to in the fifth verse, but only the agricultural and horticultural products. The words "plant," "field" and "grew" (v. 5) are new words, not found in the creation record.* In Gen. i. the vegetable kingdom as a whole was spoken of. Now, it is simply the cereals and garden herbs, and things of that sort; and here instead of coming into col- lision with the previous narrative, we have something that corresponds with what botanists tell us, that field and gar- den products are sharply distinguished in the history of nature from the old flora of the geological epochs. In the same way it is not the whole animal kingdom that is referred to in verse nineteen, but only the domestic ani- mals, thdse with which man was to be especially associated, and to which he was very much more intimately related than to the wild beasts of the field. It may be easy to make this narrative look ridiculous, by bringing the wild beasts in array before Adam, as if any companionship with them were conceivable. But when we bear in mind that reference is made here to the domestic animals, there is nothing at all inappropriate in noticing that while there is a certain degree of companionship possible between man and some of those animals, as the horse and dog, yet none of these was the companion he needed. In the first chapter of Genesis, nature is the great theme. We are carried over universal nature, and the great truth is there set forth, that God has created all things. In the sec- ond chapter of Genesis, man is the great theme, and conse- * The correct translation of the fifth verse is: " Now no plant of the field was yet in the laud, and no herb of the field was growing." 72 MISTAKES OF INGEXSOLL. quently nature is treated of only as it circles around him, and is related to him. This sufficiently accounts tor the difference between the two. Man. Passing now from nature to Man, we find again a marked difference. In Gen. i. we are told, " God created man in His own image; in the image of God created He him." And here: "The Lord God formed man of the du^st of the ground." (ii. 7.) Some people tell as there is a contra- diction here. la there any contradiction, let me ask? Are not both of them true? Is there not something that tells you that there is more than dust in your composition? Is there not something in you that tells you, you are related to God the Creator? When you hear the statement that " God made man in His own image, is there not a response awakened in you something in you that rises up and says, It is true? On the other hand, we know that man's body is formed of the dust of the earth. We find it to be true in a more literal sense 'than was formerly supposed, now that chemistry discloses the fact that the same elements enter into the composition of man's body, as are found by analysis in the "dust of the ground." And not only are both these statements true, but each is appropriate in its place. In the first account, when man's place in universal nature was to be set forth man as he issued from his Maker's hand was it not appropriate that his higher nature should occupy the foreground? His lower relations are not entirely out of sight even there, for he is introduced along with a whole group of animals created on the sixth day. But while his connection with them is sug- gested, that to which emphasis is given in the Genesis is his relation to his Maker. But now that we are going to hear about his fall, about his shame and degradation, is it DR. GIBSON'S liEPLY. 78 not appropriate that the lower rather than the higher part of his nature should be brought into the foreground, inas- much as it is there that the danger lies? It was to that part of his nature that the temptation was addressed ; and so we read here, " God formed man of the dust of the ground." Yet here, too, there is a hint of his higher nature, for it is added, " He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life," or as we have it in another passage, " The inspiration of the Almighty gave him understanding." In this connection it is worth while to notice the use of the words "created" and "formed." " God created man in His own image." So far as man's spiritual and immor- tal nature was concerned it was a new creation. On the other hand, "God formed man out of the dust of the ground." We are not told He created man's body out of nothing. We are told, and the sciences of to-day confirm it, that it was formed out of existing materials. Woman. Then, in relation to Woman, there is the same appropri- ateness in the two narratives. In the former her relations to God are prominent: "God created man in His own im- age. In the image of God created He him; male and fe- male created He them " man in His image; woman in His image. In the latter, it is not the relation of woman to her Maker that is brought forward, but the relation of wo- man to her husband. Hence the specific reference to her organic connection with her husband. Here, again, it is very easy for one that deals in literali- ties to raise difficulties, forgetting that there is no intention here to detail scientifically the process of woman's forma- tion, but siim'U n> indicate that she is organically connected with her 1) 1 1 n- j. It is here proper to remark that the ren- dering " rib " is probably too specific. The word is more 74 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. frequently used in the general sense of "side." As an ev- idence that there is no intention to give here any physio- logical information as to the origin of woman, we may refer to the words of Adam: "This is now bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh. She shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of man." And now, is there anything irra- tional in the idea that woman should be formed out of man? Is there anything more mysterious or inconceivable in the formation of woman out of man, than in the original form- ation of man out of dust? Let us conceive of our origin in any. way we choose, it is full of mystery. Though there may be mystery connected with what is said in the Bible, there will be just as much mystery connected with any other account you try to give of it. Matthew Henry, in his quaint and half-humorous way, really gets nearer to the true spirit of the narrative than any physiological inter- preter can, when he makes the remark that some of you may be familiar with, u that woman was taken out of man, not out of his head to top him, nor out of his feet to be trampled underfoot; but out of his side to be equal to him, under his arm to be protected, and near his heart to be beloved." Another remark of his is worth quoting. Re- ferring to the fact of Adam's being first formed and then Eve, and the claim of priority and consequent superiority, as made on his behalf by the apostle Paul, he says: "If man is the head, she is the crown a crown to her husband, the crown of the visible creation. The man was dust re- fined, but the woman was dust double-reflned one remove further from the earth." But, Matthew. Henry apart, one thing is certain, that this old Bible narrative, while it has not done that which it was never intended to do, while it has given no scientific expla- nation of either man's origin or woman's origin, has never- theless accompl lulled its great object. It has given woman DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 75 her trne place in the world. It is only in Bible lands that woman has her true place; and it is only there that marriage has its proper sacredness. Here as everywhere else, we see the practical power of the Bible. It was not written to satisfy curiosity, but to save and to bless; and most salutary and most blessed has been the influence of these earliest words about woman, setting forth her true relation to man and to God, to her earthly husband and her heavenly Father. Mistakes Respecting Labor and Death, Corrected. . . . The Bible has been charged with representi ng labor as a curse. The charge is not true. On the contrary, we are told that Adam was appointed in Eden to dress the garden and keep it. The law of labor came in among the blessings of Eden, along with the law of obedience and the marriage law. It is a slander on the Bible to say that it represents labor as a curse. It is not the labor that is the curse. It is the thorns and the thistles. It is the hardness of the labor. " In the sweat of thy brow thou shalt eat bread." Labor would have been easy and pleasant otherwise. Then in regard to death. There are those who represent the Bible as if it taught that death was unknown in the world until after the Fall. And then they point us to the reign of death throughout the epochs of geology as contra- dicting the Bible. Now, the Bible teaches nothing of the kind. On the contrary, there seems rather to be a suggestion that death was in existence among the lower animals all the way through. Not to speak of the probability that one of the divisions of animals, mentioned in the first chapter of Genesis, corresponds with the carnivora, is there not some- thing in the way the subject of death is introduced, which rather suggests the idea that it was already known? It was a new thing to Adam. It was not a new thing to animal life. Man had been created with relations to mortality 76 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. below him, but with relations also to immortality above him. Had he not fallen, his immortal nature would have ruled his destiny; but now that he has separated himself from God by his sin, his lower relations, his mortal relations, must rule his destiny. Instead of having as his destiny the prospect of being associated with God in a happy immor- tality, he is degraded from that position, and is henceforth associated with the animals in their mortality. We are told that " death passed upon all men, because all have sinned." But you do not find a passage in the Bible asserting that death passed upon the animals because of man's sin. The Deluge and Its Difficulties Not Universal - Ararat Originally a District (Alas ! Ingersoll Calls it a High Mountain) Other Deluges. . .. . We must here touch a little on the difficulties con- nected with the story of the flood. These difficulties are almost all founded upon the idea that the deluge was univer- sal; that it covered the highest tops of the Himalayas in India, the Rocky Mountains here, and all the mountains over all the earth. It is but reasonable, then, to ask if there is good reason for insisting that it was universal? I know of only three strong reasons that are given for this position. The first is the use of the term " earth " continu- ally throughout the narrative, which only proves that those who translated the Bible into English, believed the flood to have been universal. As we have had occasion already to prove, the word " earth " in Hebrew means just as readily a limited district. Why do not those who insist so strongly on the wide signification of " earth " here, not insist upon the same interpretation in such a passage as Genesis, xii. 1. and make it an article of faith that Abraham left the world altogether and went to another, when he left Ur of the Ohaldees and went to Canaan? The second argument for Uti. f.'/USON'S RKl'LT. TJ universality is found ill universal expressions, the (strongest of which is Gen. vii. 19: "And the waters prevailed ex- ceedingly upon the earth, and all the high hills that were under the whole heaven were covered." Now remember that this is the account of an eye-witness, vividly describing just what he saw, water on every side, water all around, nothing but water even the mountains to the farthest verge of the horizon covered over with water. When, in the book of Job, we read of the lightning flashing over the whole heaven, the meaning surely can not be that a lightning flash starts at a certain degree of latitude and longitude, and makes a journey right round the world to the point where it started. " The whole heavens " is evidently bounded by the horizon. The third reason which has led people to sup- pose the whole earth -was covered with water, is found in the tradition that the ark rested on Mount Ararat. The tradition, we say, for that is all the authority there is for the idea. In Gen. vii. 4, we are told that the ark rested on the mountains or highlands of " Ararat." The word " Ararat " only occurs other two times in the Bible, and in neither place does it refer to what was only long afterward called Mt. Ararat. In Old Testament times Ararat was not a mountain at all, but a district, on some of the highlands of which the ark rested. A moment's thought will show that it could not be on the top of Ararat. It would require one of the hardiest mountaineers to perform such a feat as the climbing of Ararat. It would be the most inconvenient place you could think of for the ark to rest on. When you look fairly at these three arguments that are urged in sup- port of a universal deluge, you will find that none of them really demand it. On the other hand, there are things that seem to point the other way. In the eleventh verse of the seventh chap- ter we are told that " in the second month, the seventeenth 78 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. day of the month, were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.* There is no indication there of the sudden creation of such a body of water as would cover the earth to the depth of 30,000 feet above the old sea-level. The causes that are as- signed are just such as could be most readily and naturally used. It may be worth while to notice here in passing, an attempt which has been made recently to cast ridicule upon the story of the flood, by representing the Bible as if it attributed the deluge to nothing else than a long, heavy rain, whereas the first importance is given to an entirely different cause: "the fountains of the great deep were bro- ken up." That is just what would appear to one who was describing such a scene as we imagine this to be. Suppose there had been some great submergence of the land there, as has taken place in other parts of the world. There would be a rushing up of water from below, from " the fountains of the great deep." Again, in the first verse of the eighth chapter, natural agency is made use of: " God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters assuaged." There is no reason why we should suppose a greater miracle performed than was necessary. Still further; turn to the tenth verse of the ninth chapter, where God says: "I establish my covenant with you, and with every living creature that is with you; from all that go out of the ark, to every beast of the earth." What were those beasts of the earth thus distinguished from those going out of the ark? Probably they were those that came from the area of land not covered by the flood. Then again, attention is called to the purpose of the flood, which was simply to destroy the race of men, and it is not to be supposed they had traveled a great distance by this time from their original place of abode. The extent of the flood need not have been any greater than was necessary to submerge that area. DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 79 Further, when we take this view, not only do geological and other difficulties disappear, but there is decided confir- mation from modern scientific research. There is no evi- dence in geology that there was in any 'period of the earth's history, a flood great enough to overtop the Rocky Moun- tains, but there are evidences of floods as great as this one must have been, for the purpose of destroying the race. I do not know how it is in the immediate region where the flood is supposed to have been. I do not know whether geologists have explored it sufficiently; but this is certain, that there are evidences of similar floods in other parts of the world. Some of our own geologists have discovered evidences of them in this very neighborhood. You have not to go very far from Chicago to find such traces of sudden, powerful, and transient diluvial action. Then, finally, this view of the deluge removes, of course, all difficulty about the number of animals in the ark, because all that was necessary was, that the species more nearly connected with man, those found in the region that was submerged, should be represented in the ark. But after all, the question of extent is of quite minor importance so long as it is conceded that it was universal in the sense of destroying all but the family of Noah. The reality of the judgment is the great thing, and of this we have abundant confirmation from tradition. We find legends of a flood everywhere. We find them among the Semitic and Aryan and Turanian races. We find them east and west, and north and south; in savage nations and civilized nations; on continents and in islands; in the old world and in the new. And if Egypt is a solitary exception, which is very doubtful, but if it is, the exception is accounted for by the simple fact that in that country they have floods every year. Here again, as in the traditions of the Fall, there is difference enough to show which is the original and true. 80 MISTAKES OF ]^'^RSOLL. Other traditions of the flood are polytheistic, whereaa here we have the one living and, true God. Those are full of mythological elements, whereas here is a plain narrative, with the impressive scene vividly, but quite simply, depicted. In heathen traditions, too, you find many grotesque items and exaggerations, as for instance, when the ark is described as three- fourths of a mile long, and drops of rain the size of a bull's head; and, generally speaking, a conspicuous ab- sence of that moral purpose which is so impressive and all- pervading in the narrative before us. Faith In Jesus Christ the Essential Factor. . . . There are those in our day who find a stumbling- block at the very threshold of the Christian life, in the fancy, that what is required of them in order to salvation, is the cred- iting of all the details of a long history extending from the first man to the last man, from Adam to the consummation of all things; and long accustomed to that sceptical attitude of mind which questions all things, they think it would take them a life-time (as indeed it would) to verify every statement that is made from Genesis to Revelation, and clear them from all possible objections; and so they do not venture at all. But remember, it is never said: " Believe everything that is in the Bible and you will be saved." Ah, there have been many who believed everything in the Bible, who never thought of questioning a sentence in it, who will find themselves none the better for their easy acquiescence in the statements of a book which they had been taught to accept as inspired. There is no such word written as, " Relieve the Bible and you will be saved." No. It ^s il Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved." Do not trouble yourselves in the first instance about questions connected with the book of Genesis, or difficulties suggested by the book of Revelation. Let the wars of the DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 81 Jews alone in the meantime, and dismiss Jonah from your mind. Look to Jesus; get acquainted with Him; listen to His word; believe in Him; trust Him; obey Him. That is all that is asked of you in the first instance. After you have believed on Christ and taken Him as your Saviour your Master, your Model, you will not be slow to find out that " all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine and for reproof, and for correction, and for instruction in righteousness." You may never have all your difficulties solved, or all your objections met; but though difficulties may still remain, and interrogation points be scattered here and there over the wide Bible-field, you will be sure of your foundation ; you will feel that your feet are planted on the " Rock of Ages," even on Him of whom God, by the mouth of the prophet Isaiah, said:. " Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation, a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner-stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste." Candor v. Injustice Dr. Gibson's Pointed Summary. The prevailing feeling among intelligent readers of the Bible in reference to the profane and coarse assaults made on it by Mr. Robert Ingersoll, is that few people are so ignorant as to be imposed upon by his vulgar witticisms. But, inasmuch as there are not a few who accept without inquiry his account of what is in the Bible, it may be well to give a few illustrations of his unscrupulousness in put- ting "mistakes" into the Bible which he either knows or ought to know, are not there. He^ asserts positively that Moses must have understood by firmament something solid, though every one who has studied the subject knows, and the fact has been published again and again, that the Hebrew word means something 82 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. exceedingly attenuated, being the very best word in the language to designate the atmosphere; while the mistake found in the English word "firmament," is due to the sci- ence of Alexandria, where in the third century before Christ, the " expanse " of Moses was translated " stereoma" (firmament) to suit the advanced astronomy of the time. When, in speaking of the vegetation of the third day, he says, " Not a blade of grass had even been touched by a single gleam of light," is he dealing fairly with a narrative that makes light its first creation? When he accuses Moses of compressing the astronomy of the universe into five words, is he dealing fairly with a narrative that does not profess to give any astronomy at all, but, after a general reference to the heavens and the earth as created in the beginning, restricts itself to the earth and its "environment?" Any intelligent person can see that this is the reason why sun, moon and stars are referred to only in their relations to the earth. When he represents the first and second chapters of Gen- esis as a varying repetition of the same story, is it fair to withhold all reference to the different purport and object of the two narratives, which fully and satisfactorily explains the variation? Is it fair to speak of the deluge to represent it as ascribed to nothing but rain, when the Bible expressly says, "All the fountains of the great deep were broken up," evidently pointing to such a subsidence of the land as is familiar to any one acquainted with geology. Is it fair to make the Bible responsible for the Armenian tradition that the ark rested on the top of Mount Ararat, 17,000 feet high, when the Bible nowhere, from Genesis to Revelation, makes any such statement? The district of Ararat on the mountains or highlands of which the ark rested is not the " A stopped, but turned back ten degrees, simply to convince a gentlemai that he was not going to die of a boil. They may say I will be daninec if I do not .believe that, and I tell them I will if I do. Then he gives us the history of astronomy, and he gives it to us in five words: " He made the stars also." He came very near forgetting tht stars. Do you believe that the man who wrote that knew that there are stars as much larger than this earth as this earth is larger than the apple which Adam and Eve are said to have eaten? Do you believe that he knew that this world is but a speck in the shining, glittering universe of existence? I would gather from that that he made the stars after he got the world done. The telescope, in reading the infinite leaves of the heavens, has ascertained that light travels at the rate of 192,000 miles per second, and it would require millions of years to come from some of the stars to this earth. Yet the beams of those stars mingle in our atmosphere, so that if those distant orbs were fashioned when this world began, we must have been whirling in space not six thousand, but many millions of years. Do you believe the man who wrote that as a history ef astronomy really knew that this world was but a speck compared with millions of sparkling orbs ? I do not. He then proceeds to tell us that God made fish and cattle, and that man and woman were created male and female. The first account stops at the second verse of the second chapter. You see, the Bible originally was not divided into chapters; the first Bible that was ever divided into chapters in our language was made in the year of grace 1550. The Bible was originally written in the Hebrew language, and the Hebrew language at that time had no vowels in writing. It was written entirely with consonants, and without being divided into chapters or into verses, and there was no system of punctu- ation whatever. After you go home to-night write an English sen ence or two with only consonants close together, and you will find that it will take twice as much inspiration to read i* as it did to write it. When the Bible was divided into verses and chapters, the divisions were not alway* correct, and so the division between the first and second chapter of Gen "MISTAKES OF MOSES." 108 ens is not in the right place. The second account of the creation com- mences at the third verse, and it differs from the first in two >senual points. In the first account man is the last made; m the second, man is made before the beasts. In the first account, man is made "male and female; " in the second only a man is made, and there is no intention of making a woman whatever. You will find by read in or that second chapter that God tried to palm off on Adam a beast as his helpmeet. Everybody talks about the Bible and nobody reads it; that is the reason it is so generally believed. I am probably the only man hi the United States who has read the Bible through this year. I have wasted that time, but I had a purpo-o in view. Just read it, and you will find, about the twenty-third ver^-. that God caused all the animals to walk before Adam in order that li<> might name them. And the animals came like a menagerie into town, and as Adam looked at all the crawlers, jumpers ar.d creepers, this God stood by to see what he would call them. After this procession passed, it was pathetically remarked, "Yet was there not found any helpmeet for Adam." Adam didn't see anything that he could fancy. And 1 am glad he didn't. If he had, there would not have been a free-thinker in this world; we should have all died orthodox. And finding Adam was so par- ticular, God had to make him a helpmeet, and having used up the nothing he was compelled to take part of the man to make the wpman with, and he took from the man a rib. How did he get it? And then imagine a God with a bone in his hand, and about to start a woman, trying to make up his mind whether to make a blonde or a brunette. Right here it is only proper that I should warn you of the consequenceB of laughing at any story in the holy Bible. When you come to die, your laughing at this story will be a thorn in your pillow. As you look back upon the record of your life, no matter how many men you have wrecked and ruined, and no matter how many women you have deceived and deserted all that may be forgiv en you; but if you recollect that you have laughed at God's book you will see through the shadows of death, the leering looks of fiends and the forked tongues of devils. Let me show yon how it will be: For instance, it is the day of judgment. When the man is called up by the recording secretary, or whoever does the cross- examining, he says to his soul: " Where are you from?" " I am from the world." "Yes, sir. What kind of a man were you?" "Well, I don't like to talk about myself." "But you have to. What kind of a man were you? " "Well, I was a good fellow; I loved my wife, I loved my children. My home was my heaven; my fireside was my paradise, and to eit there and see the lights and shadows falling on the faces of tliose I love, that to me was a perpetual joy. I never gave one of them a 104 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. olitary moment of pain. I don't owe a dollar in the world, and I left enough to pay my funeral expenses and keep the wolf of want from the door of the house I loved. That is the kind of a man I am." " Did you %>elong to any church?" "I did not. They were too narrow forme. They were always expecting to be happy simply because somebody else was to be damned." " Well, did you believe that rib story?" " What rib- story? Do you mean that Adam and Eve business? No, I did not. To tell you the God's truth, that was a little more than I could swallow." "To hell with him! Next. Where are you from?" "I'm from the world, too." "Do you belong 1 to any church?" "Yes, sir, and to the Young Men's Christian Association." "What ia your business?" " Cashier in a bank." " Did you ever run off with any of the money?" 44 1 don't like to tell, sir." " Well, but you have to." "Yes, sir; Idid." "What kind of a bank did you have?" "A savings bank." "How much did you run off with ?" " One hundred thousand dollars." " Did you take anything else along with you?" "Yes, sir." "What?" "1 took my neighbor's wife." " Did you have a wife and children of your own?" " Yes, sir." " And you deserted them ?" " Oh, yes; bu , such was my confidence hi God that I believed he would take care of them.'' " Have you heard of them since?" " No, sir." ' " Did you believe that rib story?" "Ah, bless your soul; yes! I believe all of it, sir; I often used to be sorry that there were not harder stories yet in the Bible, so thai I could show what my faith could do." " You believed it, did you?" 44 Yes, with all my heart." "Give him a harp." I simply wanted to show you how important it is to believe these sto- ries. Of all the authors in the world God hates a critic the worst. Hav- ing got this woman done he brought her to the man, and they started housekeeping, and a few minutes afterward a snake came through a crack in the fence and commenced to talk with her on the subject of fruit. She was not acquainted in the neighborhood, and she did not know whether snakes talked or not, or whether they knew anything about the apples or not. Well, she was misled, and the husband ate some of those apples and laid it all/-on his wife; and there is where the mistake was made. God ought to have rubbed him out once. He might have known that no good could coine of starting the world with a man like that. They were turned out. Then the trouble commenced, and people got worse and worse. God, you must recollect, was holding the reins of government, but he did nothing for them. He allowed them to live six hundred and eixty-nine years without knowing their A. B. C. He never started a school, not even a Sunday school. He didn't even keep His own boys at home. And the world got worse every day, and finally he concluded to drown them. Yet that same god has the impudence to tell me how to " MIS TAKES OF MOSES." 105 raise my own children. What would you think of a neighbor, who had just killed his babes giving you his views on domestic economy? God found that he could do nothing with them and He said. " I will drown thim all, except a few." And He picked out a fellow by the name of Noah, that had been a bachelor for five hundred years. If I had to drown any- body, I would have drowned him. 1 believe that Noah had then been married something like. one hundred years. God told him to build a boat, and he built one five hundred feet long, eighty or ninety feet broad and fifty-five feet high, with one door shutting on the outside, and one win- dow twenty-two inches square. If Noah had any hobby in the world it was vetilation. Then into this ark he put a certain number of all the animals in the world. Naturalists have ascertained that at that ume there were at least eleven hundred thousand insects necessary to go into the ark, about forty thousand mammalia, sixteen hundred reptilia,, to say nothing about the mastodon, the elephant and the animalcuhe, of which thousands live upon a single leaf and which cannot be seen by the naked eye. Noah had no microscope, and yet he had to pick them out by pairs. You have no idea the trouble that man had. Some say that the flood was not universal, that it was partial. Why then did God say: " I will destroy every living thing beneath the heavens." If it was partial why did Noah save the birds? An ordinary bird, tending strictly to business, can beat a partial flood. Why did he put the birds in there the eagles, the vultures, the condors if it was only a partial flood? And how did he get them in there ? Were they inspired to go there, or did he drive them ap? Did the polar bear leave his home of ice and start for the tropics inquiring for Noah; or could the kangaroo come from Australia unlesa he was inspired, or somebody was behind him? Then there are animals on this hemisphere not on that. How did he get them across? And there are some animals which would be very unpleasant in an ark unlesa the ventilation was very perfect. When he got the animals in the ark, God shut the door and Noah pulled down the window. And then it began to rain, and it kept on raining until the water went twenty-nine feet over the highest mountain. Chimborazo, then as now, lifted its head above the clouds, and then as now, there sat the condor. And yet the waters rose and rose over every mountain in the world twenty-nine feet above the highest peaks, cov- ered with snow and ice. How deep were these waters? About five and a half miles. How long did it rain? Forty days. How much did it have to rain a day? About eight hundred feet. How is that for damp- neaa? No wonder they said the windows of the heavens were open, li [ had been there I would have said the whole side of the house was out. Ho\v long were they in this ark? A year and ten days, floating around v=: u 106 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. no rudder, no sail, nobody on the outside at all. The window was abut, and there was no door, except the one that shut on the outside. Who ran this ark who took care of it? Finally it came down on Mount Ararat, a peak seventeen thousand feet above the level of the sea, with about three thousand feet of snow, and it stopped there simply to give the ani- mals from the tropics a chance. Then Noah opened the window and got a breath of fresh air, and he let out all the animals; and then Noah took a drink, and God made a bargain "with him that He would not drown us any more, and He put a rainbow in the clouds and said: " When I see that I will recollect that I have promised not to drown you." Because if it was not for that He is apt to drown us at any moment. Now can anybody believe that that is the origin of the rainbow? Are you not all familiar with the natural causes which bring those beautiful arches before our eyes ? Then the people started out again, and they were as bad as before. Here let me ask why God did not make Noah in the first place? He knew he would have to drown Adam and Eve and all his family. Then another thing, why did He want to drown the animals? What had they done? What crime had they committed? It ia very hard to answer these questions that is, for a man who has only been born once. After a while they tried to build a tower to get into heaven, and the gods heard about it and said: "Let's go down and see what man is up to." They came, and found things a great deal worse than they thought, and thereupon they confounded the language to prevent them succeeding, so that the fellow up above could not shout down "mortar " or " brick " to the one below, and they had to give it up. Is it possible that any one believes that that is the reason why we have the variety of languages in the world? Do you know that language is born of human experience, and is a physical science? Do you know that every word has been suggested in some way by the feelings or observations of man that there are words as tender as the dawn, as serene as the stars, and others as wild as the beasts? Do you know that language is dying and being born continually that every language has its cemetery and cradle, its bud an" mikado of Japan, and Mr. Hayes sent a commissioner there; and suppose he should employ Hermann, the wonderful German, to go along with him; and when they came in the presence of the mikado Hermann threw down an umbrella, which changed into a turtle, and the commissioner said: " That is my certificate." You would say the country is disgraced. You would say the president of a republic like this disgraces himself with jugglery. Yet we are told God sent Moses and Aaron before Pharaoh, and when they got there Moses threw down a stick which turned into a snake. That God is a juggler he is the infinite prestidigitator. Is that possible? Was that really a snake, or was it the appearance of a snake? If it was the appearance of a snake, it was a fraud. Then the necroman- cers of Egypt were sent for, and they threw down sticks, which turned into snakes, but those were not so large as Moses' snakes, which swal- lowed them. I maintain that it is just as hard to make small snakes as it is to make large ones; the only difference is that to make large snakes eithei larger sticks or more practice is required. Do you believe that God rained hail on the innocent cattle, killing them in the highways and in the field? Why should he inflict punishment on cattle for something their owners had done? I could never have any respect for a God that would so inflict pain upon a brute beast simply on vxount of the crime of its owner. Is it possible thut God worked luira- "MISTAKES OF MOSES." Ill eles to convince Pharaoh that slavery was wrong? Why dM he not tell Pharaoh that any nation founded on slavery could not stand? Why did he not tell him, " Your government is founded on slavery, and it vill go down, and the sands of the desert will hide from the view of man yf-ur temples, your altars, and your fanes? " Why did he not speak about the infamy of slavery? Because he believed in the infamy of slavery himself. Can we believe that God will allow a man to give his wife the right of divorce- ment and make the mother of his children a wanderer and a vagrant. There is not one word about woman in the Old Testament except the word of shame and humiliation. The God of the Bible does not thuik woman is as good as man. She was never worth mentioning. It did not take the pains to recount the death of the mother of us all. I have no respect for any book that does not treat woman as the equal of mav. And if there is any God in this universe who thinks more of me than he thinks of my wife, he is not well acquainted with both of us. And yet they say that that was done on account of the hardness of their hearts ; an4 that was done in a community where the law was so fierce that it stoned a man to death for picking up sticks on Sunday. Would it not have ben better to stone to death every man who abused his wife and allowed them to pick up sticks on account of the hardness of their hearts ? If God wanted to take those Jews from Egypt to the land of Canaan, why didn't He do it instantly? If He was going to do a miracle, why didn't He do one worth talking about? After God had killed all the first-born in Egypt, after he had killed all the cattle, still Egypt could raise an army that could put to flight nix hun- dred thousand men. And because this God overwhelmed the Egyptian army, he bragged about it for a thousand years, repeatedly calling the attention of the Jews to the fact that he overthrew Pharaoh and his hosts. Did he help much with their six hundred thousand men? We find by the records of the day that the Egyptian standing army at that time was never more than one hundred thousand men. Must we believe all these stories in order to get to Heaven when we die ? Must we judge of a man's character by the number of stories he believes? Are we to get to Heaven by creed or by deed? That is the question. Shall we reason, or shall we rimply believe? Ah, but they say the Bible is not inspired about those little things. The Bible says the rabbit and the hare chew the cud. But they do not. They have a tremulous motion of the lip. But the Baing that made them says they chew the cud. The Bible, therefore, is not inspired in natural history. Is it inspired in its astrology? No. "Well, what is it inspired in? In its law? Thousands of people say that i/ it had not been for the ten commandments we would not have known ?*y better than to rob and steal. Suppose a man planted an acre of potato*s 112 AtiSTAKKS Of 1XGEKSOLL. hoed them all summer, and dug them in the fall ; and suppose a man had at upon the fence all the time and watehed him; do you believe it would be necessary for that man to read the ten commandments to find out who, in his judgment, had a right to take those potatoes ? All laws against larceny have been made by industry to protect the fruits of its labor. Why is there a law against murder? Simply because a large majority of people object to being murdered. That is all. And all these laws were in force thousands of years before that time. One of the commandments said they should not make any graven images, and that was the death of art in Palestine. No sculptor has ever enriched stone with the divine forms of beauty in that country; and any commandment that is the death of art is not a good commandment. But they say the Bible is morally inspired; and they tell me there is no civilization without this Bible. Then God knows that just as well as you do. God always knew it, and if you can't civilize a nation without a Bible, why didn't God give every nation just one Bible to start with? Why did God allow hundreds of thousands and billions of billions to go down to hell just for the lack of a Bible? They say that it is morally in- pired. Well, let us examine it. I want to be fair about this thing, be- cause I am willing to stake my salvation or damnation upon this ques- tion whether the Bible is true or not. I say it is not; and upon that I am willing to wager my soul. Is there a woman here who believes in the institution of polygamy? Is there a man here who believes in that in- famy? You say: "No, we do not." Then you are better than your God was four thousand years ago. Four thousand years ago he believed in it, taught it and upheld it. I pronounce it and denounce it the infa- my of infamies. It robs our language of every sweet and tender Vord in it. It takes the fireside away forever. It takes the meaning out of the words father, mother, sister, brother, and turns the temple of love into a vile den where crawl the slimy snakes of lust and hatred. I was in Utah a little while ago, and was on the mountain where God used to talk to Brigham Young. He never said anything to me. I said it was just as reasonable that God in the nineteenth century should talk to a polygamist in Utah as it was that four thousand years ago, on Mount Sinai, he talked to Moses upon that hellish and damnable question. I have no love for any God who believes in polygamy. There is no heaven on this earth save where the one woman loves the one man anj 1 the one man loves the one woman. I guess it is not inspired on thft polygamy question. Maybe it is inspired about religious liberty. God says that if anybody diflers with you about religion, "kill him." He told His peculiar people, " If any one teaches a different religion, kill him! " He did not say, "Try and convince him that he is wrong," but "MISTAKES OF MOSES." 113 "kill him!" He did not say, " I am in the miracle business, and I will convince him;" but " kill him." He said to every husband, "If your wife, that you love as you love your own soul, says, ' let us go and worship other gods,' then ' thy hand shall be first upon her and she shall be stoned with stones until she dies. ' " Well, now, I hate a God of that kind, and I cannot think of being nearer heaven than to be away from Him. A God tells a man to kill his wife simply because she differs with him on religion! If the real God were to tell me to kill my wife, I would not do it. If you had lived in Palestine at that time, and your wife the mother of your children had woke up at night and said: " I am tired of Jehovah. He is always turning up that board-bill. He is always telling about whipping the Egyptians. He is always killing somebody. I am tired of Him. Let us worship the sun. The sun has clothed the world in beauty; it has covered the earth with green and flowers; by its divine light I first saw your face; its light has enabled me to look into the eyes of my beautiful babe. Let us worship the sun, father and mother of light and love and joy." Then what would it be your duty to do kill her? Do you be- lieve any real god ever did that? Your hand should be first upon her, and when you took up some ragged rock and hurled it against the white bosom filled with love for you, and saw running away the red current of her sweet life, then you would look up to heaven and receive the con- gratulations of the infinite fiend whose commandments you had to obey. I guess the Bible was not inspired about religious liberty. Let me ask you right here: Suppose, as a matter of fact, God gave those laws to the Jews and told them " whenever a man preaches a different religion, kill him," and suppose that afterwards the same God took upon himself flesh, and came to the world and taught and preached a different re- ligion, and the Jews crucified him did he not reap exactly what he sowed? May be this book is inspired about war. God told the 'Israelites to overrun that country, and kill every man, woman and child for defending their native land. Kill the old men ? Yes. Kill the women? Certainly. And the little dimpled babes in the cradle, that smile and coo in the face of murder dash out their brains; that is the will of God. Will you tell me that any god ever commanded such infamy? Kill the men and the women, and the young men and the babes! "What shall we do with the maidens?" " Give them to the rabbJe murderers!" Do you believe that God ever allowed the roses of love and the violets of modesty that shed their perfume in the heart of a maiden to be trampled beneath the brutal feet of lust? If there is any God, I pray him to write in the book of eternal remembrance opposite to my name, that I denied that lie. Whenever a woman reads a Bible and comes to that passage, she ought 8 114 MISTAKES OF 1NGEKSOLL. to throw the book from her in contempt and scorn. Do you tell me that any decent god would do that? What would the devil have done under the same circumstances? Just think of it; and yet that is the God that we want to get into the Constitution. That is the God we teach our children about, so tha* iV y will be sweet and tender, amiable and kind? That monster that fi I guess the Bible is not inspired about relig- ious liberty, nor about vmr. Then, if it is not inspired about these things, maybe it is inspired about slavery. God tells the Jews to buy up the children of the heathen round about and they should be servants for them. What is a " ser- vant? " If they struck a " servant " and he died immediately, punish- ment was to follow; but if the injured man should linger a while, there was no punishment, because the servant represented their money! Do you believe that it is right that God made one man to work for anothex and to receive pay in rations ? Do you believe God said that a whip on the naked back was the legal tender for labor performed? Is it possible that the real God ever gave such infamous, blood-thirsty laws? What more does he say? When the time of a married slave expired, he could not take his wife and children with him. Then if the slave did not wish to desert his family, he had his ears pierced with an awl, and became his master's property forever. Do you believe that God ever turned the dimpled cheeks of little children into iron chains to hold a man in slave- ry? Do you know that a God like that would not make a respectable devil? I want none of his mercy. I want no part and no lot in the heaven of such a God. I will go to (perdition, where there is human sympathy. The only voice we have ever had from either of those other worlds came from hell. There was a rich man who prayed his brothers to attend to Lazarus so that they might " not come to this place." That is the only instance, %o far as we know, of souls across the river having any sympathy. And I would rather be in hell, asking for water, than in heaven denying that petition. Well, what is this book inspired about? Where does the inspiration come from ? Why was it that so many ani- mals were killed ? It was simply to make atonement for man that is all. They killed something that had not committed a crime, in order that the one who had committed the crime might be acquitted. Based upon that idea, is the atonement of the Christian religion. That is the reason I attack this book because it is the basis of another infamy, viz : that one man can be good for another, or that one man can sin for another. I deny it. You have got to be good for yourself ; you have got to sin for yourself. The trouble about the atonement is, that it saves the wrong man. For instance, I kill some one. He is a good man. He loves his wife and children and tries to make them happy; but he is not a Chris- "MISTAKES OF MOSES." 116 tian, and he goes to hell. Just as soon as I am convicted and cannot get a pardon I get religion, and I go to heaven. The hand of mercy cannot reach down through the shadows of hell to my victim. There ia no atonement for the saint only for the sinner and the crim- inal. The atonement saves the wrong man. I have said that I would never make a lecture at all without attacking this doctrine. I did not care what I started out on. I was always going to attack this doctrine. And in my conclusion I want to draw you a few pictures of the Christian heaven. But before I do that I want to say the rest I have to say about Moses. I want you to understand that the Bible was never printed until 1488. I want you to know that up to that time it was in manuscript, in possession of those who could change it if they wished; and they did change it, because no two ever agreed. Much of it was in the waste bas- ket of credulity, in the open mouth of tradition, and in the dull ear of memory. I want you also to know that the Jews themselves never agreed as to what books were inspired, and that there were a lot of books written that were not incorporated in the Old Testament. I want you to know that two or three years before Christ, the Hebrew manuscript was trans- lated into Greek, and that the original from which the translation was made has never been seen since. Some Latin Bibles were found in Africa but no two agreed; and then they translated the Septuagint into the lan- guages of Europe, and no two agreed. Henry VIII. took a little time between murdering his wives to see that the Word of God was translated sorrectly. You must recollect that we are indebted to murderers for our Bibles and our creeds. Constantino, who helped on the good work in its early stage, murdered his wife and child, mingling their blood with the blood of the Savior. The Bible that Henry VIII. got up did not suit, and then his daughter, the murderess of Mary, Queen of Scotts, got up another edition, which also did not suit; and finally, that philosophical idiot, King James, prepared the edition which we now have. There are at least one hundred thousand errors in the Old Testament, but everybody sees that it is not enough to invalidate its claim to infallibility. But these errors are gradually being faed, and hereafter the prophet will be fed by Arabs instead of "ravens,'* and Samson's three hundred foxes will be three hundred "sheaves" already bound, which were fired and thrown into the standing wheat. I want you all to know that there was no contemporaneous literature at the time the Bible was composed, and that the Jews were infinitely ignorant m their day and generation that they were isolated by bigotry and wick- edness from the rest of the world. I want you to know that there are fourteen hundred millions of people in the world; and that with all the talk and work of the societies, only one hundred and twenty millions haw* 118 MISTAKES OF IXGERSOLL. pot Bibles. 1 want you to understand that not one person in one hundred in thia world ever read the Bible, and no two ever understood it alike who did read it, and that no one person probably ever understood it aright. 1 want you to understand that where this Bible has been, man has hated his brother there have been dungeons, racks, thumbscrews, and the sword. I want you to know that the cross has been in partnership with the sword, and that the religion of Jesus Christ was established by mur- derers, tyrants and hypocrites. I want you to know that the church carried the black flag. Then talk about the civilizing influence of thi* religion ! Now, I want to give an idea or two in regard to the Christian's heaven. Of all the selfish tilings in this world, it is one man wanting to get to heaven, caring nothing what becomes of the rest of mankind. " If I can only get my little soul in! " I have always noticed that the people who have the smallest souls make the mostfuss about getting them saved. Here is what we are taught by the church to-day. We are taught by it that fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters can all be happy in heaven, uo matter who may be in hell; that the husband can be happy there with the wife that would have died for him at any moment of his life in hell. But they say, " We don't believe in fire. What we believe in now is remorse." What will you have remorse for? For the mean things you have done when you are in hell? Will you have any remorse for the mean things you have done when you are in heaven? Or will you be so good then that you won't care how you used to be? Do n't you see what an infinitely mean belief that is? I tell you to-day that, no matter in what heaven you may be, no matter in what star you are spending the summer, if you meet another man whom you have wronged you will drop a little behind in the tune. And, no matter in what part of hell you are, and you meet some one whom you have succored, whose nakedness you have clothed, and whose famine you have fed, the fire will cool up a little. According to this Christian doctrine, when yon are in heaven you won't care how mean you were once. What must be the social condition of a gentleman in heaven who will admit that he never would have been there if he had not got scared ? What must be the ocial position of an angel who will always admit that if another had not pitied him he ought to have been damned? Is it a compliment to an infi- nite God to say that every being He ever made deserved to be damned the minute He got him done, and that He will damn everybody He has not had a chance to make over? Is it possible that somebody else can be good for me, and that this doctrine of the atonement is the only anchor for the human soul ? For instance: here is a man seventy years of age, who has been t "MISTAKES OF MOSES." 117 splendid fellow and lived according to the laws of nature. He has got about him splendid children, whom he has loved and cared for with all hit heart. But he did not happen to believe in this Bible; he did not believe in the Pentateuch. He did not believe that because some child- 'ren made fun of a gentleman who was short of hair, God sent two bears and tore the little darlings to pieces. He had a tender heart, and ha thought about the mothers who would take the pieces, the bloody frag- ments of the children, and press them to their bosom in a frenzy of grief ; he thought about their wails and lamentations, and could not believe that God was such an infinite monster. That was all he thought, but he went to Hell. Then, there is another man who made a hell on earth for his wife, who had to be taken to the insane asylum, and his children were driven from home and were wanderers and vagrants in the world. But just between the last sin and the last breath, this fellow got religion, and he never did another thing except to take his medicine. He never did a solitary human being a favor, and he died and went to heaven. Do n't you think he would be astonished to see that other man in hell, and say to himself, " Is it possible that such a splendid character should bear such fruit, and that all my rascality at last has brought me next to God?" Or, let us put another ease. You were once alone in the desert no provisions, no water, no hope. Just when your life was at its lowest ebb, a man appeared, gave you water and food and brought you safely out. How you would bless that man. Time rolls on. You die and go to heaven; and one day you see through the black night of hell, the friend who saved your life, begging for a drop of water to cool his parched lips. He cries to you, " Remember what I did in the desert give me to drink." How mean, how contemptible you would feel to see his suffering and be unable to relieve him. But this is the Christian heaven. We sit by the fireside and see the flames and the sparks fly np the chimney everybody happy, and the cold wind and sleet are beating on the window, and out on the doorstep is a mother with a child on her breast freezing. How happy it makes a fireside, that beautiful contrast. And we say "God is good," and there we sit, and she sits and moans, not one night but for- ever. Or we are sitting at the table with our wives and children, every- body eating, happy and delighted, and Famine comes and pushes out its shriveled palms, and, with hungry eyes, implores us for a crust. How that would increase the appetite! And yet that is the Christian heaven. Don't you see that these infamous doctrines petrify the human heart? And I would have every one who hears me, swear that he will never con- tribute another dollar to build another church, in which is taught such infamous lies. I want every one of you to say that you never will, direct- 118 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. ly or indirectly, give a dollar to any man to preach that falsehood. It has done harm enough. It has covered the world with blood. It nan filled the asylums for the insane. It has cast a shadow in the heart, in the sunlight of every good and tender man and woman. I say let OB rid the heavens of this monster, and writ* upon the dome " Liberty, lore and law." No matter what may come to me or what may come to you, let us do exactly what we believe to be right, and let us give the exact thought in our brains. Rather than have this Christianity true, I would rather all the gods would destroy themselves this morning. I would rather the whole universe would go to nothing, if snch a thing were possible, thi instant. Rather than have the glittering dome of pleasure reared on the ternal abyss of pain, I would see the utter *nd eternal destruction of this universe. I would rather see the shining fabric of our universe crumble to unmeaning chao, and take itself where oblivion broods and memory forgeta. I would rather the blind Samson of some imprisoned force, re- leased by thoughtless chance, should so rack and strain this world that man in stress and straint. in astonishment and fear, should suddenly fall back to savagery and barbarity. I would rather that this thrilled and thrilling globe, shorn of all life, should in its cycles rub the wheel, the parent s.ar, on which the light should fall as fruitlessly as falls the gaze of love on death, than to have this infamous doctrine of eternal punish- ment true; rather than have this infamous selfishness of a heaven for a few and a hell for the many established as the word of God! One world at a time is my doctrine. Let u? make some one happy here. Happiness is the interest that a decent action draws, and the more decent actions you do, the larger your income wi)l be. Let every man try to make his wife happy, his children happy. Let every man try to make every day a joy, and God cannot aflbrd to damn such a man. I cannot help God; 1 cannot injure God. I can help people; I can injure people. Consequently humanity is the only real religion. I cannot better close this lecture than by quoting four lines from Robert Burns: To make a happy fireside clime To weans and wife That'i the true pathos and lublim* Of human life." JB&E a. BLAOK'8 KEPLT. JUDGE JERE S. BLACK'S REPLY TO COL. This is no personal wrangle with Mr. Ingersoll. He has said nothing offensive about me. His indignation at finding himself confronted, not by a professional theologian, but by a layman who applied the judicial test to his assertions, was natural and expressed with tolerable moderation. On the other hand, I tried, and I think I tried successfully, to confine myself rigidly to the square issue between us. A just or even an intelligent criticism, could not be made wi thout some reference to his mental peculiarities, which, with habits of shallow thinking and rash talking, made him an utterly incompetent judge of the subject he pretended to argue. But I found the proofs of this within the four corners of his own paper. There, also, I learned that he was without any acknowledged standard of right or wrong. It was legitimate to notice that, because it ac- counted satisfactorily for his other utterances. Neither is there any question of partisan politics be- tween us. I have certain political convictions, which you may call prejudices if you will. But whether they are well or ill-founded, they have no manner of just con nee- 120 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. tion with the subject matter of Mr. Ingersoll's diatribe against Christianity. I believe, and have often expressed the belief, that re- ligion and politics cannot be mingled together without en- dangering both. The most perfect system of human gov- ernment that ever was invented by the wit of man, and the holiest religion that God has revealed to His creatures, when united together, form a monstrous compound highly injurious to the best interests of the human race. Such a union is pronounced by Christ and His apostles to be impure, and the fathers of this Republic so shaped their fundamental law as to make it a wall of perfect partition between them. Without such complete separation there can be no security for either civil liberty or the rights of conscience in matters of religion. The worst form of this adulterous connection is not assumed when a legal union is formed between Church and State. It is when a popular party in a free government undertakes to mingle its coarse interests and its vulgar passions with the religious senti- ments of the people. That is what pollutes and falsifies both. The history of the world, and especially that of our own country, has been written in vain if this be not the lesson it teaches. These convictions not only disarm me of the power to repel Mr. Ingersoll's assaults by a political argu- ment, but force me to admit for the purposes of this case that he is right on all the points of that kind which he chooses to lug in. lean do that, argumenti gratia, without affecting the real question in controversy. He thought he was striking a powerful blow at the Al- mighty when he showed that the Jewish Constitution con- tained a provision which conflicted with the platform of the Abolitionists. They had determined and resolved that JERE 8. SLACK'S REPLY. 121 under all circumstances, at all times, and everywhere, the toleration of slavery or servitude for life was a crime. By this and by other means not now to be described they got money, power, and great personal consequence for them- selves and their fellows. Mr. Ingersoll could trust them to unite with him in howling down Christianity or anything else that dimin- ished the profits of their business. Directly before him he had the successful example of Demetrius, the silver- smith, who raised a tremendous uproar against the Gospel of Christ by simply bellowing out : " Great is Diana of the Ephesians." " Sirs, you know that by this craft we have our wealth." I could only protest that these appeals to the interest and passions of a political party were unfair. Diana of the Ephesians and Yankee Abolitionism may both have been great, and they were great in the sense of being pop- alar, but that does not prove that the Gospel of God is a pernicious imposture. The Jewish Constitution, which tolerated the enslavement of savages in Judea, and the resolves of the Abolition caucus, which condemned it in America, might both be right, since the two systems were not to be judged by one another; each should be consid- ered with proper reference to circumstances widely differ- ent. But the suggestion that the infallible God might be believed to have proceeded on just grounds without im- pugning the righteousness of the Abolitionists met with no favor. The practiced demagog cannot forego the tricks of hia trade, and so he makes the panegyric of his political fac- tion an excuse for casting contempt in the face of his Maker nd for insulting the faith and reason of all who be- lieve in Christ. The barest thought that the Judffe of all 122 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. the earth did right fills him with rancor, which he pours out over page after page and then repeats it again and again : Unpacks his heart with words, And falls to cursing like a very drab A scullion I have said thus much about the slavery point, not as an answer to Mr. Ingersoll, but because I will not have it understood, if I can help it, that I permitted or provoked the introduction of partisan politics into the discussion of a religious subject. These furious outbreaks of intemperate abuse upon God, His laws and institutions, do not disturb any one's intel- lectual belief or at all diminish the awful reverence which a Christian feels for the supreme object of his adoration. Mr. Ingersoll thinks he is raising a storm on the ocean of thought; he is not producing a ripple. He is merely doing the part of a common scold, to whom the idle listen for the sport of the thing, while others, taking counsel of their outraged feelings, think him a nuisance that ought to be abated. This is, perhaps, not so very easy to do. A woman, for such an offense, could be ducked, under the rule of the ancient law, but when a communis vixatrix of the male gender vexes the peace of the neighborhood in this way the remedy is difficult and doubtful. To learn how gratuitous these anilities are how he scolds for the mere sake of scolding look at his fanfar- onade on polygamy. By the unaided influence of the Church alone this vice has been extirpated completely and perfectly. In Christian countries the universal rule is that one man shall be the husband of one wife and no more; and it is neither the rule nor the practice anywhere else on the face of the globe. Now, a person who has or- JERE S. BLACK'S REPLY. 123 dinary sense must see that the moral merit of Christ's Gospel in this respect is directly proportioned to the mag- nitude of the evil, from which it has relieved human society. But Mr. Ingersoll tries to blacken the character of the Christian religion by railing at the bad practice which it has opposed and destroyed. If he had flung out at mono- gamous marriage, which Christianity upholds, his act, though unjust, might have had an apparent object not alto- gether preposterous. Indeed, monogamy is as open to mere vulgar vituperation as polygamy. When an unclean mind exerts itself to imagine what may take place it is as easy to talk about brutality and the animal degradation of woman in one case as another. To the beastly all things are beastly. In point of fact the great body of unbelievers have de- nounced the Christian institution of marriage with espe- cial bitterness. To tie one man and one woman together by a bond which nothing but death can dissolve is, in their opinion, not only unjust and immoral, but a base and brutal tyranny which imposes a degrading restraint upon the natural rights of men and women to love and cohabit with whom they please. This is a prime and prominent part of the atheistic theory, everywhere advocated by its regular organs and its greatest disciples. In France, where their societies are compact and powerful, they define their creed substantially thus: 1. There is no God. 2. Religion is a lie. 3. Property is theft. 4. Love must be free. 5. Marriage is slavery. 6. Children belong to the State and not to anybody in particular. This is u the gospel of dirt," I don't say that Mr. In- gersoll swallows it whole. He believes, or at least he practices, the Christian doctrine on the subjects of mar- 124 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. riage, paternity, and property, not because he is bound bj the Divine commandment, but because he feels like it. Others, rejecting as he does the " golden metewand of the law," have an equal right to take their own feelings as the measure of righteousness. So one set of atheists curses marriage and another blackguards polygamy, and they are both right if there be no God above all and over all. My principal object is to show that Ingersoll's "circu- lar abuse " amounts to absolutely nothing. A regular reply would prove that in every line of his last article he has either falsified history or applied to it an erroneous interpretation. But I am tempted not to quit without giving a sample of his efforts .at scientific reasoning. If he does not deny the existence of a God, his occupa- tion is gone. The object, therefore, of his highest ambi- tion ever since he took the stump against Christianity has been and is to annihilate the evidence which shows that the world has a Maker and a Moral Governor. This being his great central point on which all other points must turn, he has, of course, laid himself out to his very best for it. Let us see what he has achieved. I thought I was giving a true and accurate account of his theory when I said that he regarded the universe as natural; that "it came into being of its own accord "; that "it made its own laws at the start, and afterward improved itself considerably by spontaneous evolution." But he denies that this is a true exposition of his views,|and he exercises his conceded right to define them again more sharply than he did before. Now he says that the uni- verse did not come into being at all; it always was; nor did it make its own laws, for it has no laws. If the material universe existed, just as it is now, from all unbegun eternity, there is, to be sure, not much chance JERE S. BLACK'S ME PL Y. 125 for a creature to have done any work; if its harmony is preserved and the uniformity of its action maintained without any rule or regulation prescribed by a superior power, then there is and has been no need of a lawgiver; God is, therefore, so useless a being that He must be the- oretically blotted out of existence. For the proposition that the universe always was (with- out a creator) and will be forever (without a preserver) he offers only one proof, to-wit, that it is according to his idea. This he considers potent enough to overrule all the evidence, direct and circumstantial, by which his "idea" is opposed. All testimony borne by the common sense of mankind, all the deductions of reason, all philos- ophy, and all faith in Holy Writ, must be swept aside, so that his idea may have free course to run and be glorified. But this ascription of supreme authority to an idea, mere- ly because it happens to be his idea, will hardly be con- curred in. The assertion of it, indeed, proves nothing except that his bump of self-esteem is in a state of chronic inflammation. He starts another idea, which has the same special merit of being his own, namely: that the material universe is not governed by laws. The planets move at the rate and in orbits which can be calculated with absolute certainty; the earth revolves on its axis with such perfect regularity that the very second of time at which the sun will rise at a particular place can be predicted a thousand years be- forehand; chemical substances combine always in exactly the same relative proportions; in the animal and vegetable worlds like produces like; in all organized beings certain causes are known to produce certain effects favorable or unfavorable to light and health. Mr. Ingersoll's idea .is that these are not the results of 126 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. law or tiny sort ot'intelligentpre-arrangement; but they are phenomena which happen, and the world is by mere acci- dent prevented from falling into chaos. In his wisdom he decides " as matter of fact " that there is no rule back of the phenomenon which a controlling power compels the subject-matter to obey; it merely happens, but it happens so uniformly that it creates the idea of law in our minds, which is, however, a mere delusion. If Galileo and New- ton and Kepler and all the other philosophers, great and small, have been seduced into the weak belief that the ma- terial universe is underthe reign of law, it is rare good fortune for us in these latter days to have found a superior personage who, by merely turning the Drum- mond light of his intellect on the subject, at once exposes the blunders of the ignorant living and " the barbarous dead." Let no man misunderstand or misrepresent Mr. Inger- Boll. It is not in irony or to point a scurrile jest that he denies the operation of natural laws upon matter. He is in serious earnest, and if he does not actually believe what he says, his simulation of sincerity is very perfect. To make himself clear he takes a simple case. Water, he says, always runs down hill, not because there is a law be- hind it law does not cause the phenomenon, but the phe- nomenon causes the idea of law to exist in our minds but that idea is on this side of the fact. It follows that Newton must have been grossly mistaken when he said that the falling of water and other bodies toward the center of the earth was caused by the law of gravitation. Mr. Ingersoll supposes that he is imputing an absurdity to me when lie says, "Mr. Black probably thinks the dif- ference in the weight of rocks and clouds is produced by law/' Undoubtedly I do. I learned in my infancy (and JERE 8. BLACK'S REPLY. 127 I have "kept the credulity of the cradle ") that this dif- ference is caused by that same law of gravitation operating according to rules which are perfectly understood by all tolerably well-informed men. I will go further arid con- fess that I think it a most beneficent law which prevents the rocks from flying about through the air and the clouds from becoming immovably fixed in the earth. Our great Creator ought to be adored and thanked^ for making such an arrangement. But this only proves to Mr. Ingersoll that I am a believer in " the monstrous and miraculous, the impossible and immoral." Mr. Ingersoll is much accused of plagiarism. Whether that be true or not of his declamatory spouting, this no- tion that the material world is not governed by law is without doubt original. It never entered any human head before and I think that in all future time it will find no lodgment in the mind of any reasonable being. Another way he has of reaching the athiestic conclu- sion. I do not say that I know what he wants to be at. But as well as I can understand him, he asserts that the universe could not have had a design because we cannot trace back the designer to his own origin; the world was not made because we cannot tell who made the maker. The mechanism of a watch is so curious that " it must," says he, " have had a maker, but he adds the watchmaker himself is more wonderfully made than the watch, and hence he infers that he also must have had a maker, since the necessity of a Creator increases with the wonder of the creature. He is unquestionably, though perhaps un- consciously, right in this. It makes a demonstration as complete as mathematics that man was created by "some pre-existent and self-conscious being of power and wisdom to us unconceivable." 128 MISTAKES OF INUERSOLL. But instead of accepting this plain, palpable, and neces- sary consequence of his own logic, he turns his back upon the conclusion, and begins to maunder over his own ina- bility to understand how a designer could be without an anterior design, and telling how hard it is for him to see the plan or design in earthquakes and pestilences; and how the justice of God is not visible to him in the history of the world. This silly trash" he thinks sufficient to repel the irresist- ible proofs of a Creator which he himself has adduced, and which by all fair and unperverted minds are received as conclusive. J. S. BLACK. Not satisfied with his recent parade of the "Mistakes of Moses " before the Chicago public (which called forth our first book, entitled the " Mistakes of Ingersoll, as Shown By Prof. Swing and Others "), Mr. I. has since returned and delivered another lecture against the Bible and against his critics, Prof. Swing, Dr. Ryder, Dr. Hertford and Dr. Collyer. These last efforts of Mr. Ingersoll have called forth the present volume, in which will be found additional " Mistakes," as shown by Rev. W. F. Crafts, who is the well-known successor of Dr. Tiffany in Trinity Methodist Episcopal Church; by Chaplain C. C. McCabe, Bishop Cheney, Arthur Swazey, D.D., Robert Collyer, D.D., whose names are all familar to the public; and by Fred Perry Powers, who is favorably identified with Chicago journalism. The " commendable fairness," mentioned by the press, in printing both the " text and replies " in the former volume* requires in this instance, also the text, which is given at the close and which includes Mr. Ingersoll's replies to Prof. Swing, Dr. Ryder, Brooke Herford and others. J. B. McCLURE. CHICAGO, May 17, 1879. Entered according to Art of Congress, in the year 1879, by J. B. McCuiRB & R. 8. RHODES, in the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington, D. C J"ACJlfi. W. F. CRAFTS' REPLY ...... 7 Ingersollism Outlined "Ten Points" instead of " Five " Infi- del Protoplasm . . . . . . 7 First Point in the Ten Sepulchral Hoots of the Ingersoll Owl A Theological Rip Van Winkle .... 10 Ingersoll Mistakes a Part for the Whole Gross Misrepresenta- tions ........ 12 The Great Ingersoll Boomerang How it Works Further Mis- representations Examined ..... 13 Misrepresenting Bible Passages . . . 14 Sun and Moon Standing Still ..... 15 Hell 16 The Present vs. the Future . . . . . 17 Ingersoll's Horrible Estimate of Truth ... 19 The Bible the Best of Books, and Christ the Best of Men . 20 Something New if True Infidelity the Essential Factor in Pro- gressive Civilization But Coleridge, Wm. H. Seward, Bis- marck, and other Great Statesman can not see it Civilization goes only with Christianity .... 21 Marvelous Power of Time and Circumstance Tragic Effect of Iso-thermal Lines Peoria Mud Necessarily the Seventli Heaven as Ingersoll Sees it . . . .34 Law is Ingersoll's God ..... 26 Liberty and Infidelity What De Tocqueville Says About it 26 Woman Ingersoll's Theory at Variance with Facts . . 27 Ingersoll's Theory of Childhood Some of His Little Stories The Whole Subject Carefully Examined Significant Incident in the Life of Abraham Lincoln . . . . 28 Ingersoll Says Christianity Fetters Thought The Bible and a Host of Distinguished Men Say Otherwise . . .32 A Cloud of Witnesses ..... 34 Jesus Christ ..... 37 Amazing Ignorance of Infidels Concerning the Scriptures Hume's Ignorance of the New Testament Tom Paine With- out a Bible ....... 38 I 4 CONTENTS. Distributed Ignorance nd Concentrated Hatred Probable Cause of Ingers"H's Infidelity . . ... 89 The Truth of the Whole Matter . . . .' . . 40 CHAPLAIN MCCABE'S REPLY . . . . .43 The Famous Chaplain Has a Remarkable Dream He Sees the Great City of Ingersollville Which Ingersoll and the Infidel Host Enter And are Shut in for Six Months Remarkable Condition of Things Outside and Inside Happiness and Misery Ingersoll Finally Petitions for a Church and sends for a Lot of Preachers ..... 43 DR. SWAZEY'S REPLY ...... 49 Momentary View of Col. Ingersoll Through the Doctor's Glass The Bible on the Meridian What the Doctor Sees in the Great Book ....... 49 Occultatiou of Ingersoll's Good Sense General Survey of Deities Scope of Divine Revelation ... 51 The Great Central Figure Absolute Unity of the Bible System 53 The Bible Law of Development vs. Infidel Philosophy . 54 Common Sense View of the Subject How it Eliminates Polyg- amy, Slavery, Etc. ...... 56 More Common Sense The Great Ingersoll Orb Approaching the Nihilistic Belt Nebulae ..... 58 DR. COLLYER'S REPLY ...... 63 Dr. Collyer Relates a Little Story A Book that Cost Mr. Inger- soll the Governorship of Illinois The Volume Philosophically Considered Heavy Blows . . . . .63 Sparks Flying in all Directions Singular Mental Phenomenon Occasioned by $25,000 a Year . . . 64 The Clear Ring of Truth vs. the Dull Thud of the Baser Metal- Potency of Simple Statement The Doctor's Objections to Ingersoll's Talk ...... 67 Putting the Fine Edge on Orthodoxy Taking a Weld with Prof. Swing and Dr. Thomas Borax and Bigotry . . 69 A Touching Illustration Eloquence and Truth Havelock's Saints ........ 73 Atheism Not an Institution but a " Destitution ! " The True Life 74 FRED. PERRY POWERS' REPLY .... 75 The Sinaitie Code Solvent Powers of the Historic Method- Graphic Illustration of the Two Schools ... 75 CONTENTS. 5 Divine Adjustment of the Moral Law Progressive Elimination of Polygamy, Slavery, Etc. Mount Sinai and Mount Calvary 78 Purpose and Potency of the Mosaic Law ... 80 Excessive Wickedness and Proportionate Punishment The Court of Heaven vs. the Court of Eartli ... 82 Able Bodied Mendacity and Civilization Love and Obedience 84 Mr. Powers' Pungent Peroration .... 85 BISHOP CHENEY'S REPLY . . . . . .89 How the Question of Forgery Applies to the Five Books of Moses . . . . . . . . 89 The " Common Ground " of the Contending Parties Logical Position of Ezra . . . . . . .91 The Bishop Planting Signals on the Mountain Tops of History Survey of the New Moses Air Line .... 92 Termination of the Great Air Line . . . .95 Genealogical Reflections, ..... 96 Cutting the Gordian Knot . . . . . .97 The Bishop's Challenge Moses and Ingersoll as Chronologists 99 Mud Calendars vs. Facts Some Sad and Sorrowful Scientific Figuring in the Sand ...... 101 A Mistake of Ingersoll, Tom Paine & Co. Corrected Conclusion 103 fNGERSOLL's LECTURE ON SKULLS and his Replies to Prof. Swing, Dr. Ryder, Dr. Herford, Dr. Collyer, and Other Critics, . . 107 INGERSOLL AT His BROTHER'S GRAVE . . . 146 Colonel Ingersoll's Funeral Oration .... 147 HENRY WARD BEECHER'S Comments on Mr. IngersolPs Faith, and Funeral Discourse . . . . . .148 HON. ISAAC N. ARNOLD'S Comments on Ingersoll's Funeral Oration 150 ISTAKES OF INGERSOLL AS SHOWN BY W. F. CRAFTS, CHAPLAIN McCABE, ARTHUR SWAZEY, D. D. ROBERT COLLYEli, D. D. F. P. POWERS, BISHOP CHENEY, AND OTHERS. ALSO INCLUDING INGERSOLL'S LECTURE IN FULL ON " SKULLS," AND HIS RE- PLIES TO PKOF. SWING, W. II. RYDER. BROOKE HERFORD, AND OTHER CRITICS. W. F. CRAFTS' REPLY. Ingersollism Outlined "Ten Points" instead of "Five" Infidel Protoplasm. " I WAR with principles, not with men " the motto of Webster in political debates should be the law in all con- flicts of ideas, especially in the realm of religion. It is not of the person, Mr. Ingersoll, that I speak, but rather of the principles of which he is the most popular spokes- man, and which make up that shallowest, but loudest Jericho book of infidelity's bitter waters which begins in a few tears of pretended martyrdom to love of truth ; spat- ters the mud of epithets upon Christians, while condemn- ing that very vu-e in a part of the Church in less advanced 7 8 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. ages; babbies shallowly along its little cbanncl about law as an almigbtj executive, as if the rails that give direction to a train took the place of the engine that draws it: winds J. O t very crookedly through the Old Testament, avoiding every passage except those few that can be used for ridicule; plows still more crookedly through church history, shun- ning every part except the unchristian swamps of bigotry aad superstition; keeps up the same snaky crookedness in its passage through religion of to-day, hurrying noisily among only the few rocky and marshy places, where it can find the reptiles of superstition and error; passes with great dash of spray along the audacious theory that Christian civilization is the result of anti-Christian forces; plunges with loud roar of waters down its claim that infidelity is the only liberator of man, woman, and child; and still flow- ing within its narrow little channel babbles of itself as an emancipated ocean of untrammeled thought. These characteristics of the brook are the ten points of Ingersollism. I have read and re-read, carefully, the nine published lectures of Mr. Ingersoll on religious themes, besides hearing the one entitled " Skulls," and every one of them has something on each t of these ten points of his fixed and unchanging creed, and not one or all has anything beyond these ten " doctrines " for he often uses the words, " That is my doctrine." While attacking creeds of the Church he holds and urges all to believe his own unformu- lated but distinct creed, offering in place of the " five points of Calvinism " the ten points of Ingersollism, the latter occurring as regularly in every one of his lectures in this age as the former did a century ago in the sermons of Cal- vinists, which he ridicules for their sameness. "What is this frightful monster that we call " a creed?" Simply a statement of what one believes. Every man, jmless he is an idiot, has a creed in which he agrees W. F. CRAFTS' REPLY. 9 with somebody. The only question is to find by "reason, observation, and experience,'' which is the best. It would hardly be considered bigotry for a scientist to believe a few things as a creed of fixed scientific truths which no progress can ever erase, for instance, the rotund- ity and revolution of the earth, the attraction of the planets upon each other, and scores of other things M liich every scientist has held for many years unchanged, and is sure are unchangeable because proved conclusively. There are some certainties in the science of religion, such as are referred to in the Apostles' Creed, which may, without any greater bigotry, be considered as proved and established. The Christian Church of to-day does not generally insist upon anything further than these few concrete facts of the ' Apostles' Creed " as essentials " in Christian belief. "When Evangelical churches shout their watchword, " In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity," it is as if a company of scientists should say, " On proved facts we will all agree, but in the realms of hypothesis and opinion, we will agree to disagree." But the special point we wish to notice is, that Mr. Ingersoll attacks creed with creed. He is as bigoted a par- tisan of his own creed as ever called hard names. The very heart of his creed seems to be the belief that his mission is to destroy the creed of everybody else. It is a suggestive fact that the naturally-gifted mind of Mr. Ingersoll, who declares that godless and soulless mate- rialism is the emancipator and inspirer of thought, should be able, in all the years which these ten lectures represent, to produce but ten ideas, the same ten ideas which made up his earliest lecture, years ago, appearing successively in each of the succeeding lectures, including that of to-day, there being no change save in the cap and bells of his jokes. Beading these ten ideas over and over for as many 10 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. hours in going through these lectures, brought back a ludicrous scene in our college burial of mathematics when fifteen notes of Plejel's hymn were played dolefully over and over again for nearly an hour, as marching music. In reading these lectures, which are but ten combinations %nd permutations of ten ideas, one is reminded also of the lecturer's own illustration of the boarding house keeper, who, for years, had no change of diet from hash, for every lecture is the same hash of ten ideas, changed only in the name and in the order of putting in the ten elements. ARTICLE I. First Point in the Ten Sepulchral Hoots of the Ingersoll Owl A Theological Rip Van Winkle. As in the beet hash of New England the blood red beet predominates and gives color to the whole, so the principal element in these lectures against Christianity is the blood of past persecutions by a corrupt part of the Church, for which true Christianity has no more responsibility than a loyal colonel in our war of 1776, or 1861, for the robberies and crimes of camp-followers or traitors. In every published lecture on religion, Mr. Ingersoll deliberately cites the acts of the Benedict Arnolds of the Christian army as repre- senting the Washingtons and Grants. He describes past counterfeits of religion as specimens of its accepted cur- rency. It is as if one should attack present astronomers by relating ridiculous stories of the old astrologers, or assail present physicians by quoting the strange practices of the ancient alchemists. In one lecture a fair representative of all in this respect I found that in forty-three pages only two did not con- tain these stale references to past persecutions, except a few pages given to the trial of Professor Swing, which were equally stale as assailing chiefly abandoned features of W. F. C HAFTS' ME PLY 11 human Calvinism. Past errors and follies of the humaa Calvinism, human Catholicism, and heathen religions are constantly spoken of as if vital elements of Christianity. Mr. Ingersoll ought to have a hymn to sing at the open- ing and close of his lectures, made on the pattern of that one whose first verse is: Go on, go on, go on, go on, Go on, go on, go on, Go on, go on, go on, go on, Go on, go on, go on, with forty-two verses more of the same, substituting " past persecutions," instead of "go on," which is too progressive for a " go-back " lecture. Mr. Ingersoll is a Rip Yan Winkle in theology, who seems to have slept ever since the days of persecution. He is a Sancho Panza who assails imaginary foes of his own making, and thinks he has captured the golden helmet of Christianity when he has only secured the abandoned brass "kettle of old traditions and discarded superstitions. He is a Falstaff killing the dead Percy of past follies. His lectures bustle with the antiquated and misused words "priests," " dark ages," " witches," " fagots," " religious wars," " church fathers," " damned infants," " martyrs," " gods," etc., as if he were speaking in a heathen land, and also in some dead century. And he uses the past tense so exclusively in his " progressive " lectures that one would suppose English as well as Hebrew had no present tense. It must have been Mr. Ingersoll, in his boyhood, that came from his first hunt crying, " I 've shot a cherub," having mistaken an owl for a cherub, because of the wretched pictures of the latter on the old grave stones. Mr. Ingersoll logically destroys some Church owl of the dark ages, and because it corresponds with his own carica- ture of the Church thinks hn has dethroned Christianity 13 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. itself. Like Poe's " raven " who had but one word, " Never- more," Mr. Ingersoll is continually crying in the ears of the present that worn-out strain about abuses which we all condemn, u Galileo-Servetus, Galileo-Servetus." This ten-idea champion of popular materialism, while talking of progress and condemning those who hold fast to things of the past, is nevertheless so largely devoted to showing his carefully preserved martyr-mummies from the long-past ages of persecution, that we find Mark Twain's question constantly arising at each new charge against Christianity: "Is he is he dead?" and we are also tempted to cry out for a " fresh corpse " in place of these very dry and dead mummies of past abuses. To paraphrase the lecturer's own words, we want one pres- ent fact. We pass our hats through the lectures in vain for some present facts against pure Christianity, which he assumes to assail and overthrow. There is far more excuse for Thomas Paine, in an age when the old Calvinistic errors were largely held, and for Yoltaire, surrounded by the superstitions of Romanism, misunderstanding Christianity, than for this modern lecturer, who very well knows that the caricatures which he represents as Christianity are very old pictures of its ancient camp-followers. ARTICLE II. Ingersoll Mistakes a Part for the Whole Gross Misrepresen- tations. Article Second of Ingersollism, like unto the first, but with present instead of past tense, is about as follows: Christianity to-day is proved to be false by the present errors and abuses that are found in some of the churches. Romish superstitions and the errors of those who have grossly misinterpreted the Bible as a support of slavery, polygamy, etc., are continually used by this champion of W. P. GRAFTS' REPLY. 13 " liberty of thought," and " charity " and " brotherhood," as representing true Christianity to-day, which is quite as honorable as if a man should attack the principles of med- icine by citing the tricks of quacks. An examination of the hull of the Great Eastern found adhering to the iron- plates of the bottom an enormous multitude of mussels, whose weight is estimated at three hundred tons. The great ship has been carrying on her hull a burden equal to full cargoes for six or eight sailing ships. Suppose I should show you a few of those barnacles as specimens of what the Great Eastern is made of, and then denounce its builders as fools? Mr. Ingersoll is constantly confounding barnacles of some " church " with Christian- ity. Suppose I should take the belts a-nd whips of torture that are used by Romanists in Mexico and show them in lectures as specimens of the barbarism of Congregational- ists and Methodists? It is certainly most palpable unfair- ness for Mr. Ingersoll to use the word "gods" indiscrimi- nately of heathen and Christian objects of worship, and to employ the words, " The Church," as if there were no false or true, past or present in connection with it, and as if its meaning were as much a unit as " The Moon." So also he unfairly classes all ministers as "priests." It would be quite as fair to speak of all " medicine men," past and present, savage and civilized, under the words, " The Doctors." ARTICLE III. The Great Ingersoll Boomerang How it Works Further Mis- representations Carefully Examined. Far less prominent, but ever present, is the third element in Ingersollism an oft-recurring moan " Infidels to-day are martyrs at whom men cast epithets, but not ballots." 1 The defeated infidel politician appears as regularly and 14 MISTAKES OF INOEHSOLL. revengefully in every lecture (indirectly, of course) as the misanthropic Byron shows himself in each of his poems as the real hero under the various names of " Childe Harold not understand." Similar sentiments are uttered by 24 v MISTAKES OF INGEHSOLL. the leading statesmen of all lands, the unanimous verdict of statesmanship being that civilization can not be carried forward without Christianity. ARTICLE V. Marvelous Power of Time and Circumstance Tragic Effect 01 Iso-thermal Lines Peoria Mud Necessarily the Seventh Heaven as Zngersoll Sees it. The fifth article of Ingersollisin is, that gods and men are but evolutions of matter and circumstance, the differ- ence between heathen gods and the Christian's God being the result of a difference in their worshippers, and the dif- ference in men being the result of varying soils and sur- roundings. He says : " No god was ever in advance of the nation that created him." In answer to this last statement, which is true, of course, of all imaginary deities, but not of the One True God, it is only necessary to ask any candid and intelligent man to read the description of God given in the Bible, where both Testaments declare Him to be "merciful and gracious, long suffering and abundant in goodness and truth, but will by no means spare the guilty," and then say whether this God is nothing more than the reflec- tion of the stiff-necked and perverse people who held to this conception of Deity. The fact is, God as described in the Bible is infinitely loftier and purer than the Jewish people, or any people of any age. It is still more absurd, if pos- sible, for Mr. Ingersoll to assert that " men are but the creatures of their surroundings, made what they are wholly by material causes, such as soil and climate." It is one of the characteristic contradictions of history, such as are found so frequently in Mr. Ingersoll's lectures, when he asserts that great minds have never been found except in the " lands of respectable winters," with the intimation that no great achievements in art or literature are possible in warm W. F. CRAFTS' REPLY. 25 Oriental lands. As if Babylon, and Nineveh, and Egypt had not been in early ages the universities of the world. Carlyle must have been very much deceived when he declared Job of the Oriental land of Uz to be the greatest poet the world has known. Mohammed of those warm lands was certainly great, even though wrong, and scores of others, equally eminent, uJght be mentioned, although, of course, it is evident that greatness of men or peoples in tropical lands is rather in spite of circumstances than by their help. Mr. Ingersoll in his lecture on "Man, Woman, and Child," speaking of one of these warm countries as the rep- resentative of all, says: "You might go there with five thousand Congregational preachers, five thousand deacons, five thousand professors in colleges, five thousand of the solid men of Boston and their wives, settle them all, and you will see the second generation riding upon a mule bare- back, no shoes, a grapevine whip, with a rooster under each arm going to a cock fight on Sunday. Such is the influence of climate." But like most of Mr. Ingersoll's theories, this one is unfortunately the direct opposite of facts. The Sandwich Islands have all these disadvantages of climate, and fifty years ago were plunged in the deepest barbarism, with all the vices of savage life; but to-day, as all well- informed persons know, they are as truly civilized as any land, with industries, education, protection of life and property, equal to what is found in our own favored coun- try. And this is all due, as King Kalikua said in New Tork, to the Christianizing of his people. Indeed, Mr. Ingersoll contradicts his own theory as to the dependence of the individual upon surroundings in his lectures on Humboldt and Paine, both of whom he represents as becoming great in spite of surroundings that would natu- rally have led in the opposite direction, thus involuntarily recognizing something in man deeper than mere physical evolution. 26 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. The whole absurd theory of individuals and nations being wholly dependent upon soil, and climate, and surroundings for their character, is fairly represented in the following incident: " Pa," said a little six- year old, " what makes me grow ? J> " Why, the bread and potato I feed you with." " Does potatoes make our pig grow, too?" " Yes." " Then, what makes him be a pig and me be a boy?" That boy's simple question explodes all the theories of evolution. ARTICLE VI. Law is Ingersoll's God. The sixth article of Ingersollism is, u I believe in law, the Almighty maker of Heaven and earth." One might ae well say that the United States Constitution made our country, or try to rule the land by laws without enforcers. That the universe is governed according to a system of law is recognized by Christians as much as by any one, and the laws of the Bible are not new arbitrary enactments, but recognitions and proclamations of that part of the law-sys- tem of the universe that relates to religion and morality. Laws of spirit are as eternal as laws of matter. Natural science proclaims the latter, religious science the former. ARTICLE VII. Liberty and Infidelity What De Tocqueville Says About it. The seventh article is made up of the following statements: " All religions are inconsistent with mental freedom. The doubter, the investigator, the infidel, have been the saviours of liberty." Mr. Ingersoll, when talking of liberty contradicts what he himself has said of law, and fails to remind his hearers W. P. CRAFTS' REPLY. 