077 371 Domestic Facts and Forces. VI. Marriage. g =i A SUNDAY LECTURE Congregation Rodeph Shalom Eighth Street, near Perm Avenue PITTSBURG, PA. RABBI J. LEONARD LEVY SERIES 1. SUNDAY, Feb. 16, 1902. No. 17 These Sunday Lectures are distributed FREE OP CHARGE in the Temple to all who attend the Services. Another edition is distributed free throughout the City to friends of liberal religious thought. An extra edition is printed for those wishing to have them mailed to friends residing out of the City. Apply to CHARLES H. JOSEPH, 202 Ferguson Block, Pittsburgh. SUNDAY LECTURES BEFORE CONGREGATION RODEPH SHALOM. SERIES I. 1. For What Do We Stand? 15. Gc 2. The Consequences of Belief. 16. PI 3. The Modern Millionaire. 17. M 4. The Wandering Jew. 18. 5. A Father's Power. 19. 6. A Mother's Influence. 20. 7. The Child's Realm. 21. 8. The Chosen of the Earth. 22. 9. Atheism and Anarchism. 23. 10. A Jewish View of Jesus. 24. 11. The Doom of Dogma. 25. 12. The Dawn of Truth. 26. 13. Friendships. 27. 14. Zionism. 28. Gone, but Not Forgotten. Pleasures and Pastimes. Marriage. CONGREGATIONAL ACTIVITIES. SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 23rd. 10:30 a. m Service and Lecture 2:80 p. m Congregational School 4:00 p. m Children's Service 4:30 p. m Teachers' Meeting TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25th. 2:30 p. m. , Young Ladies' Sewing Society. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 26th. 4:30 p. m Post Graduate Class THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27th. 4:00 p. m C. J. W. Bible Class SATURDAY, MARCH 1st. 10:30 a. m., Sabbath Service and Ser- DOMESTIC FACTS AND FORCES/ VI. MARRIAGE. A SUNDAY LECTURE BEFORE CONGREGATION RODEPH SHALOM, BY RABBI J. LEONARD LEVY. Pitlsbvrg, Febrttarv i6(h, 1902. And Adam said, This is bone of iny bones, and flesh of my flesh : she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife : and they shall be one flesh 4 (Genesis ii, 23, 24.) Love is strong as death, jealousy cruel as the grave. . . . Many waters cannot quench love, neither can the floods drown it ; if a man would give all the substance of his house for love, it would utterly be contemned. (Song of Songs viii, 6, 7.) There is a beauu-ul legend in the Talmud which tells us that when God created man and woman, He formed them together, not only simultaneously in time, but physically united, like the Siamese twins. In the process of time, the same legend tells us, it was found necessary to divide the physical bond that connected the numan pair. liiver since then, for every human being created there is supposed to exist a counterpart, and every soul ushered into this world in human form is destined to seek out its associate 01 the opposite sex to which it would have been physically bound, if the old system had continued to prevail. It is only a legend, but how sweetly it seems to teach us that the union of man and woman by the marriage tie should not be deemed as a matter or chance, a hap-hazard undertaking, but the result of soul seeking soul, of individuality reaching out after sundered individuality, of self seeking its other self. Among the best men and women of earth, among the highest types of spiritual mannood ana womanhood, we believe marriage is conceived to be the union of sundered individualities, which are necessary to each other, the joining of opposites to make a perfect whole. But we must not imagine ton a moment that marriage, thus understood, nas come to mean what it does, by one tremendous leap and jump. \Ve have learned too much, within the past fifty years from such *Stenographically reported by Caroline Loewenthal. 1 21 17777 men as Spencer, Darwin and Huxley, to believe that anything in this world is 01 spontaneous growth. We are led to believe that all the conditions, by which we are surrounded in the world of to-day, are the product of an orderly evolution. Our very bodies prove it; society is an ocular demonstration of it; marriage is a palpable evidence of it. The seeking of soul tor its sundered kindred soul is among the cuief ot the forces at the very basis of civilization. Abolish the home ana you have given a death-thrust to morals. Without noly matrimony, home is impossible. Without the home, morality will tnrive but little. The only temple in which a trinity may be logically worshipped, so to speak, is the home, for there you find the only sacred trinity of mother, father and child. The home is the Temple of Love, with its sanctuary adorned by the altar of sacrifice, the seven-armed candlestick of faith and enlightenment, the tabie ana shrew-bread of modesty and simplicity and the Holy of Holies with its shrine of virtue. But the home, thus under- stood, is also not the product of a momentary creation. Like mar- riage, it is the outcome of long ages of struggles and survivals. Marriage, as primeval man understood it, ws a vastly different matter xi-om that which we now recognize it to be. Our modern conception owes its