Some
Modern
Isms
BL 98 .J6 1919
Johnson, Thomas Gary, 1859
1936.
Some modern isms
,^^V^^ OF M/#^
J UN 21 1919
borne Modern Isms
A
BY
THOS. GARY JOHNSON
Author of ''The Southern Presbyterian Church," "John Cal-
vin and the Genevan Reformation," "The Life and Letters
of Robert Lewis Dabney," "The Life and Letters of Benja-
min Morgan Palmer," "Virginia Presbyterianism and Re-
ligious Liberty," "Introduction to Christian Missions"
"Baptist in the Apostolic Age"
PRESBYTERIAN COMMITTEE OF PUBLICATION,
RICHMOND, VA.
Copyright, 1919
by
Thos. C. Johnson
Thb Book is Dedicated to
My Wife
Whose Sympathy is
An Unfailing Help.
PREFACE
The lectures in this volume, on Mormonism, on Chris-
tian Science, and on Russellism, were delivered to the Senior
Class in Union Theological Seminary in Virginia, in Janu-
ary, 1918. Many who heard them suggested that they should
be published. Brethren here and there throughout the
Church have suggested the same thing. The present Senior
Class, through a spokesman, has formally asked that they
be printed, if practicable, before January, 1919. In com-
pliance with these suggestions and requests, those lectures
are now offered for publication.
Along with them a brief discussion of some wayward off-
spring of Christian Science — New Thoughtism, and the ism
of The Unity School of Christianity — and a discussion of
Nietzschism, are included in this volume.
It is hoped that they will give a clear understanding of
the several issues dealt with, and serve to rescue some who
would otherwise fall into these errors.
A full and fair statement of the major isms has been at-
tempted. If rebutted statements are often brief, it is be-
cause the fair statement of the ism should kill it with
thoughtful readers.
October 10, 1918.
Contents
I. MORMONISM.
II. Eddyism, or Christian Science.
III. Wayward Children of Mother Eddy: or the New
Thought People's Ism; and the Ism of the
Unity School of Christianity.
IV. Rlssellism.
V. Nietzsciieism.
Literature on Mormonism
Book of Mormon
Orson Pratt: Pamphlets, Liverpool, 1857.
Mrs. T. B. Stenhouse: Tell It All.
Progress, No. 11, Vol. IIL: The Mormon Church.
John Doyle Lee : The Mormon Menace.
J. W. Gunnison: The Mormons.
Encyclopedia, Snb Voce Mormonism.
Mormonism
On the 23d day of December, in the year of our Lord
1805, Joseph Smith was born at Sharon, Windsor County,
Vermont, of poor, ignorant, thriftless and not over honest
parents. Along with them he removed, ten years later, to
a poor farm in the western part of the State of New York,
where he reproduced the shiftlessness, ignorance, meanness
and dishonesty of his parents in his own character. For
years in his youth and early manhood he spent much time
in befooling men and defrauding them, by pretending that,
through the aid of a marvelous stone which he possessed,
he could discover hidden treasures, gold mines and the
like.'^ For such practices he was brought before a justice
of the peace in Bainbridge, Chenango County, New York,
on the 20th day of March, 1826, and adjudged guilty of
being a disorderly person and an imposter.
Meanwhile the region in which he lived had been visited
by a religious revival when he was about fifteen years of
age, and his own mind had been wildly agitated.
Under the influence of this religious excitement several
members of the Smith family joined the Presbyterian Church.
But Joseph was more inclined to the Methodists. He tells
us that he prayed much to be guided aright; that he was
greatly perplexed by the numbers and varieties of the sects;
and that he saw none that seemed to be correct. He would
have us believe that, like Mohammed, whom he more nearly
resembled in the ethical features of his teachings than any
other with whom we could compare him, he was dissatisfied
with every form of Christianitv which he knew, on the one
*See Gunnison: The History of the Mormons, pp. 88 ff.
12 Some Modern Isms.
hand, and equally dissatisfied on the other with Judaism as
he saw it.
He tells us, also, that he began to see visions from this
time on, and that in one of these visions, which occurred on
the night of the 21st of September, 1823, the angel Moroni
appeared to him three times, and told him that the Bible of
the Western Continent, the supplement to the New Testa-
ment, was buried near the adjacent town of Manchester, and
that thither in 1827, after the necessar)^ disciplinary proba-
tion, he went and received from an angel a stone box, in
which was a volume six inches thick, made of thin gold
plates 8 inches by 7, and fastened together by three rings;
that the plates were covered with small writing in the "re-
formed Egyptian" tongue, and that there was with them a
pair of supernatural spectacles, in the shape of two crystals
set in a silver bow, and called "Urim and Thummin." As
the illiterate Smith could hardly write, he employed as
amanuensis Oliver Cowdery, to whom, from behind a cur-
tain, he dictated, as he claimed, a translation of the un-
.sealed contents of the plates. With the aid of a farmer of
some means, Martin Harris, the copy thus produced by
Oliver Cowdery was printed and published in 1830, under
the title of "The Book of Mormon."
It was prefaced by the sworn statement of Oliver Cow-
dery, David Whitmer and Martin Harris, that an angel of
God had shown them the plates of which the book was a
translation.
This book — the so-called "Book of Momion" — in which
Joseph Smith is declared to be God's prophet, with all
power, and entitled to all obedience, tells us that certain
Hebrews settled in America in 600 B. C. ; that they subse-
quently divided over a question of leadership, and that the
victorious party, which was also the party of insubordination
to God, suffered the darkening of their skins as a curse for
Some Modern Isms. 13
their insubordination and became the red Indians of Amer-
ica. It tells us that subsequently the party of the servants
of the Lord became still smaller through apostasy and that
finally it was destroyed by the Indian Hebrews in the year
384, A. D.; but that among the few who escaped destruc-
tion were Mormon and his son Moroni; that Mormon col-
lected the sixteen books of record, kept by successive kings
and priests, into one volume, and that jNIoroni supplemented
the work of Mormon by some personal reminiscences and
then hid the volume in the hill of Cumorah, being assured
of its going, one day, to be discovered by God's chosen
prophet.
Such is the account of the water-wizzard, the cheat and
the fraud, Joseph Smith, as to the origin of the "Book of
Moniion." In a part of this account he was at first sup-
ported by the sworn statement of his three friends, Cowdery,
Whitmer and Harris. But some years later, all three of these
renounced Mormonism and denounced their oaths as false.
There is little reason for believing that Joseph Smith ever
was as profoundly agitated on the subject of religion as he
professed; there is still less reason for believing that he made
an intelligent study of either Christianity or Judaism, and
thus intelligently rejected them as insufficient. There is the
best evidence for believing that the ''Book of Mormon" came
not through angelic ministrations, but in quite a different
way.
The most of this book seems to have been written by an
invalid and crack-brained Presbyterian preacher, Solomon
Spalding, by name, to while away the tedious hours of his
invalid years. He had been accustomed to maintain that the
Indians of America were descendants of some of the Israelit-
ish tribes, and, in a period of infirm health, he wrote a ro-
mance to support his views. He called his work the "Manu-
script Found," and tried, but in vain, to find a publisher.
14 So^EE Modern Isms.
This work appears to have fallen into the hands of Smith,
and after some slight manipulations, to have come out the
"Book of Mormon."
That Spalding's romance was the original of the ''Book
of Mormon/' was the confident affirmation of contempora-
ries of Joseph Smith, who had examined both books. And
these men not only asserted such a relation between the
"Manuscript Found" and the "Book of Mormon," but they
proved it by pointing to numerous and distinctive names,
phrases, characters and stories in Spalding's* manuscript
which re-appear as distinctive in Smith's work. And -^o
strong do they make their case that Gentile historians of
Mormonism generally, and perhaps universally, agree in
taking this view of the origin of the so-called "Book of
Mormon," as the most probable.
Joseph Smith gave his people not only the "Book of Mor-
mon." In 1830, he claimed to have received another reve-
lation proclaiming him "seer, translator, prophet, apostle of
Jesus Christ, and elder of the Church." The revelations,
thus begun, continued to his death, in 1844. They include
that which sanctions polygamy and which was privately
given, in the year 1843, to pacify his lawful wife and to
silence the objections of the saints to his living with a
number of women whom he had persuaded to worse than
polygamous relations. For reasons of policy this revelation
was not published abroad for ten years, not until 1853.
These revelations to Smith, together with one to Brigham
Young, written and published by him at "Winter Quar-
ters," in the year 1847, to inspire and guide the saints in
their projected western pilgrimage through the wilderness,
were collected and published under the title of the "Book
of Doctrine and Covenants."
We suppose an up-to-date "Book of Doctrine and Cove-
♦Gunnison: Ibid., pp. 93-96.
Some Modern Isms. 15
nants" would include several other revelations, as for in-
stance, one which, while still justifying polygamy as ethi-
cally proper, advised its cessation, as a condition necessary,
in order to the admission of Utah to Statehood!
These are the two distinctive books of the Mormons.
They comprise their "inspired writings," which, as "mod-
ern revelations," they place alongside the ancient scriptures
"properly translated," contained in the Old and New Testa-
ments. In theory the Monnons hold the Bible "properly
translated," the Christian Bible, the "Book of Mormon" and
the "Book of Doctrine and Covenants" to be the God-given
scriptures of authority and direction. They hold that the
Old Testament was addressed particularly to the Jewish
Church; that the New Testament was similarly addressed
to the Judaic and European Christian Church; the "Book
of Mormon" to the American Christian Church, and the
"Book of Doctrine and Covenants" to the Church of Jesus
Christ of The Latter Day Saints.'''
