HPB-SB-7-223

T i

vol. 7, p. 223

H. P. Blavatsky Scrapbooks

from Adyar archives of the International Theosophical Society

vol. 7 (March-September 1878)

Legend

SBT, DT

• HPB note
• HPB highlighted
• HPB underlined
• HPB crossed out
• <Editors note>
• <Archivist note>
• Lost or unclear
• Restored

<<   ☰   >>

eng • рус

The Identity of the Higher Teaching of Spiritualism with Bible Christianity*

Mr. Chairman, Ladies, and Gentlemen,—The subject of this evening’s lecture was suggested by reading an extraordinary letter which appeared in the Christian World of March 22nd of this year, written by Mr. Wm. Howitt, from Meran in the Tyrol, under date 7th of the same month, to warn his countrymen against the “present degraded status” of Spiritualism. This letter was one of very many on the subject of “Present-Day-Spiritualism,’’ which appeared in the Christian World during several successive weeks in the spring of the year, the editor of this paper having, with a liberality unparalleled by the religious press of this country, opened the columns of his influential paper for many weeks to communications on this subject.

My justification for referring to Mr. Howitt’s letter is his high character and his well-deserved literary reputation throughout the world. This prestige gives weight to his words, and compels those who have evidence that his conclusions are erroneous to take notice of them notwithstanding. Farther, if any man commands the attention of Spiritualists that man is Wm. Howitt—not that there are not men in the present day who work harder, and with almost an absolute abnegation of self, to disseminate the knowledge of open communion between the worlds seen and unseen, but Mr. Wm. Howitt was one of those who, twenty or twenty-five years ago, led the forlorn-hope of the movement against the hostile forces of the ecclesiastical and scientific worlds with such an invincible determination and undaunted courage, that their Mamelon and Malakof of non-possimus and closed-revelation were taken and utterly destroyed, thus making certain, sooner or later, the capture and complete destruction of the city of unbelief. These considerations, coupled with the publication of the letter in the Christian World—a journal of preeminent influence and world-wide circulation make it necessary for us as Spiritualists to inquire into the truth of these charges against “Present-day Spiritualism,” made and placed on record by Mr. Howitt; and, if they are proved to be without foundation in fact, every one will regret that a man to whom we owe so much, and whose name we wish to' cherish with unbroken gratitude, should be now so far removed from us as to misunderstand and misrepresent us.

I have here the Christian World of March 22nd which contains this letter. I do not purpose reading it in extenso—it is much too long, occupying more than a column and a quarter of the paper—but I shall cite from it sufficient to disclose its spirit. I have no doubt that, after you have heard the citations, you might be under the impression that in the uncited portion there will be something to mitigate the gravity of the charges and severity of the denunciations. This, however, is not the case; only the tip of the lowest feather in the back of the wing of the angel of charity—that angel who “thinketh no evil,” and “hopeth all things”—is visible; and this is shown in the hope expressed that a new Spiritualistic journal, then about to start, might be the “beginning of better things.” Were it not for this the entire letter, from its first word to its last, would be a manifestation of unmitigated uncharitableness.

Mr. Howitt, after a cursory reference to his defence of the truth of the phenomena and a passing affirmation of their reality, says concerning the movement: “During its early years, its advocates—men of serious character and elevated Christian convictions—entertained the most cheering hopes of its becoming the means of corroborating the miraculous relations of the Bible, and thus invigorating the Christian faith, . . . but a totally opposite result has now taken place: everywhere Spiritualism has announced itself as the sworn enemy of the Gospel of Christ. It boasts of turning its votaries back to every species of heathenism.” These comprehensive assertions strike the chord of the whole letter. Those referring to the earlier years of the dispensation are true beyond a question. To see whether the latter are, I purpose citing from The Spiritualist newspaper, in which Mr. Howitt asserts “this anti-Christian leaven is sufficiently obvious;” and from the published utterances of some of the leading members of the British National Association of Spiritualists, from whose programme, according to our authority, “Christianity was expressly banned and excluded,” whilst its members were “to embrace as fellows the holders of every other spiritual credence, however absurd and degrading.” If time permit, I will also quote from the direct utterances of spirits. To quote from the direct utterances of spirits is, perhaps, to go outside of Mr. Howitt’s circle, for I do not understand him to say the spirits have announced themselves as the “sworn enemy of the Gospel of Christ,” although he says Spiritualism everywhere has announced itself as such. But as the citations I shall give will be from the communications of spirits to members of the British National Association, and reported by them, and approved by them, they will be for every reason admissible.

Perhaps many or all of you will say, Why confine yourself to The Spiritualist and. British National Association? Why ignore The Medium, the “Spiritual Institution,” and the other papers and societies? Why? because Mr. Howitt has ignored them. Let them not, however, think they are excluded from his condemnation. The phrases “Spiritualists everywhere,” “Spiritualism everywhere,” include all. You, here, who are striving to live so that the world may be the better for your presence in it, who are trying, however imperfectly it may be, to embody in your lives Christ’s glorious gospel of doing good; our chairman, whose life’s aspiration is similar, and I, who desire to be ruled by the same principle, are each and all, if active Spiritualists, classed by Mr. Howitt as “sworn enemies of the Gospel of Christ.” In consequence, therefore, of Mr. Howitt’s reference, and to prevent a charge of inability to refer to the pages of The Spiritualist, and the sayings and doings of such Spiritualists as may sympathise with or belong to the “National Association,” I confine myself to these. If I am told hereafter that these do not represent all the Spiritualists in Britain, I shall not dispute the statement, for I am not a member of the Association, neither has the editor of The Spiritualist undertaken to represent me; but he has frequently in the past allowed me to express in the columns of his paper opinions differing from his own, so likewise has the editor of The Medium.