origin, largely, to the lessons inculcated in the Sacred Scriptures. In them we are taught tnat God is reported to have said, "It is not meet that man should live alone." We are there taught that God created woman out of man, as though to place him not in a position of authority, but as the defender of the weaker sex. There we are taught that woman was bone of man's bone, flesh of man's flesh, his equal in rights and privileges, that marriage should be the ideal of mutuality, of reciprocity. There we are taught, "therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother and cleave unto his wife, so that they become one flesh." But the Bible was written late in the development of the human lamily. For hundreds oi thousands of years had man been on earth, before the Bible appeared. It is a new book, comparatively speaking, only a couple of thousand years old. Originally, men and women lived, in primitive society, in a con- dition called by scholars, "promiscuity." There was no conception of the marriage tie. Any man might possess any and all women he could capture or purchase. The relationship between the sexes was practically "common among inferior creatures." There was no prop- erty to be left to the family, no state to demand the care of the off- spring. The relationship was purely sensual and altogether animal. 2 This evidently did not work to the satisfaction of mankind, and changes, after many thousands of years had passed, were brought about. Then we find a condition called, Endogamy, in which broth- ers and sisters became husbands and wives; in which only people of blood relation could enter into the marriage relationship, in which the privilege of marriage was not permitted be- tween members of different tribes. These ancJer.t mar- riages of such close blood relationship produced great degeneracy, and it is still the opinion, nay it is the positive teaching of many of our best physicians that consanguinity is not an ideal relationship in marriage. Another scheme was tried, called Exogamy, in which a body of men, brothers, would marry a body of women, sisters, who were members of other tribes and clans. This plan also failed to produce desired results, and then two rival systems were adopted, one called polygamy and the other called polyandry. In the former man was acknowledged as the head of the family, with the right of possessing as many wives as he desired. In the latter, woman was given the privilege of possessing as many husbands as she wished. It has been observed by scientific men that the number of men and women in the world is practically equal. It has therefore occurred to them to lay down as a law in so- ciety that as there are as many men as women, or nearly so, it seems to be the design of nature that monogamy should prevail. When we reach the time, when one man takes to himself one woman in mar- riage, we have already reached a very high stage in the history of civilization. This, then, seems to us to be a fixed principle, that man shall seek his mate, and in wedding her, he is supposed to find the other half of his own soul. And when marriage is thus understood, when marriage is thus conceived, when marriage is thus entered into, it becomes a great blessing. The union of opposites seems to be the great law of nature. Man stands for one element, woman for an- other. Man represents the law of variation, woman the law of her- edity. Heredity would give us the same condition of things without variation of form or shape or size. Variation tends to produce dif- ferentiation. Man stands for strength and vigor; woman for grace and beauty. Man stands for the mind and the head; woman for the heart and the soul of humanity. And it is in bringing these two together, in the union of these two forces, that we find the ideal marriage. No one has expressed this more beautifully than Tenny- son, in these words: "For woman is not undeveloped man, But diverse: could we make her as the man, Sweet love were slain: his dearest bond is this, Not like to like, but like in difference. Yet in the long years liker must they grow; The man be more of woman, she of man; He gain in sweetness and in moral height, Nor lose the wrestling thews that throw the world; She mental breadth, nor fail in childward care, Nor lose the childlike in the larger mind; Till at the last she set herself to man, Like perfect music unto noble words; And so these twain, upon the skirts of Time, Sit side by side, full summed in all their powers, Dispensing harvest, sowing the To-be, Self-reverent each and reverencing each, Distinct in individualities, But like each other even as those who love. Then reign the world's great bridals, chaste and calm; Then springs the crowning race of mankind." Unfortunately, however, even among people who believed in the "one wife for the one husband" principle, woman was long regarded as a piece of property. If you read the law books of the world up to the period of recent times, you will find that woman