We must not, however, think of their canon as being as
important to them as ours to us. They believe that con-
tinuous revelation is necessary; that "without new revela-
tion their officers never could be qualified to perform the
various duties of their calling." There is no other people
more completely under the domination of their priesthood.
It is unlike Christianity in this respect.
In theory, nevertheless, Mormonism is Christianity per-
fected. It is the theory and the boast of Mormons that, as
Christianity surpasses the religion of the Jewish Dispensa-
tion, so Mormonism surpasses Christianity. And as a matter
of fact, Mormon teachers are constantly making false appeals
to the Christian Scriptures in order to establish Mormonism,
*With this historical sketch of Smith and the books, compare
the account of Bishop Daniel S. Tuttle on "Mormons" in Schaff-
Herzog- Encyclopedia, the article in the Encyclopedia Britanica,
and especially Orson Pratt's Work, Tract No. 6, "Remarkable
Visions."
16 Some Modern Isms.
as Paul indubitably proved the truth of Christianity from
the Old Testament. Monnon propagandist literature is
chock full of references to the Old and New Testament,
illustrating with indefinite fulness the pregnant saying, "In
religion, what damned error but some sober brow will bless
it and approve it with a text?" Not one of the college of the
apostles quoted scripture with greater show of unction. But
this Mormon unction is the unction of the deceived, or the
hypocrite; and the theory of Mormonism, that it is a legiti-
mate development of Christianity, is false. The distinctive
teachings of Mormonism are in direct and absolute an-
tagonism to those of Christianity.*
Let us examine them briefly: In the first place, the Mor-
mon notion of God, is that of an immense material sub-
stance, with only parts of it personalized. Naive Material-
ism, tritheism with two only out of the three gods per-
sonal, and progressively increasing polytheism are scrouged
into this notion of God or Gods. But let Mormonism speak
for itself:
In "an epitome of the faith of "The Latter Day Saints,"
prepared by Joseph Smith himself, the first article reads,
"We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son,
Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost." This article in the
Mormon mouth means something very different from what
it does when pronounced by a Christian. Orson Pratt, per-
haps the most eloquent and able of the expounders of Mor-
monism, an apostle, and claiming inspiration, says "The
Godhead consists of the Father; the Son, and the Holy
Spirit. The Father is a material being. The substance of
which he is composed is wholly material. It is a substance
widely different in some respects from the various substances
with w^hich we are more inmiediately acquainted. In other
♦The Mormonism herein discussed is Mormonism of the later
days of Joseph Smith and of the time of Bingham Young and
since.
Some Modern Isms. 17
respects it is precisely like all other materials. The sub-
stance of his person like other matter, cannot be in two
places at the same instant. It also requires time for him
to transport himself from place to place. It matters not
how great the velocity of his movements, time is an essential
ingredient to all motion, whether rapid or slow. It differs
from other matter in the superiority of its powers, being
intelligent, all-wise, and possessing the power of self-motion
to a far greater extent than the coarser materials of nature.
God is a Spirit, but that does not make him an immaterial
being — a being that has no properties in common with
matter. The expression, an immaterial being is a contra-
diction in tenns. Immateriality is only another name for
nothing. It is the negative of all existence. A spirit is as
much matter as oxygen or hydrogen. It has many prop-
erties in common with matter. . . . He is not a being
without parts, as modern idolaters teach; for every whole
is made up of parts. The whole person of the Father con-
sists of innumerable parts; and each part is so situated as
to bear certain relations of distance to ever}- other part.
There must also be, to a certain degree, a freedom of mo-
tion among those parts, which is an essential condition to
the movement of his limbs, w^ithout which he could only
move as a whole.
"All the foregoing statements in relation to the person
of the Father, are equally applicable to the person of the
Son.
"The Holy Spirit being one part of the Godhead, is also
a material substance, of the same nature and properties in
many respects, as the Spirits of the Father and the Son. It
exists in vast immeasurable quantities in connection with all
material worlds. This is called God in the Scriptures, as
well as the Father and the Son; God the Father and God
the Son cannot be everywhere present; indeed they cannot
18 Some Modern Isms.
be even in two places at the same instant; but God ttie
Holy Spirit is omnipresent — it extends through all space,
intermingling with all other matter, yet no one atom of
the Holy Spirit can be in two places at the same instant,
which in all cases is an absolute impossibility. It must
exist in inexhaustible quantities, which is the only possible
way for any substance to be omnipresent. All the innum-
erable phenomena of universal nature are produced in their
origin by the actual presence of this intelligent, all-wise and
all-powerful material substance called the Holy Spirit. It
is the most active matter in the universe, producing all its
operations according to fixed and definite laws enacted by
itself, in conjunction with the Father and Son. What are
called the laws of nature are nothing more nor less than
the fixed method by which this spiritual matter operates.
Each atom of the Holy Spirit is intelligent, and like all other
matter, has solidity, form and size, and occupies space. Two
atoms of this Spirit cannot occupy the same space at the
same time; neither can one atom, as before stated, occupy
two separate spaces at the same time. . . .If several
of the atoms of this Spirit should unite themselves together
into the form of a person, then the person of the Holy
Spirit would be subject to the same necessity as the other
two persons of the Godhead, that is, it could not be every-
where present. No finite number of atoms can be omnipres-
ent; an infinite number of atoms is required to be every-
where in infinite space. Two persons receiving the gift of
the Holy Spirit, do not each receive at the same time the
same identical particles, though they each receive a sub-
stance exactly similar in kind. It would be as impossible
for each to receive the same identical atoms, as it would be
for two men at the same time to drink the same identical
pint of water."*
*Orson Pratt: "Kingdom of God." Part T, p. 49. Tn "Sei-ies
of Pamphlets." Liverpool. 1857.
Some Modern Isms, 1^
In his treatise, "The Kingdom of God," Part IV., p. 15,
the "inspired apostle," Pratt, gives a summar}^ of his doc-
trine of God. He says: "We have endeavored to point out
the nature and character of the great supreme governing
power of the universe, consisting of the Father, Son and the
Holy Ghost. The person of the Father consists of a most
glorious substance, called spirit, which we have shown must
have extension and parts, and consequently must be material.
Without these qualities no substance could exist.
"The Son is the express image of the Father, and is also a
material being. The same material body that was crucified
and laid in the tomb, rose again. The same flesh, the same
bones, were reanimated by the same material spirit. This
glorious compound of flesh and bones, and spirit — all mate-
rial, ascended into heaven to dwell in the presence of the
glorious personage of the Father, of whose express image
and likeness he was the most perfect pattern. Therefore
from the description given of Jesus we are irresistibly led
to the conclusion that both he and the Father must appear,
so far as relates to form and size, very much like man. If
then both these glorious personages are about the size of man,
they must, like man, occupy a finite space of but a few
cubic feet in dimension; and according to the admitted truths
of philosophy, no substance can be in two or more places
at the same time, therefore neither the Father nor Son can,
consistently with those truths, be in two places at once. Re-
vealed truths never will contradict any other truths. The
revealed truths contained in the Bible inform us that God
is everywhere, sustaining and upholding all things, and that
in him we live and move and have our being. How can
those important truths of divine revelation be reconciled
with other admitted truths of philosophy which are equally
certain? They can be reconciled in no way except by ad-
mitting the omnipresence of the Holy Spirit. This all-
20 So5kiE Modern Isms.
powerful substance extends throughout the material universe,
uniting and mingling with all other matter in a greater or
less degree, not absolutely filling all space, for then there
would be no room for other matter, but like the rays of
light or heat, existing in different degrees of density in differ-
ent parts of space. By it all things are governed in the
most perfect order and wisdom, according to the will of the
leather and the Son. This view of the subject does not neces-
sarily do away with a personal spirit, acting in conjunction
with the other two persons of the Godhead; for myriads of
personal spirits could be organized out of the inexhaustible
quantities which exist, and still an abundance would be left
to govern and control the various departments of the uni-
verse where those personages could not always be present."
In another passage the great expounder of Mormonism
exclaims at an enemy for not seeing that the Holy Spirit, if
a person, could not be omnipresent.*
Similarly in a so-called ''Revelation" to Joseph Smith,
dated December 27th, 1832, the omnipresence of God by his
Spirit universally diffused, is taught. There is no shadow
of ground for doubt that Pratt expounded the Mormon doc-
trine of God in harmony with Smith's teaching.
Thus we have, in this beggar's basket of a doctrine of
God, the assertion of absolute materiality, on the supposition
that matter is the only substance. We have two personal
Gods — God the Father and God the Son — stripped of the
attribute of omnipresence and by implication and logic of
ever}^ divine attribute. Personality is denied the Spirit on
the ground that to make him personal would be to make him
finite. He is turned into It.
What a hotch-potch! An infinite, material, impersonal
God — a sort of material soul of the world — two material,
♦Orson Pratt: "Absurdities of Ti-nmatorialism," p. 25. In a
Series of Pamphlets. Liverpool. 1857.
Some Modern Isms. 21
finite, personal Gods, making materialism, tritheism, practi-
cal atheism.
