|
Prev
| Next
| Contents

CHAPTER II. THE REVELATION
I can now turn with some relief to a more
impersonal view of this great subject. Allusion has
been made to a body of fresh doctrine. Whence does
this come? It comes in the main through automatic
writing where the hand of the human medium is
controlled, either by an alleged dead human being, as
in the case of Miss Julia Ames, or by an alleged higher
teacher, as in that of Mr. Stainton Moses. These
written communications are supplemented by a vast
number of trance utterances, and by the verbal messages
of spirits, given through the lips of mediums.
Sometimes it has even come by direct voices, as in the
numerous cases detailed by Admiral Usborne Moore in his
book The Voices. Occasionally it has come through
the family circle and table-tilting, as, for example,
in the two cases I have previously detailed
within my own experience. Sometimes, as in a case
recorded by Mrs. de Morgan, it has come through the
hand of a child.
Now, of course, we are at once confronted with the
obvious objection--how do we know that these messages
are really from beyond? How do we know that the medium
is not consciously writing, or if that be improbable,
that he or she is unconsciously writing them by his or
her own higher self? This is a perfectly just
criticism, and it is one which we must rigorously apply
in every case, since if the whole world is to become
full of minor prophets, each of them stating their own
views of the religious state with no proof save their
own assertion, we should, indeed, be back in the dark
ages of implicit faith. The answer must be that we
require signs which we can test before we accept
assertions which we cannot test. In old days they
demanded a sign from a prophet, and it was a perfectly
reasonable request, and still holds good. If a person
comes to me with an account of life in some further
world, and has no credentials save his own assertion, I
would rather have it in my waste-paperbasket than
on my study table. Life is too short to weigh the
merits of such productions. But if, as in the case of
Stainton Moses, with his Spirit Teachings, the
doctrines which are said to come from beyond are
accompanied with a great number of abnormal gifts--and
Stainton Moses was one of the greatest mediums in all
ways that England has ever produced--then I look upon
the matter in a more serious light. Again, if Miss
Julia Ames can tell Mr. Stead things in her own earth
life of which he could not have cognisance, and if
those things are shown, when tested, to be true, then
one is more inclined to think that those things which
cannot be tested are true also. Or once again, if
Raymond can tell us of a photograph no copy of which
had reached England, and which proved to be exactly as
he described it, and if he can give us, through the
lips of strangers, all sorts of details of his home
life, which his own relatives had to verify before they
found them to be true, is it unreasonable to suppose
that he is fairly accurate in his description of his
own experiences and state of life at the very
moment at which he is communicating? Or when Mr.
Arthur Hill receives messages from folk of whom he
never heard, and afterwards verifies that they are true
in every detail, is it not a fair inference that they
are speaking truths also when they give any light upon
their present condition? The cases are manifold, and I
mention only a few of them, but my point is that the
whole of this system, from the lowest physical
phenomenon of a table-rap up to the most inspired
utterance of a prophet, is one complete whole, each
attached to the next one, and that when the humbler end
of that chain was placed in the hand of humanity, it
was in order that they might, by diligence and reason,
feel their way up it until they reached the revelation
which waited in the end. Do not sneer at the humble
beginnings, the heaving table or the flying tambourine,
however much such phenomena may have been abused or
simulated, but remember that a falling apple taught us
gravity, a boiling kettle brought us the steam engine,
and the twitching leg of a frog opened up the train
of thought and experiment which gave us electricity.
So the lowly manifestations of Hydesville have ripened
into results which have engaged the finest group of
intellects in this country during the last twenty
years, and which are destined, in my opinion, to bring
about far the greatest development of human experience
which the world has ever seen.
It has been asserted by men for whose opinion I
have a deep regard--notably by Sir William Barratt--
that psychical research is quite distinct from
religion. Certainly it is so, in the sense that a man
might be a very good psychical researcher but a very
bad man. But the results of psychical research, the
deductions which we may draw, and the lessons we may
learn, teach us of the continued life of the soul, of
the nature of that life, and of how it is influenced by
our conduct here. If this is distinct from religion, I
must confess that I do not understand the distinction.