was still an object owned by man, and to this day the law, the force of the stronger, often makes woman a chattel, a plaything, a toy for man. Under such conditions marriage can never become sacred. Marriage is only true when there is a union of hearts as well as a joining of hands. Nay, matrimony means rather the union of lives than the signing of contracts. True marriage means heart going out to heart, hand seeking hand, life joining life, for all existence, here and beyond. Marriage means the union of two kindred souls, attracted to each other by none but spiritual considerations. Marriage means the sanctification of all the powers within us. It means the hallow- ing of all the instincts and all the intuitions we have within us, for self-preservation and for race preservation. Marriage, according to the Jewish church, is not a sacrament, inviolable and irrefragable, an undertaking which can never be dis- solved under any circumstances. Nay, we would not have it so if we could. For upon entering into matrimony, too much is at stake, to make it eternally binding under all conditions, especially for the woman, who has brought to the altar an innocence and a virtue rarely possessed by the man. When woman enters into marriage, the stake she puts up is infinitely higher than that put up by man. Therefore, we would not have man and woman bound to all eternity, unable to separate even by the power and consent of law. Nor do we conceive that marriage is a mere contract, a mere entrance into a bargain, a mere business proposition, although, unfortunately, it fre- 4 quently is nothing else. Nor do we conceive of marriage as a mere deed of transfer, the passing over of the body of the one into the keeping of the other. Marriage is to be considered, according to the highest ideals of religion, as a holy vow, a sacred obligation, an ethical undertaking, to be adhered to faithfully, honorably, 'honestly, and to this vow, obligation and undertaking, God and the State are witnesses de- manding and guaranteeing stability. Marriage requires love. With- out love, before God, there can be no true marriage. The law may bind two people together; under the law, so long as thy are thus bound, they must live together, honestly, uprightly, purely; but when two people are bound together and not joined by the power of love, then we feel that though they are united, they are not truly married, though they are bound, they are not tied by the sweet bond of matrimony. Love is the cementing power in mar- riage-. By love, I do not mean sickly sentimentality. By love, I do not mean the heaving of sighs. By love*, I do not mean the loss of appetite and the lack of power to sleep. By love, I do not mean the loss of that vitality which ought to produce virile life. By love, I do not mean that indefinite longing which seeks expression by the touching of hands or the "playing with feet." By love, I do not mean that merely animal state that finds its satisfaction in sensual thrills. But by love, I do mean the offering of life unto life, the surrendering of heart to heart, the finding of the other part of one's own soul. By love, 1 mean sacrifice, the willingness to toil, to slave, to strive, to struggle, to fight, for the object of our affection. This is love. "Love is our morning star and our evening star." It is the rainbow that shines amid the storms of life. The voice of love is the sweetest music; it is the mother of melody. Without love, marriage is the act of mere animals. With love, marriage is the union of hearts as well as of hands, through it "earth becomes a paradise and we walk it like gods." Love is the poetry of existence, the music of life, and where you find man and woman bound by this tie, in harmony with the civil laws which we make and with due regard for the demands of religion, there you find marriage. Where you find it not, men may sign contracts which must, nevertheless, be kept, men may enter into bonds which must be observed, but this is not true marriage. Theodore Parker is reported to have said, in his last days, that he had always striven to maintain loving relations with his wife. In order to achieve this desirable end, he had set himself these rules: "That he would never, without the best reasons, oppose the will of his wife; that he would do all service for her sake freely; that he would never look cross at her; that he would never scold her; that he would never weary her with commands; that he would love, honor, cherish and defend her." And wherever you have men and women (because these rules apply mutually), who thus understand marriage, there you will find the sweetest fruits of marriage grow. When these considerations prompt marriage, then though our pathway be amid thorns and briers, we shall, nevertheless, pluck roses by the way. Wherever these considera- tions do not prompt marriage, then, though you have brillant cere- monies, then, though you have many guests to celebrate marriage with you, then, though