Reply to the Rev. John Jones, on Spiritualism as "The Work of Demons." ^*

By Thomas Brevior.

When a scientist is confronted with the facts of Spiritualism, and is satisfied that they are genuine, he is pretty sure to conclude that he has come upon the discovery of a "new force;" when the same facts are brought home to a clergyman or Congregationalist Minister, he in general is equally confident that it must all be the work of the devil or of evil spirits; and as the one naturally has recourse to levers, spring balances, and other mechanical apparatus to prove his theory, so the other as instinctively resorts to Church doctrines, Scripture texts, and other theological apparatus to establish his. I do not complain of this: every man to his trade and to the tools he is most expert in the handling. The worthy shoemaker in the old story was no doubt sincere in urging that for the defence of a city there was nothing like leather; his fellow-citizens, however, might, we think, reasonably be excused for not taking quite the same professional view of the situation, and so a mere layman may perhaps be pardoned if he takes exception to the validity of the conclusions and method of reasoning of the conscientious and earnest Congregationalist Minister of Chadwick Mount Chapel, Liverpool, in his late sermon on Spiritualism; the substance of which he has now "sent forth from the press, in order that it may address itself to a still larger audience."

The Congregationalist Minister reminds us that "For these sixteen past years Spiritualism has been spreading like a tidal wave over the land;" that it "is beginning to deeply agitate the masses;" and that it "is coming up to the front in the town of Liverpool as in other places;" and he warns "the ministers of religion" that they "had better deal with it in time." He sets his brethren in the ministry an example in this respect, but so far it would seem the results are not encouraging, for we learn his sermon and pamphlet have given quite an impetus to

^* Spiritualism the Work of Demons. By the Rev. John Jones, Congregationalist Minister, Liverpool.

page 2 the movement of Spiritualism in Liverpool; and this is what might have been expected, for his testimony and the evidence he adduces to the truth of Spiritualism could scarcely fail to arrest attention and excite inquiry, which is all it needs. In reply to those who affirm that Spiritualism is a system of imposture and trickery, he very forcibly remarks:—

"That is a strange imposture in which millions are leagued together, many of whom are eminent personages in the ranks of literature, science, and nobility throughout the civilised world." Again, he shows that natural causes alone are insufficient to explain the phenomena of Spiritualism, and refers as instances to direct spirit-writing and spirit-music. He observes—"Now, there is in the fact of a written sentence and familiar music a display of intelligence which neither magnetism nor electricity possess, and these laws of nature, therefore, do not account for the mystery." In short, Mr. Jones considers himself to have established the following propositions:—"1.—The facts of Spiritualism are sufficiently authenticated. 2.—These facts cannot be interpreted in the light of imposture and trickery. 3.—Neither can they be accounted for by any known laws. 4.—They belong, therefore, to the domain of the preternatural."

The only contention with him is as to "what is the source of these preternatural manifestations?" To this question he replies that they are Satanic; and he offers the following arguments in support of his theory:—"1.—These Satanic manifestations are predicted in the Scriptures. 2.—They are corroborated by the facts of history. 3.—Having recourse to the spirits of the dead is forbidden by God. 4.—Spiritualism is an apostacy from the Truth?"

Of course this raises the whole question of Bible Spiritualism, the adequate consideration of which would require far more space than can here be given to it; but without entering fully into this discussion now, I may remark that the first two propositions have no bearing on the question unless it can be shown that all spirit manifestations—and those of the present day especially—are Satanic. The adroit introduction of the term "These," (meaning modern spiritual manifestations) is simply begging the question to be proved. In connection with the third proposition it would need to be shown (which is not even attempted) that the prohibition to the Jews is binding upon Christians, and that spiritual intercourse, through all time, of every kind and for whatever purpose, is alike forbidden and unlawful. ^* The last proposition involves the inquiry—What

^* I have treated the subject at some length in the first three chapters of The Two Worlds, and more particularly in the second chapter on "The Law of the Old Testament and of the New."