To me it IS religion--the very essence of it. But
that does not mean that it will necessarily crystallise
into a new religion. Personally I trust that it
will not do so. Surely we are disunited enough
already? Rather would I see it the great unifying
force, the one provable thing connected with every
religion, Christian or non-Christian, forming the
common solid basis upon which each raises, if it must
needs raise, that separate system which appeals to the
varied types of mind. The Southern races will always
demand what is less austere than the North, the West
will always be more critical than the East. One cannot
shape all to a level conformity. But if the broad
premises which are guaranteed by this teaching from
beyond are accepted, then the human race has made a
great stride towards religious peace and unity. The
question which faces us, then, is how will this
influence bear upon the older organised religions and
philosophies which have influenced the actions of men.
The answer is, that to only one of these religions
or philosophies is this new revelation absolutely
fatal. That is to Materialism. I do not say this in
any spirit of hostility to Materialists, who, so far as
they are an organized body, are, I think, as earnest
and moral as any other class. But the fact is
manifest that if spirit can live without matter, then
the foundation of Materialism is gone, and the whole
scheme of thought crashes to the ground.
As to other creeds, it must be admitted that an
acceptance of the teaching brought to us from beyond
would deeply modify conventional Christianity. But
these modifications would be rather in the direction of
explanation and development than of contradiction. It
would set right grave misunderstandings which have
always offended the reason of every thoughtful man, but
it would also confirm and make absolutely certain the
fact of life after death, the base of all religion. It
would confirm the unhappy results of sin, though it
would show that those results are never absolutely
permanent. It would confirm the existence of higher
beings, whom we have called angels, and of an ever-
ascending hierarchy above us, in which the Christ
spirit finds its place, culminating in heights of the
infinite with which we associate the idea of all-power
or of God. It would confirm the idea of heaven and of
a temporary penal state which corresponds to
purgatory rather than to hell. Thus this new
revelation, on some of the most vital points, is
NOT destructive of the beliefs, and it should be
hailed by really earnest men of all creeds as a most
powerful ally rather than a dangerous devil-begotten
enemy.
On the other hand, let us turn to the points in
which Christianity must be modified by this new
revelation.
First of all I would say this, which must be
obvious to many, however much they deplore it:
Christianity must change or must perish. That is the
law of life--that things must adapt themselves or
perish. Christianity has deferred the change very
long, she has deferred it until her churches are half
empty, until women are her chief supporters, and until
both the learned part of the community on one side, and
the poorest class on the other, both in town and
country, are largely alienated from her. Let us try
and trace the reason for this. It is apparent in all
sects, and comes, therefore, from some deep common
cause.
People are alienated because they frankly do not
believe the facts as presented to them to be true.
Their reason and their sense of justice are equally
offended. One can see no justice in a vicarious
sacrifice, nor in the God who could be placated by such
means. Above all, many cannot understand such
expressions as the "redemption from sin," "cleansed by
the blood of the Lamb," and so forth. So long as there
was any question of the fall of man there was at least
some sort of explanation of such phrases; but when it
became certain that man had never fallen--when with
ever fuller knowledge we could trace our ancestral
course down through the cave-man and the drift-man,
back to that shadowy and far-off time when the man-like
ape slowly evolved into the apelike man--looking back
on all this vast succession of life, we knew that it
had always been rising from step to step. Never was
there any evidence of a fall. But if there were no
fall, then what became of the atonement, of the
redemption, of original sin, of a large part of
Christian mystical philosophy? Even if it were as
reasonable in itself as it is actually unreasonable, it
would still be quite divorced from the facts.
Again, too much seemed to be made of Christ's
death. It is no uncommon thing to die for an idea.
Every religion has equally had its martyrs. Men die
continually for their convictions. Thousands of our
lads are doing it at this instant in France. Therefore
the death of Christ, beautiful as it is in the Gospel
narrative, has seemed to assume an undue importance, as
though it were an isolated phenomenon for a man to die
in pursuit of a reform. In my opinion, far too much
stress has been laid upon Christ's death, and far too
little upon His life. That was where the true grandeur
and the true lesson lay. It was a life which even in
those limited records shows us no trait which is not
beautiful--a life full of easy tolerance for others, of
kindly charity, of broad-minded moderation, of gentle
courage, always progressive and open to new ideas, and
yet never bitter to those ideas which He was really
supplanting, though He did occasionally lose His temper
with their more bigoted and narrow supporters.
Especially one loves His readiness to get at the spirit
of religion, sweeping aside the texts and the forms.
Never had anyone such a robust common sense, or such a
sympathy for weakness. It was this most wonderful and
uncommon life, and not his death, which is the true
centre of the Christian religion.