27 and readers that the circle of law bounds on every side the privileges of liberty, that one has liberty only within the range of propriety, and that all beyond that is license. He also forgets the very evident fact that the prevailing ideas of personal liberty in the world are due to the general dissem- ination, by Christianity, of the truth that a man is a soul as well as a body. Wherever men are regarded as mere phys- ical beings, with no life deeper than the bodily life, the stronger will enslave the weaker woman, child and captive. When the idea that each man is an immortal soul takes hold upon man, with it there comes the idea of individual rights. If Ingersollism should ever persuade a civilized people that man has no soul, this form of bondage of the weaker to the stronger will be resumed. Not soil, but soul, is the secret of liberty. Even Mr. Frothingham recently declared that the Bible is a democratic book, and that we get out of it our ideas of equality. He remembered what Mr. Ingersoll seems to for- get, that all through the Bible, the idea of personal and relig- ious liberty is found, especially in those words of the Apostles to the rulers who attempted to tyrannize over their con- sciences, " We ought to obey God rather than man, r frhich has fitly been termed the concisest of all statement? of the principles of personal liberty. We may show this relation of religion to liberty in the words of the greatest modern writer upon such questions, De Tocqueville, who says, " Bible Christianity is the companion of liberty in all its conflicts, the cradle of its infancy, and the divine source of its claims." ARTICLE VIII. Woman Ingersoll's Theory at Variance with Fads. The eighth article of Ingersollism, is in regard to woman, and is as follows: "As long as woman regards the Bible as the charter of her ri gilts, she will be the slave of man. 28 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. The Bible was not written by a woman. "Within its lid* there is nothing but humiliation and shame for her." , You have all doubtless observed that in heathen coun- tries, where the Bible has not jet come with its enslaving (?) influence woman has (?) liberty and honor, and educa- tion, and opportunities of public activity and benevolence (?), but in Christian lands she is veiled, degraded, shut out of sight and restrained from education (?). I have always observed, as a pastor, that it is the religious, and church- going husbands that tyrannize over their wives as "bosses,** and deny them their liberties of conscience, and other rights. (?) You smile at the absurd statement, knowing that the "heathen at home," who as husbands are harsh and brutal to the wives they have promised to cherish, are frequently ardent believers in Ingersollism, and seldom in any way connected with even nominal Christianity, while every school boy is familiar with the fact that woman, in all except Christian lands, is hardly better than a slave, nota- bly so, in that land where Ingersollism under the name of Buddhism has the controlling influence. Mr. Ingersoll utters many true sentiments about the family, but all of these he learned of Christianity, not from China, or Egypt. ARTICLE IX. Ingersoll's Theory of Childhood Some of His Little Stories The Whole Subject Carefully Examined Significant Incident in the Life of Abraham Lincoln. The ninth article of Ingersollism is a theory of child- nood which attacks the principles of sound government and health even more than religion : " Do not have it in your mind that you must govern them ; that they (children) must obey. Let your children eat what they desire. They know what they wish to eat. Let them begin at which end of the dinner they please." W. F. CEAFT& HE PLY. 29 Such a tlieory is worthy of nothing more than the smile with which you hear it. It is all answered in the following representative fact of childhood: A little bit of a girl wanted more and more buttered toast, till she was told that too much would make her sick. Looking Avistfnlly at the dish for a moment, she thought she saw a way out of her difficulty, and exclaimed, " "Well, give me annuzer piece, and send for the doctor!" Mr. Ingersoll, in connection with his theory of child- hood, often refers to the fact, that he leaves his pocket- book around where his children can help themselves to whatever they wish, and urges the same course upon all parents. It is said that one of the lecturer's admirers, being convinced that this was the correct theory, determined to give up punishing his child, and try the new plan. Accord- ingly, he said to his boy, "John, I am convinced I have been taking the wrong course to try to make you a better boy. I am going to trust you more, and give up whip- pings. I am going away for a few days, and I have left my pocket-book in the top drawer of the bureau. Help yourself to money whenever you need it." After a few days the father returned to his home, late at night. As he opened the door he stumbled over a large canoe in the entry, and was then attacked by a large bull-dog that his boy had bought. Entering the boy's room, he found it hung round with guns, and fishing poles, and daggers, with another canoe, and several small dogs his pocket-book lying empty on the top of the bureau. He is now less enthusi- astic in regard to Ingersoll's knowledge of domestic gov-. eminent. The leading point which Mr. Ingersoll endeavors to make in connection with his lecture on Thomas Paine is that the Bible shocks a child, and, therefore, can't be trne. Tou have all observed how much children are shocked as 30 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. they gather about the mother's knees in the twilight, and hear her tell the stories of Jesus, and Joseph, and Moses, and Samuel, and Daniel (?). As to the relation of the Bible to childhood and home life, let me quote the opinion of several eminent men, mostly skeptics, for whom even Mr. Ingersoll cherishes the highest regard: Thomas Jefferson, speaking of the Bible and home life, says: " I have always said, and always will say, that the studious perusal of the sacred volume will make better citizens, better fathers, and better husbands." John Quincy Adams says : " So great is my veneration for the Bible, that the earlier my children begin to read it, the more confident will be my hopes that they will prove useful citizens to their country and respectable members of society.' 1 Theodore Parker says: " There is not a boy on the hills of ]^ew England, not a girl born in the filthiest cellar which disgraces a capital in Europe, and cries to God against the barbarism of modern civilization; not a boy nor a girl all Christendom through, but their lot is made better by that great book." Diderot, the French philosopher and skeptic,- was wont to make this confession: "No better lessons than those of the Bible can I teach my child." Huxley, in an address upon education, says: "I have always been strongly. in favor of secular education, in the sense of education without theology; but 1 must confess I have been no less seriously perplexed to know by what ' practical measures the religious feeling, which is the essen- tial basis of conduct, was to be kept up, in the present utterly chaotic state of opinion on these matters, without the use of the Bible. The pagan moralists lack life and color, and even the noble stoic, Marcus Aurelius, is too high and refined for an ordinary child. Take the Bible as W. F. CRAFTS' REPLY, 81 whole, make the severest deductions which fair criticism can dictate, and there still remains in this old literature a vast residuum of moral beauty and grandeur. By the study of what other book could children be so humanized? If Bible reading is not accompanied by constraint and solem- nity, I do not believe there is anything in which children take more pleasure." What would " shock the mind of a child " would be to hear Mr. Ingersoll excuse them for telling a lie, in order to escape a whipping. "What would shock a child would be to hear Mr. Ingersoll uttering profanity * What would shock the mind of a child would be to hear Mr. Ingersoll telling to a crowded audience with a smile of approval the story of a boy's oath. Speaking of swearing reminds me of that incident of Abraham Lincoln, whom Mr. Ingersoll calls " the grandest man ever President of the United States," who said to a person sent to him by one of the Senators, and who, in conversation, uttered an oath, " I thought the Sen- ator had sent me a gentleman; I see I was mistaken. There is the door, and I bid you good-day." 1 hold in my hand the last report of the New York Society for the Pre- vention of Cruelty to Children. Of course, the bruised and beaten little ones, here described, were the victims of cruelty in Christian homes (?). Their fathers and mothers had taken too much religion ( ?), had become brutalized by reading the Bible (?), and hence abused the children by their own fireside until the law was compelled to interfere for their defense (?). 82 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. In my work as a member of the Citizen's League for the suppression of the sale of liquors to minors, I have noticed that this supreme cruelty to children selling them in their immature years the liquors that make them self-destroyers, violators of the public peace, and candidates for drunkards' graves is perpetrated by Christian men, not by the infidels who applaud so lustily at Mr. Ingersoll's lectures (?). Here I am reminded of the published report, which seems well authenticated, that Mr. Ingersoll in his childhood lived in one of those exceptional homes where nominal Christianity was combined with harshness, cruelty and bigotry. If so, this would be some slight excuse for his present conduct, were it not for the fact that maturer years have given him abundant opportunity to see the bright and sunny side of Christian gentleness in other homes. And there are no true homes that do not owe their existence to the influence of Christianity upon the family relation. Having myself made childhood a special study for several years, I find that the degree of recognition given to the opinions and importance of childhood in various ages and countries, is exactly in proportion to the degree of Chris- tianity there, children being scarcely noticed in heathen lands, either in poetry, or history, or ethics, while the Bible religion has always given childhood an exceedingly prom- inent place. All the attention given to the education and development of the little ones is but the starlight that shines down upon us from the manger of the God-child. ARTICLE X. Ingersoll Says Christianity Fetters Thdught The Bible and a Host of Distinguished Men Say Otherwise. The tenth article of Ingersollism is the frequent asser- tion that Christianity fetters thought, while infidelity emancipates it, in such passages as these: " In all W. F. CRAFTS 1 REPLY. reason lias been regarded as the enemy of religion." gods dreaded education and knowledge then (in the time of the Garden of Eden) just as they do now." "For ages a deadly conflict has been waged by a few brave men oi thought and genius, on the one side, and the great, ignorant, religious mass, on the other. The few have said: 'Think.' The many have said : 'Believe.'" In order to ascertain what freedom and power of thought materialism had given to the mind of Mr. Ingersoll, I made special examination of the logic in the lecture on " The Gods," and found there, in a very short time, one or more specimens of all the fallacies laid down in the text- books of logic. " Waiter," said John Randolph, at a cer- tain hotel, "if this is coffee, bring me tea; if this is tea, bring me coffee-" And so we say, if this is the " power oi thought," give us weakness. Instead of the Bible forbidding us to think, as Inger- sollism so often declares, it is full of ringing appeals to "reason," "think," "consider," "ponder," "prove aU things." Prov. 26 : 16 : " The sluggard is wiser in his own 'conceit than seven men that can render treason." Eccl. 7 : 25 : "I applied mine heart to know, and to search, and to seek out wisdom, and the reason of things, and to know the wickedness of folly, even of foolishness and madness." Isa. 1 : 18 : " Come now and let us reason together, saith the Lord,' though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow ; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool." Matt. 22 : 42 : " What think ye of Christ ?" Acts 17 : 2 : " Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures." Acts 18: 4: " He reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and per- suaded the Jews and the Greeks." Acts 18 : 19 : " And he came to Ephesus, and left them there ; but he himself entered into the synagogue and reasoned with the Jews." Acts 24 : 25 : " And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled." 8 34 MISTAKES OF INOE11SOLL. Rom. 12:1: "I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service." Phil. 4:8: "Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatso- ever things are honest, whatsoever things are j ust, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report, if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.' 1 1 Thess. 5 : 21 : " Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." Let us look into biography, and make a practical test of this theory that the Bible fetters thought. If so, those who believe and love it will not be strong and leading thinkers. Let us apply the test in the ranks of science. A Cloud of Witnesses. Professor Benjamin Pierce, of Harvard College, has recently completed a very remarkable course of lectures at the Lowell Institute, Boston, on "Ideality in Science." Professor Pierce, who is now in his seventieth year, i$, perhaps, the most eminent mathematical scholar in this country, and the author of some of the most profound investigations and speculations that have been made in the realm of astronomical science. This man of mighty thought must have been emancipated and inspired by infidelity ( ?). This scholar, whose mind may be supposed to feed on fact, holds an unquestioning faith in a personal God and the immortal life. The late Professor Henry, of the Smithsonian Institute, was one of the broadest and best of scientific thinkers because infidelity gave him freedom of thought (?). No, he was a sweet-spirited Christian in his daily life. Sir David Brewster, another eminent scientist, said of his Christian experience: "I have had this light for many years, and oh! how bright it is to me." Professor Silliman, who is unsurpassed in his scientific W. F. OR AFT 8* REPLY. 35 department, must also be classed under the head of " the ignorant religious mass," for he was another of the very many Christian scientists, whom the world has ignorantly( ?) supposed a thinker, in spite of Mr. Ingersoll's theory of faith as being a mental bondage. He says: " I can truly declare that, in the study and exhibition of science to my pupils and fellow men, I have never forgotten to give all honor and glory to the infinite Creator happy if I might be the honored interpreter of a portion of his works, and of the beautiful structure and beneficent laws discovered therein by the labors of many illustrious predecessors." "We might add scores of others in each department of sci- ence, who have found no discord between the Word and world of God. Who are the four greatest thinkers in the realm of states- manship of this century? Daniel Webster, Gladstone, Thiers, and Bismarck. All of them, of course, are enabled to be thus broad and prominent as national thinkers by the power of infidelity ( ?). No, each one of them is most posi- tive in his Christian belief. Webster declares the grandest thought which ever entered his mind was that of " personal accountability to God." Gladstone gives much of time and attention to religious writing. Thiers says, in his last days: "I often invoke that God in whom I am happy to believe, who is denied by fools and ignorant people, but in whom the enlightened man finds his consolation and hope." Bismarck is called, in derision, " the God-fearing man," in reference to his well-known religious principles. (Busch's Bismarck, p. 200). We might add to these Charles Sumner, who called Christianity the u true religion " and " our faith," and whose speeches constantly recognize God and Christianity. M MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. Who are the leading literary characters of the century? Yictor Hugo, what of him ? Did you ever read his chapter on prayer in Les Miserables, and his grand tribute to immortality, uttered as a rebuke to a company of French physicians, a few years ago? Moore have you read his " Paradise and the Peri," the Gospel of repentance, and do you know him as the author of the hymn, " Come, ye Dis- consolate?" Walter Scott have you read his translation of "Dies Irag," uttered so devoutly in his last days: " Oh! in that day, that dreadful day, When Heaven and earth shall pass away, Be Thou, oh Christ, the sinner's st y, When Heaven and earth shall pass uway." And Shakspeare, whom Mr. Ingersoli accounts one of the grandest of human minds, was great enough to believe in the Bible. And so Thackeray, Whittier, Dickens, Gold- smith, Longfellow, and Irving were intellectual believers in Christianity. The following men, also lacking the freedom, and power of thought that comes by materialism (?) became mentally so weak (?) that they declared, in varying terms, after read- ing largely in all departments of literature, that the Bible is the best book in the world : Sir Walter Scott, Sir Wil- liam Jones, George Gilfillan, Milton, Pollok, Coleridge, Collins, Bacon, John Adams, Napoleon, James Freeman Clarke, Lange, Kitto, Robertson. And Channing put the Gospels where these others place the whole Bible above all other literature. The following persons strongly commend the Bible as a whole: Dr. Samuel Johnson, Carlyle, Dryden, Young, Cowper, Locke, Newton, Seward, Dawson, Franklin, John Quincy Adams, Bellows, Bartol, Theodore Parker, Rous- seau, Guizot, Bunsen, Story, Webster, Diderot, Matthew Arnold, and Huxley. W. F. CRAFTS' tiEPLY. 37 The following persons among many others declare that they found in the Bible, not fetters for thought, but their strongest inspiration to thought : Daniel Webster, Fisher A.mes, Mitchell, the Astronomer, Huskin and Goethe. It is evident that very many others might truly have said the same, including Theodore Parker and Mr. Froth- ingham and other skeptics, whose writings show plainly that they owe their beauties of style to a familiarity with the Bible. Jesus Christ. With these great men who have commended the Bible should be mentioned one who is confessed by Christians and skeptics the greatest and best of men, JESUS CHRIST, who used the Psalms as His prayer and hymn book, and always spoke of the whole Old Testament as the Eternal Law Book of humanity. There is not time, nor is it necessary now to answer in detail all the hard questions that can be asked about single Bible passages. But these great men and Christ saw all these points of difficulty, and yet accepted the Bible as the pre-eminent book, commending it to the perusal of all as the source of the mind's grandest inspira- tions. Side by side with these scores of the world's fore- most men who declare the Bible the best of books, or strongly commend it, or point to it as the source of their grandest thoughts, put the opinion of that more learned (?), more profound (?), more unprejudiced (?) scholar and phi- losopher, Colonel Ingersoll, who stands almost alone among educated men in strongly condemning the Bible, which his bigotry prints with a small " b " in spite of the rules of grammar, and describes it as about the worst book of the world, in these words among others: "If men will read the Bible as they read other books, they will be amazed that they ever, for one moment, supposed a being of infinite wisdom to be the author of such ignorance and of such 38 MISTAKES OF 1NGERBOLL. atrocity. The Bible burned heretics, built dungeons, founded the inquisition, and trampled upon all the liberties of men. All the philosophy of the Bible would not make one scene in Hamlet. I could write a better book than the Bible, which is full of barbarism." Amazing Ignorance of Infidels Concerning the Scriptures Hume's Ignorance of the New Testament Tom Paine Without a Bible. " But some one asks, Are there not other eminent men who have despised and condemned the Bible? Most cer- tainly, as there are those who have entered their protest against almost any and everything mentionable. It is, nevertheless, worthy of note that, in most instances, those who have sought the more resolutely to defame the Holy Scriptures are those who are comparatively unacquainted with them. David Hume, distinguished both as essayist and historian, standing among the most noted of modern skeptical philosophers, was a resolute objector of the Bible, but was notoriously ignorant of its contents. Dr. Johnson, in conversation with several literary friends, once observed, in his usual, direct, and unequivocal manner, that no hon- est man could be a deist, because no man could be so after a fair examination of the truths of Christianity. When the name of Hume was mentioned to him as an exception to his remark, he replied: 'No, sir; Hume once owned to a clergyman in the bishopric of Durham, that he had never read even the New Testament with attention.' "* Let us cross-question another important witness as to his knowledge of the book against which he offers testimony. "We ask Thomas Paine as to his familiarity with the Bible, which he so bitterly condemns, and he replies, " I keep no Bible." I hold in my hand a sermon preached in New *From " What Noted Men Think of the Bible." W. F. CRAFTS^ REPLY. 39 York City, by Rev. "W. F. Hatfield, in reply to Mr. Inger- soll's lecture on Thomas Paine, in which reply, with abund- ant 'facts, such as would convince a court, it is shown con- clusively that Thomas Paine was vicious and corrupt in life, and miserable and remorseful in death. As to the value of Yoltaire's testimony against Christianity, Carlyle declares it worthless on the ground of lack of knowledge on the sub- ject of which he testifies. He says: " It is a serious ground of offense against Yoltaire that he intermeddled in religion without being himself, in any measure, religious; that, in a word, he ardently, and with long-continued effort, warred against Christianity, without understanding, beyond the mere superfices, what Christianity was." There are also a class of specialists who are quoted against ihe Bible, and who manifest a hostility to it, whose testi- mony is of little value because of the narrow range in which they have studied, making them authorities only in their special department. Halley, the astronomer, once avowed his skepticism in presence of Sir Isaac Kewton. The venerable man replied: " Sir, you have never studied! these subjects and I have. Do not disgrace yourself as a, philosopher by presuming to judge on questions you have never examined." Distributed Ignorance and Concentrated Hatred Probable Cause of Ingersoll's Infidelity. The largest proportion of skeptics, however, are mere sophomores, spoiled with a little learning which is only ** distributed ignorance," well represented by a precocious boy of fourteen, whom I found writing an essay on " Mat- rimony,"/ and who left it during my call to argue in favor of Ingersollism and against the Bible (of which he knew as little as of matrimony), which he admitted he had never read, as do nearly all skeptics when questioned on this MISTAKES OF INGEliSOLL. The bitterness of the opposition to Christianity of Mr. lugersoll and other infidels is explained by the Earl of Rochester, who was converted from infidelity and -said, in explanation of his former course and that of others: "A bad heart, a bad heart is the great objection against the Holy Book." " The fool hath said in his heart " (not his head) " there is no God." The bad heart is father to the infidel thought. It is like the case of the old woman who broke her looking-glass because it showed the wrinkles creeping into her fading face. Men strive to break the Bible glass that shows the wrinkles and defects of character. The- whole appearance and tone and spirit of Mr. Ingersoll in his lectures is suggestive of this heart hatred against the book which he attacks, " kicks," " hates," not with the calmness of logic, but with the bitterness of a heart-hos- tility. Those infidels who have faithfully examined the Bible have usually been convinced of its truth and con- verted to Christianity. Among them, such distinguished names as Lord Lyttleton, Gilbert West, Soame Jenyus, Bishop Thompson, and at least a score of notable cases in connection with Mr. Moodj's revival meetings in England. "What comparison, let us ask, will the number of cele- brated skeptics, even when the best possible showing is made, hold with the distinguished men who have ranked the sacred volume above all others? Remember that your mother's love for the Bible and your own early reverence for it, have the indorsement of the grandest and profound- est minds which have been known and honored among humanity." The Truth of the Whole Matter. But salvation is not by belief in a book, or a creed, or a Church, but by belief in the person of Jesus Christ. Mr. Ingersoll skips this hard problem, " What think ye of W. F. GRAFTS' 11EPLY. 41 Christ?" He hardly refers to this citadel of Christianity half a dozen times in all his' lectures, making his attacks chiefly on human outposts and then claiming to have over- borne the citadel of Christianity. Even Strauss, Kenan, Rousseau, Theodore Parker, Napoleon, and Richter none of them experimental Christians unite as a jury in the verdict expressed by Richter in regard to Christ, " He is the purest among the mighty, the mightiest among the pure." "We have, then, two facts as a sure anchora-eof our Christianity to-day. All scholarly skepticism agrees with Christianity that the Bible is the best of books and that Christ is the best of men. Re who thus accepts the Bible and Christ can not logically or consistently stop short of a Christian life, following Christ as his pattern, and walking by the Bible as his rule. We may differ about creeds, and Church forms, and Bible interpretation, but he who has faith and faithfulness toward the person, Jesus Christ shall be saved. Let us then devoutly utter the creed of Daniel Webster, as inscribed ky his own request on his tombstone at Marshfield : " LORD, i BELIEVE, HELP THOTI MINE UNBELIEF. PHILOSOPHICAL ARGUMENT ESPECIALLY THAT DRAWN FROM THE VASTNE8S OF THE UNIVERSE IN COM- PARISON WITH THE APPARENT INSIGNIFICANCE OF THIS GLOBE, HAS SOMETIMES SHAKEN MY REASON TOR THE FAITH THAT IS IN ME; BUT MY HEART HAS ASSURED ME THAT THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST MUST BE A DIVINE REALITY. THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT CAN NOT BE A MERELY HUMAN PRODUCTION. THIS BELIEF ENTERS INTO THE VERY DEPTH OF MY CONSCIENCE. THE WHOLE HISTORY OF MAN PROVES IT." CHAPLAIN McC ABE'S REPLY. 43 CHAPLAIN M'CABE'S REPLY. The Famous Chaplain has a Remarkable Dream He Sees the Great City of Infc ^rsollville Which Ingersoll and the Infidel Host Enter And are Shut in for Six Months Remarkable Condition of Things Outside and Inside Happiness and Mis- ery Ingersoll Finally Petitions for a Church and sends for a Lot of Preachers. I had a dream which was not all a dream. I thought I was on a long journey through a beautiful country, when suddenly I came to a great city with walls fifteen feet high. At the gate stood a sentinel, whose shining armor reflected back the rays of the morning sun. As I was about to salute him and pass into the city, he stopped me and said: "Do you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ?" I answered: " Yes, with all my heart." " Then," said he, " you can not enter here. No man or woman who acknowledges that name can pass in here Stand aside!" said he, " they,are coming." I looked down the road, and saw a vast multitude approaching. It was led by a military officer. " Who is that?" I asked of the sentinel. " That," he replied, " is the great Colonel Robert I , the founder of the City of Ingersoll ville." " "Who is he?" I ventured to inquire. " He is a great and mighty warrior, who fought in many bloody battles for the Union during the great war." I felt ashamed of my ignorance of history, and stood silently watching the procession. I had heard of a Colonel 44 .;/ /.< T. I A" KS OF INGER8OLL. I , ****** bllt , of conree, this could not be the man. The procession came near enough for me to recognize some of the faces. I noted two infidel editors of national celebrity, followed by great wagons containing steam presses. There were also five members of Congress. All the noted infidels and scoffers of the country seemed to be there. Most of them passed in unchallenged by the sentinel, but at last a meek-looking individual with a white necktie approached, and he was stopped. I saw at a glance it was a well-known " liberal " preacher of New York. " Do you believe in the Lord Jesus?" said the sentineL " Not much !" said the doctor. Everybody laughed, and he was allowed to pass in. There were artists there, with glorious pictures; singers, with ravishing voices; tragedians and comedians, whose names have a world- wide fame. Then came another division of the infidel host saloon- keepers by thousands, proprietors of gambling hells, brothels, and theatres. Still another division swept by: burglars, thieves, thugs, incendiaries, highwaymen, murderers all all marching in. My vision grew keener. I beheld, and lo! Satan him- aelf brought up the rear. High afloat above the mass was a banner on which was inscribed: " What has Christianity done for the country?'* and another on which was inscribed: "Down with the churches! Away with Christianity it interferes with our happiness!" And then came a murmur of voices, that grew louder and louder until a shout went np like the roar of Niagara: "Away with Him! Crucify Him, crucify Him!" I felt no desire now to enter Ingersollville. As the last of the procession entered, a few men and women, with broad-brimmed hats and plain bonnets, made CHAPLAIN McGABE'3 HE PLY. 45 their appearance, and wanted to go in as missionaries, but they were turned rudely away. A zealous young Metho- dist exhorter, with a Bible under his arm, asked permission to enter, but the sentinel swore at him awfully. Then I thought I saw Brother Moody applying for admission, but he was refused. I could not help smiling to hear Moody say, as he turned sadly away: " Well ! they let me live and work in Chicago ; it is very strange they won't let me into Ingersollville." The sentinel went inside the gate and shut it with a bang; and I thought, as soon as it was closed, a mighty angel came down with a great iron bar, and barred the gate on the outside, and wrote upon it in letters of fire, " Doomed to live together six months." Then he went away, and all was silent, except the noise of the revelry and shouting that came from within the city walls. I went away, and as I journeyed through the land I could not believe my eyes. Peace and plenty smiled everywhere. The jails were all empty, the penitentiaries were without occupants. The police of great cities were idle. Judges sat in court-rooms with nothing to do. Business was brisk. Many great buildings, formerly crowded with criminals, were turned into manufacturing establishments. Just about this time the President of the United States called for a Day of Thanksgiving. I attended services in a Presby- terian Church. The preacher dwelt upon the changed con- dition of affairs. As he went on, and depicted the great prosperity that had come to the country, and gave reasons for devout thanksgiving, I saw one old deacon clap his handkerchief over his mouth to keep from shouting right out. An ancient spinster, who never did like the " noisy " Methodists a regular old blue-stocking Presbyterian couldn't hold in. She expressed the thought of every heart by shouting with all her might, " Glory to God for Inger- 4 MISTAKES OF INQEBSOLL. eollville!" A young theological student lifted up his hand and devoutly added, " Esto perpetua." Everybody smiled. The country was almost delirious with joy. Great pro- eesaions of children swept along the highways, singing, " We'll not give up the Bible, God's blessed Word of Truth." Vast assemblies of reformed inebriates, with their wives and children, gathered in the open air. No building would hold them. I thought I 'was in one meeting where Bishop Simpson made an address, and as he closed it a mighty shout went up till the earth rang again. O, it was won- derful ! and then we all stood up and sang with tears of joy, " All hail the power of Jesus' name ! Let angels prostrate fall ; Bring forth the royal diadem, And crown him Lord of all." The six months had well-nigh gone. I made my way back again to the gate of Ingersollville. A dreadful silence reigned over the city, broken only by the sharp crack of a revolver now and then. I saw a man trying to get in at the gate, and I said to him, " My friend, where are you from?" " I live in Chicago," said he, " and they've taxed us to death there; and I've heard of this city, and I want to go in to buy some real estate in this new and growing place." He failed utterly to remove the bar, but by some means he got a ladder about twelve feet long, and with its aid, he climbed up upon the wall. With an eye to business, he shouted to the first person he saw: " Hallo, there ! what'e the price of real estate in Inger- sollville ?" " Nothing !" shouted a voice ; " you can have all you want if you'll just take it and pay the taxes." "What made your taxes so high?" said the Chicago man. I noted the answer carefully ; I shall never forget it. CHAPLAIN McC ABE'S REPLY. 47 " We've had to build forty new jails and fourteen peni- tentiaries a lunatic asylum and an orphan asylum in every ward; we've had to disband the public schools, and it takes all the city revenue to keep up the police force." "Where's my old friend, I ?" said the Chicago man. " O, he is going about to-day with a subscription paper to build a church. They have gotten up a petition to send out for a lot of preachers to come and hold revival services. If we can only get them over the wall, we hope there's a future for Ingersollville yet." The six months ended. Instead of opening the door, however, a tunnel was dug under the wall big enough for one person to crawl through at a time. First came two bankrupt editors, followed by Colonel I himself; and then the whole population crawled through. Then I thought, somehow, great crowds of Christians surrounded the city. There was Moody, and Hammond, and Earle, and hundreds of Methodist preachers and exhorters, and they struck up, singing together, " Come, ye sinners, poor and needy." A needier crowd never was seen on earth before. I conversed with some of the inhabitants of the aban- doned city, and asked a few of them this question: " Do you believe in Hell?" I can not record the answers; they were terribly orthodox. One old man said, " I've been there on probation for six months, and I don't want to join." I knew by that he was an old Methodist backslider. The sequel of it all was a great revival, that gathered in a mighty harvest from the ruined City of Ingersollville. V [Photographed by Moshe*.] . BWAZEY'8 REPLY. 40 DR. SWAZEY'S REPLY. Momentary View of Col. Ingersoll Through the Doctor's Glass The Bible on the Meridian What the Doctor Sees in the Great Book. THE genial, eloquent, sensational, unfair, evasive Colonel Ingersoll has come and gone. Xobody has been alarmed. But out of 400,000 people a large audience was found to laugh with him at Moses and the Bible. He eschewed argument altogether. He did not attempt to instruct any- body. He had only a campaign speech to make against God. This article is simply an invitation to any fair- minded doubter to consider the* reasonableness of a laugh at the Christian's Bible. Is this book a bad book, or a silly book, just fit for jeer and sarcasm ? Take a common- sense view. In order to do so, it is necessary to take a common-place view, to bring to the foreground that which all assailants like to leave in the background, namely, that the Bible teaches by commandment and urecept only that which is pure and good. Relating to man's duty to himself, it teaches personal purity, sexual and otherwise; temperance in meats, drinks, opinions and ambition, responsibleness for inclinations, thoughts and actions; a paramount love for the truth; courage and hopefulness in all lawful purposes; self-im- provement, and a cheerful enjoyment of the good things of life. Relating to man's duty to others, the Bible teaches honesty between man and man; restitution when wrong has been done, wittingly or unwittingly; the clamnableness 4 CO MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. of adultery, seduction, and everything that violates the purity of a family or a person; the forgiveness of injuries; a charitable view of human actions, including patience and forbearance, mercy; the duty of life-long usefulness, kind- ness and helpfulness; a genial temper in social and business life; obedience to magistrates; and a multitude of minor virtues. Relating to the moral order of things, the Bible teaches that wrong-doing is unavoidably the way of sorrow, and right-doing the way of happiness. These teachings, given not in bald outline, but in fresh and animated pictures and discourses, make up the ethical system of the Bible from the first lesson of the antediluvian age to the last words of the book, which are against whore- mongers, and all makers and lovers of a lie, and in praise of all who are just and good. And, still further, in no instance is there left on record an immoral precept, or one which impurity, or injustice, or dishonesty, or unkindness, or selfishness in any form are proposed. There is no mis- take in that direction. TStill further, we challenge any assailant to name a virtue, acknowledged to be such by the mass of mankind, which is wanting in the catalogue of Bible virtues. The ethical system is as complete as it is pure, as comprehensive as it is sound and true, absolutely covering the whole area of man's duty to himself and to his fellow-man; a system sounding all depths, touching the most delicate fibres of life, and without a flaw or an omis- sion. Its precepts and laws come in their own order, but they all appear in the record first or last. The Buddhistic " decalogue " seems to have been in advance of the Mosaic in this that it had two commandments wan ting in the lat- ter ''Thou shalt not lie," "Thoushalt not get drunk." But these commandments, although not in our own deca- logue, are written over and over again in the Old Testament as well as the New. And yet once more the moral require- DR. SWAZEY'S REPLY. 31 ments of the Bible, are as clear of puerilities as they are of impurity or oblique vision. The Buddhistic decalogue steps right down to a moral weakness of which the Bible is never guilty. " Thou shalt not visit dances nor theatrical representations." " Thou shalt not use ornaments nor per- fumery in dress." Occultation of Ingersoll's Good Sense General Survey of Deities Scope of Divine Revelation. Now the common-sense question occurs whetner a book containing such a system, always teaching men what is good and* pure, always warning him against evil, and encouraging him to be a strong, sound, pure, complete man in everything, is worthy of sneers, ribaldry and irrever- ence, even though it were full of unbelievable fables and fantastic ideas of immortality. In what spirit can a com- pany of people shout their applause when a book whose lines of thought are always leading a man above himself is made the target of sarcasm and ridicule, and the cry is almost in so many wdrds, ' Down with the Bible!" Let us go a little beyond the strictly ethical. The general ideas of our Bible about God commend themselves to the best wisdom of mankind. "We make no reference now to any sect of theologies, but to the theological atmosphere both of the Old and New Testaments, namely, that God is, and being the Creator, the life and force of all things, in other words, as our Bible has it, the Living God, superin- tends all human affairs. As a Creator He has not forgotten His work; as a Father He is always mindful of His off- springs; and caring for man is leading him on by a great hope to a great inheritance; that His face is against evil doing, that He smiles on all who strive to be just and good, and that in sorrow and want and temptation He folds to His great heart a righteous and even a repentant man; and 52 MISTAKES OF TNGERSOLL. as the shuttle goes back and forth, knitting into each other the soiled and blood-stained threads, He is weaving there- from a garment of light for mankind; that superstition, despotism, slavery and war are only other names for His patience, while man is learning the great lesson. This is the Bible interpretation of the incomprehensible Cause and Spirit of the universe, that He is alive, and the Father and Friend of man now, and will have some more for him after the years have rolled by. Suppose, now, it be all untrue, is there not something in this dream or conceit that should bring a sigh rather than a sneer from the heart of the unbeliever? The god of Brahmanism is an abstraction without attributes, the great nothing of the universe. Much the same is true of Budd- hism, only in another way. It has law and virtue, but no God of love, and asks no trust or faith. The same is true in the unchanging round which knows no spirit above and no hope below, taught by Confucius to his disciples. The religion of the Persians presented a god who had a devil- god for a yokefellow, keeping up the eternal and never-to- be-ended quarrel of good and evil. Our Bible begins with the idea that God is one God, the only and the Supreme, and ends with this one God sending angels down to say to the weary world, " Peace on earth good will to men." Away beyond all the faiths and all the Bibles held sacred by mankind, ours alone declares that man is not an orphan, that good and evil are not eternal antagonisms, in other words, that the Great Supreme is our Father in Heaven. Trueor false, wisdom has taught nothing more inspiriting or helpful to man. Neither imagination nor credulity has else- where painted a vision so attractive, or out of the " silences " and " eternities," and mysteries, whispered so good a word in the ears of mortals. This idea of lordship and father- hood is not incidental. It runs through every narration, &R. SWAZEY'S REPLY. 53 is implied in every precept, and re-affirmed in every prom- ise. And even if it be beyond proof it makes the whole Bible at least a golden dream. Suppose now one does not take as absolutely and histor- ically true the story of Adam's rib and the woman, or of the fish swallowing a man and throwing him unhurt on the shore, does not the high moral tone of every command and every precept everywhere illumined by [this pure and golden dream, entitle this book to the reverence of man- kind? And especially since by the common consent the idea of virtue in our Bible goes beyond the many excellent things of Confucius, Zoroaster and the other sacred writers of other religions, and its idea of the " living God " sur- passes in purity and attractiveness, and in consolation and hope, all other religions, is not this purest blossom of the instinct, if you please to call it so, of duty and faith, of inestimable value as the guide and hope of man, even though it were overlaid with ten-fold more difficulties than the most ingenious scoffer can present? Or, if it is not reliable as a guide, is it not worthy of reverence as the proudest achievement of the hungry mind of man? The Great Central Figure Absolute Unity of the Bible System. Still further, this Bible has for its central, or rather ter- minal, figure a name so remarkable that none but the obscene and j/rofane use it lightly, a man so remarkable that whatever the skeptic may say of Moses or Paul, his tongue would refuse its office should he attempt to catalogue the mistakes of Jesus of Nazareth. Yoltaire, Diderot, Bolingbroke, Strauss, Eenan, all speak reverently of this One Man of history. And yet the whole New Testament is built up on the sayings and doings 01 was Man. And not the New Testament only. The Jewish scriptures, full of errors or not, were full of the ideas of a Messiah, from 54 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. Moses to Malachi. And this marvelous man claimed that He was that Messiah. So that the Old Testament, as well, is a record of various forms pointing to this 3Ian. I raise here no question of the truth of prophecy; I simply affirm that this Man, whose purity and wisdom are so singularly impressive, claimed to fee the fulfillment of those old writings, identified Himself with Moses and David and Isaiah, and sanctified the great current of thought which from the mouths of these men flowed along the shores of that elder world. So that to revile the old Bible of the Jews is to revile Him. There is no scholar, orthodox -or liberal, believing or skeptical, who does not identify the phenomenon of Christianity with the phenomenon of Judaism. Out of the soil of Judaic history sprung this purer growth Jesus and the things He taught. I suggest, therefore, that before one joins in the laugh against a religion which was founded long anterior to any other historical records than its own, he pause a little, remembering that this remarkable Man, who has not yet become antiquated, quoted those old books as His Bible, and doubtless had a tolerable understanding of their mean- ing and worth. And, perhaps, if He whose sermon on the mount is yet as fresh in tho nineteenth century as though it were uttered to-day, found a vein of precious ore in those books, those same veins may be yet visible in our time. The Bible Law of Development vs. Infidel Philosophy. I have given, you will perceive, room for a large amount of the unaccountable and incredible in a Bible worthy of reverence. In fact, there is no occasion, except in the peculiarity of some men's minds, to allow so much. There is a passage in the Bible that is descriptive of the kingdom of Heaven, and reads thus: " First the blade and then the DR. SWAZEF'S REPLY. 55 ear, and after that the full corn in the ear." The Bible here gives the key to itself. It is a statement of the law of development, intellectual and moral. An observation of the Bible from the standpoint of this law discovers an answer to the objections that are just now brought against our sacred Book. Col. Ingersoll and men of his style of criticism (and, I am sorry to say, some preachers, also,) quote a verse from Genesis precisely as though the same words, or the same event, were found in the Gospels. They judge an act or a usage recorded in the Pentateuch precisely as though it were found in the Acts of the Apos- tles. They make no allowance for the stage of human progress. They would teach a child surveying before he had learned the multiplication table. They talk about " skulls " as indicating progress, but God must needs put the same ideas into a skull of the Lauren tian period that He does into a skull of to-day. Otherwise, God is worthy of hate. They would preach the doctrine of equality on the deck of a man-of-war. They utterly ignore the drill that men and nations need in coming up to their majority. They would suffer the rabble in a court- room to vote down the decision of a judge on the bench. The men who are historically connected with God's order of things must dis- pense with the great schoolmaster experience. Ideas must spring forth complete, like Minerva. Hafters and dome must touch the skies the same day the foundation stones were laid. Those are the ideas with which a certain class of critics approach the Old Testament. If a people are not ripe for a commonwealth, and God gives them a king, God is all wrong. If a people are become a great military camp and Moses proclaims martial law, Moses and his God are monsters of cruelty. If there are no jails, r.o way of disposing of prisoners of war, and a gentle servi- tude is the substitute, God is a great slave-driver. If men's 56 MISTAKES OF INOER80LL. lusts are so greedy that even the best of them want more wives than one, the patience of God with the slow growth of moral ideas is translated as the establishment of polyg- amy. If a people are so vile and filthy that the beasts are clean and modest in comparison, and God sends an army to wipe them out of being, we are pointed to the white faces of women and children lifted on the crests of the divine wrath! Common Sense View of the Subject How it Eliminates Poly- gamy, Slavery, etc. Common sense, in asking whether the Bible is worthy of confidence would ask whether, as matter of fact, the moral instruction of any period of Bible record was not fully up to the capacity of that period to receive it? It would ask another question namely, whether a divine tuition is dif- ferent from any other, except that it is more skillful? whether, in fact, the critics who compare an old order of things with the highest state of moral development are not demanding that the people under God's training shall be a miraculous people, throwing off prejudices as they do a Winter garment, bearing fruit without any intermediate period of growth and blossom, and, in general terms, upset- ting the every -day laws of progress. It is this idealism than which nothing is more irrational which creates a large share of the moral difficulties of the Old Testa- ment. It is the insane or reckless, the idiotic or perverse tenacity with which men demand that the divine teaching must not suit itself to the time in which it was given, but must always be up to the ripest periods of progress, that gives any opportunity for the objugations of men who " can write a better Bible " themselves than ours. The two great charges brought against the Bible are polygamy and slavery. Now, admit that in all stages, DR. SWAZEY'S ME PLY. Sfl from the chimpanzee up to Darwin, they are wrong (which is by no means clear), are these charges true? The fact that polygamy and slavery existed among the people v/lio were under drill does not prove it. The fact that there were laws regulating either of these practices does not prove it. A law regulating the social evil does not prove that the sovereign people who make the laws approve the social evil, but only that, if men and women will go wrong, society must put up some defenses against corruption. Common sense inquires whether statutory allowance is an indorsement. And if that Remarkable Man, commenting on the divorce laws of Moses, said that Moses gave those laws because the people could not bear any better laws, common sense inquires if the same may not be true of other recognized usages which are below the ideal of an advanced age. And when one rails at the Bible for its ill-treatment of women, the railing is simply gratuitous. I have read the Old Testament more or less carefully for many years, but I do not, at this writing, remember a single word that dis- honors woman as woman. I have read only a little of Brahminical writings, but I remember a sentence or two about women. "A woman is never lit for independence;" " Women have no business with the text of the Yeda. * * * Sinful women must be as foul as falsehood itself. This is fixed law." Whether in the last quotation it ia meant that there is no purification for a bad woman, or what else, I do not know; but I do not recall anything like it in the Old Testament. Educated common sense knows that women among the Hebrews occupied a vastly higher level than the women of all other nations. It is simply notorious, that with all the lapses from virtue, the Hebrew women were as white as snow compared with the women of the Gentile world, and honor goes always hand in hand with virtue. 58 MISTAKES OF INOKRSOLL. More Common Sense The Great Ingersoll Orb Approaching the Nihilistic Belt Nebulae. Common sense demands that in judgment of the moral worth of the Bible, it be taken as a whole. The theory of all who receive the Old and New Testaments is that they belong together, are so to be interpreted; that one is the beginning, and the other the conclusion, of the one Bible. The one begins in the " Laurentian period," so to speak, and follows man up from a wild nomad to wealth and empire, and the decay of empire; the moral and the civil law blend- ing and running along together for hundreds of years, then separating by the simple explosion of the civil powers. The other takes him after the wounds caused by the explo- sion have partly healed, and puts forth moral ideas unen- cumbered by any considerations of the state. The former gave moral laws to the Jew; the latter moral laws to the man; everything from first to last going on as nat- urally as the building of a city, or the growth of a tree. And common sense should inquire how it happens, that, while the great army of scholars who have studied these systems, believers and skeptics alike, have been filled with admiration, a man rises up now and then to vituperate the logic of events and malign the great God because He has not chosen to plant a tree with the branches in the ground and the roots in the air. Common sense naturally asks what the meaning of this bitter outbreak may be. We have no right to men's motives. But this is a phenomenon, the cause of which we have a right to ask, as we would ask the cause of a fall- ing meteor. The Bible is a law and order book. It teaches that one must look out how he pulls up even the tares. Are we in our historic orbit passing a belt of niliilism, a time when assassination is reform, arid a bad shot at a poor DR. SWAZEY'S 11EPL Y. 59 czar, inheriting semi-barbarism and striving with all his might to get rid of the inheritance, is to be lamented? You may be told that it is the horrid theology of the Bible which provokes assault. Common sense remarks that, horrid as its theology may be, its sterner features are just like the theology of nature, namely, a demand for obedience to law and " the survival of the fittest." It is nature put into language, the operation of moral causes foretold that is all. If you want a government more just than one which judges a man according to his deeds, good or bad, and takes into account his knowledge and oppor- tunities, why, the thing to do is to rail at nature, at cause and effect, at seed-time and harvest. For while on the better side the Bible theology is more beneficent than nature, on the hard side it is simply unmitigated natural law. Do the theologians preach that good men will be damned ? Then rail at the theologians, and not at the Bible. In closing this short article, as an addendum, let me ask a question or two for the benefit of all who have a bad opinion of the Bible, as a woman's book or a slave's book. 1. Forget the harem of Solomon, and say why Judaism was a house of refuge for thousands of Koman and Greek iromen, many of them of noble birth, for a century pre- ceding the Christian era ? 2. In the same line, squarely, has, or has not, the mod- ern estate of woman been the fruit of Christian (including Judaic) teaching? 3. Did not the Bible first mitigate and finally destroy slavery in the Roman empire \ 4. Did not the Bible destroy slavery in England and America? Charge all the slave-driving you will to Chris- tian men, and give any unbeliever aU he claims, and then go down to a last analysis. 60 tTlBTAKES OF INGER80LL. 5. Are not republican institutions, including (as the old republics did not) democratic ideas, directly and palpably the fruit of the teachings of that remarkable Man (whom the French infidels called the Great Democrat); whose Bible was the Old Testament, and who told His followers how to amend and finish it by a book called the New Test- ament ? In whatever way these questions may be answered, the man who essays to answer them will find that it is not so easy to eliminate the genius of Moses and Jesus from the genius of the world's movement toward virtue, equality and liberty. TELL the Prince that this ( a costly copy of the Bible ) ifl the secret of England's greatness. Queen Victoria. I HAVE always said and always- will say, that the studious perusal of the Sacred Yolume will make better citizens, better fathers and better husbands. ^Thomas Jefferson. THE Bible is equally adapted to the wants and infirmi- ties of every human being. No other book ever addressed itself so authoritatively and so pathetically to the judgment and moral sense of mankind. Chancellor James Kent. CHRIST proved that He was the Son of the Eternal by His disregard of time. All His doctrines signify only, and the same thing, eternity. Napoleon Bonaparte. I HAVE read the Bible morning, noon and night, and have ever since been the happier and better man for such reading. Edward Burke. I DO not believe human society, including not merely a few persons in any state, but whole masses of men, ever has attained, or ever can attain, a high state of intelli- gence, virtue, security, liberty, or happiness without the Holy Scriptures. "William H. Seward. r Photographed by Melander.] DR. VOLLYE&8 MJifLT. DB. COLLYER'S REPLY. Dr. Collyer Relates a Little Story A Book that cost Mr. Ingersofl the Governorship of Illinois The Volume Philosophically Considered Heavy Blows. I HAVE been told a gentleman went to see Mr. Ingersofl once, when he lived in Peoria, and finding a fine copy of Yoltaire in his library, said, " Pray, Sir, what did this cost you?" " I believe it cost me the governorship of the State of Illinois," was the swift and pregnant answer. 1 can not but recall the incident as he stands in the light of his lec- ture. He seems to be saying, "it is my turn now, and I will do what I can to square the account. I will dethrone your God to-day amid peals of laughter; blow His being down the wind on the wings of my epigrams. I have those, about me who will send my words flying all over the state. I will start a crusade which will shut up your churches some day, silence your immemorial prayers, slay all the hopes that would strive after something more than this mpmentary gleam between the eternities, make of no account the grand deep truth that ' life struck sharp on death makes awful lightning,' and so dwarf our human kind that when we get man where we want him he shall aever again be able, to look over the low billows of his green graves, and end the fight by making my own creed good once, for all that Man, God'3 last work, who seemed so fair, ' Such splendid purpose in his eyes, Who rolled the psalms in wintry skies, Who built him fanes for fruitless prayer, 64 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. Who trusted God was love indeed, And love, creation's final law ; Though nature red, in tooth and claw, With raven, shrieked against his creed ; Who loved, who suffered countless ills, Who battled for the true and just, Is blown about the desert dust, And sealed within the iron hills." Now, since we first knew Mr. Ingersoll by report, there has been a time when those who can only believe in God as a rather helpless little brother, by no means able to take care of Himself, and in themselves as big brothers, who are bound to stand up for Him, might have felt there was grave danger in such a sight as we have witnessed of a vast array of men and women, some of them it is fair to believe of a thoughtful turn, assembled to hear the last and best word which can be said why God should be dethroned, and His presence and providence numbered among the things that seemed true enough once, but pass away inevit- ably in the process through which we arise from " our dead selves to higher things." Sparks Flying in all Directions Singular Mental Phenomenon Occasioned by $25.000 a Year. He was clothed once in a fine austerity; went on his lonely way quite content, to give grave and serious reasons for rejecting what so many of us hold dearer than our life, and was faithful to his instinct and insight, though such ovations as were ever given him as Dr. Dyer used to say of the old abolitionists might take the form mainly of rotten eggs. I know of more than one man, who, in those days, nourished a deep and most tender regard for him, and found something noble in the stand he made for the best a man can do and be, who has to abide so utterly alone. But Mr. Ingersoll, roystering around as the popular advocate of DR. COLLY Eft 8 REPLY. 65 atheism, at $'25,000 a year, as the common report goea/ is quite another sort of a man. No doubt the laborer is worthy of his hire. Those who run the thing may be trusted to see to that, and a good many of us who stand on the other side may not be much better, according to i the old proverb that it is " money makes the mare go." Still, as this always turns the fine edge of our endeavor, and makes us weak for good when we make it at all a matter of barter and sale, so it must be with Mr. Inger- soll, making him weak for what I can not but believe to be evil. He is no more in such a case than the second batch of reformers in the old times, who argued lustily for a reformation, while still they grew rich on the Church lands. No more than your Archbishop, in the Church of England, arguing on the godliness of tythes and priestly authority. So Mr. Ingersoll, in motley, trying to laugh the deepest and most sacred convictions of men down the wind under the guise of girding at the Pentateuch (for we must thank him, I say again, for the frankness with which he tells us this is his ultimate aim), is a very differ- ent man to the quiet, manful fellow we used to hear of in Peoria long ago, who won such regard from those who could at all understand him. The man in the ring, whose sole business it is to make you laugh, makes no converts even to rough riding. And so there is ground for neither hope nor fear, as we stand on that side or this, about the advance of atheism, so long as this remains as the best method of its choicest champions. It may make headway with such men as Toltaire had to handle, and in such times: but this serious and deep-hearted race of ours never did take to this kind of thing, and never will. It is only as the crackling of the thorns under a pot. Nor can this bitter and relentless spirit toward those who differ help the advocates of atheism any more than it does 5 66 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. . the advocates of the faith. Robert Southey says, in a letter to Sharon Turner, touching the contentions of his time between the sects, " When I hear the dissenters talk about Churchmen, I feel like a very high Churchman myself; but when I hear Churchmen talk about dissenters, I feel that I am a dissenter, too." It was but the bias of a nature, in which the balances were still true, in favor of the side which was dealt with most unfairly. The plea in the mind of one who could look on both sides with a calm concern, that the result of fighting over the lamp should not be to put out the light, or of contending over the nature and properties of the spring to soil the water so that no one could drink at it, be he ever so athirst. Lord Bacon says, " there is a superstition in avoiding superstition, when those think they do best who go farthest; but care should be taken that the good should not be purged away with the bad, which commonly happens when this is the method.' 1 So I think it must be with such violent and utter denunciation as this, which lies within the spirit of Mr. Ingersoll's address. It has pleased a very bright and able man in our ranks to fall into accord with him in many things he has to say, and to show how we also hold this ground. I may be old-fashioned, and unfit for a fair judgment, but I am very much of Sonthey's mind, and when I hear orthodoxy denounced in such a spirit, I say I agree with Mr. Ingersoll nowhere. Here is bigotry of a .iew shape, denouncing bigots ; and I sway to the other side for very charity, and the desire that the most good pos- sible should be found in any evil, and especially that one should think as well as possible of those who can not see as we do, but are still of as fine and clear a grain, and show as noble a soul of self-sacrifice that uttermost and inner- most proof a man can give that he believes he is right. DR. COLLY Eft 8 REPLY. 67 The Clear Ring of Truth vs. the Dull Thud of the Baser Metal Potency of Simple Statement The Doctor's Objections to Ingerscll's Talk. Now, a man who seeks and loves the truth, must be esteemed in every human society; but so far as my own observation goes, the most of our fights and contentions carried on in such a spirit as this I am trying to touch, end in vast clouds of dust and smoke, in which the clear, shining sun of the truth turns blood-red to our human vision. And those who, even with the best intentions, are forever going about, as we say, with a chip on their shoul- der, are likely in the end to be voted a common nuisance. The truth must be told, no matter who gets hurt; the truth, or even semblance of the truth, which smites the man who tells it, and moves his heart so that he has to cry " Woe is me if I preach not this Gospel !" But the truth still comes to us through clear and simple statements which tell their own story, rather than through denial, denuncia- tion, satire, slang, and appeals to the top-gallery. So Channing thought, and the result is, that his best sermons are simply statements of the truth as it had come home to his own heart and mind. So Parker thought, and reading his life again, just now, I find there is nothing the man longed for so much as that he might be quiet, and just let the truth dome itself in his great fine heart and brain, while he regrets bitterly the evil times that compelled him to take to other methods; and the best work he ever did for the deep, still truth, are statements. So John Wesley thought, when once he struck his shining path from earth to heaven, and his sermons from 1740 to 1780, are simply statements of the ever-growing and ever-brightening truth God is revealing to man. And so even Calvin* thought, and his earliest and best utterances are still statements, grim, hard, iron-clinched, but all the same the stern and 06 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. inexorable affirmation, made good for all time, that neither priest nor Pope can play fast and loose with the Most High God. Always you find the greatest and best men when they themselves are at their best making statements, exactly as Jesus does in the sermon on the mount. Saying what is in them simply and sincerely, feeling sure, as Coleridge says, that " no authority can ever prevail in opposition to the truth." So Columbus holds himself before the Council of Salamanca, when a new world is in debate. So Stephen- son holds himself before the House of Lords, when he has to answer for his locomotive. So Newton affirms his dis- covery of the law of gravitation ; and Harvey, that of the circulation of the blood. That is the law of all truth-tell- ing in its noblest and best shape, and then the contention, if there is one, is simply the hiss, as Stebbins, of California, said once, when he was speaking in defence of the Chinese, "is simply the hiss the white-hot truth makes when it strikes the black waters of hell." Here, then, is my radical objection to Mr. Ingersoll's talk, apart from his final aim. It is conceived and done in a narrow and most bigoted spirit, by one who claims, above all things in the world, to be free from bigotry. The men of whom he speaks so unworthily are, take them by and large, worthy men. The things in the five books of Moses, so called, on which the fathers based their creeds, are rapidly passing into worthier meanings; and the day is not far distant when the old belief will have rotted down, and be as when an old tree rots, to become the nursing mother of a bed of violets. No man believes in such things any more, who has read and thought to any purpose; and the man who has not done this, had far better believe in the six days' work and one day's rest, rib, serpent, fall, flood, ark, manna, and all the rest of those wonders, than in Mr. Ingereoll's enormous and most fatal negation of God. DR. COLLY ERS REPLY. 0* Putting the Pin Edge on Orthodoxy Taking a Weld with Prof. Swing and Dr. Thomas Borax and Bigotry. Nor is that bad and bitter spirit in orthodoxy now which once found utterance in fire and the axe, as it did in far more ruthless ways in atheism when the goddess of Rea- son was the divinity of France. Orthodoxy, in a free-spoken land like ours, is very civil, indeed, and timid, as I think, almost to a fault, showing just the spirit which is no f sure the ground may not slip from under it any moment; and so far as its finest leaders go edging away from the rocking base, as fast and as far the people for whom those men have to care will follow. Nothing could be more gentle than the way orthodoxy used Brother Swing. He was no more orthodox than you are. He might not think so, but that's the truth, patent to the whole world. Yet the church to which he was preaching, and the old standbys, as we call them, said, " This is what, we are here for, and have laid out our money and time for, and, if you go back far enough, it is what our fathers shed their blood for. Dr. Swing must be true to his ancient vows, or leave." If Mr. Ingersoll should ever lay out his money, and those of his mind put theirs to it, to build a great hall in Washington or Chicago for the propagation of atheism, and employ a man to preach to them, and then if this man should depart as far backward from their way of thinking as Brother Swing departed forward from that of the Presbyterians, they will be much more catholic and inclusive than I think they are if they use that man as gently. I do not mention this for proof of my word that ortho- doxy is getting to be very civil indeed, gentle, timid, and even wanting in a proper courage to take care of its own household, if we are to judge from the half-and-half meas- ures they are taking with Mr. Talmadge, in Brooklyn, and the way in which they let him smite them on the mouth. TB MISTAKES OF INQERSOLL. Orthodoxy has exchanged the old fetters of iron for silken bands with an elastic base. Brother Thomas, my dear and good friend, has no right to preach in a Methodist pulpit, and in the days I remember, would not have preached in one to this time. There must be a certain concert of opin- ion, capable of being brought within fair lines, or nobody would organize or hold anything. This is the secret of our most happy relation through all these years in this church. "We hold together through n large, free, common opinion about certain grand verities. I should injure my own nature if I went over those lines. Yet men are continually going over them in the orthodox churches. But they bear and forbear, scold a little, fret a good deal, and trust the brother may see things different presently or depart in peace, and then, when there is no help for it, they lift him very gently out of the fold. Nor is the scorn Mr. Ingersoll pours out on these ancient books befitting any man who could feel his way to their heart, apart from any theory of inspiration or the use made of them to hinder human progress. It is the spirit of the Caliph he shows, who, when the question came up what should be done with a superb library, said, "Burn it; what- ever is against the Koran ought to be burnt, and whatever agrees with the Koran is not needed." With some such narrow vision he would judge these venerable monuments of the most ancient time; make an end of them to human credence; get them branded for worthless in the interests of human reason; and order himself toward them as if an iconoclast, looking over the treasures of the Louvre, should note only what is grotesque or painful, while he missed what is most beautiful and entrancing, tumble the whole into a heap, and burn it into ashes and lime. Men have misused these books, there can be no doubt of that, and turned some parts of them into bane, which, well used, DR. COLLTERS REPLY. 71 might bring blessing. So they tell me, there is no place that can match Peoria in its power to turn good grain into whisky; therefore, shovel Peoria into the river, and leave the smiling prairies where the grain grows, a waste. Nothing in the world shows a man s limitations so fatally as the play of this power which can not or will not distin- guish between the use and the abuse of things, or will over- look the abiding good because of the transient evil. We tolerate it easily in the child who turns in wratu on the chair against which he has bruised himself; we look twice at the man who does this, and then draw our own conclu- sion. I have been told, on good authority, that Mr. Inger- soll, in his childhood and his early youth, did get badly bruised against these books. Well, the books have to take it now; but is this the sign of a large and a gracious mind? One would think he might have gotten over it before this, and come to understand them better than mere instruments of hurt. I can agree in nothing touching the Bible and the soul's life with the man who tells me his aim is to damage or destroy the faith of man in God, to the best of his ability; but if this was out of the way, one might not object to his antagonism to the misuse of Moses by those who think they do God service. Still, in any case, I find too much beauty in the books to allow me to touch them with irreverent hands. They are simply above all stand- ards of value, with which I measure other books outside the Scriptures, in the revelation they make to me of the way men felt their way toward a sure faith in God in those old times, and so grew, in many instances, to be very noble and good at last, and, as I have said, of the way in which they tried to account for this wonderful and mysterious universe in which they found themselves when they had "learned the use of I and me, and said ' I am not what I see, and other than the things I touch.' ' Nor would I lose one of 72 MISTAKES OF the wonders. They all tell us something we want to know about the working of the human mind.. That is a very poor and rude matter I treasure in my etudy; a broken vase of gray clay, with a few fishbone marks on it; but if there was not another of them in the world I would not exchange it for the Portland vase, for this reason: That on a day, so remote I can not strike it. some poor savage made that vase in my little town, to hold the dust of some one dear to him, put those marks on it for a token of what was in his mind, and then made a little vault and hid it away until the sun of this century should shine on it, und when I hold that vase, I find a trace of the man who had else been lost. There is the faint beat of a human heart lingering in the clay, and a dim remembrance of tears, and the marks, and as if they should open my grave two thousand years from now, and find the white cross still fresh on my coffin, and say, " Tender, loving hands laid that there, let us deal with it tenderly." These rude and half-shapen things in the old books are the clue to the man who made them, and how he felt, and what he thought. I would not spare the least letter out of them, but would scan them in all reverence, let who will scorn them. They all belong to our human history, and it is only their mis- fortune they have ever been misused. They are included in the saying of the great and wise German, that the Bible begins nobly with Paradise, the symbol of Faith, and con- cludes with the eternal kingdom ; and with the grand, sweet word of Thomas Carlyle: " In the poorest cottage there is one book wherein, for thousands of years, the spirit of man has found light and nourishment, and an interpreting response to whatever is deepest in him. The Book wherein to this day the eye that will look well, the mystery of existence reflects itself, and if not to the satisfvinjr of v O the outward sense, yet to the opening of the inward sense, vrhich is the far grander result." DR. COLLYE&S REPLY. 78 A Touching Illustration Eloquence and Truth Havelock's Saints. Of the doctrine advanced by Mr. Ingersoll, and his pnr- pose to have done with the God Jesus believed in, and show reason why we should have done with Him, there is nothing to say if I have not said it steadily these many years. A remark of Charles Hare strikes me forcibly as I read the few words that are said on this matter, in the address, "There is no being eloquent for atheism. In that exhausted receiver the mind can not use its wings the clearest proof that it is out of its element." For when I consider how eloquent Mr. Ingersoll has been at times, and the moving cause of it, I can see that he also must answer to this law. He never said grander words than those about our boys, their mighty heart, and utter self-sacrifice, for the noblest ends. But there never was anything done since the world stood, in which the presence of God could be traced, and his power felt m'ore clearly, nor did ever men make such sacrifice with a devouter sense that God was within it all, than those most worthy his grand and touch- ing eulogium. " Call out Havelock's saints," Sir Archi- bald Campbell shouted, when hope was almost dead in the great Sepoy rebellion in India. Something must be done, and done on the swift instant, or there would be more woful work among the women and children. Call out Havelock's saints, tJiey are sure to be ready, and they are never drunk. They were of the sort that carry a Bible in their knapsack, and turn to chapter and verse, and sing psalms from old Rouse's version to Dundee and Elgin, and the Martyrs, and nourish their hearts on stories of the way stout battles were fought and grand martyrdoms endured for God among the moors. Call out Havelock's saints, they are always ready, and never get drunk, and they do fight like the very angels. They were but the brothers of the great, simple 74 MISTAKES OF INQERSOLL. ' . souls who fought at Ball's Bluff, and in scores of battles beside, while mothers and sisters did the prajing for the moment, for they had no time except just to look up and hear that voice in the heart saj, " Steady, my boy, steady, you are of a grand stock, you must tell a grand story. And they told it, and at the heart of it all was God, and a new life for the nation, and in time a new civilization that shall shed its blessing on the whole waiting world. Atheism Not an Institution but a " Destitution ! "The True Life. I have no stones to throw at atheism any more than I have stones to throw at blindness. It can never be more than a very sore and sad limitation, not an institution, but a destitution. This Anglo-Saxon nature is not good soil for it; no arguments can make it take hold and grow in us any more than arguments can make roses take hold and grow on Aberdeen granite. Nor have I any exhortation save this: That as we stand as pioneers of the noblest and fairest faith we can reach, a faith which throws no strands to stay itself on the fall,. or the flood, or the manna, or the sun, standing still, or any of these old wonders, but just fronts the light and drinks it in, we shall grow ever more worthy to prove God's presence in the world, by revealing it in our life, and in the work he has given us to do. There is no argument like that which lies within a sweet and true life which looks to God forever for its inspiration and its joy. Let us be right worthy of our faith. Then shall this Western Goth, So fiercely practical, so keen of eye, Find out some day that nothing pays but God. Served whether in the smoke of battle field, In work obscure done honestly or vote For truth unpopular or faith maintained, To ruinous convictions or good deeds, Wrought for good's sake, heedless of heaven or helL FRED. PERUY POWEES' HE PLY. 75 FRED. PERRY POWERS' REPLY. The Sinaitic Code Solvent Powers of the Historic Method Graphic Illustration of the Two Schools. CHRISTIANITY, like a fortress on an open plain, is liable to attack from opposite directions. But if is well for the at- tacking parties to remember that columns of argument do not, like columns of soldiers, co-operate when moving in opposite directions. Christianity is not to be disposed of bj proving that at the same timo it is and is not a certain thing. The " historic method," like every new journal, seems "to meet a long-felt want." It has been clutched greed- ily and employed in every conceivable shape. It proves not only that whatever is is right, but that whatever was was right, and whatever will be will be right. It has been car- ried to a point where it undermines personal responsibility, and with it Mr. Herbert Spencer, in the conclusion of his Sociology, enjoins the reformer and the philanthropist from activity. It eliminates ethical considerations from the mind of the historian. It closes the eyes of society to the vices of its members, and it lays its hand upon the mouth of the judge before whom stands a man who, as the result of antecedents, and in the natural effort to harmonize himself with his environment, has committed murder. Now, it is a little singular that this invaluable historic method should be a legitimate weapon against the church, but an illegitimate weapon for the church. If the church is to be allowed to use this weapon freely it will have no 76 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. difficulty in making a perfect defense for itself, its predeces- sor and all of its members, no matter how wild or wicked. The historic method is a solvent in which the inqui- sition disappears, and which at once removes those spots on the robe of religious history, the wars and massacres of the Israelites. I have no disposition to make any such exten- sive use of the historic method as this. But all matters of history are to be studied as historical, not as contempora- neous. And it is in the last degree uncandid for the oppo- nents of Christianity to make the extremest use of the his- toric method when it suits their purpose, and then, in dealing with religious history, eliminate ordinary historic perspective. In this latter particular the enemies of the church are not alone. The Reformation brought in a re- vival of Judaism, and a large section of Protestant Chris- tianity resolutely closes its eyes to the fact that the Mosaic dispensation was given several thousand years ago, and to a race wholly different in its position from any now existing. The Mosaic dispensation is not the only thing treated in this way. The directions given by St. Paul to a particular church at a particular date are constantly appealed to in the churches as universal law, applicable to all churches and throughout all ages. If a picture with a man in the foreground and an elephant in the background were shown to two savages, one of whom knew something about ele- phants, and the other of whom did not, the former would insist upon it that the artist was a ignoramus for painting an elephant smaller than a man, and the other would con- clude that man was a larger animal than an elephant, be- cause he appeared so in the picture. The former repre- sents a school of atheists who attack the ethics of the Sina- itic code, and the latter represents a school of devout be- lievers who, receiving the Sinaitic code as a matter of rev- elation, feel compelled to defend it as the truth and noth- FRED. PERRY POWERS' REPLY. 77 ing but the truth, and the truth for all times and all places. It is worth while to remember at the very outset what both parties to the war waged over the etnics of the Pentateuch seem disposed to ignore, that what are now denounced as the errors of the Sinaitic code were pointed out more than eighteen hundred years ago by tne Highest authority rec- ognized by the Christian world. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus Christ used the fol- lowing language: Ye have heard that it hath been said, an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a toeth. But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil ; but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other, also. Matt, v., 38, 89. The lex talionis, here repudiated, was not a rabbinical interpolation; it was an integral maxim of the Sinaitic code, as the following words, coming shortly after the Deca- logne, show: And if any mischief follows, then thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. Exodus xxi., 23-25. Free divorce was another Sinaitic error, so called, and in pointing it out Christ gave us the key to the whole Mosaic dispensation, as the following passage shows: The Pharisees also came unto Him, tempting Him, and saying unto Him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause ? And He answered and said unto them, Have ye not read that He which made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, for this cause shall a man leave father and mother and shall cleave to his wife, and they twain shall be one flesh ? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What, therefore, God hath joined together, let no man put asunder. They say unto Him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away ? He saith unto them, Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, suffered you to put away your wives ; but from the beginning it was not so. And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornica- tion, and shall marry another, committeth adultery; and whoso rnarri- eth her which he put away doth commit adultery. Matt, xix., 3-9. 78 MISTAKES OF IXQBROOLL Divine Adjustment of the Moral Law Progressive Elimination at Poly gamy, Slavery, Etc. Mount Sinai and Mount Calvary. The "hardness of heart 1 ' referred to is evidently the dullness of the intellectual and moral sense that character- ized the almost savage slaves of the Egyptians when they come np out of Egypt. Instead of imposing on them an ethical system perfectly complete and perfectly unintelligi- ble to them in their degraded condition, Moses, under di- rection of divine wisdom, gave them a moral law which they could understand, and which would develop in them a capacity for something purer and higher. Polygamy was tolerated, not because it was the ideal system; not because the deity of the Hebrews could devise no other, but because polygamy is the natural intermedi- ate station between promiscuity and monogamy. God chose to make a civilized people out of the Jews, not by His creative fiat, but by operating through natural laws of sociology. In due time, when men were prepared for it, the law of permanent and monogamous marriage was pro- mulgated, but it was in advance of public sentiment, as is ahown by the fact that when Christ, in the passage above quoted, forbade free divorce, and proclaimed the sanctity of the marital relation, the disciples suggested that if thab was the law it was better not to marry. So slavery was tolerated under the Mosaic law. But ser- vitude for a short term of years was substituted for per- manent and hereditary servitude, and the law threw some protection about the person of the slave. The Mosaic dis- pensation is not responsible for a defense of slavery. It tolerated an intermediate state between barbarism and civ- ilization. A fact of vast importance to notice is that this Mosaic system contained within itself the seeds which, when FRED. PERRT POWERS' REPLY. 70 humanity had outgrown the old dispensation, would mature into a new dispensation so far in advance of human attain- ments, that after nearly nineteen centuries the human race has not begun to catch upon it: Christ expounded the Old Testament references to Himself, beginning with Moses. 7 O O "When Sinai had reduced society to order, and stamped out paganism, then Calvary came and appealed to all that was highest and purest in man. Even at this late day there are not many souls that really comprehend the full meaning of Calvary and whose lives give evidence of that fact. When any considerable portion of the human race has received all that Calvary can confer, a new dispensation may be expected. In this sense the Mosaic dispensation was perfect and complete. As promulgated on Mount Sinai, it was adapted only to a certain low condition of mankind. But it contained a vital principle, which enabled it to expand as fast as civilization advanced. Starting with the Decalogue, it developed the penitential psalms and the noble exhorta- tions of the prophets, and finally the Beatitudes. Begin- ning with a catalogue of penalties, it in course of time developed sorrow for sin, and at last that love to God which withholds from sin. This system of religion has developed faster than civilization has advanced. The Israelites at the foot of Mount Sinai probably knew something of the wrong- fulness of murder, theft and adultery. But, to-day, in spite of great moral advances to-day, nineteen centuries after Christ how much does the human race really know about " hungering and thirsting after righteousness ? " Let the foolish declaration that we have outgrown Christianity come from those who have been filled, and who still want something more. The Decalogue is by no means the complete moral code that it is often represented to be, and it would be singularly 80 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. out of place in a Christian church were it not that, even to-day, and in the United States, there are many persons incapable of comprehending the Beatitudes which compre- hend all there is in the Decalogue, and vastly more. The seventh commandment does not apply to crimes, both participants in which are unmarried, and the Mosaic law treated the seduction of an unbetrothed bondmaid as a trivial offense, sufficiently atoned for by the sacrifice of a ram. The seduction of a free maid, if she was not be- trothed, was atoned for by marriage. It was on account of the " hardness of their hearts," their infancy in ethics, that this easy-going statute regarding the sexes was enacted. But Christ said : Te have heard that it was said of them of old time, " Thou shalt not commit adultery;" but I say unto you. That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in' his heart. Matt, v., 27, 28. The Decalogue said, "Thou shalt not kill," but Jesus Christ added to this as follows : Whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in dan ger of the judgment. Matt, v., 22. The Decalogue forbade the bearing of false witness; it was silent as to ordinary mendacity. In the New Testa- ment this law is extended to cover all untruthfulness. Purpose and Potency of the Mosaic Law. The purpose of the Mosaic law was to start the Israelites on the path of spiritual enlightenment. It was a provi- sional system, superseded at the right time by Christianity. The sacrifices were fines imposed on the guilty. They were also daily reminded of the existence of God, and the blood pouring from the altar taught the serious nature and fatal consequences of sin as nothing else would. Of course, to a set of modern sophists, who deny the existence of sin,, FRED. PERRY POWERS' REPLY. 81 the sacrifices are simply meaningless, revolving spectacles; but the man who hasn't studied the subject enough to understand the meaning of the Hebrew sacrifices is estopped from discussing them in public. The barbarities of the Mosaic system form a pet subject of denunciation by gentlemen who have a repugnance to study, coupled with a mania for delivering lectures, when the latter can be done at a pecuniary profit. If a man thinks it just as well to worship the sun or a bull as to worship Jehovah, of course he will regard the penalties denounced against idolatry as tyrannical and barbarous. But no man, unless he has a purpose to accomplish thereby, can shut his eyes to the barrier that idolatry places in the way of mental or moral progress, or both. The interests of the human race demanded that paganism should be roofed out somewhere, if not everywhere. The promise to Abra- ham, that in his seed should all the nations of the earth be blessed, has been fulfilled, but that has been accomplished only by the most rigorous hostility to paganism among the Jews. In spite of all the stern laws of Moses, Israel again and again relapsed into paganism; yet it was an absolute necessity that if what we now know as civilization was ever to come, paganism must in some corner of tho world be stamped out, and the way prepared for Christianity. To teach the Israelites what a moral contagion was idolatry, they had to be taught that it was a physical contagion, contaminating everything connected with the idolator. Had not this been done, the Israelites would have remained, like all the rest of the world, immersed in the unspeakably unclean worship of Baal and Astarte and Moloch. Cost what it might, the ravages of the pestilence had to be checked somewhere. 6 83 MISTAKES OF INQEXSOLL. Excessive Wickedness and Proportionate Punishment The Court of Heaven vs. the Court of Earth. Of course, the wars of the Israelites and the annihilation of certain tribes are held to be horrible cruelties by the sophists of the present day. But we are distinctly told that it was for their extraordinary wickedness that these tribes were exterminated. We are again and again told that it was for the wickedness of the Amalekites that their destruction was commanded. We get some glimpses of the unmentionable vileness of some of these Canaanitish tribes. The fact was that they were ulcers on the body of the human race which had to be cut out. Possibly the innocent suffered with the guilty, and possibly there were no innocent except the infants, whom it would have been no mercy to save after their unclean parents were destroyed. It is probable that the moral taint had so rooted itself in the physical system that, had the children been spared, they would have inevitably developed into adults as unclean as their parents. The passages sometimes quoted to show that Jehovah was vindicative, are passages aimed at sin. The most ample amnesty to the repentant is prom- ised from one end of Genesis to the other end of Revelation. The people who denounce the divine government, as mani- fest in the Old Testament, either deny that there is any such thing as sin, or, which is often the case, they have admirable reasons for being angry because sin is punished. The gentlemen who denounce the destruction of Sodom are necessarily apologists for the Sodomists. When malignancy is charged against Jehovah it is im- portant to remember that the presence of five righteous persons would have saved Sodom. There was only one righteous person, and not only was he enabled to escape but he secured immunity for his family. Nineveh was FRED. PERRY POWERS' REPLY. 83 spared because the people repented. The Israelites were delivered from their enemies when they forsook their sins. On the other hand Nathan's rebuke to David is a matter of record, and Solomon's licentiousness was punished by the revolt of Jeroboam and the ten tribes. The statement that Jehovah disregarded distinctions of right ami wrong, or treated the innocent and guilty alike, or took pleasure in the death even of the wicked is false, and known to be so by the persons who make it. The very sentiment of hu- manity which prompts certain persons to denounce the di- vine government of the Jews is found only where Chris- tianity, the legitimate successor of Judaism, prevails. "What are denounced as massacres committed by the Israelites were judicial executions performed under the or- ders of the only court in the universe which has perfect in- formation of the cases tried before it, and which is per- fectly free from weaknesses. To object to the judgment one must either show that the condemned were innocent, which at this late day can not be shown, or one must show that the crimes were less heinous than the court held them to be, which is to become an apologist for crimes of every character, some of which are not even to be named. It is also to be remembered that the divine government is the creator of society, instead of the creature of society, as is human government. The former is, therefore, not to be judged precisely as the latter is, even though abstract justice is the same in Heaven that it is on earth. The charge of vindictiveness is absolutely without foundation; find, by the way, of all the nations known to the Jews the one we might suppose them most hostile to is the Egypt- ian, for it was in Egypt- that the Israelites were enslaved *nd maltreated. Yet the divine command, coming from Moses, was that the Israelites should in no case oppress the Egyptians, and the reason was that they were once so- 84 MISTAKES OF INQERSOLL. jourmiv; in the land of Egypt, the very reason we might suppose vhy they should be especially bitter toward the Egyptians. Able Bodied Mendacity and Civilization Love and Obedience. There is a good deal of deuce ignorance or able-bodied mendacity in circulation regarding the ethics of the New Testament. Jesus Christ and His apostles upheld neither political nor domestic despotism. But it is a fact which lecturers should understand that civil order is the first step toward civilization. Despotism is more conducive to civilization than anarchy is. Furthermore, when Paul wrote his epistles the Roman officials suspected all Chris- tians of being hostile to the government, and it was espe- cially necessary that the Roman power should understand by the loyalty of the Christians that He whom they called their king was a spiritual sovereign, and not a rival of the emperor, "WTiat Paul at a particular time wrote to a particular church is by no means necessarily a universal law. What is particularly to be noted is that the exhortations to obe- dience on the part of the citizen, the wife, the child and the servant are coupled with and conditioned on exhorta- tions to the ruler, the husband, the parent and the master, which certain uncandid and irrational persons, some of whom are inside the church and some of whom are outside of it, are careful to ignore. In Ephesians v. 22, Paul com- mands wives to submit themselves to their husbands, but in the twenty-fifth verse husbands are commanded to love their wives as Christ loves His church. Now, if the hus- band fulfills his part of the mutual obligation, the wife's submission will not be of a very mental character. In Ephesians vi. 1, children are commanded to obey their par- ents, but in the fourth verse fathers are commanded not FRED. PERRY POWERS' REPLY. 85 to provoke their children to wrath, but to bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. In the next verse servants are commanded to obey their masters, but in the ninth verse we read, "And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening, knowing that your Master also is in Heaven ; neither is there respect of person with Him." In Hebrews xiii. 17, we read, " Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves; for they watch for your souls as they that must give account." The command to obey rules is conditioned on the dis- charge of their duties by the rulers. Now, in omitting one half of each double command, and on the strength of the other half arraigning Christianity as the ally of domestic and political tyranny, modern "free thought" is accomplishing a great work, is it not? The distinguishing characteristic of " free thought " seems to be that it is thought freed from all subservience to facts. Mr. Powers' Pungent Peroration. Theology has made many shipwrecks by an excess of a, priori reasoning, and by reasoning deductively when the means of reasoning inductively exist. But what is termed materialism is habitually doing the same thing, if it can make a point against Christianity by so doing. The ene- mies of Calvinism have denounced it because it promoted immorality. Yet a severer code of morals would be diffi- cult to find than that maintained by the English Puritans, the Scotch Covenanters, and the French Huguenots, all Cal- rinists. Would it not be just as rational to judge Calvinism by its fruits as to judge its fruits by Calvinism? When man has argued from the New Testament that Christianity must be the ally of despotism, and then looks about him and sees that civil liberty is not known outside of Christian lands, and has its fullest development in Eng- 86 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. land and America, where Christianity in its simplest forms prevail, and where there are the fewest barriers between the human soul and the New Testament itself; when he has argued from the Xew Testament to show that Chris- tianity is inimical to the best interests of womanhood, and then looks around and sees womanhood honored only in Christian countries, constantly employed by and honored . in the church, must it not occur to him with painful force that he is a good deal off the track ? It would not be necessary to remind philosophers of the fact, but it is necessary to remind sophists that the Jews did a good many things that the Mosaic dispensation is not responsible for, and that it is mere idiocy to hold Chris- tianity responsible for everything done by individuals or associations in its name. The man who can riot discrim- inate between the legitimate results of a system, and the abuses grafted on to it by its professed adherents, is plainly unfit to debate philosophical questions. If people made half the effort to understand the Bible that they make to discard it, they wouldn't be so funny a& they are now, but they would know more. THERE are over two hundred passages in the Old Testa- ment which prophesied about Christ, and every one of them has come true. D. L. Moody. In regard to the Great Book, I have only to say it is the best gift which God has given to man. All the good from the Saviour of the World is communicated through this Book. But for this Book we could not know right from wrong. All those things desirable to man are contained in it. I return you my sincere thanks for this very elegant copy of the Great Book of God which you present. Abra- ham Lincoln, on re<>eiving a present of a Bible. ITEMS. 