you have never so great a display of gifts and presents from people who are supposed to congratulate that which does not deserve congratulation, then marriage becomes like Dead Sea fruit, full of the powder and ashes of unavailing regrets. There can be little doubt but that we are living in a very practical age. So practical are we, nowadays, that most of us accept nothing without proof. The first statement we make in connection with any proposition is, "Prove it;" and if proof is not immediately forthcoming, the proposition has no sanction for most ot us. Society is surfeited with doubt and scepticism, leaving little room even for logical rational beliefs, Religion is now pass- ing through a very trying position because of this attitude of men and women towards it. There is no statement made in the pulpit to-day, but at once it is challenged by the pews. It is a new attitude, and it is, in most respects, a rightful demand. The day has gone by when a preacher is a priest, when the pulpit is the keeper of the people's conscience, whpn the preacher has the right to dogmatically state that "this is the truth ana no questions may be askeu." The day is fast going by, and pray God it may soon ue gone forever, wnen men may teach, with a show of authority, that God breaks riis own laws. The days are fast passing by when preachers and teachers may, unchallenged, force opinions upon men, in place of truths, theories instead of lacts. Conscious as we are of how little can be absolutely proven, we acknowledge the justice of the demand that, at least logical reasons must be given lor the position taken by the teachers of the children of man. We may hope that the days are nigh at hand when men will ask for a rational belief, to supplant a credulous faith. Living in sucn a period, we understand that things held sacred for thou- sands of years, do necessarily, in a transition period, lose their 6 sanctity. And there can be but little doubt, if we understand what we hear, read and observe, that marriage, to-day, is in a de- generate condition. According to modern social conditions, it quite often appears that marriage is not a match, it is a catch; it is not a union of hearts, but a joining of properties. Marriage is not something holy, something sacred, something unselfish. Marriage does not mean the subordination of the "ego" for the benefit of the race; but marriage has become the very apotheosis of selfishness. When people enter into a matrimonial alliance, thy simply ask, like so many politicians, "What's in it for us?" The "golden" rule applies to marriage not in the sense of love, but in the sense of selfishness. Marriage to-day has become a matter of arrange- ment, to a large degree. It does not presuppose that the woman has a right to wait until she has met her other self, nor, that the man is seeking that which shall become to him the true comple- ment of his life. Marriage, only too frequently, means the addi- tion of bank account to bank account, wealth to wealth, position to position. It does not mean that we are careful of the character of the individuals to be wed, or that we investigate the state of health of the individuals to be married, or tnat we regard the character, the moral standing, the cleanliness of habits of the parties to be allied. It often means that we have more respect for the pedigrees of our horses and dogs than we have for our grandcmldren. it means that we sell our daughters, legally, as the ancients sold their children, barbarously. It means that we sacrifice our daughters to Moloch, the degrading god of a debased society, as did people of old. Sometimes marriage is forced on a maid. A girl is confronted by conditions that mean that she must either support herself or be dependent on relatives, or go through life alone, so that she cannot enjoy the society of the opposite sex, for rumor would take from her her character. Parents plead with such a girl to wed, to take the first chance which comes along, be- cause it relieves ihem of a burden, and will, probably, insure pro- tection during coming years. This forced marriage is to me despicaole. it is not man seeking maid, but male uniting with temaie. It is the surrender of all self-respect. A thousand ...mes i would rather have my child remain forever alone, than, moved by such considerations, to be chained for life to the whim of one who can rarely be worthy of her respect, 'men, too, there is the marriage of convenience. You may, in this country, not have seen two wonderful pictures painted by Orchardson, the great Eng- 7 lish artist. INO one who has seen them could have felt but that ne had gazed on a sermon in color. In one there may be observed an old man, sated with the pleasures of the world, seated before a table witn a young, delicate, but fashionable-looking woman. They nave married "for convenience' sake." Sne wanted more lioerty, he more money. Sne wanted the freedom, with which his name could dower her. He wanted more