Now, let us look at the light which we get from the
spirit guides upon this question of Christianity.
Opinion is not absolutely uniform yonder, any more than
it is here; but reading a number of messages upon this
subject, they amount to this: There are many higher
spirits with our departed. They vary in degree. Call
them "angels," and you are in touch with old religious
thought. High above all these is the greatest spirit
of whom they have cognizance--not God, since God is so
infinite that He is not within their ken--but one who
is nearer God and to that extent represents God. This
is the Christ Spirit. His special care is the earth.
He came down upon it at a time of great earthly
depravity--a time when the world was almost as wicked
as it is now, in order to give the people the
lesson of an ideal life. Then he returned to his own
high station, having left an example which is still
occasionally followed. That is the story of Christ as
spirits have described it. There is nothing here of
Atonement or Redemption. But there is a perfectly
feasible and reasonable scheme, which I, for one, could
readily believe.
If such a view of Christianity were generally
accepted, and if it were enforced by assurance and
demonstration from the New Revelation which is coming
to us from the other side, then we should have a creed
which might unite the churches, which might be
reconciled to science, which might defy all attacks,
and which might carry the Christian Faith on for an
indefinite period. Reason and Faith would at last be
reconciled, a nightmare would be lifted from our minds,
and spiritual peace would prevail. I do not see such
results coming as a sudden conquest or a violent
revolution. Rather will it come as a peaceful
penetration, as some crude ideas, such as the Eternal
Hell idea, have already gently faded away within our
own lifetime. It is, however, when the human soul
is ploughed and harrowed by suffering that the seeds of
truth may be planted, and so some future spiritual
harvest will surely rise from the days in which we
live.
When I read the New Testament with the knowledge
which I have of Spiritualism, I am left with a deep
conviction that the teaching of Christ was in many most
important respects lost by the early Church, and has
not come down to us. All these allusions to a conquest
over death have, as it seems to me, little meaning in
the present Christian philosophy, whereas for those who
have seen, however dimly, through the veil, and
touched, however slightly, the outstretched hands
beyond, death has indeed been conquered. When we read
so many references to the phenomena with which we are
familiar, the levitations, the tongues of fire, the
rushing wind, the spiritual gifts, the working of
wonders, we feel that the central fact of all, the
continuity of life and the communication with the dead,
was most certainly known. Our attention is arrested by
such a saying as: "Here he worked no wonders
because the people were wanting in faith." Is this
not absolutely in accordance with psychic law as we
know it? Or when Christ, on being touched by the sick
woman, said: "Who has touched me? Much virtue has
passed out of me." Could He say more clearly what a
healing medium would say now, save that He would use
the word "Power" instead of "virtue"; or when we read:
"Try the spirits whether they be of God," is it not the
very, advice which would now be given to a novice
approaching a seance? It is too large a question for
me to do more than indicate, but I believe that this
subject, which the more rigid Christian churches now
attack so bitterly, is really the central teaching of
Christianity itself. To those who would read more upon
this line of thought, I strongly recommend Dr. Abraham
Wallace's Jesus of Nazareth, if this valuable
little work is not out of print. He demonstrates in it
most convincingly that Christ's miracles were all
within the powers of psychic law as we now understand
it, and were on the exact lines of such law even in
small details. Two examples have already been
given. Many are worked out in that pamphlet. One
which convinced me as a truth was the thesis that the
story of the materialization of the two prophets upon
the mountain was extraordinarily accurate when judged
by psychic law. There is the fact that Peter, James
and John (who formed the psychic circle when the dead
was restored to life, and were presumably the most
helpful of the group) were taken. Then there is the
choice of the high pure air of the mountain, the
drowsiness of the attendant mediums, the transfiguring,
the shining robes, the cloud, the words: "Let us make
three tabernacles," with its alternate reading: "Let
us make three booths or cabinets" (the ideal way of
condensing power and producing materializations)--all
these make a very consistent theory of the nature of
the proceedings. For the rest, the list of gifts which
St. Paul gives as being necessary for the Christian
Disciple, is simply the list of gifts of a very
powerful medium, including prophecy, healing, causing
miracles (or physical phenomena), clairvoyance, and
other powers (I Corinth, xii, 8, 11). The early
Christian Church was saturated with spiritualism, and
they seem to have paid no attention to those Old
Testament prohibitions which were meant to keep these
powers only for the use and profit of the priesthood.

Prev
| Next
| Contents
|