37 I DEFT you all, as many as are here, to prepare a tale so simple and so touching, as the tale of the passion and death of Jesus Christ, whose influence will be the same after so many centuries. Denis Diderot. THE Bible is the best book in the world. It contains more of my little philosophy than all the libraries I have seen. John Adams. (Second President of United States.} AND, finally, I may state, as the conclusion of the whole matter, that the Bible contains within itself all that, under God, is required to account for and dispose of all forms of infidelity, and to turn to the best and highest uses all that man can learn of nature. Chancellor Dawson. THE Bible is the only cement of nations, and the only cement that can bind religious hearts together. Chevalier Bunsen. THE Bible is the Word of God with all the peculiarities of man, and all the authority of God. Prof. Murphy. FROM the time that, at my mother's feet, or on my fa- ther's knee, I first learned to lisp verses from the sacred writings, they have been my daily study and vigilant con- templation. If there be anything in my style or thoughts to be commended, the credit is due to my kind parents in instilling into my mind an early love of the Scriptures. Daniel Webster. THE same divine hand which lifted up before the eyes of Daniel and of Isaiah the veil which covered the tableau of the time to come, unveiled before the eyes of the author of Genesis the earliest ages of the creation. And Moses was the prophet of the past, as Daniel and Isaiah and many others were the prophets of the future. Prof. Guyot. WE are persuaded that there is no book by the perusal of which the mind is so much strengthened and so much enlarged as it is by the perusal of the Bible. Dr. Melville. J ''holographed by Mosher.J BfSHOI' CHENEY* REPLY. BISHOP CHENEY'S REPLY. How the Question of Forgery Applies to the Five Books of Moses. IN looking at almost any object in the world of nature round about, it becomes remarkable only from certain points of view. The cathedral rocks that form one of the glories of the Yosemite Yalley differ not much from any other great pile of jagged cliffs, except in a certain position, where the great mass of Gothic spires and arches appear clothed with evergreen ivy. Only as you reach a certain point where Profile Notch penetrates the White Mountains, do you see far up, up on the topmost cliff, the formation of a face cut in the solid granite by nature's own chisel. But the case of alleged forgery before us is extraordinary from every point of view, for forgery is generally something which concerns some brief document, something that requires only a signature in order to secure its currency. The longer and more elab- orate the document which forgery produces, the more danger there must inevitably be of its final and ultimate detection. But here are five long historic books. They are full of details. They cover vast periods of time. Thoy enter into a variety of topics. Incidentally they discuss not only ques- tions of religion, but of law^of politics, of commerce, even of hygiene medical laws of health. Was ever forgery com- mitted before or since on such a gigantic scale as this? Moreover, there is no crime that is liable to be so speedily detected as forgery. The man who signs some document with another's name rarely goes down to the grave without meeting his punishment here on earth. Why, only a few weeks ago, the doors of our penitentiary, in the State of 90 MISTAKES OP INGERSOLL. Illinois, closed upon a prisoner who had affixed the name of another, whose name was better than his own, to a check upon which he had received the money; but only one month intervened as a gap between that crime and the punishment it merited and received. It was a hundred years ago, that Thomas Chatterton, one of the most wonderful men, or boys, I might rather say, that England has ever produced, forged a huge mass of papers, professedly historical, that were dated away back in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The style was that of the monks and chroniclers, which he had imitated with the greatest possible perfection. The references to the customs of that ancient period were such as to avoid detection, and Chatterton, in the precocity of his intellect, and in the versatility of his talent, was without a peer in English literary history. The English literary world re- ceived it as a revelation out of lost centuries. The great scholars of England were deceived. But it only took three years to expose to every eye the fraud that had been committed, and Chatterton, whom Wordsworth called the "marvelous boy," ended his career in a suicide's grave. O, 1 >rethren ! who can count the years, who can enumerate the centuries which have rolled over this world of ours since the alleged forgery of this man Moses! And yet to-day, after the lapse of centuries, there are more people who believe in that forgery as the genuine work of the man whom God appointed the great law-giver and leader of Israel, there are more people who hang their hopes for time and eternity on this alleged fraud, and that which has grown out of this alleged fraud the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ than ever before in two thousand years. Am I not then justified in saying that if this be a forgery, which is contained in the five books of Moses, it is the most extraordinary forgery that has ever been committed in the world since words BISHOP CHENEY'S REPLY. 91 expressed human thought, or human beings learned to wield a pen? The " Common Ground " of the Contending Parties Logical Position of Ezra. Now, in the first place, I desire to call your attention to certain facts concerning the Mosaic record. In all contro- versies in every department of human thought there are certain points which are regarded as neutral ground. "When our great civil war shook this land from centre to circum- ference and two mighty armies were face to face in the Yalley of the Tennessee, the stars and stripes floated in the same breeze that wafted the stars and the bars ; the strains of "Dixie" and "My Maryland" commingled with "Hail Columbia" and the "Star-Spangled Banner ;" the soldiers of the different armies exchanged such commodi- ties as they possessed, as if they had been neighbors in peace at home. No wonder that finally it came to pass that between these armies there was what is known as neutral ground, on which it was agreed that the soldiers of one side should not fire on those of the other. Now, is there any such ground as that between those who defend what are known as the five books of Moses, and those who declare they were never written by Moses at all ? Is there any point, I say, in this controversy where the skeptic and the believer can come to stand upon one common ground ? If we can find such a neutral ground as that, it will save us a long, tirdsome, profitless debate. Now, such a ground I think we have in the life and his- tory of Ezra, the writer of the book of the Old Testament, which bears his name. It is conceded on all hands that this man was a scribe of the Jewish law after the close of the Babylonian captivity. After the people had returned from the land of their exile into the land of their fathers, 92 MISTAKES OF INQERSOLL. he gathered into one great collection all these sacred writ- ings that were held by the Jews to be the inspired word of God. No infidel that I am aware of has ever questioned the fact that in this collection of Ezra was contained the five books of Moses. It has been claimed by some of the least scholarly of infidels that Ezra wrote those five books. But that idea was found visionary and was long ago given up by those who opposed the truth of Christianity. But the fact remains that no one, Christian or unbeliever, to-day questions the historic fact that the five books of Moses, as we now accept them, were received as the writings of the lawgiver of the Jewish people when Ezra was at the acme of his influence after the Baylonian captivity. But they state that it was universally conceded that it was four hun- dred and fifty years before the birth of Christ. In other words, it was admitted that every Jew who returned out of the Babylonian captivity, held these five books to be the works of Moses, the man of God, twenty-three hundred years ago. The Bishop Planting Signals on the Mountain Tops of History Survey of the New Moses Air Line. We stand, then, without dispute, without any controversy, at this point of time four hundred and fifty years before the birth of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Now, fix that point in your memory while I attempt, like a civil en- gineer penetrating some wilderness, to plant the signal on some more remote mountain top of history. Now, all the ancient writings, whether Egyptian or Chaldean, cor- roborate the testimony of the Bible that these Hebrews were slaves in the land of Egypt. They also agree that they migrated into Southern Syria, under the leadership of a man who was called Moses a word which meant '' one drawn out of the water." It is also universally allowed that they settled in this new land, which had long before BISHOP CHENEYS REPLY. 93 been promised to their fathers, about the year 1450 before Christ. We have established then our second date a date which no skeptic has ever called in question. When our great tunnel that brings the pure water of Lake Michigan into every home and household in this city was in process of construction, the workmen began at either end. There was a shaft out in yonder crib, and there was another on the shore, and underneath the waves the two parties of toilers worked toward each other. And so it is with us. ' We tunnel between our two shafts. The date 450 B. C. and the date 1450 B. C. only one thousand years are to be ac- counted for. Does that seem along period of time to you? I admit that it does, but not in the history of nations. It is only a trifle more than the time in which you and I are living is removed from the time of William of Normandy, who conquered Harold and the English barons. Now we will cross the sea to the old tower that still recalls the memory of William the Conqueror. We will enter the office of public records, and in that fire-proof vault, guarded as they guard the specie that is gathered into the treasury of the nation, is a book in two huge volumes of /ellum. It is known as the u Doomsday Book." In the, year 1086, eight hundred years ago, remember, William the Conqueror caused that record to be prepared. It is nearly as old as the five books of Moses, the Pentateuch, was in the days of Ezra the scribe. But not a page of the "Doomsday Book'- 'has been lost; not a line has been altered; not a letter erased. Its pages read to-day as they did in this old time when the Norman heel was on the Saxon neck eight centuries ago. The ink is as fresh on 'the parchment as though that parchment were unstained by age. Do you ask how it is that the record has remained uncorrupted? Do you ask how it is that after all the revo- lutions that have swept over England, after all the changes 94 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. of royal houses, and the dissolutions of powerful parties, that that has remained perfectly unaltered? The answer ia a perfectly easy one to give. It is because " Doomsdaj Book " contains the name of every man, who, in the daya of William the Conqueror, owned one rood of English soil. It contains a description of the lands throughout the realm. It gives the boundaries of every great estate, and every old Engiish family must, therefore, find the roots of i':s gene- alogy in that old book of the early times of the Normaa conquest. It gives the title to every acre of land in Eng- land. Thus, two of the strongest motives that can influence the human mind and the human will, have conspired to guard this " Doomsday Book " with a jealous and tireleas care. The possession of a great name, and the possession of landed property are wrapped up in England in the safety of that one book. Now, exactly the same motives conspired for the preservation, from all corruption, of the five books of Moses. They contain the list of those who came out of Egypt with Moses and entered into Palestine; they gave a description of the land that was apportioned to each and every name. To lose these books, which the Jews ever regarded as a precious treasure, the genealogy of their household to suffer them to be tampered with, was to unsettle the title to every man's field from Dan to Beersheba. If the " Doomsday Book " has survived, uncorrupted, what reason on earth is there to doubt that the Penta- teuch was preserved intact during the thousand years that intervened between the time of Moses and the time of Ezra? But I need not stop here. Ezra, as I have said, was one of the captives who returned out of exile. But Daniel, long before the time of Ezra, speaks of this law of Moses. He bases his own conduct and his own private character upon it. Daniel brings us a hundred years nearer to the days BISHOP CUE NET'S REPLY. 95 when Moses gave that law to the world. When King Josiah mounted the throne of Judah he found that throne pol- luted by the wickedness that characterized the reign of his father, King Manasseh, and then there came an overwhelm' ing and powerful revival of religion throughout the king- dom. Monarch and subject united in humiliation before God. Numbers of people bowed down before the Jehovah whom they had offended. But. we all distinctly know that the root and the seed out of which this revival sprung was the finding of the copy of the five books of Moses, and learning there what Moses had commanded against the sin of idolatry. I have reached a point nearer yet to the time of Moses himself. I will hasten on. Termination of the Great Air Line. One thousand and four years before Christ, Solomon regulated the temple service and worship, but he regulated it, we are distinctly told, according to the law that was contained in the Pentateuch. And we are within four hun- dred and fifty years of the death of Moses. But David refers constantly to the five books of Moses in the psalms. The law of Moses was the foundation on which all the relig- ious character of the psalms of David rest. Before David was Samuel. His entire career pre-supposes the exist- ence of the Mosaic books. But only three hundred and fifty years intervened between Samuel and Moses. Joshua succeeded Moses as the leader of the chosen people. Again and again in his addresses to the people, did he reprove, exhort and encourage Israel, but everywhere on the basis of the books of the law of Moses. Thus, we have link by link carried back this chain of testimony to the very days in which Moses lived. Now we want no better proof than that in the secular history. Suppose the farewell address of George Washington had been made the object of 96 MISTAKES OF INQEB80LL. skeptical criticism; suppose that it had been denied that it had been written by "Washington, and if I find it alluded to in Mr. Lincoln's address at the monument-raising in Gettys- burg; if I find in one of his speeches that President Polfe also spoke of it; if this is true of Mr. Yan Buren, and Mr. Madison before him, and if even John Adams, the sue- cessor of George Washington in the presidential chair, refers to that address why then, every sensible man will say that it is the nearest equivalent of mathematical demon- stration that can possibly be given of the genuineness of the document to which I have referred. Genealogical Reflections. Now, I want you to notice again that if these writings were forged, they were forged by men, who even in so doing, blackened the character of their own lineage and an- cestry. It has been well said that a man whose chief glory is in his ancestors, is very like a potato the best part of him is under ground. But after all there is no good man who does not rejoice and thank God for the fact when he is able to trace back a long line of God-fearing, pure- living, honest men and women as the seed from whence he sprang. If I go to work and forgo a genealogy for my- self, I certainly will not manufacture one that describes my forefathers as the blackest set of criminals that ever escaped from a penitentiary. No one pretends for a mo- ment that any one but the Jews were those who could have been responsible for the Testament records ; but if they forged it they must have had some motive. Forgers always have a motive. There is something before their minds that is to be gained. But what did these forgers do ? "Why they compiled a record of their own family tree, that overwhelmed their fathers with everlasting shame and contempt. They described the ancient Hebrews as besotted BISHOP CHENEYS REPLY. 97 idolaters in the land of Egypt. When God promised them a land, all their own, flowing with milk and honey whea all that was set before them they were willing to give up all hope of prosperity, all hope of deliverance from slavery, if they might only have that which they sighed for the fish and the leeks and garlic of Egypt. They are repre- sented as bowing down to the worship of a calf, which their own hands had made out of their golden ear-rings, and doing that in the very presence of God, displayed upon Mount Sinai, and are described when they reached the borders of the promised land, when all its glory was before them, and its liberty was almost theirs, as being too cowardly to fight the battles that were necessary to gain the possession of their inheritance, till at last God refused to let one of the miserable, cowardly generation enter the land Ho had promised to their fathers. Yet all this is forgery, not of the Assyrians, not of the Egyptians, who were their hereditary enemies ; not of the Philistines, but themselves the forgery of the Jews them- selves. As though in the dead of night a man should steal out under cover of the darkness to the tombstone of his dead father, and with chisel and mallet in hand try to erase the honorable record of his life, and forge a lying epitaph that made him the vilest scoundrel that ever polluted the earth. Nay, if I commit a forgery on my family record, if ever I try to impose a fabulous family tree on those who know me, I don't think I shall ever trace my line to Caesar Borgia. Cutting the Qordian Knot. Now again I would like to notice very briefly some of the objections to the credibility of the Mosaic writers. Now, there is nothing easier than to start difficulties on any subject which the human mind can give atten- tion to. Let a child in its tiny fingers grasp a pin and 7 98 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL. get at the silvered side of a mirror, and in five minutes it will do more damage than the most skillful laborer can remedy with the work of many hours. Is it wonderful that the Bible has been made the subject of repeated attacks ? I no more hope to answer all the objections that can be put against a book such as the book in question, or even the books of Moses I say I can no more hope to answer all these attacks than in this spring- time I can hope to pick off every green leaf that starts out upon every spreading tree. It were an easier and more effective way to girdle the tree itself. God girdles the tree of infidelity by revival. If the record of experience tells any fact in the world, it is this, that a thousand objections which the head can see, vanish into thin air when the spirit of God gets hold of a man's heart. Why, there are men here to-night who remember the hour when they found difficulties upon every page of the word of God, when they objected to every principle it propounded, and now look back to the difficulties they used to find there, and wonder how it was possible that they could ever have been troubled by difficul- ties so palpably absurd. They did not study out one by one the replies that might have been made to these objec- tions. When, in June, huge swarms of flies make our city like the land of Egypt in the days of old, we never under- take to kill them one by one ; half a million of people would not be sufficient for that. But God's west wind blows, and they are scattered. So it is that the winds of God's spirit sweep away the swarms of difficulties that men find in the Bible. And yet I am prepared to-night to take .np two or three of the objections which have been urged against the credibility of the Pentateuch. These objections resolve themselves into two different parts the one to the facts of the history of Moses, the other to the morality of BISHOP CHE NET 8 REPL7. 99 the acts that are there recorded, or the precepts that are there laid down. I won't have time to go over both branches of the subject. The limits of such a sermon as this absolutely forbid it. I speak now of the facts. At some future time I hope to take up the moral portion of it. Now, every time you visit the South Park, you find a place of rest under the grateful shade of an ancient willow. The vast expanse of its gigantic branches, the immense girth of its trunk are the witnesses of its venerable age. If I should take up to-morrow the report of the park com- missioners and find there the statement that they, at vast expense, had transplanted that willow tree from the native soil in which it grew to adorn Chicago's pleasure-ground, I should know beforehand that it was false; the very appear- ance of the tree gives the lie to the statement, and if there were any way in which I could examine the rings that made up the trunk, I need only count them to have a posi- tive proof of the fact that the statement contained in the report was false. Now, precisely akin to that is the accusation that is often brought against the Book of Genesis. It is said that Moses declares that six thousand years ago God created this world in which we are living now. But we only need to count the geologic strata we only need to number the rings of the huge trunk of this earth in order to disprove the statement. The Bishop's Challenge Moses and Ingersoll as Chronologists. jSTow, in reply to this difficulty, which is so often urged against the Book of Genesis, I want to say one word, and that is, I challenge any man in this congregation I chal- lenge any man in the wide world that has ever read the Bible, to find in any book of the Bible, much less in the Book of Genesis, the statement that the creation of this 100 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. earth took place six thousand years ago. This Moses, whom Col. Ingersoll thinks was such a blunderer; whose mistakes have been the subject of his jeers and blasphem- ous ridicule, was a more careful man than our Peoria skep- tic thinks. He certainly was careful not to fix the time at which God created this earth. Whether that creation took place six thousand or six million years ago, he does not state. He does say that " In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." But that is all. All that he asserts is, that matter the substance out of which the earth was made is not eternal; it had a beginning; He did create it. Well, then, again, the creation of man, equally with that of the world, is made the object of attack. We are told that the Bible claims that between five and six thousand years ago God placed^ the first pair of the human family in Eden. But when geologists have dug down into the forma- tions that make up this globe formations which upon mathematical calculation have taken ages and ages to pro- duce they find there the remains of ancient tools, weap- ons, ornaments and utensils that prove that man must have lived in a time far ante-distant to thsrt of Adam. For example, the skeleton of an Indian was exhumed Borne years ago, while digging for the foundation of the gas-works in the City of New Orleans, and it was alleged by one geologist of that day that it could not have been lees than fifty thousand years ago that that man lived. It has been flaunted in our faces that science and religion are opposed to each other ; that the Bible is against progress, and that we all must concede that the Pentateuch, is but a tissue of falsehood. Now the first answer I have to give is, that there is not one syllable in the Bible that fixes the length of time 01 man's existence upon this earth. Not one syllable. Mosee BISHOP CHENEY'S REPLY. 101 does not tell us anything about the date that God created Adam and put him in the garden of Eden. True, we have in the New Testament, in the genealogy of Christ, a state- ment of the number of generations from Abraham down to the Saviour; but who knows precisely what is the mean- ing of the term " generations ?" The word is used in a variety of senses in the Bible, and it baffles all calculation to deter- mine how many ages intervened between Adam and Abra- ham. The wisest scholars have been perplexed to fix the number of centuries that rolled over the world in that period of time. To say that God placed man upon this earth six thousand years ago, is not quoting the Bible. I want you to remember that. I want you to tell it to the skeptic that picks out genealogical difficulties in the Scrip- ture. It is only repeating the result of calculations in chronology of certain fallible men who, as fallible, were liable to be mistaken. All infidels do it in trying to fasten upon the Scripture the blunders of mistaken men. But, as is well known, the tendency of the best geologists in our day is rapidly going away from the old ideas of the vast periods of time in the construction of this earth. Mud Calendars vs. Facts Some Sad and Sorrowful Scientific Figuring in the Sand. It was not very long ago that Sir Charles Lyell, the distin- guished English geologist, calculated from his own stand- point the rate at which the mud is deposited in the great delta of the Mississippi. By actual figures he reached the astounding calculation that the formation of the delta of the Mississippi must have occupied not less than one hundred thousand years. And, when down underneath that deposit a skeleton was exhumed, it proved beyond all question that not less than fifty thousand years ago human feet had trod the soft soil of the delta of the Mississippi. 103 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. Bnt unfortunately for Sir Charles Lyell, American geolo- gists were on his track, and the United States coast survey followed in the pathway where he had been investigating. Gen. Humphrey, of the American army, measured accu- rately the amount of the deposit. He reviewed the figures of the English geologist, and he showed unanswerably that the whole delta of the Mississippi could not have been in process of formation longer than four thousand four hundred years. For many years geologists held that a quantity of pottery that was found some sixty feet below the surface of the soil, in the delta of the Nile, was at least twelve thousand years old. But later investigations deeper down in the same soil came upon some more patterns, which were undoubtedly of Roman origin, and under these, a brick that bore inefface- ably the stamp of Mehemet Ali, a modern pasha. If you have visited Minneapolis, you certainly must have been struck by the formation of the banks where the Mis- sissippi has cut its way through the rocks. Above there is layer upon layer, stratum upon stratum of limestone, and beneath them the saccharoid sandstone, white as the sugar from which it derives its name, and soft enough to be cut with a knife, lies in huge masses. On the bluff overlooking the river, there lives, in an immense house, which many years ago was a popular hotel of the ancient city of St. Anthoriy's Falls, a friend of mine. One day there came to him startling news. Just outside of his premises, in exca- vating for the foundation of a new building, the workmen had struck upon a wooden coffin, and in it they found what was recognized to be, beyond all doubt, human bones. A local geologist, a physician of the state, with some skeptical tendencies, seized upon this new foundation of the an- tiquity of man, and the next day the 'columns of an even, ing paper of St. Paul contained an article from this gen. tleman's pen about what countless ages must have elapsed BISHOP CHENEY'S REPLY. 10* io perfect that saccharoid sandstone over tlie coffin, and ever that to have put these layers upon layers of ruck. The conclusion was, that the chronology of the Bible Was utterly a mist;;ke, and that we hud, before the days ot Mr. Ingersoll, one of the mistakes of Moses. On reading the article my friend felt at >nce it was his duty to investi- gate the event. He found the coffin still unrernoved, for it was solidly wedged into the saccharoid sandstone, and small pieces of the bones were scattered carelessly about. My friend, whose Christian feeling is only equaled by his profound ability and scholarship, began carefully to examine these relics of pro- Adamite man. Imagine his surprise to find that the coffin which had been made so many ages be- fore Adam was placed upon this earth, was the plank sewer of the old hotel in which he lived, and the bones were those of some innocent lamb, that a careless cook had some time ago flung into that receptacle. T honor geology, but I claim it is yet a very imperfect science, and even with all its im- perfections I have yet to find a solitary principle or fact that geology has laid down that contradicts one word of the five books of Moses. A Mistake of Ingersoll, Tom Paine & Co. Corrected Conclusion, I allude to one more of the Mosaic facts that is assailed by the opponents of the Gospel. It is a difficulty which Mr. Ingersoll recently brought forward in that remarkable production of his, as something which he had discovered ; but Bishop Colenso, whom the Church of England some thirty years ago sent out among the Zulus, dwelt upon it long ago, and even before his time, Tom Paine had made it his weapon against the truthfulness of the Pentateuch. It is simply this: "We are told that the children of Israel, according to the Bible, were in the land of Egypt, in cap- tivity, two hundred and fifteen years. There went down 104 MISTAKES OF INOBKSOLL. with Jacob and his sons, their wives and children, seventy souls in all. But the Exodus finds in the army of Israel six hundred thousand fighting men, involving a total of men, women and children which could not have been less than two or three millions, and it is declared that such an increase is utterly unparalleled in the annals of history. Our mathematicians have figured it all out to their satis- faction. Xow, I want you to observe what a tissue of blunders make up this opposition to this Great Book. First of all turn back to the life of Abraham, the ancestor of + Jacob, and you there discover that a Hebrew family did not consist merely of the parents and children. The ser- vants were a part -of the Hebrew household, and God dis- tinctly made His commands imperative and unavoidable upon Abraham, that every male youth born in his house should receive the seal of circumcision. He therefore became a participator in the Abrahamic covenant. Nay, more, if he bought a servant he had to be brought into the covenant of circumcision. God insists upon this, and thus every servant of every Hebrew household became a He- brew, and was reckoned in the family into which he was adopted. Away back in the time of Abraham, if you take up the Book of Genesis you will find he had so many of these servants born in his own household, that three hundred and eighteen of them, able-bodied men, soldiers, followed him to battle, and when Jacob, in the one hundred and thirtieth year of his age, went down into the land of Egypt the three hundred and eighteen of Abraham's day surely must have multiplied intp thousands. The Pentateuch, it is true, gives only the formal list of Jacob's sons, their wives and their children. There is no formal mention of this vast crowd of attendants, who, not- withstanding us part of the family, must have entered into the land of Egypt with them. Thus, at the very rate of BISHOP CJIENET'S REPLY. 105 increase that the tables of the census of the United States to-day display, these thousands might have easily amounted to three millions in two hundred and fifteen years. I am not through with this stronghold of the enemies of the Pentateuch. As I study it seems to me that I never knew a ghost to vanish into thinner air. I v/ould like to know where or how the critics learned that Israel was in bondage in the land of Egypt two hundred and fifteen v^ars. Why, they learned in precisely the way that they learned that Moses said this earth was made just six thousand years ago. They have taken up certain genealogies and specula- tions of commentators. They have taken up the calcula- tions of Hales and others, and they have regarded them as infallible. They have never turned to the twelfth chapter of Exodus, and I find there the statement given with pre- cision that admits of no question that the sojourn of the children of Israel in Egypt was four hundred and thirty years: " And it came to pass, at the end of four hundred and thirty years, within the self-same day it came to pass that all the hosts of the Lord came out of the land of Egypt." Long before that, God had told Abraham that his seed should be strangers in a land that was not theirs, and that they should afflict them four hundred years. And the Jews so understood it, as shown by the fact that in the New Testament Stephen declares that God told the father of the faithful that his seed should sojourn in a strange land, and they should bring them into bondage and evil entreat them four hundred years. JS r ow, if but seventy had gone down with Jacob into Egypt, an increase to two or three or even four millions in four and a half centuries would have been no more than what is paralleled by the history of every race on the surface of the globe. In Italy, three hundred years ago, when men were wild over the discovery of Galileo's telescope, there was one philosopher who refused to look through the tube that pierced the vail of the starry worlds, and when he was asked the reason, "I am afraid," he said, ''that I should believe Galileo's theory of the planetary motion." My brethren, look into the telescope of revelation. To know it, to study it, is to find the very truth of God. INGERSOLL'S LECTURE ON SKULLS, AND HIS REPLIES TO PROF. SWING, DR. RYDER, DR. HERFORD, DR. COLLIER, AND OTHER CRITICS.. REPRINTED FROM "THE CHICAGO TIMES." LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: Man advances just in the proportion that he mingles his thoughts with hi labor just in the proportion that he takes advantage of the forces of nature ; just in proportion as he loses superstition and gains confidence in himself. Man advances as he ceases to fear the gods and learns to love his fellow-men. It is all, in my judgment, a question of intellectual development. Tell me the religion of any man and I will tell you the degree he marks on the intellectual thermometer of the world. It is a simple question of brain. Those among us who are the nearest barbarism have a barbarian religion. Those who are nearest civilization have the least superstition. It is, I say, a simple question of brain, and I want, in the first place, to lay the foundation to prove that assertion. A little while ago I saw models of nearly everything that man has made. I saw models of all the water craft, from the rude dug-out in which floated a naked savage one of our ancestors a naked savage, with teeth twice as long as his forehead was high, with a spoonful of brains in the back of his orthodox head I saw models of all the water craft of the world, from that dug-out up to a man-of-war that carries a hundred guns and miles of canvas ; from that dug-out to the steamship 107 106 MI/STAKES OF INGERSOLL. that turns its brave prow from the port of New York, with a compass like a conscience, crossing three thousand miles of billows without miss- ing a throb or beat of its mighty iron heart from shore to shore. And I saw at the same time the paintings of the world, from the rude daub of yellow mud to the landscapes that enrich palaces and adorn houses of what were once called the common people. I saw also their sculpture, from the rude god with four legs, a half dozen arms, several noses, and two or three rows of ears, and one little, contemptible, brainless head, up to the figures of to-day, to the marbles that genius has chid in such a personality that it seems almost impudent to touch them without an introduction. I saw their books books written upon the skins of wild beasts upon shoulder-blades of sheep books written upon leaves, upon bark, up to the splendid volumes that enrich the libraries of our day. When I'speak of libraries I think of the remark of Plato : "A house that has a library in it has a soul." I saw at the same time the offensive weapons that man has made, from a club, such as was grasped by that same savage when he crawled from his den in the ground and hunted a snake for his dinner : from thut club- to the boomerang, to the sword, to the cross-bow, to the blunderbuss, to the flint-lock, to the cap-lock, to the needle-gun, up to a cannon cast by Krupp, capable of hurling a ball weighing two thousand pounds through eighteen inches of solid steel. I saw, too, the armor from the shell of a turtle that one of our brave ancestors lashed upon his breast when he went to fight for his country; the skin of a porcupine, dried with the quills on, which this same savage pulled over his orthodox head, up to the shirts of mail that were worn in the middle ages, that laughed at the edge of the sword and defied the point of the spear ; up to a monitor clad in complete steel. And I say orthodox not only in the matter of religion, but in everything. Whoever has quit growing he is orthodox, whether in art, polities, religion, philosophy no matter what. Whoever thinks he has found it all out he is orthodox. Orthodoxy is that which rots, and heresy is that which grows forever. Orthodoxy is the night of the past, full ofthe darkness of superstition, and heresy is the eternal coming day, the light of which strikes the grand foreheads of the intel- lectual pioneers of the world. I saw their implements of agriculture, from the plow made of a crooked stick, atttached to the horn of an ox: by some twisted straw, with which our ancestors scraped the earth, and from that to the agricultural implements of this generation, that make it possible for a man to cultivate the soil without being an ignoramus, In the old time there was but one crop ; and when the rain did not come in answer to the prayer of hypocrites a famine came and people fell upon their knees.' At that time they were full of superstition. They were frightened all the lime for fear that some god would be enraged at SKULLS AND REPLIES. 109 his poor, hapless, feeble and starving children. But now, instead of depending upon one crop they have several, and if there is not rain enough for one there may be enough for another. And if the frosts kill all, we have railroads and steamships enough to bring what we need from some other part of the world. Since man has found out some- thing about agriculture, the gods have retired from the business of pro- ducing famines. I saw at the same time their musical instruments, from the tom-tom that is, a hoop with a couple of strings of raw-hide drawn across it from that tom-tom, up to the instruments we have to-day, that make the common air blossom with melody, and I said to myself there is a regular advancement. I saw at the same time a row of human skulls, from the lowest skull that has been found, the Neanderthal skull skulls from Central Africa, skulls from the bushmen of Australia skulls from the farthest isles of the Pacific Sea up to the best skulls of the last generation and I noticed that there was the same difference between those skulls that there was between the products of those skulls, and I said to myself: "After all, it is a simple question of intellectual development." There was the same difference between those skulls, the lowest and highest skulls, that there was between the dug-out and the man-of-war and the steamship, between the club and the Krupp gun, between the yellow daub and the landscape, between the tom-tom and an opera by Verdi. The first and lowest skull in this row was the den in which crawled the base and meaner instincts of mankind, and the last was a temple in which dwelt joy, liberty and love. And I said to myself, it is all a question of intellectual development. Man has advanced just as he Has mingled his thought with his labor. As he has grown he has taken advantage of the forces of nature ; first of the moving wind, then of falling water, and finally of steam. From one step to another he has obtained better houses, better clothes, and better books, and he has done it by holding but every incentive to the ingenious to produce them. The world has said, give us better clubs and guns and cannons with which to kill our fellow Christians. And whoever will give us better wedpons and better music, and better houses to live in, we will robe him in wealth, crown him in honor, and render his name deathless. Every incentive was held out to every human being to improve these things, and th;it is the reason we have advanced in all mechanical arts. But that gentleman in the dug-out not only had his ideas about politics, mechanics, and agriculture ; he had his ideas also about religion. His idea about politics was " right makes might." It will be thousands of years, may be, before mankind will believe in the saying that " right makes might." He had his religion. That low skull was a devil factory. He believed in Hell, and the belief was aeon- 110 MISTAKES OF INGER&OLL. eolation to him. He could see the waves of God's wrath dashing against the rocks of dark damnation. He could see tossing in the white-caps the faces of women, and stretching above the crests the dimpled hands of children; and he regarded these things as the justice and mercy of God. And all to-day who believe in this eternal punishment are the barbarians of the nineteenth century. That man believed in a devil, too, that had a long tail terminating with a fiery dart; that had wings like a bat a devil that had a cheerful habit of breathing brimstone, that had a cloven foot, such as some orthodox clergymen seem to think I have. And there has not been a patentable improvement made upon that devil in all the years since. The moment you drive the devil out of theology, there is nothing left worth speaking of. The moment they drop the devil, away goes atonement. The moment they kill the devil, their whole scheme of salvation has lost all of its interest for mankind. You mast keep the devil and you must keep Hell. You must keep the devil, because with no devil no priest is necessary. Now, all I ask is this the same privilege to improve upon his religion as upon his dug- out, and that is what I am going to do, the best I can. No matter what church you belong to, or what church belongs to us. Let us be honor bright and fair. I want to ask you : Suppose the king, if there was one, and the priest if there was one at that time, had told these gentlemen in the dug-out: " That dug-out is the best boat that can ever be built by man ; the pattern of that came from on high, from the great God of storm and flood, and any man who says he can improve it by putting a stick in the middle of it and a rag on the stick, is an infidel, and shall be burned at the stake;" what, in your judgment honor bright would have been the effect upon the circumnavigation of the globe ? Suppose the king, if there was one, and the priest, if there was one and I presume there was a priest, because it was a very ignorant age suppose this king and priest had said : " The tom-tom is the most beautiful instrument of music of which any man can conceive ; that is the kind of music they have in Heaven ; an angel sitting upon the edge of a glorified cloud, golden in the setting sun, playing upon that tom-tom, became so enrap- tured so entranced with her own music, that in a kind of ecstasy she dropped it that is how we obtained it; and any man who says it can be improved by putting a back and front to it, and four strings, and a bridge, and getting a bow of hair with rosin, is a blaspheming wretch, and shall die the death," I ask you, what effect would that have had upon music ? If that course had been pursued, would the human ears, in your judg- ment, ever have been enriched with the divine symphonies of Beethoven ? Suppose the king, if there was one, and the priest, had Baid: " That crooked sticks is the best plow that can be invented ; the pattern of that SKULLS AND REPLIES. Ill plow was given to a pious fanner in an exceedingly holy dreani, and that twisted straw is the ne plus ultra, of all twisted things, and any man who says he can make an improvement upon that plow, is an atheist;" what, in your judgment, would have been the effect upon the science of agriculture ? Now, all I ask is the same privilege to improve upon his religion as upon his mechanical arts. Why don't we go back to that period to get the telegraph ? Because they were barbarians. And shall we go to bar- barians to get our religion? Y\ r hat is religion? Religion simply embraces the duty of man to man. Religion is simply the science of human duty and the duty of man to man that is what it is. It is the highest science of all. And all other sciences are as nothing, except as they contribute to the happiness of man. The science of religion is the highest of all, embracing all others. And shall we go to the barbarians to learn the science of sciences ? The nineteenth century knows more about religion than all the centuries dead. There is more real charity in the world to-day than ever before. There is more thought to-day than ever before. Woman is glorified to-day as she never was before in the history of the world. There are more happy families now than ever before more children treated as though they were tender blossoms than as though they were brutes than in any other time or nation. Religion is simply the duty a man owes to man ; and when you fall upon your knees and pray for something you know not of, you neither benefit the one you pray for nor yourself. One ounce of restitution is worth a mil- lion of repentances anywhere, and a man will get along faster by help- ing himself a minute than by praying ten years for somebody to help him. Suppose you were coming along the street, and found a party of men and women on their knees praying to a bank, and you asked them, " Have any of you borrowed any money of this bank ?" " No, but our fathers, they, to, prayed to this bank." " Did they ever get any ?" " No, not fliat we ever heard of." I would tell them to get up. It is easier to earn it, and it is far more manly. Our fathers in the " good old times," and the best that I can say of the " good old times " is that they are gone, and the best I can say of the good old people that lived in them is that they are gone, too believed that you made a man think your way by force. Well, you can't do it. There is a splendid something in man that says: "I won't; I won't be driven." But our fathers thought men could be driven. They tried it in the " good old times." I used to read about the manner in which the early Christians made converts how they impressed upon the world the idea that God loved them. I have read it, but it didn't burn into my soul. I didn't think much about it I heard so much about being fried forever in Hell that it didn't seem so bad to burn a few minutes. I love 112 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. liberty and I halt- all persecutions in the name of God. 1 never appre- ciated the infamies that have been committed in the name of religion until I saw the iron arguments that Christians used. I saw, for instance, the thumb-screw, two little innocent looking pieces of iron, armed with some little protuberances on the inner side to keep it from slipping down, and through each end a screw, and when some man had made some trifling remark, as, for instance, that he never believed that God made a fish swallow a man to' keep him from drowning, or something like that, or, for instance, that he didn't believe in baptism. You know that is very wrong. You can see for yourselves the justice of damning a man if his parents had happened to baptize him in the wrong way God can not afford to break a rule or two to save all the men in the world. I happened to be in the company of some Baptist ministers once you may wonder how I happened to be in such company as that and one of them asked rue what I thought about baptism. Well, I told them I hadn't thought much about it that I had never sat up nights on that question. I said : " Baptism with soap is a good institution." Now, when some man had said some trifling thing like that, they put this thumb-screw on him, and in the name of universal benevolence and for the love of God man has never persecuted man for the love of man ; man has nevei persecuted another for the love of charity it is always for the love of something he calls God, and every man's idea of God is his own idea. If there is an infinite God, and there may be I don't know there may be a million for all I know I hope there is more than one one .seems so lonesome. They kept turning this down, and when this was done, most men would say: " I will recant." I think I would. There is not much of the martyr about me. I would have told them: " Now you write it down, and I will sign it. You may have one God or a million, one Hell or a million. You stop that I am tried." Do you know, sometimes I have thought that all the hypocrites in the world are not worth one drop of honest blood. I am sorry that any good man ever died for religion. I would rather let them advance a little easier. It is too bad to see a good man sacrificed for a lot 6f wild beasts and cattle. But there is now and then a man who would not awerve the breadth of a hair. There was now and then a sublime heart willing to die for an intellectual conviction, and had it not been for these men we would have been wild beasts and savages to-day. There '.vere some men who would uot take it back, and had it not been for a few such, brave, heroic souls in every age we would have been cannibals, with pictures of wild beasts tattooed upon our breasts, dancing around gome dried-snake fetish. And so they turned it down to the last thread of agony, and threw the victim into some dungeon, where, in the throb- . SKULLS AND REPLIES, 113 bing silence and darkness, ho might suffer the agonies of the fabled damned. This was done in the name of love, in the name of mercy, in the name of the compassionate Christ, And the men that did it are the men that made our Bible for us. I saw, too, at the same time, the collar of torture. Imagine a circle of iron, and on the inside a hundred pointy almost as sharp as needles. This argument was fastened about the tin-cat of the sufferer. Then he could not walk nor sit down, nor stir without the neck being punctured by these points. In a little while the throat would begin to swell, and suffocation would end the agonies of that man. This man, it may be, had committed the crime of saying, with tears upon his cheeks, " I do not believe that God, the father of us all, will damn to eternal perdition any of the children of men." And that was done to convince the world that God so loved the world that He died for us. That was in order that people might hear the glad tidings of great joy to all people. I saw another instrument, called the scavenger's daughter. Imagine a pair of shears with handles, not only where they now are, but at the points as well and just above the pivot that unites the blades a circle of iron. In the upper handles the hands would be placed ; in the lower, the feet; and through the iron ring, at the centre, the head of the victim would be forced, and in that position the man would be thrown upon the earth, and the strain upon the muscle would produce such agony that insanity took pity. And this was done to keep people from going to Hell to convince that man that he had made a mistake in his logic and it was done, too, by Protestants Protestants that persecuted to the extent of their power, and that is as much as Catholicism ever did. They would persecute now if they had the power. There is not a man in this vast audience who will say that the church should have temporal power. There is not one of you but what believes in the eternal divor-ce of church and state. Is it possible that the only people who are fit to go to heaven are the only people not fit to rule mankind ? I saw at the same time the rack. This was a box like the bed of a wagon, with a windlass at each end, and ratchets to prevent slipping. Over each windlass went chains, and when some man had, for instance, denied the doctrine of the trinity, a doctrine it is necessary to believe in wler to get to Heaven but, thank the Lord, you don't have to under- stand it. This man merely denied that three times one was one, or wiaybc he denied that there was ever any Son in the world exactly as jld as his father, or that there ever was a boy eternally older than his ,nolhcr then they put that man on the rack. Nobody had ever been p<-.."ecuted for calling God bad it has always been for calling him gof" .. vVLen I atai."* 1 . here to say that, if there is a Hell, God is a fiend .uey say 'uat is very bA They say I am trying to tear down ti>> jusiittt- 114 MISTAKES OF INOEBSOLL. tions of public virtue. But let me tell you one thing ; there is no refor- mation in fear you can scare a man so that he won't do it sometimes, but I will swear you can't scare him so bad that he won't want to do it. Then they put this man on the rack and priests began turning these levers, and kept turning until the ankles, the hips, the shoulders, the elbows, the wrists, and all the joints of the victim were dislocated, and he was wet with agony, and standing by was a physician to feel his pulse. What for? To save his life? Yes. In mercy? No. But in order that they might have the pleasure of racking him once more. And this was the Christian spirit. This was done in the name of civili- zation, in the name of religion, and all these wretches who did it died in peace. There is not an orthodox preacher in the city that has not a respect for every one of them. As, for instance, for John Calvin, who was a murderer and nothing but a murderer, who would have disgraced an ordinary gallows by being hanged upon it. These men when they came to die were not frightened. God did not send any devils into their death-rooms to make mouths at them. He reserved them for Voltaire, who brought religious liberty to France. He reserved them for Thomas Paine, who did more for liberty than all the churches. But all the inquisitors died with the white hands of pence folded over the breast of piety. And when they died, the room was filled with the rustle of the wings of angels, waiting to bear the wretches to Heaven. When I read these frightful books it seems to me sometimes as though I had suffered all these things myself. It seems sometimes as though I had stood upon the shore of exile, and gazed with tearful eyes toward home and native land ; it seems to me as though I had been staked out upon the sands of the sea, and drowned by the inexorable, advancing tide; as though my nails had been torn from my hands, and into the bleeding quick needles had been thrust ; as though my feet had been crushed in iron boots ; as though I had been chained in the cell of the Inquisition, and listened with dying ears for the coming footsteps of release; as though I had stood upon the scaffold and saw the glittering axe fall upon me ; as though I had been upon the rack and had seen, bending above me, the white faces of hypocrite priests ; as though I had been taken from my fireside, from my wife and children, taken to the public square, chained; as though fagots had been piled about me; as though the flames had climbed around my limbs and scorched my eyes to blindness, and as though my ashes had been scattered to the four winds by all the countless hands of hate. And, while I so feel, I swear that while I live I will do what little I can to augment the liberties of man, woman and child. I denounce slavery and superstition every- where. I believe in liberty, and happiness, and love, and joy in tins world. I am amazed that any man ever had the impudence to try and SKULLS AND MEPLIES. 115 . do another man's thinking. I have just as good a right to talk about theology as a minister. If they all agreed I might admit it was a science, but as they all disagree, and the more they study the wider they get apart, I may be permitted to suggest it is not a science. When no two will tell you the road to Heaven that is, giving you the same route and if you would inquire of them all, you would just give up trying to go there, and say: " I may as well stay where I am, and let the Lord come to me." Do you know that this world has not been fit for a lady and gentle- man to live in for twenty-five years, just on account of slavery. It was not until the year 1808 that Great Britain abolished the slave trade, and up to that time her judges, her priests occupying her pulpits, the mem- bers of the royal family, owned stock in the slave ships, and luxuriated upon the profits of piracy and murder. It was not until the same year that the United States of America abolished the slave trade between this and other countries, but carefully preserved it as between the states. It was not until the 28th day of August, 1833, that Great Britain abolished human slavery in her colonies; and it was not until the 1st day of Jan- uary, 1803, that Abraham Lincoln, sustained by the sublime and heroic North, rendered our flag pure as the sky in which it floats. Abraham Lincoln was, in my judgment, in many respects, the grandest man ever president of the United States. Upon his monument these words should be written : " Here sleeps the only man in the history of the world, who, having been clothed with almost absolute power, never abused it, except upon the side of mercy." For two hundred years the Christians of the United States deliberately turned the cross of Christ into a whipping-post. Christians bred hounds to catch other Christians. Let me show you what the Bible has done for mankind : " Servants, be obedient to your masters." The only word coming from that sweet Heaven was, " Servants, obey your masters.'' Frederick Douglas told me that he had lectured upon the subject of freedom twenty years before he was permitted to set his foot in a church. I tell you the world has not been fit to live in for twenty-five years. Then all the people used to cringe and crawl to preachers. Mr. Buckle, in his history of civilization, shows that men were even struck dead for speaking impolitely to a priest. God would not stand it. See how they used to crawl before cardinals, bishops and popes. It is not so now. Before wealth they bowed to the very earth, and in the presence of titles they became abject. All this is slowly, but surely changing. We no longer bow to men simply because they are rich. Our fathers wor- shipped the golden calf. The worst you can say of an American now is, he worships the gold of the calf. Even the calf is beginning to see this distinction. 116 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. The time will come when no matter how much money a man has, he will not he respected unless he is using it for the benefit of his fellow, men. It will soon be here. It no longer satisfies the ambition of a great man to be king or emperor. The last Napoleon was not satisfied with being the emperor of the French. He was not satisfied with having a circlet of gold about his head. lie wanted some evidence that he had something of value within his head. So he wrote the life of Julius Caesar, that he might become a member of the French academy. The emperors, the kings, the popes, no longer tower above their fellows. Compare, for instance, King William and Hclmholtz. The king is one of the anointed by the Most High, as they cluiin oue upon whose head has been poured the divine petroleum of authority. Compare this king with Helmholtz, who towers an intellectual Colossus above the crowned mediocrity. Compare George Eliot with Queen Victoria. The queen is clothed in garments given her by blind fortune and unreasoning chance, while George Eliot wears robes of glory woven in the loom of her own genius. And so it is the world over. The time is coming when a man will be rated at his real worth, and that by his brain and heart. "We care nothing now about an officer unless he fills his place. No mat- ter if he is president, if he rattles in the place nobody cares anything about him. I might give you an instance in point, but I won't The world is getting better and grander and nobler every day. Now, if men have been slaves, if they have crawled in'.the dust before one another, what shall I say of women ? They have been the slaves of men. It t-iok thousands of ages to bring women from abject slavery up to the divine height of marriage. I believe in marriage. If there is any Heaven upon earth it is in the family by the fireside, and the famii/ is a unit of government. Without the family relation is tender, pure and true, civilization is impossible. Ladies, the ornaments you wear upon your persons to-night are but the souvenirs of your mother's bond- age. The chains around your necks, and the bracelets clasped upon your white arms by the thrilled hand of love, have been changed by the wand of civilization from iron to shining, glittering gold. Nearly every civilization in this world accounts for the devilment in it by the crimes of woman. They say woman brought all the trouble into the world. 1 don't care if she did. I would rather live in a world full of trouble with the women I love, than to live in Heaven with nobody but men. I read in a book an account of the creation of the world. The book I have taken pains to say was not written by any God. And why do I say so ? Because I can write a far better book myself. Because it is full of bar- barisms. Several ministers in this city have undertaken to answer me notably those who don't believe the Bible themselves. I want to ask these mil. ^nt nnn$. * *>si uiert. cc be lair. SKULLS AND REPLIES. 117 Every minister in the ,City of Chicago that answers me, and those who have answered me had better answer me again I want them to say, and without any sort of evasion without resorting to any pious tricks I want them to say whether they believe that the Eternal God of this universe ever upheld the crime of polygamy. Say it square and fair. Don't begin to talk about that being a peculiar time, and that God was easy on the prejudices of those old fellows. I want them to answer that question and to answer it squarely, which they haven't done. Did this God, which you pretend to worship, ever sanction the institution of human slavery? Now, answer fair? Don't slide around it. Don't begin and answer what a bad man I urn, nor what a good man Moses was. Stick to the text. Do you believe in a God that allowed a man to be sold from his children ? Do you worship such an infinite monster ? And if you do, tell your congregation whether you are not ashamed to admit it. Let every minister who answers me again tell whether he believes God commanded his general to kill the little dimpled babe in the cradle. Let him answer it. Don't say that those were very bad times. Tell whether He did it or not, and then your people will know whether to hate that God or not. Be honest. Tell them whether that God in war captured young maidens and turned them over to the soldiers ; and then ask the wives and sweet girls of your congregation to get down on their knees and worship the infinite fiend that did that thing. Answer! It is your God I am talking about, and if that is what God did, please tell your congregation what, under the same circumstances, the devil would have done. Don't tell your people that is a poem. Don't tell your people that is pictorial. That won't do. Tell your people whether it is true or false. That is what I want you to do. In this book I have read about God's making the world and one man. That is all he intended to make. The making of woman was a second thought, though I am willing to admit that as a rule second thoughts are best. This God made a man and put him in a public park. In a little while He noticed that the man got lonesome ; then He found He had made a mistake, and that He would have to make somebody to keep him company. But having used up all the nothing He originally used in making the world and one man, He had to take a part of a man to start a woman with. So He causes sleep to fall on this man now under- stand me, I do not say this story is true. After the sleep had fallen on this man the Supreme Being took a rib, or, as the French would call it, a cutlett, out of him, and from that He made a woman ; and I am willing to swear, taking into account the amount and quality of the raw material used, this was the most magnificent job ever accomplished in this world. Well, after He got the woman done she was brought to the man, not to see how she liked him, but to see how he liked her. He 118 MISTAKES OF 1NOERSOLL. liked her and they started housekeeping, and they were told of certain things they might do and of one thing they could not do and of coarse they did it. I would have done it in fifteen minutes, I know it There wouldn't have been an apple on that tree half an hour from date, and the limbs would have been full of clubs. And then they were turned out of the park and extra pol icemen were put on to keep them from getting back. And then trouble commenced and we have been at it ever since. Nearly all of the religions of this world account for the exist ence of evil by such a story as that. Well, I read in another book what appeared to be an account of the same transaction. It was written about four thousand years before the other. All commentators agree that the one that was written last was the original, and the one that was written first was copied from the one that was written last. But I would advise you all not to allow your creed to be disturbed by a little matter of four or five thousand years. It is a great deal better to be mistaken in dates than to go to the devil. In this other account the Supreme Brahma made up his mind to make the world and a man and woman. He made the world, and he made the man and then the woman, and put them on the Island of Ceylon. According to the account it was the most beautiful island of which man can conceive. Such birds, such songs, such flowers, and such verdure! And the branches of the trees were so arranged that when the wind swept through them every tree was a thousand ^Eolian harps. Brahma, when he put them there, said : " Let them have a period of courtship, for it is my desire and will that true love should torever precede mar- riage." When I read that, it was so much more beautiful and lofty than the other, that I said to myself: " If either one of these stories ever turns out to be true, I hope it will be this one." Then they had their courtship, with the nightingale singing and the stars shining and the flowers blooming, and they fell in love. Imagine that courtship! No prospective fathers or mothers-in-law ; no prying and gossiping neighbors ; nobody to say, " Young man, how do you expect to support her?" Nothing of that kind nothing but the night- ingale singing its song of joy and pain, as though the thorn already touched its heart. They were married by the Supreme Brahma, and he said to them, " Remain here ; you must never leave this island." Well, after a little while the man and his name was Adarni, and the woman's name was Heva said to Heva: "I believe I'll look about a little." He wanted to go West. He went to the western extremity of the island where there was a little narrow neck of land connecting it with the mainland, and tin 1 Devil, who is always playing pranks with us, pro- duced a mirage, and when he looked over to the mainland, such hills and vales, such dells and dales, such mountains crowned witli snow, SKULLS AND REPLIES. 119 such cataracts clad iu bows of glory did he see there, that lie went back and told Heva: "The country over there is a thousand times better than this; let us migrate." bhe, like every other woman that ever lived, said : " Let well enough alone ; we have all we want ; let us stay here." But he said: " No, let us go;" so she followed him, aud when they came to this narrow neck of land, he took her on his back like a gentleman, and carried her over. But the moment they got over they heard a crash, and, looking back, discovered that this narrow neck of land had fallen into the sea. The mirage had disappeared, and there was naught but rocks and sand, and then the Supreme Brahma cursed them both to the lowest Hell. Then it was that the man spoke and I have liked him ever since for it " Curse me, but curse not her ; it was not her fault, it was mine." That's the kind of a man to start a world with. The Supreme Brahma said : " I will save her but not thee." And then spoke out of her full- ness of love, out of a heart in which there was love enough to make all her daughters rich in holy affection, and said: "If thou wilt not spare him, spare neither me; I do not wish to live -without him, I love him." Then the Supreme Brahma said and I have liked him ever since I read it " I will spare you both, and watch over you and your children forever." Honor bright, is that not the better and grander story ? And in that same book I find this : " Man is strength, woman iu beauty; man is courage, woman is love. When the one man loves the one woman, and the one woman loves the one man, the very angels leave Heaven, and come and sit in that house, and sing for j oy ." In the same book this : " Blessed is that man, and beloved of all the gods, who is afraid of no man, and of whom no man is afraid." Magnificent char- acter ! A missionary certainly ought to talk to that nan. And I find this: " Never will I accept private, individual salvation, but rather will I stay and work, strive and suffer, until every soul frori every star has bcL-n brought home to God." Compare that with the Christian that expects to go to Heaven while the world is rolling ovc? Niagara to an eternal and unending Hell. So I say that religion lays nil the crime and troubles of this world at the beautiful feet of woman. And then the church has the impudence to say that it has exalted women. I believe that marriage is a perfect partnership ; that woman has every right that man has and one more the right to be protected. Above all men in the world I hate a stingy man a man that will make his wife beg for money. " What did you do with the dollar I gave you last week ? " " And what are you going to do with this ? " It is vile. No gentleman will ever be satisfied with the love of a beggar and a slave no gentle- man will ever be satisfied except with the love of an equal. What kind 120 MISTAKES OP INGERSOLL. of children does a man expect to have with a beggar for their mother? A man can not be so poor but that he can be generous, and if you only have one dollar in the world and you have got to spend it, spend it like a lord spend it as though it were a dry leaf, and you the owner of unbounded forests spend it as though you had a wilderness of your own. That's the way to spend it. I had rather be a beggar and spend. my last dollar like a king, than be a king and spend my money like a beggar. If it has got to go let it go. And this is my advice to the poor. For you can never be so poor that whatever you do you can't do in a grand and manly way. I hate a cross man. What right has a man to assassinate the joy of life? When you go home you ought to go like a ray of light so that it will, even in the night, burst out of the doors and windows and illuminate the darkness. Some men think their mighty brains have been in a turmoil ; they have been thinking about who will be Alderman from the Fifth Ward ; they have been thinking about politics, great and mighty ques- tions have been engaging their minds, they have bought calico at five cents or six, and want to sell it for seven. Think of the intellectual strain that must have been upon that man, and when he gets home everybody else in the house must look out for his comfort. A woman who has only taken care of five or six children, and one or two of them sick, has been nursing them and singing to them, and trying to make one yard of cloth do the work of two, she, of course, is fresh and fine and ready to wait upon this gentleman the head of the family the boss! I was reading the other day of an apparatus invented for the eject- ment of gentlemen who subsist upon free lunches. It is so arranged that when the fellow gets both hands into the victuals, a large hand descends upon him, jams his hat over his eyes he is seized, turned toward the door, and just in the nick of time an immense boot comes from the other side, kicks him in italics, sends him out over the side- walk and lands him rolling in the gutter. I never hear of such a man a boss that I don't feel as though that machine ought to be brought into requisition for his benefit. Love is the only thing that will pay ten percent of interest on the out- lay. Love is the only thing in which the height of extravagance is the last degree of economy. It is the only thing, I tell you. Joy is wealth. Love is the legal tender of the soul aud you need not be rich to be happy. We have all been raised on success in this country. Always been talked with about being successful, and have never thought our- selves very rich unless we were the possessors of some magnificent man- sion, and unless our names have been between the putrid lips of rumor we could not be happy. Every little boy is striving to be this and be SKULLS AND REPLIES. 121 that. 1 tell you the happy man is the successful man. T~e man that has won the love of one good woman is a successful man. The mau that has been the emperor of one good heart, and that heart embraced all his, has been a success. If another has been the emperor of the round world and has never loved and been loved, his life is a failure. It won't do. Let us teach our children the other way, that the happy man is the successful man, and he who is a happy man is the one who always tries to make some one else happy. The man who marries a woman to make her happy ; that marries her as much for her own sake as for his own ; not the man that thinks hia wife is his property, who thinks that the title to her belongs to him that the woman is the property of the man ; wretches who get mad at their wives and then shoot them down in the street because they think the woman is their property. I tell you it is not necessary to be rich and great and powerful to be happy. A little while ago I stood by the grave of the old Napoleon a mag- nificent tomb of gilt and gold, fit almost for a dead deity and gazed upon the sarcophagus of black Egyptian marble, where rest at last the ashes of the restless man. I leaned over the balustrade and thought about the career of the greatest soldier of the modern world. I saw him walking upon the banks of the Seine, contemplating suicide I saw him at Toulon I saw him putting down the mob in the streets of Paris I saw him at the head of the army of Italy I saw him crossing the bridge of Lodi with the tri-color in his hand I saw him in Egypt in the shadows of the pyramids I saw him conquer the Alps and mingle the eagles of France with the eagles of the crags. I saw him at Marengo at Ulm and Asterlitz. I saw him in Russia, where the infantry of the enow and the cavalry of the wild blast scattered his legions like Winter's withered leaves. I siw him at Leipsic in defeat and disaster driven by a million bayonets back upon Paris clutched like a wild beast ban- ished to Elba. I saw him escape and" retake an empire by the force of his genius. I saw him upon the frightful field of Waterloo, where chance and fate combined to wreck the fortunes of their former king. And I saw him at St. Helena, with his hands crossed behind him, gazing out upon the sad and solemn sea. I thought of the orphans and widows he had made of the tears that had been shed for his glory, and of the only woman who ever loved him, pushed from his heart by the cold hand of ambition. And I said I would rather have been a French peas- ant and worn wooden shoes. I would rather have lived in a hut with a vine growing over the door, and the grapes growing purple in the kisses of the Autumn sun. I would rather have been that poor peasant with my loving wife by my side, knitting as the day died out of the sky with my children upon my knees aud their arms about me. I would 122 MISTAKES OF 1NGEKSOLL. rather have been that man and gone down to the tengueless silence ot the dreamless dust, than to have been that imperial impersonation of force and murder known as Napoleon the Great. It is not necessary tc be rich in order to be happy. It is only necessary to be in love. Thou- sands of men go to college and get a certificate that they have an edu- cation, and that certificate is in Latin and they stop studying, and in twc years to save their life they couldn't read the certificate they got. It is mostly so in marrying. They stop courting when they get mar- ried. They think, we have won her and that is enough. Ah ! the differ- ence before and after! How well they look! How bright their eyes ! How light their steps, and hew full they were of generosity and laughter f I tell you a man should consider himself in good luck if a woman loves hto when he is doing his level best ! Good luck! Good luck! And another thing that is the cause of much trouble is that people don't count lairly. They do what they call putting their best foot forward. Thai meanr lying a little. I say put your worst foot forward. If you have got any faults admit them. If you drink, say so and quit it. If you chew and smoke and swear, say so. If some of your kindred are not very good people, say so. If you have had two or three that died on the gallows, or that ought to have died there, say so. Tell all your faults, and if after she knows your faults she says she will have you, you have got the dead wood on that woman forever. I claim that there should be perfect equality in the home, and I can not think of anything nearef Heaven than a home where there is true republicanism" and true democ- racy at the fireside. All are equal. And then, do you know, I like to think that love is eternal; that if you really love the woman, for her sake, you will love her no matte* what she may do; that if she really loves you, for your sake, the same; that love does not look at alterations, through the wrinkles of time, through the mask of years if you really love her you will always see the face you loved and won. And I like to think of it. If a man loves a woman she does not ever grow4old to him, and the woman who really loves a man does not see that he grows old. He is not decrepit to her. He is not tremulous. He is not old. He is not bowed. She always sees the same gallant fellow that won her hand and heart. I like to think of it in that way, and as Shakspeare says: "Let Time reach with his sickle as far as ever he can ; although he can reach ruddy cheeks and ripe lips, and flashing eyes, he can not quite reach love." I like to think of it. We will go down the hill of life together, and enter the shadow one with the other, and as we go down we may hear the ripple of the laughter of our grandchildren, and the birds, and spring, and youth, and love will sing once more upon the leafless branches of the tree of age. SKULLS AND REPLIES. 123 I love to think of it in that way absolute equals, happy, happy, and free, ah our own. But some people say : "Would you allow a woman to vote?" Yes, if she wants to; that is her business, not mine. If a woman wants to vote, I am too much of a gentleman to say she shall not. But they say woman has not sense enough to vote. It don't take much. But it seems to me there are some questions^as for instance, the question of peace and war, that a woman should be allowed to vote upon. A woman that has sons to be offered on the altar of that Moloch, it seems to me that such a grand woman should have as much right to vote upon the question of peace and war as some thrice-besotted sot that reels to the ballot box and deposits his vote for war. But if women have been slaves, what shall we say of the little children born in the sub-cellars; children of poverty, children of crime, children of wealth, children that are afraid when they hear their mtrnes pronounced by the lips of the mother, children that cower in fear when they hear the footsteps of their brutal father, the flotsam and jetsam upon the rude sea of life, my heart goes out to them one and all. Children have all the rights that we have and one more, and that is to be protected. Treat your children in that way. Suppose your child tells a lie. Don't pretend that the whole world is going into bankruptcy. Don't pretend that that is the first lie ever told. Tell them, like an hon- est man, that you have told hundreds of lies yourself, and tell the dear little darling that it is not the best way ; that it soils the soul. Think of the man that deals in stocks whipping his children for putting false rumors afloat! Think of an orthodox minister whipping his own flesh and blood, for not telling all it thinks! Think of that! Think of a lawyer beating his child for avoiding the truth ! when the old man makes about half his living that way. A lie is born of weakness on one side and tyranny on the other. That is what it is. Think of a great big man coming at a little bit of a child with a club in his hand ! What is the little darling to do? Lie, of course. I think that mother Nature put that ingenuity into the mind of the child, when attacked by a parent, to throw up a little breastwork in the shape of a lie to defend itself. When a great general wins a battle by what they call strategy, we build monuments to him. What is strategy ? Lies. Suppose a man as much larger than we are as we are larger than a child five years of age, should come at us with a liberty pole in his hand, and in tones of thunder want to know " who broke that plate," there isn't one of us, not excepting myself, that wouldn't swear that we never had seen that plate in our lives, or that it was cracked when we got it. Another good way to make children tell the truth is to tell it yourself. Keep your word with your child the same as you would with your 124 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. banker. If you tell a child you will do anything, either do it or give the child the reason why. Truth is born of confidence. It comes from the lips of love and liberty. I was over in Michigan the other day. There was a boy over there at Grand Rapids about five or six years old, a nice, smart boy, as you will sec from the remark he made what you might call a nineteenth century boy. His father and mother had prom- ised to take him out riding. They had promised to take him out riding for about three weeks, and they would slip oft' and go without him. Well, after a while, that got kind of played out with the little boy, and the day before I was there they played the trick on him again. They went out and got the carriage, and went away, and as they rode away from the front of the house, he happened to be standing there with his nurse, and he saw them. The whole thing flashed on him in a moment. He took in the situation, and turned to his nurse and said, pointing to his father and mother: "There goes the two d 1 liars in the State of Michigan!" When you go home fill the house with joy, so that the light of it will stream out the windows and doors, and illuminate even the darkness. It is just as easy that way as any in the world. I want to tell you to-night that you can not get the robe of hypocrisy on you so thick that the sharp eye of childhood will not see through every veil, and if you pretend to your children that you are the best man that ever lived the bravest man that ever lived they will find you out every time. They will not have the same opinion of father when they grow up that they used to have. They will have to be in mighty bad luck if they ever do meaner things than you have done. When your child confesses to you that it has committed a fault, take that child in your arms, and let it leel your heart beat against its heart, and raise your children in the sunlight of love, and they will be sunbeams to you along the pathway of life. Abolish the club and the whip from the house, because, if the civilized use a whip, the ignorant and the brutal will use a club, and they will use it because you use the whip. Every little while some door is thrown open in some orphan asylum, and there we see the bleeding back of a child whipped beneath tho roof that was raised by love. It is infamous, and the man that can't raise a child without the whip ought not to have a child. If there is one of you here that ever expect to whip your child again, let me ask you some- thing. Have your photograph taken at the time and let it show your face red with vulgar anger, and the face of the little one with eyes swimming in tears, and the little chin dimpled with fear, looking like a piece of water struck by a sudden cold wind. If that little child should die, I cannot tliink of a sweeter way to spend an Autumn afternoon than to take that photograph and go to the cemetery, when the maples are clad in tender gold, and when little scarlet runners are coming from SKULLS AND REPLIES. 125 the sad heart of the earth, and sit down upon that mound, and look upon that photograph, and think of the flesh, now dust, that you beat. Just think of it. I could not bear to die in the arms of a child that I had whipped. I could not bear to feel upon my lips, when they were withered beneath the touch of death, the kiss of one that I had struck. Some Christians act as though they really thought that when Christ said, "Suffer little children to come unto me," He had a rawhide under His coat. They act as though they really thought that He made that remark simply to get the children within striking distance. I have known Christians to turn their children from their doors, especially a daughter, and then get down on their knees and pray to God to watch over them and help them. I will never ask God to help my children unless I am doing my level best in that same wretched line. I will tell you what I say to my girls : " Go where you will ; do what crime you may ; fall to what depth of degradation you may ; in all the storms and winds and earthquakes of life, no matter what you do, you never can commit any crime that will shut my door, my arms or my heart to you. As long as I live you shall have one sincere friend." Call me an antheist; call me an infidel because I hate the God of the Jew which I do. I intend so to live that .when 1 die my children can come to my grave and truthfully say: " He who sleeps here never gave us one moment of pain." When I was a boy there was one day in each week too good for a child to be happy in. In these good old times Sunday commenced when the sun went down on Saturday night, and closed when the sun went down on Sunday night. We commenced Saturday to get a good ready. And when the sun went down Saturday night there was a gloom deeper than midnight that fell upon the house. You could not crack hickory nuts then. And if you were caught chewing gum, it was only another evidence of the total depravity of the human heart. W^ll, after a while we got to bed sadly and sorrowfully after having heard Heaven thanked that we were not all in Hell. And I sometimes used to wonder how the mercy of God lasted as long as it did. because I recollected that on sev- eral occasions I had not been at school, when I was supposed to be there. Why I was not burned to a crisp was a mystery to me. The 'next morn- ing we got up and we got ready for church all solemn, and when we got there the minister was up in the pulpit, about twenty feet high, and he commenced at Genesis about " The fall of man," and he went on to about twenty thirdly; then he struck the second appMcation, and when he struck the application I knew he was about half way through. And then he went on to show the scheme how the Lord was satisfied by pun- ishing the wrong man. Nobody but a God would have thought of that ingenious way. Well, when he got through that, then came the catechism 123 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. the chief end of man. Then my turn came, and wo sat along on a little bench where our feet catne within about fifteen inches of the floor, and the dear old minister used to ask us: "Boys, do you know that ynn ouajht to be in Hell ?" And we answered up as cueerfuily as could be expected under the cir- cumstances : " Yes, sir." " Well, boys, do you know that you would go to Hell if you died in your sins?" And we said : " Yes, sir." And then came the great test : "Boys" I can't get the tone, you know. And do you know that is how the preachers get the bronchitis. You never heard of an auctioneer getting the bronchitis, nor the second mate on a steamboat never. What gives it to the minister is talking solemnly when they don't feel that way, and it has the same influence upon the organs of speech that it would have upon the cords of the calves of your legs to walk on your tip-toes, and so I call bronchitis " parsonitis." And if the ministers would all tell exactly what they think they would all get well, but keep- ing back a part of the truth is what gives them bronchitis. Well the old man the dear old minister used to try and show us how long we would be in Hell if we would only locate there. But to finish the other. The grand test question was: " Boys, if it was God's will that you should go to Hell, would you be willing to go?" And every little liar said : " Yes, sir." Then, in orc?er to tell how long we would stay there, he used to eay : "Suppose once in a billion ages a bird should come frm a far distant clime and carry off in its bill one little grain of sand, the time would finally come when the last grain of sand would be carried away. Do you understand ? " Yes, sir." " Boys, by that time it would not be sun-up in Hell." Where did that doctrine of Hell come from ? I will tell you ; from that fellow in the dug-out. Where did he get it? It was a souvenir from the wild beasts. Yes, I tell you he got it from the wild beasts, from the glittering eye of the serpent, from the coiling, twisting snakes with their fangs mouths ; and it came from the bark, growl and howl of wild beasts ; it was born of a laugh of the hyena and got it from the depraved chatter of malicious apes. And I despise it with every drop of my blood and defy it. If there is any God in this universe who will damn his children for an expression of an honest thought I wish to go to Hell. I wculd SKULLS AND REPLIES. 127 rather go there than go to Heaven and keep the company of a God that would thus damn his children. Oh ! it is an infamous doctrine to teach that to little children, to put a shadow in the heart of a child to fill the in- sane asylums with that miserable, infamous lie. I see now and then a little girl a dear little darling, with a face like the light, and eyes of joy, a human blossom, and I think, " is it possible that little girl will ever grow up to be a Presbyterian ?'' Is it possible, my goodness, that that flower will finally believe in the five points of Calvinism or in the eternal damnation of man ?" Is it possible that that little fairy will finally believe that she could be happy in Heaven with her baby in Hell ? Think of it ! Think of it ! And that is the Christian religion ! We cry out against the Indian mother that throws her child into the Ganges to be devoured by the alligator or crocodile, but that is joy in comparison with the Christian mother's hope, that she may be in salva- tion while her brave boy is in Hell. I tell you I want to kick the doctrine about Hell I want to kick it out every time I go by it. I want to get Americans in this country placed so they will be ashamed to preach it. I want to get the congregations so that they won't listen to it. We can not divide the world off into saints and sinners in that way. There is a little girl, fair as a flower, and she grows up until she is twelve, thirteen, or fourteen years old. Are you going to damn her in the fifteenth, sixteenth or seventeenth year, when the arrow from Cupid's bow touches her heart and she is glorified are you going to damn her now ? She marries and loves, and holds in her arms a beautiful child. Are you going to damn her now ? When are you going to damn her'? Because she has listened to some Methodist minister and after all that flood of light failed to believe? Are you going to damn her then ? I tell you God can not afford to damn such a woman. A woman in the State of Indiana forty or filty years ago who carded the wool and made rolls and spun them, and made the cloth and cut out the clothes for the children, and nursed them, and sat up with them nights and gave them medicine, and held them in her arms and wept over them cried for joy and wept for fear, and finally raised ten or eleven good men and women with the ruddy glow of health upon their cheeks, and she would have died for any one of them any moment of her life, and finally she, bowed with age and bent with care and labor, dies, and at the moment the magical touch of death is upon her face, she looks as though she never had had a care, and her children burying her cover her face with tears. Do you tell me God can afford to damn that kind of a woman? One such act of injustice would turn Heaven itself into Hell. If there is any God, sitting above him in infinite serenity we have the figure of j ustice. Even a God must do j ustice ; even a God 128 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. must worship justice; and any form of superstition that destroys justice is infamous ! Just think of teaching that doctrine to little children ! A little child would go out into the garden, and there wouldtbe a little tree laden with blossoms, and the little fellow would lean against it, and there would be a bird on one of the bows, singing and swinging, and thinking about four little speckled eyes warmed by the breast of its mate, singing and swinging, and the music in happy waves rippling out of the tiny throat, and the flowers blossoming, the air filled with perfume, and the great white clouds floating in the sky, and the little boy would lean up against the tree and think about Hell and the worm that never dies. Oh ! the idea there can be any day too good for a child to be happy in ! Well, after we got over the catechism, then came the sermon in the afternoon, and it was exactly like the one in the fore-noon, except the other end to. Then we started for home a solemn march " not a soldier discharged his farewell shot" and when we got hnrne if wu had been real good boys we used to be taken up to the cemetery to cheer us up, and it always did cheer me, those sunken graves, those leaning stones, those gloomy epitaphs covered with the moss of years always cheered me. When I looked at them I said : "Well, this kind of thing can't last always." Then we came back home, and we had books to read which were very eloquent and amusing. We had Josephus, and the " History of the Waldcnses," and " Fox's Book of Martyrs," Baxter's "Saint's Rest," and "Jenkyu on the Atonement." I used to read Jenkyn with a good deal of pleasure, and I often thought that the atone- ment would have to be very broad in its provisions to cover the case of a man that would write such a book for the boys. Then I would look to see how the sun was getting on, and sometimes I thougt it had stuck from pure cussednes*s. Then I would go back and try Jenkyn's again. Well, but it had to go down, and when the last rim of light sank below the horizon, off would go our hats and we would give three cheers for liberty once again. I tell you, don't make slaves of your children on Sunday. The idea that there is any God that hates to hear a child laugh ! Let your children play games on Sunday. Here is a poor man that hasn't money enough to go to a bij church and he has too much independence to go to a little church that the big church built for charity. He don't want to slide into Heaven that way. I tell you don't come to church, but go to the woods and take your Tamily and a lunch with you, and sit down upon the old log and let the children gather flowers and hear the leaves whispering poems like memories of long ago, and when the sun is about going down, kissing the summits of far hills, go home with your hearts filled with throbs of joy. There is more recreation and joy in that SKULLS AND REPLIES, 139 than goins to a dry goods box with a steeple on top of it and hearing a man tell you that your chances are about ninety-nine to one for being eternally damned. Let us make this Sunday a day of splendid pleasure, not to excess, but to everything that makes man purer and grander and nobler. I would like to see now something like this: Instead of so many churches, a vast cathedral that would hold twenty or thirty thou- sand of people, and I would like to see an opera produced in it that would make the souls of men have higher and grander and nobler aims. I would like to see the walls covered wi,th pictures and the niches rich with statuary; I would like to see something put there that you could use iu this world now, and I do not believe in sacrificing the present to the future ; I do not believe in drinking skimmed milk here with the promise of butter beyond the clouds. Space or time can not be holy any more than a vacuum can be pious. Not a bit, not a bit ; and no day can be so holy but what the laugh of a child will make it holier still. Strike with hand of fire, on, weird musician, thy harp, strung with Apollo's golden hair! Fill the vast cathedral aisles with symphonies sweet and dim, deft toucher of the organ's keys; blow, bugler, blow until thy silver notes do touch and kiss the moonlit waves, and charm the lovers wandering 'mid the vine-clad hills. But know your sweetest strains are discords all compared with childhood's happy laugh the laugh that fills the eyes with light and every heart with j oy ! O, rippling river of laughter, thou art the blessed boundary line between the beasts and men, and every wayward wave of thine doth drown some fretful fiend of care. O Laughter, rose lipped daughter of Joy," there are dim- ples enough in thy cheeks to catch and hold and glorify all the tears of grief. Don't plant your children in long, straight rows, like posts. Let them have light and air and let them grow beautiful as palms. When I was a little boy children went to bed when they were not sleepy, and always got up when they were. I would like to see that changed, but they say we are too poor, some of us, to do it. Well, all right. It is as easy to wake a child with a kiss as with a blow; with kindness as with a curse, And, another thing; let the children eat what they want to. Let them commence at whichever end of the dinner they desire. That is my doc- trine. They know what they want much better than you do. Nature is a great deal smarter than you ever were. All the advance that has been made in the science of medicine, has been made by the recklessness of patients. I can recollect .when they wouldn't give a man water in a fever not a drop. Now and then some fellow would get so thirsty he would say: " Well, I'll die any way, so I'll drink it," and thereupon he would drink a gallon of water, and thereupon he would burst into a generous perspiration, and get well 130 MISTAKES OF INGEItSOLL. and the next morning when the doctor would come to see him they would tell him about the man drinking the water, and he would say; 44 How much?" "Well, he swallowed two pitchers full." "Is he alive?" "Yes." So they would 'go into the room and the doctor would feel his pulse and ask him : " Did you drink two pitchers of water ?" " Yes." " My God! what a constitution you have got." I tell you there is something splendid in man that will not always mind. Why, if we had done as the kings told us five hundred year* ago, we would all have been slaves. If we had done as the priests told us we would all have been idiots. If we had done as the doctors told us we would all have been dead. We have been saved by disobedience. We have been saved by that splendid thing called independence, and I want to see more of it, day after day, and I want to see children raised so they will have it. That is my doctrine. Give the children a chance. Be perfectly honor bright with them, and they will be your friends when you are old. Don't try to teach them something they can never learn. Don't insist upon their pursuing some calling they have no sort of fac- ulty for. Don't make that poor girl play ten years on a piano when she has no ear for music, and when she has practiced until she can play " Bonaparte crossing the Alps," and you can't tell after she has played it whether Bonaparte ever got across or not. Men are oaks, women are vines, children are flowers, and if there is any Heaven in this world, it is in the family. It is where the wife loves the husband, and the husband loves the wife, and where the dimpled arms of children are about the necks of both. That is Heaven, if there is any and I do not want any better Heaven in another world than that, and if in another world I can not live with the ones I loved here, then I would rather not be there. I would rather resign. Well, my friends, I have some excuses to make for the race to which I belong. In the first place, this world is not very well adapted to rais- ing good men and good women. It is three times better adapted to the cultivation of fish than of people. There is one little narrow beltrunning zigag around the world, in which men and women of genius can be raised, and that is all. It is with man as it is with vegetation. In the valley you find the oak and elm tossing their branches defiantly to the storm, and as you advance up the mountain side the hemlock, the pine, the birch, the spruce, the fir, and finally you come to little dwarfed trees, that look like other trees seen through a telescope reversed every limb SKULLS AND REPLIES. 