of the world's goods. The picture is called "Le Mariage de Convenance." The draperies and bric-a-brac are beautiful; the table is covered with foods, the most costiy and with decorations most exquisite, with silver the most gorgeous. At the side of this picture there was another picture, tfie sequel, as it were, and called &.n.er." The same drapenes, the same bric-a-brac, tne same table, the same silver, the same luxuries. But the man is there with His hands in his pockets, his head upon his chest, his feet extended toward the tire, alone, with nothing but a nameless shame for his company and h'is vain regrets for his companion. This is your "marriage of con- venience." We call by a name I must not use here a woman who sells herself for bread, or for the support of her children. How much better beiore God is a woman who does not need bread, yet sells herself for social position? We say that our garments must not touch those of a fallen sister for fear of contamination. How much more contaminating are those women, who having all and needing nothing, yet, for a brilliant position, sell themselves? This is not popular talk. This is not the kind of talk that pleases; but I hope to God, it is the kind that burns into the soul, that will make parents pause before they become a party to the sale of their chim and make every young girl pause before she sells herself to a man unworthy of her, and wno cannot bring to the altar of God the purity and the innocence and the virtue that he demands of her! Is Max Nordau altogether wrong when, in earnestness, yet in bitterness, he says the following: "Why should we blame the man or woman of our civilization because he or she looks upon marriage as a charitable institution, a 'Sheltering Arms,' and when a proposal is made looks around to see if any one bids higher. They see that the world takes the amount of the fortune as the measure of the worth of the individual; they see the rich faring sumptuously and Lazarus lying in the dust at the gate, to-day as well as in the Bibical times; they know the crush and the weariness of the struggle for existence and the difficulty of winning a victory in it; they know that they can only count upon their individual selves and strength, and if they fall that they need expect no acceptable help from the community. What wonder then that they look upon every act of their life, marriage included, solely and exclusively from the standpoint of their personal, palpable ad- vantage in the struggle for existence? Why should they allow love to influence them in the selection of a husband or wife? Because humanity would be better off by it? What do they care for hu- manity? What has humanity done for them? Does it satisfy their appetite when they are hungry? Does it give them work when they can find no work to do? Does it feed their children when they are clamoring for bread? And if they die will it support their widows, their orphans? No, and as it does not fulfill any of these duties toward them, they have only their individual selves to consider, and look upon love as an agreeable pastime and upon marriage as a means of increasing their share of the goods of this world." ("Con- ventional Lies of our Civilization," p. 288). No! " Do not think that we can enter into any such scheme and have God's law work with us. I am not foolish enough to believe that God's law is written in a book. It is too grand a thing to be written on the pages of a human work. The Bible is an attempt to interpret God's law, spiritually, morally and ethically. God's law is written in the universe, and you can no more play with God's law than you can with edged tools without running into danger. The law of na'ture, which is the law of God, seems to be that marriage must be the product of love to produce the normal results desired by nature; that where there is no love there may be a contract, but there cannot be true marriage. Where there is no love, matrimony may be a matter of money and the little Cupid may be cupidity, but there is not the union of souls needed to effect nature's true purposes. Scholarly men, men of wide vision and careful observation, have no- ticed that you find love among people in proportion as you find peo- ple necessary to each other; and it has been often pointed out that you find most love among the very poorest of people. I do not mean to say, nor do these writers mean to teach, that there is no such thing as love among rich people, but it is found much less rarely, they show, among the rich than among the poor. Love, which is the attraction of soul to soul, is found much more among the poor than the so-called high and the wealthy classes. The product of love in the form of a child, is said to be the better, the healthier, the more vigorous, the more fully equipped for the struggles of life, when love has stirred the father and affection moved the mother. The conse- quence is that tue gospel of "little love and little families" is scarcely