page 3 is "the Truth" from which Spiritualism is charged with being an apostacy, and are we to accept Mr. Jones as its infallible interpreter? We certainly cannot with him receive unreservedly and without qualification the Romanist maxim that "the Truth" is "the doctrines of the Gospel as received by the Church in all ages." From his standpoint of Protesting Nonconformity it would not be easy to define these doctrines, but we know that with the gold and silver there is much hay and stubble; that they are variable and fallible; and too vague, indeterminate, and open to exception to be received as the standard or test of Truth. Concerning them Spiritualism only says with the Apostle—"Who art thou that judgest another?" "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." The text, 1 John iv. 1, to which the Congregationalist Minister refers, may fairly be quoted in support of the Spiritualist, position, for when we are told not to believe every spirit, it implies that there are some spirits worthy of credence; and the exhortation to "try the spirits whether they are of God" could have no point if it did not mean that some were so, and that we should discriminate between them; which is just what the Spiritualist affirms and what the Congregationalist Minister denies.

The truth is, the Bible throughout recognises what the Congregational Minister does not—that there are two kinds of Spiritualism: the good and the bad; the divine and the diabolical; the lawful and the unlawful. The latter, doubtless, is prohibited; the former was practised by patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and by Christ himself. Of this kind are the spiritual gifts of the early Church and the modern Spiritualists, and concerning which St. Paul told the members of the Church at Corinth he would not have them ignorant, bidding them earnestly to covet the best gifts. It is a sheer evasion of the Congregationalist Minister to say of the good men in the Bible narratives to whom Angels of Light were despatched, "but these were exceptional cases, and always emanated from God, and are a totally different thing to necromancy or Spiritualism." This is only asserted, it is not even attempted to be proved.

But while prepared to meet our clerical opponent on his own ground, point by point, and text by text, and to shew that while he ignores or evades one class of passages in Scripture, he puts upon another a construction, and gives to them an application unwarranted and gratuitous; I apprehend that my readers, like myself, must be weary of this constant battle of texts, which the experience of Christendom has proved so eminently unsatisfactory, turning as it generally does to a considerable extent on verbal subtleties, questions of Greek and Hebrew, grammar and critical exegesis,—laboured attempts page 4 to get at the mind of certain Oriental writers of fifty or a hundred generations back. Protestantism not only admits but insists upon the right of every man to exercise his private judgment on the interpretation of Scripture, and when our readings differ, as in the present case, how is the question to be determined? When there are conflicting interpretations, who is to decide? There is no court of appeal. Protestantism is a Legislature without a Judiciary, and the theory of infallible authority in the letter of the Bible is thus practically nugatory. There is, for us, no infallible Pope, either at Rome, Canterbury, or Liverpool, to settle the articles of our faith; and we cannot accept for the sterling coin of Truth the tattered paper currency of bankrupt creeds.

The most casual reader of this sermon can scarcely fail to observe in it an evident straining of texts to fit the facts, and an equally obvious straining of facts to fit the texts; as, for example, in the pretence that Spiritualism leads men to become vegetarians and celibates, which, though it may be exceptionally true, as a rule is so contrary to the universal plain fact that it could never have been made except to make it fit the text about forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats.

So again, the text is quoted in which the seer of the Apocalypse saw two unclean spirits like frogs; but what has this to do with Modern Spiritualism? The spirits seen by our mediums are not like frogs, but are our departed friends and kindred. Mr. S. C. Hall, for instance, as quoted by Mr. Jones, tells us that he and seven other friends saw the spirit of his "venerable and truly Christian sister," and that the "likeness was exact;" that he "recognised every feature;" she was, therefore, no more like a frog than like a weasel or a whale. Again, there is an eager clutching at any extravagant or exceptional utterance of any reputed Spiritualist which may seem to serve the writer's purpose, with a desperate effort to fasten upon Spiritualism the responsibility for these individual vagaries. We may smile at these puerilities and special pleadings; but it is a matter of serious regret to find a Christian minister, in order to make a point against Spiritualism, striving to depreciate the value of the belief in immortality, questioning if conversion to it may not be "a very barren result," and affirming that "it is much to be feared that this mere abstract belief in futurity will be of little value in relation to the final destiny of man."

Very different is the feeling of those who have ever experienced the agony of doubt. Speaking of the "idea of a world to come," Robert Burns says—"Would to God I as firmly believed it as I ardently wish it;" and the celebrated author of Night Thoughts says of the dispute about religion—"I think it page 5 may be reduced to this simple question, Is man immortal, or is he not? If he is not, all our disputes are mere amusements, or trials of skill . . . . . I have long been persuaded that most, if not all, our infidels are supported in their deplorable error by some doubt of their immortality at the bottom; and I am satisfied that men once thoroughly convinced of their immortality are not far from being Christians."