131 twisted as through pain getting a scanty substance from the miserly crevices of the rocks. You go on and on, until at last the highest crag is freckled with a kind of moss, and vegetation ends. You might as well try to raise oaks and elms where the mosses grow, as to raise great men and great women where their surroundings are unfavorable. You must have the proper climate and soil. There never has been a man or woman of genius from the southern hemisphere, because the Lord didn't allow the right climate to fall upon the land. It falls upon the water. There never was much civilization except where there lias been snow, and ordinarily decent Winter. You can't have civilization without it. Where man needs no bedclothes but clouds, revolution is the normal condition of such a people.- It is the Winter that gives us the home ; it is the Winter that gives us the fireside and the family relation and all the beautiful flowers of love that adorn that relation. Civilization, liberty, justice, charity and intellectual advancement are all flowers that bloom in the drifted snow. You can't have them anywhere else, and that is the reason we of the north are civilized, and that is the reason that civilization has always been with Winter. That is the reason that philosophy has been here, and, in spite of all our superstitions, we have advanced beyond some of the other races, because we have had this assistance of nature, that drove us into the family relation, that made us prudent; that made us lay up" at one time for another season of the year. So there is one excuse I have for my race. I have got another. I think we came from the lower animals. I am rot dead sure of it, but think so. When I first read about it I didn't " like it. My heart was filled with sympathy for those people leave noth- ing to be proud of except ancestors. I thought how terrible this will be upon the nobility of the old world. Think of their being forced to trace their ancestry back to the Duke Orang-Outang or to the Princess Chim- panzee. After thinking it all over I came to the conclusion that I liked that doctrine. .1 became convinced in. spite of myself. I read about rudimentary bones and muscles. I was told that everybody had rudi- mentary muscles extending from the ear into the cheek. I asked: " What are they ?" I was told: " They are the remains of muscles ; that they became rudimentary from the lack of use." They went into bank- ruptcy. They are the muscles with which your ancestors used to flap their ears. Well, at first, I was greatly astonished, and afterward I was more astonished to find they had become rudimentary. How can you account for John Calvin unless we came up from the lower animals ? How could you account for a man that would use the extremes of torture unless you admit that there is in man the elements of a snake, of a vul- ture, a hyena, and a jackal? How can you account for the religious 133 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. i reeds of to-day ? How can you account for that infamous doctrine of Hell, except with an animal origin? How can you account fi>r your conception of a God that would sell women and babes into slavery ? Well, I thought that thing over and I began to like it after a while, and I said : " It is not so much difference who my father was as who his son is." And I finally said I would rather belong to a race that com- menced with the skulless vertebrates in the dim Laurentian seas, that wriggled without knowing why they wriggled, swimming without know- ing where they were going, that come along up by degrees through millions of ages, through all that crawls, and swims, and floats, and runs, and growls, and barks, and howls, until it struck this fellow in the dug- out And then that fellow in the dug-out getting a little grander, and each one below calling every one above him a heretic, calling every one who had made a little advance an infidel or an atheist, and finally the heads getting a little higher and donning up a little grander and more splendidly, and finally produced Shakspeare, who harvested all the field of dramatic thought and from whose day until now there have been none but gleaners of chaff and straw. Shakspeare was an intellectual ocean whose waves touched all the shores of human thought, within which were all the tides and currents and pulses upon which lay all the lights and shadows, and over which brooded all the calms, and swept all the storms and tempests of which the soul is capable. I would rather belong to that race that commenced with that ekulless vertebrate ; that produced Shakspeare, a race that has before it an infinite future, with the angel of progress leaning from the far horizon, beckoning men forward and upward forever. I would rather belong to that race than to have de- scended from a perfect pair upon which the Lord has lost money every moment from that day to this. Now, my crime has been this: I have insisted that the Bible is not the word of God. I have insisted that we should not whip oui children. I have insisted that we should treat our wives as loving equals. I have denied that God if there is any God ever upheld polygamy and slav- ery. I have denied that that God ever told his generals to kill innocent babes and tear and rip open women with the sword of war. I have denied that, and for that I have been assailed by the clergy of the United States. They tell me I have misquoted ; and I owe it to you, and maybe I owe it to myself, to read one or two words to you upon this subject In order to do that I shall have to put on my glasses; and that brings me back to where I started that man has advanced j ust in proportion as his thought has mingled with his labor. If man's eyes hadn't failed he would never have made any spectacles, he -would never have had the telescope, and he never would have been able to read the leaves of Heaven. SKULLS AND REPLIES. 133 Mr. Ingersoll's Reply to Dr. Collyer. Now, they tell me and there are several gentlemen who have spoken on this subject the Rev. Mr. Collyer, a gentleman standing as high as anybody, and I have nothing to say against him, because I denounce a God who upheld murder, and slavery and polygamy, he says that what I said was slang. I would like to have it compared with any sermon that ever issued from the lips of that gentleman. And before he gets through he admits that the Old Testament is a rotten tree that will soon fall into the earth and act as a fertilizer for his doctrine. Is it honest in that man to assail my motive ? Let him answer my argument! Is it honest and fair in him to say I am doing a certain thing because it is popular? Has it got to this, that, in this Christian country, where they have preached every day hundreds and thousands of sermons has it got to this that infidelity is so popular in the United States ? If it has, I take courage. And I not only see the dawn of a brighter day, but the day is here. Think of it ! A minister tells me in this year of grace, 1879, that a man is an infidel simply that he may be popular. I am glad of it. Simply that he may make money. Is it possible that we can make more money tearing up churches than in building them up? Is it possible that we can make more money denouncing the God of slavery than we can praising'the God that took liberty from man ? if so, I am glad. I call publicly upon Robert Collyer a man for whom I have great r espect I call publicly upon Robert Collyer to state to the people of this city whether he believes the Old Testament was inspired. I call upon him to state whether he believes that God ever upheld these institutions ; whether he believes that God was a polygamist ; whether he believes that God commanded Moses or Joshua or any one else to slay little children in the cradle. Do you believe that Robert Collyer would obey such an order ? Do you believe that he would rush to the cradle and drive the knife of theological hatred to the tender heart of a dimpled child ? And yet when I denounce a God that will give such a hellish order, he says it is slang. I want him. to answer; and when he answers he will say he does not believe the Bible is inspired. That is what he will say, and he holds these old worthies in the same contempt that I do. Suppose he should act like Abraham. Suppose he should send some woman out into the wilderness with his child in her arms to starve, would he think that mankind ought to hold his name up forever, for reverence ? Robert Collyer says that we should read and scan every word of the Old Testament with reverence; that we should take this book up with 134 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. reverential hands. I deny it. We should read it as we do every other book, and everything good in it, keep it; and everything that shocks the brain and shocks the heart, throw it away. Let us be honest. Mr. Ingersoll's Reply to Prof. Swing. Prof. Swing has made a few remarks on this subject, and I say the spirit he has exhibited has been as gentle and as sweet as the perfume. of a flower. He was too good a man to stay in the Presbyterian church. He was a rose among thistles. He was a dove among vultures and they hunted him out, and I am glad he came out. I tell all the churches to drive all such men out, and when he comes I want him to state just what he thinks. I want him to tell the people of Chicago whether he believes the Bible is inspired in any sense except that in which Shaks- peare was inspired. Honor bright I tell you that all the sweet and beautiful things in the Bible would not make one play of Shakspeare, all the philosophy in the world would not make one scene in Hamlet, all the beauties of the Bible would not make one scene in the Midsummer Night's Dream; all the beautiful things about woman in the Bible would not begin to create such a character as Perdita or Imogene or Miranda. Not one. I want him to tell whether he believes the Bible was inspired in any other way than Shakspeare was inspired. I want him to pick out something as beautiful and tender as Burns' poem to Mary in Heaven. I want him to tell whether he believes the story about the bears eating up children; whether that is inspired. I want him to tell whether he considers that a poem or not. I want to know if the same God made those bears that devoured the children because they laughed at an old man out of hair. I want to know if the same God that did that is the same God who said, " Suffer little children to come unto me, for such is the kingdom of Heaven." I want him to answer it, and answer it fairly. That is all I ask. I want just the fair thing. Now, sometimes Mr. Swing talks as though he believed the Bible, and then he talks to me as though he didn't believe the Bible. The day he made this sermon I think he did, just a little, believe it. He is like the man that passed a ten dollar counterfeit bill. He was arrested, and his father went to see him and said, "John, how could you commit such a crime? How co'uld you bring iny gray hairs in sorrow to the grave ?" " Well," he says, " father, I'll tell you. I got this bill and some days I thought it was bad and some days I thought it was good, and one day when I thought it was good I passed it." I want it distinctly understood that I have the greatest respect for Prof. Swing, but I want him to tell whether the 109th psalm is inspired. SKULLS AND REPLIES. 135 I want mm to tell whether the passages I shall afterward read in this book are inspired. That is what I want. Ingersoll's Reply to Brooke Herford, D.D. Then there is another gentleman here. His name is Herford. He- says it is not fair to apply the test of truth to the Bible I don't think it is myself. He says although Moses upheld slavery, that he improved it. They were not quite as bad as they were before, and Heaven justified slavery at that time. Do you believe that God ever turned the arms of children into chains of slavery ? Do you believe that God ever said to a man: "You can't have your wife ualess you will be a slave! You cannot have your children unless you will lose your liberty; and uu- less you are willing to throw them from your heart forever, you cannot be free?" I want Mr. Herford to state whether he loves such a God. Be honor bright about it. Don't begin to talk about civilization, or what the church has done or will do. Just walk right up to the rack and say whether you love and worship a God that estab- lished slavery. Honest! And love and worship a God that would allow a little babe to be torn from the breast of its mother and sold into slavery. Now tell it fair, Mr. Herford, I want you to tell the ladies in your congregation that you believe in a God that allowed women to be given to the soldiers. Tell them that, and then if you say it was not the God of Moses, then don't praise Moses any more. Don't do it. Answer these questions. The Ingersoll Gattling Gun Turned on Dr. Ryder. Then here is another gentleman, Mr. Ryder, the Rev. Mr. Ryder, and he says that Calvinism is rejected by a majority of Christendom. He is mistaken. There is what they call the Evangelical Alliance. They met in this country in 1875 or 1876, and there were present representatives of all the evangelical churches in the world, and they adopted a creed, and that creed is that man is totally depraved. That creed is that there is an eternal, universal Hell, and that every man that does not believe in a cer- tain way is bound to be damned forever, and that there is only one way to be saved, and that is by faith, and by faith alone ; and they would not allow anybody to be represented there that did not believe that, and they would not allow a Unitarian there, and would not have allowed Dr. Ryder there, because he takes away from the Christian world the conso- lation naturally arising from the belief in Hell. Dr. Ryder is mistaken. All the orthodox religion of the day is Cal- vinism. It believes in the fall of man. It believes in the atonement. It believes in the eternity of Hell, and it believes in salvation by faith; tuat is to say, by credulity. 136 MISTAKES OF 1NOERSOLL. That is what they believe, and he is mistaken ; and I want to tell Dr. Ryder to-day, if there is n God, and He wrote the Old Testament, there is a Hell. The God th;it wrote the Old Testament will have a Hell. And I want to tell Dr. Ryder another thing, that the Bible teaches au eternity of punishment. want to tell him that the Bible upholds the doctrine of Hell. I want to tell him that if there is no Hell, somebody ought to have said so, and Jesus Christ himself should not have said: " I will at the last day say : ' Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.'" If there was not such a place, Christ would not have said : " Depart from mo, ye cursed, and these shall go hence into everlasting fire." And if you, Dr. Ryder, are depending for salvation on the God that wrote the Old Testament, you will inevitably be eternally damned. There is no hope for you. It is just as bad to deny Hell as it is to deny Heaven. It is just as much blasphemy to deny the devil as to deny God, according to the orthodox creed. He admits that the Jews were polygamists, but, he says, how was it they finally quit it? lean tell you the soil was so poor they couldn't afford it. Prof. Swing says the Bible is a poem. Dr. Ryder says it is a picture. The Garden of Eden is pictorial ; a pictorial snake and a pictorial woman, I suppose, and a pictorial man, and inaybe it was a pictorial sin. And only a pictorial atonement. Ingeraoll's Reply to Rabbi Bien. Then there is another gentleman, and he a rabbi, a Rabbi Bien, or Bean, or whatever his name is, and he comes to the defense of the Great Law-giver. There was another rabbi who attacked me in Cincinnati, and I couldn't help but think of the old saying, that a man got off when he said the tallest man he ever knew, his name was Short. And the fattest man he ever saw, his name was Lean. And it is only necessary for me to add that this rabbi in Cincinnati was Wise. The rabbi here, I will not answer him, and I will tell you why. Be- cause he has taken himself outside of all the limits of a gentleman; because he has taken it upon himself to traduce American women in language the beastliest I ever read; and any man who says that the American women are not just as good women as any God can make, and pick his mud to-day, is an unappreciative barbarian. I will let him alone because he denounced all the men in this country, all the members of Congress, all the members of the Senate, and all the j udges upon the Bench; in his lecture he denounced them as thieves and robbers. That won't do. I want to remind him that in this country the Jews were first admitted to the privileges of citizens; that in this country they were first given all their rights, and I am as much in lavor SKULLS AND REPLIES. 137 f their having their rights as I am in favor ot having my own. But when a rabbi so far forgets himself as to traduce the women aud men of this country, I pronounce him a vulgar falsifier, and let him alone. Strange, that nearly every man that has answered me, has answered me mostly on the same side. Strange, that nearly every man that thought himself called upon to defend the Bible was one who did not believe in it himself. Isn't it strange? They are like some suspected people, always anxious to show their marriage certificate. They want at least to convince the world that they are not as bad as I am. Now, I want to read you just one or two things, and then I ani going to let you go. I want to see if I have said such awful things, and whether I have got any scripture to stand by me. I will only read two or three verses. Does the Bible teach man to enslave his brother? If it does, it is not the word of God, unless God is a slaveholder. Moreover, all the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy of their families which are with you, which they beget in your land, and they shall be your possession. Ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you to inherit them. They shall be your bondsmen forever. (Old Testament.) Upon the limbs of unborn babes this fiendish God put the chains of slavery. I hate him. Both thy bondmen and bondwomen shall be of the heathen round about thee, and them shall ye buy, bondmen and bondwomen. Now let us read what the New Testament has. I could read a great deal more, but that is enough. Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters, according to the flesh in fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ. This is putting the dirty thief that steals your labor on an equality with God. Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle but also to the froward. For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, sufferiu* wrongfully. The idea of a man on account of conscience toward God stealing another man, or allowing him nothing but lashes on his back as legal- tender for labor performed. Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of a.V honor, that the name of God and His doctrine be not blasphemed. How can you blaspheme the name of God by asserting your independ- ence? How can you blaspheme the name of a God by striking fetters from the limbs of men? I wish some of your answers would tell you that t% And they that have believing masters let them not despise them." That is to say, a good Christian could own another believer in Jesus Christ; could own a woman and her children, and could sell the child away from its mother. That is a sweet belief. 0, hypocrisy! MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. Let them not despise them because they are brethren, but rather do them Benrice because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. Oh, what slush ! Here is what they tell the poor slave, so that he \vill serve the man that stole his wife and children from him : For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. navinjj food and raiment let us be therewith content. Don't you think that it would do just as well to preach that to the thieving man as to the suffering slave? I think so. Then this same .Bible teaches witchcraft, that spirits go into the bodies of the man, and pigs; and that God himself made a trade with the devil, and the devil traded him off a man for a certain number of swine, and the devil lost money because the hogs ran right down into the sea. He got a corner on that deal. Now let us see how they believed in the rights of children : If a man have a stubborn and a 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 barken unto them, 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. And they shall say nnto 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. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die, so shalt thou put evil away. That is a very good way to raise children. Here is the story of Jeph- thah. He went oft and he asked the Lord to let him whip some people, and he told the Lord if He would let him whip them, he would sacrifice to the Lord the first thing that met him on his return ; and the first thing that met him was his own beautiful daughter, and he sacrified her. Is there a sadder story in all the history of the world than that? What do you think of a man that would sacrifice his own daughter ? What do you think of a God that would receive that sacrifice ? Now, then, they come to women in this blessed gospel, and let us see what the gospel says about women. Then you ought all to go to church, girls, next Sunday and hear it. " Let the woman learn in silence with all subjec- tion ; suffer not woman to think nor usurp authority over man, for Adam was formed first, not Eve." Don't you see ? "Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgession. Notwithstanding all this she shall be saved in child- bearing if she continues in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety." (That is Mr. Timothy.) " 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." I suppose that every old maid is acephalous. 41 For a man indeed ought not to cover head, forasmuch as he is '.he image and glory of God ; but the woman is the glory of man. For the man is not of the woman, but woman of the man. Neither was the man SKULLS AND REPLIES. 139 created for the woman, but the woman for the man. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husband as unto the Lord, for the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the Church." Do you hear that! You didn't know how much we were above you. When you go back to the Old Testament, to the great law-giver, you find that the woman has to ask forgiveness for having borne a child. If it was a boy, thirty-three days she was unclean ; if it was a girl sixty-six. Nice laws! Good laws! If there is a pure thing in this world, if there is a picture of perfect purity, it is a mother with her child in her arms. Yes, I think more of a good woman and a child than I do of all the gods I have ever heard these people tell about. Just think of this: 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, and seest among the captive a beautiful woman and hast a desire unto her that thou wouldst have her to thy wife, then thou shall bring her home to thine house, r.nd she shall shave her head, and pare her nails. Wherefore, ye must needs be subject not only for love, but for conscience sake, and for this cause pay ye tribute, for they are God's ministers. I despise this wretched doctrine. Wherever the sword of rebellion is drawn in favor of the right, I am a rebel. I suppose Alexander, czar of Russia, was put there by the order of God, was he ? I am sorry he was not removed by the nihilist that shot at him the other day. I tell you in a country like that, where there are hundreds of girls not 16 vears of age prisoners in. Siberia, simply for giving their ideas about : try, ua^ we fcUogr^^bof 1 *,r '.hat country congratulating that wretch that he was not killed, my heart goes into the prison, my heart goes with. the poor girl working as a miner in the mines, crawling en her hands and knees getting the precious ore out of the mines, and my sympathies go with her lad my symphathies cluster around the point of the dagger. ^>oea u ne Bible describe a God of mercy ? Let me read you a verse or two. I will make my arrows drunk with blood, anf of mystery and death. This brave and lender man in every storm of life was oak and rock, but in the sunshine he was vine and flower. He was the friend of all heroic souls. He climbed tlie heights and left all superstitions far below, Avhile on his forehead Tell the golden dawning of a grander day. He luvtd the beautiful and was with color, form, and music touched to tears. He sided with the weak, and with a willing hand gave alms ; with loyal heart and with the purest hand he faith- fully discharged all public trusts. He was a worshipper of liberty and a friend of the oppressed. A thousand times I .have heard him quote the words : "For justice all place a temple and all season summer." He believed that happiness was the only good, reason the only torch, justice the only worshipper, humanity the only religion, and love the priest He added to the sum of human joy, and were every one for whom he did some loving service to bring a blossom to his grave he would sleep to-night beneath a wilderness of flowers. Life is a narrow vale between the cold and barren peaks of two eternities. We strive in vain to look beyond the heights. We cry aloud, and the only answer is the echo of our wailing cry. From the voiceless lips of the unreplying dead there comes no word; but in the night of death hope sees a star and li>tening love can hear the rustle of a wing. He who sleeps here, when dying, mistaking the approach of death for the return of health, whispered with his latest breath, " I am better now." Let us believe, in spite of doubts and dogmas and tears and fears that these dear words are true of all the countless dead. And now, to you who have been chosen from among the many men he loved to do the last sad office for the dead, we give his sacred dust. Speech can not contain our love. There was there is no gentler, stronger, manlier man. 148 INOERSOLD8 FUNERAL ORATION. BEECHER'S COMMENTS. Henry Ward Beecher's Comments on Mr. lugersoll's Faith, and Funeral .Discourse. " The root element of faith is in the imagination. The tendency of our age, or in certain lines of it, is a rising tendency among the educated to give to the evidence of the physical senses not only greater weight than comes with the imagination, but to deny to the imagination all use except that of producing pleasure. To a certain extent we are indebted for this to the perversion of religious views. The ascetic school ban- ished the imagination from religion and made it a mere minion of pleasure and turned the thoughts of men to what are called weightier things. We are told in the serious words of the ascetic teachers that life is too important to trifle away. They have stripped off the wings of the imagination to make quills to write their dull treatises withal. There is also danger from the scientific or materialistic tendencies ot the age, the votaries of which hold that all things must be proven by tangible evidence that the soul is but matter. But taking the mate- rialistic view that the soul is but matter, it is matter so different from or- dinary matter that it is to be judged by entirely different laws. But without taking that ground and adhering as I do to the ground that it is a spiritual matter, the necessity is much stronger for applying the true principle in dealing with its consideration. "There is a growing tendency towards materialism in the German mind, and this has long been the tendency of the French mind. It has made inroads into the sturdy old English mind, and it has with ten thousand other immigrants that we could have spared come across the seas and gained a foothold here. But to apply to the imagination the same rules you apply to things that have no imagination is impolitic, unphilosophical and unwise. There are a great many men who say with Tyndall : ' If you present God as a poem I can accept it, but if you present Him as a fact I resist it ; I say there is no evidence ; it is not proven.' There are realities which can not be proven. No formula can demonstrate the sentiment of honor; yet honor demonstrates itself, and the intellect discerns things by the aid of the imagination that it can not discern without it. Reasonings are no more than spider- webbings. " That which comforts must be accepted as true, although it can not be proven by any direct line of evidence. Take, for instance, the pictures of the Virgin Mary which are the objects of such veneration to devout BEECHEK8 COMMENTS. 149 Homan Catholics. They are not really the Virgin Mary; they don't even look like her ; but they are a representation of the tenderness of the mother towards the child, and that tenderness is a reality. I, too, hang the pictures in my parlor and in my bedroom, and I, too, am a worshipper of the Virgin. I worship the tender, loving spirit of God out of which theology has eheated us. Put that in theology and you would not want any pictorial illustration. So as to ministering angels ; I never thought of an angel except with wings. I never saw an angel painted with wings that it did not look like an old hen to me. So with ministering angels. The moment you apply to them all that belongs to them that moment you destroy them. " A French philosopher once said very truly : ' Everybody believes in God until you attempt to prove his existence.' Take the existence of the soul in heaven that is a mere question of reason without evidence such as belongs to regulated forms of matter and it is full of obscurities But let it hang in the realm of imagination and it is not only the product of the imagination of one man, but of all the nations through the growth of time. It is the imagination that has been reaped and threshed and winnowed and grown into the very bread of life. It is not any poem or notion ; it is the work, the final work of the imagination of the human race, speaking all languages, under all governments; it is the result to which men come that death doesn't stop human life; it goes on unending. " Mr. Ingersoll is a man of great merit and power and he has made himself perhaps tis widely known as almost any other man in this gen- eration by his contemning of, I will not say religion, but of those views of religion handed down to us by the teachers of 'Christianity. He has great power of the imagination a flaming wit and has said a great many things, not wise, but by which wise men may profit. He has uttered a great many criticisms on the subject of Christianity which are just criticisms, yet taking his views of religion as a whole, they lack completeness ; it is a special plea, a fault-finding plea, which sees only one side. Now, while I accord to him the extremes! liberty of discus- sion and disclaim any right to interfere with this liberty, we hare a right to whatever of instruction there may be, and I think he can instruct us by his latest utterance. He has lost a brother dearly beloved, a good man who lived happily with his family and was respected by the com- munity, and at that brother's funeral, Mr. Ingersoll made one of 'the most exquisite^ yet one of the most sad and mournful, sermons that I ever ^ad. " v is ever anything uttered by the lips of man more pathetic ? But we &* ot only a hope, we have the certainty we know that if our 150 INQERSOLDS FUNERAL ORATION. earthy tabernacle is lost we have a building not made with hands eternal in the heavens. To us the sweet voice comes under burdens, under sor- rows, in pain, in persecution, in the prison dungeon the voice of the spirit and the bride says come and the voice of the whole Church of God cries out to us ' it is real, it is real come ; ' and when this noble brother of Mr. lugersoll felt the touch of death, I don't doubt he felt the touch of God the second time, and saw in the eternal world things which he had counted but shadows here. Even skepticism and that which had been provocative of skepticism in others says when it comes to the death of hope : ' In spite of doubts or dogmas, let us hope that there is a better world.' " ARNOLD'S COMMENTS. Hon. Isaac N. Arnold's Comments on IngersolTs Funeral Oration. The sad, pathetic, and almost hopeless cry of Robert G. Ingersoll over the grave of his brother has been widely read. It is eloquent with feeling, and shows that his heart is tender and affectionate ; and one can not but sympathize with a grief which is not soothed by any hope of a reunion hereafter. He says, speaking of death: "Whether in mid- sea or among the breakers of the farther shore, a wreck must mark at last the end of each and all ; and every life . . will at its close become a tragedy as sad, and deep, and dark as can "be woven of the warp and woof of mystery and death. And Life is a narrow vale between the cold and barren peaks of two eternities. We strive in vain to look beyond the hights. We cry aloud, and the only answer is the echo of our wailing cry." This, then, is the despairing moan of one of the brightest infidels of our country of one who is doing more to destroy faith in God and immortality than any other! How striking the contrast between such a " wreck," as Ingersoll calls it, and the joyous, hopeful death of a Christian. I have lately been reading an account of the last hours of Sir Walter Scott. As death approached this great and healthy-minded Scotchman, he asked Lockhart to read to him. " What shall I read ?" said Lockhart. " Need you ask ?" said Sir Walter. " There is but one Book." And the words that have comforted the dying and soothed the living for eighteen hundred years fell gratefully upon his ear: Let not your heart be troubled. In my Father's house are many mansions. I jjo to prepare a place for you. ARNOLD'S COMMENTS. 151 " Lockhart," were the last words of Scott, " Lockhart, I have bur, a moment to speak to you ; my dear, be a good man ; be virtuous, be religious ! Nothing else will give you any comfort when you come to lie here." Ingersoll sadly says over the remains of his beloved brother, " We cry aloud, and the only answer is the echo of our wailing cry ;" and, speaking of his dead brother, he says: " He climbed the hights, and left all superstition far below." If such are the results of " climbing the hights ;" if to climb is only to look into the black gulf of despair, to hear over the grave only the " echoes of our wailing cry," who would not rather stay in the warm valley of faith and hope ? I would kindly ask Ingersoll, Are not faith and hope, better than doubt and despair? And, if so, why make it your life's mission to ridicule, satirize, and destroy the faith and hope <>f the thousands who find in their religion the only refuge from the sufferings and sorrows of this life? Why labor to make your brother of humanity believe that he is but The pilgrim of a day? Spouse of the worm and brother of the clay, Frail as the leaf in Autumn's yellow bower, Dust in the wind, or dew upon the flower? ******* A child without a eire. Whose mortal life and transitory fire Light to the grave his chance-created form, As ocean wrecks illuminate the storm. And then To night and silence sink forevermore! If these The pompous teachings ye proclaim, Lights of the world and demi-gods oi fame, The laurel wreath tbat murderer rears, Blood nursed and watered by the widow's tears, Seems not so foul, so tainted, and so dread, As the dally nightshade round the skeptic's head. Infidelity is indeed the " deadly nightshade,' 4 deadly alike to happi- jiess and to virtue. There are exceptions like Ingersoll, who have inherited from their Christian ancestors natures so generous that their sturdy virtues have resisted the deadly influence. But every blow this modern apostle of infidelity strikes against Christianity is a blow in favor of vice and immorality. To the young man whose faith Ingersoll by his wit and eloquence has shaken, I would say, listen to his cry of despair over his dead brother, and compare it with the Christian's triumphant death and joyous hope, and choose the truth. In his recent lecture entitled "What Shall We Do to Be Saved?" (appended to the replies in this volume) Colonel Ingersoll has made a "new departure." So far as this lec- ture makes reference to Jesus Christ it is hailed with de- light. The references, however, made to " interpolations," etc., have called forth various " replies," the principal of . which we have carefully put on record in this book. They are by Professor Swing, Dr. Thomas, Bishop Fallows, and others, whose learning and sincerity insure a " fair rejoin- der." We acknowledge our indebtedness to the press of the Garden City. J. B. M'CLURE. CHICAGO, October 1st, 1880. fage. REPLY or PKOFESSOR DAVID SWING i? Col. Ingersoll's Xew Lecture under Prof. Swing's Stero- scope He Finds it Witty, Powerful and Worthy of "All Fair Rejoinder" 17 Matthew's Gospel. 19 The Colonel is Xot Sound in the Faith 21 Christianity Philosophically Considered It Must Xot be Confounded with the Follies of Man 22 The Weak Points in Ingersoll's Lecture 2.7 ' The Colonel's Cruel Advice, which He Himself Does . Not Follow A Solid Shot from Prof. Swing 26 The Grand Architecture of Home An Eloquent Per- oration 28 REPLY OF DR. H. W. THOMAS 31 Points Wherein the Doctor and the Colonel Agree and Differ A Fair and Candid Rejoinder 31 IngersolFs Xew Departure What the Doctor says About it 33 The Teachings of Christ Emphasized Character Rather Than Dogma. C5 vi. CONTENTS. vli. KEPLY OF DR. GEOKGE C. LORIMER ....................... 39 The Scope of the Lecture, and Not the Lecturer, undei Consideration The Issue Faith and Works ....... 39 Theology Progressive Creeds, Faith, Etc ............... 41 Ingersoll's Gospel under the Doctor's Microscope Shows a Fatal Contradiction God Forgives, but " Bob " is for " Inexorable Justice" The Colonel, in Fact, an Extreme Calvinist .................................. 43 Ingersoll Does Not Answer the Question, " What Shall We Do to Be Saved V ............................... 44 Authenticity of the New Testament .................... 45 The Gospel Plan of Salvation .......................... 47 The Vital Kelation of Faith to the Soul Its Elevating and Saving Power When Fixed on Jesus Christ ..... 50 Saved, Not for Faith's Sake, Nor Works' Sake, But for Christ's Sake ........................................ 51 Infidelity Unmasked ................................... 53 REPLY OF PROFESSOR SAMUEL IVES CURTIS ................ 55 A Little Story Ingersoll " Innocent of Greek," and the Consequences .................................. 55 Ingersoll's Interpolations " Won't Do." ................ 56 Love and Obedience .................................... 58 Faith in Christ the Great Basis of Salvation ........ 60 BEPLY OF DR. FREDERICK COURTNEY.. . .,< ............... 68 Preparatory Statement ................................. 63 Ingersoll's Alleged Interpolations ...................... 64 Clear, Pointed, and Pungent Answers to a Number of Ingersoll's Assertions .............................. 66 How Shall We Account for the Kingdom of Christ?. . . 70 Christ the Summit of History ............ - ..... 72 viii. CONTENTS. Page. The Facts of Faith A Few Words About " Believing." 75 More About Faith 77 The Anathanasian Creed 81 John Stuart Mill at Variance with Ingersoll on the Human Will 83 The Gospel of Good Cooking Does "Bob" Under- stand It? 84 BEPLY OF BISHOP FALLOWS 87 The Bishop Believes the Colonel Is Making "True Progress " 87 The Facts in the Case 88 How Gels us, the Ingersoll of the Second Century, Did a Great Work for the Church 91 APPENDED : Ingersoll's Lecture, " What Shall We Do to Be Saved?" 0;J Ingersoll's Answer to Prof. Swing, Dr. Thomas, and Others 121 SlicuLl "we cLo to IBe BY- PROF. SWING, PROF. CURTIS, DR. THOMAS, BISHOP FALLOWS, DR. LORIMER, DR. COURTNEY, AND OTHERS. OIF 1 lE'IROIF 1 . Col. Ingersoll's New Lecture Under the Professor's Stereoscope He Finds it Witty. Eloquent, Powerful, and " Worthy of All Fair Rejoinder." It has not been quite a year since, along with many other pastors of this city, I gave my personal convictions that, in order to be saved, man must, to the best of his ability, obey the laws of right. I attempted to show that whatever work Christ may have done to help man find the favor of the Supreme Judge, man must himself be a sincere doer of right things. Conduct is the path of safety. As earthly society depends for its quality and happiness upon the character of its members, so all society, in earth or in Heaven, must depend upon the actions and desires of the 18 REPLY TO INtiEliXOLL'S NEW LECTURE. individual members, coine they from any clime or age. I stated then my own opinions so fully that it would be wearisome to all of us to pass again over the same ground; hence it will be my purpose this morning to point to some parts of Mr. IngersolTs theory, rather than to discuss fully his theme of last Sunday, ""What Must Man Do to Be Saved?" Much of the long address of the interesting speaker was aimed at the follies of an older time, at fanaticism, and ignorance, and cruelty; and should such wit poured out be- fore large audiences in all parts of the land only bring more fully to an end all such bad phases of human nature, it would not be labor lost. But, besides rendering unpopular old follies, this wit must tend to make contemptible some principles and persons true and noble; and for this reason it is not our privilege to pass in silence such an entertain- ing and even powerful discourse. I cannot find it in my heart or judgment to say, as many do, that such addresses are not " worth answering." Not only are all the speeches v of that gentleman very acute and convincing, and therefore worthy of all fair rejoinder, but they are so original that they invite new lines of argument from the clergy, and en- able the pulpit to see itself and present itself in many new and more rational lights. In this recent address there was much of rhetorical flour- ish that came from the speaker's love of the grotesque rather than from the direct merit of the case. All that wvs said about the interpolations in the writings of Matthew must be attributed to humor or recklessness. It might as well be affirmed that interested parties had inserted ideas freely into the manuscripts of Tacitus, or Seneca, or Virgil, or that Tacitus or Seneca never saw the books which now bear their names. That memoir of Jesus is just as honest and genuine a manuscript as any piece of writing that ha* BY PROF. SWING. 19 come down from any far-off period. And, furthermore, s lawyer should set the clergy an example of that mental power which can discern at once the irrelevant and the rel- evant. We are all taught to look to the legal profession to learn how grand a thing is pure reason compared with mere feelings and superficial studies. But it now seems that this popular lawyer does not perceive that Christianity no more rests upon the accuracy of a manuscript than the United States rests upon the accuracy of Bancroft, or the glory of England upon the truth or capacity of her histo- rians. It may be that the man Matthew never saw that Gospel which we call Matthew. What is the inference? The book is simply anonymous. Matthew's Gospel. It was very common in that period for writings to be without a name. Many poems are, by a kind of courtesy, ascribed to Anacreon and Homer, and prose essays without number have come along through the classic period with no known authorship. Admitting, for the sake of argu- ment, that Matthew never wrote the Gospel which bears his name, and that to the nameless memoir many additions were made by persons who had some interest to secure, the conclusion to be drawn is that we must make a closer study of those times to find, if possible, what were the facts amid which that memoir of a Christ came into circulation. A great religious fact will no more depend upon a Matthew than a great political fact will depend upon a Hume, or a Gibbon, or a Macaulay. The younger Pliny, a Roman pagan and a political enemy of Christianity, lived in that very period out of , which the Gospel history sprang, and, with his mind full of bitter prejudices, he wrote the following words to his Emperor, Trajan : " These Christians assemble on an ap- peinted time, and sing alternately the praises of Christ as a 20 REPLY OT INGER8OLLS NEW LECTURE, Divine Being. They bind themselves by an oath not to commit any crime, to abstain from theft and impure con- duct, to fulfill every promise, and not to deny any trust confided to them. Afterward they separate, and again come together to partake of an innocent repast." Thus we have a Gospel according to Pliny, a Gospel not in any way dependent upon Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; and it is this stubborn historic fact that stands as the basis of the modern religion. Those men and women who assembled together to sing responsive hymns to a Divine Being did also bind themselves by an oath to commit no crime, to steal nothing, to live purely, and to keep every promise, and not to refuse any duty confided to them. The same writer, Pliny, said that so many had entered into this holy compact that the temples of the Roman gods were daily becoming deserted, and the sale of animals for sacrifice had almost ceased. The salient point for such a pretentious reasouer as Mr. Ingersoll to attack was not what poor Matthew may have said about the new religion, but the merits of the new re- ligion itself, as it came along with its deep and glowing prin- ciples, and with its amazing Leader, before whom even the infidels all bow with reverence. Along came that moral fact seen by Pliny, and Trajan, and Tacitus, audit gradually displaced the morals and belief of Home, and wrought out for the world a new code of not only law and morals, but of a most tender charity. It would seem a better application of eloquence, and almost genius, should the public speaker under notice take the positive side of Christianity, and tell the young men that the world has never seen anything nobler, or more useful, or happier, than those compacts of integrity and purity which those thousands entered into when they met in the name of Christ and sang responsive hymns in the morning air. An orator who can gain the BY PROF. SWING. 21 ear and the heart, too, of tens of thousands of youth ought not to teach them how to ridicule a Matthew or a Calvin, but rather teach them how to trace the risings of new phi- losophy full of righteousness and charity, and how to appre- ciate such an exalted being as Jesus Christ. The Colonel is not " Sound in the Faith." Not only is all j-idicule or criticism of Matthew irrelevant to any one speaking from the philosophic standpoint, but all the time and words spent against the idea of salvation by faith are wasted so far as Christianity is itself concerned. Such objections as were raised in the address of last Sun- day weigh against only those who hold to a salvation by be- lief. Doubtless there are some individual Christians who are expecting to be saved by faith, and there are some denominations which still make use of that formula of words; but it is safe to say that the doctrine that man is saved by a belief is so far abandoned by the great denomin- ations that the Church no longer merits rebuke, or abuse, or laughter on account of that peculiar idea. A hundred years ago the Church universal needed much plain talk from infidel or from any one able -to give it, for it did hold to a method of pleasing God that was false and deeply in- jurious. Luther declared that there was no sin for which faith in Christ would not be taken as an atonement or com- pensation in the day of final judgment. But this tenet haa of late years rapidly become obsolete. ISTot one of the large denominations which now make up the Christian commun- ity would accept of what Martin Luther announces about the office of faith. They would join with the infidel in affirming that faith cannot take in any manner the place of morality. By "faith" in Christ a fidelity to His teachings is generally understood. Salvation by faith is a salvation by a personal faithfulness to a great law and a great Master. What Pliny saw when 22 REPLI TO INGERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, he wrote to his Emperor that those new religionists assem- bled each morning and made pledges to each other in the name of Christ to do ne wrong, this taking of a solemn vow was the act of faith, which became a conspicuous part in the plan of safety. Instead of saving a wicked man, the first act of Christianity was to make each, heart vow to be righteous, and benevolent, and virtuous. Faith in Christ implied an abandonment of Paganism as a religion, and of all immorality as a practice, and an espousal of that new leadership which appeared in Judea. And if Christ was indeed a person before whom even infidelity and atheism bow in reverence, this vow of faith was not an empty action in that olden time, and will not be in our day. Sent out to arrest and punish the early followers of Jesus, Plinv reported that he could not find them guilty of crimes, but only of a pitiable superstition. To the early Christian it therefore teemed a first requisite that they should live without crimes. Christianity Philosophically Considered It Must Not be Confounded With the Follies of Man. If subsequent periods perverted that simple religion, and declared that a sinner could be saved by giving assent to certain doctrines, or that a sinner could buy Heaven by paying certain sums ot money into the treasury of a church, all such events in the intellectual world must be classed among the blunders and vices of society. The institution of -marriage cannot be held responsible for what the Mor- mons may have made of it on the one hand, or what the Oneida Community may have made of it on the other. That social compact must be looked at in all the lights, and must not be seen only in a Mormon settlement or in a divorce case. So the religion of our day cannot b*e justly painted by dipping the brush into the ugly, or pale, or dirty colors of ignorant and wicked times, but it can be seen rightly only by minds wide enough and fair enough to separate the BY PROF: SWING. 23 absolute from the incidental. There are many clergymen now engaged in active duty in their profession who, if they were compelled to find the doctrines of their Christianity in the books of only certain old Romanists and old Calvin- ists, would at once descend from their pulpits and join with those who live without God and without hope; but they remain, and remain with happy hearts, because there is a religion a Christianity that has not been ruined or even marred by any blundering man or blundering century. Mr. Ingersoll forgets how difficult it has always been for man to keep pure any form of philosophy. Suppose society should conclude to adopt the creed which this gentleman set forth a week ago, in what condition would he find that creed and the public practice of it should its author come back to earth in a hundred years and move about amoii V his so-called apostles? Man is slow in finding the deepest and best meaning of any of his systems of action or thought. [Republics have come and gone because men, even the wisest, find slowly the many details which must be com- bined to make the perfect and the enduring State. It is wondered yet whether our continent has found the republic- anism that will endure. That we have found many of the elements of power and durability all confess; but there may be some defect in the moral education of the young, or some excess in our love of material things, that will in a half century begin to make our grand liberty-tree scatter in mid- summer its leaves, never to bud again. Thus all systems tremble as they move forward. Plato opened up a spiritual philosophy with the cardinal idea that the only valuable thing in the universe was the soul. It had not advanced far before it was joined by the idea that men ought, there- fore, to pay no regard to food or dress, but should develop only their power of thought. Christ found the world -quite full of asceticism when He 24 REPLY TO IftQERSOLL'S NE W LECTURE. came, and long after Christ it moved on, growing more insane as it advanced. Plotinus and others assumed that they had gotten away from their bodies, and were nothing but pure souls. This whole system was arrested at last by the practical ideas of the seventeenth and eighteenth cen- turies, and the doctrine of the soul was? brought back to that middle ground of our period. After a long journey through darkness, the worth of both the body and the mind emerges into light. All fair enemies of Christianity will remember that ideas, like men, have their trials and sor- rows, and must be estimated, not in some one hour of their history, but in all their long and varied experience. In this manner we must all investigate the claims of religion. Like the politics of liberty, like the spiritualism of Plato, it has had to move through a wild and savage country. Ae; the chariots of elegant queens in the fourteenth century often became stalled in the mud, and the royal personages must descend and wait for the slow help of slow levers and slow men, so the noble truths of some bright or divine mind often "become mired when they attempt to cross a country or an age, and he only is able to speak wisely of a religion who has kept in mind the natural misfortunes of philoso- phies. It seems necessary, therefore, to arraign the popular speaker for three errors of judgment or information; an error regarding the importance of Matthew to the fact of Christianity; an error regarding the commonly-received doctrine of salvation by faith; an error of information as to the trials which befall all good ideas in their effort to gain foothold in the world. Let us note a fourth shape of weak- ness in the long discourse. All hearers and readers of the address were gratified by the following words : " Let me say, once for all, that to that great and serene man I gladlv pay, I gladly pay the homage of my adoration and my tears." BY PROF. SWING. 25 The weakness of the address here lies in the assumption that that greatness and serenity which drew admiration and tears came into a world that had no religion, no church, no worship, no hope of another life, the assumption that no causes had toiled in harmony to produce such a person- age as Jesus. The Weak Point in Ingersoll's Lecture. If a public teacher has iound a man who is so worthy of a glad homage, this public teacher should have informed the large audience assembled what ideas and practices met together in Galilee to bring about such a character; and if Christ did not result from the gospel of good food and good clothes and good humor, our reformer slumld at least have confessed that great men had often come into society by other gates than those of the tailor, and the cook, and the humorist. Great indeed is the value of all those qualities and substances and conditions. Food, clothes, houses, laughter, friendship are all blessings seen too dimly by many; but a glance at such a being as Christ should in- stantly remind us that the heroes who have drawn "admir- ation and tears" have had poured into their souls other in- gredients, while in Christ religion was the ruling element. It ought to be an impressive fact that when a distin- guished enemy of all religion wishes to find one on earth to whom he will yield tearful reverence, he must seek for him and find him at the altar of God, teaching men to say, " Our Father who art in Heaven." In the hour of most need the philosophy of good food and good clothes fails our friend, and he must find a model of serene greatness in a man who had only a seamless coat, aad who slept often houseless when even the foxes had holes and the birds their happy nests. .Not only did it become necessary for Mr. Ingersoll to 36 REPLY TO INQBBSOLL'S XEW LECTURE, borrow a religious name upon which to bestow deep re- gard, but it will always be necessary for him, after he has announced his. philosophy of manhood, to go outside of it to find the manhood itself. The doctrines of good food and good clothes, and plenty of fresh air, and plenty of liberty, are valuable to society after certain other high doctrines" have made the society, but as laws for making a great man- hood they are infinitely contemptible. The Roman glut tons had plenty of good food; the Arabs in the mountains had plenty of liberty; the American Indians always have had plenty of fresh air. The wise lawyer's rules and regu- lations of man and home are excellent where some other rules and regulations, as in England and America, may have first made the man and the home. Mr. Ingersoll's system could give a better wardrobe to the man of Nazareth, could spread for him a better feast than the one Martha set before him, could put, indeed, a pillow of down under the weary head, but it could not first produce the Nazarene himself. Mr. IngersolPs final phi- losophy can explain a tailor-shop or a dining-room, but it cannot explain the human race. It is ignorant as a child of the causes that have made all that is great in humanity, and that will continue to make. The Colonel's Cruel Advice Which He Himself Does Not Follow-A Solid Shot From the Frofessor. Let us allude now to the fifth error of the discourse. It unites with all of the gentleman's speeches in advising the public to build no churches, to attend no church, but to put into homes the money which they have been accus- tomed to waste in so-called houses of God. This advice is hasty, and even cruel, for many reasons. It will be admit- ted that some centuries did rob the home that they might build the temple. And one can yet see something of this form of injustice in our world. But the world is outgrow- BY PROF. SWING. 27 ing -this form of folly, and we all live in a broad West, where the country and village church rises up among the trees in great simplicity. Complaints tliat we have applied to Europe in the far past cannot, Ly any mind that wishes to be reasonable, be laid against the simple sanctuaries which so adorn this new continent. A lecturer's fee for a night, a clergyman's fee for a month, would make ready for use one of those village meeting-houses, which would assemble the dear children together for a generation, that they might study that Man who elicits from even infidels sympathetic tears. Look into this advice more deeply. All valuable moral truths must be regularly and faithfully taught. The pri- vate home is confessed, both in philosophy and song, to be the most blessed spot on earth, but not out of those private dwellings has the education of the world proceeded. The young and old have been compelled by the laws of instruc- tion to meet together in companies larger than and quite different from the one which assembles by tke fireside. Hence politics has had its forum or senate, art its school and gallery, philosophy its porch, and morals or piety its temple. To these the throng has repaired. Home has its own peculiar virtue. There is no language eloquent enough to describe home. The song of home is destined to be immortal, but, after all, that mighty thing called society has poured out of quite other gates. Men assemble to- gether, and behold! after they have studied, and taught, and learned, mind to mind and heart to heart, up has risen a fine art, or a science, or a politics, or a religion. Our lecturer refused his own advice; for, in order to teach his own views, he had to seek for a temple, not built for a dwelling-house, but for a school and an arena of art. .Remanding us all to the walls of our private houses, and telling us to put our gold into only our houses, he asked us 28 REPLY TO INUERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, to postpone obeying the advice until we had come out to :an expensive building to hear from him the laws of life and salvation. It would seem that the dwelling-house theory were not designed to apply to the enemies of religion, but only to its friends. Persons who will laugh at piety may assemble in elegant halls; those who love the idea of a God and a heaven should cease to meet in churches or hulls, and should build up the walls of their homes! The Grand Architecture of " Home "An Eloquent Peroration. Assuming that the orator is right his eulogy of the place called home, assuming that he cannot plant one flower too many by the door or window or wake up too much joy or laughter and music within, yet we dare not be ignorant of the fact that no such home has come or can come to a nation that has no God and no temple of hymn and incense. Home is not an isolated fact, but it is a result. The arts and the sciences, all the learning and wisdom of the world have made their contributions toward the beautiful little result called home. There is not a farmhouse or a palace in England, not a cottage in New England, not a mansion along the Hudson, or upon the avenue of any city that has not resulted from a blending together of all past learning, and taste, and morals, and piety. Could you dissect the idea of home and find the nerves of its structure, it would be found that thoughts of God and of a future life, which will gather to- gether all those scattered here, form a strange and tender part of this house where the parents arid the children meet and part. Atheists come upon our homes already built; but they neglect to ask, they dare not ask, what built them? Must we tell them that beneath the homes of France, of Germany, of England, of America, there is lying a civili- zation made tender by all the broad and deep teachings or BY PROF. SWING. 29 religion? Food, and furniture, and laughter, and joy did not make these blessed abodes of man. The atheist can decorate these homes, but he did not make them. Beneath them is a belief in God, a deep pathos of life and death, and deep hope in a life to come after the earthly house of encampment has been dissolved. Into these walls where we all live pass, as component parts, the tears and prayers of saints and martyrs. - The songs and hymns of our fathers are more significant ele- ments than the brick, and wood, and marble; the frequent trips of the children to the sanctuary across the open field or along the crowded street have, in building up the mod- ern home, surpassed the architect and the mason. Atheism can live happily in a home which hands more divine have fabricated from the world's rich dust. OIF DDR. Points Wherein the Doctor and Colonel Agree and Differ A Fair and Candid Rejoinder. [As the Pulpit of the Centenary Church was supplied by a visiting candidate;, the Rev. Dr. Thomas contributed the following letter :] I have no desire to differ from Col. Ingersoll where it ia possible for us to agree. The disposition to antagonize to seek to find points of difference, rather than points of agreement, has, perhaps, often led both parties in religious debates to magnify each other's real or supposed errors. We should rather seek to know as far as we may the exact truth, and give it full credit wherever found. This seems to be the spirit in which the lecturer sought to stand before his great congregation. I would reciprocate this as fully as I can, and say, " Let us see wherein we can agree?" Let us say that the time for meditation has arrived in the pro- found questions of thought; not of compromise of principle or fact, but of harmony where harmony is possible. Such a spirit will do much to soften the severity of discussions, and it will be a mental and moral help to all parties. And first, in reference to Col. Ingersoll's plea for the right and the duty of all to think and to reason. He says: " I belong to the republic of intellectual liberty, and only those are good citizens of that republic who depend upon reason and upon persuasion, and only those are traitors who resort to- brute force." In this we can agree. I belong to the same, and I indorse that statement. 1 agree with him also in not thinking that " people who disagree with me are 31 32 REPLY TO INQERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE. bad people," and that mankind are generally " reasonably honest;" and that most "ministers are endeavoring to make this world better." I agree with him when Ite claims the right to think, and for the two reasons that " I like, too, and arid I can't help it." I like to think, and I can't help it; and will add, that I would not "help it" ii I could." But here we should distinguish between proper freedom to think, and what is loosely called " free thought." Freedom to think should be the right of all; but there is not, and there cannot be, any such thing as "free thought," unless it is in a bad sense. And for this reason, that all thought is conditioned, first, by the laws of thought; and secondly, by the facts, and the things about which we think. All normal mental freedom must submit to these natural limitations. And in this I think Mr. Ingersoll will fully agree with me. In the second place, I agree with much that the Colonel has to say* about the good that is in the Christian religion, lie says: "There are many good things about it. I be- lieve that. He says: "I will never attack anything that I believe to be good, and will never fail to attack anything I honestly believe to be wrong." In this we can agree, also. I will join hands with the Colonel in defending what I believe to be right, and in opposing what I believe to be wrong. But I cannot agree with him when, in the next sentence, he says: We have, I say, what they call the Christian religion, and, I find just in proportion that nations have been religious, just in the proportion they have gone back to barbarism. I find that Spain, I'ortuetal, Italy are the three worst nations in Europe. I find that the nation nearest infidel is the most prosperous France. I think the fairness in debate for which the Colonel claims to stand, should have led him to discriminate be- tween religion arid superstition, or the abuse of religion. He is a friend of liberty, but he would not think it fair to charge liberty with all the abuses and the wrongs wrought BY DR. THOMAS. ;>>3 in the name of liberty. The Colonel indorses the teachings of Jesus as to purity of heart, and mercy, and justice, and forgiveness. We certainly gather from his lecture that he believes these to be the essence, the very spirit of religion, and he certainly would not claim that the more a nation had of these, the worse it would be; and, if not, it is hardly iair to charge the bad state of Spain, Portugal, and Italy to religion. Why not say that in those countries the spirit of the teachings of true religion has been corrupted and turned to base purposes. In the third place, I can agree with much that the lec- turer says about Christ. I was glad to read his clear, ananly words, when he said : 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, to that great and serene man I gladly pay the homage of my ad- miration 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 out of the human mind. Had I lived at that time I would have been his friend, and should He come again, He would not find a better friend than I will be. Ingersoll's New Departure What the Doctor says About it. This seems to be a new departure, or at least a step be- yond where the Colonel has taken his stand in previous lectures ; though I do not recall a single instance where } >, has said anything against the life of Christ that is, Hi?: lite as a man. My heart is with him in those noble senti. ments. I am glad he spoke so freely and so sincerely. "Wit! him I feel that the " place where man dies for man is hoi;- ground;" and with him I pay .to that "serene man th< homage and the admiration of my tears." I think with the Colonel, also,, that Jesus was regarded by the Church of that day as an "infidel " and a " blasphemer," and that lie 3 34 REPLY lt> INUERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, was put to death by those who claimed to be the only relig- ions people of the time, and who looked upon everybody who did not accept their teachings and mode of life as sinners. But then i have to get the facts of that great and good life from the very books of the !tfew Testament that the Colonel labored so hard to cast suspicion upon as being un- reliable, and not written till " hundreds of years after," and as coining from confused and conflicting manuscripts. Speaking further of Christ, the lecturer says: For the theological creation I have a different feeling. If He was, in fact, God, He knew there was no such thing as death. He knew that what we call death was but the eternal opening of the golden gates of everlasting joy; and that it took no heroism to face a death that was simply eternal life. I will admit that some of the "theological" conceptions of Christ may have served to confuse the mind ; but then, in the calmest exercise of that very reason for which my excellent friend makes so strong a plea, I am compelled to think that there was in that life something more than human. Approach it where you will; touch it at any point from the " conception" to the last scenes of the cross, and the resurrection, and the ascension, and it all seems to be of a piece; it is consistent with itself throughout; it moves along on its own unique and majestic plane. We have the picture before us; we have the marvelous facts; and for me it is easier a less strain upon the reason to accept the account as given; to accept the, to us, supernatural, in that life, than to account for it in any other way. How could the unlettered disciples plain, common men have cre- ated such a character? How could such marvelous results have flown from the life of one who was only a man? Wiser and better than other men, but yet onlv a man. I am in worse mental trouble when I attempt to put away the divine, the supernatural in Christ, and the B7 7)R THOMAS, 85 Scriptures and i^ilgion, than wLen I accept it, With me it is a way out of difficulty, rather than r, way into difficulty; and "I gladly pay the homage or my admi- ration and tears" to Him not only as a " serene man," but to that higher being who is the Son of God, as well as the Son of Man. To me He is that being brought into exist- ence by a special, or an exceptional, creation, arid in whom God is revealed to the world. And this makes it all the more easy for me to understand His deep and tender sym- pathy His tears, His prayers, His agony in the garden and on the cross. As a man, Jesus had the susceptibilities to pain, and in a measure, to fear, common tc men. As " Immanuel," as God with us, there was an upper and higher sweep to his whole life; and it was the dwelling of this divine nature within him that so quickened and exalted all his sensibilities and made possible a degree of suffering to us perhaps unknown. I think that when we enter into the real life of Christ, His outward sufferings were but the smallest part; the mere symbol; the "flag of distress" thrown out to arrest our coarse sense. The real agony was within. It was the Buffering of love love slighted and rejected; love scorned and crucified by those He came to save. It was the burden of the cold, cruel world put upon Him in the last hours of a life that had been only tender and merciful to all. He feared not " the change we call death." To Him there was no " death;" and yet a horror worse than any mere death gathered about that awful hour. The Teachings of Christ Emphasized -Character rather than Dogma. A word in the fourth place, about Christ's teachings, as to what man must do to be saved. I can agree with Col. Ingersoll that these are reliable whenever or by whoever written. And I believe with him that Christ put emphasis 36 REPLY TO INQERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, upon character rather than upon dogma; upon what we are rather than what w r e profess or what, in a technical sense, we believe. Of course, great beliefs must underlie the very principles of purity and mercy and justice that He taught. I must believe that the pure and merciful and just will be saved. They are saved already; lor to have such qualities is to have salvation. It may not, indeed, be a " theological" or a " regulation" salvation that h a sal- vation according to a "creed;" but it is what is far better; it is salvation, in fact. And I agree with the Colonel in the absurdity of the old Athanasian creed, over which he had so much fun, when it says that whosoever will be saved "first of all it is necessary to hold the Catholic faith." and then goes on to define that faith in terms, the meaning of which only those who have made of theology a profound study can have the most distant conception; and then closes up by saying that " except one do thus believe he shall perish everlastingly." That was an error of the creed-mak- ing age. The Protestant Episcopal Church does not retain that creed, and the Church of England holds it only be- cause it does not know how to get rid of it. An effort was made some years ago in England to lighten the formal terms of subscription, but it failed. But I should think the Colonel did not get all the teach- ings of Christ in reference to salvation; not all of Matthew, even. Jesus taught not only the inner principles of salva- tion as it is found in character, but lie taught that men should pray; that they should deny themselves and take up the cross and follow Him. He taught that men should re- pent and be converted. But still, I agree with the lecturer that we should put more stress upon principles and con- duct, and less upon creeds, and I will join him in pressing these things upon the Church and upon the world. It was not the purpose of this paper (begun at 9 o'clock BY DR. THOMAS. 37 on Saturday evening, and now about finished before 11) to review in any full sense this long lecture, but rather to look at some things in which we can agree; and to .suggest some points on which my own faith goes beyond. There are some very palpable, even remarkable errors, or mistakes., in statement that I have no doubt some of our clergy will find pleasure in exposing. And yet there are many things in it that cannot fail to make an impression upon many who have heretofore regarded the Colonel's lectures as only blasphemous. And I want to say to my friend that I think there is one point in which he should be more careful. I like all he says about liberty, and not causing pain to others. But when I read his lectures and I have read them all I am compelled to feel that he is not suffi- ciently mindful of the feelings of many good people who differ from him on matters of belief. lie ought to practice in this respect what he preaches. And he will not blame me for another word, and that is? with so many manly utterances for honesty, and fairness he should be careful not to permit his love of fun, and the laughter and applause of the people who hear, to lead him to indulge in unjust caricatures of things sacred, or to make unfair statements for the sake of gaining a point. I think his denunciation of the old and terrible ideas of endless punishment, and the gross and shocking views that hav e been sometimes held concerning a penal atonement, are not wholly uncalled for. I fear the teachers of religion have in some things made an occasion for some of his lectures ; but even admitting all this, there is still a law of the congruous, a sense of the fitting, or of what is proper in the discus- sion of themes that have been in all ages and literature accounted sacred. Less extravagance, more care in state- ment, and fairness in reason, and with all more reverence, is what our lecturer needs to cultivate. ".v.-n.in: >v-, .,1 OIF 1 The Scope of the Lecture, and Not the Lecturer, Under Consideration The Issue- Faith and Works. It has, I believe, been intimated by Col. Robert G. In- gersDll that his clerical critics are usually more inclined to consider him personally than the merits of his ideas, and he justly resents so grave a departure from the amenities of debate. The fault complained of cannot be too severely condemned, for it is certain when controversies degenerate into attacks on individuals who advocate objectionable views, and are not directed against the views themselves, an amount of prejudice is engendered fatal to the discovery or defense of truth. Into so serious an error I shall take care not to fall. Being a member of that unfortunate body, of whom Jeremy Taylor, so approvingly quoted by Col. Ingersoll, wrote " were as much to be rooted out as anything that was the greatest pest and nuisance on earth," but who, if Ban. croft and Lecky are to be credited, have been from the be- ginning the steadfast friends ot unlimited freedom of thought and of speech, I have it not in my nature to call in question the honesty of any man's opinions, or to deny his right to disseminate them as widely as he can. Indeed, I am related to a people who have for so long a time been in the minority, and who have been compelled to suffer so- much for their antagonism to the tyranny of botli church and state, that I can hardly refrain from a kind of admir- ing sympathy with iconoclasts, even when their sturdy 40 RE PL P TO IHQERSOLLS NE W LECTURE blows are directed against my own most cherished convic- o * tions. Influenced by such feelings, you will not be sur- prised if, in reviewing some portions of Col. Ingersoll's lectnre, I confine myself strictly to their representations, and avoid unnecessary reference to the lecturer himself. The avowed design of the lecture alluded to was to answer the all-important question: ""What must I do to be saved?" a question that has engaged the thought of many burdened generations, and which only irreverent shallow- ness would treat with laughter and derision; and in furnish- ing a reply, it was claimed that orthodox Christians teach "the justification of the sinner by faith alone; not any words, just faith believing something you do not under- stand." This statement is in various ways repeated in the published reports of the discussion. For instance, when the passage is quoted in which the Lord is represented as judging, the following comment appears as a fair account of what is currently taught : " ' He shall reward every man' to the church he belongs to? No. T the man- ner in which he was baptized? No. According to liis creed? No. 'He shall reward every man according to his works,'" the impression conveyed being that we advocate what is here so emphatically negatived. Similar queries are propounded in connection with our Savior's interview with Zaccheus, and with the same end in view; and after a dissertation on the Romish creed, it is asserted, " In order to be saved it is necessary to believe this. What a mercy it is that man can get to heaven with- out understanding it." All denominations are classed together as conditioning salvation on the reception of some such doctrinal formula, and O n this assumption are made the subjects of infinite merriment. Unquestionably the Tridentine Decrees are fairly open to criticism, and un- doubtedly some old Protestant confessions are not clear of BY DP. LOPdMER. 41 the error charged against them; but though this must be conceded, it does not follow that the pulpit of the present makes the eternal welfare of the soul depend on intellectual belief. If it ever did so, it has long since found out its mistake. Theology Progressive Creeds, Faith, Etc. Theology, -like any other science, is far from being per- fect ; progress has distinguished it, and must continue to do so. In the course of its advancement it has come to be more fully recognized that whatever saving faith may mean, it does not involve subscription to a creed, however ortho- dox. A man may hold to the " five points " and to even as many more " points " as he pleases, and yet be a stranger to God's grace. He may even contend sincerely for the verbal inspiration of scripture, and still have no assurance of Divine acceptance. "Devils believe and tremble;" and the same is true of men. Creeds have their place. They summarize what is held by a particular body of disciples; they form convenient compendiums for reference, and they impart definiteness to an organization, but they have no more efficiency in the salvation of a soul than a prescrip- tion has in the healing of a body. A prescription may guide an invalid to the means of health, and a confession of faith may accurately point out the way of everlasting life; but if the prescription is swallowed instead of the remedy, or the confession is relied on instead of the Savior, the result in the one case will be about as vain as the other. Consequently it is mere waste of time and energy to labor to disprove, what is far from being generally held, if held at all in Protestant circles, that intellectual belief is indis- pensable to the eternal well-being of the soul. In rejecting this answer to the great inquiry, one of two- others is suggested: the first as embodying the alleged opin- 42 REPLY TO INGERSOLVS NEW LECTURE, ions of Matthew, Mark, and Luke ; the second as expressing the conviction of the lecturer himself. Several texts are col- lated from the whole writings of these three Evangelists to sustain the view that they predicated salvation exclusively of works, and every utterance of theirs that seems to point to anything else is repudiated as an interpolation. Of the warrant for discriminating in this manner between the words of the same testimony I shall speak by and by ; at present I am only concerned to remind you of the unmeas- ured approval which the lecture under consideration lavishes on this interpretation. We have, tor instance, this commendation of the Sermon on the Mount: "If you will forgive men that trespass against you, God will forgive your trespasses against him. I accept, and I never will ask any God to treat me better than I treat my fellow-men. There's a square promise. There's a contract and it must of necessity be true. No God could afford to damn a forgiving man." Then, after the text: "He shall reward every man according to his works," the exclamation follows: ''Good! I subscribe to thf.t doctrine." Subsequently the rule of judgment, that is mentioned in the twenty-fifth chapter of Matthew, elicits this fervent eulogy; "I tell you to-night that God will not punish with eternal thirst the man who has put a cup of cold water to the lips of his neighbor; God will not allow to live in the eternal nakedness of pain the man who has clothed others. For instance: Here is a shipwreck, and here is some brave sailor, who stands aside to let a woman that he never saw before take his place in a boat. He stands there great and serene as the wide sea, and he goes down. Do you tell me there is any God who will push the boat from the shore of eternal life when that man wishes to step in? Do you tell me that God can be unpitving to the piti- ful; that Hecan be unforgiving to the forgiving? I deny it. BY DR. LORIMER. 43 And from the aspersions of the pulpit I seeks to rescue the reputation of the Deity." Ingersoll's Gospel under the Doctor's Microscope Shows a Fatal Contradic- tion -God Forgives, but " Bob "is for " Inexorable Justice" The Colonel in Fact an Extreme Calvanist. it is my turn to say, "Good!" but how does this firm approval of what is claimed to be the apostolic scheme of salvation comport with the lecturer's personal convictions on the same subject ? His own position is diametrically opposed to what he has so elegantly extolled. Here it is in his own words : " I believe in the gospel of justice, that we must reap what we sow. I do not believe in forgive- ness. If I rob Mr. Smith, and God forgives me, how does that help Smith ? If I by slander cover some poor girl with the leprosy of some imputed crime, and she withers away like a blighted flower, and afterward I get forgiveness, how does that help her? If there is another world, we have got to settle. * * * For every crime you commit you must answer to yourself and to the one you injure. And if 'you have ever clothed another with unhappiness as with a gar- ment of pain, you will never be quite as happy as though you hadn't done that thing. No forgiveness, eternal, inex- orable, everlasting justice that is what I believe in." Here is a Draconian evangel with a vengeance! In what essential respect does this differ from the most extreme and rigid Calvinism. If one is an upper mill- stone, the other is the nether; if one is a land-slide, the other is an earthquake; if the one is hopelessness, the other is despair; if the one is blackness, the other is starless night; if the one is a shroud, the other is a coffin, and if the one is a grave, the other is a charnel-house. I had thought from what had so earnestly been commended by the lecture, that there must be some healing balm in charity, some purifying efflorescence in pity, some sweetening aroma in 44 REPLY TO INGERSOLL'S NE W LECTURE, patient gentleness, and some heavenly grace and beauty in the spirit of forgiveness ; but no; if the only real and divine thing in the universe is "eternal, inexorable, everlasting justice," these qualities are emptied of their significance and worth; yea, they must be regarded as positive evils, running counter as they do to the absolute sovereignty of merciless retribution, and society should convert itself into an organized feud, and its people into ravening wolves. If this latest gospel is true, then the sailor would not be saved on account of the heroism so beautifully described unless throughout his life he had been perfectly blameless in the dealings with others ; nor could the dying thief have been saved " because he "pitied innocence suffering on the cross," though we are assured that he was by the lecturer, as he certainly had committed wrong against his fellow-beings. And if it is true that there is nothing to be looked for in the future "but inexorable, everlasting justice," then it is not true "that God cannot afford to damn any man capable of pitying anyone." lagersoll Does Not Answer the Question, " What Host We Do to Be Saved 1" Which of these two solutions of the momentous problem are we to regard as entitled to credence? Which shall we adopt ? They cannot both be reasonable and worthy of all acceptation, for they are destructive of each other. If the first be true, the second is not; and if the second is, then there is no place for the just. The encampment of forgive- ness cannot withstand the stern fortress of unfaltering jus- tice: and the breath of all-loving mercy is fatal to the sign of unapproachable Nemesis. Again, I ask, which theory shall we believe? One or the other, or neither? Obviously the lecture does not help us to a decision} for its glaring contradictions only make certain that its clever author is s.~-t oJear in his own mind as to what humanity must do to BY DR. LORIMER. 43 be saved, and that we must look elsewhere for a satisfactory answer. And to whom shall we look for the much needed light if not to Christ ? If not to that being for whom the lecturer expresses such high regard that he is ready to pay him the tribute of his " admiration and his tears." As it is conceded that He should inspire us with "infinite respect," and admitted that He in some sense "died for man," we cannot surely do better than lay to heart, and receive as final His doctrine regarding the salvation of the soul. But how shall we ascertain what He taught? Permit me to reply, by asking another question, how does Col. In- gersoll know that Jesus was a " great and serene man,'' one deserving the confidence of his friendship, and " the ad- miration of his tears?" We are reminded that He never directed anything to be written, and never wrote anything Himself, except some words in the sand. From whence then comes the information which enables the lecturer to form so high an estimate of His character? Evidently it is derived from the !N"ew Testament, for there are no other documents to which an appeal can be carried. If then it is sufficiently reliable to warrant us in accepting its por- traiture of Christ, it may certainly be trusted when it undertakes to set before us the doctrine that He preached. Authenticity of the New Testament. It may not be amiss at this point to suggest a few addi- tional thoughts bearing on the authenticity of this book. The statement that " it was not written for hundreds of years after the Apostles were dust" is utterly devoid of proof. Ty the gospels were in circulation by the close of the first century is the belief of the world's most eminent scholars, a belief abundantly confirmed by Irenceus, Paplas, Tertullian, and Origen. The assertion that they were orig- inally written in Hebrew, and that, as ths comes are all ia 4C RE PL Y TO INGERSOLL 3 NE W LECTURE, Greek, a language which it is assumed the disciples did not understand, no confidence can be placed in their reported authorship, is gratuitous and uiitr us worthy. Thoughtful rationalists, who have studied this subject carefully, hesitate to venture on such untenable ground. According to the best authorities, in our Lord's day the Greek language was current in Palestine; and it is needless to say that such writers as Lightfoot, Alford, De Wette, and Lueke have assigned good and sufficient reasons for believing that the gospels were the work of the men to whom they are com- monly ascribed. But even were there serious doubts upon this point, it should not be overlooked that it is simply incredible that centuries alter Christ a company of unknown men should have been able to impose on the churches as apostolic, writings that radically differed from the doctrine fixed and accepted among them; and if they are in substan- tial agreement, as undoubtedly they are, then, for the pur- poses of this discussion, we may accept with confidence their report ot what Christ taught concerning the salvation of the soul. And if we attach to them enough importance to call them to the witness-stand at all, we are bound to receive their whole testimony, and not to garble it to suit our own views. To reject every statement that mitigates against our opinions as interpolations, or to discriminate between wit- nesses whose claims on our attention are equally valid, sim- ply because one seems to be more pronounced against us than the others, only betrays a determination to make good a position at any hazard. Such a course is illogical and unjustifiable. For it to be pursued in any other investiga- tion than that of religion, would expose its author to cen- sure and condemnation. If the Evangelists are entirely untrustworthy, do not appeal to them at all; but if you are going: to admit their testimony, admit the whole of it; any SY DR. LORIMER. 47 other course is not only inconsistent, it will prove inconclu- sive as well. The Gospel Plan of Salvation. Believing, then, that we have in this volume a faithful transcript of the Savior's teachings, let us draw near to it, earnestly inquiring, "What must we do to be saved?" The text, which I have chosen on which to rest ray argu- ment, teaches that salvation is the end or the result of faith. What, it will be asked, is it possible that good works have nothing to do with eternal life? I say not that; I would not seem even to imply that. Throughout the New Testa- ment the strongest emphasis is laid on the indispensable- ness of virtue, both in its root and flavor. It is expressly declared that evil-doing bars the gates of the kingdom "they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God," and it is written: " Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city." We do not teach, nor are others authorized to teach, that the beatitudes pronounced by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount are available to any who fail to comply with the conditions. They who receive the benediction must breathe the spirit on which it depends, and they who are looking for forgiveness must not fail to be forgiving in their turn. L know of no salvation that regards these moral and spir- itual excellencies as superfluous. At this point we have no Serious controversy with the statements made in the lecture before us, however one may object to the manner in which they are put. We all hold to the great truth that, " without holiness, no man shall see the Lord," and that " the grace of God that bringeth salvation" teaches us " to deny ungodliness and worldly crests, and to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world." And, who- 48 REPLY TO INGERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, soever represents us to the contrary, gives currency to a slander as foul as it is false. But, while this position is 1 to be maintained most earnestly, it is impossible to read the New Testament with- out arriving at the conclusion that, in some very real sense, faith is interwoven with the soul's salvation. To escape from this fact, Col. Ingersoll has been obliged to manipu- late his witnesses, and to reject, altogether, the testimony of one who has as good a right to be heard as the others. Certainly, John teaches " He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life," and shows how dependent we all are upoa Christ for salvation. This is not called in question, and we need not therefore multiply texts in its defense. That the same doctrine runs through the epistles will hardly be seriously denied. " Therefore, being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, " " in whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation," are texts which indi- cate the direction of apostolic thought upon this subject. "When we turn back to three Evangelists we find the same doctrine, not only implied, but expressed. In the account given by Mark of our Lord's first preaching we find him saying, "The time is fulfilled, and the Kingdom of God is at hand; repent ye and believe the gospel." And the great commission under which the Apostles were to act, and which last Sunday came in for no small amount of vituperative eloquence, is but an echo of this original proclamation. The same writer represents Christ as saying to Peter, "Have faith in God;" and on another occasion he records the fact that " seeing their faith," he said, " Be of good cheer, thy sins be forgiven thee." Indeed, all the benefits conferred by Christ's ministry presuppose the existence of faith in Him aa tlie Messiah. He not only directly asks the people whether they possess it, but speaks of His gracious BY DR. LORIMER. 49 purposes as being hindered by their unbelief. "When he says to them, " Come to me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest; take my yoke upon you and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart, and ye shall find rest unto your souls," confidence in Himself is necessarily implied. How could they take Him at His word unless they were moved to do so by their faith? I admit that there is growth and development in the New Testament teachings on this subject, as on every other with which it is concerned. There were reasons why the people should be gradually led up step by step to the apprehension of the doctrines of grace, and he must be blind who fails to discern this advancement in the writings of the Apostles. But notwithstanding this admission, the germs of all that was afterward more fully elaborated appears in the utterances of the Savior. Do the Apostles dwell on the necessity of our becoming " new creatures ?" Not only does John represent Jesus as saying: " Ye must be born again," but Matthew, Mark, and Luke describe Him as preaching " repentance," which is one aspect of the same thing, and as insisting on the tree being made good if we would have the fruit good as well. Do they magnify His gracious dying for the world^ They were anticipated by Him of whom they wrote, for during His ministry, as reported by Matthew, He claimed " to give His life a ran- som for many," and in the institution of the last supper said: "This is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." And thus faith, too, proceeded from the earliest intimations of its import- ance to grow in clearness, until in the epistles it appears distinctly defined as to its nature and value, and we might just as well deny to the full head of wheat the existence of the germ from whence it sprang, as to deny to the com- 50 RJSPLI TO INGERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, pieted conception of this grace in the apostolic writings its rootage in the earliest works of our Lord Himself. The Vital Relation of Faith to the Soul Its Elevating and Saving Power When Fixed on Jeans Christ. We are now prepared to advance another step in this investigation. How comes it that faith is made to sustain so vital a relation to the eternal welfare of the soul? My first answer is, because it is the source of godliness in heart and life. Paul when writing to the Thessalonians associ- ates them together; and Peter, alluding to the conversion of the Gentiles, declares that God purified their hearts by faith. In the epistles to the Ephesians, Galatians, Colos- sians, and Hebrews, stress is laid on the thought that our union with Christ, which is effected by faith, should be and must be productive of good works. They flow from it nec- essarily, as wreathed forms of beauty rise from the sea, as broad gleams of light stream down from the sun, and as flowers and harvests spring from the fertile earth. To understand the matter more fully we must remember that the Bible assumes the need in humanity of a new principle of moral life. Christ says that He came to seek and to save the lost. That we are in some sense lost has been more than suspected, even by those who have sought guidance from the light of nature only; for theyihave been sadly con- scious of imperfection in their lives. Were we to succeed in destroying the Bible, we would still fail to erase from human consciousness the conviction that sin reigns unto death. Sin is here, not because the Bible teaches it, but because we transgress the divine law. But how shall we be deliv- ered from this thralldom? How shall we so influence our heart that henceforward our bent, drift, and tendency shall be toward righteousness? To this no answer is given by last Sabbath's lecture. That has no redemption to preach BY DR. LORI HER. 51 from a dreary past, no encouragement to extend of a nobler future. That simply assures us that if we are in the wrono- we must continue in it, and sink in it deeper and deeper. But this is not the message of the gospel. That teaches the possibility of implanting in the heart a new principle, which will regenerate both character and life. The prin- ciple which it thus highly exalts is faith not faith in a creed, in a form of words, but in a person, and that person Christ. Have you never observed the elevating and puri- fying power of this grace in other relations? When a young man who has been, reckless unites himself with a pure, devoted woman in marriage, if he has confidence in her, how decisively her character will act on his. His affi- ance with her creates a purer air around him, and imprints upon his heart both the reality and loveliness of a virtuous life. Or, to change the illustration, let it be the confidin- love of a child in a mother, or of a son in a father, or of one friend in another, and in proportion as the object of trust is morally exalted will it have power to transform into its own likeness. Pre-eminently must this be true of Christ. Consider His greatness, His moral splendor and spiritual magnificence. He represents Himself not only as the teacher of the world, but as its sacrifice for sin. As such He magnifies in our eyes the dignity of the moral law and of personal purity. He does not leave the impression that if we wrong any one it can be passed unnoticed by the Su- preme Ruler. The wrong must not only be atoned for by his priestly offering, but we must right it ourselves as far as possible, aud whatever remains of compensation God will not withhold from the sufferer. Saved, Not for Faith's Sake, Nor Work's Sake, But for Christ's Sake. It is a misrepresentation to imply that if we injure a fellow being, we can obtain forgiveness without being 52 RE PL Y TO INGERSOLL'S NE W LECTURE, deeply sensible of our guilt, and without sincere efforts to counteract the evils we have wrought. Christ taught no such doctrine, neither do we. Christ taught the abornin- ableness of iniquity, the blasphemy of wrong doing; and on the other side, the essential and eternal beauty of right- eousness. And if we trust Him, that is, if we receive Him as our prophet, priest, and king, we say amen, to all that He is and to all that He proclaims; we accept Him as the pat- tern of our life and as its inspiration. How can there be such trust without morality? and how can there be morality springing from such a source without peace of mind, and hope of everlasting salvation? Faith saves, not because there is in it intrinsic worth greater than resides in right- eousness, but because it is itself the source of righteous- ness, bringing us into fellowship with One whose presence must ever tend to chase away the shadow of sin.. \Ve are saved, not for faith's sake, nor for our works' sake, but for Christ's sake; by whom we are influenced, through the in- strumentality of faith, to preserve ourselves blameless in thought and deed unto the end. This is the gospel that I preach to you. That its truth has been confirmed by its influence on society, such impar- tial writers as Lecky, who, as you know, is not favorably disposed to Christianity, concedes ; and there are few who would venture the assertion made last Sabbath, " that na tions in proportion as they have been religious, have gone back to barbarism." The examples adduced to maintain this allegation, Spain, Portugal, and Italy, have been afflicted with a system that can hardly claim very close affinity with primitive Christianity. But nothing was said of England, Germany, and America, and all the philanthro- pic triumphs of Christianity in these countries were con- veniently passed unnoticed. The selection of France to prove the beneficial influence of infidelity was far from BY DR. LORIMER. 