But this Mormon theolog>' — these bizarre, confused and
conflicting representations of God became still more grotes-
que, absurd and contradictory when Brigham Young, the
"Prophet of the Lord" who succeeded Joseph Smith, publicly
taught as he did on the 9th of April, 1852: "When our
father Adam came into the Garden of Eden, he came into
it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives,
with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He
is Michael the Archangel, the Ancient of Days, about whom
holy men have written and spoken. He is our Father and
our God, and the only God with whom we have to do."*
Mrs. T. B. H. Stenhouse, in her work, "Tell It All," or
"The Story of a Life's Experience in Mormonism," after
quoting these words of Brigham Young's, says: "This public
declaration gave great offense and led to the apostasy of
many. Nevertheless, Brigham Young thinks that just as
Adam came down to Eden and subsequently became a God,
in like manner he also himself will attain to the Godhead.
Heber C. Kimball, zealous to go a step further, declared
that Brigham was God, 'and that he (Kimball) stood towards
him in the same relation as the Third Person in the Blessed
Trinity does toward the First.' "f
Dr. Sheldon Jackson, ex-Moderator of the Presbyterian
Church North, who "was for twenty years a missionary
among the Mormons," says of Mormonism: "God (God the
Father) is none other than Adam the first man. Adam mar-
ried many wives here and begot many children. He died,
went to heaven and was made God of Earth because of his
many wives and children. He has many wives in heaven
and begets manv children there still. Every man after death
*Mrs. T. B. H. Stenhouse: "Tell It All," pp. 299-300.
tMrs. T. B. H. Stenhouse: "Tell It All," p. 300.
22 Some Modern Isms.
is God over a world, the magnitude of which is proportioned
to the number of wives and children he has here. If he has
many wives and children here he will be a god over a large
kingdom hereafter."' '^'' Thus gods of smaller size than the
Father and the Son are growing daily.
Mrs. Stenhouse says, and truly: "The Confession of
Faith published by Joseph Smith during his life time, w^ould
certainly deceive an uninitiated person; and it was in con-
sequence of the ambiguity of that very document, that so
many unsuspecting persons were from the beginning of Mor-
monism led astray by the teachings of the missionaries. The
convert was told that Mormon faith proclaimed the existence
of one true God, but he was not told that Father Adam was
that deity, and that he is 'like a well-to-do-farmer.' He was
told that Christ was the Son of God, but he was not taught
that the Virgin Mary was 'the lawful wife of God the
Father,' and that he intended after the resurrection to take
her again as one of his own wives, to raise up immortal
spirits in eternity. ... He was taught that the saints
believed in the Holy Ghost, but he was not told that the
Holy Ghost is a man, (i. e., that a personalized part of the
Holy Ghost is a man) and our God. You think our Father
and our God is not a lively, sociable and cheerful man. He
is one of the most lively men that ever lived. "f
If Dr. Sheldon Jackson can be trusted, Mrs. Stenhouse
might have gone still further. She might have said : "Though
they taught men to have faith in Christ, they did not teach
that the marriage in Cana of Galilee was Christ's own mar-
riage; that the Marys and Marthas of the New Testament
were wives of his, and that he begat many children and still
begets children in heaven. "=!" These esoteric teachings of
♦Private Report of Dr. Jackson'.s Address, hv Mr. R. V
Jopling-.
tMrs. T. B. H. Stenhouse: "Tell It All," p. 296.
♦Private Report of Dr. Jackson's Address, bv Mr R V,'
Joplingr.
So:me Modern Isms. 23
Mormonism were left to be unfolded later, to those within
the pale.
Now place, if you please, alongside this mass of drivel-
ling assumption, of discordant, rampant and warring blas-
phemy, of materialism, bi-personality, tri-personality accord-
ing to some later teaching of the tabernacle, impersonality
of the Spirit according to Joseph Smith and Orson Pratt,
ditheism, tritheism, polytheism, atheism, (for these gods are
but men) place, if you please, alongside this refuse heap of
ribald fancy the Christian conception of God: "God is a
Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in his being, wis-
dom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth." "There
are three persons in the Godhead : the Father, the Son and the
Holy Ghost; and these three are one God the same in sub-
stance equal in power and glory."
The Mormon degradation and defamation of the notion of
God marks it as no development of Christianity, but a most
foul and blasphemous apostasy.
In the second place, the Mormon anthropology includes
the doctrines of the soul's divine origin and nature, its mate-
riality, its pre-existence, its fall which they regard as no
more serious than Pelagians say, and its entire ability to
save itself, once Christ has died, and to make for itself an
estate of material happiness in the world to come.
Says Elder Franklin D. Richards, of Salt Lake City:
"Mormonism teaches that the spirit of man is the off-spring
of God and existed as a living entity before incorporation into
a mortal body." f In "Revelation of May 6, 1833," Joseph
Smith teaches that the spirits of men are the offspring of God
in these words: "And now verily I say unto you, I was in
the beginning with the Father and am the first born; and
all those who are together through me are partakers of tlie
glory of the same and are the Church of the First Born.
•In Progress. No. 11. Vol. III. Art, "The ^lormon Church."
24 Some Modern Isms.
Ye were also in the beginning with the Father."* Mrs.
Stenhouse says, "The soul was said to be immortal, and to
have three stages of existence. The first was the purely
spiritual stage — the stage of the soul before it came into this
world. Spirits in that condition were not perfect. They
must first take a fleshly body and pass through the trials
of life before they could attain to the highest state of exist-
ence. Hence it was the solemn duty of, as well as the
highest privilege of men, to practice polygamy; their duty,
as by this means, and this alone, the yet imperfect souls,
now waiting to come into this world, could ever hope to be
admitted into the "Celestial Kingdom," — and a privilege,
as all the souls whom they thus assisted to emigrate, would
form their own "kingdoms" in eternity, over which as kings
and priests they would reign forever and ever.
"The second stage of the soul's existence is the mortal,
with which we are all sadly acquainted. The third is the
condition subsequent to the Resurrection, when they believe
the flesh and bones will form the raised body, but that the
blood v/ill not be there; for the blood is the principle of
the corrupt life, and therefore another spirit supplies its place
in heaven.
"That Christ partook of some broiled fish and part of a
honey comb is evident from Holy Scripture. The Mormons
therefore teach that heaven will be very much the same as
earth, only considerably improved. We shall not marry
there or be given in marriage; hence it is necessary for us
to marry here, and to marry as much as we can, for then in
heaven the man will take the wives whom he had married
on earth, or who have been sealed to him by proxy; they
will be his queens and their children will be his subjects.
We shall eat and drink and spend a happy time generally.
We shall thenceforth never die — thence we shall ourselves
be Gods!
^Quoted "In Progress." Vol. Ill, No. 11, p. 686.
Some Modern Isms. 25
"It was in the pre-existent state, the Mormon tells us,
that the work of salvation was first planned — but not after
the fashion believed by all Christians. A grand celestial
council was held, at which all the sons of God appeared.
Michael the father of all, presided and stated that he pro-
posed to create a new world, of which he proceeded to give
some details. His first begotten then arose, and made a
speech in which he proposed that Michael, his father, should
go down to the world, when created, with Eve his mother,
and do there much after the fashion of what is related of
our first parents in the book of Genesis; he himself would
descend some thousands of years subsequently, and would
lead his erring brethren back, and save them from their
sins. Lucifer the second son then stood forth and unfolded
his plan. Jealous of the popularity of his brother, he pro-
posed to save men in their sins.
"Great discussion ensued, in which the unnumbered fam-
ily of heaven divided into three parties — one under each>
of the two elder sons, and the third standing neutral. After
a terrible conflict, the second son, was defeated, and with
all his followers was driven out of heaven. They descended
into the abyss where they founded the infernal kingdom, of
which Lucifer became the chief. He was henceforth known
as the Devil. (Michael or) Adam created his world and
carried out his part of the plan; and in due time the eldest
son, who conquered in heaven, took upon him the form of
flesh, dwelt among men and was known as their Redeemer.
The spirits who stood neutral during the conflict subse-
quently took upon them forms of flesh, entering into the
children of Ham, and were known as negroes. Therefore
it is, that although the American Indians and all other
races are eligible for the Mormon priesthood, the negro
alone can never attain to that high dignity."* Such is the
Mormon anthropology^
•Mrs. T. B. H. Stenhouse: "Tell It All," pp. 297-299.
26 Some Modern Isms.
Since the time of Plato, and perhaps before, the intel-
lectual world has been acquainted with the fancy of the pre-
existence of souls and has regarded it as baseless. But the
Mormons suppose all souls to have existed eternally and in
an imperfect state. In the first pair on earth, their Father,
God, Michael, Adam, or whatever he may be called, and his
wife, the race fell further, but owing to the redemptive work
of Christ no man suffers for this primeval earth's sin. They
teach that men are naturally able to comply with the re-
quirements which entitle to salvation, f They teach a view
of heavenly man about as grossly sensual as the Mohamme-
dans, but in other respects like the Pelagians.
Compare now with this puerile, superficial, absurd and
palpably false, vagarious, and heathen view of man, with
its accompanying defamation of God, the Christian doc-
trine as to man's creation, fall, sinfulness, moral helpless-
ness, salvation by grace if at all, freedom in Christ, every-
thing through Christ:
''God created man male and female, after his own
image, in knowledge, righteousness and holiness. When
God created man, he entered into a covenant of life
with him on condition of perfect obedience. Our first
parents, being left to the freedom of their own will, fell
from the estate wherein they were created by sinning against
God. The fall brought mankind into an estate of sin and
mise^^^ The sinfulness of that estate whereinto man fell,
consisted of the guilt of Adam's first sin, the want of original
righteousness, and the corruption of his whole nature, which
is commonly called original sin, together with all actual
transgressions which proceed from it. But God, having out
of his mere good pleasure from all eternity elected some to
everlasting life, did enter into a covenant of grace, to de-
liver them out of the estate of sin and misery, and to bring
them into an estate of salvation bv a Redeemer."
fCompare Ben. E. Rich: "A Friendly Discussion." p. 11.
