Legend
<Untitled> (The lamps we light are but the stars of promise)
The lamps we light are but the stars of promise, |
< lessness of Minute Discussion on Abstruse Points (continued from page 3-167) >
...
Lord Bacon`s Theory of Spirits
Sir,—It was the opinion of Lord Bacon that all bodies are pervaded by a spiritual substance, which, when we come to plants and animals, has been called soul. He said, “It is not a question of words, but infinitely material in nature; for spirits are nothing else but a natural body, rarefied to a proportion, and included in the tangible parts of bodies, as in an integument.” “The tangible parts of bodies,” he said, “are stupid things; and the spirits do in effect all”—that is, are the source of all power, and form the basis of the minds of men; hence the free action of the mind and power of combination, which we cannot conceive of the tangible physical organ, and this spiritual basis within, in relation to the spiritual pervading medium without, giving a true correspondence in our perception which cannot otherwise be accounted for; in fact, the theory becomes a necessity in the nature of things.
Bacon also said that there may be many powers and sources of information in nature, had we the appropriate senses to perceive them; but there is not one educated person in a thousand that ever heard of these theories of Bacon, and men of science have only sneered at them. Bodies never do actually touch, as shown by Newton, hence all action must occur by the intervening something we agree to call spirit. But facts remain facts, whether we can explain them or not—such as the passage of light through seemingly solid glass, and the millions of actions through a point in space and in opposite directions without interference. These things cast some light on the fact of the store of latent impressions in memory, the free and complex action in the mind, and the leavening or investing of the fresh matter taken up with all the conditions and abilities of the old; also the germ cell with the whole latent character of the being, or ability to develops into a similar being. This leavening and animal magnetic principle will act a great part in the future, and bring Spiritualism into a more scientific position. It would take a volume for me to generalise the principle into all its correlations, exhibiting one great general law of all natural action. Further than general laws we cannot penetrate, though instinct and clairvoyance do seem to overleap experience, notwithstanding the mechanical explanation attempted by Herbert Spencer, Mr. Wallace, and Dr. Darwin. The facts will not bend to such theories. As we progress we shall attain fuller and broader views; but even Professor Tyndall supposed future man will never dive beyond the surface, into the reason of the nature of things—if even there be a reason at all, which is very doubtful. The facts and principles are what they are seemingly by a primordial necessity, as Humboldt said, and as Bacon positively affirmed, referring all to an adamantine chain of necessity that no power could possibly sever.
Boulogne-sur-Mer.
Astrology
Sir,—My astrological prediction of the result of the race was about as lucky as the predictions of other sporting prophets who derive their inspiration from less occult sources. The time of the figure was incorrectly copied by me, and so printed. It should have been Oh. 9 min. 14secs, mean time. I believe the signs and planets were correctly placed, but my blunder must have been apparent to any one who had more experience than mine. I mistook the lordship of Jupiter over Saturn for a good aspect towards the latter.
But my attempt was rather made with a view to elicit some explanatory comments from “Aldebaran” than with any expectation of success. Horary astrology, of course, must not be judged by the experiments of beginners, without knowledge of the principles of the science, if it is one, and with imperfect acquaintance even with its rules. But surely the test should be easy, as the practical importance of the science would be enormous. I have little sympathy with the degradation of knowledge to personal ends, but there is one thing that is much worse, which is the superstitious regulation of action by an illusory light. Let us know, if possible, what degree of definiteness and certainty belongs to this branch of astrology. That there is “something in it” I have little doubt. It is the amount and worth of this something that we want to know.
Tomple, Oct. 29th.
Sir,—In your issue of Sept. 14th “Aldebaran” recommends ‘‘Raphael” as a reliable astrologer. So do I.
About six years ago my attention was drawn to astrology. Being of a practical turn of mind, and fortunately knowing the exact time of my birth, I put the science to the test by getting several professional astrologers, previously unknown to me, to calculate my nativity; the result was a marvellous correspondence in their leading conclusions, both as to the past and the future. Of the past I was able to judge by my bygone experience. The future predictions, so far, have proved very correct. The inference is that the science is based on sound mathematical laws, but the reliability of the calculations entirely depends upon the knowledge of the science possessed by the calculator of the problems before him. Thus much for astrology.
Astrologers as a body are a “peculiar people,” hard to understand. The pseudo practice of astrology affords ample opportunity to the dishonest to dupe confiding and unwary folk. Few men of respectability care to be for ever open to the clutches of an iniquitous law. Notwithstanding, both the practice and study of astrology are vastly on the increase.
I found Raphael so straightforward and clear in his judgments that I have often, during the last three or four years, appealed to him for his astrological opinion upon events of importance that have arisen during my active business life, and I cannot fail to admit he has proved himself thoroughly worthy of my confidence and respect.
I have been a student of nearly all the modern isms, and I know of no other science that can give a man fuller knowledge of himself and the laws under which he lives, and moves, and has his being.
Sir,—It was with a considerable amount of pain that I read Mr. C. C. Massey’s letter (in your last issue), under date October 23rd, 1877.
Considering the great prejudice which exists against astrology, the fearful amount of vice and immorality connected with horse-racing, and the necessary laws against betting and gambling, could no other illustration, or example of the rules of astrology, be found than the one which high-minded, thoughtful men will assuredly shun?
It does seem to me that Mr. Massey has made a most injudicious selection of an example to publish; or he is purposely disparaging a subject of which he declares “he does not know anything.” I cannot think the latter of Mr. Massey.
It is singular that, on the matter of “horse-racing” Lilly does not give a single rule (see Bohn’s edition). And Zadkiel, although he gives some short rules, makes this very pertinent remark, “I would not encourage any one in the pursuit of this pernicious, foolish, and discreditable practice, for the sake of mammon.” (Handbook of Astrology, Vol. II., p.93).
October 27th, 1877 (10.30 a.m.).
Editor's notes
Sources
-
London Spiritualist, No. 186, March 17, 1876, p. 125
-
London Spiritualist, No. 271, November 2, 1877, pp. 214-5