53 iortunate; for to-day, with all of its material prosperity there is more of unrest, and, perhaps, more of unhappiness than elsewhere. The republic is, at best, a tyranny, and its moral corruption threatens to engulf it. Others have read history as well as Col. Ingersoll, and others see, what IK can not, that, wherever the gospel has been preached, and preached most freely, the intellectual and moral life of the people have advanced. There true freedom has taken root, there education has flourished, and there the home has developed in sanctity and beauty. France has no home life ; France has but a dim apprehension of any other evangel than violence ; and if France is ever rescued from the power of her bloody traditions, it will only be through that gospel which is again being proclaimed in her white fields. Infidelity Unmasked. But, however we may read the past, one thing is clear from the lecture whose leading thoughts we have considered, humanity is left hopeless and helpless by infidelity. If we are in sorrow it has no comfort, if we are in sin it has no deliverance, if we are in perplexity it has no message, if we are in darkness it has no light. The virtue it preaches is without foundation, the heroism it inculcates is without inducement, and the immortality it whispers is without evidence. Its loftiest sentiments are borrowed from the religion it affects to despise; the liberty which it claims to champion, it has sacrificed but little to secure; and the sweet charities it commends, it has done nothing to estab- lish. The garland eloquence wherewith it clothes itself, is the adornment of a corpse, every flower sheaths a worm in its 'bosom, and every breath of fragrance is mingled with death. Its oratory smells of the tomb, and the symbol of its hope is an eyeless, tongueless skull, grinning in mocking insolence at everything that dignifies and ennobles life. It 54 REPLY TO INQBRSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, brings no benefaction, it pronounces no benediction, but casts its baneful shadow on all that is fair and sacred. From its cold lips there comes no grand and rounded full " Yea'' to match its piercing, blighting and destroying " Nay." It is simply a huge negation, seeking with one hand to stop the mouth of religion, and with the other to write on hu- man aspirations and beliefs a bitter and derisive " No." It has no gospel of salvation even for this world, but only an evangel of destruction. Let us then turn from it, and proclaim Him in whom is life, and who came " that we might have life, and have it more abundantly." Let us, in realizing the insufficiency of all other answers, repeat to those who ask, " What must we do to be saved?" " Believe on. the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved," saved from sin, saved from despair, saved from uselessness and misery, anci saved forever more in the kingdom of His glory, IF^OIF 1 . A Little Story Ingersoll " Innocent of Greek, " and tlie Consequences. The story is told of a certain scholar who made a great flourish of a so-called rare discovery, but was brought to confusion by a critic, who said, after exposing him, that he was reminded of a caution often uttered by his grand- mother: ''Children should not play with sharp-edged tools or they will cut their fingers." Now, when Col. Ingersoll, who appears to be innocent of Greek, dabbles in New Tes- tament criticism, he is constantly cutting his fingers, al- though he does not seem to be aware of it. One may well be ashamed to attempt any reply to such a lecture as the one entitled: "What Shall "We Do to Be Saved?" a lecture which is full of disgraceful blunders; and yet, if Mr. Ingersoll should become the apostle of Com* munism, our best statesmen would probably think it wise to combat principles which, uttered with adroitness, would be very popular, although evidently fallacious to every stu- dent of political economy. The editor of the Tribune, therefore, has done well to summon the clergy to answer Col. Ingersoll's statements concerning Matthew. The assertion that the New " Testament wae not written for hundreds of years after the Apostles were dust" is so wilct as to need no refutation, and would be laughed to 65 56 REPL Y TO INGERSOLL'S NE W LECTURE, scorn by the most radical critics in Germany. Intelligent skeptics would never think of making such a claim. The statement that " in the original manuscripts * * the epistles are addressed to nobody," might seem a little more plausible to one unacquainted with the facts. But all of Paul's epistles are addressed to some specific church or person. A man who cares for the truth would be likely to hide his head for shame after making such an entirely false affirmation. Ingersoll's Interpolations, " Wont Do." Col. Ingersoll's assertions about interpolations in the original text of the Ne*v Testament are unreliable with one exception. It is true that many scholars are inclined to reject Mark, xvi., 9-20, as not from the same author as that which precedes. Still, critics who are not considered ortho- dox, such as Schleiermacher, De Wette, Schwarz, Strauss, and Hilgenfeld, defend its authenticity. Even those who affirm that these verses were not written by Mark, claim for them a very early origin, since they are found in the Syriac version, and^are quoted by Irenseus (d. 202). It is of course very convenient for the opponents of future pun- ishment to assume that all the passages regarding retribu- tion in another world are interpolations, but the doctrine rests upon a large number of passages which are found in all the oldest manuscripts. I need not say that Col. Inger- soll makes an assertion without the slightest foundation in fact when he claims that Christ's answer to the young man who asked, What lack I yet? "Go sell that thou hast and give to the poor," is an " interpolation effected through the Church's greed of gain." These are a few specimens of the false statements in which the lecture abounds. Is Mr. Ingersoll as ignorant as he seems, or is he dishonest and reckless? Awaiting further developments, I prefer to call him BY PROF. CURTIS. 57 ignorant. He is like the blind leading the blind of whom Christ speaks. Turning now to Mr. Ingersoll's resume of Matthew's teaching, we find that the orator's half truths are as misleading as falsehoods. He tells his audience that he has read them every word in Matthew on the subject of salvation, and " there is not one word about believing any- thing. * * * If it was necessary to believe anything to go to Heaven, Matthew should have told us." This is a very superficial statement. We have no evidence that Christ clearly preached salvation through Himself until after His resurrection, and then He seems to have spoken to His disciples. Such preaching would have been entirely premature, as neither they nor the people would have been prepared to understand it, for even the twelve Apostles were looking for a temporal deliverance of the Jewish nation through Him. There can, however, be no difficulty in finding the doc- trine of salvation through faith in Christ in Matthew. He clearly teaches that there are two grand classes of men. In the Sermon on the Mount Christ says: " No man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will hold to the one and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and Mammon." Again Christ strikes a heavy blow at indifferentism when he affirms: "He that is not with Me is against Me; and he that gathereth not with Me scattereth." He repeatedly asserts that there will be a separation be- tween the righteous and the wicked. This he sets forth most impressively in several parables which He Himself explains. In the parable of the tares He says that " the good seed are the children of the Kingdom, but the tares are the children of the wicked one. * * * As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so shall it be in the end of this world. The Son of Man shall send forth His angels, 68 REPLY TO INUERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, and they shall gather out of His Kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity, and shall cast them into a furnace of fire." We have the same separation be- tween two classes of men in the parables- of the net, the foolish virgins, etc., and in that solemn description of the time when all nations shall be gathered before the Son of Man, " and He shall separate them one from another as the shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats." But Col. Ingersoll affirms that this very passage along with many others shows, according to Matthew, that men will be saved by good works without faith. It is evident, however, when we examine Christ's ideal of a righteousness which saves, that is utterly unattainable. He entirely rules out the righteousness of the largest and most respectable body of the Jewish nation, and says : " Except your right- eousness shall exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the Kingdom of Heaven." JS T ow, whether this refers to a degree or kind of righteousness, such a test excludes a large proportion of the human race from Heaven who would fall far below these Jewish moralists. Love and Obedience. It is clear from Christ's Sermon on the Mount that no merely untoward obedience to the law is sufficient. He says: "Whosoever shall look on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery already with her in his heart.*' He condemns the Pharisees because they " outwardly ap- pear to be righteous," while they are "full of iniquity." His conception of obedience to the law is not of an outward conformity to the ten commandments, for when a certain lawyer asked which is the greatest commandment in the law he replied: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment; and the second is BY PROF. CURTIS. 59 like anto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the proph- ets." But what man has ever kept these commandments? And if not, how then can we be saved? Indeed this is a question that the disciples put to Christ, according to Matthew, in view of the impossibility of ful- filling His requirements: ""Who then can be saved?'' Christ answers: ""With men this is impossible; but with God all tilings are possible," i. e., according to Meyer? Christ refers the disciples from human helplessness in ob- taining salvation to the Almighty power of converting and saving grace. That human righteousness is not sufficient^ for salvation is clearly set forth in the parable of the man who had not on a wedding garment. Matthew plainly teaches the necessity of conversion. He represents Christ as saying in so many words : " Except ye be coiverted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven," and as exhorting His hearers: "Enter ye at the straight gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat." .t naturally follows that Matthew should teach that Jesus is he Savior of sinners. Plence we read in the communi- caion which the angel made to Joseph, that he was to "call ELs name Jesus, for He shall save His people from their eiis." This is remarkable in view of the fact that the Jews wo*e looking for a temporal deliverer in the Messiah, and that tb Gospel according to Matthew seems to have been more eoecially designed for the Jews. Moreover, we find Christ fcgiving sins. It is related that one sick of the palsy waa bought to Christ, and that He, seeing their faith, said to tie sick of the palsy: "Son, be of good cheer; thy sins ae forgiven thee." The scribes of course thought Him of blasphemy. Jesus then, reading their thoughts, 60 REPLY TO INQERSOLLS NEW LECTURE, that they might know that the Son of Man had power on earth to forgive sins, commanded the sick of the palsy: , "Arise, -take up thy bed, and go unto thy house." In the institution of the Last Supper the ground of for- giveness is clearly stated as being in the bloocl'of Christ, lie Himself said as He took the cup, gave it ib His dis- 'ciples, and commanded them to drink of it: " This is My blood ol the New Testament, which is shed fo: many for the remission of sins." Creiner remarks that tnis is " the forgivness of sins on the part of God, with refeitenoe to the future judgment." The New Testament, or ]^ew Cove- nant, is here mentioned. We know what the Old Cove- nant was. It is described in the sixth chapter of modus. Peace-oiferings were offered. Moses took the book W the Covenant and read it before the people. They promied to keep it. Moses sprinkled the blood of the peace-off'irings upon them. The author of the Hebrews alludes to ihose two Covenants when he says: "For if the blood of Wlls and goats, and the ashes of an heifer sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, who, through the eternal spirit, offered Himilf without spot, purge your conscience from dead works (to serve the living God." Faith in Christ the Great Basis of Salvation. It is an interesting fact that Matthew, in his account |>f most of the cures wrought by Christ, represents Him is making faith the condition of His mighty works and |f His healing power. We read that in His own country did not many mighty works because of their unbelief, the Canaanitish woman He says: " O woman, great is tl faith; be it unto thee even as thou wilt." To the worn; with the issue of blood He said, "Daughter, be of goo| comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole." [Literallj BY PROF. CURTIS. 61 hath saved tliee.] To the blind men He said, " ' Believe ye tliat I ain able to do this?' They said unto Him, ' Yea r Lord.' Then touched He their eyes, saying, ' According to your faith be it unto you.' " Are we to suppose that Christ would mate faith a condition of the salvation of the body and not make it a condition of the salvation of the soul? especially vhen we find Him regarding the forgiveness o^ sins as of the first importance with the sick of the palsy > and grantirg him healing because of the faith of those who brought MM to Jesus? Any other conclusion is unreason- able. Indeed, we find Christ pronouncing a fearful doom on Chsmzin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum because they repented/ not on seeing His mighty works; that is, they did no? believe in Him, and so did not repent. But we have a more explicit declaration by Matthew when he says of Jeais: "In His name shall the Gentiles trust" [liter- arly bpe]. But they could not do this without faith. If Matthew has in mind the name which he uses hun- dreds of times, and far more than any other^ then the name in whch the Gentiles are to hope is Jesus, by which He was caled because he should save His people from their sins- Btt the most explicit passage is where Matthew quotes CHst as saying : " Whoever, therefore, shall confess Me beore men, him will I also confess before My Father which is inHeaven. But whosoever shall deny Me before men, him wl I also deny before My Father in Heaven." Cremer in h; Biblico-Theological Lexicon says : " The confessing of Grist is the outward expression of personal faith in Him. Tiis is contrasted with [the word translated deny] a/rneis- tai, to withhold, refuse, or withdraw such a confession. In closing this article I do not deny that Matthew lays eecial emphasis upon good works. They are not inconsis- mt with salvation by faith. No faith can be genuine which oes not manifest itself by them. But MatthQw nowhere 62 REPLY TO INQERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, claims that men are saved by works alone. Th 69 which the lecturer points out as showing the untrust- worthiness of the gospels. It is the advice the blessed Lord gives to "forsake father, and mother, and house, and lands and all the rest for the sake of Me and of My gospel." Now, then, there are crises, as every student of history knows, that occur in the world's history, and there are crises which occur, as every student of history knows, in a nation's history. It is not so long ago that there was the crisis in this nation's history. Twenty years ago from this very time the nation was just on the very brink of its crisis, and twenty years ago next year it was in the vortex of that crisis. Now, then, what would the lecturer, what would anyone have said, in that day, if a man had loved father, or mother, or brother, or friend, or house, or lands, or money, more than his country's honor, and more than his country's wel- fare? I was told, only yesterday, that he himself eulogized, at the conclusion of the war, those who had forsaken father and mother, and house and lands, and home, and gone to maintain their country against those whom they regarded as rebels ; and that time, when the Lord was here, was the crisis in the world's history, and it was necessary that those who were heralds of the cross should put the cause of God first, above everything, every consideration of father, or mother, or house, or lands, or neighbor, or friend, or any- thing whatsoever, besides what would carry that cause to the consummation to which it is destined, in the time which is to come. It has not reached it yet. We want something of the enthusiasm, we want something of the utter regardlessness of everything else which animated the first preachers of the cross. After quoting from the Sermon on the Mount and the 12th chapter of St. Matthew, also the 18th chapter, 3d and 4th verses, and about the rich young man to which I have REPLY TO INUKRSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, just referred, he says: "This is all there is in Matthew on the subject of salvation; not one word about belief, etc. It is the gospel of deeds, the gospel of charity, the gospel of self-denial." Of course it is; that is exactly what Christianity is; but what is the basis of the deed, the char- ity, and the self-denial? I assert that it is faith, belief in Jesus of Nazareth, the historical personage; that Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God, the revealer of the Father, the rightful king of mankind, and the Savior of man. And if any of you are disturbed on the subject of what is called biblical criticism, and are floundering about in a sea of doubt, let me here remind you of what is not 'an original remark by me, but was enunciated by Prebendary Jioe, in 1837, that <( ithe essence of the Christian religion is the historic life of Jesus of Nazareth." Don't forget it. Keep it in your minds as a sentence until you have thought it over and digested it. "The essence of the Christian relig- ion is the historic life of Jesus of Nazareth ;" and the sig- nificance of those facts the facts of His historic life is such as to lead men to believe that lie is their head and He is their Savior. That is the essence of the Christian religion. And now let ' me detain you while I read to you some- thing from the eloquent Father Lacordaire in his " Confer- ence sur Jesus Christ." How Shall We Account for the Kingdom of Christ 1 "The principal question, because it contains all, the past, the present, and the future, is this: The world having lived in idolatry in the times before Augustus, how has it become Christian since his time? These are the two sides that divide all history the side of anrfquity, and the side of later ages; the one idolater, plunged into the most licen- tious materialism; the other Christian, purified at the sources of a complete spirituality. In the ancient world BY DR. COURTNEY. 71 the flesh publicly prevailed over the spirit; in the present, the spirit publicly prevails over the fiesh. What has- caused this? "Who has produced a change so great and BO general in extent between the two periods of mankind? Who has so greatly modified the human form and the course of history? Your fathers adored idols; you, their posterity, descended from them by a corrupted blood ; you adore Jesus Christ. Your fathers were materialists even in their worship; you are spiritualists even in your pas- eions. Your fathers deny all that you believe; you deny all that they believe. Again I ask, what is the reason of this? There are no events without causes in history, any more than there is movement without motive power in mathematics. What is this historical cause which con- verted the idolatrous world into the Christian world, which gave Charlemagne as a successor to Nero ? You are com- pelled to know or at least to seek it. "We Catholics say that this prodigious change corres- ponds to the appearance upon earth of a man who called .himself the Son of God, sent to take away the sins of the world who preached humility, purity, penance, gentle- ness, peace; who lived piously among the poor and lowly; who died on a cross, with arms extended over us to bless us; who left His teachings and His example in the gospel; and who, having touched the souls of many, subdued their pride, and corrected their senses, has left in them a tran- quil joy so marvelous that its perfume has spread to the end of the world, and has won even sensuality. " We say this. Yes, a man, a single man, has founded the empire of Christians upon the ruins of this idolatrous empire; and we do not marvel thereat, because we have re- marked in history that all good as well as evil invariably springs from a single principle, from a man the depository of the hidden force of the demon, or the invisible force of God. 72 REPLY TO INGERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, Christ the Summit of History. " We say this, and we base our declaration upon uninter- rupted monuments which begin with Moses and reach to us; we appeal also to a publicity of thirty-two consecutive centuries ; we join together the Jewish people, Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church, or, rather, we do not join these, they appear before us closely linked together in a course of things sustained the one by the other; we appeal, in fine, to the whole web of history, and in the name of that immense monument which is absolutely necessary to admit and to explain, we say to you, Jesus Christ is the supreme expres- sion of history; He is its key and its revelation." * * * < And if a gleam of good faith remains in the depths of your soul, will you not be compelled to say with us: Yes, it is Christ on Calvary, in that blood which was shed that the renovation of the human soul began ? Therefore, gen- tlemen, before our epoch none dared to deny the historical reality of Jesus Christ, not one. Before you, long before you, Jesus Christ had enemies; for before you pride existed, and pride is the chief enemy of Jesus Christ. Before you Jesus Christ had enemies, for before you sensuality existed, and sensuality is the second enemy of Jesus Christ. Before you Jesus Christ had enemies, but before you egotism existed, and egotism is the third enemy of Jesus Christ. And yet when He appeared for the first time, when He came with His cross -to sap your pride, to insult your senses, to drag down your egotism to the very dust, what was said of Him? Pride, sensuality, egotism have now, as then, able men in their service Celsus, Pophyry, all the Alexandrian school, and the lovers of this life, and the throng of courtiers, ever ready to find in truth a secret enemy in power what said they of Christ? They pursued Him by putting His followers to death ; by deriding His life; by disputing His dogmas; by opprea- BY DR. COURTNEY. 73 si on dulled to the help of a cause which betrayed liberty; but their oooks, subsisting in a thousand remains by the aid of printing which I just now called the salvation of history their books confirm Him; not one of them has denied the reality of the life of Jesus Christ. You alone, coming eighteen centuries after, and thinking that time, which confirms history in its destroyer you have dared to battle against' the very light of the sun, hoping that every negation is at least a shadow, and that human folly, seeking a refuge against the severity of Jesus Christ, would accept of any arms as a defense, or of any shield as a protection. You have deceived yourselves. History subsists in spite of negation, as the heart of man subsists in spite of the debauching of the senses; and Jesus Christ remains under the shelter of unexampled publicity, and of a necessity to which there is no counterpoise, upon the summit of history. "Nevertheless, as a last hope you say to me: If it were a question of human events only, such as those of which the ordinary annals of nations are composed, it is manifest that the life of Jesus Christ contained in the gospels would be beyond all discussion. But in that life it is a question of events which bear no comparison with those we habitually witness. It is a question of God, who made Himself man, who died and rose again. How is it possible for us to ad- mit such strange things upon a mass of human evidence? For, in fine, public writings, public events, the public and general web of history, all this assemblage of proofs is purely human; and it is upon this mortal foundation that you base a history where all is superhuman. The base must evidently sink under such a weight. " Gentlemen, I do not undervalue the force of that objec- tion. Yes; I understand that when it is a question of the history of God it needs another pen than that which traces 74 REPLY TO INOERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, the history of the greatest man in the world. This is true. But I also believe that God has solved this objection by creating for His only Son, Jesus Christ, a history which is not human; that is to say, which, in its proportions, is so much above the nothingness of man that the ordinary power of history would evidently not have sufficed for i Where will you find such connection as that of the Jewish people, Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church? Where is there anything to be compared to it? And, moreover, without returning to what has already been said, where, among all the histories known to you, do you find any which for three centuries had witnesses who gave it the testimony of their blood? Where are the witnesses who have given their lives in favor of the authenticity of the greatest men or the greatest events? Who died to certify the history ot Alexander? Who died to certify the history of Caesar? Who? Not one. No one in the world has ever shed his blood to add another degree of evidence to the historical certainty of anything whatever. Men leave his- tory to take its course. But to form it with their blood, to cement historical testimony with human blood for three centuries, is what has never been witnessed, save on the part of Christians for Jesus Christ. We were interrogated during three centuries, and asked to declare who we were ; we answered: Christians. Then they said to us: Blaspheme the name of Christ, and we replied: We are Christians. They put us to death for this in frightful tortures; and in the hands of our executioners our last sigh exhaled, as a balm for the dying and a testimony for the living to all eternity, the name of Jesus Christ. We did not die for opinions, but for realities the very name of martyr proves it; and Pascal has well said: " I believe in witnesses who give the testimony of their blood." And, although there may be presumption in attempting to speak better than BY DR. COURTNEY. 78 Pascal, I shall, however, say something better: I believe in the human race dying for its faith." There, what do you think of it? Is it not as satisfactory as it is eloquent? Is it not as true as it is persuasive? Let that testimony stand and feel that you are standing upon the rock that, as he says, has been watered by the blood of Christian people, and then remembering that the essence of the Christian religion is the historic life of Jesus Christ, and that that historic life produced, by the signifi- cance of its facts, faith in the minds of the people who had to do with Jesus Christ, whether then, and so on down to the present day, it is better than the book of St. Matthew to say what the lecturer says that this is all there is in Matthew on the subject of salvation not one word about believing anything. The Facts of Faith A Few Words about "Believing-" Early in St. Matthew's gospel you- have the visit of the magi. They came saying, " Where is He that was born King of the Jews?" What was the reason of their coming? They believed Him to be the King. They would not have come else. Is it not true? It is only a question of fact. It is not a question of opinion. Peter, James, John, and Andrew are successively called by Him with the words, " Follow me." Wllf do they do it? Why do they leave their nets? Why do they leave their boats ? Why do they leave their father fUd hired servants and follow Him? Wliy? A fact. Was it because they did not believe He was the master? Why? No. That would have left them where they were before. It was because they did believe that He was the master that they followed Him. The Sermon on the Mount, to which the lecture refers, and from which he quotes, "By whom is it received?" By those who believe that the speaker of that sermon was the 76 REPLY TO INGERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, true teacher. If He were the true teacher, are we to treat Him as no scholars treated a teacher before; that is, to pick and choose, and say, " I take this because I like it, and I refuse to take that because I do not like it and do not understand it?" That is not the way people treat teachers. It is not the way in which you encourage your children to treat a teacher in the schools. It is not the way in which you treat any teacher when you read his book or when you listen to his lectures. At the end of that sermon, in the twenty-fourth verse of the seventh chapter, lie says: "Whosoever heareth these sayings of mine" a distinct evidence of the truth of that thing " and doeth them, I will tell you to whom he is like." Doeth what? What he likes? No. Doeth those say- ings of mine; doeth them all. And it is the true principle that is enunciated in another part of the Scripture, where it is said: "Faith cometh by hearing." Here comes a leper. " Lord, if thou wilt thou canst make me clean." What lies back of that declaration except faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and His power to cure even leprosy which was such a dire disease that when Naaman, afflicted with that disease, came to the King of Israel with a mes- sage from the King of Syria, the King of Israel said : " Am 1 a God to kill and make alive, that this man dost send unto me to cure a man of his leprosy? " And yet here was this leper. What was the principle that he had in hi& heart except faith in this name, this historic man, Jesus of Nazareth, that He could heal? Here is a centurion, and he says: "Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy grievously tormented." In the tenth verse of the eleventh chapter of Matthew what does the Lord say? The Lord says: "I tell you I have BY DR. COURTNEY. 77 not found so great faith, no not in Israel." And yet there is not a word about believing in anything or anybody! More Faith. Is faith not belief; and in whom did the centurion believe if he did not believe in Jesus Christ? He comes to reprove His disciples, those who had been trusting Him, and what does he say to them: " Oh, ye of little faith! " If they had great faith then they had great commendation. Then came a number of friends and they bring a man sick of the palsy and the first word the Lord says to him is : " Son, be of good cheer, thy sins be forgiven thee." And they begin to quarrel and say: "Who is this that forgiveth sins?" and thereupon He says: "Which is the easier to say, ' Thy sins are forgiven thee,' or to say, ' Rise, take up thy bed and walk;' but that ye may know that the Son of Man hath power on earth." He sayeth to the man sick of the palsy, " Arise and take up thy bed and go to thine house," etc. And they say, " We never saw it done in that fashion." What then? Didn't that lead to their having faith in the assertions that He had made that He had power on earth to forgive sins, and the forgiveness of sins is the first step to- ward salvation? And yet there is not a word about faith or believing in anybody, or believing in anything in Mat- thew except what the lecturer gave last Sunday. He called Matthew from being a receiver of customs to be an an evan- gelist by the words: "Follow me," and when He went and eat down among His friends they quarreled, and they said to Him: "Why sitteth thy master with publicans and sin- ners?" and He said: "I have come, not to call the right- eous but to call sinners to repentance." Can they repent if they do not believe in Him who brings the message? That is the ground of Matthew's repentance and he followed the Lord Jesus Christ. 78 REPL Y TO INGERSOLL'8 NJS W LECTURE, Here is a rnler who comes and says: " My little daughter IB even now dead. Come and lay Thy hand upon her and ehe shall live." What is the meaning of it? Had he not faith? And if he had an implicit faith, in whom, I pray you, had he faith and what was the character of that faith? Why did he trust Him? Why, because he had faith in His power to call back even from the dead. He gives a com- mission to His apostles to go and preach. He sends them out, these twelve, two and two. What is the ground of that commission except that they had faith in Him who gave it believed and that he had authority to give that com- mission. Read it over and see if there is not faith running right through it from beginning to end. And here comes John the Baptist with a message. He says: "Art thou He that is to come or look we for another?" And the Lord answered him back: "Yes;" and He says: " Go, and tell each one of the things that ye have seen, and aay, ' Blessed is he who hath not stumbled in me.' " Well, if a man is not stumbled in the Lord Jesus Christ as that poor lecturer was last Sunday afternoon if a man is not stumbled in the Lord Jesus Christ what is the neces- sary consequence? Why, that he believes in Him, is it not? Jt is only a question of fact ; not a question of interpretation, Here again he upbraids the city in which most of His mighty works are done. Why? Because they repented aot. But what was the ground of their not repenting? Why, because they did not believe it. Isn't thai so? He gives that invitation of the eleventh chapter, " Come unto me all ye that are weary and heavy-laden and I will give jou rest." Who is going to accept it? Those that believe in Him who gave it, and nobody else. Isn't it so? I ask it, does He not claim belief in Himself as the possessor and enunciator of principles of abstract truth, applying them to individual cases? For instance, in His treatment BY DR. COURTNEY. 70 of the Sabbath clay. For instance, again, in the question of whether He cast out devils by Beelzebub or by the finger of God. Doesn't He put the matter right clearly before them, so that they must believe it or refuse to believe it in spite of themselves, when He says: "The good tree brings forth good fruit and the evil tree brings forth evil fruit? " And you can't have one kind of fruit on the other kind of tree. That is an impossibility. What is the meaning of all the parables in the 13th chapter of St. Matthew if they are not a declaration of the principles of the Kingdom of Heaven, for the reception of which principles as being true it is absolutely essential you shall have faith and believe in Him who thus enun- ciates that faith. Is it not so? Only a question of fact, not a question of interpretation. "He did not many mighty works there." Why? Because of their unbelief. 1 am only in St. Matthew, and yet there is not a word about belief ! There is not a word about faith or belief in anything or anybody, except the things that the lecturer qupted, and he never referred to one of these things. The young woman of Cana comes to Him, and what does He say? " O, woman, great is thy faith. Be it unto thee even as thou wilt." It is a fact. Here is about the center of the gospel, and here comes something of a crisis. We would be content to stake it all upon this one thing : "The Lord said to His disciples, His Apostles, when they came into the town of Caesarea, * Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am? 'and they answering said, "Some say that Thou art Eli as; some Jeremias, and some, one of the prophets," and He said unto them: "But who say ye that I am?" and Peter, answering said, " Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God." Now just take it, and look at it, and think of it, and meditate upon it, and come to a conclusion, and tell me honestly, does that imply or does it not, whole- 80 7? EPL Y TO INGERSOLL'S NE W LECTURE, souled, unreserved, and absolute allegiance of Peter, in his whole being, body, soul, and spirit, as a human creature, to the Lord Jesus Christ, to Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah and Son of the living God. Answer it is a fact. And yet there is not a word about believing anything or anybody in Matthew. He goes up to what is called the Mount of Transfiguration, and there comes a voice, and the voice says : "This is My beloved Son in whom I am well J / pleased. Hear ye Him." And not believe? And not trust what He says? That voice is to come and to command the ascent of those who hear to propositions which they are perfectly familiar with; to declarations that they learned when they were in a rabbi's school. God Almighty is to speak from heaven, and to give his authority to the words that His dearly beloved Son, manifest in the flesh, shall utter when those words are nothing but what anybody else has uttered. Is that reasonable? I trow not. The lecturer is very fond of little children. Thank God for that ! And he refers to Christ's action toward little children, and the words that He speaks, repeating them. One of the things he says is this, * "Whosoever shall offend one of these little ones which believe in Me" it is in Matthew; it is not in Mark, or Luke, or John. It ig Matthew, which has nothing about belief in it. It ;s a fact The Lord says, in speaking to them, and in encouraging them to pray : " Where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst ot them." How are you going to apprehend that except by faith? He says again: "The Son of Man came to give His life as a ransom ior many ; but," says the lecturer, " I don't believe in for- giveness except on the principle that, if you forgive other people, God will forgive you." " If ye have faith, ye should be able to do" so and so, says the Lord. His great con- demnation of those who refused Him wa>: " The publicans YB DR. COURTNEY. 81 and the harlots go into the Kingdom of God before you, for they repented; but ye, when ye had seen Him, afterward did not repent, that ye did not believe Him." And yet there is not a word about faith in Matthew. You come down to the evidence of the institution of the supper, and the Lord says : " This is My blood of the New Testa- ment, which was shed for many for the redemption of sins." And I am to wait until the last quarter of the nineteenth century, in one of the greatest but the youngest cities of the world, to be told that I am to accept the unsupported statement of an individual against the assertion in the most solemn moment of the life of Him whom I believe to be God manifest in the flesh. You come to the last verses of the last chapter of St. Matthew, and what do they say? "All power is given unto Me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things thatsoever I have commanded you, and, so, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." I believe it. The Athanasian Creed. The lecturer, in his address, refers to the hymn, "iuit>- cumque Yult," commonly called " The Creed of St. Athan- asius." It is fortunate for him that he did not quote the Apostles' or Nicene Creeds, as they are almost wholly a recitation of facts. You remember that : " I believe in God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ His only begotten Son, our Lord, who wa conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried, descended into hell, and on the third day rose again, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father, and from thence shall come again to judge 6 82 REPLY TO INGERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, both the quick and the dead." It is all facts. It is simply a recitation of facts; -and facts are stubborn things. The difference between the so-called Athanasian creed and those two others is that, while they are simply a compilation of facts, it is a compilation of deductions from those facts, expressing the Christian doctrine in the language of scien- tific definition. Now you remember that, and then think of the way in which the lecturer treats it. To understand any science this is not what he says, but what I am saying, to under- stand any science it is necessary to have studied it. The definition respecting it will appear important to those who are learned, unimportant to those who are shallow, and gibberish to the ignorant, and yet this is the way in which the lecturer treats this creed. I will only give you one sample. I dare not give you more. I should consider it blasphemy to go through it from beginning to end. He quotes the early part of it, " We worship one God in trin- ity, and trinity in unity, dividing the substance," and then he says: " Of course you understand how that's done, and you see what a predicament that would leave the Deity in if you divided the substance." Now take physical science, and of it the one department of gravitation, and suppose that I, before a popular audi- ence like that gathered last Sunday afternoon, which had received no technical instruction, in order to show that the law of gi-avitation is an absurdity, should quote the propo- sition, " Any two masses in the universe attract each other with a force which varies according to thee squarnvere si of the distance," and say: "Of course you understand how that's done." You see how awkward it would be for the law of gravitation if you were to treat it by no other method than that. Would I be dealing fairly with it? Should I not betray one of two things either my own BY DR. COURTNEY. 83 animus or my ignorance? It is only a question, not a question of interpretation. Keep it down to that and remember in all that I say I say exactly what the lecturer said last Sunday afternoon. He said that he had no quarrel with Methodists or Presbyterians or Baptists. I suppose he would also have said Episcopalians; but he quarreled with Methodism and the principle of the Baptists, and Presbyterianism, and Episcopalianism, and all those things. I have no quarrel with the lecturer himself whatever, but I do quarrel with his principles, and I believe in my soul that they are false from beginning to end, and, if he will pardon me for saying so, shallow. I think they are tricky. I think the way in which the subject of the Athanasian Creed last Sunday afternoon was treated is worthy of the severest and calmest reprobation. And I will give you the realon why I thimk so: And this is the man to whom we are all to listen, whom we are to believe, rather than the wise and good of all the ages, and rather than He of whom the Church has ever, all along, been bearing us testimony. John Stuart Mill at Variance With Ingersoll on the Human Will. There is one thing that he said last Sunday afternoon that has often been said before, but it is very specious, and I want to point out where it is wrong. This is what he said: "You cannot believe as you wish. You must believe ae you must. You hear evidence, for and against, and the integrity of the soul stands at the scales and tells which side rises and which falls." I say this were all well enough if the soul stood in perfect integrity, but many things come in to prevent the soul being impartial. If I were to quote a sentiment against Col. Ingersoll which was expressed by one who was considered orthodox, I suppose he would put it on one side on account of the orthodoxy of the person who said it; and the more orthodox the individual the more resolutely he would refuse to accept it. But I pre- .84 REPLY TO INQERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, sume he will not quarrel with the authority that I shall bring forward. Certainly no clearer-headed and no colder man has existed in this century than John Stuart Mill. In his autobiography, page 169, this is what he says he is speaking of the time when the Benthamite doctrine of necessity broke down. He says: "I say that, though our character is formed by circumstances, our own desires can do much to shape those circumstances, and that what is really inspiring and ennobling in the doctrine of free will is the conviction that we have real power over the forma- tion of our own character; that our will, by influencing some of our circumstances, can modify some of our future habits or capabilities of willing." Now see what he says ana remember that he was about the most exact user of language that this century has pro- duced. He says that " Our own desires can do much to shape those circumstances, and, therefore, if our desires happen to yield to the bias toward evil, which we must con- fess, whatever kind of the ology we have adopted, as exist- ing in our nature, then that warps all our future judgment, and leads us to chocfse the evil instead of the good. And when when we stand at the scales and see one side rise and another side fall, we get an obliquity of vision which causes us to assert sometimes that evil is good and good is evil ; put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter." That is the answer I give to the assertion that " you cannot believe as you wish, and you must believe as you must." The Gospel of Good Cooking Does " Bob " Understand It? In conclusion of the lecture the lecturer said he would preach the " gospel of good fellowship friends all around, the observance of the laws of health," into which he inter- jected the remark that " it is a thousand times better to know how to cook food than it is to understand any theology in the world. I believe the lecturer makes his living by an BY DR. COURTNEY. 85 intellectual profession. Does he think that it is a thousand times more important that he should know how to cook food, than it is to understand any system of law in the world ? And if he does not think that, then you must take this remark about theology for what it is worth, according to his standpoint. He would have no forgiveness for any one, out absolute justice. He would have a gospel of intelligence. He would say : " Be honest, be forgiving, be merciful and stand upon those as rocks." Now I ask you where do you get an example and ground of good fellowship that is equal to that which we have in Jesus Christ? I ask you with regard to the gospel of intelligence where you have such teaching of principles of intelligence as in the teachings of Jesus Christ? Who is the teacher commanding honesty ^ pardon, and mercy, except Jesus Christ? And then, are we to refuse Him our allegiance who comes and proclaims Himself a ransom for us from the condemnation and power of some one through whom we can be forgiven and so redeemed that we go forth to sin no more, and turn around 'end contemptuously decline pardon, and discard the redemp- tion which we so urgently need? Go and preach that gos- pel through tbe wide world I mean the gospel he enun- ciated last Sunday afternoon and see where you will have any hearts that will rise up and hate the evil that is in themselves, and not only that has brought trouble upon them by the evil that they have done toward other people, but hate the evil that is in themselves, and learn to believe in that God and Father who is the source of all piety, as He is the source of all holiness, and whose life shall testify to the reality of the change that has taken place in transforming them from all that is evil into all that is good, and all that is lovely, and all that is honest, and all that is of good report. Preach it, and see if yon ; REPLY TO INGERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE. \\ ili get any such result as that which we do get, and have got all the ages along from the preaching of the gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ My dear brethren and sisters, I have detained you all this long time, merely with taking up some points of that long lecture last Sunday afternoon and endeavoring to show you how utterly untrustworthy the principles are upon which that lecture goes, and how little you have to fear, and I believe it in my soul you have but little to fear from any such attacks made upon the gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, or the trustworthiness of the record of this holy book. I must not so far trespass upon your patience as to keep you longer. I have been speaking for nearly an hour now, but I had hoped to have answered the question, " What must I do to be saved?" this morning. It has taken me longer than I expected. I will answer that question to- night. I will say what I have to say on the question, "What must I do to be saved?" and endeavor to show you that the answer which the Apostle gave, to that question, asked by the trembling jailer of Philippi, in the midnight, is a true and a reasonable and a trustworthy answer, and I trust to show that it is so. OF The Bishop Believes the Colonel is Making " True Progress." We have been treated quite recently to an exegesis of the New Testament by the well-known author of the lecture on "The Gods." This congregation will acknowledge with me that there is almost an infinity of distance between that atheistic pro- duction and the last lecture of Col. Ingersoll. He is cer- tainly moving forward with gigantic strides, and although the last lecture was full of the most objectionable sentences it was such an improvement over all his previous eiforts in the recognition of certain Christian -truths, and in his efforts to draw a distinction between Christ and His pro- fessed followers, that he ought to be taken by the hand and encouraged to go still further in the way of light and true progress. I am glad Mr. Ingersoll is not lost in the treacherous quicksands of Straussian unbelief. He evidently does not believe that the Church created Christ. He does homage in his way to this central character of all history. He has too much common sense to believe that such men as the Apostles, or any other men, could invent this glorious per- sonage. He knows that such a miracle would infinitely transcend all other miracles put together. I should greatly 87 88 REPLY TO INQERSOLVS NEW LECTURE, enjoy hearing him turn his brilliant powers of banter and sarcasm upon Strauss and all his school, who endeavored to evolve all the stupendous facts of Christianity out of the subjective consciousness of Christians in succeeding cen- turies. I hope to have that pleasure yet. Mr. Ingersoll is in error when he says: " This Testament was not written for hundreds of years after the Apostles were dust. * * * They depended upon the inaccuracy of legend, and for centuries these doctrines were blown about by the inconstant winds." The Facts in the Case. Now what are the facts in the case ? When the Church entered the second century, the year 101, or very near that period, she had the New Testament in her hands. A friend has called my attention to a communication from an agnostic champion of Col. Ingersoll in the Chicago Tribune, which was intended to forestall any answers the Chicago clergymen might make. He says : " The orthodox ministers will say, no doubt, that there is an unbroken line of evidence running back to the Apostolic age as to the au- thenticity of the Gospels. This is not true." He then states that the Rev. Brooke Foss Wescott, D. D., in his " History of the Canon of the New Testament," page 11, says " that it is an error to suppose that there is such an unbroken chain of evidence; that a few letters of consolation and warning, two or three apologies addressed to heathen, a controversy with a Jew, a vision, and a scanty gleaming of fragments of lost works, comprise all Christian literature to the middle of the second century " (that is, to 150 A. D.). This is simply another specimen of the special pleading so marked in the treatment of these important questions. Dr. "Wescott in this quotation refers to the whole canon of the New Testament, and not to the four gospels. " The evidence of the earliest Christian writers is not only un- BY BISHOP FALLOWS. 80 critical and casual, but also fragmentary," he says, in rela- tion to the entire canon. The point he makes is, that it needed a more critical and literary period to gather together the records which had been made in the earliest times the Apostolical times and determine their canonicity. The whole aim of his book is to show just the opposite of what this agnostic defamer by a garbled extract makes him as- sert viz.: that there is an unbroken line of evidence from the present time to the Apostolic age as to the authenticity of the gospels, and also of the other canonically received portions of the New Testament. This uncritical, casual, and fragmentary evidence of these early writers, along with the critical, close, and full treat- ment of the subject in succeeding years, from a historic highway on which we may triumphantly march over all the centuries, first to the upper chamber where the Pentecostal spirit inaugurated the visible Church for the nations, to the Cross of Calvary, and to the Mount of Beatitudes. Our Divine Lord wrote no recorded word, but He wrote Him- self upon the imperishable tablets of -His disciples' hearts. They were His loving epistles. It was their sole supreme business to make known to the world what He had said, done, and suffered. Eye-witnesses and heart-witnesses, they went about preaching the facts and teaching the truths of Christianity. Their mode of communication was at first, perhaps, purely oral. Undoubtedly their words in some instances were taken down in writing by the hearers, as Veil as treasured up in their remembrance. These records, brief and fragmentary, multiplied. Churches began to multiply. In the year 64 A. D., Tacitus says the Chris- tians at Rome were a vast multitude. Pliny, in 112 A. D., in a. letter to Trajan, refers to their great nnmber in the remote province of Bithynia. Irenseus and Tertullian, 150- 180 A. D., state that the Christian brethren were thickly 90 REPLY TO INQERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, scattered over the known world. Out of this original oral Gospel, and these written records of the Apostles' teach- ing, the first three Gospels were constructed. The un_ broken tradition of the Church is that they were written by the persons whose names they bear. There is not the slightest ground for the presumption of a doubt in the case of Matthew. The uniform testimony is that he wrote his gospel in the Hebrew or the Syrio- Chaldaic language. No testimony could be more complete. The gospel we have is in Greek. We do not know who translated it; whether it was Matthew himself or some other person. There was an urgent need of such transla tion, for Greek was the language of the world's literature and the medium of communication between different nations. (Mr. Ingersoll made a woful lapse when he attempted a witticism upon the alleged ignorance of Greek by the Evangelists.) The unbroken line of evidence is that the gospel of Matthew that we he have is either the gospel written in Greek by that Evangelist or a translation by some other person made while the Evangelist was living. Not the slightest shade of suspicion, so far as we know, was thrown .upon, the genuineness of this gospel as we have it So far as known, there are not fifteen manuscripts of Plato extant. There are not as many of Herodotus. Not one of them is older than the ninth century. Nearly a thousand manuscripts of the New Testament have been consulted by critics, and at least fifty of them are more than a thousand years old, and some are over 1,500 years old. The most competent scholars fix the date of the Syriac version within the first half of the second century, that is within 150 A. D. BY BISHOP FALLOWS. 9! The Codex Vaticanus was written about tlie year 300 A. IX, and the Codex Alexandrinus about '325 A. D. The Codex Sinaiticus about 30',. A. D., or a little earlier. Of a portion of the three last manuscripts I give as near as possible, in the illustrations before you, a fac-simile on an enlarged scale. Irenseus in his youth had been a companion of Polycafp, the disciple of St. John. He makes 400 quotations from the Four Gospels. Tertullian (A. D. 160) gives about 200 quotations. Fabian (A. D. 190) gives a " Harmony of the Foui Gospels." How Celsus, the Ingersoll of the Second Century, Did a Great Work fox the Church. Celsus was the Robert Ingersoll of the second century. He was an acute man, a witty and eloquent conversational- ist, rather fond of stretching facts and principles when it served his purpose, and not caring always to know the facts. He lived a little more than 130 years after the ascension of the Divine Founder of Christianity. He at- tacked the Christians of his age with banter, ridicule and sophisms. He hunted up every difficulty in the Christians' pathway, and magnified all seeming discrepancies iiito irreconcilable contradictions. His attacks upon the Chris- tian system live only in the famous reply to them made by Origen. This unbeliever, although he caused great an- noyance to the believers in Christ living in his day, and seemed to many to be disturbing the foundations of the Christian faith, rendered more real service to Christianity than any father of undisputed orthodoxy in the Church. He admits all the grand facts and doctrines of the gospel, as they were preached by the Apostles, and contained in their acknowledged writings, for the sake of opposing them. He makes in his attacks eighty quotations from the 'New Tes- 02 REPLY TO INGER80LLS NEW LECTURE, tment, and appeals to it as containing the sacred writings *of Christians, universally received by them as credible and Divine. , He is, therefore, the very best witness we can summon tto prove that the New Testament "was not written hun- dreds of years after the Apostles were dust;" but in less than a century and a half had been received by the Chris- tian Church all over the world. He expressly quotes both the synoptical gospels, as they are termed (the first three gospels), and the Gospel of St. John. It was stated in the Pan-Presbyterian Council at Phila- delphia, last Friday, by the Rev. Dr. Humphrey, a gentle- man whom I know to be profound and scholarly, "that while the Bible contains the names of about four thousand persons and places, in not a single instance had modern discovery, through explorations in ancient places, shown one of the four thousand names to have been a myth or one of the mini to have been misplaced." I can imagine I hear Mr. Ingersoll, in his emphatic way, saying, " I like that; good. A Bible that is so true to historic fact demands my attention. It is a proof presumptive that the gospel records are true." . IKGERSOLL'S NEW DEPARTURE. HIS LECTURE ENTITLED ""WHAT SHALL WE DO TO B& SAVED?" Delivered in McVicker's Theatre, Chicago, Sept. 19, 1880. [From the Chicago Times, Verbatim Report,] LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:^ Fear is the dungeon of the mind, and superstition is a dagger with which hypocrisy assassinates the soul.J Courage is liberty. I am in favor of absolute freedom of thought. In the realm of the mind every one is a monarch. Every one is robed, sceptered, and crowned, and every one wears the purple of authority. I belong to the republic of intellectual liberty, and only those are good citizens of that republic who de- pend upon reason and upon persuasion, and only those are traitors who resort to brute force. Now, I beg of you all to forget just for a few moments that you are Methodists or Baptists or Catholics or Presbyterians, and let us for an hour or two remember only that we are men and women, And allow me to say "man" and "woman" are the highest titles that can be bestowed upon humanity. "Man" and " woman." And let us if possible banish all fear from the mind. Do not imagine that there is some being in the'infinite expanse who is not willing that every man and woman should think for himself and herself. Do no not imagine that there is any being who would give to his children the holy torch of reason and then damn them for following where the holy light led. Let us have courage. Priests have invented a crime called " blasphemy," and behind [ii 3 INOERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, that crime hypocrisy has crouched for thousands of years. There is but one blasphemy, and that is injustice. There is but 0119 worship, and that is justice! You need not fear the anger of a God whom you cannot injure. Rather fear to injure your fellow-men. Do not be afraid of :i Berime you cannot commit. Rather be afraid of the one that you Hiay commit. There was a Jewish gentleman went into a restaurant to get his dinner, and the devil of temptation whispered in his ear: "Eat some bacon." He knew if there was anything in the universe calculated to excite the wrath of the Infinite Being, who made every shining star, it was to see a gentleman eating bacon. He knew it, and he knew the Infinite Being was looking, and that he was the Infinite Eavesdropper of the universe. But his appetite got the better of his conscience, as it often has with us all, and he ate that bacon. He knew it was wrong. When he went into that restaurant the weather was delightful, the sky was as blue as June, and when he came out the sky was covered with angry clouds, the lightning leaping from one to the other, and the earth shaking beneath the voice of the thunder. He went back into that restaurant with a face as white as milk, and he said to one of the keepers: " My God, did you ever hear such a fuss about a little piece of bacon ?" As long as we harbor such opinions of Infinity ; as long as we imagine the heavens to be filled with such tyranny, so long the sons of men will be cringing, intellectual cowards. Let us think, and let us honestly express our thought. Do not imagine for a moment that I think people who disagree with me are bad people. I admit, and I cheerfully admit, that a very large proportion of mankind and a very large majority, a vast number are reasonably honest. I believe that most Christians believe what they teach ; that most ministers are endeavoring to make this world better. I do not pretend to be better than they are. It isan intellectual question. It is a question, first, 6f in- tellectual liberty, and after that, a question to be settled at the bar of human reason. I do not pretend to be better than they are. Probably I am a good deal worse than many of them, but that is not the question. The question is: " Bad as I am, have I a right to think?" And I think I have, for two reasons. First, I can't help it. And secondly, I like it. The whole ques "WHAT SHALL WE DO TO BE SAVED?" 3 tion is right at a point. If I have not a right to express my thoughts, who has? "Oh" they say, "we will allow you, we will not burn you." "All right ; why won't you burn me ?" "Because we think a decent man will allow others to think and to express his thought." "Then the reason you do not persecute me for my thought is that you believe it would be infamous in you !" "Yes." "And yet you worship a God who will, as you declare, punish me forever." The next question then is : Can I commit a sin against God by thinking? If God did not intend I should think, why did He give me a "thinker." Now, then, we have got what they call the Chris- tian system of religion, and thousands of people wonder how lean be wicked enough to attack that system. There are many good things about it, and I shall never attack anything that I believe to be good! I shall never fear to attack anything I honestly believe to be wrong ! "We have, I say, what they call the Christian religion, and, I find, just in proportion that nations have been religious, just in the proportion they have gone back to barbarism. I find that Spain, Portugal, Italy are the three worst nations in Europe ; I find that the nation nearest infidel is the most prosperous France. And so I say there can be no danger in the exercise of absolute intellectual freedom. I find among ourselves the men who think at least as good as those who do not. We have, I say, a Christian system, and that system is founded upon what they are pleased to call the "New Testament." "Who wrote the New Testament ? I don't know. "Who does know ? Nobody ! We have found some fifty-two manuscripts containing portions of the New Testament. Some of those manuscripts leave out five or six books many of them. Others more ; others less. No two of these manuscripts agree. Nobody knows who wrote these manuscripts. They are all written in Greek; the disciples of Christ/ knew only Hebrew. Nobody ever saw, so far as we know, one of the original Hebrew manuscripts. Nobody ever saw any- body who had seen anybody who had heard of anybody that had seen anybody that had ever seen one of the original Hebrew man- uscripts. No doubt the clergy of your city have told you these facts thousands of times, and they will be obliged to me for having 4 INUSRSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, repeated them once more. These manuscripts are written in what are called capitalG reek letters. Tluy are called Uncial charac- ters ; and the New Testament was not divided into chapters and rerses, even, until the year of grace 1551. Kecollect it. In the original the manuscripts and gospels are signed by no- body. The epistles are addressed to nobody ; and they are signed by the same person. All the addresses, all the pretended ear- marks showing to whom they are written and by whom they are written are simply interpolations, and eveiybody who has studied the subject knows it. It is further admitted that even these manuscripts have not been properly translated, and they have a syndicate now making a new translation ; and I suppose that I cannot tell whether I really believe the Testament or not until I see that new trans- lation. You must remember, also, one other thing. Christ never wrote a solitary word of the New Testament not one word. There is an account that he once stooped and wrote something in the sand, but that has not been preserved. He never told anybody to write a word. He never said : " Matthew, remember this. Mark, don't forget to put that down. Luke, be sure that in your gospel you have this. John, don't forget it." Not one word. And it has always seemed to me that a Being coming from another world, with a message of infinite importance to mankind, should at least have verified that message by his own signature. Why was nothing written ? I will tell you. In my judgment they expected the end of the world in a very few days. That gen- eration was not to pass away until the heavens should be rolled up as a scroll, and until the earth should melt with fervent heat. That was their belief. They believed that the world was to be destroyed, and that there was to be another coming, and that the saints were then to govern the world. And they even went so far among the Apostles, as we frequently do now before election, as to divide out the offices in advance. This Testament was not written for hundreds of years after the Apostles were duafc. These facts lived in the open mouth of credulity. They were in the waste- baskets of forgetful ness. They depended upon the inaccuracy of legend, and for centuries these doctrines and stories were blown about by the inconstant winds. And, finally, when reduced to writing, some gentleman would write by the side of the passage bis idea of it, and the next copyist would put that in as a part of "WHAT SHALL WE DO TO BE SAVED T 5 the text. And, finally, when it was made, and the Church got in trouble, and wanted a passage to help it out, one was interpolated to order. So that now it is among the easiest tumgs in the world to pick out at least one hundred interpolations in the Testament. 4_nd I will pick some of them out before I get through. And let rne 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, to that great and serene man I gladly pay the homage 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 out of the human mind. Had I lived at that time I would have been His friend, and should He come again He would not find a better friend than I will be. That is for the man. For the theological creation I have a dif- ferent feeling. If He was, in fact, God, He knew that there was no such thing as death. He knew that what we call death was but the eternal opening of the golden gates of everlasting joy ; and it took no heroism to face a death that was simply eternal life. But when a man, when a poor boy sixteen years of age, goes upon the field of battle to* keep his flag in heaven, not knowing but that death ends all not knowing but that, when the shadows creep over him, the darkness will be eternal there is heroism. And so for the man who, in the darkness, said: "My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?" for that man I have nothing but respect, admiration, and love. A while ago I made up my mind to find out what was necessary for me to do in order to be saved. If I have got a soul, I want it saved. I do not wish to lose anything that is of value. For thou sands of years the world has been asking that question : " What shall we do to be saved ? " Saved from poverty? No. Saved from crime ? No. Tyranny? No. But " What shall we do to be saved from the eternal wrath of the God who made us all ?" If God made us, He will not destroy us. Infinite wisdom never made a poor investment. And upon all the works of an infinite God, a dividend must finally be declared. The pulpit has cast a shadow over even the cradle. The doctrine of endless punish- ment has covered the cheeks of this world with tears. I despise it, and I defy it. 6 INGERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, I made up my mind, I say, to see what I had to do in order to save my soul according to the Testament, and thereupon I read it. I read the gospel, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. But I foun.l that the Church had been deceiving me. I found that the clergy did not understand their own book. I found that they had been building upon passages that had been interpolated. I found that they had been building upon passages that were entirely untrue. And I will tell you why I think so. The first of the these gospels was written by St. Matthew, according to the claim. Of course he never wrote a word of it. Never saw it. Never heard of it. But, for the purposes of this lecture, I will admit that he wrote it. I will admit that he was with Christ for three years; that he heard much of His conversa- tion during that time, and that he became impregnated with the doctrines, or dogmas, and the ideas of Jesus Christ. Now let us see what Matthew says we must do in order to be savad. And I take it that, if this be true, Matthew is as good an authority as any minister in the world. The first thing I find upon the subject of salvation is in the fifth chapter of Matthew, and is embraced in what is commonly known as the Sermon on the Mount. It is as follows : " Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." Good ! " Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain rnercy." Good ! "Whether they belonged to any church or not; whether they believed the Bible or not. " Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy." Good ! " Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God. Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake," (that's me, little) " for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven." In the same sermon he says : " Think not that I am come to dastroy the law or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill." And then he makes use of this remarkable language, al- most as applicable to-day as it was then : " For I say unto you that except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees ye shall in no wise enter into the King- dom of Heaven." Good! In the sixth chapter I find the following, and it conies directly after the prayer known as the Lord's prayer: "For if you forgive men their trespasses your Heavenly Father will also forgive you; "WHAT SHALL WE DO TO JiH SAVED?" f but if ye forgive not men their trespasses neither will your Father forgive your trespasses." I accept the conditions. There is an offer; 1 accept it. "If you will forgive men that trespass against you, God will forgive your trespasses against Him. I accept, and 1 never will ask any God to treat me any better than I treat my fellow-men. There is a square promise. There is a contract. If you will forgive others God will forgive you. And it does not say you must believe in the Old Testament, nor be baptized, nor join the Church, nor keep Sunday. It simply says, if you forgive others God will forgive you ; and it must of necessity be true. Xo God could afford to damn a forgiving man. [A voice : " Will He for- give Democrats?"] Oh, certainly. Let me say right here that I know lots of Democrats, great, broad, whole-souled, clever men ; and I love them. And the only bad thing about them is that they vote the Democratic ticket. And I know lots of Eepublicans so mean and narrow that the only decent thing about them is that they vote the Republican ticket. Now let me make myself plain upon that subject, perfectly plain. For instance, I hate Presbyterianism, but I know hundreds of splendid Presbyterians. Understand me. I hate Methodism, and yet I know hundreds of splendid Methodists. I dislike a cer- tain set of principles called Democracy, and yet I know thousands of Democrats that I respect and like. I like a certain set of prin- ciples that is, most of them, called Eepublicanism, and yet I know lots of Republicans that are a disgrace to those principles. I do not war against men. I do not war against persons. . I war against certain doctrines that I believe to be wrong. And I give to every other human being every right that I claim for myself. Of course I did not intend, to-day, to tell what we must do in the election for the purpose of being saved. The next thing that I find is in the seventh chapter and the second verse: "For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again," Good! That suits me! And in the twelfth chapter of Matthew : "For whosoever shall do the will of my Father that is in heaven, the same is my brother and sister and mother. For the Son of Man shall come in the- glory of His Father with His angels, and then He shall reward every man according ' To the church he belongs to? !No. To the manner in which he was baptised ? Xo. According to his creed ? 2s r o. "Then he shall reward every man according to- his works." Good! I subscribe to that doctrine. S INQERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, And in th^ si-cteenth chapter: "And Jesus called a little child to Him and atood him in the midst; and said, 'Verily, I say unto you. except ye become converted and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.' " I do not wonder that a reformer in His day that met the Scribes and Pharisees -and hypocrites, I not wonder that at last He turned to children and said : "Except ye become as little children," I do not wonder. And yet, see what children the children of God have been. What .an interesting dimpled darling John Calvin was. Think of that prattling babe known as Jonathan Edwards ! Think of the infants that founded the Inquisition, that in vented instruments of torture to tear human flesh. They were the ones who had become as little children. So I find in the nineteenth chapter: "And behold, one came and said unto Him : 'Good master, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life ?' and he said unto him, 'why call'st thou Me good ? There is none good but one, and that is God, but if thou will enter into eternal life, keep the commandments,' and lie said unto Him, ' Which ?' " Now, there is a pretty fair issue. Here is a child of God asking God what is necessary for him to do in order to inherit eternal Jife. And God says to him : Keep the commandments. And the diild said to the Almighty: "Which?" N"ow if there ever had been an opportunity given to the Almighty to furnish a gentle- man with an inquiring mind with the necessary information upon that subject, here was the opportunity. "He said unto Him. which?" And Jesus said: "Thou shalt do no murder; thou shalt not commit adultery; thou shalt not steal; thou shalt not bear false witness ; honor thy father and mother ; and, thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." He did not say to him : " You must believe in Me that I am the only begotten Son of the living God." He did not say: "You must be born again." He did not say : " You must believe the Bible." He did not say : " You must remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy." He simply said: "Thou shalt do no murder. Thou shalt not commit adultery. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not bear false witness. Honor thy father and thy mother; and, thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." And thereupon the young man, who I think was a little " fresh," and probably mistaken, said unto Him : " All these things have I kept from my youth up." I don't believe that. "WHAT SHALL WE DO TO BE SAVED}" 9 Now comes in an interpolation. In the old times when the Church got a little scarce for money, they always put in a passage praising poverty. So they had this young man ask: " What lack I yet?" And Jesus said unto him : " If thou \vilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast and give it to the poor, and thou shalt have treasures in. heaven." The Church has always been willing to swap of treasures in heaven for cash down. And when the next verse was written the Church must have been nearly dead-broke. "And again I say unto you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." Did you ever know a wealthy disciple to unload on account of that verse ? And then comes another verse, which I believe is an interpola- tion : " And every one that has forsaken houses, or brethren or sisters, or father or mother, or wife or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit ever- lasting life." Christ never said it. Never. "Whosoever slsall forsake father and mother." Why He said to this man that asked him: "What shall I do to inherit eternal life?" among other things, He said: " Honor thy father and thy mother." And we turn over the page and lie says: "If you will desert your father and your mother you shall have everlasting life." It won't do. If you will desert your wife and your little children, or your lauds the idea of putting a house and lot on equality with wife and children. Think of that! I do not acce.pt the terms. I will never desert the one I love for the promise of any God. It is far more important that we shall love our wives than that we shall love God. And I will tell you why. You cannot help Him. You can help her. You can fill her life with the perfume of perpetual joy. It is far more important that you love your children than that you love Jesus Christ. And why ? If He is God you cannot help him, but you can plant a little ilower of hap- piness in every footstep of the child, from the cradle until you die in that child's arms. Let me tell you to-day it is far more im- portant to build a home than to erect a church. The holiest temple beneath the stars is a home that love has built. And the holiest altar in all the wide world is the fireside around which gather father and mother and children. There was a time when people believed that infamy. There was a time when they did desert fathers and mothers, and wives and children. St. Augustme says to the devotee: "Fly to the 10 INQERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, desert, and though your wife put her arms around your neck, tear her hands away ; she is a temptation of the devil. Though your father and mother throw their bodies athwart your threshold, step over them ; and though your children pursue and with weeping eyes beseech you to return, listen not. It is the temptation of the evil one. Fly to the desert and save your soul." Think of such a soul being worth saving. While I live I propose to stand by the folks. Here there is another condition of salvation. I find it in the 25th chapter: "Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungred and ye gave Me ( meat ; I was thirsty and ye gave Me drink ; I was a stranger and ye took Me in ; naked and ye clothed Me ; and I was sick and ye visited Me ; and I was in prison, and ye came unto Me." Good! And I tell you to-night that God will not punish with eternal thirst the man who has put the cup of cold water to the lips of his neighbor. God will not allow to live in eternal nakedness of pain the man who has clothed others. For instance, here is a shipwreck, and here is some brave sailor stands aside and allows a woman whom he never saw before to take his place in the boat, and he stands there, grand and serene as the wide sea, and he goes down. Do you tell me there is any God who will push the life-boat from the shore of eternal life, when that man wishes to step in ? Do you tell me that God can be unpitying to the pitiful, that He can be unforgiving to the for- giving? I deny it; and from the aspersions of the pulpit I seek to rescue the reputation of the Deity. Now, I have read you everything in Matthew on the subject of salvation. That is all there is. Not one word about believing anything. It is the gospel of deed, the gospel of charity, the gospel of self-denial ; and if only that gospel had been preached, persecu- tion never would have shed one drop of blood. Not one. Now, according to the testimony, Matthew was well acquainted with Christ. According to the testimony, he nad been with Him, and His coinpanio)! for years, and if it was necessary to believe anything in order to get to heaven, Matthew should have told us. But he forgot it. Or he didn't believe it. Or he never heard of it. You can take your choice. The next is Mark. Now let us see what he says. And for the purpose of this lecture it is sufficient for me to say that Mark "WHAT SHALL WE DO TO BE SAVED f" 11 agrees, substantially, with Matthew, that God will be merciful to the merciful ; that He will be kind to the kind ; that He will pity the pitying. And it is precisely, or substantially, the same as Matthew until I come to the 16th verse of the 16th chapter, and then I strike an interpolation, put in by hypocrisy, put in by priests, who longed to grasp with bloody hands the sceptre of uni- versal authority. Let me read it to you. And it is the most infamous passage in the Bible. Christ never said it. No sensible man ever said it. "And He said unto them" that is, unto His disciples "Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned." Now, I propose to prove to you that that is an interpolation. Now how will I do it? In the first place, not one word is said about belief in Matthew. In the next place, not one word about belief in Mark, until I come to that verse. And when is that said to have been spoken ? According to Mark, it is a part of the last conversation of Jesus Christ just before, according to the account, He ascended bodily before their eyes. If there ever was any important thing happened in this world, that is one of them. If there was any conversation that people would be apt to recollect, it would be the last conversation with God before He rose through the air and seated Himself upon the throne of the Infinite. We have in this Testament five accounts of the last conversation hap- pening between Jesus Christ and His apostles. Matthew gives it. And yet Matthew does not state that in that conversation He said : " Whoso believeth and is baptized shall be saved, and whoso believ- eth not shall be damned." And if He did say those words, they were the most important that ever fell from His lips. Matthew did not hear it, or did not believe it, or forgot it. Then I turn to Luke, and he gives an account of this same last conversation, and not one word does he say upon that subject. Now it is the most important thing, if Christ said it, that He ever said. Then I turn to John, and he gives an account of the last conver- sation, but not one solitary word on the subject of belief or unbe- lief. Not one solitary word on the subject of damnation. Not one. Then I turn to the first chapter of Ihe Acts, and there I find an. account of the last conversation ; and in that conversation there i 12 f$GBR&OLL'8 NEW LECTURE, not one word upon this subject. Now I say that that demonstrates that the passage in Mark is an interpolation. What other reason have I got ? That there is not one particle of sense in it. Why? Mo man can control his belief. You hear evidence for and against, and the integrity of the soul stands at the scales and tells which side rises and which side falls. You cannot believe as you wish. You must believe as you must. And He might as well have said: "Go into all the world and preach the gospel, and whosoever has red hair shall be saved, and whosoever hath not shall be damned." I have another reason. I am much obliged to the gentleman who interpolated these passages. I am much obliged to him that he put in some more two more. Now hear : "And these signs shall follow them that believe." Good! "In My name shall they cast out devils. They shall speak with new tongues, 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." Bring on your believer! Let him cast out a devil. I do not claim a large one. Just a " little one for a cent." Let him take up serpents. "And if he drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt him." Let me mix up a dose for the theological believer, and if it does not hurt him I'll join a church. "Oh! but," they say " those things only lasted through that Apostolic age." Let us see. Go into all the world and preach the gospel, and whosoever be- lieves and is baptised shall be saved, and these signs shall follow them that believe." How long? I think at least until they had gone into all the world. Certainly these signs should follow until all the world had been visited. And yet if that declaration was in the mouth of Christ, he then knew that one-half of the world was unknown and that He would be dead 1,492 years before His disciples would know that there was another world. And yet he said, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel," and He knew then that it would be 1,492 years before anybody went. Well, if it was worth while to have signs follow believers in the old world, surely it was worth while to have signs follow believers in the new world. And the very reason that signs should follow would be to con- vince the unbeliever, and there are as many unbelievers now as ever, and the signs are as necessaiy to-day as they ever were. I would like a few myself. " WHAT SHALL WE DO TO BE SA VED ?" 15 This frightful declaration, "He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned," has filled the world with agony and crime. Every letter of this pas- sage has been sword and fagot ; every word has been dungeon and chain. That passage made the sword of persecution drip with innocent blood for ten centuries. That passage made the horizon of a thousand years lurid with the flames of fagots. That passage contradicts the Sermon on the Mount. That passage travesties the Lord's Prayer. That passage turns the splendid religion of deed and duty into the superstition of creed and cruelty. I deny it. It is infamous I Christ never said it! Kow I come to Luke, and it is sufficient to say that Luke substantially agrees with Matthew and with Mark. Substantially agrees, as the evidence is read. I like it. "Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father is also merciful." Good! "Judge not and ye shall not be judged. Condemn not and ye shall not be condemned ; forgive and ye shall be forgiven." Good I "Give and it shall be given unto you good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over." Good ! I like it. "For the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again." He agrees substantially with Mark ; he agrees substantially with Matthew ; and I come at last to the nineteenth chapter, "And Zaccheus stood and said unto the Lord, ' Behold, Lord, the one-half of my goods I give to the poor, and if I have taken any- thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him four-fold/ And Jesus said unto him, 'This day is salvation come to this house.' " That is good doctrine. He didn't ask Zaccheus what he be- lieved. He didn't ask him, " Do you believe in the Bible ? Do you believe in the five points ? Have you ever been baptised sprink- led ? Oh! immersed. " Half of my goods I give to the poor, and if I have taken anything from any man by false accusation, I restore him four- fold." ' And Christ said, ' This day is salvation come to this house.' " Good ! I read also in Luke that Christ when upon the cross forgave His murderers, and that is considered the shining gem in the crown of His mercy that He forgave His murderers. That He forgave the men who drove the nails in His hands, in His feet, that plunged a spear in His side ; the soldier that in the hour of death 14 TNQERSOLUS NEW LECTURE, offered Him in mockery the bitterness to drink ; that He forgave them all freely, and that yet, although He would forgive them, He will in the nineteenth century damn to eternal tire an honest man lor the expression of his honest thoughts. That won't do. I find too, in Luke, an account of two thieves that were crucified at the same time. The other gospels speak of them. One says they both railed upon Him. Another says nothing about it. In Luke we are told that one did, but one of the thieyes looked and pitied Christ, and Christ said to that thief : " This day shalt thou meet me in Paradise." "Why did He say that? Because the thief pitied Him. And God cannot afford to trample beneath the feet of His infinite wrath the smallest bios som of pity that ever shed its perfume in he human heart! Who was this thief? To what church did he belong? 1 don't know. The fact that he was a thief throws no light on that question. Who was he? What did he believe? i dont know. Did he believe in the Old Testament? In the mira- cles? I don't know. Did he believe that Christ was God? I don't know. Why, then, was the promise made to him that he should meet Christ in Paradise. Simply because he pitied inno- cence suffering on the cross. God cannot afford to damn any man that is capable of pitying anybody. And now we come to John, and that is where the trouble com- mences. The other gospels teach that God will be merciful to the merciful, forgiving to the forgiving, kind to the -kind, loving to the loving, just to the just, merciful to the good. ]^ow we come to John, and here is another doctrine. And allow me to say that John was not written until centuries after the others. This, the Church got up : "And Jesus answered and said unto him: 'Furthermore I say unto thee that except a man be born again he cannot see the, Kingdom of God.'" Why didn't He tell Matthew that? Why didn't He tell Luke that? Why didn't He tell Mark that? They never heard of it or forgot it, or they didn't believe it. 4i Except a man be born of water and of the. Spirit he cannot enttT into the Kingdom of God." Why ? " That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, ' ye must "WHAT SHALL WE DO TO BE SAVJSDf 15 be born again.' That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the spirit is spirit," and He might have ad ded that which is born of water is water. "Marvel not that I say unto thee, 'ye must be born again.'" And then the reason is given, and I admit I did not understand it myself until I read the reason, and when you read the reason, you will understand it as well as I do; and here it. is: "The wind bloweth where it listeth, andthou hearest the sound thereof, and canst not tell whence it cometh and whither it goeth." So, I find in the b ook of John the idea of the real presence. So I find in the book of John, that in order to be saved we must eat of the flesh and we must drink of the blood of Jesus Christ, and if that gospel is true, the Catholic Church is right. But it is not true. I cannot believe it, and yet for all that it may be true. But I don't believe it. Neither do I believe there is any God in the universe who will damn a man simply for expressing his belief. ""Why," they say to me, "suppose all this should turn out to be true, and you should come to the day of judgment and find all these things to be true. What would you do then ?" I would walk up like a man, and say, " I was mistaken." "And suppose God was about to pass judgment on you, what would you say ?" I would say to him, "Do unto others as you would that others should do unto you." Why not ? I am told that I must render good for evil. I am told that if smitten on one cheek I must turn the other. I am told that I must overcome evil w ith good. I am told that I must love my enemies ; and will it do for this God who tells me, " Love my enemies," to say, " I will damn mine ? " No, it will not do. It will not do. In the book of John all this doctrine of rege neration ; all Jthis doctrine that it is necessary to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ ; all the doctrine that salvation depends upon belief in this book of John all these doctrines find their warrant ; nowhere else. Bead these three gospels and then read John, and you will agree with me that the gospels that teach "We must be kind, we must be merciful, we must be forgiving, and thereupon that God will forgive us," is true, and then say whether or no that doctrine is not better than the doctrine that somebody else can be good for you, that somebody else can be bad for you, and that the only way to get to heaven is to believe something that you do not under- stand. 10 IJSGERSOLISIS NEW LECTURE, Ixow upon these gospels that I have read the churches rest ; and out of those things that 1 have read they have made their creeds. And the first Church to make a creed, so far as I know, was the Catholic. I take it that is the first Church that had any power, That is the Church that has preserved all these miracles for us. That is the Church that preserved the manuscripts lor us. That is the Church whose word we have to take. That Church is the first witness that Protestantism brought to the bar of history to prove miracles that took place eighteen hundred years ago; and while the witness is there Protestantism takes pains to say: "You can't believe one word that witness says, now." That Church is the only one that keeps up a constant communi- cation with heaven through the instrumentality of a large number of decayed saints. That Church is an agent of God on earth. That Church has a person who stands in the place of Deity ; and that Church, according to their doctrine, is infallible. That Church has persecuted to the exact extent of her power and always will. In Spain that Church stands erect, and that Church is arrogant. In the United States that Church crawls. But the object in both countries is the same, and that is the destruction of intellectual liberty. That Church teaches us that we can make God happy by being miserable ourselves. That Church teaches you that a nun is holier in the sight of God than a loving mother with a child in her thrilled and thrilling arms. That Church teaches you that a priest is better than a father. That Church teaches you that celi- bacy is better than that passion of love that has made everything of beauty in this world. That Church teaches you that celibacy is better than that passion of love that has made everything of beauty in this world. That Church tells the girl of 16 or IS years of age, with eyes like dew and light that girl with the red of health in the white of her beautiful cheeks tells that girl, " Put on the veil woven of death and night, kneel upon stones, and you will please God." 1 tell you that, by law, no girl should be allowed to take the veil, and renounce the beauties of the world, until she was at least 25 years of age. "Wait until she knows what she wants. I am opposed to allowing these spider-like priests weaving webs to catch the flies of youth ; and there ought to be a law appointing commissioners to visit such places twice a year, and release every person who expresses a desire to be released. I don't believe in keeping penitentiaries for God. No doubt they are honest about it That is not the question. "WHAT SHALL WE DO TO BE SAVED}" 17 Now this Church, after a few centuries of thought, made ;i creed, and that creed is the foundation of orthodox religion. Let me read it to you : " Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that Ue hold the Catholic faith; which faith, except every one do keep ontire and inviolate, without doubt, he shall everlastingly perish." Xow the faith is this: "That we worship one God in trinity, and trinity in unity." Of course you understand how that's done, and there's no need of my explaining it. " Neither confounding the persons nor divid- ing the substance." You see what a predicament that would leave the Deity in if you divided the substance. For one is the person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost; but the Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one" you know what I mean by Godhead. "In glory equal, and in majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, such is the Holy Ghost. The Father is uncreated, the Son uncreated, the Holy Ghost uncreated, The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, the Holy Ghost incomprehensible." And that is the reason we know so much about the thing. "The Father is eternal, the Son eternal, the Holy Ghost eternal," and yet there are not three eternals, only one eternal, as also there are^not three uncreated, nor three in- comprehensibles, only one uncreated, one incomprehensible. " In like manner, the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, the Holy Ghost almighty." Yet there are not three almighties, only one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son God, the Holy Ghost God, and yet not three Gods ; and so likewise, the Father is Lord, the Son is Lord, the Holy Ghost is Lord, yet there are not three Lords, for as we are compelled by the Christian truth to acknowledge every person by himself to be God and Lord, so we are all forbidden by the Catholic religion to say there are three Gods, or three Lords. "The Father is made of no one; not created or begotten. The Son is from the Father alone, not made, nor created, or begotten. The Holy Ghost is from the Father and the Son, not made nor begotten, but proceeded " You know what proceeding is. " So there is one Father, not three Fathers." Why should there be three Fathers, and only one Son ? "One Son, and not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy 18 INQEBSOLVa NEW LECTURE,. Ghosts; and in this Trinity there is nothing before or after- ward, nothing greater or less, but the whole three persons are co-eternal with one another, and co-e^ual, so that in all things the unity is to be worshiped in Trinity, and the Trinity is to be worshiped in unity, and therefore we will believe. Those who will be saved must thus think of the Trinity. Further- more, it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. Now the right of this thing is this: That we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is both God and man. He is God of the substance of His Father begotten before the world was. That was a good while before His mother lived. , "And he is man of the substance of His mother, born in this world, perfect God and perfect man, and the rational soul in human flesh subsisting equal to the Father, according to His God- head, but less than the Father, according to his manhood, who being both God and man is not two but one one not by conversion of God into flesh but by the taking of the manhood into God." You see that it is a great deal easier than the other. " One altogether, not by a confusion of substance, but by unity of person, for as the rational soul and the flesh is one man, so God the man, is one Christ, who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead, ascended into heaven, and He sitteth at the right hand of God, the Father Almighty, and Ho shall come to judge the living and the dead." In order to be saved it is necessary to believe this. What a blessing that we do not have to understand it. And in order to compel the human intellect to get upon its knees before that infinite absurdity, thousands and millions have suffered agonies ; thousands and millions have perished* in dungeons and in fire; and if all the bones of all the victims of the Catholic Church could be 'gathered together, a monument higher than all the pyramids would rise in our presence, and the eyes even of priests would be suffused with tears. That Church covered Europe with cathedrals and dungeons. That Church robbed men of the jewel of the soul. That Church had ignorance upon its knees. That Church went into part- nership with the tyrants of the throne, and between these two vultures, the altar and the throne, the heart of man was devoured- Of course I have met, and cheerfully admit that there thousands of good Catholics; but Catholicism is contrary to 'human liberty. "WHAT Sir ALL WE DO TO BE SAVED1" 19 Catholicism bases salvation upon belief. Catholicism teaches man to trample his reason under foot. And for that reason, it is wrong. Now, the next Church that comes along in the way that I wish to speak is the Episcopalian. That was founded by Henry VIII., now in heaven. He cast off Queen Catherine and Catholicism together. And he accepted Episcopalianism and Annie Boleyn at the same time. That Church, if it had a few more ceremonies, would be Catholic. If it had a few less, nothing. We have an Episcopalian Churcn in this country, and it has all the imperfec- tion of a poor relation. 