THE REFORMATION: PAST AND PROSPECTIVE

Evening Star, Issue 4064, 6 March 1876, Page 2

THE REFORMATION: PAST AND PROSPECTIVE

Was the subject of Mr Charles Bright’s freethought lecture last night. 'J be circus tent was crowded to excess; and many were unable to obtain admission. , The chair was occupied by Mr Pyke. BThe lecturer, at the outset, traced the progress of the Christian religion from the time of Constantine down to the present; and sketched the lives of the early reformers. The Free-thinker of to-day said to the worshipper of the Bible“ This that, you term God's Word is only God’s Word so far as it is good. These heroes of it whomjrou idolise are only God’s people so far as they are good people. We will not believe that it was a good thing for Abraham to prepare to murder his sou because the Bible says so. We will not believe that that hypocr tical deceiver, Jacob, was a worthy man, and that large-hearted, magnanimous, simple-aouled Esau was a bad man. we will look upon Moses as a’ sagacious, astute, powerful, but bloody-minded lawgiver and commander, bynomeanssnperiorto Solon and Lycurgus; and as for Joshua, we will esteem him a ferocious slaughterer, in comparison with whom Alexander, Napoleon, Tamerlane, Genkhis Rian, Aloric, and Attala appear as gentle and merciful conquerors. We will not admit that David was a man after God’s own heart, more than Louis Napoleon, of whom we have never heard that he caused one of the captains of his troops to lose his life, so that he might have freer access to his widow.' We tell you that the God herein painted is not the Universal Father, and that this book is the Book of God only so far as it inculcates goodness, promotes love, and deifies truth.’ ’ When the time was ripe another Lather would proclaim it in the ear of Christendom. True Christianity may teach, may persuade, hat cannot judge andpmiish. It ceases to be Christianity the moment it is handed over to he enforced by the police. The so-called' antagonism between religion and science will disappear when the world returns to Ihe best teachings of Jesus. Science —true science —preaches a God and immortality as eloquently as Christianity does. Science has no quarrel with real Christianity. It is only when priestcraft' wonld deify a man as the infinite Creator and Worship a scroll or a book that -deuce enters its protest, and priestcraft, whatever appearance it may assume in the eyesof theignorant, has never yet performed, and never ean perform, its hollow ceremonious public worshippings in any other temple than that of Paganism. The most popular saint, as Bret Harte says, is still Saint Dives, tfnd the Church of St. Dives is the Church where respectable people love to worship. The spiritual revival of Christianity cannot possibly come through any sect, now or old. The moment a body of men begin to be proud of their clique, and to compare it favorably with other cliques, Christianity, which is.universal brotherhood, disappears'.' The various semi-Fagan sects of our day are evidently based on pride, not love.” The adoption of practical Christianity would include reform in every direction—physical and mental. It would involve the better education of women, who were the chief supporters of conservatism in religion, for as long as they continued to be so, there could not be any great and general change. He might be asked what, anyone could do to help forward the advent of this spiritual revival, and replied, “ Each may do that in a way small or great, by shunning what he or she believes to be a sham, and by welcoming what seems to be the truth. At any rate, all may do this—Think the best instead of the worst of your fellow creatures, and when you have occasion to speak, say the best instead of the worst you kaow of them. This, in itself, would not be an enormous stride in the direction of Christian brotherhood. To avoid misunderstanding, let me say a word or two respecting the term “ God," which I have used frequently during this lecture. By it I mean the Mind which animates the orderly—and, as it seems to me, the fatherly —government of the Universe, “ Nature’s soul.’’ as thepoets have it. I know no more of God. I)o you ?. With those who object to tbe term God, and prefer the term Nature, I have no quarrel. I stove to deal with facts, not names, and I know right well that many a man who calls himlelf an Atheist is nearer tho centre of worship, and is intrinsically a holier man than thousands of those who have God perpetually in their months, and affect to know all about Him and His relatives. These tilings are but idolatrous and ephemeral excrescences; the true God is to be sought only in His great temple of Nature. Those who cannot find him there will find Him nowhere; for Nature, as Carlyle says, is “the time-vestUre of God,#that reveals Him to the wise and hides him from the foolish.’” The lecture was attentively listened to throughout. There was occasionally manifested a deposition to applaud, but it wai choked at <.nce. When Mr Bright resumed his seat, Mr J. 6.5. Grant cndeavorei to speak, but the p o-ee; tings were (Wared to have been terminated. ±