The experience of many a Spiritualist more than bears out this last assertion. They have confessed that Spiritualism has made them, not only almost, but altogether Christians.

Writing of the late Professor Hare, Judge Edmonds says—"Dr. Hare has all his life long been an honest, sincere, and inveterate disbeliever in the Christian religion. Late in life Spiritualism comes to him, and in a short time works in his mind the conviction of the existence of a God, and his own immortality. . . . . The last time I ever saw him, he told me that he was at length a full believer in the Revelations through Jesus—that, in fine, he was now a Christian, full in the faith—that but a few days before he had made a public proclamation of his belief at a meeting which he had addressed at Salem, Mass., and he read me a long article on that subject, which he had prepared for publication." Judge Edmonds adds:—"In the Introduction to my second volume of Spiritualism, I published some twenty letters from different persons, showing that the writers of these letters were but a few of the long list we have of such conversions."

Of the efficacy of Spiritualism in bringing home the conviction of immortality to those who had doubted or denied it, and whom the pulpit had failed to convince, we have the fullest admission in the pamphlet before us. Thus, after citing Mr. Hall's account of the apparition of his sister, it goes on to say:—"Equally remarkable and authenticated instances are recorded, apparently confirming the Spiritualistic theory, and what seems to strengthen their belief in it, is the consideration of the object of such apparitions, viz., to lead back the world, in this materialistic epoch, to the belief in the doctrine of immortality. In this Spiritualism has undoubtedly succeeded. It has made a convert of many a bold materialist; it has gathered up into its chariot crowds of the rationalists and sceptics of the world, and such like are still rallying around the unfurled banner on which is inscribed the word 'Immortality.'"

If this is "the work of demons," may God speed it! The "demons" are manifesting His truth, and so doing a great work, which the professed ministers of religion have been unable to effect, and which, alas! too many of them are now striving to hinder.

Nor do the concessions of our reverend opponent end here. He tells us—"Spiritualism comes also under the guise of benevolence; and human suffering and malady excite the compassion of the spirits." But we are told, that "for all this semblance of religion and benevolence, there is within it the elements of the blackest apostacy." That is to say, the theological opinions of some spirits and of some Spiritualists do not altogether coincide with those of the Congregationalist Minister of Chadwick Mount Chapel, Liverpool. All his quotations at the utmost prove no more than this. In the simplicity of his heart, the good pastor says in effect, "So much the worse for them. They ought to believe as I believe, and to teach as I teach: if the spirits do not, it is a sufficient proof that they are demons. Beware of them!"

Thomas Carlyle, alluding to the strange fantastic tricks played before high heaven by an eminent Anglican divine, once wrote:—

"The Builder of this universe was wise,
He made all systems, planets, particles;
The plan He framed the worlds and æons by
Was—Heavens!—was thy small Nine-and-thirty Articles."

The Congregationalist Minister of Chadwick Mount Chapel is a seceder—or, to use his favourite term, an "apostate" from the Church of the "Nine-and-thirty Articles;" but, nevertheless, he has his own small plan of orthodoxy by which the wise Builder of this universe framed the worlds and æons, and to which pattern the spirit-world must conform its teachings. If the spirits do not preach this Gospel of total depravity and endless punishment, they are to be held "accursed." If they teach that the Divine Father is ever ready to forgive "all such as do truly repent," in whatever world they may be; that "when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive," whether he be physically embodied or disembodied; and that there is hope and the possibility of progress for all; they are proclaimed teachers of "damnable heresies."

Alas! for the rarity
Of Christian charity
Under the sun.