1C is always boasting of a rich relative. In England the creed is made by law, the same as we pass statutes here. And when a gentleman dies in England, in order to determine whether he shall be saved or not, it is necessary for the power of heaven to read the acts of Parliament. It becomes a question of law, and sometimes a man is damned on a very nice point. Lost on demurrer. A few years ago, a gentleman by the name of Seabury, Samuel Seabury, was sent over to England to get some apostolic succession. We hadn't a drop in the house. It was necessary for the bishops of the English Church to put their hands upon his head. They refused. There was no act of Parliament justifying it. He had then to go to the Scotch bishops; and, had the Scotch bishops refused, we never would Have had any apostolic succession in the new world. And God would have been driven out of half the world ; and the true church never could have been founded. But the Scotch bishops put their hands on his head, and now we have an unbroken succession of heads and hands from St. Paul to the last bishop. In this country the Episcopal Church has done some good, and I want to thank that Church. Having, on an average, less religion than the others, on an average, you have done more good to man- kind. You preserved some of the humanities. You did not hate music ; you did not absolutely despise painting, and you did not altogether abhor architecture, and you finally admitted that it was no worse to keep time with your feet than with your hands. And some went so far as to say that people could play cards, and that God would overlook it, or would look the other way. For all these things accept my thanks. When I was a boy, the other Churches looked upon dancing as probably the mysterious sin against the Holy Ghost ; and they 20 IN&ERSOLL'X NEW LECTURE, used to teach that when four boys got in a hay-mow, playing seven-up, that the Eternal God stood whetting the sword of Hia eternal wrath waiting to strike them down to the lowest helL And so that Church has done some good. After a while, in England, a couple of gentlemen, or a couple of men by the name of "Wesley and Whitfield, said: "If everybody is going to hell, nearly, somebody ought to mention it. The Episcopal clergy said: "Keep still; don't tear your gown." Wesley and Whitfield said: "This frightful truth ought to l>e proclaimed from the housetops at every, opportunity, from the highway of every occasion." They were good, honest men. They believed their doctrine. Arid they said: ''If there is a hell, and a Niagara of souls pouring over an eternal precipice of ignorance, somebody ought to say something." They were right ; somebody ought, if such thing waa true. Wesley was a believer in the Bible. He believed in the actual presence of the Almighty. God used to do miracles for him ; used to put off a rain several days to give his meeting a chance ; used to cure his horse of lameness; used to cure Mr. Wesley's headaches. And Mr. Wesley also believed in the actual existence of the devil. He believed that devils had possession of people. II talked to the devil when he was in folks, and the devil told him that he was going to leave; and that he was going into another person; that he would be there at a certain time; and Wesley went to that other person, and there the devil was, prompt to the minute. He regarded every conversion as an absolute warfare be- tween God and this devil for the possession of tkat human souL Honest, no doubt. Mr. Wesley did not believe in human liberty. Honest, no doubt. Was opposed to the liberty of the colonies. Honestly so. Mr. Wesley preached a sermon entitled, ' The Cause and Cure of Earthqtiakes," in which he took the ground that earthquakes were caused by sin ; and the only way to stop them was to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. No doubt an honest man. Wesley and Whitfield fell out on the q-uestion of predestination. Wesley insisted that God invited everybody to the feast. Whit- field said He did not invite those He knew would not come. Wesley said Ho did. Whitfield said : "Well, He didn't put plates for them, anyway." Wesley said He did. So that, when they were in hell, he could show them that there was * seat left for them. And that Church that they founded is still active. And "WHAT SHALL WE DO TO BE XAVEDt" 21 probably no Church in the world has done so much preaching for as little money as the Methodists. "Whitfield believed in slavery and advocated the slave trade. And it was of Whitfield that Whittier made the two lines : He bade the slave ships speed from coast to coast, Fanned by the wings of the Holy Ghost. "We have lately had a meeting of the Methodists, and I find, by their statistics, that they believe they have converted 130,000 folks in a year. That, in order to do this, they have 26,000 preach- ers, 226,000 Sunday-school scholars, and about $100,000,000 invested in church property. I find, in looking over the history of the world, that there are 40,000,000 or 50,000.000 of people born a year, and if they are saved at the rate of 130,000 a year, about how long will it take that doctrine to save this world ? Good, honest people : they are mistaken. In old times they were very simple. Churches used to be like barns. They used to have them divided men on that side, and women on this. A little barbarous. We have advanced since then, and we now find as a fact, demonstrated by experience, that a man sitting by the woman he loves can thank God as heartily as though sitting between two men that he has never been intro- duced to. There is another thing the Methodists should remember, and that is, that the Episcopalians were the greatest enemies they evrr had. And they should remember that the Free-Thinkers have always treated them kindly and well. There is one thing about the Methodist Church in the !N"orth that I like. But I find that it is not Methodism that does that. I find that the Methodist Church in the South is as much opposed to liberty as the Methodist Church jSTorth is in favor of liberty. So it is not Methodism that is in favor of liberty or slavery. They differ a little in their creed from the rest. They do not believe that God does everything. They believe that He does His part, and that you must do the rest, and that getting to heaven is a partnership business. The next church is the Presbyterians in my judgment the worst of all, as far as creed is concerned. This Church was founded by John Calvin, a murderer! John Calvin, having power in Geneva, inaugurated human torture. Voltaire abolished torture in France. The man who abolished torture, if the Christian religion be true, God is now torturing in hell; and the man who inaugu- rated torture, is now a glorified angel in heaven. It won't do. 22 INQERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, John Knox started this doctrine in Scotland, and there is this, peculiarity about Presbyterianism, it grows best where the soil is poorest. I read the other day an account of a meeting between John Knox and John Calvin. Imagine a dialogue between a pesti- lence and a famine I Imagine a conversation between a block and an ax! As I read their conversation it seemed to me as though John Knox and John Calvin were made for each other; that they fitted each other like the upper and lower jaws of a wild Least. They believed happiness was a crime ; they looked upon laughter as blasphemy, and they did all "they could to destroy every human feeling, and to fill the mind with the infinite gloom of predestination and eternal damnation. They taught the doc- trine that God had a right to damn us because He made us. That is just the reason that He has not a right to damn us. There is some dust. Unconscious dust I "What right lias God to change that unconscious dust into a human being, when He knows that human being will sin ; and He knows that human being will suffer eternal agony? "Why not leave him in the unconscious dust? What right has an infinite God to add to the sum of human agony ? Suppose I knew that I could change that piece of furni- ture into a living, sentient human being, and I knew that that being would suffer untold agony forever. If I did it, I would be a fiend. I would leave that being in the unconscious dust. And yet we are told that we must believe such a doctrine, or we are to \# eternally damned! It won't do. In 1S39 there was a division in this Church, and they had a law- suit to see which was the Church of God. And they tried it by a judge and jury, and the jury decided that the new school was the Church of God, and then they got a new trial, and the next j un- decided that the old school was the Church of God, and that settled it. That Church teaches that infinite innocence was sacrificed for me! I don't want it! I don't wish to go to heaven unless I can settle by the books, and go there because I ought to go there. I have said, and I say again, I don't wish to be a charity angel. 1 have no ambition to become a winged pauper of the skies. The other day a young gentlemen, a Presbyterian w r ho had just been converted, came to me and he gave me a tract, and he told me he was perfectly happy. Ugh! Says I: "Do you think a &reat many people are going to hell ?" "Oh, yes." "And you were perfectly happy'?" "Well, he didn't know as he was quite." "Wouldn't you be happier if they were all going to heaven?" "WHAT SHALL WE DO TO BE SAVED!" 33 "Oh, yes." "Well, then, you are not perfectly happy ?" "No, he didn't think he was." Says I: "When you get to heaven, then you would be perfectly happy ?" "Oh, yes." "Now, when we are only going to hell, you are not quite happy; but when we are in hell, and you in heaven, then you will be perfectly happy ? You won't be as decent when you get to be an angel as you are now, will you ?" "Well," he said, "that was not exactly it." Said I. "Suppose your mother were in hell, would you be happy in heaven then ? "Well," he says, "I suppose God would know the best place for mother." And I thought to myself, then, if I was a woman, I would like to have five or six boys like that. It will not do. Heaven is where are those we love, and those who love us. And I wish to go to no w r orld unless I can be accompanied by those who love me here. Talk about the con- solations of this infamous doctrine. The consolations of a doc- trine that makes a father say, "I can be happy with my daughter in hell ;" that makes a mother say, "I can be happy with my gen- erous, brave boy in hell ;" that makes a boy say, "I can enjoy the glory of heaven with the woman who bore me, the woman toho would have died for me, in eternal agony." And they call that tidings of great joy. I have not time to speak of the Baptists, that Jeremy Taylor said were as much to be rooted out as anything that is the greatest pest and nuisance on the earth. Nor of the Quakers, the best of all, and abused by all. I can not forget that John Fox, in the year of grace 1640, was put in the pillory and whipped from town to town, scarred, put in a dungeon, beaten, trampled upon, and what for? Simple because he preached the doctrine: "Thou shalt not resist evil with evil." " Thou shalt love thy enemies/ Think of what the Church must have been that day to scar the flesh of that loving man ! Just think of it ? I say I have not time to speak of all these sects. And of the varieties of Presby- terians and Campbellites. The people who think they must dive in order to go up. There are hundreds and hundreds of these sects, all founded upon this creed that I read, differing simply in degree. Ah! but they say to me: " You are fighting something that is dead. Nobody believes this, now." The preachers do not believe what they preach in the pulpit. The people in the pews do not believe what they hear preached. And they say to me: "Yon are fighting something that is dead. This is all a form, we do not believe a solitary creed in it. We sign it and swear that we 24 INGERSOLL'S NEW LECTURE, believe it, but we don't. And none of us do. And all the minis- ters, they say in private, admit that they do not believe it, not quite." I don't know whether this is so or not. I take it that they believe what they preach. I take it that when they meet and solemnly agree to a creed, I take it they are honest and solemnly believe in that creed. The Evangelical Alliance, made up of all orthodox denominations of the world, met only a few years ago, and here is their creed: They believe in the divine inspiration, authority, and sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures ; the right and duty of private judgment in the interpretation of Holy Scriptures, but if you interpret wrong you are damned. They believe in the unity of the Godhead and the trinity of the persons therein. They believe in the utter depravity of human nature. There can be no more infamous doctrine than that. They look upon a little child as a lump of depravity. I look upon it as a bud of humanity, that will, under proper circumstances, blossom into rich and glorious life. Total depravity of human nature! Here is a woman whose husband has been lost at sea; the news comes that he has been drowned by the ever-hungry waves, and she waits. There is something in her heart that tells her he is alive. And she waits. And years afterward, as she looks down toward the little gate, she sees him; he has been given back by the sea, and she rushes to his arms, and covers his face with kisses and with tears. And if that infamous doctrine is true every tear is a crime, and ever kiss a blasphemy. It won't do. According to that doctrine, if a man steals and repents, and takes back the property, the repentance and the taking back of the property are two other crimes if he is totally depraved. It is an infamy. What else do they believe? "The justification of a sinner by faith alone," without works, just faith. Believing something that you don't understand. Of course God cannot afford to reward \a man for believing anything that is reasonable. God rewards only for believing something that is unreasonable, if you believe some- thing that you know is not so. What else ? They believe in the eternal blessedness of the righteous, and in the eternal punishment of the wicked. Tidings of great joy I They are so good that they will pot associate with Universalists. They will not associate with Unitarians. They will not associate with scientists. They will only associate with those who believed that God so loved the world that He made up His mind to damn the most of us. "WHAT SHALL WE DO TO BE SAVED?" & Then they say to me : "What do yo propose ? You have torn this down; what do you propose to give in the place of it?" I have not torn the good down. I have only endeavored to trample out the ignorant, cruel fires of hell. I do not tear away the pas- sage, " God will be merciful to the merciful." I do not destroy the promise, " If you will forgive others, God will forgive you." I would not for anything blot out the faintest stars that shine in the horizon of human despair, nor in the horizon of human hope; but I wil do what I can to get that infinite shadow out of the heart^of man. " What do you propose in place of this ? " Well, in the first place, I propose good fellowship good friends all around. No matter what we believe, shake hands and let it go. That is your opinion. This is mine : " Let us be friends." Science makes friends ; religion superstition makes enemies. They say, "Belief is important." I say, no, good actions are importan. Judge by deed, not by creed, good fellowship. We have had too many of these solemn people. Whenever I see an exceedingly solemn man, I know he is an exceedingly stu- pid man. No man of any humor ever founded any religion never. Humor sees both sides, while reason is the holy light; humor car- ries the lantern, and the man with a keen sense of humor is pre- served from the solemn stupidities of superstition. I like a man who has got good feeling for everybody good fellowship. One man said to another : "Will you take a glass of wine? " " I don't drink." "Will you smoke a cigar?" " I don't smoke." ' Maybe you will chew something?" " I don't chew." " Let us eat some hay." " I tell you I don't eat hay." "Well, then, good-bye; for you are no company for man or beast." I believe in the gospel of cheerf ullness, the gospel of good nature, the gospel of good health. Let us pay some attention to our bodies. Take care of our bodies, and our souls will take care of themselves. Good health! And I believe that the time will come when the public thought will be so great and grand that it will be looked upon as infamous to perpetuate disease. I believe 26 - INGERSOLL'S NW LECTURE, the time will come when man will not- fill the future with con- sumption and insanity. I believe the time will come, when we study ourselves, and understand the laws of health, that we will sny, "We are under obligation to put the flags of health in the cheeks of our children." Even if I got to heaven, and had a harp, I would hute to look.back upon my children and grandchildren, and see them diseased, deformed, crazed, all suffering the penalties of ^crimes I had committed. I, then, believe in the gospel of good health, and I believe in a gospel of good living. You can not make any God happy by fast- ing. Let us have good food, and let us have it well cooked and it is a thousand times better to know how to cook it than it is to understand any theology in the world. I believe in the gospel of good clothes ; I believe in the gospel of good houses ; in the gospel of water and soap. I believe in the gospel of intelligence, in the gospel of education. The school-house is my cathedral'. The universe is my Bible. I believe in that gospel of justice that we must reap what we sow. I do not believe in forgiveness. If I rob Mr. Smith and God for- gives me, how does that help Smith. If I, by slander, cover some poor girl with the leprosy of some imputed crime, and she withers away like a blighted flower, and afterward I get forgiveness, how does that help her ? If there is another world we have got to set- tle. No bankrupt court there. Pay down. The Christians say, that among the ancient Jews, if you committed a crime^you had to kill a sheep, now they say, "Charge it." "Put it upon 'the slate." It won't do, for every crime you commit you must answer to your- self and to the one you injure. And if you have ever clothed another with unhappiness, as with a garment of pain, you will never be quite as happy as though you hadn't done that thing. No forgiveness. Eternal, inexorable, everlasting justice. That is what I believe in. And if it goes hard with me, I will stand it, and I will stick to my logic and I will bear it like a man. And I believe, too, in the gospel of liberty, in giving to others what we claim for ourselves. I believe there is room everywhere for thought, and the more liberty you give away the more you will have. In liberty extravagance is economy. Let us be just. Let us be generous to each other. I believe in the gospel of intelligence. That is the only lever capable of raising mankind.- Intelligence must be the savior of this world. Humanity is the grand religion, and no God can put "WHAT SHALL WE DO TO BE SAVED?" 27 another in hell in another world who has made a little heaven in this. God cannot make a man miserable if that man has made somebody else happy. God cannot hate anybody who is capable of loving anybody. So I beh'eve in this great gospel of generosity. "Ah I but," they say, "it won't do. You must believe." I say no. My gospel of health will bring life. My gospel of intelligence, my gospel of good living, my gospel of good-fellowship will cover the world with happy homes. My doctrine will put carpets upon your floors, pictures upon your walls. My doctrine will put books upon your shelves, ideas in your minds. My doctriue Avill rid the world of the abnormal monsters born of the ignorance of super- stition. My doctrine will give us health, wealth, and happiness. That is what I want. That is what I believe in. Give us intelli- gence. In a little while a man may find that he cannot steal without robbing himself. He will find that he cannot murder without assassinating his own joy. He will find that every crime is a mistake. He will find that only that man carries the cross who does wrong, and that the man who dQes right the cross turns to wings upon his shoulders that will bear him upward forever. He will find that intelligent self-love embraces within its mighty arms all the human race. " Oh." but they say to me, " you take away immortality." I do not. If we are immortal it is a fact in nature, and we are not indebted to priests for.it, nor to Bibles for it, and it cannot be destroyed by unbelief. As long as we love we will hope to live, and when the one dies that we love we will say, " Oh, that we could meet again !" And whether we do or not, it will not be the work of theology. It will be a fact in nature. I would not for my life destroy one star of human hope ; but I want it so that when a poor woman rocks the cradle, and sings a lullaby to the dimpled darling, that she will not be compelled to believe that, ninety-nine chances in a hundred, she is raising kindling-wood for hell. One world at a time that is my doctrine. It is said in the Testament, " Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof; " -and I say, sufficient unto each world is the evil thereof. And suppose, after all, that death does end all, next to eternal joy, next to being forever with those we love and those who have loved us, next to that is to be wrapt in the dreamless drapery of eternal peace. 88 INGEKSOLUS NEW LECTURE. Next to eternal life is eternal death. Upon the shadowy shore of death the sea of trouble casts no wave. Eyes that have been curtained by the everlasting dark will never know again the touch of tears. Lips that have been touched by eternal silence will neveT ntter another word of grief. Hearts of dust do not break ; the dead do not weep. And I had rather think of those I have loved, and those I have lost, as having returned, as having become a part of the elemental wealth of the world I would rather think of them as unconscious dust I would rather think of them as gurgling in the stream, floating in the clouds, bursting in the foam of light upon the shores of worlds I would rather think of them as the inanimate and eternally unconscious, than to have even a suspicion that their naked souls had been clutched by an orthodox God. But for me, I will leave the dead where nature leaves them- And whatever flower of hope springs up in my heart I will cherish ; but I can not believe that there is any being in this universe who has created a human soul for eternal pain. And I would rather that every God would destroy himself; I would rather that we all should go to eternal chaos, to black and starless night, than that just one soul should suffer eternal agony. I have made up my mind that if there is a God, ho will be merciful to the merciful. Upon that rock I stand. That he will forgive the forgiving. Upon that rock I stand. That every man should be true to him- self, and that there is no world, no star,' in which honesty is a crime. And upon that rock I stand. The honest man, the good, kind, sweet woman, the happy child, has nothing to fear, neither in this world nor the world to come. And upon that rock I stand. Ingersoll's Answer to Prof. Swing^ Dr. Thomas and Others* After looking over the replies made to his new lecture, Col. Ingersoll was asked by a Tribune reporter what he thought of them ? He replied as follows : "I think they dodge the point. The real point is this: If salvation by faith is the real doctrine of Christianity , I asked on Sunday before last, and I still ask, why didn't Matthew tell it ? I still insist that Mark should have remembered it, and I shall always believe that Luke ought, at least, to have noticed it. I was endeavoring to show that modern Christianity has for its basis an interpolation. I think I showed it. The only gospel on the orthodox side is that of John, and that was certainly not written, or did not appear in its present form, until long after the others were written. I know very well that the Catholic Church claimed during the Dark Ages, and still claims, that references had been made to the Gospels by persons living in the first, second, and third centuries ; but I believe such manuscripts were manu- factured by the Catholic Church. For many years in Europe there was not one person in 20,000 who could read and write. During that time the Church had in its keeping the literature of our world. They interpolated as they pleased. They created. They destroyed. In other words, they did whatever in their opinion was -necessary to substantiate the faith. The gentlemen who saw fit to reply did not answer the question, and I again call upon the clergy to explain to the people why, if salvation depended upon belief in the Lord Jesus Christ, Matthew didn't mention it. Some one has said that Christ didn't make known this doctrine of salvation by belief or faith until after His resurrection. Cer- tainly none of the gospels were written until after His resurrec- tion ; and if He made that doctrine known after His resurrection, 29 90 INQERSOLL'S ANSWER and before His ascension, it should have been in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, a;j well as John. The replies of the clergy show that they have not investigated the subject; that they are not well acquainted with the ]\e\v Testament. In other words, they have not read it except with the regulation theological bias. There is one tiling I wish to correct here. In an editoral in the Tribune it was stated that I had admitted that Christ was beyond and above Buddha, Zoroaster, Confucius, and others. I didn't say so. Another point was made against me, and those who made it seemed to think it was a good one. In ray lecture I asked why it was that the Disciples of Christ wrote in Greek, whereas, in fact, they understood only Hebrew. It is now claimed that* Greek was the language of Jerusalem at that time; that Hebrew had fallen into disuse; that no one under- stood it except the literati and the highly educated. If I fell into an error upon this point it was because I relied upon the New Testament. I find in the twenty-first chapter of the Acts an ac- count of Paul having been mobbed in the city of Jerusalem ; that he was protected by a Chief Captain and some soldiers; that, when upon the stairs of the castle to which he was being taken for protection, he obtained leave from the Captain to speak unto the people. In the fortieth verse of that chapter I find the fol- lowing; "And when he had given him license, Paul stood on the stairs and beckoned with the hand unto the people ; and when there was made a great silence he spake unto them in the Hebrew tongue, saying" And then follows the speech of Paul, wherein he gives an account of his conversion. It seems a little curious to me that Paul, for the purpose of quieting a mob, would speak to that mob in an unknown language. If I were mobbed in the city of Chicago, and wished to defend myself with an explanation, I cer- tainly would not make that explanation in Choctaw, even if I un- derstood that tongue. My present opinion is that I would speak in English ; and the reason I would speak in English is because that language is generally understood in this city. And so I conclude from the account in the twenty-first chapter of the Acts that "Hebrew was the language of Jerusalem at that time, or that Paul would not have addressed the mob in that tongue." " Did you read Mr. Courtney's answer ? " "I read what Mr. Courtney read from others, and think some of his quotations very good; and have no doubt that the authors will feel complimented by being quoted." * But what about there being ' belief ' in Matthew ? " rO PROF. SOWING, I'll. THOMAS AND OTHE11X. 31 * Mr. Courtney says that certain people were cured of diseases on account of faith. Admitting that mumps, measles, and whoop- ing-cough could be cured in that way, there is not even a sugges- tion that salvation depended upon a like faith. I think he can hardly afford to rely upon the miracles of the New Testament to prove his doctrine. There is one instance in which a miracle was performed by Christ without His knowledge. And I hardly think that even Mr. Courtney would insist that any faith could have been great enough for that. The fact is, I believe that all these miracles were ascribed to Christ long after His death, and that Christ never, at any time or place, pretended to have any super- natural power whatever. Neither do I believe that He claimed any supernatural origin. He claimed simply to be a man no less, no more. I don't believe Mr. Courtney is satisfied with his own reply." " And now as to Prof. Swing ? " "Mr. Swing has been out of the orthodox church so long that he seems to have forgotten the reasons for which he left it. I don't believe there is an orthodox minister in the city of Chicago who will agree with Mr. Swing that salvation by faith is no longer preached. Prof. Swing seems to think it of no importance who wrote the Gospel of St. Matthew. In this I agree with him. Judging from what he said, there is hardly difference enough of opinion between us to justify a reply on his part. He, however, makes one mistake. I did not in the lecture say one word about tearing churches down. I have no objection to people building all the churches they wish. While I admit that it is a pretty sight to see children on a morning in June going through the fields to the country church, I still insist that the beauty of that sight doesn't answer the question how it is that Matthew forgot to say anything about salvation through Christ. Prof. Swing is a man of poetic temperament; but this is not a poetic question." " How did the card of Dr. Thomas strike you 't " " I think the reply of Dr. Thomas in the best possible spirit. I regard him to-day as the best intellect in the Methodist denomina- tion. He seems to have what is generally understood as a Christ- ian spirit. He has always treated me with perfect fairness, and I should have said long ago many grateful things, had I not feared I might hurt him with his own people. He seems to be by nature a perfectly fair man; and I know of no man in the United States for whom I have a pro founder respect. Of course, I don't agree with Mr. Thomas, I think in many things he is mistaken. But 1 82 INGERSOLUS ANSWER. believe him to be perfectly sincere. There is one trouble about /him, he is growing; and this fact will no doubt give great trouble lo many of his brethren. Certain Methodist hazelbrush feel a .little uneasy in the shadow of this oak. "Are you going to make a formal reply to their sermons ?" "Not unless something better is done than has been. Of course I don't know what another Sabbath may bring forth. I am wait- ing. But of one thing I feel perfectly assured ; that no man in the United States, or in the world, can account for the fact, if we are to be saved only by faith in Christ, that Matthew forgot it, that Luke said nothing about it, and that Mark never mentioned it ex- cept in two passages written by another person. Until that is answered, as one grave-digger says to the other in "Hamlet," I shall say: 'Ay, tell me that and unyoke." In the meantime, I wish to keep on the best terms with all parties concerned. I can- not see why my forgiving spirit fails to gain their sincere praise." The Covenant Symbol. 10 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL THOMAS PAINE, AS SHOWN BT DR. GOODWIN, BISHOP FALLOWS, DR. HATFIELD, SIMEON GILBERT, DR. BLACKBURN, PROF. WILCOX, JAMES MACLAUGHLIN, PERE HYACINTHE, AND OTHERS, INCLUDING, ALSO, INGERSOLL'S LECTURE ON THOMAS PAINE. SIMEOIST GILBERT'S REPLY. (Editor Advance.) Heavy Cannonading Against the Ingersoll Citadel The Learned Editor Parks His Artillery Twenty-one Effective Shots. Col. Ingersoll's address on Thomas Paine delivered in Chicago, January 29th, 1880 was in some respects so outrageous as to be best answered by declaring it a prodigy of unfairness. Its alleged facts in regard to Paine may be true, but some of the assumptions and assertions, right and wrong, made by Col. Ingersoll, may be profitably noted: \ 1. " The man who will tell the truth about the dead is a good man, and for one about this man, I intend to tell just as near the truth as I can." A good round compliment, at the outset, from the orator for himself, patly offered ! "The man who tells the truth is a good man." True, since truth- telling is a virtue. But what of one who tells only this or 11 W MISTAKES OF INOBRSOLL. that truth; or little bits of truth; who so mixes truth with falsehood, that it can hardly be known from falsehood, but is horribly distorted and perverted? The lies of slander or superstition are no worse than those of flattery or in- fidelity. 2. " Why would God give an inspired book to the world and not see to it that it was translated right?" As well ask, ** Why would God make a man and endow him with reason, without seeing that he use his reason aright?" 3. "John Calvin would have liked to roast Prof. Swing. The church was ignorant, bloody, relentless." " It waged war against human nature." But only because blind to Borne of Christ's precepts, and not yet delivered from tra- ditional error. 4. "A friend of man is also a friend of God if there is one." True; the true friend of man will not turn his back to God. Nor is he any friend of God who has no heart of friendship for mankind. There is no schism between true philanthropy and true piety. He who rejects God and worships man has a very poor Deity to worship, even if he worship himself ! There are sham pretenses of philan- thropy, as there are also of piety. " If there be a God " (and Mr. Ingersoll never denies that perhaps there is one) to go about the country trying to destroy loving, grateful loyalty to Him is a sorry office of friendship for man. 5. " Paine said, ' To argue with a man who has renounced his reason is like giving medicine to the dead.' This sen- tence ought to adorn the walls of every orthodox church." Grand! So Paul would say, "Prove all things." So Locke, "He that takes away reason to make way for revelation puts out the light of both." So Butler, " Reason is the only faculty we have to judge of anything, even revelation itself." So Cook, "I want no pulpit that is not built on SIMEON GILBERTS REPLY. 13 rendered reasons." The orthodox of our day generally preach the reasonableness of the great doctrines. We join hands with the rationalists in saying that faith can not go without or againt reason. We never need go even above and beyond reason without finding reason for so doing. If only men could let reason tell them when, and what, and whom to believe, instead of going against testimony, against authority, against revelation, in neglect and defiance of reason! Science itself, though it carry them into skept- icism, would lead them back to faith. 6. " ' Paine's Rights of Man' should be read especially by every minister." That depends on whether the rights are treated with proper regard to duties, or are the rights of those who want a reckless license,- instead of lawful liberty. Besides, not every minister wants to take tartar emetic into his stomach. 7. " To vote against the execution of the king was to vote against his own life, and there isn't a theologian who lias ever maligned Thomas Paine that had the courage to do that thing." Doubtless there is sometimes a marvelous courage in even the most wicked men; sometimes splendid heroism in otherwise bad men, just as there is a wondrous and charming gift of eloquence sometimes turned ungrate- fully against the divine Being who bestowed it. True, those who malign Paine or Ingersoll may not like to be martyrs. But the courage to stand by the most sacred convictions and doctrines, the courage to oppose those who in the name of reason renounce reason, or in the name of morality defame religion, the courage to test all popular science and oratory by the right standards this is of a far higher kind. 8. " Every abuse had been embalmed in Scripture." True, just as the devil quoted Scripture, and Ingersoll 14 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. makes capital out of the Tract Society and the New York Observer. But Scripture stands firm and rebukes those who so misinterpret and pervert its meaning. 9. " By some unaccountable infatuation belief has been, and still is, considered of immense importance." True, but not the mere belief of the head, not " a mere intellectual conviction" which says " Yes," but that which, while it credits, also trusts and obeys that faith which according to Coleridge's definition, is " the synthesis of the reason and the will," and which naturally results in the purifica- tion of the whole character, the highest possible inspiration to a true life. 10. Paine asserted " any system of religion that has any- thing in it that shocks the mind of a child can not be a true system." "Beautiful sentiment !" But that depends on what the shock is, which may be nothing worse than a shock of surprise and wonder, or a shock of conviction of sin, or a shock of the fear of righteous judgment. Whatever shocks a child's mind, or a man's mind by running counter to its native intuitions or its common-sense judgments, or its sound reasonings, is undoubtedly false. Infidelity like Ingersoll shocks all noble and tender sensibilities, the most conscientious and rational beliefs. What more shocking to a good child than to be told, " There is no God," "no soul," " no truth in religion! " 11. " Why any one should be punished for acting honor- ably in accordance with reason " " endowed with reason simply that our souls may be caught in its toils and snares " " given reason simply that we may through faith ignore its deductions and avoid its conclusions " such an idea is, as Ingersoll says, preposterous. But why charge it against the " entire orthodox world?" Such a charge i& totally unfair, and can only be made by a mind blinded to SIJJEON GILBER1\S LEPLY. 15 just discrimination by unreasoning prejudice. The " or- thodox " object only to making reason a " goddess," and erecting her altar under the shadow of the Eternal Throne, and substituting in her name the worship of self for the worship of God. 12. " I deny that whosoever believeth, etc." Who is this denier of Christ's own doctrine? Not one who lacks rever- ence only, but reason; for he takes the belief required to be one which "no man can control," and pronounces it " senseless," " infamous," ridiculous, as if it were better to " malign " Christ than Paine. 13. "Gratitude is a virtue, ingratitude a crime, whether there be a God or not." True conscience in every unper- verted mind says: " I ought to be grateful." But what i& there which can both require and produce gratitude so well as religion? There is nothing else so distinctive in the Christian religion as its appeals to the sentiment of gratitude. It is in this respect absolutely unique. In this precisely is seen the supremacy of its power, the sweetness of its constraint, the honorableness of its motives. " If there be a God," and He has given us a Kevelation, and a Saviour, Mr. Ingersoll is right " ingratitude is a crime." 14. " Christianity is better now because there is less of it " "Why not say, because there is more reason with a less " blind " or " unreasoning " faith? 15. "There is but one test by which to measure a man. Did he leave this world better than he found it? Of course he did, if he was a bad man, for he made it worse while in it, especially if he became great, and only the more dangerous on account of his shining gifts and un- principled virtues. Besides, if he did really leave the world better for his havingjived in it. was it better because he designed and accomplished the good, or only because 16 MISTAKES OF 1NOERSOLL. the Lord made a good use of him and overruled his life for the world's benefit? 16. " The church is and always has been incapable of a forward movement." True only of the "church" which " has reduced Spain to a guitar, Italy to a hand-organ, and Ireland to exile," and hardly true now even of that ecclesiasticism. 17. " As the human race has advanced, the church had lost, power." Yes, every church, so far as its creed is " the ignorant past bullying the enlightened present;" but the race has not advanced by any mere creedless negations. No nation has advanced by cutting loose from its religion. *' Doubters and infidels " are not to be put with " investi- gators " as saviors. Events are heralded by ideas, positive convictions. " Bibles and creeds," so far as the creeds are true to the Bible, have been the advancing and triumphing forces. It was Paints political creed which gave him power his belief in liberty. His reason would have had far more power if usedybr religion instead of against it. 18. " I deny that the worship of God is the end and object of this life. I deny it. The Infinity needs nothing from me. I can neither hurt Him nor help Him." But what if you do not treat Him fairly, justly, or even decently? "What if you use against Him the reason and eloquence He gave you? "What if you do not say " Thank you" for life, health, reason, liberty, home, while yet " ingratitude is the blackest of crimes ?" 19. "Virtue does not consist in believing, but in doing." " Sublime truth," indeed ! But to believe as Christianity requires is to do something more sublime, more manly, more womanly, more child-like, than any mere pioneer in modern thought or science or patriotism ever dreamed. 20. " Is there any God in the heavens who hates a SIMEON GILBERT'S REPLY. IT patriot f " A God who hates " is not the God who loves, but the God of love must condemn the ungodly, if not inhuman, patriot who cares for his own farnilj or country > without proper regard to the rest of the world, and idolizes patriotism as a substitute for philanthropy and even piety. 21. " Ought the sailor to throw away his compass and de- pend entirely upon the fog?" The witty rhetorician could not ask himself a better question. Ought a man to throw away the Bible, and with it all fairness of interpretation, and depend entirely upon his doubts? Ought a reasoner to throw away his candor and his power of making just dis- criminations, and depend wholly on his prejudices? Col. Ingersoll should Discriminate, and be Fair. The good and the bad in this world are strangely mixed. A constant necessity is upon us to use vigilant discrimina- tion. And yet some minds seem 16 be incapable of exer- cising any discriminative fairness in their judgments. Individuals may be seen any day who are the veriest slaves of their one-sided prejudices. Public opinion, too, is often, from the same cause, cruelly unjust. There are those who have the sense to perceive the things that differ; who have the courage to be candid; who are too thoroughly dominated by the spirit of fairness, to allow themselves to be victimized by any sort of capricious and perverse or merely traditional judgments; and who are perfectly convinced that, in the steady course of things, nothing is gained to the public good by refusing justice to any man. Thomas Paine as a patriot, gifted with a very rare genius for seeing certain political facts, and for saying certain truths, at exactly the right time, and in a way to produce extraordinarily influential and beneficent results, and noble 18 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. consistency of devotion to the cause of human liberty, as he understood it, is one thing. "Tom Paine" as the "infidel," reviling the Bible, misconceiving and hating Christianity, scoffing at some of the deepest and most sacred instincts of the human heart, and often indulging in most indecent and blasphemous raillery, k another thing. Yet the two were combined in one person. His pamphlets entitled "Common Sense" and "The Crisis," published about the time of the Declaration of Independence, were undoubtedly among the most effective political pamphlets ever published. For the good he did in this way and for his other eminent services to the cause of national emanci- pation and human freedom, in that great crisis, he will ever be gratefully remembered by Americans. As for his "Age of Reason," written later in life, when the -author had come under the influence of that fierce spasm of fanat- ical atheism, which fifrly expressed itself in the French " reign of terror," it is one of the worst of books. In place of candor and fair reasoning, one finds in it the substitution , of dogmatic assumption, willfully blind, passionately bitter perversion and caricature. Col. Ingersoll's eulogy on Thomas Paine contains much that is true and brilliantly said, as well as much that is false and smartly put. His sketch of Paine's political career and vicissitudes, both in America and in France, is interesting. Paine's claim upon the grateful remembrance of his countrymen, as a forward champion of independence and liberty, in our first great national crisis, is just. Whatever must be thought of his passionate screeds of infidel vituperation, which Paine afterwards flung at the Bible and Christianity, we need not hesitate to acknowledge any real services rendered by him, directly or indirectly, to the cause of human progress. BISHOP WALLOWS. (Photographed by QentOa.) 80 BISHOP FALLOWS' MEPLY. 2* BISHOP FALLOWS' REPLY. Col. Ingersoll at His Old Tricks His Defense of Thomas Paine Only a New Cover Under Which He is Fighting the Church. A gentleman in our midst, well known to the community and to the nation at large as an orator of eloquence, has recently lectured upon the infidel writer, Thomas Paine. I have no fault, whatever, to find with anything which may have been said respecting the eminent services Mr. Paine rendered the American Republic at the beginning of its history. I think that Christian people, as well as those who, par excellence, call themselves free thinkers, will be willing to accord to him his just meed of praise. It is not my purpose now to enter into any argument on that side of the subject. I do not touch on the point that the extravagant praise ^vhich has been accorded him is not fomided upon a just appreciation of the political services rendered. I will not touch on the thought that there may have been a power behind the throne, as there doubtless was, urging on and giving weight to his publications. "What I want to do is to call attention to the fact that Mr. Ingersoll, in his crusade (I think I may call it tirade) against Christianity, has failed to discriminate between things which are entirely different; that he has created the impression that Christianity and the Christian Church of a past age are one and the same, and that all the corruptions of Christianity are to be charged over against it. He has repeatedly used the word church/ he has not qualified it, but has given it in its broadest sense, and made S3 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. the whole church of Jesus Christ the object of unreasonable onslaught. Ingersoll has failed as a logician, as a man of erudition, to distinguish between things that are entirely different. He has confounded Christianity with the church, arid is attempting to show that the former has been and is responsible for the faults of the latter. Everybody must agree with him that the church has done what will bring the blush to the cheek of any man, and no one can under- take t^ defend such deeds. Ingersoll sees no distinction between the church as an earthly institution and the fundamental pi'inciples upon which it was founded, and which are of divine origin. He has assailed Christianity in many ways, and the defense of Thomas Paine is only a new cover under which he is fighting the same battle. A just and obvious distinction must be made between Christianity as a civilizing agent, affecting men in their varied earthly relations, and Christianity as a spiritual power, securing everlasting life to individual believers. We have the right, and all historians exercise it, whether friendly or hostile to Christianity, to speak of a Christian civilization in contradistinction to pagan civilization, or & Mohammedan civilization, meaning thereby a civilization in which Christian ideas prevail, and in which the whole community share. Albert Barnes would call the far- reaching influences of these ideas the " radiations " of Christianity the influences which have gone beyond the direct agency of the Christian system as a soul-saving power. These influences are felt even by the leaders of modern thought, who may be regarded as unfriendly to spiritual Christianity. They are compelled to a greater or less de-^ gree to recognize the fundamental assumption of Chris- tianity, the existence of a first great cause. BISHOP FALLOWS' REPLY. What Messrs. Spencer, Darwin, Mill, Tyndall and Paine Say of the Divine Existence Paine Believes in 'One God and Immortality. Mr. Spencer, whatever may be his confession of ignorance of what the infinite may be, yet admits its existence and vigorously defends it. The ultimate religious truth of the highest possible certainty is " that the power which the universe manifests to us is utterly inscrutable." "Appear- ance without reality is unthinkable." " To say that we can not know the absolute is, by implication, to affirm that there is an absolute." Mr. Darwin says : " The question whether there exist* a creator or ruler of the universe has been answered in the affirmative by the highest intellects that have ever lived." Again he says : " An omniscient creator must have fore- seen every consequence which results from the law imposed by him." And again: "An omnipotent and an omniscient creator ordains everything and foresees everything." That is going further than some Christian college professors can go. Says J. Stuart Mill, in an essay on Theism: "I think it must be allowed that, in the present state of our knowledge, the adaptation in nature affords a large balance of proba- bility in favor of creation by intelligence." Thomas Paine himself says: " / believe in one God and no more, and I hope for happiness hereafter" In a lecture at Manchester, delivered after his Belfast ad- dress, Prof. Tyndall, after speaking of the wonders and mysteries surrounding us, says: "Can it be there is no being or thing in nature that knows more about these matters than I do? Do I, in my ignorance, represent the highest knowledge of these things existing in this universel Ladies and gentlemen, the man who puts that question t* ' 34 MISTAKES OF INGER30LL. himself, if he be not a shallow man, if he be a man capable of being penetrated by a profound thought, will never answer the question by professing the creed of atheism which lias been so lightly attributed to me." Friends, I would sooner err with Bacon and Darwin and Tyndall and Huxley, and even Thomas Paine, believ- ing in God's existence, than put my belief on this theme gide by side with the man who would fain cheapen what might be a splended reputation in endeavoring to fasten the malignant failings of mankind upon the very name of Deity ! Christianity does not create civilization. It came in contact with the highest civilization of the ancient world, civilizations, remember, which were the outgrowth mainly of the religious principle, and aimed to make them Christian civilizations. The followers of Christ have been recreant to the principles He taught. Christianity has been corrupted. Ingersoll said in his lecture on Thomas Paine: "But the church is as unforgiving as ever, and still wonders why any infidel should be wicked enough to endeavor to destroy her power. I will tell the church why I hate it. "You have imprisoned the human mind ; jou have been the enemy of liberty; you have burned us at the stake, roasted us before slow fires, torn our flesh with irons ; you have covered us with chains, treated us as outcasts; you have filled the world with fear; you have taken our wives and children from our arms; you have confiscated our property; you have denied us the rights to testify in courts of justice ; you have branded us with infamy ; you have torn out our tongues ; you have refused us burial. In the name of your religion, you have robbed us of every right; and after having inflicted upon us every evil that can be inflicted in this world, you have fallen upon your knees, and with clasped hands Implored your God to finish the holy work in hell." There should be no dissenting from this. The arraign- ment is a strong but a just one. Fanaticism lias disturbed BISHOP FALLOWS' REPLY. 25 its truths, zeal lias hardened into bigotry, enthusiasm has degenerated into burning wrath, puerile glosses and worse than childish interpretations have been taken as the reve- lation of God Himself. We know that a Galileo has been forced to recant the truth; a Copernicus has been in mortal fear of his life; a Roger Bacon persecuted and tormented; the beautiful and philosophical Hypatin was rent limb from limb by the infuriated monks. Libraries have been burnt; justice has been denied. Liberty has been trampled upon. The mercy of God has been bought and sold. Fires have curled around the bodies of the martyrs of the truth, as it was hoped the flames of hell would be kindled around body and soul in the world to come. Ingersoll's Defective Logic The Church and Christianity Not Identical Dr. Draper's Explanation. But why enumerate? We will plead "guilty " for the church on every fearful count in the long and terrible in- dictment. But the church is not Christianity. In no way or manner can Christ or His apostles be arraigned for the inhuman and unchristian acts of their professed followers. It is unfair in the highest degree for any man claiming to be a candid investigator, and a faithful historian, to seem to implicate them in such misdeeds. Neither is the church of the present responsible for the sins of the church of the past. No logic can fasten the guilt of the transgression of the father upon the children. The fathers may have eaten sour grapes and the children's teeth set on edge, but while the effects of the acidity are experienced by the children, they did not do the eating. The iniquities of the fathers shall be visited upon the children unto the third and fourth generations, but the sin never! 26 MISTAKES OF INGEIt&OLL Let the sword be unsparingly used against the corrup- tions of the faith. Let righteous indignation flame against all the unchristian additions which have been made to the Bublime doctrines of Christianity. Let the anathemas of every pope in Romanism or Protestantism against free inquiry and the victorious march of the intellect be hurled back. This discrimination between the principles of Christianity and the teachings and practices of the church has been recognized by writers of eminence seemingly hostile to Christianity, however much they may have con- founded the two or confused the public mind in their treatment of the Christian religion. Dr. Draper says: For centuries after Christianity was the established religion of Europe, it failed to bear its natural fruit, because its lot was cast among a peopie whose ignorance compelled them to be supersti- tious, and who, on account of their superstition, defaced a system which, In its original purity, they were unable to receive. I The intellectual bondage, then, of the dark ages was not owing to the teachings of Christianity, but to their per- yersion. But Mr. Ingersoll says In all ages reason has been regarded as the enemy of religion. Nothing has been considered so pleasing to the Deity as a total denial of the authority of your own mind. Self-reliance has been thought deadly sin; and the idea of living and dying without the aid and con- ftolation of superstition has always horrified the church. By some unaccountable infatuation, belief has been and still is considered of immense importance. All religions have been based upon the idea that God will forever reward the true believer, and eternally damn the man who doubts or denies Belief is regarded as the one essential thing. To practice justice, to love mercy, is not enough. Col. Ingersoll, the propounder of the " new religion " has omitted to state that the Old Testament throughout teaches, in addition, that it is man's duty to walk humbly before God. To practice justice, to love mercy, and to walk humbly before God is the religion of the Bible and of Christianity BISHOP FALLOWS REPLY. 27 This is the religion of the Old Testament, and it is illustrated in not a few of the alleged incredible stories of the book. To come and tell Chicago people ench truths, of which Ingersoll apparently was to be the great apostle, is to repeat enunciations four thousand years old. The Canaanites might well be the executioners of revoltingly evil tribes and nations; and much else of the Old Testa- ment, in its caviled-at facts, is the. soundest philosophy. Science is welcomed by religion, but not the science falsely so called; philosophy is welcomed, but not the counterfeit of vain conceits. The Important Factors in Paine's Life The Bishop and Ingersoll Concerning the So-called Church Persecutions. Paine's religion has been summed up in: " The world is my country, and to do good is my religion." It is strange that Colonel Ingersoll, who takes such pains to abuse the Bible, should have overlooked its fundamental teachings. Mr. Paine himself, in his intellectual nature and in his political history, was the product of the forces which were rife at the time on this continent and in Europe. He represented in his " Rights of Man " and in his " Common Sense," and in his political pamphlets the ideas which were prevalent, ideas which had been actualized in America's short, but glorious, history. . In his u Age of Reason " he represented the ideas which were dominant in the French revolution. Paine was the son of a Quaker, and I attribute his correct life, if that life did at the end fall into social eclipse^ to their healthful influence. Paine was also for a short time a dissenting minister, and preached. His mind was susceptible to all the views about him, and he did not come to this country to forward 28 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. liberty, but simply to make his living or fortune. His speeches and writings were characterized by Anglo-Saxon strength, vigor, and terseness, but when he went to France he swung from the moorings of early life and became sat- urated with the views of the French encyclopedists and infidels. The arrogant, self-styled Church of Christ which caused the bloody revolution in France, deserved the terrible chastisement it received. That power which was seated upon the seven hills; which had arrogated to itself not only spiritual but temporal sover- eignty; which placed its feet literally on the necks of kings and princes; which exercised a spiritual despotism over the minds and consciences of man; which 'went into the deepest recesses of the most sacred trusts of the heart; which claimed the prerogatives of God himself this was the very power which hurried on all this madness and ruin of the French revolution to their culmination in the sub- stitution of a nude street-walker as an object of worship. Ingersoll told the truth when he said that " Voltaire had driven a dagger into the heartless bosom of Rome." As Sir Isaac Taylor has well said " the old heathen Roman was far more human than his ecclesiastical successor, and there was not one who would not fly from a Roman inquisitor to the feet of the Roman legionary for mercy and life." Ingersoll's Fatal Mistake True Christianity Not Within Range of the Ingersoll Guns. But I insist that Ingersoll's indictment does not cover the whole case. Should Ingersoll go before a court, and say he hated the law, he would be requested to qualify or be considered mad. It was law that sent Christ to the cross, the martyrs to the stake, and which has done much BISHOP FALLOWS' REPLY. 29 of the wretchedness of earth, but law is not universally a scourge and an evil. I have never been a member of the attacked kirk of Scotland, nor was I brought up a Pres- byterian those bodies can take care of themselves. Yet I must deny that any Protestant body could be justly called the " twin sister of the inquisition." One can count on his fingers, almost, the number of persons who were put to death by Protestants for religious belief or non-belief. Such rare occurrences were due to some branch of the tree momentarily lacking its nutriment, whereas the steady practice of Rome showed a tree poisoned from topmost twig to deepest root. The fatal charge must be confessed, that Ingersoll has not discriminated between the branches of the church, or between the Church of Christ and Christianity. This failure is so great as to disarm the whole philippic of its weight, and it might be denied that Christianity was the religion of which he had been the assailant. The Protest- ant church is not a sister of the inquisition. Christ and His apostles can not be arraigned for the corruptions which Ingersoll has noted. The Bishop's Closing Words Peace. Prosperity and True Christianity Inseparable. Let the individual man present the highest type of per- sonal preparation, with every appetite, desire, and natural perfection, subordinated to the moral reason, to his highest spiritual being. Let our homes be a sacred retreat where the wife and mother shall not play the part of a scold nor the husband and father the part of a tyrant homes in which there shall be no scorching blasts of passion nor polar storms of coldness and hate; homes in which happy children shall ever see the beauty of love and the beauty 30 MISTAKES OF IAOERSOLL. of holiness; homes cheered by music, refined by books, and gladdened with songs; homes of sympathy, homes of self-sacrifice, homes of devotion, homes of undying affection; homes which would lure the angels from the felicities and fellowships of the upper paradise to dwell in these bowers of earthly bliss. Let every form of social evil be banished from the world, from the maddening bowl ' which biteth like a serpent - and stingeth like an adder," to the " steps of her that take hold on death." Let every personal right be given to man the right of property in the earth; the right to his share of the multitudinous forms of material blessings; the right to property in ideas, to property in character and reputa- tion and the venomous slanderer no more walk the earth. Let every duty growing out of these rights be faithfully performed. Let the rights of woman be maintained, she being placed, not beneath man's feet, but by his side, with every faculty of her nature called out, and not repressed. Let the rights of children be respected and the most tender, judicious and elevating educational influences be thrown around them. Let all the antagonisms between capital and labor forever cease the laborer no longer be an eye- servant, but receive his honest due for his honest work and yet have time to develop, by books, society and home, his immortal mind. Let not the buyer say, "It is naught; it is naught," and then go straightway and boast what he hath done; nor the seller expose only the best side of his wares. Let there be entire truthfulness in all the intercourse be- tween man said man, in looks, and words, and acts; and all white lies with all black lies be no more known. Let science push her discoveries to the utmost into all the realms of nature, for "the relief of man's estate" no more disdaining the useful as beneath its notice; and Watts BISHOP FALLOWS' REPLY. 31 with the steam-engine, and Davy with the safety-lamp, and Stephenson spanning the Menai straits, and Hoe with the printing-press, and Morse with the telegraph, and Tyndall with the smoke-respirator, be followed by other and greater benefactors of mankind. Let art no more be prostituted to the basest of purposes, and the artist be no more disobe- dient to the heavenly visions of purity and grace; let genius consecrate its highest gifts to the weal and not to the woe of mankind, and the works That hold with sweet but cursed art Their incantations o'er the heart, Till every pulse of pure desire Throbs with the glow of passion's fire, no more proceed from the pen. Let the hand of government be lighter than eider-down upon the head of the obedient subject, and yet stronger than a thunderbolt to avenge his wrongs. Then you have only the flower and the blessed golden fruit of those two immortal principles of Christianity: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and thy neighbor as thy- self." think of the Bible as a structure solid and eternal." Dr. Burtol. " I KNOW not how the printers have pointed this passage, for I keep no Bible." Thomas Paine Criticising the Scriptures. " To SEE God's own law universally acknowledged as it stands in the holy written book; to see this or the true unwearied aim and struggle toward this is a thing worth living and dying for." Thomas Carlyle. 32 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. " I HAVE but one book (the Bible,) but that is the best." TFra. Collins 1 Reply to Dr. Johnson. " THE Bible containes a complete series of facts, and of historical men to explain time and eternity, such as no other religion has to offer. Everything in it is grand and worthy of God. The Gospel is more than a book; it is a living thing, active, powerful, overcoming every obstacle in its way." Napoleon Bonaparte. "To the Bible men will return because they cannot do without it. Because happiness is our being's end and aim, and happiness belongs to righteousness, and righteousness is revealed in the Bible. For this simple reason men will return to the Bible, just as a man who tried to give up food, thinking that it was a vain thing and that he could do without it, would return to food, or a man who tried to give up sleep, thinking it was a vain thing and he could do without it, would return to sleep." Matthew Arnold. PROF. WILGOX'S REPLY. PROF. WILCOX'S REPLY, The Professor's Interview with Paine's Physician, Dr. Manly Remorseful Death of the Great Infidel. Undoubtedly, Mr. Paine was misrepresented by his opponents. Unquestionably, he has been maligned. That he was enthusiastic, unselfish and immensely service- able in the defense of the American colonies, it would be ungenerous and unfair to deny. That his pen was a power in the struggle for independence is matter of record. And his admirers will nave it that only an " orthodox " Chris- tian has any grievance against him as a counter-balance to to these services. Paine the patriot, they would have us acknowledge, was blameless, whatever may be said of Paine the religionist. There is no greater mistake. There are men by the million in these states who are not " orthodox " or devout or Christian in profession or in life, who see clearly and say freely that Christianity is a power that the nation never could have spared. As patriotic citizens they defend it. And suppose that Paine had succeeded in his fierce crusade against American Christianity? Suppose he had banished the Bible from every fireside, silenced every church bell, soured every Christian in the land into a sneering unbeliever like himself? Suppose he had wiped out with a stroke of his pen, as he deliberately aimed to do, all that Christianity has ever been worth to the intelli- gence, the refinement, the morality, the beneficence, of this country all the institutions it has founded every college, seminary, hospital, asylum, mission-school what would 34 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL, have been the effect on the republic? What would have been the outcome of Paine's life and influence, as 'a whole? for his country? What relief would his patriotic pamph- lets have offered to a calamity like this? They would have been the light of a glow-worm in a night of despair. Better, a thousand-fold, to have left us under the shelter of Christian England, with all the tyranny of her govern- ment. Better leave the Ship of State on the stocks than to launch her, without helm or compass, to a sure wreck and ruin. Whether Mr. Paine ever came to recognize the work he had attempted to do, is an open question. That he ever forsook his anti-Christian attitude there is no sufficient proof. But that he grew uneasy as he approached his end, that he suffered from such alarms as are commonly ex- plained by remorse, is as certain as any fact that rests on evidence. On the llth of June, 1849, the writer enjoyed an inter- view with Dr. Manly, of New York, the physician of Mr. Paine during his last illness, in 1810. Dr. M., who must have passed his threescore years and ten, was highly re- spected in his profession and a gentleman of evident .candor and simplicity of character. He defended his former patient from several discreditable rumors, as, for instance, that he inveigled aw.iy the wife of his friend Bonneville. There had been published, over Dr. Manly's name, the following account of Paine's last hours: "During the latter part of his life, though his conversation was equivocal, his conduct wns singular. He would not be left alone, night or day. He not only required to have some person with him, but he must see that he or she was there, and would not allow his curtain to be closed at any time. And if, as it would sometimes unavoidedly happen, he was left alone, he would scream and halloo until sonic person came PROF. WILCOXS REPLY. 85 to him. When relief from pain would admit, he seemed thoughtful and contemplative, his eyes being generally closed, and his hands folded upon his breast, although he never slept without the assistance of an anodyne. There was something remarkable in his conduct about this period (which comprises about two weeks immediately preceding his death) particularly when we reflect that Thomas Paine was author of the 'Age of Reason.' He would call out during his paroxysms of dis- tress without intermission, 'O Lord, help me! God, help me! Jesus Christ, help me, Lord help me,' etc., repeating the same expression with- out any variation, in a tone of voice that would alarm the house. It was this conduct which led me to think that he had abandoned his former opinions, and I was more inclined to that belief, when I understood from his nurse, who is a very serious, and, I believe, pious woman, that lie would occasionally inquire when he saw her engaged with a book, what she was reading; and being answered, and asked, at the same time, whether she would read aloud, he assented and would appear to give particular attention. The book she usually read was Hobart's ' Com- panion for the Altar.' " I took occasion, during the night of the 5th and 6th of June, to test the strength of his opinions respecting Revelation. I purposely made him a very late visit. It was af a time that seemed to sort exactly with my errand. It was midnight. He was in great distress, constantly ex- claiming in the words above mentioned; when, after a considerable preface, I addressed him in the following manner, the nurse being present: " Mr. Paine, your opinions, by a large portion of the commu- nity, have been treated with deference; you have never been in the habit of mixing in your conversation words of course ; you have never indulged in the practice of profane swearing. You must be sensible that we are acquainted with your religious opinions as they are given to the world. "What must we think of your present conduct? Why do you call upon Jesus Christ to help you ? Do you believe that He can help you? Do you believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ? Come, now, answer me honestly. I want an answer from the lips of a dying man, for I verily believe that you will not live twenty-four hours.' I waited some time at the end of every question ; he did not answer, but ceased to exclaim in the above manner. Again I addressed him, ' Mr. Paine, you have not answered my questions ; will you answer them ? Allow me to ask again, Do you believe, or let me qualify the question, do you wish to believe, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God ? After a pause of some minutes, he answered, ' I have no wish to believe on that subject.' I then left him, and know not whether he afterward spoke to 36 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. any person on any subject, though he lived, as I before observed, to the morning of the 8th. Such conduct, under usual circumstances, I con- eider absolutely unaccountable; though with diffidence I would remark, not so much so in the present instance. For though the first necessary and general result of conviction be a sincere wish to alone for evil committed, yet it may be a question worthy of able consideration, whether excessive pride of opinion, consummate vanity and inordinate self-love might not prevent or retard that otherwise natural conse- quence?" The object of the present writer in seeking an interview witli Dr. Manly was to obtain from his own lips a con- firmation or denial of these statements. Dr. M. acknowledged and re-affirmed them in every particular. He added that the outcries were so violent as to be dis- tinctly heard by the neighbors in a house standing diagonally opposite, and at a considerable distance from Mr. Paine's residence. And they were evidently cries from no mere physical pain. If Col. Ingersoll were in pain to-day, would he call upon Jesus Christ for relief ? Thomas Paine was not a man of so barren thought or meager speech that he could find no other ejaculation. He may not have clearly seen the wickedness and folly of the "Age of Heason." But a candid reader will hardly doubt that he inwardly trembled with some vague fear of coming retribution as he looked out into the shadows. "THERE is but one book; bring me the Bible." Sir Walter Scott. " THAT book " (pointing to the Bible.) " is the rock upon which our republic rests." Andrew Jackson. " YOUNG man, attend to the voice of one who has pos- sessed a certain degree of fame, and who will shortly appear before his Maker. Read the Bible every day of your life." Dr. Samuel Johnson. MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. 37 " THE farther the ages advance in cultivation, the more can the Bible be used, partly as the foundation, partly as the means of education, not, of course, by superficial, but by really wise men." Goethe. " PERUSE the books ot philosophers with all their pomp of diction: how meagre, how contemptible, are they when compared with the Scriptures. The majesty of the Scrip- ture strikes me with admiration." Rousseau. " BUT it is a much more serious ground of offense against Yoltaire that he intermeddled in religion without being himself in any measure religious; that, in a word, he ar- dently, and with long-continued effort, warred against Christianity, without understanding, beyond the mere super- ficies, what Christianity was." Carlyle's Criticism, of Voltaire. " THE Bible is a fountain whose waters feed intellect, heart, life, promoting the highest worship as well as the largest humanity. * * * Kingdoms fall, institutions perish, civilizations change, human doctrines disappear; but the imperishable truths which pervade and sanctify the Bible shall bear it up above the flood of change and the deluge of years. It will forever remain." James Free- man Clarke. " FOE a wonder, gentlemen, for a wonder, I know nobody, either in France or anywhere else, who could write and speak with more art and talent. I defy you all as many as are here to prepare a tale so simple, and at the same time so sublime and so touching as the tale of the passion and death of Jesus Christ; which produces the same effect, which makes a sensation so strong and as generally felt, and whose influence will be the same, after so many centuries." Diderot 38 MISTAKES OF INQERSOLL. " I HAVE carefully and regularly perused the holy Scrip- tures, and am of opinion that the volume, independently of .its divine origin, contains more sublimity, purer mor- ality, more important history, and finer strains, both of poetry and eloquence, than could be collected within the same compass from all other books that were ever composed in any age or in any idiom." Sir William Jones. "Tflis book is the mirror of the Divinity, the rightful regent of the world. Other books, after shining their season, may perish in flames fiercer than those which consumed the Alexandrian library; this, in essence, must remain pure as gold and unconsumable as asbestos, amid the flames of gen- eral conflagration. Other books may be forgotten in the universe where suns go down and disappear like bubbles in the stream; this book, transferred to a higher clime, shall shine as the brighcness of that eternal firmament, and as those higher stars which are forever and forever." George Gil/Ulan. JAMES M AC LAUGH LI N^ 8 REPLY. 30 JAMES MACLATJGHLXN'S REPLY. The Scotchman Looks the Lawyer Square in the Face How They Manage Witnesses Ingersoll and His Last Client, Thomas Paine. The aim of a lawyer is to do the best he can for his client. Some lawyers are not very scrupulous as to the means and methods by which they can rescue a client from the due deserts of his crime. A dangerous witness they will put out of the way if they can. If they can't, then they will blacken his character in order to impare his testimony. They will puzzle him with an array of questions to elicit discrepant statements and to break down his evidence. They will suborn liars to prove an alibi. They will use every device and trick and scheme which legal chicane can invent to invest their client, though the most guilty of the guilty, with a robe of innocence as unsullied as that of an angel. If guilt is too apparent to be denied, then emotional insanity is adroitly coined, or some uncontrolable mania is put in, as a plea, to either free the criminal from responsi- bility or to mitigate his crime. Their oblique contrivances to dishonor truth and defeat justice are not the inventions of to-day. They were current in the days of Robert Barns. The plowman poet, in his own satirical way, describes the lawyers in the other world as suffering in that little mem- ber, the tongue, by which they have sinned so much in this. Colonel Bob Ingersoll is a lawyer. His last client is Tom Paine, and, if we believe the advocate, his client deserves the glory of being the founder of this great repub- lic, and the alone apostle of modern liberty! 40 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. The Colonel states at the outset as follows: " About this man, I intend to tell just as near the truth as I can." Now, when speaking about his client, \\ownear the truth a law- yer will go is an intricate question. It would not be good policy for him to go too near the truth in every case; it might materially change the cause and character of the client. Getting at the Facts Interesting Incidents in Paine's Life. That Paine was of humble parentage is true, but in this I can not see anything peculiarly meritorious. Many who were born in poverty and cradled in hardships became the benefactors of humanity, the patrons of industry, and the champions of liberty. That the young Quaker, Paine, had a keen, vigorous intellect, and that he received a good ele- mentary education, is also true. That he was a staymaker with his father, then a grocer, and then an exciseman, is as near the truth as we can come. That he lost^his place on the excise because he started in the tobacco business is about true. Being out of work, an acquaintance gave him a letter of introduction to Franklin, then in London, who advised him to emigrate to America. All this is as near the truth as we can get. Paine came to Ajnerica, as many before him did, and many since have done, simply to find a wider field for his ambition. This was in 1774, when he was in his thirty-eighth year. Paine became editor of the Pennsylvania Magazine. In January, 1776, at the suggestion of Franklin, Paine wrote the pamphlet of " Common Sense." All true. And if his "Common Sense" was, as the Colonel says, "the first argument for separation, the first assault on the British form of government, the first blow for a republic, and aroused our fathers like a trumpet blast," then be it JAMES MACLAUOIILIWS REPLY. 41 remembered that Paiije drew his introductory arguments and illustrations, not from the arsenal of infidelity, but from the arsenal of this old book, the Bible, which Colonel Ingersoll vituperously slanders. Paine was not an avowed infidel at this time, but a Quaker. It was the Quaker Paine, not the infidel Paine, that worked for American independence, and we challenge the Colonel to show us anything done by Paine in the interests of national liberty after he avowed his religious or irrelig- ious views in his "Age of Reason." But was Paine's " Common Sense " the first peal of the tocsin of separation and independence? ]STo. Ten years before this, when both Franklin and Paine were in Eng- land, and strangers to each other, and immediately after the news of the passage of the stamp act had reached America, a young man, by name, Patrick Henry, amid his assembled colonists in Virginia, arose and said: "Cassar had his Brutus, Charles I. his Cromwell, and George III." Here he was interrupted by the cry, " Treason." Paus- ing, he added "may profit by their example." This was the key-note of resistance and independence. And in spite of the timid, who quaked at the utterance, the words of Patrick Henry flowed outward and onward, swelling many a brave heart with the dawning hope of liberty. Bancroft vs. Ingersoll Additional Facts! And there is another fact that sadly conflicts with the Colonel's fulsome rhetoric. We give it from the page and in the words of Bancroft, where the illustrious historian describes the early settlers who formed the Young Ameri- can colonies, and mentions Presbyterians who had come from Ireland and planted themselves in the upland region of North Carolina. And in connection with this he adds: 42 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. i * ( We shall find that the first voice publicly raised in America to dissolve all connection with Great Britiari came, not from the Puritans of New England, the Dutch of New York, or the planters of Virginia, but from Scotch-Irish Presbyterians" Tell it not in Gath. The Colonel will call all history a lie and all men liars, rather than have his own pet client outstripped in the manly race by detestable Christians. He would gladly pay, I fancy, $10 more a volume for Bancroft if that passage had not been written. Now, we have no wish to dwarf the services rendered by Paine to the cause of American independence. His " Common Sense " was a heavy gun in the field, and the writer was rewarded for it by a vote of 500 by the Legis- lature of Pennsylvania. I need not say that his patriotism was so intensely strong that he actually accepted the sum. Nor was this all his reward. He was appointed clerk to the Committee for Foreign Affairs, an office which he was afterward obliged to resign in 17T9, on account of some breach of trust. It was while in this office that he wrote his stirring appeals entitled "The Crisis," from which we would not detract an iota. In 1780 he obtained the office of Clerk to the Assembly of Pennsylvania. His friends moved to have him appointed historiographer to the United States, but they failed. Congress, in 1785, however, voted him $3,000, which the distinguished patriot had the generosity to accept from the young republic just starting in business. The State of New York also gave him 500 acres of land. Tom Paine was well rewarded for all his valuable services in the cause of liberty; and none but a lawyer's eye can discover the sacrifices, the self-denials which made the poor Quaker emigrant rich at a time Avhile thousands of Irish JAMES MAC LAUGH LIN'S REPLY. 48 colonists had become poor by laying their possessions at the feet of independence. If Paiue's object was to benefit mankind, as his learned counsel says, then it would appear that, while engaged in this really patriotic career, he was benefiting himself. After a thirteen years' residence in this country Paine sailed to France (1787). From France he crossed to Eng- land. " His rights of Man," in reply to Burke was written in England. It was pronounced seditious, and the author was threatened with prosecution. Paine's well- known republican sentiments had made him popular in France. He was elected to represent the Department of Calias in the National Convention, and, escaping from England, he took his seat in that radical assembly in 1792. The Reign of Terror The Great Ingersoll Epoch Voting for the King's Execution. France was now a political volcano. The church to which Colonel Ingersoll is proud to belong, and not the infamous Kirk of Scotland, was in the ascendency, and, oh, how humane and merciful the scepter! There was no John Adams to invoke the blessing of heaven on the new Republic of France. Neither a God to love nor a devil to fear, was the prevailing creed. Reason ruled a rod of iron? Worse still. Reason's reign was a reign of terror. The soldiers of this sweet goddess of Colonel Ingersoll had the power. They were sovereigns, and their acts declared that their mistress was the " twin sister of the Spanish Inquisition." They became the regicide of a monarch more virtuous than his executioners, and like ferocious tigers, they struck their claws into thousands of victims and devoured them without mercy. It is but the trick of 44 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL. a lawyer to offset this butchery by a reference to the mas- sacre of St. Bartholomew in 1572. We want neither the terror of 1793 nor the massacre of 1572; and neither was inspired by the lessons of our Saviour. They were both monsters of the same family, each begotten by the enemy, not the friend of the Bible. We do not implicate Paine in these atrocities which made even stout hearts shudder in France. We give him credit for voting against the execution of Louis. But the learned counsel has made out that his client stood almost alone in his resistance to the king's death. History must be a lie,, that Tom Paine may enjoy the solitary grandeur of the humane in the midst of the cruel in that convention. In that assembly there were 721 suffrages; of these, 366 only a bare majority voted for the king's execution; so- that Tom Paine was one of 355 to share in the courage or humanity of that occasion. It was not, after all, a work of devotion such as has no parallel in the life of any theologian. The Colonel's eloquence on this point reminds us of the old story of the mountain being in labor and bringing forth a mouse. And this is about the briefest and best critique on the entire lecture about Tom Paine. That Tom Paine became popular with the leaders of the French revolution because he was not wicked enough, is true, and he was thrown into prison; but this happened not at once, but fully a year after the execution of the king. He remained in prison nearly two* years. After his release he published the second part of his "Age of Reason." In 1802 he left France and reached Baltimore. We can not find any trace after this in his life of any public or political activities deserving- commendation. His influence and reputation certainly- declined after he avowed his religious sentiment in the " Age of Reason." JAMES MAC LAUGH LIN'S REPLY. 45 How Ingersoll Wastes His Powder Some of His Blunders Paine's Moral Decline. The Colonel very adroitly tries to rebut the allegation that Paine was a drunkard. He refers to his services ren- dered to American independence, and the rewards he re- ceived, and asks could all this have happened had Paine teen a drunkard. But the Colonel has only wasted powder in blazing away so furiously as he has done on this point. The allegation that Paine fell into habits of dissipation extends only to the last few years of his life, and the learned counsel's effort to disprove this is exceedingly lame. We are not disposed either to exaggerate Paine's faults or to detract from liis merits, but, coming as near as we can, we must gently hint that his last years were snot the most purely spent nor most happy of his life. Paine was married twice. His first wife died about a year after their marriage. After living about three and a half years with his second wife they separated, not by di- vorce, but by mutual consent. He brought the wife of a French bookseller and her two sons to America and what- ever were his relations to that woman, pure or impure, deponent saith not, but she, her husband, and children, not the United States nor her war-worn veterans, became his chief legatees. If Colonel Ingersoll fancies that the services of Tom Paine in the cause of human rights is the natural outflow of infidelity, he blunders egregiously. In the first place, Tom Paine's infidelity was of a milder type than that of his advocate. Tom Paine was a respect- able deist, and he would have scorned to drop from his pen the ribald words which his admirers would have employed to caricature the amiable founder of our Christianity. 46 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL. In the second place, Colonel Ingersoll can not deny that Tom Paine was not the avowed infidel, but the Quaker, when he championed the cause of American independence against tyranny and oppression, and let some one show us what sacrifices Tom Paine laid upon the altar of humanity or liberty after he avowed his sentiments in the " Age of Reason." That infidels have rendered valuable services to their country and to the world, may be true, but to con- clude from this that Christianity is tyranny outstrips- Aristotle. Charity vs. Slander. But our objection to the Colonel's lecture and logic arises not so much from what he has said about Paine as from what he has said about others. The Colonel would have every American to cover all the faults of his client with " the divine mantle of charity," and not "breathe one word against his name." But, alas, his mantle of charity is so beautifully small that it can cover but the faults of his own client. The Colonel mentions slander as the last weapon left in the arsenal of Jehovah. I am surprised that he went to this arsenal to borrow his weapon from Jehovah, as there seems to be no neighborly feeling be- tween them. Pejhaps he scorned to be under any compli- ment in that quarter, and may have found the weapon somewhere else. Having found it, ground it, and polished it with a keen Damascus edge, armed he comes to Chicago and slashes away like a valiant knight of ancient times. Slander! None so expert in the use of this weapon as the courageous Colonel. No quarter for the living or the dead, the innocent or the guilty. Like Herod's sword in Bethlehem, he cuts, carves, and spares none, but slays all that he may slay the child Jesus. JAMES MAO LAUGH LIN' 8 HE PLY. 47 The Scotchman Draws His Bible on the Colonel ! A Heavy Shot, Which Hits Between the Eyes. The Scriptures, too, are assailed by the gallant Coionel, in these words: "He (Paine) knew that every abuse had been embalmed in Scripture, that every outrage was in partnership with some holy text." The Scriptures, then, must be a wonderful license and guide to crime. Each criminal in the land should love the Bible, and carry a copy of the old book under his arm. But do they? Let us see y Colonel Ingersoll has a church with a large membership. To what church, religion, or superstition do our notorious criminals belong? I am willing to visit, in company with him, the penitentiary, the jail. I shall take the Bible, he can take his lecture on Tom Paine; and at the iron door inside of which sit accused crime and guilt I shall present the Bible, and he can present his lecture. AYhich will be accepted and read with "infinite gusto" my Bible, "which embalms every crime," "in which outrage finds partnership in some holy text," or his lecture, in which God, Bible, and religion have no quarter? A fellow feeling makes us wondrous kind. By their fruits ye shall know them. The Bible, this patron of crime, has found its way into the Sandwich Islands. The Colonel might visit that little dusky kingdom in safety to- day. Had he done so with Captain Cook, when there was no Bible there, the rotund and rosy champion of infidelity would have been a splendid banquet for the natives. What is Madagascar to-day under the influence of the Bible? Some years ago the Colonel might have made his last will and testament before he touched its shores; to-day he could find there a safe retreat in which to rest his travel-worn frame. In the far "West, where Indians roam in freedom, I fancy that the advocate of Tom Paine would spend the 48 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. night with less anxiety in the wigwam where the Bible was read and loved by the chief than in the tent of the brave who gloried in human scalps rather than in the cross of Christ. We have no more respect for superstition than Colonel Ingersoll has ; we condemn as much as he can all tyrannv, civil and clerical. We confess that in the name of religion cruelties have been committed. Blood has been shed, which may well shock every chord of the human heart, and arouse a shuddering storm of indignation. But the coun- terfeit and'the false implies the genuine and the true; and in destroying the one it would be only foolish and ruinous to destroy the other. When Christianity started at first on her benevolent inarch, she was the kind, innocent maiden going from liouse to house to dispense her boons with the hand of charity. Her enemies could prefer no charges against her tmt that she worshiped one God, loved Jesus Christ, and lived a good, benevolent and praiseworthy life. So far as Ohristians have departed from this, they have departed from the lessons and examples of the primitive preachers of the Christian faith, and Christianity is no more respon- sible for the corruption and cruelties subsequently intro- duced and practiced under her name than the legislators of the State of Illinois are for the law breakers and crimes that disgrace her history. Ingersoll'a Sophistries. The Colonel has employed all the arts of sophistry, as well as slander, to undermine Christianity, and upon God and the Bible he has poured the fire of wit, sarcasm, ridi- cule, and everything of that kind; but let sober judgment ait down, examine, analyze, and weigh the production, and JAMES MACLAUGHLIN'8 REPL Y. 49 there is not there the earnestness and heart, of a sincere reformer, but rather the foolery and flings and fancies of the circus clowti, whose chief object is to start a laugh. The lecturer at times becomes a metaphysician, and per- haps his disciples, like those of Pythagoras of old, consider his ipse dixit a sufficient proof. But assertion is not enough now. He tells us that "intellectual liberty, as a matter of necessity, forever destroys the idea that belief is- either praise or blameworthy, and is wholly inconsistent with every creed in Christendom.' 1 Again. " No man can control his belief." So the Colonel teaches that all who hold a Christian creed are intellectual slaves. Now a creed is a belief, and if no man can control his belief, then no man is intellectually free, not even himself. If, in the exercise of reason, I honestly come to the conclusion that the universe is the marvelous product of a master mind and an. almighty arm, and if I write down my creed I believe in- one God, the Creator am I the intellectual slave, and Colonel Ingersoll, who denies this, the intellectual free- man ? So his logic leads. How wonderfully liberal are our modern advocates of free thought. They cry charity, when they themselves are most uncharitable, and brand all outside their own circle as servile fools. We acknowledge, with modesty, the compliment. But, while Colonel Ingersoll may say that a man is not responsible for his belief, can he deny that error in belief may result in disaster and death? A boy, for instance, finds a pistol, and in playful sport points the weapon at his little sister. There is an explosion, and the red mark on the brow of the prostrate child shows that death's message has been delivered. Such a thing has happened. It was only an error in belief. The boy believed that the pistol was not loaded, but it was; the belief was 50 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. wrong. Engineers believed that the Tay bridge was all right. So did those in the train on that stormy Sunday night. But the sad disaster dissipated the belief, and ended in wreck. The belief was wrong. Pardon us, then, Colonel, for believing in God, the gospel, and a future state. If we are wrong, our belief and religion are no bur- den to us here, and can not hurt us hereafter. If you are wrong, your error will prove hereafter your greatest pain. Is It True? Paine as a Philanthropist. The Colonel declares that his client was " the first to lift liis voice against human slavery." He is admirable at assertion. In the very year that Tom Paine came to America, October, 1774, the first American Congress passed this resolution: " We will neither import, nor purchase any slaves imported, after the first day of December next ; after which time we will wholly discon- tinue the slave trade, and neither be concerned in it ourselves, nor will we hire our vessels nor sell our commodities or manufactures to those -who are concerned in it." Is it likely that the emigrant of a few months' resident in this land was the father of that resolution? That slavery still remained as a stain on the escutcheon of this republic js true; and that Christians were arrayed against Christians on this subject, is no less true. But, let Colonel Ingersoll drop that laugh of disdain. We will not only assert, but prove, that Christians were the first abolitionists. When Christianity lifted her banner, one-half the popu- lation of the old Roman Empire were slaves. But as that banner advanced in age, respect, influence, and power, it dropped the blessing of manumission on the heart of the bondsman. Primitive Christianity, not Tom Paine, was the first abolitionist. And is it true, or not true, that Great JAMES MACLAUGHLIN'S REPLY. 