Legend
Spiritualism in Glasgow
Sir,—Mr. Wallis, of London, occupied the platform of the Glasgow Spiritualists’ Association last Sunday. The subject of the address, selected by the audience, was, “The Teachings of Christ in Relation to Spiritualism,” and was announced to the lecturer by the chairman after the opening prayer. The committee appointed to select the subject was composed of three non-Spiritualists and two Spiritualists. The subject was treated fluently and clearly, in a discourse lasting about an hour and a half. The audience was pleased, and the committee considered that the subject had been handled very successfully. The lecturer first considered what were the teachings of Christ; next, the teachings of Spiritualism; and, thirdly, the relation—were they in harmony, or otherwise? The lecturer argued that the teachings were identical, therefore in harmony. The religious principles of modern Spiritualism, according to the standpoint of the speaker, were plainly put before the audience in a pleasing and telling manner, without “tearing a passion to tatters” over the beliefs and creeds of other folks —a tiring that too often disgraces the platform and drives would-be inquirers away, instead of attracting their attention to that superior light, modern Spiritualism, which is to illuminate the dark chambers of sectarianism or gross materialism. Spiritualism must win its way by weight of its facts, the purity of its ethics, the reasonableness of its philosophy, and the simplicity of its religion; not by howling anathemas on those who for the present cannot see or believe with us; not by robbing man of his “gospel” crust, or scientific fragment, before he is able to distinguish between the bread of Spiritualism and the stones of superstition, lest, mistaking the stones for bread, h9 die from lack of nutriment. No Spiritualist lecturer will advance the cause by descending to the low tactics of the market-place, and underrating the value of goods not sold by himself; if he has a superior article for disposal the public will discover the fact in time. These are living, earnest times. Man everywhere is, consciously or unconsciously, looking out for “light, more light,” but will not be cheated into thinking a candle is the sun, that noise is earnestness, declamation is sincerity, or that crying down the systems which exist as explanatory of faiths or facts will fill the aching void for truth and light within their souls.
Mr. Wallis gave two seances and one chamber lecture in addition to the Sunday service. Mr. Birrell, known here as the “medium for inventions,” will lecture in the Spiritualists’ Hall next Sunday. Several of Mr. Birrell’s inventions have been patented, notably one for the display of oxy-hydrogen light. He claims that these inventions were given through spirit agency; at any rate, he is a hard-working struggling man, blessed like most inventors with more brains than “siller,” and is highly respected by the Glasgow Spiritualists. Mr. J. J. Morse will officiate the following Sunday. It is expected that Miss Wood, of New-castle-on-Tyne, will in the course of the month give a series of sittings here. In compliance with request I have opened a phrenological and mesmeric class every Wednesday evening at eight p.m. in the Society’s rooms. There were thirty present last class night, and the gatherings seem in a fair way of being successful. Members of the late Phrenological Society are taking considerable interest in them, and that is something. Next Wednesday I shall lecture upon the “Relation of Mesmerism to Spiritualism,” which I hope will be of some use in clearly demonstrating mesmerism to be the stepping-stone to Spiritualism.
The “Bloody Sweat.”
Sir,—In reference to the above phenomenon, the following, from a letter from a correspondent to whose extensive and curious information I am often indebted, and to whom I sent a copy of your paper on the 24th January, may be interesting:—
“Some years since a very interesting paper (by a medical man) appeared in one of Cassell’s publications, which furnishes all the information ‘A. J. C.’ wishes for, though it overturns his hypothesis. I am only now quoting from memory, but I am sure of the correctness of the fact I am giving. The medical name of the ‘bloody sweat’ is ‘Epidesis.’ It is of very uncommon occurrence, and produced by the most violent mental suffering, and the death of the sufferer generally takes place almost immediately. The author stated three instances. One was of a general, whose troops were surprised and temporarily panic-stricken, in consequence of his own negligence. He jumped on horseback, rallied his men, repelled the enemy, and fell dead, sweating blood. The second case was of a nun who was chased by robbers, and succeeded in escaping, but on reaching a cottage fell dead, with her face covered with a sweat of blood. The third case (I am not certain this did not take place under the author’s immediate notice) was in a London hospital, a few years before the time of writing (date given); but in this case the patient, whose symptoms were described at length, lingered for some little time. I should imagine notes on the subject would be found in Alford, or any other well annotated edition of St. Luke’s Gospel.”
February 3rd.
Madame Blavatsky
Sir,—The question of Madame Blavatsky’s attitude towards modern Christianity which Dr. Wyld has raised, not very opportunely, if I may say so, in your columns, presents an aspect which deserves notice, and which seems to have escaped Mr. Massey in his otherwise complete survey of Dr. Wyld’s criticisms. Madame Blavatsky feels with extraordinary force the mischiefs which arise from “religious despotisms” generally. It were easy to cite many of such mischiefs—the discouragement of private judgment, the dry bones of formalism, the checking of the expansive development of the human spirit, which must have an internal and not an external motive power, the cramping of the will, and the degradation of the understanding, which such despotisms tend to produce, will serve as instances. To quicken the sense of individual responsibility, and teach men to seek for truth by the aid of the hidden light within themselves, are the first objects of every reformer; and among the chief obstacles to the reception of such lessons will be found the blunt dulness which is the frequent result of a cut-and-dry theological system, whereof the underlying truths have been fossilised or obscured, partly by corrupt additions, and partly by the mechanical habit which is born of unintelligent use. He, then, who wishes to show to men the way to appreciate their own spiritual capacities must needs combat all systems so far as they are despotisms; and he may do this with courage, for he need never fear but that the gold will survive, whatever the force of the flame which he may turn upon the alloy. And if a reformer hits hard, there is no danger but that the Conservative forces of common opinion will afford a sufficient corrective.