Some Modern Isisis. 27
Christianity teaches that man was created by God. It
teaches the doctrine of ex nihilo creation. ]Mormonism
teaches the eternity of matter, and regards the souls of men
as a part of that eternal matter. Christianity teaches that
mankind fell in Adam, our ancestral head, from an estate
of holiness. Mormonism teaches that souls in an imperfect
state were embodied as a necessary stage in their progress
toward perfection. Christianity teaches the moral helpless-
ness of man and the need of divine grace in order to sal-
vation. Mormonism teaches that man can do everything
necessary to salvation once the eldest son of the Michael,
who became Adam, has died in the race's behalf. Mor-
monism looks forward to a heaven of sensuality much like
that of Mohammed. Christianity looks forward to a heaven
in which fleshly appetites have no scope. Mormonism is no
development of Christianity. It is another gospel than
that which Paul preached.
In the third place, the Mormon doctrines of soteriology
are equally crude and unchristian.
Joseph Smith says, in his Articles of Faith, "We believe
that, through the atonement of Christ, all mankind may be
saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.
We believe that these ordinances are: First, faith in the
Lord Jesus Christ; second, repentance; third, baptism by
immersion for remission of sins; fourth, laying on of hands
for the gift of the Holy Ghost."=^
The theory of the Mormons is that the sacrifice of Christ
so far does away with the effect of Adams' sins that all men
suffer for their own individual sins only. Moreover the
sacrificial death of Christ, they teach, so far clears the way
that man can save himself. They describe faith as fol-
lows: They who believe "Must believe, first, in the exist-
ence of God; secondly, in his revealed law; and thirdly, in
•Articles of Faith. 3 and 4.
28 Some Modern Isms.
the sufferings of the Son of God"* as satisfying divine
justice. They define repentance with more apparent ade-
quacy. They teach that immersion is the only mode of hap-
tism sanctioned by our Lord. They say also that "baptism
is not, as many false teachers now affinn, 'an outward sign
of an invisible grace,' but is an ordinance whereby a be-
lieving penitent obtains a forgiveness of all past sins."t
They thus teach the ex opere operato theory of the efficiency
of the sacrament. They make water baptism to be essen-
tial to salvation, as well as baptism with the Holy Ghost.
Joseph Smith teaches this in "Revelation" dated November,
1831. He represents Christ as saying, "Verily, verily, I
say unto you, they that believe not on your words and are
not baptized in water in my name for the remission of their
sins, that they may receive the Holy Ghost, shall be damned
and shall not come into my father's kingdom.";]: The
Mormons also teach that after a man has believed and re-
pented and been baptized for the remission of sins, he must
then receive the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands,^
and so be empowered to heal the sick and work miracles
generally.
Now observe that this soteriology of Mormonism is funda-
mentally unlike that of Christianity. The Christian system
is the plan of the uncreated and independent tri-personal
God for saving one who is a creature in the absolute sense
of the term creature. The Mormon system is the plan by
which persons called "eternal" try to save other beings
equally eternal and uncreated. Christianity represents the
atonement as an infinite satisfaction by a person of the
triune Godhead to divine justice, for the sin of finite beings.
Mormonism represents the atonement as a satisfaction by
one of two persons clothed, inconsistently, with some of the
•Orson Pratt: "Kingdom of God." Part II, pp. 3. 4
tOrson Pratt: "Kingrdom of God." Part II, pp. 4 5
JQuoted in Progress. Vol. III. No. 11, p. 687.
IBen. E. Rich: "A Friendly Discussion," pp. 15, 16.
Some Modern Isms. 29
divine attributes for the sin of beings not their creatures,
and also clothed with the same metaphysical attributes.
Mormonism represents faith as purely intellectual. Chris-
tianity represents it as of the heart as well as the head. We
distinguish between the mere historical faith of the in-
tellect which even devils may have and that faith of the
mind and heart and whole man which the child of God
must have. Repentance in the two systems, notwithstand-
ing any superficial likeless, is essentially unlike, since God,
sin and sinner, are different things as seen by Mormons
and by the teachings of Christianity. The Mormons clothe
baptism with water with an efficiency which is never af-
firmed nor implied of it in Scriptures, and which is never
taught even by any branch of nominal Christians but the
most apostate and superstitious. Nay, it may be doubted
whether any branch of the nominally Christian church, even
the most apostate and degraded, has taught sacramentalism
so fully. The Mormons are like a few Christian enthusiasts
indeed, in claiming that the maraculous gifts of the apostolic
age are continued in this age. But here, too, they stand in
sharp contrast to the very best and noblest part of the Chris-
tian church in all ages and countries save the darkest.
But we are not yet done with the Mormon soteriology.
They tell us that "the living saints may perform ordinances
for the repentant dead." And as a matter of fact the dis-
covery of repentance on the part of the dead does not seem
difficult. Accordingly, Queen Anne of England, George
Washington, Napoleon Bonaparte, and how many others
time would fail us to tell, have been baptized by proxy into
the Mormon communion.
Marriage is an element in Mormon soteriology. They
call it a sacrament. They say "it is solemnized for time and
for eternity. It is sealed on earth by one having divine
authorit^^ and it is therefore sealed in heaven.
30 Some Modern Isms.
This union of the sexes is essential to perfect exaltation in
the celestial world. The marriage does not take place in
or after the resurrection, but in this life, where the parties
are tested in their probation. Those persons who arrive at
no higher conditions than that of angels, are ministering
spirits unto the sons and daughters of God."* That is,
those who are not married after the Mormon fashion shall
be underlings, scullions and kitchen-maids in heaven. For
woman or man, according to Mormonism, the way to the
heaven of heavens is through marriage. Those who do not
marry, even if they reach the celestial portals, must be
hewers of wood, drawers of water, attendants and boot-
blacks to the saints, t
We have now passed in rapid review the Mormon doc-
trines of God, of man, and of salvation. We have seen
that instead of holding to Christian theism, they hold to
materialism, tritheism in union with the impersonality of
one of the gods, the other two gods being little more than
indefinitely big men. We have seen that they make man
an eternal material being, who existed before he was clothed
with flesh, who was clothed with flesh in order to improve-
ment of character, and getting rid of original imperfections,
but who tumbled into more trouble in the person of God
the Father who became Adam, but was redeemed by his
eldest son who became Christ, and hence is able to work
out his own salvation by obeying gospel ordinances. We
have seen that they make this Christ work out a sort of an
atonement; that they then condition a man's salvation on
his entertaining intellectual faith,* on his having repented
of his past and determined to live according to their teach-
ings, on baptism by water, on receiving the miraculous pow-
♦Elder F. D. Richards: "In Progress." Vol. III. Xo. 11. p.
r.85. See also, "Tell It All," p. 257.
tSee "Tell It All," p. 257.
♦The uninspired elder, Ben. E. Rich, has a better view of
faith.
Some Modern Isms. 31
ers of the Holy Ghost by the imposition of hands, and on
his marrying under the Mormon authorities.
This system has no kinship with Christianity. As the
"Book of Mormon" uses a few phrases found frequently in
our Sacred Scriptures, such as, "And it came to pass," so
the Mormon system is set forth by the use of our Christian
terminology in part. As we have the words God, Lord,
Christ, man, sin, salvation, atonement, faith, repentance, bap-
tism, and so forth, so Mormonism has these words. But
the meanings in every case are different. Mormonism is no
development of Christianity, but the contrary. It is a re-
ligion as unchristian as Manichaeism, or Mohammedanism.
It is a true child of its founder, Joseph Smith, the cheat,
the fraud, the liar and the devotee of lust.
The essentially contra- Christian character of Mormonism
may be shown still more convincingly by examining some
distinctive peculiarities of Mormon ethics, viz. : polygamy,
and the unusual distinction between innocent and guilty
blood, the blood atonement or the principle that the end
justifies the means.
In 1843, in Nauvoo, Joseph Smith claimed to receive a
revelation from God sanctioning a plurality of wives. The
revelation is long, full of argument and assertions warrant-
ing polygamy. Paragraphs 20 to 25 read as follows:
"Verily, I say unto you, a commandment I give unto mine
handmaid, Emma Smith, your wife. . . . Let mine
handmaid, Emma Smith, receive all those that have been
given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and
pure before me; and those that are not pure and have said
that they were pure, shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your
God. ... I give unto my servant Joseph that he
may be made ruler over many things, for he hath been
faithful over a few things, and from henceforth I will
strengthen him.
32 Some Modern Isms.
*'And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide
and cleave unto my servant Joseph, and to no one else.
But if she will not abide this commandment, she shall be
destroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and
will destroy her if she abide not in my law; but if she
will abide this commandment, then shall my servant Joseph
do all things for her even as he hath said; and I will bless
him, and multiply him, and give unto him a hundred fold
in this world, of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters,
houses and lands, wives and children, and crowns of eternal
lives in the eternal world. And, again, verily I say, let
mine handmaid forgive my servant Joseph his trespasses,
and then shall she be forgiven her trespasses, wherein she
has trespassed against me; and I, the Lord thy God, will
bless her, and multiply her, and make her heart to re-
joice.