51 Britain, professedly Christian, abolished slavery in her West Indian Islands? Is it true, or not true, that in doing- this she laid on the altar of humanity an offering of" 20,000,000? Is it true, or not true, that all this was the result, not of infidel, but of Christian voices, such as those of a Clarkson, a Thomson, a Wilberforce, a Cowper, whose pleadings secured this grandest act in the drama of modern events? How many dollars did Tom Paine give or lend to- the cause of manumission? Surely, this philanthropist,, before whose loving kindnesses those of a Howard must pale, devoted his fortune of $13,000, if he had it, to the grand cause of oppressed humanity, especially as he had no heirs to inherit it. Alas, we find no such disposition of his property; it falls into the lap of Mme. de Bonncvillef John Calvin. The Colonel, in the course of his lecture, makes a fling- at Calvin; but it was a happy hit in the Music Hall. We had thought that the story of Calvin and Servetus had become too hackneyed to start an additional laugh. It is well that in Calvin's life his enemies find but this one string to play upon. Were it otherwise, the music would never cease. But let me tell Mr. Ingersoll that if he loves republicanism, he should love John Calvin more than he loves Tom Paine. John Calvin was the master spirit in a republic more than 200 yeirs older than that of the United States the first little republic of modern times. John Calvin might have arisen to the chair of the Roman Pontiff and sat in the highest seat in Christendom. But turning- his back on honors, emoluments, place, and power, almost alone, he goes out to battle with the hosts of superstition and tyranny for mental emancipation and human rights. His whole life was one great offering to human freedo 52 MISTAKES OF INUEHSOLL* His self-denials, his hair-breadth escapes, proclaim him the honest hero, and, after spending a life of toil and danger in molding and guiding and strengthening the little He- public of Geneva, he dies, not even with $13,000 to leave to the children of another man's wife. And in the matter of Servetus, be it known that, while Calvin took part in the trial of Servetus for blasphemy, he was neither judge nor jury. It was the Senate or Council of Geneva that condemned Servetus, and, although their sentence was uni- versally approved in those days, and Servetus had been burned in effigy by the Roman Catholic Church after he made his escape from prison, still there was one voice raised in favor of mitigating his sentence, and that voice was the voice of John Calvin. But, as every one who has read the history of those times knows, Calvin had his opponents in Geneva. The reins of his moral discipline were too tight for some; they resisted, and formed the party of the libertines. This party, with which Colonel Ingersoll would have naturally stood, was in the ascendancy when Servetus was tried and condemned, and hence Cal- vin's efforts with the council to save Servetus from the flames were futile. But Calvin's admirers deplore that act. and pronounce it the relic of a dark, barbarous age. In the last century one of the Genevese said: . ''Would to God that we could extinguish this burning pile with our tears." That is the sentiment of the Calvinists now, and when an error is deprecated and deplored surely a common charity should allow its ashes to sleep. Colonel Ingersoll's attack on the Kirk of Scotland is the most marvelous piece of his lecture. For vituperation, misrepresentation, and exaggeration it is unparalleled. He caricatures the Kirk as "the full sister of the Spanish In- quisition. It waged war upon human nature, it was the JAMES MAC LAUGH LIN'S REPLY. 55 ememy of happiness, the hater of joy, and the despiser of religious liberty; it taught parents to murder their children rather than allow them to propagate error; if the mother held opinions which the infamous Kirk disapproved, her children were taken from her arms, her babe from her very bosom, and she was not allowed to see them or write them one word." That is a sample of the valiant Colonel's on- slaught on the Kirk. Poor Scotland! She must have suffered a reign of terror. Where were her Bruces and "Wallaces? "Was there not some stalwart Scot to seize the battle-ax and hew down, root and branch, this pestilential upas and free the land from a monster tyranny worse than an English Edward, or a George? Centre Shots by a Scotch Rifleman. But how comes it that the old Kirk became the patron of learning and established her parish schools ? How corner it that Scotchmen, brought up under the shadow of this old Kirk, have become statesmen, soldiers, scholars, scientists r authors, inventors, manufacturers, merchants, and even lawyers, of whom any nation might be proud ? How is it that, brought up under the shadow of that infamous Kirk, there is no man loves his native hearth or has more patriotic pride than a*Scotchman? How is it that on the calendar of crime in Great Britain and Ireland the names of Scotch- men are fewest in number? And in the United States let us visit penitentiaries and jails. If you find a Scotchman behind the bars at all he is one who has turned away from that old infamous Kirk to enter the communion of Colonel Ingersoll. I can prove this in Chicago to-day. How is it that for independence of mind and manly self-reliance and business talent and principle and push, there is no nation who can furnish the world with better men than Auld 54 MISTAKES OF 1NQERSOLL. Scotia, with its infamous Kirk? If the Kirk is the twin sister of the Spanish Inquisition, how is it that she can defy a pang of torture or a drop of blood to lift against her the accusing voice of persecution? That a boj named Thomas Arkenhead was hanged in Edinburgh about the beginning of the nineteenth century for doubting the inspiration of the Bible, if not invented for the occasion by the lecturer, is but a pious fraud, fabri- cated in some Jesuitical factory. If the Kirk had been given to such cruelty she would have had a more worthy victim in Hume, the historian. If the Kirk was so intol- erant, why did she allow secession from her ranks and other religious bodies to be formed and exist in peace at her side? That her manner was somewhat stern, her dis- cipline rigid at times, we honestly admit, but we tell Col. IngerBoll that the old Kirk has helped to make Scotchman a name of respect the world over, and some of Tom Paine's admirers would not suffer in character by a rigid conform- ity to her lessons. Impotence of Infidelity. But I must come to a close. I do so by saying that neither the tirades of Col. Ingersoll against Christianity nor the discoveries of science can overthrow our religion. The fool may say in his heart there is no God, but it is only in the fool's heart that that sentiment is written. The geologist may bore to the centre of earth; he can't find it written on the rocks of bygone generations; the astronomer may sweep the spacious firmament with his telescope, and after he has examined all from the morning star to the most distant sentinel of the sky, on the vast star-spangled tanner of night, he can't find it written there. The chemist JAMES MACLAUGHLIN'ti REPLY. 55 may analyze matter and reduce it to its primal elements, but on any of its atoms he can't find it written there. To science, in her numerous walks and works in the fields of nature, mind, and morals, we say Godspeed. Every achievement she performs, every discovery she makes, and all the results of her explorations can not overthrow the Bible, but only serve to fill in that wide outline which meets the eye on the first page. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Science can never wipe out that grand piece of information, but science can show us how many, great, and marvelous are the works of Him who created the heavens and the earth and all things therein. " THE whole hope of human progress is suspended on the ever-growing influence of the Bible." Win. H.Seward. " THE Bible is the only cement of nations, and the only cement that can bind religious hearts together." Chevalier JBunsen. " BIBLE Christianity is the companion of liberty in all its conflicts, the cradle, of its infancy, and the divine source of its claims." De Toequeille. " WE are persuaded that there is no book by the perusal of which the mind is so much strengthened and so much enlarged as it is by the perusal of the Bible." Dr. Mel- ville. " IF we abide by the principles taught in the Bible, our country will go on prospering and to prosper; but if we and our posterity neglect its instructions and authority, no man can tell how sudden a catastrophe may overwhelm us, and bury all our glory in profound obscurity." Daniel Webster. 66 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL. ''WE account the Scriptures of God to be the most sublime philosophy. I tind more sii re marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane history whatever." Sir Isaac Newton. " THERE never was found in any age of the world either religion or law that did so highly exalt the public good as- the Bible." Lord Bacon. "I BELIEVE in God and adore Him. I have a firm be- lief in the history contained in the Old and New Testa- ments and in the regeneration of the human race by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ." Guizot. "THE Bible gives strength in conscious weakness, joy in the hour of deepest sorrow, and hope triumphant when the earth and all it contains is slipping from beneath, and eternity waits for our coming." President Fislier. " BY the study of what other book could children be so- much humanized? If Bible reading is not accompanied by constraint and solemnity, I do not believe there is any thing in which children take more pleasure." Professor Huxley. " LET us cling with a holy zeal to the Bible, and the pible only, a* the religion of Protestants. Let us pro- claim, with Milton, that neither traditions, nor councils, nor canons of visible Church, much less edicts of any civil magistrate or civil session, but the Scriptures only, can be the final judge or rule." Judge Joseph Story. " IN a word, destroy .this volume, and you take from us- at once everything which prevents existence becoming of all curses the greatest; you blot out the sun, dry up the ocean, and take away the atmosphere of the moral world r na degrade man to a situation from which he may look up with envy to that of the brutes that perish." Dr. Paywn. WATSON'S REPLY. 57 WATSON'S REPLY. Paine's Popularity and Habits A Curious Side-Light Thrown upon Him in " Men and Times of the Revolution." " About this period, the notorious Tom Paine arrived at Nantes, in the Alliance frigate, as Secretary of Colonel Laurens, Minister Extraordinary from Congress, and he took up his quarters at my boarding place. " He was (Tom Paine) coarse and uncouth in his man- ners, loathsome in his appearance, and a disgusting egotist, rejoicing most in talking of himself, and reading the effusions of his own mind. Yet, I could not repress the deepest emotions of gratitude toward him, as the instru- ment of Providence in accelerating the declaration of our Independence. He certainly was a prominent agent in preparing the public sentiment of America for that glori- ous event. The idea of Independence had not occupied the popular mind, and when guardedly approached on the topic, it shrank from the conception, as fraught with doubt, "with peril, and with suffering. " In 1775 or 1776, I was present at Providence, Rhode Island, in a social assembly of most of the prominent leaders of the state. I recollect that the subject of inde- ' pendence was cautiously introduced by an ardent Whig, and the thought seemed to excite the abhorrence of the whole circle. " A few weeks after, Paine's "Common Sense" appeared and passed through the Continent like an electric spark. Jt everywhere flashed conviction, and aroused a determined 58 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. spirit, which resulted in the Declaration of Independence, upon the 4th of July, ensuing. The name of Paine was precious to every Whig heart, and had resounded through- out Europe. " On his arrival, being announced, the Mayor, and some of the most distinguished citizens of Nantes, called upon him, to render their homage of respect. I often officiated as interpreter, although humbled and mortified at his filthy appearance, and awkward address. Besides, as he had been roasted alive at L'Orient, and well basted with brimstone, he was absolutely offensive, and perfumed the whole apartment. He was soon rid of his respectable visitors, who left the room with marks of astonishment and disgust. I took the liberty, on his asking for the loan of a clean shirt, of speaking to him frankly of his dirty appear- ance and brimstone odor, and I prevailed upon him to> stew, for an hour, in a hot bath. " This, however, was not done without much entreaty, and I did not succeed, until, receiving a file of English newspapers, I promised, after he was in the bath he should have the reading of them, and not before. He at once consented, and accompanied me to the bath, where I in- structed the keeper, in French (which Paine did not understand), gradually to increase the heat of the water, until le Monsieur serait bien bouilli. He became so much absorbed in the reading, that he was nearly par- boiled before leaving the bath, much to his improvement and my satisfaction." DR. BLACKBURN'S REPLY. 59 DR. BLACKBURN'S REPLY. The Paine Factor in American Liberty Not as Potent as Ingersoll Imagines Important and Interesting Facts. Correct dates are in evidence concerning the priority of Thomas Paine in the cause of American liberty. Years before he~came from his native England to this country, in 1774, voices of freedom were in the air. In 1748 a record was made of " the tendencies of American legislatures to independence," and of their presumption in " declaring their own rights arid privileges." From 1758 onward, the independence of the colonies was predicted near at hand. In 1765, when James Otis was hailing the dawn of a " new empire," there were men in nearly all the cities, from Boston to Charleston, S. C., giving utterance to such phrases as struck hardest in the Declaration of July, 1776. Samuel Adams had been for years praying that "Boston might become a Christian Sparta," before he insisted, in 1773, that the colonies should have a Congress to frame a bill of rights, or to " form an independent State, an American common-wealth." In a private letter of Hutch- inson to Lord Dartmouth, October 9, 1773, Samuel Adams was described as " the first person that openly and in any public assembly declared for a total independence. Within these seven years his influence has been gradually increasing, until he has obtained such an ascendency as to direct the town of Boston and the House of Representatives? and consequently the Council, just as he pleases." Will any one ascribe to Thomas Paine the origin of the GO MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. Mecklenburg Declaration, put forth in May, 1775, by North Carolinians who renounced their allegiance to the King of England? The authors of it seem to have been educated at Princeton College, where Dr. "Witherspoon was still training young men for the speedy crisis. We might point to the movements of other Christian men, and of patriotic and religious bodies, in behalf of liberty. In January, 1776, Paine sent forth the little book on which his best reputation rests, and that eminent Christian, Dr. Benjamin Rush, appears to have suggested it, and given it the title of " Common Sense." If the ideas of the book had not been already popular and widely spread, it would have needed almost a miracle to give it a powerful influence; but we are told by Paine's loudest eulogist that " miracles became scarce " in those days. Its effect may have been partly due, however, to the fact that Paine cited Gideon and Samuel as authorities against monarchy. It would be easy to show what George Washington thought in those days, but what did Paine and his admirers come to think of " the Father of his country?" In 1795 the Aurora put forth these words: If ever a nation was debauched by a man, the American nation was debauched by Washington. If ever a nation was deceived by a man, the American nation has been deceived by Washington. . . Let the history of the federal government instruct mankind, that the mask of patriotism may be worn to conceal the foulest designs against the liberties of the people. Mr. Hildreth says that " this, indeed, was but a somewhat exaggerated specimen of the abusive articles to be found almost daily in the columns of the Aurora, from the office of which had just issued a most virulent pamphlet, under the form of a letter to Washington from the notorious Thomas Paine, whose natural insolence and dogmatism had now become aggravated by habitual drunkenness." DR. BLACKBURN'S REPLY. 61 The following seems to be quoted from the said pamphlet concerning "Washington : Treacherous in prirate, and hypocritical in public life, tho world will be puzzled to decide whether he was an apostate or an imposter, whether he had abandoned good principles, or ever hud any. The world has not been at all puzzled on that question, nor on the question of Paine's moral character, and his Inter influence. Hildreth, writing of the year 1802, says that " Paine, instead of being esteemed as formerly, as a lover of liberty, whose vigorous pen had contributed to hasten the Declaration of Independence, was now detested by large numbers as the libeler of Washington." Hence the damage of Paine's influence to the party of Thomas Jefferson. " The Lord, by His divine Spirit, has been pleased to give me an understanding of what I read therein." Emperor Alexander I. " WE are astonished to find in a lyrical poem of such a limited compass the whole universe the heavens and the earth sketched with a few bold touches." Baron Humboldt on 104A Psalm. " FOR more than a thousand years the Bible, collectively taken, has gone hand in hand with civilization, science, law; in short, with moral and intellectual cultivation; always supporting, and often leading, the way. Good and holy men, and the best and wisest of mankind, the kingly spirits of history, have borne witness to its influences and have declared.it to be beyond compare the most perfect in- strument gf humanity." Samuel Taylor Coleridge. " THE Bible of the Christian is, without exception, the most remarkable work now in existence. In the libraries 03 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. of the learned are frequently seen books of an extraordi- nary antiquity, and curious and interesting from the nature of their contents; but none approach the Bible, taken in its complete sense, in point of age, while certainly no production whatever has any pretensions to rival it in dig- nity of composition or the important nature of the subject treated of in its pages." Kitto. " THE Bible is the book of life, written for the instruc- tion and edification of all ages and nations. No man who has felt its divine beauty and power would exchange this one volume for all the literature of the world." Dr. Lange. *' So great is my veneration for the Bible, that the earlier my children begin to read it the more confident will be my hopes that they will prove useful citizens to their country, and respectable members of society." John Quincy Adams. " I HAVE now disposed of all my property to my family. There is one thing more I wish I could give them, and that is, the Christian religion. If they had that, and I had not given them one shilling, they would have been rich; and if they had not that, and I had given them, all the world they would be poor" Patrick Henry, in his Last Will. . HAT FIELD'S REPLY. 68 DR. HATFIELD'S REPLY. Wm. Carver's Letter to Thomas Paine, and Dr. Hatfield's Comments. Colonel Ingersoll says that ministers and editors of religious papers have not ceased their falsehoods about Thomas Paine, and if they do not stop he shall convict them at the bar of public conscience of being liars. Not long since one of Pairie's admirers wrote in a daily paper that " the stories of his drunkenness and licentious- ness are the wicked invention of the clergy, whose path he has dared to cross, and who only refrain from practising the abominable cruelties of past ages upon those who differ from them, not because of want of will, but because their strength is shorn." This assertion has been shown to be false by the testimony of one who knew him long and intimately, and who had no sinister motives whatever for giving to the world this picture of Paine's manner of life. ^ut there is another witness whose testimony ought to be taken, inasmuch as he was not only an intimate friend of Paine, but a firm believer in the doctrines that have made his name noted among men. His testimony must be received by his friends as well as his enemies, for in a private letter to the author of the Age of Reason, dated December 2, 1806, and published in the New York Observer November 1, 1877, he (William Carver) makes the following disclosures: " A respectable gentleman from New Rochelle called to see me a few days back, and said that everybody WQS tired of you there, and that no one would undertake to board and lodge you. I thought this was the 64 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL. cast, aa I found you at a tavern in a most miserable situation. You appeared as if you had not been shaved for a fortnight, and as to a shin, ii could not be said that you had one on it was only the remains of one and this likewise appeared not to have been off your back for a fortnight, and was nearly the color of tanned leather; and you had the most disagreeable smell possible just like that of our poor beggars in Eugland. Do you remember the pains I took to clean you ? that 1 got a tub of warm water and soap, and washed you from head to foot, and this I had to do three times before I could get you clean ? You ay also that you found your own liquors during the time you boarded with me ; but you should have said, ' I found only a small part of the liquor I drauk during my stay with you ; this part I purchased of John Fellows, which was a demijohn of brandy, containing four gallons, and this did not serve me three weeks.' This can be proved; and I mean not to say anything 1 can not prove, for I hold truth as a precious jewel. It is a well-known fact that you drank one quart of brandy per day, at my expense, during the different times that you have boarded with me, the demijohn ;alone mentioned 'excepted, and the last four- teen weeks you were sick. Is not this a supply of liquor for dinner and supper? " This very remarkable letter, which confirms the state- ments made by others in regard to Paine's dissolute habits, closes with the following words, which I wish might be read and pondered over by every one who believes in the doctrines Paine labored so zealously to disseminate among men: " Now, sir, I think. I have drawn a complete portrait of your character; yet, to enter upon every minutia, would be to give a history ol your life, and to develop the falla- cious mask of hypocrisy and deception under which you have acted in your political, as well as moral, capacity of life." Additional Facts Concerning the Great Infidel. Mr. Jay dismissed him from public service, under the charge that u he had violated his official oath, and was destitute ot general integrity, and marked for general falsehood." DR. HAT FIELDS REPLY. 85 When he wrote the Age of Reason, he says: "I had neither Bible nor Testament to refer to, though I was writ- ing against both." Only think of his audacious wicked- ness! "That he bitterly regretted the writing and the publishing of the Age of Reason, we have incontestable proof. During his last illness he asked a pious young woman, Mary Roscoe, a Quakeress, who frequently visited him, if she had ever read any ot his writings, and being told that she had read very little of them, he inquired what she thought of them, adding, 'From such a one.as you I expect a true answer.' She told him, when very young she had read his Age of Reason, but the more she read ot it the more dark and distressed she felt, and she threw it into the fire. 'I wish all had done as you,' he replied, 'for if the devil ever had an agency in any work, he has had it in writing that book.' " (Journal of Stephen Orellet, 1809.) In addition to the above, I quote the following from the great American philosopher, Benjamin Franklin, to whom Paine submitted his manuscript of the Age of Reason, who said: " I would advise you, therefore, not to attempt unchaining the tiger t but to burn this piece before it is seen by any other person, whereby you will save yourself a great deal of mortification from the enemies it may raise you, and perhaps a good deal of regret and repentance. If men are so wicked with religion, what would they be without it?" (Allibone's Dictionary of Authors, p. 1484.) Of his personal character and degradation, mark the following: Says his biographer, James Cheetham, page 314: "In his private dealings he was unjust, never thinking of paying for what he had con- tracted. To those who had been kind to him he was more than ungrate- ful, for to ingratitude he added mean and detestable fraud. He was guilty of the worst species of seduction the alienating of a wife and children from a husband and a father. Filthy and drunken, he was a compound of all the vices." Ingersoll says he died in the "full exercise of his facul- ties, calmly, fearlessly, and unshaken in the belief he al- ways held." How false this is let the following bear witness : s 6S maTAK&K OF 1NOERSOLL. " Dr. Manley, who was with him during his last hours, in a letter to Cheetham, in 1809, writes: 'He could not be lelt alone night or day. He not only required to have some person with him, but he must see that he or she was there, and if, as it would sometimes happen, he was left alone, he would scream and halloo until some person came to him. There was something remarkable ^in his conduct about this period (which comprises about two weeks immediately preceding his death); he would call out during his paroxysms of distress, without inter- mission, "O Lord, help me! God, help me! Jesus Christ, help me I O Lord, help me !" etc., repeating the same expressions without the least variation, in a tone of voice that would alarm the house. It was this conduct which induced me to think that he had abandoned his former opinions, and I was more inclined to that belief when I undcr stcvnl from his nurse (who is a very serious, and, I believe, pious woman), that he would occasionally inquire, when he saw her engaged with a book, what she was reading, aud being answered, and at the same time asked whether she should read aloud, he assented, and would appear to give particular attention.' The doctor asked him if he believed that Jesus Christ is the son of God ? After a pause of some minutes, he replied, 'I have no wish to believe on that subject.' 'For my own part,' says the doctor, ' I believe that had not Thomas Paine been such a distinguished infidel, he would have left less equivocal evidences of a change of opinion.' " What a Catholic Bishop Says of Faine's Closing Hours. The Roman Catholic Bishop Fenwick says: "A short time before Paine died I was sent for by him." He wa, prompted to do this by a poor Catholic woman who went to see him in his sickness, and who told him if anybody could do him any good, it was a Catholic priest. " I was accompanied by P. Kohlmann, an inti- mate friend. We found him at a house in Greenwich (now Greenwich Street, New York), where he lodged. A decent-looking elderly woman came to the door, and inquired whether we were the Catholic priests; 'for,' said she, 'Mr. Paine has been so much annoyed of late by other denominations calling upon him, that he has left express orders to admit no one but the clergymen of the Catholic Church.' Upon in- forming her who we were, she opened the door and showed us into the parlor. * * * ' Gentlemen,' said the lady, ' I really wish you may succeed with Mr. Paine, for he is laboring under great distress of mind ever since he was told by his physicians that he can not possibly live, and must die shortly. He is truly to be pitied. His cries DR. HAT FIELD'S REPLY. 07 when left alone are heart- rending. "O Lord, help me!" he will exclaim during his paroxysms of distress ; "God, help me! " "Jesus Christ, help me! " repeating these expressions in a tone of voice that would alarm the house. Sometimes he will say, " O God! what have I done to suffer so much? " Then shortly after, " But there is no God ; " and then again, " Yet if there should be, what would become of me hereafter?" Thus he will continue for some time, when, on a sud- den, lie will scream as if in terror and agony, and call for me by my name. On one occasion I inquired what he wanted. " Slay with me," he replied, " for God's sake! for I can not bear to be left alone.'' I told him I could not always be in the room. "Then," said he, ' send even a child to stay icith me, for it is hell to be alone.'" I never saw? she con- tinued, ' a more unhappy, a more forsaken man. It seems he can not reconcile himself to die.' " Such was the conversation of the woman, who was a Protestant, and who seemed very desirous that we should afford him some relief in a state bordering on complete despair. Having remained some time in the parlor, we at length heard a noise in the adjoining room. We proposed to enter, which was assented to by the woman, who opened the door for us. A more wretched being in appearance I never beheld. He was lying in a bed sufficiently decent in itself, but at present besmeared with filth ; his look was that of a man greatly tortured in mind, his eyes haggard, his countenance forbidding, and his whole appearance that of one whose better days had been but one continued scene of debauch. His only nouiishrnent was milk punch, in which he indulged to the full extent of his weak state. He had partaken very recently of it, as the sides and corners of his mouth exhibited very unequivocal traces of it, as well as of blood which had also followed in the track and left its mark on the pillow. Upon their making known the object of their visit, Paine in- terrupted the speaker by saying, ' That's enough, sir, that's enough. I see what you would be about. I wish to hear no more from you, sir; my mind is made up on that subject. I look upon the whole of the Christian scheme to be a tissue of lies, and Jesus Christ to be nothing more than a cunning knave and impostor. Away with you, and your God, too ! leave the room instantly! All that you have uttered are lies, filthy lies, and if I had a little more time I would prove it, as I did about your impostor, Jesua Christ.' Among the last utterances that fell upon the ears of the attendants of this dying infidel, and which have been recorded in history, were the words, c My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me ? ' " 68 MISTAKES OF INOBRSOLL. " ALL human discoveries seem to be made only for the purpose of confirming more and more strongly the truths contained in the holy Scriptures." Sir John Herschel. " YOUNG man, my advice to you is, that you cultivate an acquaintance with and a firm belief in the holy Scriptures this is your certain interest." Benjamin Franklvn. "AND, finally, I may state, as the conclusion of the whole matter, that the Bible contains within itself all that, under God, is required to account for and dispose of all forms of infidelity, and to curn to the best and highest uses all that man can learn of nature." Chancellor Dawson. " The Bible as a book has a self-perpetuating and multiplying power. Infidels have written books; where are they? Where is Porphyry, Julian? Fragments of them there are; but we are indebted even for this to Chris- tian criticism. Where is Hume, Voltaire, Bolingbroke? It requires the world's reprieve to bring a copy out of the prison of their darkness. Where is the Bible? Wherever there is light." Bishop Thomson. " THE first thought that strikes the scientific reader is the evidence of divinity, not merely in the first verse of the record and the successive fiats, but in i the whole order of creation. There is so much that the most recent read- ings of science have for the first time explained, that the idea of man as the author becomes utterly incomprehensi- ble. By proving the record true, science pronounces it divine ; for who could have correctly narrated the secrets of eternity but God Himself." Professor Dana. " WITH thoughts thus expanded and touching the infinite with the the soul aglow with sublimity witli as- pirations exalted let us turn to the language of the Bible, and learn whether it exalts the sensations and sentiments MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. . 69 we feel, orcrusnes them by its weakness and impotency. Let the answer come from the Hebrew Psalmist, from the prophets, from the language of those grand apocalyptic visions of St. John. I care not where it be selected, it furnishes the only fitting vehicle to express the thoughts that overwhelm us, and we break out involuntarily in the language of God's own inspiration." 0. M. Mitchell. " SOME thousand famous writers come up in this century to be forgotten in the next. But the silver cord of the Bible is not loosened, nor its golden bowl broken, though time chronicles his tens of centuries passed by. * * * You can trace the path of the Bible across the world from the day of -Pentecost to this day. As a river springs up in the heart of a sandy continent, having its father in the skies; as the stream rolls on, making, in that arid waste, a belt of verdure wherever it turns its way; creating palm groves and fertile plains, where the smoke of the cottage curls up at eventide, and marble cities send the gleam of their splendor far into the sky; such has been the course of the Bible on earth." Theodore Parker. " To a sincere and unsophisticated mind it must be evi- dent that the grand outlines sketched by Moses are the same as those which modern science enables us to trace, however imperfect and unsettled the details furnished by scientific inquiries may appear on many points. "What- ever changes we may expect to be introduced by new discoveries, in our present view of the universe and the globe the prominent traits of this vast picture will remain. And these only are traced out in this admirable account of Genesis. These outlines were sufficient for the moral purposes of the book; the scientific details are for us patiently to investigate. Professor Guyot. 70 MISTAKES OF INOEltSOLL. " THOMAS Paine, in his extreme fear lest he should be made the victim of some childish fancy, or that somebody else would be victimized, attacked Masonry on the ground tlrat it was a superstition that had come down from the Persian world, and was as full of nonsense as anything could be. He said that in the Masonic hall the presiding officer must sit in the east end of the room, the Masons must thus salute the east, and the lamps must be most abundant on the south wall of the room to mark the path of the sun; and that the 2-ith of June, a day so sacred in Masonry, was the day on which the old sun- worshipers built fires upon all the mountain tops and hill tops near their homes to celebrate the fact that the sun had reached his hottest place in the temperate zone. But, like much of Paine's reasoning, it was not important, if true. There is no harm in paying great respect to his dignity, the sun. One would better take off his hat before the sun in a grand summer morning than to render such a homage to a wicked duke or a painted girl. Prof. Swing. DR. GOODWIN'S REPLY. 71 DR. GOODWIN'S REPLY. The Renowned Pastor of over a Thousand Church Members Rises in Defense of the Truth The Ax Laid at the Root of the Ingersoll Tree The Solemn Issue. Teachers of men are like trees. We can no more trust the words and theorizings of the one than the leaves and blossoms of the other. But when fruiting time has come we shall have tests that never fail* Grapes do not corne of thorns, nor figs of thistles. Every good tree will have in- fallible witness in good fruit, and every evil tree in evil fruit. Just so of men who set up for prophets. When their doctrines have come to fruitage, there will be in the quality of that fruit, according as it is good or evil, the in- fallible test of the quality of what has been taught. This is our Lord's canon of proving things. And He bids us stand in the ways and challenge whatever claims authority over our hearts and lives. We are not to accept a teacher, because he has the look of an apostle. We are not to accept his doctrine, because it charms the ear and gives great promise of blessing. We are to demand as prime conditions of our acceptance a showing of fruits; results wrought, whereby the doctrine which appeals to us is unequivocally demonstrated to be that which exalts God and blesses men. Of course Christ and His teachings must take the same test that is applied to other teachers and other doctrines. N"o question is a fairer one with which to meet the claims of Christianity than. What fruits has it to show? Have its 72 MISTAKES OF 1NGBR80LL. teachings made men better or worse? Have they tended to emphasize and exalt truth, pnrity, justice, benevolence; to secure the well-being of individuals, communities, nations; or have they tended to beget untruth, impurity, injustice, se]fishness, cruelty, tyranny, and thus heap upon men increasing mischiefs and woes? And tins is the question between Mr. Ingersoli and the Ministers and Churches he assails so bitterly in his glorilie-.ition of Thomas Paine. We, of the Ministry and the Churches, stand upon the Bible as the divinely-inspired and hence divinely-authoritative "Word of God. We affirm that this book sets forth the true character of God, the aims and methods of His moral government, the scheme of His de- vising, whereby shall be secured His own Litest honor and the highest well-being of His creatures. We affirm that upon men's believing upon the crucified Son of God therein set forth as the Saviour of men depends their sal- vation. We affirm that only as men accept the doctrines of this book, and orC.cr their lives thereby, can they attain individually to the largest measures of intellectual and moral development; or, as associated together, enjoy the highest social security, prosperity, and happiness; or as a nation make sure of real greatness and lasting glory. Mr. Ingersoli denies all this. lie declares that Christian- ity is a " superstition," a bundle of " ancient lies;" that the doctrine of Salvation by Faith is "infamous;" that the church is "ignorant, bloody, relentless;" that it "confis- cates property," " tortures, burns, dooms to perdition," all who are outside of its pale, and does it with supreme delight; that religion "puts fetters" on man's intellect; that it is "destructive of happiness;" a "hydra-headed monster, thrusting its thousand fangs into the bleeding, quivering hearts of men;" that it " fills the earth with mourning, DR. QOODWIN'S REPLY. 73 heaven with hatred, the present with fear, the future with fire and despair." And over against this, Mr. Ingersoll sets, as the true religion, the grand panacea of all human ills, the scheme of infidelity. "Infidelity," he sajs, "is liberty." It is this which "frees men from prison; this which civilizes; this that lights the fires on the altars of reason; that fills the world with light; this that opens dull eyes; brings music into the soul; wipes tears from fur- rowed cheeks; puts out the fires of civil war; destroys from the earth the dogmas of ignorance, prejudice, power, and drives from this beautiful face of the earth the fiend of fear." Ingersoll's Sad Need of Spectacles at a Much Earlier Period in Life What He Sees in the Historic Spectrum A Remarkable Phenomenon. This is a clear, sharp issue. Mr. Ingersoll stands before our text and says, " Christianity can not take its own test- It claims to yield grapes, but when the truth is told, it has only tearing, torturing thorns to show. It claims to be a gentle, innocent sheep, but it is nothing other than a ravenous, blood-thirsty wolf in disguise. The only genuine grape-vine, the only true sheep, is the doctrine which I teach, which I learned of my master, the one great, un- equaled teacher of the ages, the apostle of liberty, the light and hope of the world Thomas Paine." What I propose is to apply this test of the text to both these schemes; to set Christianity and its fruits side ,by side with infidelity and its fruits, and see whether Mr. Ingersoll has told us the truth. It does not concern my purpose to speak particularly of Thomas Paine, and .1 shall not stop, therefore, to consider at length Mr. Ingersoll's apotheosis of him. He is entitled to his opinion, and so are we to ours. But I must confess to have read his oration 74 MISTAKES OF JNOERSOLL. with amazement. I had always supposed hitherto that there were some other unselfish, pure-rninded, liberty-lov- ing men in those old times who had something to do with originating and carrying to success the scheme of American independence. But it seems we have all been mistaken, and history has been mistaken, and so for a hundred years the country has gone on heaping eulogies upon men that never deserved them. Somehow, this terrible despot and fiend of Christianity has contrived to falsify the records, blind the people, and keep hid away in its awful dungeons of disgrace and infamy the one purest hero, the one pre- eminent magnate of that glorious epoch. It does not exactly appear how this was done. It does not appear that any other patriot-infidel was doomed to like dishonor. Never- theless, it has come to pass, that as to this man, the "first to perceive the destiny of the new world," the man that " did more than any other to cause the declaration of In- dependence," the very Achilles of the revolution, without whose voice and sword, apparently, everything would have come to naught the whole nation has for a century been reading and re-reading its history, and hardly made men- tion of his name! "What strange, what base ingratitude is this! For statesmen, historians, orators, poets, to keep sounding for decade after decade the praises of Washington, and Jefferson, and Franklin, and the Adamses, and ever BO many more, and yet never to have lifted one acclaim for the hero that overtopped them all ! Evidently, Mr. Inger- soll's spectacles should have come into use long years ago. Listening to this arraignment of history, one can not feel e that any of its so-called verdicts are to be trusted. How do we know that, as a nation, we have not been guilty of like injustice and tyranny in the judgments that have been passed on Jefferson Davis and Benedict Arnold? DR. GOODWIN'S REPLY. 75 And who shall be quite sure that not only they may yet be rescued from the infamy that now envelops them, but even Judas Iscariot may not prove to have been calumniated by this relentless tyranny of a misnamed gospel, and take his place alongside of Arnold and Paine among the stars. Here, at least, is a new field in which Mr. Ingersoll may acquire laurels. Further Optical Delusions of the Eloquent Colonel Why Paine Came to America. As to the claims put forward in behalf of Mr. Paine's leadership in securing our national independence, I can not refrain from a passing word. There is no proof what- ever that any injustice has ever been done Mr. Paine in the estimate of his services by our historians. Mr. Tnger- soll has not added a single fact to those well known before. No doubt Mr. Paine rendered valuable service, especially with his pen, in the interests of freedom; no doubt he deserved all the encomiums and substantial records he received at the hands of State Legislatures and of Congress. So far as I know, no one has ever disputed this, But when Mr. Ingersoll attempts to go beyond this, and hold up Mr. Paine as the " great apostle of liberty," the " first to perceive the destiny of the new world," as " doing more to cause the declaration of Independence than any other man," and declares his pamphlet, entitled " Common Sense," the "first argument for separation" of the colonies for the Mother country he goes vastly beyond the facts. He may believe Mr. Paine entitled to all the credit he claims, but he certainly can not prove it. The truth of history is not to be overborne by a lawyer's specious plea, nor is its voice to be drowned beyond the passing moment, by the applause evoked by the wit and eloquence of a gifted orator. 76 MISTAKES OF INOER30LL The first significant fact is, that there is no proof what- ever that Paine came to this country with any political purpose. He lost his place as exciseman, obtained an in- troduction to Benjamin Franklin, then U. S. Minister in England, who had received so many applications, that he had written a tract giving information about America and from him secured a note o^ introduction to Franklin's son-in-law, Bache, commending him as needing employ- ment, and so far as he could judge, worthy of confidence. He reached this country in December, 1774, and through Mr. Bache's influence, obtained employment as the editor of a magazine. And this is all there is of his coming. So far as appears, it was purely a matter of getting daily bread. Paine and American Independence The Cause of Liberty at White Heat before Mr. Paine gets Around Interesting Facts. In January, 1776, when he had been in the country barely a year, he published his pamphlet. Mr. Bancroft says he did it at the suggestion of Mr. Franklin, who had then returned from England, hopeless of securing any possible adjustment of the difficulties between the colonies and the home government. The pamphlet was timely. It was written in a clear, vigorous, and telling style; took ground boldly in favor of independence, and was, without doubt, greatly effective in urging forward the cause which it championed. But this is all that can be claimed for it. Franklin had cherished and uttered the same views for years, and so had Patrick Henry, James, Otis, both the Adamses, and many others. Indeed, ever since the passage of the Stamp Act there had been a growing conviction among nearly all the patriotic men] of that day, that the separation of the colonies and the establishment of an DR. GOODWIN'S HE PLY. 77 independent government was inevitable a mere question of time. And at the date when this pamphlet appeared, this conviction was the dominant one among a vast majority of the people, and with reason. Boston port-bill was a fact, and had stirred the blood of all^the colonists. Franklin had been insulted before the king's privy council, and that made the red heat white. More than all, Lexington, and Concord, and Bunker-Hill had been fought, and the smell of powder was everywhere in the air. The king had refused to listen to the second remonstrance of the colonies against .taxation without representation, had issued his proclamation for the suppression of rebellion. John Adams' wife, Abigail, hearing that proclamation, stopped her spinning wheel, and wrote to her husband : 'This intelligence will make a plain path for you, though a danger- ous 0110. I could not join to-day in the petitions of our worthy pastor for a reconciliation between our no longer parent but tyrant state, and these colonies. Let us separate ! let us renounce them ! and let us be- seech the Almighty to bfast their counsels, and bring to naught all their devices." This was in August, 1775, six months before Paine's pamphlet saw the light. And Mr. Bancroft says of Mrs. Adams' appeal, " Her voice was the voice of JS r ew England." Samuel Adams had said, also, in the Massachusetts Assembly, > ; The declaration of independence and treaties with foreign powers are to be expected." Jefferson had said speaking of the Stamp Act and kindred legislation " I will cease to exist before I will submit to a connection with England on such terms as the British Parliament propose; and in this I speak the senti- ment of America." And still beyond this, Franklin had introduced into the assembly of Pennsylvania his plan for a confederation of the colonies 78 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. This was the state of things when Mr. Paine's utterances were put forth. They were opportune and helpful. But chiefly as inciting to an earlier inauguration of the conflict that was sure to come. Washington was at the head of the army Boston invested with 20,000 men Norfolk had been burned the whole country was ready to burst into a flame. Doubtless to Mr. Paine belongs in part the honor shared by many of helping to strike the match which kindled the fires of the Revolution. But he no more merits all that honor than James Warren or Orispus Attucks. The Continent was heaving and the eruption was sure to come. Mr. Paine simply helped to break the thin crust, and precipitate the outbreak of the long-pent fires of the volcano. Paine's Fractional Glory in the French Republic". Mr. Ingersoll's statement respecting Mr. Paine's part in the assembly of the French Republic, deserves a passing word. His statement is that " Thomas Paine had the courage, the goodness, the justice, to vote against the death of Louis XYI," when ' all were demanding the death of the king," and hence when " so to vote was to vote against his own life." This would make it appear that Mr. Paine stood almost, if not quite, alone in that assembly; took upon himself the peril of martyrdom for his clemency. But read Lamartine's history of the Girondists, and see how differently a Frenchman loving democracy, and hating kingship as ardently as Thomas Paine, puts the matter. M r. Lamartine says, Mr. Paine having received from the king 6,000,000 francs for his country, had " neither the memory nor the dignity befitting his station," but by his paper, ivad before the. convention, " heaped a long series of insults upon DR. GOODWIN'S REPLY. 79 a man whose generous assistance lie had formerly solicited, and to whom he owed the preservation of his own country." And when the question of the death of the king was at last, after a full month of debate, brought to a vote there were 721 voices uttered from the tribune. Of these 387 were for death, and 334 for exile. So. that, whatever the "courage, the goodness, the justice, the sublimity of devotion to principle, the peril of life," involved in Mr. Paine's vote, he had 333 sharers of his heroism and his glory. A Fair Test, with Some Plain Philosophy. But to come now to the purpose in hand and consider his arraignment of Christianity. Is it possible to apply this test-principle of the text, so that we may know to a certainty what the relative claims of the two systems asking our acceptance are? For they have both been long enough before the world to produce ample results, and results whose quality is ascertainable beyond doubt. Let us take first, then, the character of the founder of Christianity, and test that, and then the character of the teachers of infidelity, and test them. We shall be sure to be on the right track in such inquiry. For while it does not greatly matter what the character of a man may be who gives us a new theory of electricity, or light, or any- thing his discovery being of equal value whether he be honest or dishonest, temperate or intemperate, moral or immoral it does matter what the personal character of a teacher of a new scheme of morals is. He comes claiming our acceptance of certain doctrines which, He says, are vital to our welfare. He declares that only as we accept His dogmas can we lead lives of highest happi- ness and usefulness. That everything, in short, that can be called good, is bound up in His teachings. Naturally, 80 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. therefore, and of right, we look to Him for an illustration of what He teaches. If He wants us to be truthful, honest, moral, He must be. The moment we fail to find in the teacher the exemplification of the thing taught, that moment the power of his teaching is broken. I am speaking, of course, of one who has a system which he claims to be superior to others, and which he insists that men must receive or suffer great loss. It is only folly for a known deceiver to try to enforce truthfulness, for a known thief to teach honesty, or a libertine virtue. We say, instinctively and scornfully to such " Physician, heal thyself." We have hence the best of rights to test this great teacher of Christianity, and to test Him rigidly. We have the right to put His life to proof everywhere, and see whether it shows a quality accordant with His speech. For He claims for His teaching not only supreme authority, but the authority of truth that does not rest content till it has taken possession of a man in the very roots of 'his being, penetrated him through and through, arid made him so en- tirely a lover of truth that he will tolerate no fellowship with anything else. More than this. His standards of morals deal not so much with words and deeds, as with their un- derlying motives. With Him covetousness is not so much looking upon the things of others with the eyes of the body as with the eyes of the soul. To lust after a woman is as truly adultery, as the open violation of the seventh com- mandment. It is murder as truly to have the thought daubed in blood as the hands. Furthermore, they who accept this teacher's doctrine must stand ready to surrender everything on the call of their master; to leave home and its treasures; to take oppositions, persecutions, sufferings, death even, and to do this without DR. GOODWIN' 8 REPLY. 81 murmuring. And only they who stand ready to do this, who covet to have their wills merged in their teacher's, who carry in their souls the ideal of a perfection as high as God, and who consciously and absorbingly desire and seek the good of men ; only these can be counted true dis- ciples. Jesus Christ and the Testimony Fame's Confession. Here now is opportunity indeed for tests. And this founder of the new scheme, which He insists on having men receive, must demonstrate in Himself the spirit of His own doctrines, must illustrate unequivocally their fruits, or be rejected. "What now are the facts? Why, clearly this, that He stands there on the track of history the exact embodi- ment of every truth He uttered. The keenest and most relentless criticism has had His life as in the focus of its blazing examination for centuries, has searched that life back and forth through every phase of it, from His child- hood to the last agony on the cross, and yet is compelled to confess that nowhere is there a day or an hour, a deed or a word, or a thought, that does not exactly mirror the teachings of His lips. More than that, He stands there the one only character of all the ages absolutely without a svot or Flemish, and this, as I have said, not as the verdict of partial admirers, bnt of those who would, many of them, be only too glad to prove Him a hypocrite or a cheat. Theodore Parker, and he is no enthusiastic devotee of Christianity, is compelled to say of Him that, u He unites in Himself the sublimest precepts and divinest practices; that He rises free from all the prejudices of His age, nation or' sect, pours out a doctrine beautiful as the light, sublime as heaven, true as God 6 82 'MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. Mr. Chubb, a noted English infidel, admits in his " True Gospel," " that we have in Christ an example of one who was just, honest, upright, sincere, who did no wrong, no injury to any man, and in whose mouth was no guile." Rousseau says: "What sweetness, what purity in His manner! what sublimity in His maxims! what profound- ness in His discourses! Where is the man, where the philosopher, who could so live and so die without weakness and without ostentation! If the life and death of Socrates were those of a Sage, the life and death of Jesus Christ were those of a God." And Thomas Paine himself is at pains to testify in his Age of Reason, that "' nothing that is here said" in his holding up of Christianity to ridicule, " can apply, even with the most distant disrespect, to the real character of Jesus Christ. He was a virtuous and an amiable man. The morality that He preached and practiced was of the most benevolent kind." What the Testimony Demonstrates and its Significance. Such confessions as these from the lips of infidels are most amazing. They demonstrate that Jesus Christ made good His astounding pretensions, that He was literally without sin, and had the best of rights to call Himself the light of the world. But the significance of these .confes- sions goes further than this. For this stainless, perfect character is an absolute impossibility, if the claims of in- fidelity are true. Where shall we look for the exemplifi- cation of a system of morals but to its founder? We look to Brigham Young as the prophet and head of Mormonism, and we find exactly what we should expect froin the teachings of that faith; a polygamist and a despiser of all doctrines outside of the book of Mormon. DR. GOODWIN'S REPLY. 83 We look to Mohammed, and find him exactly what we should expect from the Koran, a man who believes in sensuality and in bloodshed to secure his ends. So in the gods of the Romans and Greeks, and Hindoos and Egyptians, we find exactly such gods as we should look for from the 'religions to which they belong gods stamped with deceit, cruelty, blood-thirstiness, lust. So it should be here, if Christianity is what Mr. Inger- soll declares it to be, unloving, tyrannous, bloody, delighting in nothing so much as deceits and woes, then Jesus Christ should be of a piece with it. Nay, in Him all these foul things should be headed up. The stream can not rise higher nor be purer than its source. If lying, and rapine, and lust, and violence are the law or the practice, then in- fallibly sure are we that some Henry VIII, or Philip II, orCsesar, or Borgia, or Nero, either makes the laws or wields the scepter. If Christianity is a bundle of lies, a code of cruelty, then he that originated it stands proved either the prince of impostors or the worst of fiends. "Whereas, upon the testimony of infidels themselves, He is the one in whose speech and life there is more of purity, goodness, heaven, than in any other character the world has ever seen. He is, in short, the one combined God-man of all history! Mr. John Stuart Mill, who is an avowed atheist, and of course denies the divine character and authority of Christianity, declares that it is of no use to say that Christ as exhibited in the Gospels, is " not historical." And lie asks, " Who among His disciples, or among their proselytes, was capable of inventing the sayings ascribed to Jesus, or of imagining the life and character revealed in the Gospels? Certainly not the fishermen of Galilee; still less the early Christian writers." And Mr. Lecky, who agrees with Mr. 84 MISTAKEN Of 1NGERSOLL. Mill in rejecting the iivineness of Christianity, agrees also with him in cor .eding the historical claims of botn Christ s,nd His reputed doctrines. His language is, " It was reserved for Christianity to present to the world an ideal character, which through all the changes of eighteen centuries has filled the hearts of men with an impassioned love, and has shown itself capable of acting on all ages, nations, temperaments and conditions; has not only been the highest pattern of v rtue, but the highest incentive to practice. * * * '" 4.mid all the ^iiis and failings, amid all the priestcraft, the persecution and fanaticism which have defaced the church, it has preserved in the character and example of its founder an enduring principle of regeneration." Such language from such men is de- cisive. It demonstrates that Christ and Christianity stand or fall together. That they are as inseparable as a stream and its fountain, as essentially one in character as the light and the sun. The Other Side Gibbon, Hume, Voltaire A Co. How the Apostles of Infidelity Look Under the Doctor's Electric Light. But what now has infidelity to set forth over against all this? If it is, as is claimed by Mr. Ingersoll, the sublime and blessed truth which is to banish all evil and fill the world with purity and heaven, it will have, of course, some grand examples of its superiority to show. There must needs be some among the. apostles of this highest and divinest form of truth before whom the founder of this Christian scheme of lies, cruelty, and blood, will pale, as the stars before the sun. Who, then, are these grand lumin- aries who are to light our way to this millennium of freedom, purity and peace? There i, no lack of apostles; Voltaire, Kousseau, Diderot, . Hume, Hobbes, Lord DR. GOODWIN'S REPLY. 85 Her'-ert, Bolingbroke, Gibbon, Paine these are repre- sentative names, the highest and best that infidelity has to otter. Gibbon is one of the fairest, as he is one of the ablest of them aii, ;;?;: he has given us a biographical account of himself, and therein, amid all the polish and splendor of' tae rhetoric of which he is such a master, " there is not a line or. a word that suggests reverence for God; not a -vord of regard for the welfare of the human race; nothing >ut the most heartless and sordid selfishness, vain glory, and desire for admiration, adulation of the great and wealihy, contempt for the poor, and supreme devotedness to his own gratification." Adam Smith calls Hume a "moae. :aan," a man " as ' nearly perfect as the nature of human frailty will permit." But David Hume maintained that our own pleasure or advantage is the test of what is moral; that " the l r ; k of honesty is of a piece with the lack of strength of bodv," that " suicide is lawful and commendable," that " female infidelity when known is a small thing, when un- known," nothing;" " that adultery must be practiced, if men would obtain all the advantages of this life; and that if generally practiced it would, in time, cease to be scan- dalous, and if practiced frequently and secretly would come to be thought no crime at all." Lord Herbert taught that the " indulgence of lust and anger is no more to be blamed than thirst or drowsiness." Mr. Hobbes declared, that " civil law is the only founda- tion of right and wrong; that where there is no law, every man's judgment is the only standard of morals; that every man has a right to all things, and may lawfully get them, if he can." Lord Bolingbroke held that self-love is the only standard 86 MISTAKES OF 1NGBRSOLL. of morality, that " the lust of power, avarice, sensuality, may be lawfully gratified, if they can be safely gratified; that modesty is inspired by mere prejudice, polygamy a law of nature, adultery no violation of morals, and the chief end of man is to gratify the appetite of the flesh." And he kept faith with his teachings, and led the life of a shame- less libertine. Yoltaire advocated the unlimited gratification of the sensual appetites, and was a sensualist of the lowest type. He was likewise a blasphemer, a calumniator, a liar, and a hypocrite; a man who all his life taught and wrought " all uncleanness with greediness," and neverthe- less had the amazing good sense to wish that he had never been born. Rousseau was, by his own confessions, a habitual liar, and thief, and debauchee; a man so utterly vile that he took advantage of the hospitality of friends to plot their domestic ruin, a man so destitute of natural affection that he committed his base-born children to the charity of the public that he might be spared the trouble and cost of caring for them. To use his own language, " guilty with- out remorse, he soon became so without measure." As Jp Thomas Paine, the verdict of history is too well set- tled to be reversed by Mr. Ingersoll's wit, or ridicule, or de- nials. After all allowance that can be made for misrepresent- ation, this remains unquestignably true, on the authority of those who claimed to be his friends and knew him best, that in his last years he was addicted to intemperance, given to violence and abusiveness, had disreputable associates, lived with a. woman who was not his wife arid left to her what- ever remnant of fortune he had. These now are the representative names of infidelity, the most saintly apostles it has to offer: Men, the very DR. GOODWIN'S REPLY. 87 best of whom are characterized either by vanity or selfish- ness, or pride or envy, while some are given to deceit, blasphemy, drunkenness, sensuality. Yet these are held up as the examples and illustrators of this new and better gospel, that is to banish from the world the "dogmas of ignorance, prejudice and power," " the poisoned fables of superstition," and in their stead guarantee to us "free- dom, truth, goodness, heaven." "What say you, friends? Here they are the representatives of Christianity, the advocates of the ignorance, bigotry, despotism, which is declared to so blight this world Wesley, "Whitefield, Luther, Calvin, Anselm, Augustine, John, Paul, Jesus Christ. And here, over against them, are the representa- tives of infidelity, the advocates of the doctrines that are to bring back to the world its lost paradise Bolingbroke, Hobbes, Hume, Voltaire, Rousseau, Thomas Paine. With which class shall we make surest of truth, virtue, happiness? With which will our wives and little ones be in the safest keeping? With which the purity of the community, the security of the state, the glory of the nation^ be most surely guaranteed? Such questions answer themselves. No amount of sophistry, with even Mr. Ingersoll's brilliant rhetoric to help it, could make us mistake the night for the day. But as well attempt that, as try to make us put infidelity in the place of Christianity as the light and hope of the world. The Divine Philosophy The Way. But let us advance the thought, and ask what are the fruits of the teachings of Christ as contrasted with those of the apostles of infidelity. In looking for these fruits, this remarkable fact appears, that Christ stands everywhere as the ideal character which those who accept His doctrine are 88 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. pledged to realize so far as lies within their power. This is a peculiarity of Christianity. To study Aristotle, or Pluto, or Bacon, and accept what they teach, implies nothing of this. I may receive all they have to offer, and yet corne into no sort of personal relations to either of them. I may even accept such teachings as truth, and yet know nothing about their personal character. But not so as to Christ. I can not take up what He says about God, or sin, or obedience, or prayer, and set about carrying out such truths, realizing the ends for which they were set forth, and yet sustain no personal relations to Him, have no de- , sire to become like Him. That is an impossibility. He and His word are indissolubly wedded, are inseparably one. To hear that word, from whosesoever lips, is the same as hearing Him; to receive it, is to receive Him, and to reject it, is to reject Him. The only possible way of accepting His truth, fully and truly believing it, is to accept Him, fully believe on and trust in Him. And the whole object of His teachings may be summed up in the simple idea of bringing men to. be like Him. Xot to have the spirit of Christ, is to be none of His. Not to covet to be conformed to His image, not to set that clearly before 'the mind as a constant aim of life, is .to be proved not a true disciple. This is a fundamental principle, a law of Christianity. The Truth. Hence, the power of Christianity as it relates to men's lives. In the nature of the case, in just so far as it gets control of men's hearts, it must produce disciples stamped by the spirit of its founder. They who receive the truth of Christ, will inevitably reveal the likeness of Christ. Paul's eager counting, whereby he u counted all things but loss, that he might win Christ and be found in Him," DR. GOODWIN'S REPLY. 89 and his constant exhortations to believers to "put on Christ," to be " conformed to him," are the spirit which all true believers feel. In other words, Jesus Christ is the one, universal model held steadily before the hearts of all who receive His truth. And there results just what we should expect a spiritual transformation is wrought in every heart, whereby it takes on more and more of the likeness of Christ. Take Peter, for example, a rough, hard, very likely pro fame, fisherman, vehement and im- petuous to the point of rashness, and yet cowardly even to falsehood and blasphemy, to escape being reckoned a friend of his manacled Master. But when this gospel of Christ has gotten thorough possession of him, and the power of it conies to be felt? this same man is all inflamed with zeal, reveals a courage that does not flinch before thousands of his spiteful country- men, and takes up a life full of ridicule, insults, scourges, prisons, and goes steadily on to the sure death that waits, only eager to be more and more like Him, the unseen, yet inspiring Lord, in whom his faith is anchored. So Paul, a scholar, but full of the scholar ; s scorn of the friend of publicans; a Pharisee of the straitest sect, and hence stirred with intensest hate toward all who forsook the faith of their fathers ; so aflame with wrath that he stooped to fill the place of an executioner, and breathing forth threat- en ings and slaughter went out, even as some fierce inquisitor of Torquemada, glad to redden his hands in the blood of men, women, children, holding the despised gospel. And the Life. But this gospel by and by gets hold of him, and what a change! The lion becomes the lamb. The hate, the fe- rocity, the blood-thirstiness is not only all gone, but a 90 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. baptism of heavenly gentleness and love has come instead. He casts aside all his high opportunities, turns his back on the sure prospects of affluence and renown, and taking to his heart the very doctrines he despised, puts himself on the level of the publicans and harlots who have received the new truth, and goes forth to face an experience that for thirty-five years was one perpetual succession of indig- nities and sufferings which it is next to impossible to con- ceive. And does it with a sublime patience, nay, rejoices in his tribulations, and glories in his infirmities, because he thereby realizes more fellowship with the Christ of his hope, more power to commend Him unto men. So always, this spirit which animated Peter and Paul animates all His disciples. It is the Spirit of Christ, His pity for men, His love, His desire to do men good, His longing to clear their hearts and lives of everything false, corrupt, mischievous, and thus ennoble and bless them reproducing itself in all who receive His truth. August- ine, John Newton, John Bunyan, thousands of others, rise up all through the centuries to witness what fruits of character transformation this Gospel everywhere ensures. No matter of what race, or clime, of what condition in life, of what temperament, or idiosyncrasies, or habits, the one fact that inevitably marks the reception of this scheme of Christianity, is, that its disciples take on the visage of their Lord and Master. And if it could only have its way, and men would ever receive it into good and honest hearts, make it the law of their choosing, loving, doing, it would fill the world with the likeness of Jesus the Christ. And that, I take it, would end all debate. For our city, filled with men, women, children, all bear- ing His visage, all filled and led of His spirit, all using His speech, repeating His life, would be what a city of love, DR. GOODWIN'S REPLY. 91 T ' and purity, and heavenliness! And the world so filled would be, how plainly, that old prophetic word come true the wolf dwelling with the lamb, the leopard with the kid, the swords beaten into plowshares, the spears into pruning hooks, the tears wiped from off all faces, sorrow and sighing forever fled away, the light of everlasting peace on all the faces, joy of everlasting blessedness in all hearts. And when to this there is added all the mighty influence over men that comes /rorn such conceptions of God as Christianity unfolds and requires men to accept; concep- tions of God as infinitely good, and holy, and just, and suffering men to set up and whine by no standard but His own; conceptions hence which send men out to daily duty as under the conscious flash of omniscience, and in the conscious fellowship of perfect purity, unselfishness and tone; conceptions further of God as -administers a moral government pledged, with omnipotence behind it, to secure the triumph of holiness, and the retribution of sin, sin of act, speech or thought; when, I .repeat, all these considera- tions are brought to bear upon men's hearts and lives as constant forces, as by the scheme of Christianity they are, who can doubt what the quality of their fruitage in human conduct will be? As well might we doubt whether the sun will scatter darkness where he shines, or evoke life and beauty from the seeds embosomed by his warmth. The Potency ot Infidelity. But what has infidelity to set over against the.se forces? "What are the potent influences by which it is to surpass in efficiency for good, the example and teachings of Christ, and His apostles, the law of God and its standards, and thus renovate society and clear the earth of evil, and fill 'it with blessings? Why, that there is no absolute standard 02 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. of lu^ra;!?, and that every man is to be his own judge oJ what is ri^'hv, an-i seek what will minister to his happiness or profit. That we may gratify our appetites at pleasure. That modesty is a mere prei'idice, That to secure the highest good, we must lie, and steai, a.~.<' ^ra.tice adultery. That there is, probably, no God, and if there oe, He is above taking cognizance of the petty matters of this lite; that there is no hereafter, or. if there be, there is no punish- ment for sin; that God, if there be a God, wants men to despise all creeds, all reputations, all authorities that cross their preferences, give themselves to seeking happi- ness with utter contempt of rules, and preach 2 '.'6. ind hell- fire; live while they live, and let the future take care of itself. Two Pictures. These are the two systems which are the claimants for our acceptance. Which shall we take for the vine, and which the thornbush? Which is the sheep, and which the wolf \ Looking at the two classes of teachers as now put in contrast, and the spirit and tendency of their teachings, can there be any difficulty in making answer? As little as between a royal palm, on the one hand, its branches filled with singing birds, groups of parents and their children gathered underneath rejoicing in the grateful shade, the bubbling fountains, the fragrant flowers, and the luscious fruit; and on the other, a baleful upas tree, not a bird in its branches, nor a gushing spring, nor a flower, nor a living thing beneath, but far and near the bones of its victims thickly strewn and the poison of death tainting all the air. And just as little doubt can there be, when we apply this same test of the text to the ages, and ask for the fruits of these respective systems of belief. I commend the inquiry to you. I can only hint at the testimony of history and DR. GOODWIN'S REPLY. 93 leave yon to examine it at ycyr leisure. Mr. Ingersoll prefers fearful charges against Chrior.a^ity. Wherever he finds a witch hung, a philosopher put iivy : rison, or an unbeliever put to death by those who wear the Christian name, there he raises the cry of tyranny, and blood- thirstiness, and accuses Christianity of pulling the rr -^, turning the key, kindling the lire. I have no defence to make for such thin?-: --^ey are sad fact?. :L. church history, and I condemn them as earnes^y as does Mr. But admitting all such facts that can be hunted out in the sweep of eighteen centuries, the genius of the Gospel, the spirit of Christianity is in no respect moved to be cruel and tyrannous thereby. As well say that Peter's lifting his sword and smiting off the ear of the high priest's servant, or the desire of James and John to call down fire from heaven on the unfriendly Samaritans, was the spirit of Christ and His Gospel. Christianity Not Responsible for the Wickedness of Christians Lawlessness is Not the Law. These things are not the product of Christianity. They are in no sense the legitimate fruit of its teachings, and in no t sense do they truly represent its spirit. They are the product of human nature sometimes falsely interpreting, sometimes boldly over-riding the word of God. Good men may be led astray, may be blinded, hurried on by passion, and do things which in cooler blood and under better light they would be' the first to condemn. Christianity has never taught, has never approved such things. The Roman Catholic Church may have done so, and John Calvin, and Cotton Mather, but the Bible never. And while we condemn the misdirected zeal of these good men, we ought not to forget, as Mr. Ingersoll is at pains 94 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. to, the extenuations to which they are justly entitled, the fact, for example, that the highest authority^in English law, Sir Matthew Hale, held Cotton Mather's view about witches and sentenced them to death. And the fact, also, that the sentence of Socrates was not the act of John Calvin, but of the Swiss magistrate, and their decision to burn him adhered to in spite of Calvin's earnest appeal that he should be otherwise executed. Nor making the most and worst of such a mistake, or crime, if any choose to term it so, ought we to be blinded thereby to the splen- did services in behalf of truth, justice, liberty, rendered by these very men. There are spots even on the sun,butwe forget about them in the wealth and blessings of his effulgence. But whatever may be true of the conduct of particular disciples of Christianity, they never constitute the stand- ards by which its teachings are to be tested. Such conduct throws us back upon the question, Is this what the Bible teaches ? That is our statute book, and its express doctrines, not men's application of them, are what settle its spirit. If good men anywhere in our State, angered by the depre- dations of a gang of horse theives or burglars, organize into a vigilance committee, lay hands upon a suspected person, take him from bed or from prison and hang him to a limb of the nearest tree, we do not arraign the laws of Illinois, nor the people of Illinois for the act. We charge the violence, the lawlessness, upon the particular wrong-doers engaged. So, here, the Bible nowhere teaches cruelty, tyranny, nowhere encourages putting men to death because of their beliefs, or even their shamelessness in sin. God did, in- deed, in given instances, Cake the administration of human government into His own hands, and sweep the face of the earth clean of its vile inhabitants by the deluge; and blot DR. GOODWIN'S REPLY. 95 out Sodom and Gomorrah the cities of the plain, with a fiery storm of retributive wrath. So He likewise gave order for the purging of the land of promise of the hordes of Canaanitish idolaters whose cup of abominations was overfull. And for these things God stands ready to make answer to all who arraign Him. The Great Cloud of Witnesses. But He has laid on men no injunctions requiring them to take His place and pass upon their fellows in judgment. Throughout His Book one spirit runs. On the authority of the one great expounder of it the sum of all its com- mands is supreme love for God, unselfish love for man. And this is the spirit which Christianity has always taught and always exemplified in its true disciples. Look at the proof before us to-day. Consider these thousands of Churches, their pulpits all aiming to exalt this Bible with its law of love, to magnify this Christ with His life of devotion to the welfare of men. Consider the millions of worshipers, all seeking to know God, all accepting His standards of character, all seeking to possess the spirit and wear the likeness of His son. Consider the countless mul- titudes of children in Sunday Schools, all filling the air with the praises of Jesus Christ, and all taught, if nothing else, that He is the one model they are to imitate, and His teachings to be the law of their deeds, their words, their thoughts. Consider these innumerable Christian news- papers, filling the land with the same doctrines, and using their prodigious influence to make them the supreme faith of the nations. Consider the hundreds of Christian Colleges and Seminaries, training young men and young women for lives of beneficence and usefulness. Consider the scores nd hundreds of publishing societies, all animated with 96 MISTAKES OF 1NOERSOLL. one purpose, and sending forth their mighty streams of tracts, books, Bibles, to fill the earth with the story of Christ and with the spirit of His life. Consider the count- less institutions established by Christianity, to relieve dis- tress, to provide for the unfortunate, to administer the gospel of practical beneficence. Consider the manifold or- ganizations aimed at spreading the gospel among all the debased races of the earth and making the victims of super- sL:Son with its nameless terrors know the glad tidings of a salvation that puts an end to bloodshed, and cruelties, and woes, lills all hearts with love, all homes with peace, all lives with blessing. Consider how this spirit of Christianity illustrated in all these diverse lines of effort, everywhere carries on its Banner he doctrine of the universal brother- hood of man, recognizes no distinction between the Negro the Indian, the Chinaman, the Hottentot, the Cannibal^ but seeks to make them all one in the fellowship and liberty >f Jesus Christ. And consider yet again, that it requires, 0,3 one of its fundamental principles, a condition in fact of all true discipleship, all who receive its truths, shall pledge themselves to give, and pray, and toil without ceasing, till this gospel has penetrated every jur^ 1 ~ jlimbed every mountain fortress, hunted . t every cavern, every kraal, every wigwam, every suow-h' t, and sounded its in- vitations and promises in the ears of all mankind. Whether all this signifies anything as a power for good in the world, judge ye. Mr, IT gersoll seems to think it goes for nothing, bui against his opinion I put that of .Mr. Lecky, who in his history of European morals, says this he is speaking of the contrast between the influence of Christianity and paganism " It was reserved for Christianity to present to the world an ideal character which through all the changes of eighteen centuries has DR. GOODWIN'S UKTLY. 87 been not only the highest pattern of virtue, but the strong- est incentive to its practice, and lias exercised so deep an influence that it may be truly said to have done more to regenerate and to soften mankind than all the disquisitions of philosophers and all the exhortations of mortals." The Fruits of Infidelity The Blackest Pag-e in Human History The French Revolution. But when was ever infidelity so engaged? Where are the organizations it has instituted, the missionaries it has sent forth, to fill the world with the blessings of faith, freedom, virtue? But I forget. Infidelity has such a record of organized endeavor to regenerate mankind. Turn to the history of the French Revolution and. read it there. The leaders of that revolution, as you know, were the very class whom Mr. Ingersoll glorifies: the disciples of Diderot, Voltaire, Rousseau. They were avowed atheists or infidels, and Thomas Paine was one of the number, sat in their midst, participated in their discussions, aided in drawing up the constitution they enacted. What that convention said and did the world knows and will never forget. They did what Mr. Ingersoll would be glad to have the Congress of the United States do. They abolished Christianity by vote. They declared there was no God, forbade the public instructors to utter His name to their children. They struck the Sabbath oui of the calendar and made the week consist of ten days instead of seven. They wrote over the gates of the cemeteries, / o " Death is an eternal sleep." They tore down the bells from the church spires and cast them into cannons. They stripped the churches of everything used in worship, and made bonfires in the streets, and then instituted the rights >/ the old pagan religions, where the altars had stood. V8 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. Ingersollism Unveiled. Not content with this, Chaumette, one of the leaders of the convention, appeared one day before that body, leading a noted courtesan with a troop of her associates. Ad- vancing to the president, he raised her veil, and ex- claimed : "Mortals! recognize no other divinity than Reason, of which I present to you the loveliest and purest Personifica- tion." Whereupon the president of the convention bowed and professed to render devout adoration. And a few days later the same scene was re-enacted in the cathedral of Notre Dame, with increased profanations and more outrageous orgies, and was declared to be the public inauguration of the new religion of the commune. And like desecrations and blasphemies throughout all France took the place of the old worship. Worse than this, all distinctions of right and wrong were confounded. The grossest debauchery was inaugurated, the wildest excesses prevailed and were gloried in. Con- tempt for religion and for decency became the test of attachment to the government. The grosser the infractions of morals, the greater the so-called victory over prejudice, the higher the proof of loyalty to the state. To accuse one's father was the best proof of citizenship; to neglect it was denounced as a crime, and was punishable with death. Wives were bayoneted for the faith of their husbands, and husbands for that of their wives. One of the chief tools of the commune, Carrier, ruling at Nantes, declared that the " intention of the Convention was to depopulate and burn the country," and he was as good as his word. He gathered those suspected of disloyalty in flocks. DR. GOODWIN'S REPLY. 99 He shut tip 1,500 women and children in one prison with- out beds, without straw, without fire or covering, and kept them for two days without food. The only escape was for men to surrender their fortunes, and women their virtue. The Penumbra of Hell. He contrived ships with slides in their hulls below the water line, loaded these with his prisoners under pretext of transporting them elsewhere, and when the vessels were in the middle of the Loire, ordered the valves opened and the victims plunged into the water, while he, sur- rounded by a troop of prostitutes, looked on and gloated over the scene. And this is only a type of what occurred elsewhere. Proscription followed proscription, tragedy followed trag- edy, till the whole country was one hugh field of rapine and of blood. Mr. Ingersoll admits that 17,000 perished in the City of Paris during this combined reign of infidelity and terror; 3,000,000 lives were the costly price of establishing the new religion. There is no disputing these facts, nor the reasons that underlay them. This whole terrific record and history knows none that is darker or more damning was the di- rect and legitimate fruit of the doctrines which Mr. Inger- soll lauds as the sublime truth " that is to fill the world with peace!" The men who originated and carried out this combined scheme of government and religion, were the men with whom Thomas Paine sat, and voted, and was in every way identified. His faith was their faith. And at his door equally with theirs does this series of the most fiendish 100 MISTAKES OP INQER80LL. outrages that ever disgraced a people pretending to be civ- ilized cry for vengeance. The Final Picture Ingersollism, An Endless Night of Tears. And what infidelity was then, it is now. And what it did then, so far as its assaults upon religion were concerned, and its overturning of civil order, it would do to-day, if it had the power. If Mr. Ingersoll could have his way, he would abolish God, and the church, and the Christian Sabbath, and the Bible, and everything pertaining thereto. He would ban- ish Christian newspaper? and colleges, and benevolent societies; proscribe all oaths in courts of justice; expunge the name of God from all statute books, the name of Christ from all calendars and text-books; annihilate all moral standards; would, in a word, not only quench all prayer and praise and honoring of God, but sweep the world clear of everything that bears the name or shows the spirit of Christianity. And what would he give us for all this \ For our Bible, the Age of Reason. For the Sabbath, the beer-garden and the theatre. For worship, the rites of paganism or the adoration of an apotheosized courtesan. For the standards of God's law, that which should seem right in every man's eyes. For the law-making power, the blasphemous horde of the French commune. For security, the guillotine drip- ping with blood at every street-corner. For truth, candor, love, temperance, purity deceit, treachery, hate, drunken- ness, sensuality, with all their crimes and shames. In a word, for this is the outcome of all such purpose, if the infidelity that Mr. Ingersoll glorifies could have its way, it would strike the sun from the sky of our Christian civ- ilization, and give us instead the lurid night of the reign DR. GOODWIN'S REPLY. 101 of terror, only it would make it a night with no Napoleon or Chateaubriand to break the gloom a night of tears, and blood and woe without an end! Shall we open our arms to welcome this new gospel? Tallyrand's Advice to Ingersoll and His Friends. During this period of the history of France, one of the five Directors in whose hands the government was lodged, asked Tallyrand what he thought of Theophilanthropism, the name given the new religion. " I have but a single observation to make," was his reply. "Jesus Christ, to found His religion, suffered Himself to be crucified, and He rose again. You should try and do as much." Friends, when this new gospel of infidelity shall furnish us such proofs of its right to claim our acceptance, it will be entitled to a hearing. Until then let us cling to the teachings of Him whose words and deeds alike attest Him the light and life of the world. 102 MISTAKES OF INQE&SOLL. PERE HYACINTHE'S REPLY. [Nineteenth Century.] Ingersollism in Paris The Metaphysics of Paganism Eloquent Conclusion of the Great Philosopher. The religious question, whatever may be said or done, is the reigning question of our epoch. As regards France and the Republic it is more and more evident to any one who has the slighest perspicacity that the question they have to solve under penalty of death and of a death not far distant is precisely the religious question. As we ^approach and touch the actualities of our own time, I feel the lines of justice stronger and straighter. But within these lines and with the actualities of to-day we breathe, thank heaven, the beneficent atmosphere of liberty. I shall therefore speak my mind freely, recounting what I see in the region of free-thought, as it is called. But the word is badly chosen. We Christians also, we desire and we are bound to think freely. We are between two parties I should say armies that of Rationalism and that of Ultramontanism. I respect them both. I respect the Roman Catholics, be- cause they are especially my brethren ; I shared for a long time their delusions, and I still share their faith, as expressed in the Nicene Creed. I am and intend to remain a Catho- lic. I also respect the free-thinkers. I know how sincere a great number of them are, and moreover I feel myself moved by a painful and respectful sympathy for the suifer- ings which it has been my lot to discover in many of their PERE HYAOINTHE'S REPLY. 103 consciences. And far be it from me to willingly wound I will not say any conscience hut any person, and, if I un- wittingly do so, I retract beforehand. I will not say that in the interval of these sixteen hundred years Christianity has perished: on the contrary, I think that in more than one sense it has more life than ever in the world, and that, too, in Paris. Twice in the history cf these centuries the see of St. Denis has abdi- cated, and twice it has abdicated before two rival paganisms, mortal enemies each of the other, and yet leagued together against the Gospel against the pure and entire Gospel. Let us begin by speaking of the first of these two paganisms of that which I will call the intellectual paganism, or rather the irreligious, I should almost say the impious, paganism for it is that which suppresses religion. The other paganism is the superstitious pagan- ism, which distorts religion. In speaking of the first of these paganisms first chronologically, but not in power I can repeat what we have learned from Leibnitz, and what experience has confirmed, that each new affirmation of superstition or fanaticism is met by a negation of in- credulity and irreligion, and that each new manifestation of incredulity encounters a new affirmation of super- stition. Extremes meet nay, they do more they unite and progagate; and this is precisely the tragic, the for- midable aspect of the situation. To deal with the paganism of incredulity, of irreligion, we must go back to the troubled dawn of our French Revolution. It was before an assembly which had its days of glory, but which, at the time I am speaking of, was not worthy of France the National Convention. At its bar appeared the successor of St. Denis, he who, invested with the 1C4 MISTAKES OF INGEKSOLL. episcopal tiara, occupied the see of Paris the constitu- tional bishop, Gobel. On his brow, which had borne the mitre (mysterious symbol of the august and pacific power which comes from Jesus Christ), he had placed the red Phrygian cap emblem of the bloody demagogy. He ap- peared before the assembly without having been called, and, in base, despicable language said: i; T:^ -.vill of the people has always been my first thought, and my first duty is to obey it." But the cowardly apostate confounded the respect of the people with the fear of the scaffold, as he confounded the respect of God with the terror of hell. Tormented by day by the vision of the guillotine, tortured at night by infernal visions, actuated by the basest cowardice, and possessing no religion, neither that of the Stoics nor that of Christians, he had come there, sur- rounded by the meanest of his priests, to abjure at one and the same time his Christian faith and his episcopacy. "Citizens," said the president of the Convention to them, "in laying on tho altar of the Republic these Gothic baubles, you have deserved well of the nation." Frantic applause burst forth from most of the benches, while Robespierre, isolated in his disgust, meditated the sentence which a few days later was to send Gobel to wash out, if he could, his shame by the guillotine. This was the first abdication of the pulpit of the see of St. Denis. This abdication was not made, however, into the hands of paganism: the Convention was not pagan, it was deist. Robespierre proclaimed it in language which was per- haps strange and ridiculous, but which has also its sub- lime aspect he proclaimed the official belief of the French people in the Supreme Being and in the immortality of the soul. Would that all the Republicans of to-day preserved the orthodoxy of the National Convention! PERE HYACINTUE'8 REPLY. 105 The Convention was deist, but it was already outstripped by atheism. Robespierre was classed among the cham- pions of the old regime. The Supreme Being was a myth to be banished with Jehovah and Jesus. The Commune of Paris was in the van of progress, and the procurator ringleader of that Commune, Chaumette, stood in front of the altar of Notre Dame to inaugurate the most disgrace- ful of all paganisms the religion of atheism. On the altar of Jesus stood a courtesan; she personified in her own barren and corrupting flesh the profaned reason of man. A shameless woman, a reason profaned this was the goddess of Reason ; and to her were offered adorations which we are willing to forget on the condition that we are not forced to remember them. It was, therefore, a new paganism which arose; but, to the glory of the French people, I can say that the goddess of Reason threw off her vile trappings and cleansed herself of the mire into which she had fallen. And, yet, alas! to be faithful to truth, I am forced to say that the goddess of Reason is still standing erect, and that her throne is neither in Berlin nor London at Berlin, in the German universities, where there are no doubt powerful lucubra- tions of rationalism and irreligion; in England, where flourishes to-day the most radically skeptical school in the world but the irradiating and powerful focus is Paris. JSTot only is the goddess Reason still living in our midst, and not only are we living witnesses, but we are living actors in a veritable paganism. Paganism is vast it stretches from the African fetish- ism to the pantheism of the Brahmins and the atheism of the Buddhists, for atheism itself has its religion. There are those to be found in our day who imagine that religion can be uprooted from the human soil and a great people 106 MISTAKES OF 1NGMR80LL. made to live without adoring. But religion is a thing so great, so subtle, so deep-roote*d in man, that even when the very idea of God has disappeared, as in Buddhism (which contemporaneous savants affirm, although I myself doubt it), there still remains a religion, the most powerful and sometimes the most fanatic. Thus, from the fetishism of the Africans to the atheism of the Buddhists and the pantheism of the Brahmins, there are all the degrees and shades of polytheism. But these numerous forms, opposed to one another, all enter into the great sphere of paganism. We must not, however, con- found paganism with any of these forms, and if we wish to obtain an exact definition, we must go to the essence of it. What, then, is the essence of paganism or idolatry? Bossuet has told us in a single word : everything is God exc&pt God Himself. Paganism consists essentially in the substitu- tion of the relative for the absolute, of the finite for the infinite, of man for God. I say " man " rather than nature, for in modern times we do not adore nature, especially ex- terior nature, for we know it better than our ancestors; we have analyzed it by our science, we have conquered it by our industry; we simply make it our slave. But when God has disappeared when the Living-Infinite and the Per- sonal Absolute have gone when, as Hamilton says, we have succeeded in exorcising the spectre of the absolute, we find ourselves before another spectre-^-man: man be- holding only himself, man adoring himself, sometimes with the calculating designs of a cold egotism, sometimes with the sudden passions of voluptuousness, ambition, or pride; but it is always man that adores himself. If he adores himself in his individual person, it is egotism ; if he adores himself in the person of some or all of his kind, it is what is called to-day, in rather barbarous French, Valtruisme PERE HTACINTHE'S REPLY. 