Steadying himself a little, and struggling to be candid, our Congregationalist Minister bethinks himself that "it will be only fair to listen to the defence of the Spiritualists in regard to this charge of apostacy." Quite so. He tells us that "they say, in effect, that as Spiritualism inculcates such things as love to God, charity towards men, and morality of life, it is impossible for it to be Satanic, for then Satan is divided against page 7 himself." This, at all events, was the reasoning of One, to whose authority we should think a Christian minister must defer—One who summed up all the commandments in love to God and love to man; who laid down the rule to which Spiritualists appeal—"By their fruits ye shall know them;" and who, when the charge was brought against Him, which His professed minister here brings against the mediums of to-day—"He hath a demon,"—replied, as we are told the Spiritualist now replies, that in that case "Satan is divided against himself." This, however, the Minister tells us is all "a solemn delusion;" and "those who are under it are given up 'to believe a lie,' because they had no pleasure in the truth." In reply to the reasoning of Jesus and of the Spiritualists, he says:—"We frankly admit that such are some of the teachings of Spiritualism; but this is only what we should expect. For in this consists the 'seducing' of the text: all this is trickery on the part of the demon, and is exceedingly good policy. They know well enough that rank atheism and open immorality, and a negation of all religion, would never do as yet. The stratagem is then for the present for 'Satan himself to be transformed into an angel of light' (2 Cor. xi., 14); and through the demons, who are his subordinate ministers, to preach morality. The grand purpose is the destruction of man; and the 'powers of darkness' take care to adopt any means whereby this can be achieved. They can afford for awhile to preach love, and charity, and righteousness, if at the same time they can subtract from the creed of their victims all the wise and saving points of the Gospel. For the present they leave them the shell, after most carefully extracting the kernel. Yes, we repeat, demons can afford to proclaim morality, if, at the same time, they can destroy the notion of natural depravity, of a Saviour, and an endless doom."

Now, we ask, How does the Minister know all this? Have the "demons" taken him into their secret counsels; or has he had a special revelation on the subject; or has he acquired it by instinct, or evolved it from the depths of his own consciousness, or is it but the mere reflection of professional prejudice? One thing is clear—it is unwarranted by any present facts; for in the same breath that he says, "We charge Spiritualism with being a gross departure from the doctrines of the Gospel as received by the Church in all ages;" he adds, "Not that it at present assumes a non-religious character. No, demons are wiser than that. Séances in Paris are, under the direction of the spirits, opened with prayer. Séances in London, under similar instruction, are opened with the reading of the 23rd Psalm, and closed with the Doxology. Nay, more, the spirits seem to be of a most reveren- page 8 tial type, for at a séance held near London, the following message was received from the spirits—'We do all that we can to convince you that we live, and that God is Love.'"

Could some of these "demons" gain access to the Congregationalist Minister, they might perhaps whisper in his ear that, according to a Christian apostle, Chanty is greater than Faith; and that his Gospel of "natural depravity" and "endless doom" is not quite the same with the Good News of God proclaimed eighteen centuries ago by One who folded little children to His bosom, and reminded His disciples that "of such is the Kingdom of Heaven and who exemplified the relation of man to God in the Parable of the Repentant Prodigal; and they might remind him of that gentle warning voice—"Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of." "Judge not, lest ye be judged."

And, after all, who are these "demons?" We are told by the Congregationalist Minister that they are "evil men having departed this life." At the worst, then, they share our common humanity—weak, erring, sinful, as who is not?—but still our brethren, members of the same family, children of the same Divine Father. Should we then, on the plea that they are evil, refuse all communion with them, and withhold from them all sympathy? or, because they hold what we consider incorrect opinions, or, as the Minister puts it, have "apostatised from the faith," charge them with "teaching lies in hypocrisy," and treat them as accursed? Would it not be better, more kindly, more Christ-like, to try to win them back to virtue and to truth? Would not this be acknowledged as simply our duty were they in this world, and are our relations to them so wholly changed that we must adopt a contrary code of ethics because they have "departed this life?" Are the principles of moral obligation so mutable that, under change of circumstances, what was a duty may become a sin? Might not a disciple, and still more a minister of Christ, deem it not incompatible with his Christian profession and office, to seek to save those that were lost?—happy could he bring back some wandering sheep into the fold of the Good Shepherd—happy could he give help and counsel to some misguided, unhappy spirit, seeking light and aid from his mortal brothers.