"And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood:
If any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another,
and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second,
and they are virgins and have vowed to no other man, then
is he justified; he cannot commit adultery, for they are given
him, and to none else; and if he have ten virgins given unto
him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong
to him; and they are given unto him — therefore he is
justified. But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she
is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed
adultery; she shall be destroyed; for they are given unto
him to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my
commandments, and to fulfill the promise which was given
by my Father before the foundation of the world; and for
their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear
the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father con-
tinued til at he may be glorified.
"And again, verily, verily I say unto you, if any man
Soi^iE Modern Isms. 33
have a wife who holds the keys of this power, and he teaches
unto her the law of my priesthood, as pertaining to these
things, then shall she believe and administer unto him, or
she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God; for I will
destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those
who receive and abide by my law. Therefore, it shall be
lawful for him to receive all things whatsoever I the Lord
his God, will give unto him, because she did not believe
and administer unto him, according to my word, and she
then becomes the transgressor, and he is exempt from the
law of Sarah, who administered unto Abraham according to
the law, when I commanded x\braham to take Hagar to
wife. And now, as pertaining to this law: Verily, verily
I say unto you, I will reveal more unto you hereafter; there-
fore let this suffice for the present. Behold I am Alpha
and Omega. Amen."
This quotation shows us how restive Emma Smith,
Joseph's first and lawful wife, was under polygamy. The
threats of destruction which were intended to subdue her,
betray also the nervous uneasiness of the polygamous prophet.
The incongruous plea that Emma shall forgive the tres-
passes of Joseph against her, betrays the prophet's own
sense of the immorality of his polygamous relations. But,
cheat, liar, fraud, libertine, coward as he was, he naturally
invoked the authority of the God whom he dishonored with
his every breath, in reducing the wife he ought to have pro-
tected, to the intolerable ignominy of polygamy.
This is not only anti-Christian; it is in the teeth of the
teaching of natural religion. Go to Utah. Visit the homes
of Polygamy. In this yard is a row of small houses, much
alike, three or four, half a dozen, or a dozen or more of
them, each inhabited by a polygamous wife of the same man.
In an adjacent yard is a single house with a number of
rooms, in every room save one, the parlor, a wife and her
34 Some Modern Isms.
children, all belonging to one man. In still another yard
is a cabin with one room in which a man lives with a plu-
rality of wives. See the prevalent look of hopelessness on
the women's faces, save in the cases of new-comers, tempo-
rary queens of the harems, a few fanatics, and hardened
wretches. See in this land of boasted freedom these slaves.
See in this vaunted civilization this sign of blackest sav-
agery.
Ye men who hear me as well as ye women: is not this
against the demands of your highest nature? Is not con-
jugal love exclusive in its demands? Is it not exclusive in
proportion to a man's elevation of character? Don't you
count that man close akin to a beast who would be willing
to live in relations of polyandry? Does not logic compel
you to take a similar view of woman and polygamy? Can
you think of yourself with any degree of moral complacency
as living in polygamy? There is not a man here who will
dare say it openly !
The Bible condemns it. The original institutions of
marriage, of which we have record in Genesis 2:24, is strictly
and only monogamous. Moses restricted polygamy. Malachi
rebuked it. Christ roundly condemned it, and re-established
the monogamous character of marriage. His inspired apos-
tles set a stigma of disapproval on polygamy by forbidding
that any polygamous man should be allowed to hold office
in the church.
Joseph Smith did not get his revelation sanctioning poly-
gamy from Jesus Christ, who is the same yesterday, to-day
and forever.
The Mormon distinction between murder and the shed-
ding of innocent blood, was in the words of Mrs. Stenhouse
as follows: "Shedding innocent blood is the crime of kill-
ing a saint, which can never be forgiven but by the death
of the transgressor; but the spilling of a Gentile's blood is
Some Modern Isms. 3.5
of quite a different character. To murder a Gentile may
sometimes be inexpedient, or perhaps even to a certain extent
a wrong, but it is seldom if ever, a crime, and never an un-
pardonable sin."
Scores and hundreds of inoffensive immigrants passing
through Utah were cut down by the agents of the Mormon
church. In 1857, one hundred and twenty-one persons —
men, women and children — belonging to an immigrant train
peaceably making its way through the country, were brutally
put to death in what is known as the Mountain Meadow's
massacre. This wholesale murder was under the field lead-
ership of Bishop John Doyle Lee, and was instigated and
approved by the highest Mormon authorities, including Brig-
ham Young. Lee, according to his published confessions,
believed the murder fully justified, because commanded by
Mormon authorities above him.*
The doctrine of the Blood Atonement is, to quote Airs.
Stenhouse again, "that the murder of an apostale is a deed
of love I If a saint sees another leave the church, or even
if he only believes that his brother's faith is weakening and
he will apostatize before long, he knows that the soul of his
unbelieving brother will be lost if he dies in such a state,
and that only by his blood's being shed is there any chance
for forgiveness for him; it is therefore the kindest action
that he can perform toward him to shed his blood — the
doing so is a deed of truest love. The nearer, the dearer,
the more tenderly loved the sinner is, the greater the affection
shown by the shedders of blood. The action is no longer
murder or the shedding of innocent blood, for the taint of
apostasy takes away its innocence — it is making atonement,
not a crime; it is an act of mercy, therefore meritorious.''*
Brigham Young said in one of his sermonts in the Salt
*The Mormon Menace, or The Confessions of John i:>oyle Lee,
pp. 298ff.
*.Mrs. T. B. H. Stenhouse: "Tell It All," p. 312.
36 Some Modern Isms.
Lake City Tabernacle, "I have known a great many men
who have left this church for whom there is no chance
whatever of exaltation, but if their blood had been spilled
it would have been better for them,
"The wickedness and ignorance of the nations forbid this
principle's being in full force. But the time will come when
the law of God will be in full force. This is loving our
neighbor as ourselves. If he needs help, help him; if he
w^ants salvation, and it is necessary to spill his blood on the
earth in order that he may be saved, spill it.
"Now, brethren and sisters, will you live your religion?
How many hundreds of times have I asked that question?
Will the Latter Day Saints live their religion?"!
On other occasions he said: "I could refer to plenty of
instances where men have been righteously slain in order to
atone for their sins.
"Now, when you hear my brethren telling about cutting
people off from the earth, that, you consider, is strong doc-
trine; but it is to save them, not to destroy them."];
It is to be remarked that one can commit apostacy simply
by crossing the will of a living member of the Mormon priest-
hood. Accordingly "Rosmos Anderson, who wanted to marry-
his step-daughter against the wishes of the ward bishop, had
his throat cut by the ecclesiastical executioners, so that his
blood might run into his freshly dug grave."* John Doyle
Lee saysf that this ward Bishop, Klingensmith, wishing to
marry the girl himself, was one of Anderson's executioners;
but that the killing was a religious duty and a just act.
The inculcation of those principles and the example of
Mormon elders explain in considerable part the peculiarly
long list of murders and other horrors in the history of Utah.
Our Lord Jesus forbade the use of force of anv kind in
tQuoted in "Tell It All," p. 318.
:|:.Tohn Doyle Lee: The Mormon Menace, p. 357.
"International Encyclopedia. Sub Mormons.
2tThe Mormon :\Ienace, pp. 292ff.
Some Modern Isms. 37
religion. It has been a law of God for the State from the
time of Noah: *'Who sheddeth man's blood, by man shall
his blood be shed." But the Mormon law makes a Mormon's
murder of a Gentile no crime and teaches the slaughter of
a Mormon on the point of apostalizing a virtuous act.
Nothing more diabolical can be found in the moral teach-
ings of any people than these principles of Mormon ethics.
Such is the Mormon theology and ethics. They claim
that they are a development of Christianity. But what con-
cord hath Christ with Belial? Mormonism is not of the
Old Testament nor the New. It treats of a different God,
of a different salvation, accomplished by different means, of
different ideals of life and duty. While Christianity is
from heaven and bears writ all over it, its celestial character,
Mormonism is the monstrous offspring of earth and hell.
It is a huge monster that would roll back civilization
thousands of years and grind the weaker sex as degraded
orientals, or brutal and naked savages, do. It would re-
establish in our Western world, blessed of high heaven with
independence of Church and State, that adulterous com-
munion from which comes the motley brood, Intolerance,
Priestcraft and Persecution unto death.
Mormonism aims to control this nation in its politics as
it tries to control Utah.
We are told that in the State of Utah no Mormon can be
a candidate for office of any kind save one authorized by
the President of the Church, and that he will authorize no
one but an actual and avowed polygamist; that no bill can
pass the legislature save by the consent of the Mormon
Church; that all objectionable bills are strangled in the com-
mittee rooms; that the church has a committee to devise and
supervise all legislation; that their approval means passage
and their disapproval failure; that all schools are in the
hands of Monnons, even the State University and the Agri-
3S Some Modern Isims.
cultural School, which is largely supported by the aid of
the National Government; and that all of these are branches
of tlie Mormon propaganda.* If this be regarded as an
over-statement of their power in Utah, it may nevertheless
be taken as a just exhibition of their aim.
Mormonism would turn right into wrong and wrong into
right. It would deprive us of that God who is glorious in
holiness, fearful in praises, doing wonders; and give us in-
stead its gods witli ethical ideals lower than Jesuitism ever
reached in its lowest grovelings.