recognized among the poor. They seem to understand the prompt- in of nature's law better than the wealthy do. Their children, born amid conditions of mire and filth, that would kill us, become the con- querors and victors later on. They become the strugglers and the fighters. They are the people who are giving to the world to-day its thew and its muscle, its brawn and later on its brain, generally speaking. The consequence is that in the race of life the poor have the best advantages, though it does not seem so. Follow the stories 9 of tae families of the rich and you will see how soon degenercy im- pairs the vitality of their offspring. Follow the families of the poor and you will find that they are to-day the people who provide society with the ranks from which to draw recruits for the army of civiliza- tion. When wealth weds wealth without love, degenercy in progeny almost invariably follows, and in spite of beautiful surroundings and healthful conditions, in spite of the rearing of children amid an al- most perfect environment, you find a feeble race compared to the children of the poor who become strong and vigorous. They, too, in time err and go the way of destruction that has afflicted every land and people, who have presumed to ignore the law, natural and divine. We conclude, therefore, that only when love prompts mar- riage, can we hope to find ideal progeny; only where affection seeks affection are we likely to find those children, who are worthy to carry on the mission of the human race. Now, friends, let us be honest. Let us be open with each other. The conditions pointed out this morning are either true or untrue, 'ihey may apply to us or not. If true, let us mend them. If untrue, I regret that I have wasted an hour with you. If they can be im- proved, let us set about improving them. Let us not leave here to-day saying, "It is all right, but what are we going to do about it?" If woman will be for modern humanity what she was for Israel, for the Talmud tells us that "by the influence of righteous women, Israel was redeemed from Egypt," if woman will rise to the height of her opportunity she can become the redeemer of society. She can refuse to accept the man who is not worthy of her. She can in- sist upon domestic morality, virtue and purity; and though many, under these circumstances, may never enter into the matrimonial tie, a thousand times better that they never marry than they should marry before men and not be married before God. One of Socrates' biog. ciphers tells us the views the great teacher held concerning marriage. He makes a young husband say to his bride: "Tell me, my wife, dost thou understand why I have chosen thee and why thy parents have given thee to me? From this day forth all that is in this house is ours in common; the interest of the family and the home demands wont without and within. Now the gods adapted the nature of woman for the cares and the work of the interior, and that of man for the cares and works of the exterior. Cold, heat, travels, wars, man is so constituted as to be able to bear all; on the other hand, the gods have given to woman the inclina- tion and mission to nurse her offspring. It is also she who is in charge of the provisions, whilst man's care is to ward off all that could injure the household." Continuing, he says that "the sweet- est charm shall be when more perfect than I thou shalt have made 10 me thy servant; when, instead of fearing old age lest it deprive thee of thy influence in thy household, thou shalt have gained the assur- ance that in growing old thou becomest for me a still better compan- ion, for thy children a still better mother, and for thy husband a still more honored mistress, for beauty and goodness do not depend on youth; they increase through life by means of virtue." These words, uttered by a Greek pagan, "a heathen," twenty- nve centuries ago, may be safely repeated in a most intelligent twentietn century audience. These words are true concerning the mass of women, and wnile to-day we hold that woman's sphere does not begin and end in the field indicated by Socrates, it, neverthe- less, remains, forever, her most important function. We have not yet reached perfection, nor are we surroundeu by perfect condi- tions, we are, however, much nearer ideal conditions than ever before. Ine horrible nightmare of loveless marriage, the awful shame of forced marriage, the regrettable marriage for convenience' saKe, will pass away, ultimately, just as promiscity has disappeared and given rise to monogamy. We understand our duty better, nowadays. Parents are being better instructed, fhysicians speak on this subject more openly. The clergy speak to-day as they did not dare to a generation or more ago. We may indulge the hope that marriage will be uni- versally regarded as a union of hearts as well as of bodies, a union of consecrated loves, a bond, which serves the purpose of providing for society, families best equipped to fulfil the