Say not that for these dark and troubled spirits there can be no light, no help, no hope. Do not so malign the All-merciful Father as to say that for these His erring children He has reserved only eternal wrath and infinite despair. Say not that our counsels to them and our prayers in their behalf can be of no avail. The experience of many and many a Spiritualist—aye, and the faith of the Church in all ages when it has not been smitten with fatal paralysis—is evidence to the contrary. Think page 9 you that Christ would have preached to the disobedient spirits in prison save with a view to their deliverance, or if His preaching could be of no avail? Think you that the joy in Heaven over a sinner that repenteth is not felt alike, whether that repentance be in this stage of being or in the next? And is there no force in the appeal which Christ makes to the witness in our own hearts—"If ye, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more will your Father in Heaven give good things to them that ask Him?" Do then the principles of God's moral government change with our change of worlds?

But, as already intimated, I do not expect this question to be settled by mere citations or arguments from Scripture. The theologian is indeed ready enough to pelt heretics with texts, but he is generally text-proof when texts are quoted on the other side; and especially is this so with the clerical mind. If a text looks heretical, it must be teased and tortured to mean something different to what it says; or it must be offset by some other text more orthodox, or at least more convenient for the occasion. Instead, then, of further appeal to the logic of texts, let me give an illustration from the logic of facts; premising that while I think the matter of it instructive, I must not in quoting it be understood as thereby expressing approval of every incident related, or of the tone in which every remark is written. I quote it, not only for its bearing on the question at issue, but incidentally, because I think it may also be suggestive to those who regard forms of exorcism as of magical efficacy in casting out and banishing evil or undeveloped spirits.

An Experience with "Demons" or "Dark Spirits."

Mr. Thomas R. Hazard, who states that he has had more than fifteen years' experience in Spiritualism, in an essay just published on Mediums and Mediumship, narrates his experience with "demons" or "dark spirits," at a circle of which he was a member. First, the circle broke up the séance, when they found these spirits had gained possession of the medium. Then, they had recourse to exorcism. The spirits were commanded in the name of God to depart, which they did. A command in the name of Christ was equally effective. At length, on one of these occasions, a member of the circle, we are told, "bade every devil of them depart in the name of the devil, and depart they did full as promptly as before."

Mr. Hazard continues:—"I was now satisfied of that which I had before began to suspect—that it was not the particular name used that drove away the 'evil spirits,' but the amount of our own will that was embodied, as it were, in the name that produced the effects. Even this pleasing thought, however, was page 10 soon dissipated; for our enemies soon rallied, and concentrated their spiritual forces in the spirit-body of a very vicious and positive man when on earth—known to some of the circle—who took possession of the medium, and defiantly boasted that we could not cast him out, either by the 'name of God, Jesus, or the devil,' nor could any of us, or all combined, throw sufficient will-force into the medium's mind to dislodge him.

"And now for a new phase of the 'devil' theory which these experiences prepared us to receive. Our spirit-friends had always told us that those spirits that we had been taught to regard as 'fiends or devils,' are simply spirits less developed than some others, but still destined, in the Heavenly Father's good time, to enter into rest and joy; and that their return to earth in the way they did, was in accordance with the laws of spirit-being and unfoldment, and that, instead of chiding and driving them away, we ought always to treat them kindly, as by so doing we would greatly assist them to develope out of their dark state, and, at the same time, benefit ourselves. This was too transcendental a doctrine for even nominal orthodox Christians—as some of us were at that time—to readily receive; but at length, other means having failed, we determined to try the experiment, and, at the next greeting of our unfriends, we all put on a grave look, and answered their customary taunting expletives in as kindly a tone as we could command. At this the medium paused; and holding the pencil quietly in his hand, inclined his head one side, very much as we have seen a pig do under an apple tree when his attention has been aroused by a doubtful sound that indicated the approach of something unusual, the exact nature of which, and whether friendly or otherwise, he was not fully assured of. The spirit in control, however, in thus reading our minds, seemed to detect the exact nature of the experiment we were trying to come over him, and soon commenced railing very much in the same strain, though not so decidedly rancorous as before. We persevered, however, in our course through several sittings, until we arrived at a state of mind consonant to the external manner we had assumed, and not only spoke kindly to the poor undeveloped spirits, but from the bottom of our hearts felt so. This won for us the victory; and from that time we were not only relieved of all annoyance, but it became a most pleasing duty—to some of us at least—to commune with the poor dark 'spirits in prison,' and by our counsel and sympathy help them to progress out of their low and unhappy state.