We have called this monster huge. It has grown great
and is still growing. It has met obstacles many. Its wan-
derings from 1831 to 1847 are matters of familiar history.
Hundreds of Mormons have perished at the hands of their
incensed neighbors. Elder Richards, speaking from the
point of view of a Latter Day Saint, said about a score of
years ago: "Persecution raged against the church from
the beginning. All kinds of misrepresentation were resorted
to by its enemies. The Saints were driven from their pos-
sessions in Missouri and afterwards in Illinois; many of
them were slaughtered by mobs, their property was confis-
cated, and in 1844, on June 27th, the Prophet Joseph Smith
and his brother Hiram were shot to death by Mobocrats
with blackened faces, at Cartharge, Illinois. Subsequently
the body of the Saints were driven from Nauvoo, which
they had built on the banks of the Mississippi, and under
the leadership of Brigham Young, who was the President
of the Twelve Apostles, the persecuted Saints made their
way to winter quarters, on the banks of the Missouri, near
where Council Bluff now stands. ... In 1847 the
famous journey from the Missouri river across the plains
and mountains was accomplished by Brigham Young and
the pioneers, numbering one hundred and forty-three men,
*R. W. Jopling's Report of Dr. Sheldon Jackson's Address.
Some Modern Isms. 39
three women and two children. They reached the spot
where Salt Lake City now stands, July 24th of that year.
The great temple, costing more than three million dollars,
rear its towers on the spot where Brigham Young de-
clared at that time: 'Here we will build the temple of our
God.'
"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has
now its branches in all the civilized nations and upon many
islands of the sea. It has sixteen hundred elders in the mis-
sion field, laboring without pay. Its membership numbers
about three hundred thousand. It has four magnificent tem-
ples in which are administered ordinances for the living and
the dead. It is presided over by Lorenzo Snow, George S.
Cannon and Joseph F. Smith, Apostles of Jesus Christ,
holding the keys of the kingdom of heaven, with the bind-
ing and loosing power which Christ conferred on Peter,
James and John, and which they restored to earth. It has
twelve Apostles to open the door of the kingdom in all
nations, and set in order the affairs of the church. It has
all the orders of the Christian ministry and priesthood which
were in the church during the first century of the Christian
era. It administers the same ordinances and enjoys the
same unity, power, spiritual gifts and divine communications
as were then bestowed."'^ Thus spoke Elder Richards, tell-
ing the truth, too, so far as his account is concerned with
the progress of Mormonism and the surmounting of diffi-
culties, the growth and spread of the sect, the zeal of its
representatives, and its spirit of propagandism ; but mis-
representing anew the relation of the Mormonism to Chris-
tianity. This Mormon Church is no more like the Chris-
tian Church of the first century than that arch-rebel who
was cast from the heavenly heights to the infernal depths,
is like those pure spirits that kept their first estate and
*In Progress. Vol. IIT. No. 11, p. 684.
40 Some Modern Isms.
minister about God's throne this hour. This church has
continued to grow during the last twenty years.
The growth of Mormonism is probably to be explained:
1st. — By its religious earnestness. Some mormons are earn-
est to spread their tenets because of the temporal gain they
will thus get. Some have been given over to a strong de-
lusion, to believe a lie, the lie they teach; because they
wished to believe it instead of God's truth and to serve
gods of their own instead of the true God. Some are honest
fanatics, deceived and deceiving. This earnestness is a
powerful factor in their growth.
2d. — They are organized compactly and are under the
direction of one all powerful will. Officers abound. Every
officer has absolute control over all beneath him. At the
head stands the President, who is the Prophet, Revelator and
Seer. Near him stand his advisers, who can advise only.
Next comes the College of Apostles; next the seventy. These
are the general officers. Each district has its subordinate
organization.
Everywhere official promotion is the certain result of
efficiency in office already held. Scores of men are ap-
pointed to go out and serve as missionaries, says Bishop
Tuttle, every year; and they go usually without purse or
scrip, save such as they themselves provide. There are per-
haps two thousand such missionaries in the field to-day.
This compact organization helps it to grow.
vSrd. — Polygamy welds the Mormons together in a solid
unity, inasmuch as it separates between the Mormons and
the rest of the world; and inasmuch as having permeated
Mormon society it cannot be condemned without disgrace
either in one's self or kinsfolk. The very women who hate
it, know that its overthrow will affect tliemselves and their
daughters with dishonor.
Hence, while they published to the world that they had
Some Modern Isms. 41
ceased to contract polygamous marriages since Utah was
made a State, they still did make them, if outside witnesses
can be trusted. 'The Missionaries of the Northern Pres-
byterian Church, in the year 1898, found 2,000 polygamous
marriages that had been celebrated since Statehood was con-
ferred, and over 1,000 children bom of these marriages."
And these children are having Mormonism instilled into
them from their earliest years. Thus Mormonism grows.
It claimed 65,000 additions in the year 1898. The pro-
nunciation against future polygamy by President Smith in
the Annual Conference of 1904, cannot be taken as boua
fide, except with salt.
This growing monster, for a time fed chiefly on the peas-
antry of Europe, but alas! it is now preying on our own
land. Nor is it confining itself to the more out of the way
places and the homes of the illiterate and morally untrained.
It has become bolder. It commands newspapers in promi-
nent cities. It held a convention in the later nineties in
Atlanta, Georgia. A leading newspaper gave a broadside to
it, and no condemnation. The following cut is reproduced
from The Sun, Baltimore, Wednesday Morning, February 8,
1911.
From the Presbyterian of the South, of July 18, 1918,
we cite:
"After openly defying and after persistently defending
his own violation of the anti-polygamy statutes of the Fed-
eral government by marrvdng three women and after being
excluded from the House of Representatives, Brigham H.
Roberts, a Mormon, is now a khaki-clad government official
to serve as chaplain in our army."
These are but instances of the aggressions of Mormonism.
The people of the country should be aroused to the danger
of such.
If the people were properly instructed in God's truth com-
paratively few of them could be led off. But now vast num-
Some Modern Isms. 43
bers about us are as sheep having no shepherd. They are
the prey of wolves. We ought to teach God's truth and so
fill men's mind with it as to fortify them against such anti-
Christian religions, and we ought to expose Mormonism,
and we ought to pray to God to bring this pestiferous re-
ligion to naught, at once. What are you going to do
about it, my brethren? Carry this question with you. A
part of the responsibility for the future evil of Mormonism
rests on you. God help you to meet it! Amen.
44 Some Modern Isms.
Christian Science
I have endeavored in the following lectures to present as
a preliminary, Mrs. Eddy's definition of her ism, her alle-
gations as to its sources, characteristics, and proofs, and
then to give a systematic view of her teachings on ontology,
theology, anthropology, soteriology, eschatology, and healing.
I claim only very imperfect success, owing largely to the
impossibility of throwing into system drivellings so hetero-
geneous and inconsistent as Mrs. Eddy's are.
I crave, therefore, the indulgence of the hearer as I pro-
ceed, and particularly while I shall be dealing with the
preliminaries and with her ontology.
Some Modern Isms. 45
Literature on Christian Science
1. Science and Health.
2. Autobiography.
3. Manual of the First Church of Christ, Scientist.
4. Miscellaneous Writings. (All the foregoing are by Mrs
Eddy.)
5. W. P. McCorkle: Christian Science a False Christ
6. Marsten: The Mask of Christian Science.
7. Bates: Christian Science and Its Problems.
8. M. Twain: Christian Science.
9. Mrs. Eddy: Message to the Mother Church, June, 1902
46 Some Modern Isms.
Christian Science
Christian Science is the name given by Mrs. Mary Mason
Baker Glover Patterson Eddy, to her teaching.
I. In the study of her teaching we shall let the authoress
(1) define her caption of it, (2) tell how she got the matter
of it, (3) describe its character, (4) set forth her "tests"
of its truth:
(1) Of the term Christian Science, she says:
"The terms Divine Science, Spiritual Science, Christ
Science, or Christian Science, or Science alone, she (Mrs.
Eddy), employs interchangeably, according to the require-
ments of the context. These synonymous terms stand for
everything relating to God, the infinite, supreme, eternal
mind. It may be said, however, that the term Christian
Science relates especially to this science as applied to human-
ity. It reveals God not as the author of sin, sickness and
death, but as divine Principle, supreme Being, Mind, exempt
from all evil. It teaches that matter is the falsity, not the
fact, of existence; that nerves, brain, stomach, lungs, and
so forth, have — as matter — no intelligence, life or sensa-
tion," (pp. 20-21).*
She says, more briefly, "The term Christian Science was
introduced by the author to designate the scientific system
of Metaphysical healing," (p. 17).
She says again, "The chief stones in tlie temples of Chris-
tian Science are to be found in the following postulates;
that life is God, Good and not evil; that Soul is sinless not
to be found in body; that Spirit is not, and cannot be,
material; that life is not subject to death; that the real man
♦The reference to pasres in this lecture are to the pages of "Science
and Health," unless otherwise specified.
Some Modern Isms. 47
has no consciousness of material life or death,"' (p. 184).
(2) As to the origin of her ism the authoress says:
"The revelation consists of two parts:
1. The discovery of this Divine Science of Mind-healing,
through a spiritual sense of the Scriptures, and through the
teachings of the Comforter, as promised by the Master.
2. The proof, by present demonstration, that the so-called
miracles of Jesus did not specially belong to a dispensa-
tion now ended, but that they illustrate an ever-operative
divine Principle. The operation of this principle indicates
forever the Scientific order and continuity (p. 17).