107 (other-selfism) ; or when, finally, withdrawing himself from individuals or from his own person, he adores himself under the ideal of humanity, and when man adores himself in humanity, as Auguste Comte, a man of great talent, almost of genius, said, "in the continuity of convergent beings," it is still man adoring himself. And, I would ask, did not Auguste Oomte himself, while summing up and crowning a scientific life by mystic conceptions, pass from pure phi- losophy to religion, and inaugurate in Paris, at No. 10 Rue Monsieur le Prince it still exists what he called " the sanctuary of the religion of humanity," of which he was the first high-priest, and for which lie created a calendar and sacraments? These are living facts of to-day. . The two schools which nowadays hold sway over the scientific realm, and would fain attract within their grasp all methods of teaching, and encroach on private and social life, are the sciences of Materialise and Positivism. But I will not hesitate to tell these schools that they, in fact, are the embodiment of paganism in the sense of the substitution of man for God. It is true that it is a very pure paganism, for indeed there could be no other within a Christian society. Jesus Christ has spoken of worship in spirit and in .truth. I say that it is idolatry in spirit and in truth. It is the creature usurping the place of the Creator; the constant substitution of the finite for the infinite, of man for the personal and living God. That is paganism; and we find it in the three orders of human life knowledge, ethics, and society. In the order of knowledge, it is reason serving itself not only from Christian revelation that would be already too much, for human reason has need of the Gospel of Jesus Christ but extinguishing on the very heights it occupies the effulgent rays of dawn, the breath of the 108 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL. early day about to break. It is reason forgetting all meta- physics, as well as all religion; restraining, crippling it- self in the order of outer and material observation, and in the order of inner and psychological observation. " There is but nothingness beyond observation and facts," says the Materialist; nothing but hypothesis, says the Pos- itivist. But this is the mutilated reason of man, the science of observation set in the place of natural sense, of the rational intuition of things spiritual and eternal. Such is the first characteristic of paganism. If we enter into conscience, we find an absence of the absolute elements, because God is no longer there: God is nothing, or at least an hypothesis. The human conscience, bereft of its absolute elements, is necessarily bereft of all divine elements. iWliat then remains? Three laws, from which a man may chose according to his taste or fancy, according as his mind is of an austere or depraved charac- ter the law of conscience, but of a conscience wholly relative and contingent, a conscience based on self, which is but self communing with self in its own dignity; the law of duty, a beautiful law, inasmuch as it sometimes gives rise to real virtues, admirable self-sacrifice in incon- sistent men, who are better than their systems. And yet this is but a relative, contingent conscience, devoid of all value but that of human self. By the side of the law of conscience there is the law of the heart, with its fervid enthusiasm, its beautiful ideal of the imagi- nation as well as of sentiment. Need I add that under- neath conscience and heart lies what has been called " the law of physical members," as expounded by that great Saint-Simonian school which taught the rehabilitation of the flesh. If conscience be not an element superior to man, and PERE HYACINTUE'S REPLY. 109 law not a light existing within him, but coming to him from above, it is left to man to choose, to calculate in his wisdom the measure of his conscience which bids him sacrifice himself, the measure of his heart which bids him love, and the measure of his flesh which counsels his enjoyment. That is logic. Man may be better than logic, but nevertheless this is logic. It is man, principle and end of morality, as it is man, the principle and end of conscience. In the social order we have democracy, a most noble form, and perhaps the definitive form of human societies. Let us use no ambiguities here. The democracy which I admit is that of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the initiator of contemporary democracy ; and though often a false prophet, he was true and sublime when he qualified democracy as " God's people governing itself," i.e. the sovereignty of the people acting only as agent of the superior sovereignty of reason and justice. But the democracy of human affairs which ignores God and His divine law in all things is a democracy which renders nugatory all laws it can make itself, arid powerless all human action. If the value of laws, of political constitutions, of the constitution of society itself if the value of property and of the family tie are not founded on absolute reason, but are merely the arbitrary result of the popular will; if man, the majority of the people for it is a majority, never a whole people, that speaks declares that such and such a law is a true or just one because it has so willed it, and such and such a constitution wrong or bad because it will have no more of it I maintain that such a democracy is but tyranny under a new form. It matters little to me that I am governed by one man or millions of men. As a man I owe obedience direct only to reason and 110 MISTAKES OF INGEHSOLL. divine justice, indirectly to the social agent established in the name of this reason and of this justice. In a tradi- tionally raonarchial society this agent is the prince, and I acknowledge the monarch. But, I repeat, behind and above the monarch I bow only to divine order and supreme law, whose agent he, the king or the emperor, is held to be. In a democratic society it is the people I should say the majority of the people, since we must be arraigned before that law of numbers which is becoming the const^ tuted agent of justice and law. I accept willingly the majority of the people; but that majority can claim rnj allegiance only so long as it shall represent the principle of a higher order, the principle of absolute justice God. Thus, in the social as well as in the moral and intellectual order, it is every man arraigned before his fellow-man. In other words, it is paganism. What we must do, and I continue to appeal 'co my dear fellow-citizens, my dear co-religionists fo^, after all, we are all Christians, and when we go to tae bottom of our souls we all feel Christianity there wo must, amid all these errors, raise aloft the banner of the Gospel. Instead of isolating ourselves, instead of ring on one another in this civil war, in this criminal and mad war, we must unite together. We must labor in that work of which Mr. Gladstone, one of thoso statesmen who do not blush to be real Christians, remarked to me one day that the greatest idea of this century was Catholic reform and the unity of the Church. Above Protestanism and its divi- sions, above Roman Catholicism and its oppression, above Greek Catholicism and its somnolence or isolation, let us endeavor to arouse a great organic and living Christianity, a vast superior and integral Catholicism, a free and strong federation of churches and consciences. DYING WORDS. Ill DYISTG WORDS. " Bless you, there is no river here." Bishop Haven. " The best of all is, God is with us. Farewell " John Wesley. " O, why not now? But Thy will be done; come, Lord Jesus." St. Augustine. " Now I go into Paradise." Jacob Bcehmer. " Welcome joy.' ; John Elliot. "What shall I say? Christ is altogether lovely; His glorious angels are come for me." John Bailey. " See in what peace a Christian can die." Joseph Addison. "Glory! glory! glory! Hallelujah, 'Jesus reigns!" Jesse Lee. " I am not disappointed." Bishop Janes. " Talk to me of Jesus." Adam Nightingale. " Such singing! Do you not hear it? " John Carey. " Rest, perfect rest." Thomas Burrows. " All is light." Theophilus Pugh. " Tell my brethren I arn on the rock. There is no other foundation." Joseph Hollis. " O God of angels and powers, and of all creatures, and of all the just that live in Thy sight; blessed be Thou who hast made me worthy to see this day and hour ; Thou hast made me a partaker among the holy martyrs. O Lord, I adore Thee for all thy mercies. I bless Thee that 1 glorify Thee through Thy only-begotten Son, the eternal High Priest, Jesus Christ." Poly carp, at the Stake. 112 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. "I am not afraid to look death in the face. I can say, ' Death, where is thy sting? ' ' John Dodd. " If I had strength to hold a pen, I would write how easy and delightful it is to die." Win. Hunter. "If this be dying, it is the easiest thing imaginable." Lady Glenorchy. " I welcome death, and calmly pass away." Arthur Murphy. " I am now in a state in which nothing in this world can disturb me more. I am comfortably coming to my end." Collingwood. " I did not suppose it was so sweet to die." Saurez. the Spanish theologian. " Let me die in the sounds of delicate music." Mira- beau. "Kiss. me, Hardy. I thank God I have done my duty." Lord Nelson. " I feel well; I never felt more so in my life; I am in- expressibly happy." David Daily. "Glory to God in the highest, the whole earth shall !>< filled with His glory." Jesse Appleton. " After glories that God has manifested to my soul, all is light, light, light the brightness^!' His own glory. O come, Lord Jesus, come; come quickly." Toplofty-, author of "Rock of Ages." 1 " " See how calm a Christian can die! " Addison. " Blessed be God, all is well." Darracott. "Never better; soon home: only two steps more, and I shall reach my Father's home." Dr. Rowland Taylor. " Glory to God, I see heaven open before me." Benja- min Abbott. DYING WORDS. 113 "I have done with darkness forever." Thomas Scott. " Children, as soon as I am released, sing a psalm of praise to God." Mrs. Susanna Wesley. " Brethren, sing and pray; eternity dawns." Dr. Eddy. " I am going up, up, up." R. V. Lawrence. " I have got the victory, and Christ is holding out both hands to embrace me." Rutherford. " Glory! glory! glory! Hallelujah! Jesus reigns." Jesse Lee. " Let him fear death who must pass from this death to the second death." Cyprian "Now I go into paradise." Rev. Jacob Ballmer. " I believe, I believe. I am almost well. Lord teach us how to die." Richard Baxter "We shall meet ere long to sing the new song, and re- main happy forever in a world without end." John Bun- yan. " Live in Christ, live in Christ, and the flesh need not fear.death." John Know. " Jesus, Jesus, I die, but Thou livest." Otterbein. " The greatest conflict is over; all is done. To live is Christ; but to die is gain." J. Harvey. " My son, you have taken away my religion ; now tell me something to comfort me." The Message of Humds Mother, on her death-led, to her son. " "Welcome this chain for Christ's sake." John Huss, at the Stake. " Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost." Bede. " Into Thy hands I commend my spirit. Thou hast re- deemed me, O Lord God of truth." Martin Luther. 114 MISTAKES OF 1NOERSOLL. " I want nothing; I am looking for nothing but heaven." Melanethon. "Now let Thj servant depart in peace. Suffer me to come to thee. Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." Bishop Jewell. " I am found in Him who loved me and gave Himself for me. I am swallowed up in God." Dr. Goodwin, (Puritan Divine). " Glory to Thee, O God" Gordon Hall. " The Celestial City is now full in my view." Payson. " I am taking a fearful leap into the dark." Hobbs. "I long to die, that I may be in the place of perdition^ that I may know the worst of it. My damnation is sealed." 'William Pope. " Oh, the insufferable pangs of hell." Sir Francis Newport. "I must die abandoned of God and of men." Vol- taire. In a recent rehash of an old lecture on Thomas Paine we find the following paragraph: "You have burned us at the stake; roasted us upon slow fires; torn our flesh with iron; you have covered us with chains; treated us as outcasts ; you have filled the world with fear ; you have taken our wives and our children from our arms," etc. We ask in the name of simplest truth and common justice who it is that have suffered these things? The answer comes from every page of history, that it is follow- ers of Christ, who have clung to Him through the fires of persecution and the floods of misfortune. MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 115 They were believers in the Bible who went to the stake; else, why were Bibles burned with them in the flames? Men do not go to the rack, the stake, or the guillotine, rather than renounce their faith when they have no faith to renounce. Men and women do not choose to be placed in red-hot iron chains rather than to deny a Lord on whom they have never believed. Men do not submit to have their tungs cut out, to be thrown to wild beasts, or to perish in slow fires, in prefer- ence to recanting from a position they have never assumed. Cellsus was not crucified; Parphry was not banished; Julian did not suffer, save at the hands of his own con- science; Voltaire was not thrown into a caldron of boiling oil ; Paine was not burned at the stake, and modern skep- ti'cs are not placed in the stocks or whipped in the streets. It was men, women, yes, and children, who clung to the written word when fire and flame and irons and lash were the rewards of their fidelity. They have been driven to mountains and caverns, to wander in sheepskins and goat- skins they of whom the world was not worthy. The same hands burned Christians that burned Bibles. They thought to crush the book and its believers by the same means. But the old book lives on, unmindful of the waves that beat against its unfailing foundations. It is still the " pillar of cloud " by day, and the " pillar of fire " in the night time of persecution, and thus it will ever be until the weary feet of God's little ones find rest upon the ever green shores of eternal life.- Mrs. IT. V. Reed. COL. MOBERT G. 1NG-1EM8OLL. 116 ON THOMAS PAINE. 117 COL. INGERSOLL'S LECTURE ON THOMAS PAINE. Delivered in Central Music Hall, Chicago, January 29, 1880. (From the Chicago Times, Verbatim Report.} LADIES AND GENTLEMEN : It so happened that the first speech the very first public speech I ever made I took occasion to defend the memory of Thomas Paine. I did it because I had read a little something of the history of my country. I did it because I felt indebted to him for the liberty I then enjoyed and whatever religion maybe true, ingratitude is the blackest of crimes. And whether there is any God or not, in every star that shines, gratitude is a virtue. The man who will tell the truth about the dead is a good man, and for one, about this man, I intend to tell just as near the truth as I can. Most history consists in giving the details of things that never hap- pened most biography is usually the lie coming from the mouth of flattery, or the slander coming from the lips of malice, and whoever attacks the religion of a country will, in his turn, be attacked. Who- ever attacks a superstition will find that superstition defended by all the meanness of ingenuity. Whoever attacks a superstition will find that there is still one weapon left in the arsenal of Jehovah slander. I was reading, on yesterday, a poem called the "Light of Asia," and I read in that how a Boodh seeing a tigress perishing of thirst, with her mouth upon the dry stone of a stream, with her two cubs sucking at her dry and empty dugs, this Boodh took pity upon this wild and fam- ishing beast, and, throwing from himself the yellow robe of his order, and stepping naked before this tigress, said : " Here is meat for you and for your cubs." In one moment the crooked daggers of her claws ran riot in his flesh, and in another he was devoured. Such, during nearly all the history of this world, has been the history of every man who has stood in front of superstition. Thomas Paine, as has been so eloquently said by the gentleman who introduced me, was a friend of man, and whoever is a friend of man is also a friend of God if there is one. But God has had many friends 118 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. who were the enemies of their fellow-men. There is but one test by which 10 measure any man who has lived. Did he leave this world bet- ter than he found it ? Did he leave in this world more liberty? Did he leave in this world more goodness, more humanity, than when he was born? That is the test. And whatever may have been the faults of Thomas Paine, no American who appreciates liberty, no American who believes in true democracy and pure republicanism, should ever breathe one word against hia name. Every American, with the divine mantle of charity, should cover all his faults, and with a never-tiring tongue should recount his virtues. He was a common man. He did not belong to the aristocracy. Upon the head of his father God had never poured the divine petro- leum of authority. He had not the misfortune to belong to the upper classes. He had the fortune to be born among the poor and to feel against his great heart the throb of the toiling and suffering masses. Neither was it his misfortune to have been educated at Oxford. What little sense he had was not squeezed out at Westminster. He got his education from books. He got his education from contact with his fellow-men, and he thought; and a man is worth just what nature im- presses upon him. A man standing by the sea, or in a forest, or look- ing at a flower, or hearing a poem, or looking into the eyes of the woman he loves, receives all that he is capable of receiving and if he is a great man the impression is great, and he uses it for the purpose of benefiting his fellow-man. Thomas Paine was not rich ; he was poor, and his father Jbefore him was poor, and he was raised a sail-makar, a very lowly profession, and yet that man became one of the main-stays of liberty in this world. At one time he was an excise man, like Burns. Burns was once speak it softly a ganger and yet he wrote poems that will wet the cheek of humanity with tears as long as this world travels in its orb around the sun. Poverty was his brother, necessity his master. He had more brains than books; more courage than politeness; more strength than polish. He had no veneration for old mistakes, no admiration for ancient lies. He loved fhe truth for truth's sake and for man's sake. He saw op- pression on every hand, injustice every where, hypocrisy at the altar, venality on the bench, tyranny on the throne, and with a splendid cour- age he espoused the cause of the weak against the strong, of the en- slaved many against the titled few. In England he was nothing. He belonged to the lower classes that is, the useful people. England depended for her prosperity upon her ON THOMAS PAINE. 119 mechanics and her thinkers, her sailors and her workers, and they are the only men in Europe who are not gentlemen. The only obstacles in the way of progress in Europe were the nobility and the priests, and they are the only gentlemen. This, and his native genius, constituted his entire capital, and he needed no more. He found the colonies clamoring for justice ; whining about their grievances; upon their knees at the foot of the throne, im- ploring that mixture of idiocy and insanity, George III, by the grace of God, for a restoration of their ancient privileges. They were not endeavoring to become free men, but were trying to soften the heart of their master. They were perfectly willing to make brick if Pharoah would furnish the straw. The colonists wished for, hoped for, and prayed for reconciliation. They did not dream of independence. Paine gave to the world his " Common Sense." It was the first argu- ment for separation ; the first assault upon the British form of govern- ment; the first blow for a republic, and it aroused our fathers like a trumpet's blast. He was the first to perceive the destiny of the new . world. No other pamphlet ever accomplished such wonderful results. It was filled with arguments, reasons, persuasions, and unanswerable logic. It opened a new world. It filled the present with hope and the future with honor. Everywhere the people responded, and in a few months the Continental Congress declared the colonies free and inde- pendent states. A new nation was born. It is simple justice to say that Paine did more to cause the Declaration of Independence than any other man. Neither should it be forgotten that his attacks upon Great Britain were also attacks upon monarchy, and while he convinced the people that the colonies ought to separate from the mother country, he also proved to them that a free government is the best that can be instituted among men. In my judgment Thomas Paine was the best political writer that ever lived. " What he wrote was pure nature, and his soul and his pen ever went together." Ceremony, pageantry, and all the paraphernalia of power, had no effect upon him. He examined into the why and where- fore of things. He was perfectly radical in his mode of thought. Nothing short of the bed-rock satisfied him. His enthusiasm for what he believed to be right knew no bounds. During all the dark scenes of the revolution never fora moment did he despair. Year after year his brave words were ringing through the land, and by the bivouac fires the weary soldiers read the inspiring words of " Common Sense," filled with ideas sharper than their swords, and consecrated themselves anew to the cause of freedom. 120 MISTAKES OF INQER80LL. Paine was not content with having aroused the spirit of independence, but he gave every energy of his soul to keep that spirit alive. He was wit'i the army. He shared its defeats, its dangers, and its glory. When the situation became desperate, when gloom settled upon all, he gave them the " Crisis." It was a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night, leading the way to freedom, honor, and glory. He shouted to them " These are the times that try men's souls." The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot, will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now deserves the love and thanks uf man and woman. To those who wished to put the war off to some future day, with a lofty and touching spirit of self-sacrifice, he said: "Every generous parent should say: 'If there must be war, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace.' " To the cry that Americans were rebels, he replied : " He that rebels against reason is a real rebel ; but he that in defense of reason rebels against tyranny, has a better title to ' Defender of the Faith ' than George III." Some said it was to the interest of the colonies to be free. Paine answered this by saying : " To know whether it be the interest of the continent to be independent, we need ask only this simple, easy ques- tion : ' Is it the interest of a man to be a boy all his life ?' " He found many who would listen to nothing, and to them he said: "That to argue with a man who has renounced his reason is like giving medi- cine to the dead." This sentiment ought to adorn the walls of every orthodox church. There is a world of political wisdom in this : " England lost her liberty in a long chain of right reasoning from wrong principles;" and there is real discrimination in saying: "The Greeks and Romans were utrongly possessed of the spirit of liberty, but not the principles, for at the time they were determined not to be slaves themselves, they employed their power to enslave the rest of mankind." In his letter to the British people, in which he tried to convince them that war was not to their interest, occurs the following passage brimful of common sense: " War .never can be the interest of a trading nation any more tnan quarreling can be profitable to a man in business. But tt> make war with those who trade with us is like setting a bull-dog upon a customer at the shop door." The writings of Paine fairly glitter with simple, compact, logical statements that carry conviction to the dullest and most prejudicial. , He had the happiest possible way of putting the case, in asking quea lions in such a way that they answer themselves, and in stating his pro mises so clearly that the deduction could not be avoided. ON THOMAS PAINE. 121 Day and night he labored for America. Month after mouth, year after year, he gave himself to the great cause, until there was " a government of the people and for the people," and until the banner of the stars floated over a continent redeemed and consecrated to the happiness of mankind. At the close of the Revolution no one stood higher in America than Thomas Paine. The best, the wisest, the most patriotic were his friends and admirers ; and had he been thinking only of his own good he might have rested Irom his toils and spent the remainder of his life in com- fort and iu ease. He could have been what the world is pleased to call "respectable." He could have died surrounded by clergymen, war- riors, and statesmen, and at his death there would have been an impos- ing funeral, miles of carriages, civic societies, salvos of artillery, a Na- tion in mourning, and, above all, a splendid monument covered with lies. He chose rather to benefit mankind. At that time the seeds sown by the great infidels were beginning to bear fruit in France. The eighteenth century was crowning its gray hairs with the wreath of progress. On every hand science was' bearing testimony against the church. Voltaire had filled Europe with light; D'Holbach was giving to the elite of Paris the principles contained in his " System of Nature." The encyclopaedists had attacked superstition with information for the masses. The foundation of things began to be examined. A few had the courage to keep their shoes on and let the bush burn. Miracles began to get scarce. Everywhere the people began to inquire. Amer- ica had set an example to the world. The word liberty was in the mouths of men, and they began to wipe the dust from their supersti- tious knees. The dawn of a new day had appeared. Thomas Paine went to France. Into the new movement he threw all his energies. His fame had gone before him, and he was welcomed as a friend of the human race and as a champion of free government He had never relinquished his intention of pointing out to his country- men the defects, absurdities, and abuse of the English government. For this purpose he composed and published his greatest political work " The Rights of Man." This work should be read by every man and woman. It is concise, accurate, rational, convincing, and Unanswerable. It shows great thought, an intimate knowledge of the various forms of government, deep insight into the very springs of human action, and a courage that compels respect and admiration. The most difficult politi. cal p'roblems are solved in a few sentences. The venerable arguments in favor of wrong are refuted with a question answered with a word. For forcible illustration, apt comparison, accuracy and clearness of state- ment, and absolute thoroughness, it has never been excelled. 128 MISTAKES OF INGEEtSOLL. The fears of the administration were aroused, and Paine was prose- cuted for libel, and found guilty ; and yet there is not a sentiment in the entire work that will not challenge the admiration of every civilized 'man. It is a magazine of political wisdom, an arsenal of ideas, and an honor not only to Thomas Paine, but to human nature itself. It could have been written only by the man who had the generosity, the exalted patriotism, the goodness to say : " The world is my country, and to do good my religion." There is in all the utterances of the world no grander, no sublimer sentiment. There is no creed that can be compared with it for a moment < It should be wrought in gold, adorned with jewels, and impressed upon every human heart: "The world is my country, and to do good my religion." In 1792, Paine was.elected by the department of Calais as their repre- sentative in the National Assembly. So great was his popularity in France, that he was selected about the same time by the people of no less than four departments. Upon taking his place in the assembly, he was appointed as one of a committee to draft a constitution for France. Had the French people taken the advice of Thomas Paine, there would have been no " reign of terrorj' The streets of Paris would not have been filled with blood in that reign of terror. There were killed in the City of Paris not less, I think, than seventeen thousand people and on one night, in the massa. ere of St. Bartholomew, there were killed, by assassination, over sixty thousand souls men, women, and children. The revolution would have been the' grandest success of the world. The truth is that Paine was too conservative to suit the leaders of the French revolution. They, to a great extent, were carried away by hatred and a desire to destroy. They had suffered so long, they had borne so much, that it was impossible for them to be moderate in the hour of victory. Besides all this, the French people had been so robbed by the govern- ment, so degraded by the church, that they were not fit material with which to construct a republic. Many of the leaders longed to establish a beneficent and just government, but the people asked for revenge. Paine was filled with a real love for mankind. His philanthropy was boundless. He wished to destroy monarchy not the monarch. He voted for the destruction of tyranny, and against the death of the tyrant. He wished to establish a government on a new basis one that would forget the past ; one that would give privileges to none, and protection to all. In the assembly, where all were demanding the execution of the king, ON THOMAS PAINE. 123 where to differ with the majority was to be suspected, ana where to be suspected was almost certain death Thomas Paine had the courage, the goodness, and the justice to vote against death. To vote against the ex- ecution of the king was a vote against his own life. This was the sub- limity of devot on to principle. For this he was arrested, imprisoned, and doomed to death. There is not a theologian who has ever maligned Thomas Paine that has the courage to do this thing. When Louis Capet was on trial for his life before the French convention, Thomas Paine had the courage to speak and vote against the sentence of death. In his speech I find the following splendid sentiments : My contempt and hatred for monarchical governments are sufficiently well known, and my compassion for the unfortunate, friends or enemies, is equally profound. I have voted to put Louis Capet upon trial, because it was necessary to prove to the world the perfidy, the corruption, and the horror of the monarchical system. To follow the trade of a king destroys all morality, just as the trade of a jailer deadens all sensibility. Make a man a king to-day and to-morrow he will be a brigand. Had Louis Capet been a farmer, he might have been held in esteem by his neighbors, and his wickedness results from his position rather than from his nature. Let the French nation purge its territory of kings without soiling itself with their impure blood. Let the United States be the asylum of Louis Capet, where, in spite of the overshadowing miseries and crimes of a royal life, he will learn by the continual contemplation of the" general prosperity that the true system of government is not that of kings, but of the people. I am an enemy of kings, but I can not forget that they belong to the human race. It is always delightful to pursue that course where policy and human- ity are united. As France has been the first of all the nations of Europe to destroy royalty, let it be the first to abolish the penalty of death. As a true republican, I consider kings as more the objects of contempt than of vengeance. Search the records of the world and you will find but few sublimer acts than that of Thomas Paine voting against the king's death. He, the hater of despotism, the abhorrer of monarchy, the champion of the rights of man, the republican, accepting death to save the life of a deposed tyrant of a throneless king ! This was the last grand act of his political life the sublime conclusion of his political career. . All his life he had been the disinterested friend of man. He had labored not for money, not for fame, but for the general good. He had aspired to no office. He had no recognition of his services, but had ever been content to labor as a common soldier in the army of progress, con- 124 MISTAKES OF 1XGERSOLL. fining his efforts to no country, looking upon the world as his field ol action. Filled with a genuine love for the right, he found himself im- prisoned by the very people he had striven to save. Had his enemies succeeded in bringing him to the block, he would have escaped the calumnies and the hatred of the Christian world. And let me tell you how near they came getting him to the block. He was in prison ; there was a door to his cell it had two doors, a door that opened in and an iron door that opened out. It was a dark passage, and whenever they concluded to cut a man's head off the next day, an agent went along and made a chalk- mark upon the door where the poor prisoner was bound. Mr. Barlow, the American minister, happened to be with him and the outer door was shut, that is, open against the wall, and the inner door was shut, and when the man came along whose busi- ness it was to mark the door for death, he marked this door where Thomas Paine was, but he marked the door that was against the wall, so when it was shut the mark was inside, and the messenger of death passed by on the next day. If that had happened in favor of some Methodist preacher, they would have clearly seen, not simply the hand of God, but both hands. In this country, at least, he would have ranked witli the proudest names. On the anniversary of the Declaration, his name would have been upon the lips of all orators, and his memory in the hearts of all the people. Thomas Paine had not finished his career. He had spent his life thus far in destroying the power of Kings, and now turned his attention to the priests. He knew that every abuse had been embalmed in scripture that every outrage was in partnership with some holy text. He knew that the throne skulked behind the altar, and both behind a pretended revelation of God. By this time he had found that it was of little use to free the body and leave the mind in chains. He had explored the foundations of despotism, and had found them infinitely rotten. He had dug under the throne, and it occurred to him that he would take a look behind the altar. The result of this investigation was given to the world in the " Age of Reason." From the moment of its publication he became infamous. He was calumnia'ed beyond measure. To blander him was to secure the thanks of the church. All his services were instantly forgotten, disparaged, or denied. He was shunned as though he had been a pesti- lence. Most of his old friends forsook him. He was regarded as a moral plague, and at the bare mention of his name the bloody hands of the church were raised in horror. He was denounced as the most despicable of men. ON THOMAS PAINE. 125 Not content with following him to his grave, they pursued him after death with redoubled fury, and recounted with infinite gusto and satis- faction the supposed horrors of his death-bed ; gloried in the fact that he was forlorn and friendless, and gloated like fiends over what they supposed to be the agonizing remorse of his lonely death. It is wonderful that all his services are thus forgotten. It is amazing that one kind word did not fall from some pulpit; that some one did not accord to him, at least honesty. Strange that in the general denuncia- tion some one did not remember his labor for liberty, his devotion to principle, his zeal for the rights of his fellow-men. He had, by brave and splendid effort, associated his name with the cause of progress. He had made it impossible to write the history of political freedom with his name left out. He was one of the creators of light; one of the heralds of the dawn. He hated tyranny in the name of kings, and in the name of God, with every drop of his noble blood. He believed in liberty and justice, and in the sacred doctrine of human equality. Under these divine banners he fought the battle of his life. In both worlds he offered his blood for the good of man. In the wilderness of America, in the French assembly, in the sombre cell waiting for death, he was the same unflinching, unwavering friend of his race; the same undaunted champion of universal freedom. And for this he has been hated ; for this the church has violated even his grave. This is enough to make one believe that nothing is more natural than for men to devour their benefactors. The people in all ages have cruci- fied and glorified. Whoever lifts his voice against abuses, whoever arraigns the past at the bar of the present, whoever asks the king to show his commission, or question the authority of the priest, will be denounced as the enemy of man and God. In all ages reason has been regarded a3 the enemy of religion. Nothing has been considered so pleasing to the Deity as a total denial of the authority of your own mind. Self-reliance has been thought deadly sin ; and the idea of living and dying without the aid and consolation of superstition has always horrified the church. By some unaccountable infatuation, belief has been and still is considered of immense importance. All religions have been based upon the idea that God will forever reward the true believer, and eternally damn the man wao doubts or denies. Belief is regarded as the one essential thing. To practice justice, to love mercy, is not enough ; you must believe in some incomprehensible creed. You must say : " Once one is three, and three times one is one." The man who practiced every virtue, but failed to believe, was execrated. Nothing so outrages the feelings of the church as a moral unbeliever, nothing so horrible as a charitable atheist. 126 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. When Paine was born the world (was religious, the pulpit was the real throne, and the churches were making every effort to crush out of the brain the idea that it had the right to think. He again made up his mind to sacrifice himself.' He commenced with the assertion, " That any system of religion that has anything in it that shocks the mind of a child cannot be a true system." What a beautiful, what a tender sen- timent ! No wonder the church began to hate him. He believed in one God, and no more. After this life he hoped for happiness. He believed that true religion consisted in doing justice, loving mercy; in endeavor- ing to make our fellow-creatures happy, and in offering to God the fruit of the heart. He denied the inspiration of the scriptures. This was his crime. He contended that it is a contradiction in terms to call anything a revelation that comes to us at second-hand, either verbally or in writing. He asserted that revelation is necessarily limited to the first communi- cation, and that after that it is only an account of something which an- other person says was a revelation to him. We have only his word for it, as it was never made to us. This argument never had been, and prob- ably never will be answered. He denied the divine origin of Christ, and showed conclusively that the pretended prophecies of the Old Testament had no reference to Him whatever. And yet he believed that Christ was a virtuous and amiable man; that the morality He taught and practiced was of the most benevolent and elevated character, and that it had not been exceeded by any. Upon this point he entertained the same senti- ments now held by the Unitarians, and in fact by all the most enlightened Christians. In his time the church believed and taught that every word in the Bible was absolutely true. Since his day it has been proven false in its cosmogony, false in its astronomy, false in its chronology and geology, false in its history, and so far as the Old Testament is concerned, false in almost everything. There are but few, if any, scientific men, who apprehend that the Bible is literally true. Who on earth at this day would pretend to settle any scientific' question by a text from the Bible ? The old belief is confined to the ignorant and zealous. The church itself will before long be driven to occupy the position of Thomas Paine. The best minds of the orthodox world, to-day, are endeavoring to prove the existence of a personal deity. All other questions occupy a minor place. You are no longer asked to swallow the Bible whole, Whale, Jonah and all; you are simply required to believe in God and pay your pew-rent. There is not now an enlightened minister in the world who will seri- ously contend that Sampson's strength was in his hair, or that the ON THOMAS PAINE. 127 necromancers of Egypt could turn water into blood, and pieces of wood into serpents. These follies have passed away, and the only reason that the religious world can now have for disliking Paine, is that they have been forced to adopt so many of his opinions. Paine thought the barbarities of the Old Testament inconsistent with what he deemed the real character of God. He believed the murder, massacre, and indiscriminate slaughter had never been commanded by the Deity. He regarded much of the Bible as childish, unimportant and foolish. The scientific world entertains the same opinion. Paine at- tacked the Bible precisely in the same spirit in which he had attacked the pretensions of the kings. He used the same weapons. All the pomp in the world could not make him cower. His reason knew no " Holy of Holies,'' except the abode of truth. The sciences were then in their in- fancy. The attention of the really learned had not been directed to an impartial examination of our pretended revelation. It was accepted by most as a matter of course. The church was all-powerful, and no one else, unless thoroughly imbued with the spirit of self-sacrifice, thought for a moment of disput- ing the fundamental doctrines of Christianity. The infamous doctrine that salvation depends upon belief, upon a mere intellectual conviction, was then believed and preached. To doubt was to secure the damnation of your soul. This absurd and devilish doctrine shocked the common sense of Thomas Paine, and he denounced it with the fervor of honest indignation. This doctrine, although infinitely ridiculous, has been nearly universal, and has been as hurtful as senseless. For the overthrow of this infamous tenet, Paine exerted all his strength. He left few argu- ments to be used by those who should come after him, and he used none that have been refuted. The combined wisdom and genius of all mankind can not possibly conceive of an argument against liberty of thought. Neither can they show why anyone should be punished, either in this world or another, for acting honestly in accordance with reason; and yet a doctrine with every possible argument against it has been, and still is, believed and defended by the entire orthodox world. Can it be possible that we have been endowed with reason simply that our souls may be caught in its toils and snares, that we may be led by its false and delusive glare out of the narrow path that leads to joy into the broad way of everlasting death ? Is it possible that we have been given reason simply that we may through faith ignore its deductions and avoid its conclusions ? Ought the sailor to throw away his compass and depend entirely upon the fog ? If reason is not to be depended upon in matters of religion, that i to say, in re- 128 A118SAKES OF iNOEKSOLL. spect to our duties to the Deity, why should it be relied upon in matters respecting the rights of our fellows ? Why should we throw away the law given to Moses by God Himself, and have the audacity to make sornt of our own ? How dare we drown the thunders of Sinai by calling th ayes and noes in a petty legislature? If reason can determine what is merciful, what is just, the duties of man to man, what more do we want either in lime or eternity? Down, forever down, with any religion that requires upon its ignorant fcltar its sacrifice of the goddess Reason ; that compels her to abdicate forever the shining throne of the soul, strips from her form the imperial purple, snatches from her hand the sceptre of thought, and makes her the bond-woman of a senseless faith. If a man should tell you he had the most beautiful painting in the world, and after taking you where it was should insist upon having your eyes shut, you would likely suspect either that he had no painting or that it was some pitiful daub. Should he tell you that he was a most excellent performer on the violin, and yet refused to play unless your cars were stopped, you would think, to say the least of it, that he had an odd way of convincing you of his musical ability. But would this conduct be any more wonderful than that of a religionist who asks that before examining his creed you will have the kindness to throw away your reason? The first gentleman says: "Keep your eyes shut ; my picture will bear everything but being seen." " Keep your ears stopped ; my music objects to nothing but being heard." The last says : " Away with your reason ; my religion dreads nothing but being understood." 80 far as I am concerned, I most cheerfully admit that most Christians are honest and most ministers sincere. We do not attack them ; we attack their creed. We accord to them the same rights that we ask for ourselves. We believe that their doctrines are hurtful, and I am going to do what I can against them. We believe that the frightful text, " He that believes shall behaved, and he that bcleiveth not shall be dammed" has covered the earth with blood. You might as well say all that have red hair shall be damned. It has filled the heart with arro- gance, cruelty, and murder. It has caused the religious wars; bound hundreds of thousands to the stake; founded inquisitions; filled dun- geons; invented instruments of tortuie; taught the mother to hate her child ; imprisoned the mind ; filled the world with ignorance ; persecuted the lovers of wisdom ; built the monasteries and convents; made happi. ness a crime, investigation a sin, and self-reliance a blasphemy. It has poisoned the springs of learning; misdirected the energies of the world; filled all countries with want; housed the people in hovels; fed ON THOMAS PAINE. 130 them with famine ; and but for the efforts of a few brave infidels, it would have taken the world back to the midnight of barbarism, and left the heavens without a star. The maligners of Paine say that he had no right to attack this doctrine, because he was unacquainted with the dead languages, and, for this reason, it was a piece of pure impudence to investigate the scriptures Is it necessary to understand Hebrew in order to know that cruelty is not a virtue, that murder is inconsistent with infinite goodness, and that eternal punishment can be inflicted upon man only by an eternal fiend? Is it really essential to conjugate the Greek verbs before you can make up your mind ;is to the probability of dead people getting out of their graves ? Must one be versed in Latin before he is entitled to express his opinion as the genuineness of a pretended revelation from God '? Common sense belongs exclusively tojno tongue. Logic is not confirmed to, nor has it been buried with, the dead languages. Paine attacked the Bible as it is translated. If the translation is wrong, let its defenders correct it. The Christianity of Paine's day is not the Christianity of our time. There has been a great improvement since then. It is better now because there is less of it. One hundred and fifty years ago the fore- most preachers of our time that gentleman who preaches in this mag- nificent hall would have perished at the stake. Lord, Lord, how John Calvin would have liked to have roasted dlis man, and the perfume of his burning flesh would have filled heaven with joy. A Universalist would have been torn to pieces ID England, Scotland, and America. Unitarians would have found themselves in the stocks, pelted by the rabble with dead cats, after which their ears would have been cut off, their tongues bored, and their foreheads branded. Less than one hun- dred and fifty years ago the following law was in force in Maryland : Be it enacted by the right honorable, the lord proprietor, by and with the advice and consent of his lordship's governor, and the upper and lower houses of the assembly, and the authori'.y of the same : That if any person shall hereafter, within this province, willingly, maliciously, and advisedly, by writing or speaking, blaspheme or curse God, or deny our Saviour, Jesus Christ, to be the Son of God, or shall deny the Holy Trinity, the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost, or the God-l:ead of ary of the three persons, or the unity of the God-head, or shall utter any profane words concerning the Holy Trinity, or the persons thereof, and shall therefor be convicted by verdict, shall, for the first offense, be bored through the tongue, and fined 20, to be levied on his body. As for the second offense, the offender shall be stigmatized by burning in the forehead the letter B, and fined 40. And that for the third offense, the offender shall suffer death without the benefit of clergy. 130 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. The strange thing about this law is, that it has never been respected, and was in force in the District of Columbia up to 1875. Laws like this were in force in most of the colonies and in all countries where the church had power. In the Old Testament the death penalty was attached to hundreds of offenses. It has been the same in all Christian countries. To-day, in civilized governments, the death penalty is attached only to murder and treason ; and in some it has been entirely abolished. What a commen- tary upon the divine systems of the world ! In the day of Thomas Paine the church was ignorant, bloody, and re. lentless. In Scotland the "kirk" was at the summit of its power. It was a *ull sister of the Spanish inquisition. It waged war upon human nature. It was the enemy of happiness, the hater of joy, and the de- spiser of Jberty. It taught parents to murder their children rather than to allow them to propagate error. If the mother held opinions of which the infamous " kirk " disapproved, her children were taken from her arms, her babe from her very bosom, and she was not allowed to see them, or write them a word. It would not allow shipwrecked sailors to be rescued from drowning on Sunday. Oh, you have no idea what a muss it kicks up in heaven to have any- body swim on Sunday. It fills all the wheeling worlds with sadness to see a boy in a boat, and the attention of the recording secretary is called to it. In a voice of thtmder they say, " Upset him ! " It sought to an- nihilate pleasure, to pollute the heart by filling it with religious cruelty and gloom, and to change mankind into a vast horde of pious, heartless fiends. One of the most famous Scotch divines said: "The kirk holds that religious toleration is not far from blasphemy." And this same Scotch kirk denounced, beyond measure, the man who had the moral grandeur to say, "The world is my country, and to do good my religion." And this same kirk abhorred the man who said, "Any system of religion that shocks the mind of a child can not be a true system." At that time nothing so delighted the church as the beauties of endless torment, and listening to the weak wailing of damned infants struggling in the slimy coils and poison folds of the worm that never dies. About the beginning of the nineteenth century a boy by the name of Thomas Aikenhead was indicted and tried at Edinburgh for having de- nied the inspiration of the scriptures, and for having, on several occa- sions, when cold, wished himself in hell that he might get warm. Not- withstanding the poor boy recanted and begged for mercy, he was found guilty and hanged. His body was thrown in a hole at the foot of the scaffold and covered with stones, and though his mother came with her ON THOMAS PAINE. 131 face covered with tears, begging for the corpse, she was denied and driven away in the name of charity. That is religion, and in the velvet of their politeness there lurks the claws of a tiger. Just give thetn the power and see how quick I would leave this part of the country. They know I am going to be burned forever; they know I am going to hell, but that don't satisfy them. They want to give me a little foretaste here. Prosecutions and executions like these were common in every Chris- tian country, and all of them based upon the belief that an intellectual conviction is a crime. No wonder the church hated and traduced the author of the "Age of Reason." England was filled with Puritan gloom and Episcopal ceremony. The ideas of crazy fanatics and extravagant poets were taken as sober facts. Milton had clothed Christianity in the soiled and faded finery of the gods had added to the story of Christ the fables of mythology. He gave to the Protestant church the most out- rageously material ideas of the Deity. He turned all the angels into soldiers made heaven a battle-field, put Christ in uniform, and de- scribed God as a miiiti-i-gencral. His works were considered by the Protestants nearly as sacred as the Bible itself, and the imagination of the people was thoroughly polluted by the horrible imagery, the sub- lime absurdity of the blind Milton. Heaven and hell were realities the judgment-day was expected books of accounts would be opened. Every man would bear the charges against him read. God was supposed to sit upon a golden throne, surrounded by the tallest angels, with fiarps in their hands and crowns on theip heads. The goats would be thrust into eternal fire on the left, while the orthodox sheep, on the right, were to gambol on sunny slopes forever and ever. So all the priests were willing to save the sheep for half the wool. The nation was profundly ignorant, and consequently extremely re- ligious, so far as belief was concerned. In Europe liberty was lying chained up in the inquisition, her white bosom stained with blood. In the new world the Puritans had been hanging and burning in the name of God, and selling white Quaker children into slavery in the name of Christ, who said, " Suffer little children to come unto Me." Under such conditions progress was impossible. Some one had to lead the way. The church is, and always has been, incapable of a for- ward movement. Religion always looks back. The church has already reduced Spain to a guitar, Italy to a hand-organ, and Ireland to exile. Some one, not connected with the church, had to T attack the monster 132 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. that was eating out the heart of the world. Some one hud to sacrifice him- self for the good of all. The people were in the most abject slavery; their manhood had been taken from them by pomp, by pageantry, and power. Progress is born of doubt and inquiry. The church never doubts never inquires. To doubt is heresy to inquire is to admit that you do not know the church does neither. More than a century ago Catholicism, wrapped in robes red with the innocent blood of millions, holding in her frantic clutch crowns and sceptres, honors and gold, the keys of heaven and hell, tramping be- neath her feet the liberties of nations, in the proud movement of almost universal dominion, felt within her heartless breast the deadly dagger of Voltaire. From that blow the church can never recover. Livid with hatred she launched her eternal anathema at the great destroyer, and ignorant Protestants have echoed the curse of Rome. In our country the church was all-powerful, and, although divided into many sects, would instantly unite to repel a common foe. Paine did for Protestantism what Voltaire did for Catholicism. Paine struck the first blow. The "Age of Reason " did more to undermine the power of the Prot- estant church than all other books then known. It furnished an immense amount of food for thought. It was written for the average mind, and is a straightforward, honest investigation of the Bible, and of the Christian system. Paine did not falter, from the first page to the last. He gives you his candid thought, and candid thoughts are always valuable. The " Age of Reason" has liberalized us all. It put arguments in the mouths of the people; it put the church on the defensive, it enabled somebody in every village to corner the parson ; it made the world wiser, and the church better; it took power from the pulpit and divided it among the pews. Just in proportion that the human race has advanced, the church has lost its power. There is no exception to this rule. No nation ever materially advanced that held strictly to the religion of its founders. No nation ever gave itself wholly to the control of the church without losing its power, its honor, and existence. Every church pretends to have found the exact truth. This is the end of progress. Why pursue that which you have? Why investigate when you know. Every creed is a rock in running water; humanity sweeps by it. Every creed cries to the universe, " Halt!" A creed is the ignorant past bullying the enlightened present. ON THOMAS PAfNE. 133 Tlie ignorant are not satisfied with what can be demonstrated. Science is too slow for them, and so they invent creeds. They demand complete- ness. A sublime segment, a grand fragment, are of no value to them. They demand the complete circle the entire structure. In music they want a melody with a recurring accent at measured periods. In religion they insist upon immediate answers to the ques- tions of creation and destiny. The alpha and omega of all things must be in the alphabet of their superstition. A religion that can not answer every question, and guess every conundrum, is, in their estimation, worse than worthless. They desire a kind of theological dictionary a religious ready reckoner, together with guide-boards at all crossings and turns. They mistake impudence for authority, solemnity for wisdom, and pathos for inspiration. The beginning and the end are what they demand. The grand flight of the eagle is nothing to them. They want the nest in which he was hatched, and especially the dry limb upon which he roosts. Anything that can be learned is hardly worth know- ing. The present is considered of no value in itself. Happiness must not be expected this side of the clouds, and can only be attained by self- denial and faith; not self-denial for the good of others, but for the sal- vation of your own sweet self. Paine denied the authority of Bibles and creeds; this was his crime, and for this the world shut the door in his face and emptied its slops upon him from the windows. I challenge the world to show that Thomas Paine ever wrote one line, one word in favor of tyranny in favor of immorality; one line, one word against what he believed to be for the highest and best interest of mankind; one line, one word against justice, charity, or liberty, and yet he has been pursued as though he had been a fiend from hell. His memory has been execrated as though he had murdered some Uriah for his wife; driven some Hagar into the desert to starve with his child upon her bosom ; defiled his own daughters ; ripped open with the sword the sweet bodies of loving and innocent women ; advised one brother to assassinate another; kept a harem with seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines, or had persecuted Christians even unto strange cities. The church has pursued Paine to Meter others. The church used painting, music, and architecture simply to degrade mankind. But there are men that nothing can awe. There have been at all times brave spirits that dared even the gods. Some proud head has always been above the waves. Old Diogenes, with his mantle upon him, stiff and trembling with age, caught a small animal bred upon people, went into 134 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL. the Pantheon, the temple of the gods, ami took the animal upon his thumbnail, and, pressing it with the other, "he sacrificed Diogenes to all the gods."' Just as good as anything! In every age some Diogenes has sacrificed to all the gods. True genius never cowers, and there is always some Samson feeling for the pillars of authority. Cathedrals and domes, and chimes and chants, temples frescoed and groined ad carved, and gilded with gold, altars and tapers, and paint- ings of virgin and babe, censer and chalice, chasuble, paten and alb, organs, and anthems and incense rising to the winged and blest, maniple, amice and stole, crosses and crosiers, tiaras, and crowns, mitres and missals and masses, rosaries, relics and robes, martyrs and saints, and windows stained as with the blood of Christ, never, never for one moment awed the brave, proud spirit of the infidel. He knew that all the pomp and glitter had been purchased with liberty, that priceless jewel of the soul. In looking at the cathedral he remembered the dungeon. The music of the organ was not loud enough to drown the clank of fetters. He could not forget that the taper had lighted the fagot. He knew that the cross adorned the hilt of the sword, and so where others worshiped, he wept and scorned. He knew that across the open Bible lay the sword of war, and so where others worshiped he looked with scorn and wept. And so it has been through all the ages gone. The doubter, the investigator, the infidel, have been the saviors of liberty. The truth is beginning te be realized, and the truly intel- lectual are honoring the brave thinkers of the past. But the church is as unforgiving as ever, and still wonders why any infidel should be wicked enough to attempt to destroy her power. I will tell the church why I hate it. You'havc imprisoned the human mind ; you have been the enemy of liberty; you have burned us at the stake, rousted us before slow fires, torn our flesh with irons ; you have covered us with chains, treated us as outcasts; you have filled the world with fear; you have taken our wives and children from our arms ; you have confiscated our property ; you have denied us the rights to testify in courts of justice; you have branded us with infamy ; you have torn out our tongues ; you have re- fused us burial. In the name of your religion you have robbed us of every right; and after having inflicted upon us every evil that can be inflicted in this world, you have fallen upon your knees, and with clasped hands implored your God to finish the holy work in hell. Can you wonder that we hate your doctrines; that we despise your creeds; that we feel proud to know that we are beyond your power; that we are free in spite of you ; that we can express our honest thought, ON THOMAS PAINE. 135 and that the whole world is gradually rising into the blessed light? Can you wonder that we point with pride to the fact that infidelity has ever been found battling for the rights of man, for the liberty of conscience, and for the happiness of all ? Can you wonder that we are proud to know that we have always been disciples of reason and soldiers of free- dom ; that we have denounced tyranny and superstition, and have kept our hands unstained with human blood ? I deny that religion is the end or object of this life. When it is so considered it becomes destructive of happiness. The real end of life is happiness. It becomes a hydra-headed monster, reaching in terrible coils from the heavens, and thrusting its thousand fangs into the bleed- ing, quivering hearts of men. It devours their substance, builds pal- aces for God (who dwells not in temples made with hands), and allows His children to die in huts and hovels. It fills the earth with mourning heaven with hatred, the present with fear, and all the future with fire and despair. Virtue is a subordination of the passion of the intellect. It is to act in accordance with your highest convictions. It does not consist in believing, but in doing. This is the sublime truth that the infidels in all ages have uttered. They have handed the torch from one to the other through all the years that have fled. Upon the altar of reason they have kept the sacred fire, and through the long midnight of faith they fed the divine flame. Infidelity is liberty; all superstition is slavery. In every creed man is the slave of God, woman is the slave of man, and the sweet children are the slaves of all. We do not want creeds ; we wani some knowledge. We want happiness. And yet we are told by the church that we have accomplished nothing; that we are simply destroyers ; that we tear down without building again. Is it nothing to free the mind ? Is it nothing to civilize mankind ? Is it nothing to fill the world with light, with discovery, with science? Is it nothing to dignify man and exalt the intellect ? Is it nothing to grope your way into the dreary prisons, the damp and dropping dungeons, the dark and silent cells of superstition, where the souls of men are chained to floors of stone; to greet them like a ray of light, like the song of a bird, the murmur of a stream, to see the dull eyes open and grow slowly bright; to feel yourself grasped by the shrunken and unused hands, and hear yourself thanked by a strange and hollow voice? Is it nothing to conduct these souls gradually into the blessed light of day to let them see again the happy field?, the sweet, green earth, and hear the everlast- ing music of the waves ? Is it nothing to make men wipe the dust from their swollen knees, the tears from their blanched and furrowed cheeks ? Is it a small thing to reave the heavens of an insatiate monster and write 133 MI STARS 8 OF INOERSOLL. upou the eternal dome, glittering with stars, the grand word liberty ? Is il a small thing to quench the thirst of hell with the holy tears of piety, break all the chains, put out the fires of civil war, stay the sword of the fanatic, and tear the bloody hands of the church from the white throat of progress? Is it a small thing to make men truly free, to destroy the dogmas of ignorance, prejudice, and power, the poisoned fables of superstition, and drive from the beautiful face of the earth the fiend of fear? It does seem as though the most zealous Christians must at times en- tertain some doubt as to the divine origin of his religion. For eighteen hundred years the doctrine has been preached. For more than a thou- sand years the church had, to a great extent, the control of the civilized world, and what has been the result ? Are the Christian nations patterns of charity and forbearance? On the contrary, their principal business is to destroy each other. More than five millions of Christians are trained and educated and drilled to murder their fellow-Christians. Every nation is groaning under a vast debt incurred in carrying on war against other Christians, or defending itself from Christian assault. The world is covered with forts to protect Christians from Christians, and every eea is covered with iron monsters ready to blow Christian brains into eternal froth. Millions upon millions are annually expended in the effort to construct still more deadly and terrible engines of death. In- dustry is crippled, honest toil is robbed, and even beggary is taxed to defray the expenses of Christian murder. There must be some other way to reform this world. We have tried creed and dogma and fable, and they have failed and they have failed in all the nations dead. Nothing but education scientific education can benefit mankind. We must find out the laws of nature and conform to them. We need free bodies and free minds, free labor and free thought, chainless hands and fetterless brains. Free labor will give us wealth. Free thought will give us truth. We need men with moral courage to speak and write their real thoughts, and to stand by their convictions, even to the very death. We need have no fear of being too radical. The future will verify all grand and brave predictions. Paine was splendidly in advance of his time, but he was orthodox compared to the infidels of to day. Science, the great iconoclast, has been very busy since 1809, and by the highway of progress are the broken images of the past. On every hand the people advance. The vicar of God has been pushed from the throne of the Caesars, and upon the roofs of the Eternal city falls once more the shadow of the eagle. All has been accomplished by the heroic few. The men of science have explored heaven and earth, and with in- ON THOMAS PAINE. 137 finite patience have furnished the facts. The brave thinkers have aided them. The gloomy caverns of superstition have been transformed into temples of thought, and the demons of the past are the angels of to- day. Science took a handful of sand, constructed a telescope, and with it explored the starry depths of heaven. Science wrested from the gods their thunderbolts ; and now, the electric spark freighted with thought and love, flashes under all the waves of the sea. Science took a tear from the cheek of unpaid labor, converted it into steam, and created a giant that turns with tireless arm the countless wheels of toil. Thomas Paine was one of the intellectual heroes, one of the men to whom we are indebted. His name is associated forever with the great republic. He lived a long, laborious, and useful life. The world is better for his having lived. For the sake of truth he accepted hatred and reproach for his portion. He ate the bitter bread of neglect and sorrow. His friends were untrue to him because he was true to himself and true to them. He lost the respect of what is called society, but kept his own. His life is what the world calls failure, and what history calls success. If to love your fellow-men more than self is goodness, Thomas Paine was good. If to be in advance of your time, to be a pioneer in the direction of right, is greatness, Thomas Paine was great. If to avow your principles and discharge your duty in the presence of death is heroic, Thomas Paine was a hero. At the age of 73, death touched his tired heart. He died in the land his genius defended, under the flag he gave to the skies. Slander can not touch him now; hatred can not reach him more. He sleeps in the sanctuary of the tomb, beneath the quiet of the stars. A few more years, a few more brave men, a few more rays of light, and mankind will ven- erate the memory of him who said : Any system of religion that shocks the mmd of a child can not be a true system. The world is my country, and to do good my religion. The next question is: Did Thomas Paine recant? Mr. Paine had prophesied that fanatics would crawl and cringe around him during his last moments. He believed that they would put a lie in the mouth of death. When the shadow of the coming dissolution was upon him, two clergymen, Messrs. Milledollar and Cunningham, called to annoy the dying man. Mr. Cunningham had the politeness to say : " You have now a full view of death ; you can not live long; whoever does not believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, will assuredly be damned." Mr. Paine replied : " Let me have none of your popish stuff. Get away with you. Good THOMAS PAINE. ON THOMAS PAINE. 139 * morning." On another occasion a Methodist minister obtruded himself. Mr. Willet Hicks was present. The minister declared to Mr. Paine that "unless he repented of his unbelief he would be damned." Paine, although at the door of death, rose in his bed and indignantly requested the clergyman to leave the room. On another occasion, two brothers by the name of Pigott sought to convert him. He was displeased, and re- quested their departure. Afterward, Thomas Nixon and Capt. Daniel Pelton visited him for the express purpose of ascertaining whether he had, in any manner, changed his religious opinions. They were assured by the dying man that he still held the principles he had expressed in his writings. Afterward, these gentlemen, hearing that William Gobbet was about to write a life of Paine, sent him the following note: I must tell you now that it is of great importance to find out whether Paine recanted- If he recanted, then the Bible is true you can rest assured that a spring of water gushed out of a dead dry bone. If Paine recanted, there is not the slightest doubt about that donkey making that speech to Mr. Baalam not the slightest and if Paine did not recant, then the whole thing is a mistake. I want to show that Thomas Paine died as he has lived, a friend of man and without superstition, and if you will stay here I will do it. NEW YORK, April 24, 1818. SIR: Having been informed that you have a design to write a history of the life and writings of Thomas Paine, if you have been furnished with materials in respect to his religious opinions, or rather of his recantation of his former opinions before his de I received the following letter frem James Parton: NEWBURYPORT, Mass., Oct. 27, 1877. MY DEAR SIR: Touching Grant Thorburn, I personally knew him to have been a liar. At the age of 92 he copied witli trembling hand a piece from a newspaper and brought it to the office of The Home Journal as his own. It was I who received it and detected the deliberate forgery. * * JAMES PARTON. So much for Grant Thorburn. In my judgment, the testimony of Mr. Thorburn should be thrown aside as utterly unworthy of belief. The next witness is the Rev. J. D. Wickham, D. D., who tells what an elder in his church said. This elder said that Paine passed his last clays on his farm at New Rochelle, with a solitary female attendant. This i s not true. He did not pass his last days at New Rochelle, consequently, this pious elder did not see him during his last days at that place. Upon this elder we prove an alibi. Mr. Paine passed his last days in the City of New York, in a house upon Columbia Street. The story of the Rev. J. D. Wickham, D. D., is simply false. The next competent false witness was the Rev. Charles Hawley, D. D., who proceeds to state that the story of the Rev. J. D. Wickham, D. D., is corroborated by older citizens of New Rochelle. The names of these ancient residents are withheld. According to these unknown witnesses, the account given by the deceased elder was entirely correct. But as the particulars of Mr. Paine's conduct " were too loathsome to be described in print," we are left entirely in the dark as to what he really did. 150 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. While at New Kochelle, Mr. Paine lived with Mr. Purdy, Mr. Dean, with Capt. Pelton, and with Mr. Staple. It is worthy of note that all of these gentlemen give the lie direct to the statements of " older residents" and ancient citizens spoken of by the Rev. Charles Hawley, D. D., and leave him with the "loathsome particulars" existing only in his own mind. The next gentleman brought upon the stand is W. H. Ladd, who quotes from the memoirs of Stephen Grellett. This gentleman also has the misfortune to be dead. According to his account, Mr. Paine made his recantation to a servant girl of his by the name of Mary Roscoe. Mr. Paine uttered the wish thart all who read his book had burned it. I believe there is a mistake in the name of this girl. Her name was prob- ably Mary Hinsdale, as it was once claimed that Paine made the same remark to her. These are the witnesses of the church, and the only ones you bring forward to support your charge that Thomas Paine lived a drunken and beastly life, and died a drunken, cowardly, and beastly death. All these calumnies are found in a life of Paine by James Cheetham, the convicted libeler already referred to. Mr. Cheetham was an enemy of the man whose life he pretended to write. In order to show you the estimation in which this libeler was held by Mr. Paine, I will give you a copy of a letter that throws light upon this point: OCT. 27, 1807. MR. CHEETHAM: Unless you make a public apology for the abuse and falsehood in your paper of Tuesday, Oct. 27, respect- ing me, I will prosecute you for lying. THOMAS PAINE. In another letter, speaking of this same man, Mr. Paine says : "If an unprincipled bully can not be reformed, he can be punished." Cheet- ham has been so long in the habit of giving false information, that truth is to him like a foreign language. Mr. Cheetham wrote the life of Mr. Paine to gratify his malice and to support religion. He was prosecuted for libel was convicted and fined. Yet the life of Paine, written by this liar, is referred to by the Chris- tian world as the highest authority. As to the personal habits of Mr. Paine, we have the testimony of Wil- liam Carver, with whom he lived; of Mr. Jarvis, the artist, with whom he lived; of Mr. Purdy, who was a tenant of Paine's; of Mr. Buyer, with whom he was intimate; of Thomas Nixon and Capt. Daniel Pel- ton, both of whom knew him well ; of Amasa Woodsworth, who was with him when he died ; of John Fellows, who boarded at the same house; of James Wilburn, with whom he boarded; of B. F. Raskins, a lawyer, who was well acquainted with him, and called upon him during his last illness; of Walter Morton, President of the Phoenix Insurance Company; of Clio Rickman, who had known him for many years; of (jN THOMAS PAINE. 131 Willet and Elias Hicks, Quakers, who knew him intimately and well; of Judge Hertell, H. Margary, Elihu Palmer, and many others. -All these testified to the fact that Mr. Paine was a temperate man. In those days nearly everybody used spirituous liquors. Paine was not an ex- ception, but he did not drink to excess. Mr. Lovett, who kept the City Hotel, where Paine stopped, in a note to Caleb Bingham declared that Paine drank less than any boarder he had. Against all this evidence Christians produce the story of Grant Thor- burn, the story of the Rev. J. D. Wickham, that an elder in his church told him that Paine was a drunkard, corroborated by the Rev. Charles Hawley, and an extract from Lossing's history to the same effect. The evidence is overwhelmingly against them. Will you have the fairness to admit it ? Their witnesses T,re merely the repeaters of the falsehoods of James Cheetham, the convicted libeler. After all, drinking is not as bad as lying. An honest drunkard is better than a calumniator of the dead. "A remnant of old mortality drunk, bloated, and half-asleep," is better than a perfectly sober de- fender of human slavery. To become drunk is a virtue compared with stealing a babe from the breast of its mother. Drunkenness is one of the beatitudes, compared with editing a religious paper devoted to the defense of slavery upon the ground that it is a divine institution. Do you think that Paine was a drunken beast when he wrote " Common Sense," a pamphlet that aroused three millions "of people, as people were never aroused by words before? Was he a drunken beast when he wrote the "Crisis?" Was it to a drunken beast that the 'following letter was a idressed: ROCKY HILL, September 10, 1783. I have learned, since I have been at this place, that you are at Bordentown. Whether for the sake of retirement or economy. I know not. Be it for either, or both, or what- ever it may, if you will come to this place and partake with me, I shall be exceedingly happy to see you at it. Your presence may remind Con- gress of your pa^t services to this country; and if it is in my power to impress them, command my best exertions with freedom, as they will be rendered cheerfully by one who entertains a lively sense of the im- portance of your works, and who, with much pleasure, subscribes him- self your sincere friend, GEORGE WASHINGTON. Do you think that Paiue was a drunken beast when the following letters were received by him : You express a wish in your letter to return to America in a national ship. Mr. Dawson, who brings over the treaty, and who will present you with this letter, is charged with orders to the Captain of the Mary- land to receive and accommodate you back, if you can be ready to depart at such a short warning. You will, in general, find us returned to sentiments worthy of former times; in these it will be your glory to have steadily labored, and with as much effect as any man living. That 152 MISTAKES OF 1NQEHSOLL. you may live long to continue your useful labors, ;iud reap the reward in the thankfulness of nations, is my sincere prayer. Accept the assur- ances of my high esteem and affectionate attachment. THOMAS JEFFERSON. It has been very generally propagated through the continent that I wrote the pamphlet " Common Sense." I could not have written any- thing in so manly and striking a style. JOHN ADAMS. A few more such flaming arguments a were exhibited at Falmouth and Norfolk, added to the sound doctrine and unausweraMe reasoning contained in the pamphlet " Common Sense," will not leave numbers at a loss to decide on the propriety of a separation. GEORGE WASHINGTON. It is not necessary for me to tell you how much all your countrymen I speak of the great mass of the people are interested in your wel- fare. They have not forgotten the history of their own revolution, and the difficult scenes through which they passed; nor do they review its several stages without reviving in their bosoms a due sensibility of the merits of those who served them in that great and arduous conflict. The crime of ingratitude has not yet stained, and I trust never will stain, out national character. You are considered by them as not only having rendered important services in our revolution, but as being on a more extensive scale the friend of humnn right and a distinguished and able advocate in favor of public liberty. To the welfare of Thomas Paine, the Americans are not, nor can they be, indifferent. JAMES MONROE. No writer has exceeded Paine in rase and familiarity of style, in perspicuity of expression, happiness of elucidation, and in simple and unassuming language. THOMAS JEFFERSON. Was it in consideration of the services of a drunken beast that the Legislature of Pennsylvania presented Thomas Paine with 500 sterling? Did the State of New York feel indebted to a drunken beast, and confer upon Thomas Paine an estate of several hundred acres? Did the Con- gress of the United States thank him for his services because he had lived a drunken and beastly life? Was he elected a member of the French convention because he was a drunken beast ? Was it the act of a drunken beast to put his own life in jeopardy by voting against the death of the King ? Was it because he was a drunken beast that he op- posed the " Reign of Terror '' that he endeavored to stop the shedding of blood, and did all in his power to protest even his own enemies ? Do the following extracts sound like the words of a drunken beast : I believe in the equality of man, and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fel- low creatures happy. My own mind is my own church. It is necessary to the happiness of man that he be mentally faithful to himself. ON THOMAS PAINE. 153 Any system of religion that shocks the minil of a child can not be a true system. The work of God is the creation which we behold. The age of ignorance commenced with the Christian system. It is with a pious fraud as with a bad action it begets a calamitous necessity of going on. To read the Bible without horror, we must undo everything that is tender, sympathizing, and benevolent in the heart of man. The man does not exist who can say I have persecuted him, or that I have, in any case, returned evil for evil. Of all the tyrants that afflict mankind, tyranny in religion is the worst. The belief in a cruel God makes a cruel man. My own opinion is, that those whose lives have been spent in doing good, and endeavoring to make their fellow-mortals happy, will be happy hereafter. The intellectual part of religion is a private affair between every man and his Maker, and in which no third party has any right to interfere. The practical part consists in our doing good to each other. No man ought to make a living by religion. One person can not act religion for another every person must act for himself. One good school-master is of more use than a hundred priests. Let us propagate morality, unfettered by superstition. God is the power, or first cause ; nature is the law, and matter is the subject acted upon. I believe in one God and no more, and I hope for happiness beyond this life. The key of happiness is not in the keeping of any sect, nor ought the road to it to be obstructed by any. My religion, and the whole of it, is the fear and love of the Deity, and universal philanthropy. I have yet, I believe, some years in store, for I have a good state of health and a happy mind. I tase care of both, by nourishing the first with temperance and the latter with abundance. He lives immured within the bastile of a word. How perfectly that sentence describes the orthodox. The bastile in which they are immured is the word " Calvinism." Man has no property in man. The world is my country, to do good my religion. I ask again whether these splendid utterances came from the lips of a drunken beast ? "Man has no property in man." 154 MISTAKES OP INOERSOLL. What a splendid motto that would make for the religious newspapers of this country thirty years ago. I ask, again, whether these splendid utterances came from the lips of a drunken beast? Only a little while ago two or three days I read a report of an ad- dress made by Bishop Doane, an Episcopal Bishop in apostolic succes- sion regular line from Jesus Christ down to Bishop Doane. The Bishop was making a speech to young preachers the sprouts, the theological buds. He took it upon him to advise them all against early marriages. Let us look at it. Do you believe there is any duty that man owes to God that will prevent a man marrying the woman he loves? Is there some duty that I owe to the clouds that will prevent me from marrying some good, sweet woman? Now, just think of that! I tell you, young man, you marry as soon as you can find her and sup- port her. I had rather have one woman that I know than any amount of gods that I am not acquainted with. If there is any revelation from God to man, a good woman is the best revelation He has ever made; and I will admit that that revelation was inspired. Now, on the subject of marriage, let me offset the speech of Bishop Doane by a word from this " wretched infidel :" Though I appear a sorry wanderer, the marriage state has rot a sin- cerer friend than I. It is the harbor of human life, and is, with respect to the things of this world, what the next "world is to this. It is home, and that one word conveys more than any other word can express. For a few years we may glide along the tide of a single life, but it is a tide that flows but once, and, what is still worse, it ebbs faster than it flows, and leaves many a hapless voyager aground. 1 am one, you see, that has experienced the fall I am describing. I have lost m}'lide; itpassed by while every throb of my heart was on the wing for the salvation of America, and I have now, an contentedly as I can, made myself a little tower of walls on that shore that has the solitary resemblance of home I just want you to know what this dreadful infidel thought of home. I just wanted you to know what Thomas Paine thought of home. Then here is another letter that Thomas Paine wrote to congress on the 21st day of January, 1808, and I wanted you to know those two. It is only a short one : To THE HONORABLE THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES: The purport of this address is to state a claim I feel myself entitled to make on the United States, leaving it to their representatives in congress to decide on its worth and its merits. The case is as follows : Toward the latter end of the year 1780 the continental money had become depreciated the paper dollar being then not more than a cent that it seemed next to impossible to continue the war. As the United States was then in alliance with France, it became necessary to make France acquainted with our real situation. I therefore drew up a letter to the Count De Vergennes, stating undi.sguisedly the whole case, and concluding with a request whether France could not, either as a sub- ON THOU ,-lS PAINE. 155 idyor a loan, supply the United States with a million pounds sterling, and continue that supply, annually, during the war. I showed this letter to Mr. Morbois, secretary of the French minister. His remark Bpon it was that a million sent out of the nation exhausted it more than ten millions spent in it. I then showed it to Mr. Ralph Izard, member of congress from South Carolina. He borrowed the letter of me and said: " We will endeavor to do something about it in congress." Ac- cordingly, congress then appointed John A. Laurens to go to France and make representation for the purpose of obtaining assistance. Col. Laurens wished to decline the mission, and asked that congress would appoint Col. Hamilton, who did not choose to do it. Col. Laurens then came and stated the case to me, and said that he was well enough acquainted with the military difficulties of the army, but he WHS not acquainted with political affairs, or with the resources of the country, to undertake such a mission. Said he, " If you will go with me I will accept the mission." This I agreed to do, and did do. We sailed from Boston in the Alliance frigate February, 1781, and arrived in France in the beginning of March. The aid obtained fro;n France was six millions of liyres, as at present, and ten millions as a loan, borrowed in Holland on the security of France. We sailed from Brest in the French frigate Resolue the 1st of June, and arrived at Boston on the 25th of August, bringing with us two millions and a half in silver, and conveying a ship and a brig laden with clothing and military stores. The money was transported with sixteen ox teams to the National bank at Philadelphia, which enabled our army to move to Yorktown to attack in conjunction with the French army under iiochambeau, the British army under Cornwallis. As I never had a single cent for these services, I felt myself entitled, as the country is now in a stale of prosperity, to state the case to congress. As to my political works, beginning with the pamphlet "Common Sense," published the beginning of January 1770, which awakened America to a declaration of independence, as the president and vice- president both know, as they were works done from principle I.can not dishonor that principle by ever asking any reward for them. The country has been benefited by them, and I make myself happy in the knowledge of that benefit. It is, however, proper for me to add that the mere independence of America, were it to have been followed by a system of government modeled after the corrupt system of the English government, would not have interested me with the uabated ardor it did. It was to bring forward and establish a representative system of govern- ment. As the work itself will sliow, that was the leading principle with me in writing that work, and all my other works during the progress of the revolution, and I followed the same principle in writing in English the "Rights of Man." After the failure of the 5 per cent, duty recommended by congress to pay the interest of the loan to be borrowed in Holland, I wrote to Chancellor Livingston, then minister for foreign affairs, and Robert Morris, minister of finance, and proposed a method for getting over the difficulty at once, which was by adding a continental legislature which should be empowered to make laws for the whole union instead of recommending them. So the method proposed met with their full ap- probation. I held myself in reserve to take a step up whenever a direct occasion occurred. 156 MISTAKES OF INGERtiOLL. In a conversation afterward with Gov. Clinton, of New York, now vice-president, it was judged that for the purpose of my going fully into the subject, and to prevent any misconstruction of ray motive or object, it would be best that I received nothing from congress, but to leave it to the states individually to make me what acknowledgment they pleased. The State of New York presented me with a farm, which since my return to America. I have found it necessary to sell, and the btaie of Pennsylvania voted me 500 of their currency, but none of ihc states to the east of New York, or the south of Pennsylvania, have made me the least acknowledgment. They had received benefits from me which they accepted, and there the matter ended. This story will not tell well in history. All the civilized world knows I have been of great, service lo the United States, and have generously given away that which would easily have made me a fortune. I much question if an instance is to be found in ancient or modern times of a man who had no personal interest in the case to take up that of the establishment of a r presentative government, and who sought neither place nor office after it was established ; that pursued the same undeviating principles that I had for more than thirty years, and that in spite of dangers, difficulties, and inconveniences of which I have had my share. THOMAS PAINE. An old man in Pennsylvania told me once that his father hired a old revolutionary soldier by the name of Thomas Martin to- work for him. Martin was then quite an old man; and there was sin old Presby- terian preacher used to come there, by the name of Crawford, and he sat down by the fire and he got to talking one night, among other things, about Thomas Paine what a wretched, infamous dog he W's; and while he was in the midst of this conversation the old soldier rose from the fireplace, and he walked over to the preacher, and he said to him : " Did you ever see Thomas Paine ?" " No." " Well," he says, " I ha\ c . I saw him at Valley Forge. I heard read at the head of every regiment and company the letters of Thomas Paine. I heard them read the 'Crisis,' and I saw Thomas Paine writing on the head of a drum, sit- ting at the bivouac fire, those simple words that inspired every patriot's bosom, and I want to tell you Mr. Preacher, that Thomas Paine did more for liberty than any priest that ever lived in this world. And yet they say he was afraid to die! Afraid of what? Is there any God in heaven that hates a patriot? If there is Thomas Paine ought to be afraid to die. Is there any God ihat would damn a man for helping to free three millions of people? If Thomas Paine was in hell to-night, and could get God's attention long enough to point him to the old banner of the stars floating over America, God would have to let him out. What would he be afraid of? Had he ever burned anybody ? No. Had he ever put anybody in the inquisition? No. Ever put the thumb-screw on anybody ? No. Ever put anybody in prison so that some poor wife and mother would come and hold her little babe up at the grated window that the man bound to the floor might get one glimpse of his blue-eyed babe ? Did he ever do that ? OA' THOMAS PAINE. 157 Did he ever light a fagot? Did he ever tear human .flesh ? Why, what had he to be afraid of? He had helped to make the world free. He had helped create the only republic then on the earth. What was he afraid of? Was God a tory? It won't do. Oue would think from the persistence with which the orthodox have charged for the last seventy years that Thomas Paine recanted, that there must be some evidence of some kind to support these charges. Even with my ideas of the average honor of the believers in snp< rsiition, the averagt truthfulness of the disciples of fear, 1 did not Relieve that all those infamies rested solely upon poorly-attested falsehoods, i had charity enough to suppose that something had been caid or done by Thomas Paine capable of being tortured into a foundation of all these calumnies. What crime had Thomas Pmne committed that he should have feared to die? The only answer you cau give isth-tt he denied the inspiration of the scriptures. II that is crime, the civilized world is filled with criminals The pioneers of human thought, the intellectual leaders of this world, the foremost men in every science, the kings of literature and art, those who stand in the front of investigation, ihe men who are civilizing and elevating and refining mankind, are all un- believers in the ignorant dosrma of inspira'ion. Why should we think Thomas Pnine was afraid to die? and why should the American people malign ihe memory of that great man? He was the first to advocate the separation from the mother country* He was the first to write these words: " The United States of America." Think of maligning that man ! He was the first to lift his voice against iiiman slavery, and while hundreds and thousands of ministers all over the United States not only believed in slavery, but bought and sold women and babes in the name of Jesus Christ, this infidel, this wretch who is now burning in the flames of hell, lifted his voice against human slavery and said : ' It is robbery, and a slaveholder is a thcif; the whipper of women is a barbarian; the seller of a child is a savage.'* No wonder that the theiving hypocrite of his day haied him! I have no love for any man whoever pretended to own a human being. I have no love fora man Hint would sell a babe from the mother's throb- bing, heaving, agonized breast. I have no respect for a man who considered a lash on the naked back as a legal tender for labor performed. 80 write it down, Thomas Paine was the first great abolitioaist of America Now let me tell you another thing. He was the first man to raise his voice for the abolition of the death penalty in the French convention. What more did he do? He was the first to suggest a federal constitu- tion for the United States. He saw that the old articles of confederation 158 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. were nothing; that they were ropes of water and chains of mist, and hf said, " We want a federal constitution so that when you pass a law rais- ing 5 per cent, you can make the states pay it." Let us give him hia due. What were all these preachers doing at that time ? He hated superstition; he loved the truth. He hated tyranny ; he loved liberty. He was the friend of the human race. He lived a brave and thoughtful life. He was a good and true and generous man, and lie died as he lived. Like a great and peaceful river with green and shaded banks, without a murmur, without a ripple, he flowed into the waveless ocean of eternal peace. I love him ; I love every man who gave me, or helped to give me the liberty I enjoy to-night; I love every man who helped me put our flag in heaven. I love every man who has lifted his voice in any age for liberty, for a chainless body and a fetterless brain. I love every man who has given to every other human being every right that he claimed for himself. I love every man who hag thought more of principle than he has of position. I love the men who have trampled crowns beneath their feet that they might do something for mankind, and for that reason I love Thomas Paine. I thank you all, ladies and gentlemen, every one every one, for the attention you have given me this evening. Great Speeches I WIT, WISDOM AND ELOQUENCE! OP COL. R. G. INGERSOLL, Illustrated; 8vo, 158 pages, cloth and gold. PRICE, $1. REPLIES TO INGERSOLL ON THOMAS PAINE BY l>r. Goodwin, Bishop Fallows, James Slaclaughlin, Prof. Wilcox, Or. Il.itiU-l.l. Or. Blackburn, Simeon Oilbert, Pero Hyacintlie, and others. INCLUDING, ALSO, INGERSOL.I/S LECTURE ON THOMAS PAINE. 8vo, 15 H pages, cloth and gold. PRICE, $1. ^^^ MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL, AND ins ANSWERS COMPLETE. This volume contains Ingersoll's Lectures, "Mistakes of Moses." "What Shall We Do to be Saved?" "Skulls." "Thomas Paine." "Funeral Oration at His Brother's Grave," with Comments on same by Henry Ward Beecher, Isaac N. Arnold, and others. Also, criticisms on all of his lectures, by Prof. Swing, W. H. Ryder, D. D M J. Monro Gibson, D. D., Brooke Herford, D. D., Rabbi Wise, Rev.W. F. Grafts, Chaplain C. C. McCabe, D. D.,' Arthur Swazy, D. D., Robert Collyer, D. D., Bishop Fallows, Dr. Thomas, Dr. Lorimer. Dr. Courtney, Prof. Courtney, Prof. Curtis, Dr. Goodwin, tiev. James McLaughlin. Prof. Wilcox, Dr. Hatfield, Dr. Blackburn, Simeon Gilbert, Pere Hyacinthe. and others. Edited by J. B. McClure. Beautifully bound in cloth and gold; 8vo, 600 pages. Illustrated. PRICE, $2. Any of the above book-s will be sent by mail, post paid, on receipt -of price. Rhodes & MeClure, Publishers, METHODJST CHURCH BLOCK, CHICAGO, ILL D. L. MOODY'S ANECDOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. COMPRISING ALL OF MR. MOODY'S ANECDOTES AND ILLUS- TRATIONS USED BY HIM IN HIS Revival Work in Europe and America; - ALSO - EngifaYiqgg of Me$i% J^oodi}, j&nl^i), Whittle & Bliss, Moody' s Church, Chicago Tabernacle, Farwell Hall. Etc. A handy and handsome volume which many will prize. New York Evan- gelist. It is a good insight into the workings and teachings of the great Evangelist. Jftw York Daily Democrat. A book of anecdotes which have thrilled hundreds of thousands. Presby- terian Banner. The book has been compiled by J. B. McCLURE, whose scholarship and journalistic experience perfectly lits him to do the work discriminately and well. .V. W. Christian Advocate. (Methodist.) Beautifully bound in cloth and gold; 8 vo., 200 pages. Illustrated. Price $1.00. OR, STOEIES ABOUT CHILDREN. The universal verdict of press and public is that for juvenile literature, these stories and sketches are unequalled in the language. Purity, pith and point, instructive and entertaining is the character of this work, and it should be In the hands of every child in America. 8 vo., 150 pages, handsomely illustrated. Edited by J. B. McCLUKE. Price $1.00. Any of the above books will be sent by mail, post-paid, on ro- ceipt of price. Rhodes & McClure, Publishers, METHODIST CHURCH BLOCK, - - CHICAGO, ILL. FOR THE DEAF, RHODES' AUDIPHONE. THE ONLY INVENTION THAT ENABLES THE DEAF TO HEAR THROUGH THE MEDIUM OF THE. TEETH, AND THE DEAF AND DUMB TO HEAR AND LEARN TO SPfcAK. A Claa of Defcf Mutei Listening to Music for the Flnt Time, by aid of th Audiphone, From Frank Let lit'* Illiutrattd Ncwspafer, Dec. 13, 1879. INVENTED AND MANUFACTURED BY RICHARD S. RHODES, PRINCIPAL AMERICAN OFFICE AND AUDIPHONE PARLORS: Methodist Church Block, Corner Clark and Washington Six. PAMPHLETS FREE. CHICAGO, ILL. A 000115328