CONAN DOYLEY’S MESSAGE

Hokitika Guardian, 28 December 1920, Page 4

CONAN DOYLEY’S MESSAGE

(S)*d noy Herald). It would be idle to deny or cavil at the widespread interest that has been shown in the visit arid addresses of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Whatever may be said or thought about spiritualism and its manifestations there can be no question that it hns been a matter of constant debate iri our midst during tho past three weeks, and that all classes of tho community have been roused to consider tho pros and cons. A large section no doubt, cares for none of these thing's. Some people are so firmly fixed in their belief , that it is wrong to think of spiritualism, except.as riecroitiacy, and others are so set in their conviction that it does not matter anyhow, that they may be set aside for the moment; but by arid by the large community hns been stirred to As centre by Sir Conan Doyle. Our visitor is a man to be reckoned with; so much is clear. This is admitted by liis critics and opponents with more or less candour. They recognise in him a doughty antagonist,' if they have remained unconvinced by his message. This, then, is the essential fact after a. term of 111010 or less close contact with Sir Arthur Conan Doylo by the city of Sydney. Now that lie is leaving us the 1 question has to be faced as to tlie praci tical result of his explanations and ap- | peals; and it may help our readers if an iinpression gained from the perusal i of many letters sent for .publication is j offered. It has been our misfortune to 'bo unable to use more correspondence j oil this subject; but pressure . upon i space has been continuous and inexor-

able; and a. controversy lias threatened wliich would have needed pages not columns to satisfy. The representative letters published have, however, given a good idea of the trend of opinion, and it is only fair that a summing-up should now attempted bet it be said at once that opinion seems to have concentrated upon the alleged antagonism of spiritualism to Christianity, although a multitude of professing Christians hrive undoubtedly been impressed with the possibility of new light being thrown upon old faiths. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’-s explanations (if various phenomena. recorded in the Old and New Testaments cannot be dismissed with words either of eoiv tempt or objurgation. Whatever may be said about the frauds and failures of mediums, and the denunciations of the

Bible against necromacy, there is still a great deal that must be studied with an open mind as representing facts fitted into new relatioris while emphasising wonders in past history. But this is not crucial with many. We have been assured by one and another that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle lias made for them no new revelation. They are men and women concerned with the world s unrest to-day; and their faith in a life continued after death has not been shaken, nor has it been appreciably strengthened by our visitor’s offer of evidence. They l»ave got clown to bedrock because they are critics of the Christianity revealed in modern church life. If Christianity as we know it—rind we are a Christian community or nothing—cannot meet the present unrest and class hatred with hopeful appeals, what has spiritualism to offer? If dogma has failed on the one side will dogmatic affirmations of a life beyond the grave help on the other? Are no hot, in fact, face to face with a demand for a re-interpretation of Christianity that shall bring men together on its Founder’s original basis, instead of keeping them opposed in the present arena of endless fighting? At once the disputants join issue again, each side insisting that the truth lies with it; and spiritualists point to innumerable souls strengthened and succoured, while professing Christians claim that the same experience has been their own—but on a higher plane. But tho lookerson and listeners to the debate have opened their papers each morning with the sense that the tide of hatred in the world seems as full and fierce as ever; that, indeed, it is higher in some directions than during the war. Can there be no understanding or co-op-eration for a common salvation This is the dominant note; and the problem is whether men of good-will cannot get together by an initial admission that every honest searcher after truth deserves to he recognised as a brother. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle is honest, and ie can claim to he a lover of his fellowman. To challenge him as a perverter of the truth, or as as the dupe of evil spirits, will not help in this great search for common ground; and yet wc are hound to get back to first -principles: Christianity again and again has proved itself capable of lifting men out of the SloiK'h of Despond; but its appeal is to tlm individual, and not to masses of human kind driven into the pens of socalled faiths. we are concerned to-day with the individual who is demanding more of a world new won by science, and presenting life as a very desirable thing. Knowledge of the world’s potentialities has grown beyond belief during tlie past cemtury; and because Germany knew so much, ana could claim so much, she demanded the whole world. Has she lost her soul in the effort to gain it? Thus we come hack to tho. position that faith—a disposition of the heart and not a train of ideas in the head—must return if the world is not to crush mankind. Brother ly love must continue, or we are undone. Mere knowledge will not save us as the war has shown, and as Germany has demonstrated to her undoing; and .spiritualism, with its revelations, will prove worse than useless,un!ess it reinforces Christianity. I