"I therefore plant myself unreservedly on the teachings
of Jesus, of his Apostles, of the Prophets, and on the testi-
mony of the Science of mind. Other foundations there are
none. All other systems — systems based wholly or partly
on knowledge gained through the material senses — are reeds
shaken by the wind, not houses built on the rock.
"The theories I combat are these: (1) That all is
matter; (2) that matter originates in Mind, and is real as
Mind, possessing intelligence and life. The first theory,
that matter is everything, is quite as reasonable as the second,
that Mind and matter co-exist and co-operate. One only
of the following statements can be true: (1) that everything
is matter; (2) that ever}'thing is Mind. Which one is it?
"Matter and mind are antagonistic, and both have not
place and power. Only by understanding that there is but
one power — not two powers, matter and mind — are correct
and logical conclusions reached" (pp. 165-166).
"To grasp the reality and order of Being in its Science,
you must begin by reckoning God, Good, as the only Mind,
Life, Substance, Intelligence" (p. 171).
These quotations show that Mrs. Eddy claims to get her
teachings "through a spiritual sense of the Scriptures, and
through the teachings of the Comforter" — claims to get it
48 Some Modern Isms.
out of "the teachings of Jesus, of his Apostles, of the Proph-
ets" and out of "the testimony of the Sciences of Mind/'
She identifies "the teachings of the Comforter" with "the
testimony of the Science of Mind," i. e., with her own in-
spired teachings. (See p. 227).
What she represents as "the spiritual sense of the Scrip-
tures" is arbitrarily read by her into the Scriptures. They
contain no such sense as she asserts that they contain. Read
her "Key to the Scriptures," pp. 495-590, made up of com-
ments on parts of the first four chapters of Genesis and a
smaller portion of the Book of Revelation, and of a "Glos-
sary," in which she defines the senses in which she claims
to use certain terms. The character of her "exegesis" is
fairly illustrated by the following examples which have been
selected almost at random from the "Key," wherein she
tells us that "each text is followed by its spiritual interpre-
tation."
"Genesis 1:2: And the earth was without form, and
void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep, and the
Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."
"The divine Principles and idea constitute spiritual har-
mony — Heaven and eternity. In this universe of Truth,
matter is unknown. No supposition of error enters there.
Christian Science, the Word of God, saith to the darkness
upon the face of error, "God is All-in-all," and light ap-
pears in proportion as this is understood. It reveals the
eternal wonder — that infinite space is peopled with God's
ideas, reflecting Him in countless spiritual forms" (p. 497).
"Genesis 1:6: 'And God said: Let there be a firma-
ment in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters
from the waters.'
"Understanding is the spiritual firmament, whereby hu-
man conception distinguishes between Truth and error. The
divine Mind, not matter, creates all identities; and they are
Some Modern Isms. 49
forms of thought, the ideas of Spirit, present to Mind only,
never to mindless matter" (pp. 498-499).
''Genesis 1:24: And God said: 'Let the earth bring
forth the living creature after his kind — cattle and creep-
ing thing and beast of the earth, after his kind;' and it
was so."
"Spirit diversifies, classifies, and individualizes all
thoughts, which are as eternal as the mind conceiving them;
but the intelligence, existence, and continuity of each
thought remain in God the divinely creative Principle tliere-
of" (pp. 506-507).
"Genesis 1:25: And God created the beast of the earth
after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and everything
that creepeth on the earth after his kind; and God saw
that it was good."
"God inspires all forms of spiritual thought. His
thoughts are spiritual realities. Mortal mind — being non-
existent, and consequently outside the range of interminable
space — could not, by simulating deific power, invent the
divine thoughts, and afterwards recreate them on its own
plane; since nothing exists beyond the reach of all inclu-
sive infinity, wherein and whereof God is the sole creator.
He dwells in the realm of Mind, joyous in strength. His
infinite ideas run and disport themselves. In humility they
climb the heights of holiness. * * *
"Patience is symbolized by the tireless worm, creeping
slowly over lofty summits, persevering always in its intent.
The serpent of God's creating is neither subtle nor poisonous,
but a wise idea, charming in its adroitness; for love has no
elements of evil or poison to impart. Its ideas are subject
to the mind which formed them" (pp. 507-508).
On these interpretations I remark:
The sagest and the simplest should see that the Mother
of Christian Science put into the first chapter of Genesis
50 Some Modern Isms.
these vaporings. That chapter, in the first twenty-five verses,
gives a sublime account of the order of the creation of the
material world. But Mrs. Eddy, as has already cropped
out, teaches that there is no material world. Hence she has
deliberately set to work to break the force of the narrative
in Genesis I, by injecting teachings directly contradictory
to its real contents. In doing so, she betrays both conscious
imposture and insane egotism. She must have known, if
she had common sense, that Genesis I taught the reality of
matter and its creation, and not the vaporings which she pro-
claims; must have been guilty of conscious imposture. At
the same time only insane egotism could have moved her
to attempt this eisgesis for exegesis.
She is guilty of the same sort of doddering in dealing
with Genesis 2. Take, for example,
''Genesis, 2:6: But there went up a mist from the earth,
and watered the whole face of the ground."
The following is her spiritual comment on this passage:
"The Science and Truth of the divine creation have been
presented in the verses already considered; and now the
opposite error, a material view of creation, is to be set
forth. The second chapter of Genesis contains a state-
ment of this material view of God and the universe, which
is the exact opposite of Scientific Truth. The history of
error, or matter, if veritable, would set aside the omnipotence
of Spirit; but it is the false history, in contradistinction
to the true.
"The Science of the first record proves the incorrectness
of the second, for they are antagonistic. The first record
assigns all might and government to God, and endows man
out of His perfection and power. The second record chroni-
cles man as mutable and mortal — as having broken away
from deity, and as revolving in an orbit of his own. Exist-
ence, separate from Divinity, Science regards as impossible.
Some Modern Isms. 51
"This second record unmistakably gives the history of
error in its externalized forms, called life and intelligence
in matter. It records Pantheism, as opposed to the supremacy
of divine Spirit."
The hearer has already noted how this old dame miscon-
ceives, or at the least, misstates the orthodox teaching which
she opposes. She is not more unfair in characterizing the
orthodox view of the universe as Pantheistic in the com-
ment than her general treatment of orthodoxy.
"Genesis 2:7: And the Lord God (Jehovah) formed
man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nos-
trils the breath of life, and man became a living soul."
"Did the divine and infinite principle become a finite
deity, that He should now be called Jehovah? Mind has
man made both male and female, with a single command-
How then can a material organization become the basis
of man? How can the non-existent become the medium of
mind, and error be the enunciator of Truth? Matter is
not the reflection of Spirit, yet God is reflected in all His
creation. Is this addition to his creation real or unreal?
Is it the truth, or is it a lie, concerning man and God?"
"It must be the latter, for God presently curses the
ground. Could Spirit evolve its opposite, matter — and give
matter ability to sin and suffer? Is Spirit, God, injected
into dust, and eventually ejected at the demand of matter?
Does Spirit enter dust, and lose therein the divine nature
and omnipotence? Does mind, God, enter matter, to become
there a mortal sinner, animated by the breath of God? (pp.
517-518).
"Genesis 3 :16 : Unto the woman he said: I will multiply
thy sorrow^ and thy conception; in sorrow shalt thou bring
forth thy children and thy desire shall be to thy husband,
and he shall rule over thee."
"Divine Science deals its chief blow at the supposed Wci
52 Some Modern Isms.
terial foundations of life and intelligence. It dooms idola-
try. A belief in other gods, other creatures, and other crea-
tions, must go down before Christian Science. It unveils
the results of sin, as shown in sickness and death. When
will man pass through the open gate of Christian Science,
into the Heaven of Soul, the heritage of the first born among
men? Truth is indeed the way" (p. 527).
If old Mother Eddy can get these vaporings out of these
verses, or, on an occasion of reading them, she could as
easily get them every one out of "Mary had a little lamb."
She says, indeed: "The Divine Science taught in the origi-
nal language of the Bible came through inspiration, and
needs inspiration to be understood, p. 215. That is, she
would close the mouths of her followers when they are
tempted to recalcitrate against the imposture of her "in-
terpretations," by the claim that she speaks the mind of
God. But the claim of inspiration on her part is insuffi-
cient, God could not stultify himself by teaching that in the
sublime account of the creation of the material universe be
meant to teach that no such thing as matter exists. If the
Scriptures yield Christian Science, only as she interprets
them, it is plain that they are not a source of it at all.
Only an impostor and a cheat could pretend that they teach
any such stuff as she teaches. As a matter of fact, they
contradict every distinctive feature of Christian Science.
Her dodderings about Gen. 2:7 show that she hates tlie
Bible and especially those parts more plainly against such
dodderings.
Another pretended source is the "teachings of the Com-
forter," "the testimony of the Science of Tvlind," her own
"understanding of mind." Her own understanding of mind
is claimed to be source of all in lier teaching which is not
found in the Scriptures.
But it has been charged and ably maintained, that she de-
Some Modern Isms. 53
rived the essential points of her theory of mental healing
and even the term "Christian Science," from Dr. Phineas
P. Quimby, of Portland, Maine. The charge seems to be
proven by conclusive testimony. See the Arena for May,
1899, also W. P. McCorkle, Christian Science, a False Christ,
pp. 43-45.