I have stated that the higher teachings of Spiritualism are identical with Bible Christianity. This is my experience. By Bible Christianity I mean exactly what Mr. Howitt means by “the Gospel of Christ.” But Mr. Howitt says, “everywhere Spiritualism has announced itself as the sworn enemy of the Gospel of Christ.” Now, the simple Gospel of Christ is not difficult to formulate. The shortest is that enunciated by Jesus Himself, viz., “Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord, and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength, and thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” This commanded the assent of the learned scribe who asked Jesus to state which was the first or greatest commandment. This learned man, whose position and reputation depended upon his faithful observance of the Jewish ritual, the Mosaic ceremonial, instantly recognised the Gospel, Christ’s Gospel, and admitted its obligation, admitted it to be above, independent of even more than their divinely appointed and most sacred sacrifices. This definition Mr. Howitt accepts also; but in order that there may be no misunderstanding what he means by this gospel, I will use his own words and make them mine. “The Gospel of Christ,” says he, “demands purity in the inward part, and the utmost possible love to God, and to our fellow-men—a religion which has the most solid credentials of history, prophecy, and a code of the most divine and ennobling morals.” This, then, is what Mr. Howitt regards as the “Gospel of Christ,” and this I also regard as the “Gospel of Christ,” and this is the “Gospel of Christ.” I am thus particular about this matter, because an immense amount of mischief and misunderstanding arises out of the loose and almost universal habit of regarding the Gospel of Christ, i.e., Bible Christianity, as identical with that system of ritual, doctrine, and confession, most happily called by our chairman Churchianic Christianity. These are no more identical than the clothes which cover the body are identical with the body, but they may be said to bear the same relation to the Gospel as clothes do to the body. The body is of one blood in all men, and the Gospel of Christ is the same in all men. For reasons which would not be at all difficult to give, as you will readily understand, mankind, in this state of the world’s development, deems it necessary to cover their bodies with clothes of their own making, so also do they find it useful and necessary to cover the body of Christ with dressings almost as various as those which cover their bodies; but these clothes, these rituals, doctrines, and confessions, although very useful, indeed absolutely essential to most men, are not only not the Gospel, but they really encumber and hide it. Bearing in mind, then, that the Gospel of Christ consists in inward purity, and the utmost possible love to God and love to man, and that a conformity to any system of ritualistic or church fellowship forms no part of it, let us now examine how far Mr. Howitt’s charges against Spiritualism and Spiritualists are sustained by the public and recorded utterances of a few of some of those who are now most actively interested in the movement. I could bear my own testimony to the Christian character and life of striving to embody the Gospel of Christ in everyday work of some whose words I shall cite, but I refrain. I will let them speak for themselves, as they are reported in The Spiritualist, the journal in which it is said “the writers therein advocate Paganism as preferable to Christianity.” To prevent the inquiry becoming unmanageable, the examination shall be confined to Spiritualism in this country. Mr. Howitt says: “In America, Australia, France, Italy, Spain, it is equally distinguished by the same hatred of the religion of Christ, and the same proclivities to heathen ideas.” But, in excluding these countries from the present examination, I should not be doing justice to my convictions were I to refrain from stating my belief that in each of these countries the heart of the movement throbs with a new and diviner human life. There is recoil, but it is the recoil of the more sensitive spiritual life from Christian profession as opposed to Christian life. The rapprochement to the more anciently given systems of truth, to the doctrines of Brahma and Buddha, called “Paganism’’ by Mr. Howitt, wherever it exists I hail with satisfaction, as an evidence of awakened spiritual life, as a rising above the traditions of the elders, which are so frequently, and in the Christian Church too frequently substituted for the “Word of God,” to His complete obscuration. Depend upon it everyone who, imagining Churchianic Christianity to be Bible Christianity, turns himself from personal tritheism and its naturalistic doctrines to strive to practise a religion of life such as Buddha inculcated, will not rest there. He will either here or in the future life see Christ in Buddha, and acknowledge him to be the Lord.

In referring particularly to Spiritualism in this country, Mr. Howitt notices a book recently published, entitled Hafed, Prince of Persia, dictated, written, and illustrated entirely by spirits through the mediumship of Mr. Duguid, of Glasgow, and as an evidence of its hostility to the Scriptures he observes that the book teaches “that Christ did not receive His doctrines directly from heaven, as the Scriptures, both old and new, everywhere assert,” and he adds, “this book was rapturously received by the majority of English Spiritualists.” If all this were true, and it were the whole truth, it would tend towards substantiating Mr. Howitt’s charges; but as I read the book I am compelled to arrive at different conclusions. The following extract referring to the interview with the Jewish doctors in the Temple is an index to the character of its teachings concerning the source of the knowledge of the man Christ Jesus. Hafed says:—

“Coming back to the city, I went to the Temple, as I had been accustomed to do; and was surprised when I beheld the young Lad—whom I had left in charge of His parents—in the midst of the learned dis- <... continues on page 7-224 >

* A paper read on Tuesday, last week, before the Marylebone Association of Inquirers into Spiritualism, Mr. George King, F.S.S., in the chair.

Editor's notes

Sources

• 

  London Spiritualist, No. 311, August 9, 1878, pp. 63-5