functions designed by uod. We may believe that love, which is as "strong as death," will effect tne union that shall lead to a future, the door of which will not turn on the rusty hinges of selfishness, and will produce alliances so that the matrimonial bark will not founder on the sunken rocks of deceit. We may believe that when the ivy of affection clings to the tree of human life, on it will grow buds of devotion, blossoms of faithfulness and flowers of love. 11 XITHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY A 000124421 9 HE FOLLOWIN( >KS AND PAMPHLETS ARE FOR SALE BY CHARLES H. JOSEPH, 202 FERGUSON BLOCK, PITTSBURG, PA. WORKS BY RABBI J. LEONARD LEVY. Talmud " Rosh Hashana," or New Year, the first English translation of this work ever published *The Lights of the World, (In book form,) . . . *Modern Society " *The Nineteenth Century " Questions for Our Consideration, (In book form,) . Home Service for the Passover, (In pamphlet form) Hopes and Beliefs " . Judaism, Past, Present and Future " " . $ 2.50 i.oo I.OO I.OO 75 50 50 -25 READY FOR THE PRESS. THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL to cost about . This work will be published as soon as the names of five hundred advance subscribers have been received. SENT POSTAGE PREP Alb ON RECEIPT OF PRICE. *In pamphlet for.n. 50 cents per copy 1.50 SUNDAY LECTURES BY RABBI J. LEONARD LEVY. Series A, 1893-1894. 1. Abreast of the Times. 2. "What has the Jew done for the World ? 3. The Believing Sceptic. 4. Reliance on Science. 5. The Unity of all Religions. 6. What is the Messiah? 7. The Rule of Right. 8. Forever and Forever. 9. Are Women Superstitious? 10. Are Reform Jews becoming Christians? 11. The Survival of the Rrpublic. 12. Reformers, Deformers and Defamers. 13. An Easter Vision. 14. After the Winter, Spring. 15. True Till Death. Series B, 1894-1895. 1. Masters of the Situation. >. The Greatest Living Wonder. 5. Criminal Curiosity and Cowardly Con- sistency. 4. Has Satan Conquered God? The Greater Lights. 5. I. The Light of the World Moses and th- Prophets. A Night in the Slums. 7. II. The Light of the Orient Confucius. 8. A Parent's Blessing. 9. III. The Light of Asia Buddha. 10. Heroes and Hero tie-. 11. TV. The Light of Iran Zoroaster. 12. V. The Light of Christendom Jesus. 13. VI. The Light of Arabia Mohammed. 14. The Holy Catholic Church. l.i. Sunday Newspapers. Series C, 13951896. 1. The New Jew. 2. Put Yourself in his Place. 3. Home. 4. A Pilgrim's Journey to Mt. Zion. 5. Modern Society. (i. America and England. 7. Our Girls and Boys. x. Orthodox Saints and Reform Sinners. 9. The Church and the State. 10. Being Dead, They Yet Speak. 11. The Radicals Appeal. 12. At the Grave of Jesus. 13. Overcoming Obstacles. 14. A Common-Sense View of Religion. Series D, 1896 J897. 1. Some Questions of the Day. 2. The Greatest Work Ever Written. 3. Success and Failure. 4. Svri i and Palestine. . r i. The Most Remarkable Work Ever Written. fi. The Jewish Man. 7 The Jewish Woman. lie Jewish Youth Is Judaism Catholic? 10. Songs without Words. 11. Anti-Semitism, its Cause and Cure. 12. " My God, my God, why hast Thou for- saken me?" 13. See that ihe Republic receive no harm. Series E, 18971898. 1. Dare the Clergy Tell the Truth ? 2. Are Our Cities in Danger ? 3. " The School for Scandal." 1. Where did Religion come from ? x " Because Mother told me so." (1. ' Weighed in the Balance." 7. Custom and Conscience. 8. Are we Jews ? 9. Unrequited Affection. 10. Which Sabbath ought we Observe ? 11. What good has Ingersollistn done? 12. What advantage has the Jew? 13. The Altar at the Hearth. Series F, 18981899. 1. The Fi-st Doubt. 2. " What Will People Say?" 3. The Basis of Matrimony. I. The Rivals. 5. A Child's Blessing. f>. The Dawn of the New Era. ~. Nursery Rhymes and Superstitions. ood Literature. 9. The Lessons of History. 10. The Struggle for Liberty. 11. What Art May Do. 12. The Lost Paradise. II!. The Risen Jew, or Paradise Regained. 14. Nature as a Teacher. I\ The Drama. Series G, 18991900. 1. " New Lamps for Old Ones ; " or The Children of the Ghetto. 2. The Jew and the Gentile. 3. The Truth. 4. Home Life among the Jews. '>. Israel's Immortals. (i. " Onward and Upward." 7. The Sin Against Love. s. A Fool's Paradise. 9. ''Logic taught by Love." 10. The Jew and the Synagogue. 11. Woman. A Purim" Sermon. Man's Inhumanity to Man. lo. The Moth and the Flame. 1<. The Best is Yet to Come. Series H, 19001901. 1. Fashion and Reality. 2. " The Reign of Law." 3. Religion in the Nineteenth Century. 4. The Bible in the Nineteenth Century. Me Jew in the Nineteenth Century. <,. " Our Kin Across the Sea " 7. Science in the Nineteenth Century. B. Her Majesty. Queen Victoria. <>. The Greatest Discovery of the >;ineteenth Century. 10. The Jew's Revenge. 11. The Heart's Best Love. 12. Retrospect and Prospect. The above Lectures can be obtained at 5 cts. per copy. Apply to CHARLES H. JOSEPH, 202 Ferguson Block, Pittsburg, Pa. PUBLICITY PRES, DICK 4 CO.-PGH