"The change was marvellous indeed. Ranting, profane 'spirits of the damned,' that but a short time before came to-annoy and abuse us, when they looked into our hearts and page 11 minds, and saw that they were truly full of sympathy and kindly feeling toward them, and that we were sincerely desirous to assist them—forgot all their former animosity, and became as gentle and tractable as little children in their intercourse with us, and literally they who once came to scoff, now remained to pray. From that day I have never experienced trouble through any mediums from 'dark spirits,' but, on the contrary, have always encouraged their coming, believing that I might in this way be made an instrument to do good and help to elevate them on their plane of being, just as I must ever be dependant on those in advance of myself to assist me to rise on mine. Many have been the tokens of gratitude that have been borne me from the other world for the sympathy and words of encouragement I have thus extended to poor despairing souls in the other life, and among the most grateful of these has been the railing and vindictive spirit that we had not will-power enough to subdue or expel from the medium.

"From such and other experiences, I learned that many souls, when launched into the spirit condition, find themselves, through the false conceptions of the future state that they have imbibed in earth life, very much like a ship at sea, without chart or compass, that has lost its reckoning; nor can they find any way to advance until they return again to the earth-sphere, and through some mediumistic source acquire light and strength to begin anew their voyage of progression in the spirit-life. Nor is there probably a soul, either on earth or in the spirit-world, so utterly depraved as not to be amenable to the laws of kindness and love, such as Jesus taught and practised, if these can be extended in such a way as to leave no doubt on the intended recipient's mind of their genuineness."

Here is "philosophy teaching by example." I hope our reverend friend may profit by it, and not like too many of his clerical brethren, steeped to the lips in prejudice, be "as the deaf adder that stoppeth her ears and will not hear the voice of the charmer charm he never so wisely."

It is only the confused, perverted theologic vision, peering amid the dim religious light and sombre shadows of the conventicle, that sees more devils than vast Hell can hold. These demons of the mist vanish in the open sunshine. To that clear reason which is the eye of the soul and that purity of heart which sees God, they are alike unknown; or if known they excite no terror. Had we more faith in God we should be less haunted by these shapes of Ignorance and Fear, and the "Demon" we had cursed would be received by us in the spirit of Christ as a man and a brother. It is not the sinner but the page 12 sin that we should dread, and our security from harm is not the vain reliance on human creeds, but in conscious rectitude of motive; in the all-subduing power of kindness; in the laws of order of the spirit-World; and in the protecting presence of God and His ministering spirits. Trusting in that protection, we may say with one of old "I will fear no evil, for Thou art with me." we have but to step out of the Egyptian darkness of men's pitiless theology into the light of God, and trust the Infinite Love which, like the blue sky, bends over all.

Death is not a moral but a physical incident; it will not make us other than we are: we shall be neither worse nor better for experiencing it. If we are "evil men" now, we are as much "demons" as we shall be when we have "departed this life;" and "demons" (though we may not know it) are our associates now, as they will be then, drawn to us by the attractions growing out of a like spiritual condition. "Death creates nothing new for us. It only reveals our condition, and externalizes it. The only nearness in a spiritual sense is the nearness of sympathy; physical proximity is no condition of influence. We are no nearer in reality to an evil being because he happens to speak to us or to be in the same locality that we are in. Christ was never in any interior or real sense near to the devil who stood by His side in the desert, on the Temple height, or on the mountain-top!"

I do not deny that there are "demons"—"evil men departed this life," alas! too often made evil by ignorance and want, injustice and culpable neglect, and the force of strong temptation from which we may have been happily exempt. Perhaps, in the eye of Infinite Justice we may not be wholly free from responsibility for the misdeeds of our erring brother. If we would not have to do with "demons," let us cease to manufacture them: and let us also be vigilant lest we each individually add one to the number. But, thank God, the spirit-world is not peopled alone or chiefly by the vicious and the criminal. The wise and good who have "departed this life," and who come to us as "ministering spirits," are, indeed, a "multitude whom no man can number;" and if our reverend brother's spiritual sight is holden to this great "cloud of witnesses" that surround us, so that he cannot discern that "they that be with us are more than they that be with them," we should on his behalf offer up the prophet's prayer—"Lord Open the Young Man's Eyes that he May See!"