If this be at all an accurate, though necessarily a very imperfect, statement of Madame Blavatsky’s view, it will follow that it is only logical for her to join issue with such of these despotisms as may seem to have served their purpose, and to combat them, at any rate, to the extent of stripping off pretensions to which they can substantiate no real claim. Is it not, then, to be expected that Madame Blavatsky, living in Christian countries, and writing for nominally Christian peoples, should select for attack that despotism under which, in particular, her audience is suffering? It is not Mohammedanism, or corrupt forms of Buddhism, or Fetish worship, that chokes the growth of the spiritual life in English-speaking countries. Madame Blavatsky naturally singles out that which she considers to be the special foe of those whom she addresses, and she does this, I take it, not from any exceptional dislike of one despotism more than another, but because this is the enemy with whom she happens at the moment to be confronted. No one more fully than the writer of the letter on “Mystical Christianity,” which appeared in your columns last week, can appreciate the evil which Madame Blavatsky seeks to oppose. A human spirit first awaking to a knowledge of its own existence, and groping dimly for guidance and light, is not seldom seized at once in the toils of a specious system, and finds in a fool’s paradise a false satisfaction, which bars a progress which would otherwise have been probable. A valiant endeavour to remove such a bar ought not, I think, to be termed “unreasoning and intolerant.”
<Untitled> (Sir,—Mr. Massey considers...)
Sir,—Mr. Massey considers my description of Madame Blavatsky “excellent, appreciative, and just,” and yet he regrets that I should “seem to have gone out of my way to censure.”
I sincerely trust that I have not done so. When Oliver Cromwell sat for his portrait, he insisted that the artist should put on the canvas all the warts that were on his face, and the consequence is that we have a most interesting historical portrait.
It would have been an easy and pleasant thing for me to have drawn a one-sided, or as Madame herself would have said a “flap-doodle” portrait, but I felt it to be far more interesting, and important, and necessary that I should represent the lioness in all the lights and shadows of true photographic breadth.
“H. P. B.” is far too great and strong to object to the honest truth. She has repeatedly thanked me for my expressed opinions regarding herself, and I shall be indeed surprised if she is offended at my candid portraiture.
What I have written I consider to be entirely true; and Mr. Massey will not for a moment deny that “H. P. B.” expresses herself towards Christians and Christianity with an irreverence and intolerance which are in direct opposition to the doctrine taught by herself, and by those in the East higher than herself, viz., “Reverence and forbearance towards all truthful and reverential thinkers of all shades of religious opinion.”
With regard to the mysterious age of the pythoness, even on natural grounds, it does not present to me insuperable difficulties, as I have seen commonplace women, close on eighty years of age, looking as young as Madame Blavatsky. But I was told that a secret explanation, of which Mr. Massey hints that he is in possession, had been withheld from me because I was a Christian!
This secret, I am impressed, was revealed in part to my own intuition, but however that may he, I received from Madame Blavatsky an explanation which much interested me.
In my paper on “Man as a Spirit,” read 10th December, 1877, at the Association of Spiritualists, I stated my belief that if we could, instead of our ordinary sleep, enjoy the calm deep sleep of the profoundly entranced, we might regain nightly the daily loss of vital force incurred in our waking active condition, and thus live to a truly green old age; and, as a confirmation of this idea, “H. P. B.” informed me at Norwood that it was owing to some such process that she regained by night the I daily loss.
So much for my portrait of Madame Blavatsky. I must now most earnestly protest against the assertion that I use the term Christianity in a non-natural and misleading sense, and that I cannot consistently call myself a Christian.
In reply to the question why I should call myself a Christian, while believing that the central essence of esoteric Brahminism and Christianity is one, I might ask why should Mr. Massey call himself an Englishman, seeing that his initial position is that he is a man? Of the genus homo yes, but not the less of the Caucasian race, and by nationality an Englishman. Even so I believe the fundamental essence of all religion to be the seeking after the Spirit of God by the spirit of man; but not the less I call myself a Christian, because after thirty years of constant study and reflection I find that the life and teachings of Jesus the Christ far transcend in strength, and wisdom, and knowledge, and power, and truth, and goodness all other individual teaching which the world has produced, and because from no other source can I find so <... continues on page 8-138 >
Editor's notes
- ↑ Spiritualism in Glasgow by Coates, C., London Spiritualist, No. 337, February 07, 1879, p. 69
- ↑ The “Bloody Sweat.” by Massey, Charles Carleton, London Spiritualist, No. 337, February 07, 1879, p. 69
- ↑ Madame Blavatsky by H.J.H. (signed as H.J.H.), London Spiritualist, No. 337, February 07, 1879, p. 69
- ↑ Sir,—Mr. Massey considers... by Wyld, George, M.D., London Spiritualist, No. 337, February 07, 1879, pp. 69-70
Sources
-
London Spiritualist, No. 337, February 07, 1879, p. 69