It is charged and made equally probable that she borrowed
the theosophical and Pantheistical element which her teach-
ing contains, as will be shown, notwithstanding her denials,
from Oriental and ancient Gnostic sources; that her teach-
ing in this sphere is singularly like Madam Blavatsky's, in
regard both to matter and phraseology; that their definitions
of God, their doctrines of creation, and of man, their doc-
trines of grace, and of the future life, their discounts of the
material senses, are all singularly alike; that in all these
particulars they have adopted the doctrinal system of the
ancient Gnostics. Says Dr. Wm. P. McCorkle:
"Mrs. Eddy teaches them, if anything, more definitely
than does Madame Blavatsky; but the latter does not hesi-
tate to claim kinship with Gnostics in general and with
Simon Magus in particular, identifying her system with
theirs." Christian Science, a False Christ, p. 265. See
also "An Old Enemy With Two New Faces," in the Pres-
byterian Quarterly, April, 1899.
It is pretty clear that her understanding of the divine
Mind is only through Oriental Pantheists and ancient
Gnostics.
She contends that her cures are the sufficient proof of the
correctness of her teachings; but a thoughtful man can see
in her cures no greater proofs of the correctness of her teach-
ings than that Francis Schlatter spoke by inspiration be-
cause many praised him for having released them from the
thraldom of disease, or than that the Negro woman in New
York, who worked wonders with "grease taken from the
54 Some Modern Isms.
tail of a black cat that had died with its throat cut," was
inspired to teach men the way of life. Her well-attested
cures were such as have been wrought over and over again
by people who believed and taught the contradictiories of
her theories.
(3) She describes the character of her teaching further
by declaring: "In Christian Science are no discords, or
contradictions, because its logic is as harmonious as the
reasoning of an accurately stated syllogism, or a properly
computed sum in arithmetic," (p. 22). She describes it
further (in which perhaps her lust for gain speaks out), as
follows :
"x\ Christian Scientist requires my work on Science and
Health for his text-book, and so do all his students and
patients. Why? First, because it is the voice of Truth to
this age, and contains the whole of Christian Science, or
the Science of healing through Mind. Second, because it
was the first published book containing a statement of Chris-
tian Science, gave the first rules for demonstrating this
Science, and registered this revealed Truth, uncontaminated
with human hypotheses. Other works which have borrowed
from this book without giving it credit, have adulterated
the Science. Third, because this work has done more for
teacher and student, for healer and patients, than has been
accomplished by other works" (p. 453).
We have already seen that the distinctive teachings of
her book appear to have been stolen from Quimby, from
Oriental theosophists and ancient Gnostics; and that she
endeavored to support these teachings by imposed "spiritual
senses" on certain Scriptures, notwithstanding the patent
fact that these ver>' Scriptures cut the ground from beneath
her teaching.
As to the logical character of her teaching, it would be
hard, in all the range of literature, to find more inconse-
Some Modern Isms. 55
quent writing, and more numerous fallacies considering the
size of her book, than are to be found in "Science and
Health." Take this as a fair instance of the logical char-
acter of her writing:
"Mind creates its own likeness in ideas, and the sub-
stance of an idea is very far from being the supposed sub-
stance of non-intelligent matter. Hence the Father of INIind
is not the Father of Matter," p. 153; or again,
"The mortality of Matter establishes the conclusion that
matter never originates, never did originate, in the immortal
* ^ ^ Matter is therefore not created by Mind, or for
the manifestations and support of mind" (p. 175).
This prophetess is often guilty of the fallacy known as
the logical quadruped. That Mrs. Eddy is not only guilty
of formal fallacies but reasons from false premises as well,
will appear still more clearly as we proceed.
(4) She talks much of the tests, or proof, of Faith, i. e.,
of Christian Science. She says, "These proofs consist solely
in the destruction of sin, sickness, and death, by the power
of the Spirit, as Jesus destroyed them," pp. 128-129; "The
proof that the system herein stated is Christianly Scientific
resides in the good it accomplishes; for it cures on a demon-
strable principle which all may understand," pp. 538-539.
She apparently sets forth another criterion of Truth, on p.
22, "If you wish to know the spiritual fact, you can discover
it by reversing the material testimony, be it pro or con — be
it in accord with your preconceptions, or utterly contrary
thereto."
Mark Twain well says of the book, Science and Health:
"Without ever presenting anything which may rightfully
be called by the strong name of Evidence, and sometimes
without even mentioning a reason for a deduction at all, it
thunders out the startling words: "I have proved" so and
so. It takes the Pope and all the great guns of his Church
56 Some Modern Isms.
in battery assembled to authoritatively settle and establish
the meaning of a sole and single unclarified passage of
Scriptures, and this at vast cost of time and study and
reflection, but the author of this work is superior to all
that. She finds the whole Bible in an unclarified condi-
tion, and at small expense of time and no expense of mental
effort she clarifies it from lid to lid, recognizes and improves
the meanings, then authoritatively settles and establishes
them with formulas which you cannot tell from "Let there
be light!" "Here you have it." It is the first time since
the dawn-days of Creation that a Voice has gone crashing
through space with such placid and complacent confidence
and command." Mark Twain, Christian Science, pp. 30-32.
We have seen that her cures are no sign that she speaks
the truth; and it will require more than her ipse dixit to do
away with the validity of the testimony of our senses, since
we must trust them, to receive her teaching, through written
or spoken word.
II. In the further study of her teaching let us consider
her "Ontology," or ''Metaphysics."
She says: "Ontology receives less attention than physi-
ology. Why? Because mortal mind must waken to spiritual
life, before it cares to solve the problem of Being," p. 548.
"Ontology is defined as 'the science of the necessary con-
stituents and relations of all beings,' and it underlies ail
metaphysical practice. Our system of Mind-healing rests
on the apprehension of the nature and essence of all Be-
ing — on mind and its essential qualities," p. 456. ''Meta-
physics is above physics and matter does not enter into
metaphysical premises or conclusions. Its categories rest
on one basis, namely, the divine Mind. T^Ietaphysics re-
solves things into thoughts, and exchanges the objects of
sense for the ideas of soul. . . . Matter and Mind
Some Modern Isms. 57
are antagonistic, and both have not place or power. Only
by understanding that there is but one power— not two
powers, matter and Mind — are correct and logical conclu-
sions reached" pp. 165-166. "All forms of error support
the false conclusions that there is more than one life; that
material history is as real and living as spiritual history;
that mortal error is as conclusively mental as immortal
Truth; and that there are two separate, antagonistic entities
and beings; two powers — namely, Spirit and matter — result-
ing in a third person (mortal man), who carries out the
delusions of sin, sickness and death." "Such theories are
evidently erroneous," p. 100. "All real Being is in the
divine Mind and idea;" a "false sense evolves, in belief, a
subjective state of mortal mind, which this same mind calls
matter. . . . Mind is all, and matter is naught. . . .
the only realities are the divine Mind and Idea," which idea
she holds to be man, p. 23.
The heart of her ontological teaching comes out in her
doctrine of God. She says, "The starting-point of Science
is that God, Spirit is supreme, and that there is no other
might or Mind — that God is love, and therefore He is divine
Principle" (p. 171). "God is supreme Being, the only
life, substance, and soul, the only Intelligence of the uni-
verse, including man" (p. 225). "God is what the Scrip-
tures declare Him to be — Life, Truth, Love. God is Spirit
and Spirit is divine Principle. Principle is divine Mind,
and Mind is not both good and bad, for God is mind;
therefore Mind is God only, and there is but one mind, be-
cause there is but one God," (p. 226). "Man was and is
God's idea, even the infinite expression of the infinite Mind,
and coexistent and coeternal with that Mind. Man has been
forever in the eternal Mind, God; but infinite mind can
never be in man, though made manifest through him. Man's
consciousness and individualitv are reflections of God. Thev
58 Some Modern Isms.
are emanations of Him who is Life, Truth, Love. Idea
was and is never material, but always spiritual and eternal"
(p. 231). "God and man, Principle and idea, are insep-
arable, harmonious and eternal" (p. 232). "All is infinite
Mind and its infinite manifestation, for God is All-in-all.
Spirit is immortal truth; matter is mortal error. Spirit is
the real and eternal; matter is the unreal and temporal.
Spirit is God, and man is his image and likeness; hence
man is spiritual and not material. . . . "The spiritual
universe, including man, is a compound yet individual idea,
reflecting the divine Substance of Spirit (p. 464). "God
is the Principle of man and man is the idea of God" (p.
472). "Soul (God) is the Substance, Life and Intelligence
of man. . . . Man is the expression of God, Soul.
Separated from man, who expresses Soul, Spirit
would be a non-entity. Man divorced from Spirit, would
lose his entity; but there is, there can be, no such division,
for man is so-existent with God, and God is Spirit (p. 473).
Remark :
1st. These quotations show that she held an idealism
like Berkeley's, in that she denied the existence of matter,
but unlike Berkeley's in that while he affirmed that mate-
rial nature, in its ultimate analysis, is but a conscious ex-
perience — produced in the creature by the activity of God,
she held that material nature is the creature of "Mortal
Mind," which itself is an unreality as truly as its creation.
2d. These quotations also show, notwithstanding her dis-
claimers, that she was a Pantheist. They teach over and
over again that God is the only mind — the only life, sub-
stance, soul. They teach that God is the substance, life, in-
telligence, Principle of man.
These and scores of other passages leave one in doubt as
to whether God Himself was in her view more than Thought
— as to whether she did not resolve God Himself into idea.
Some Modern Isms. 59
Certainly she seems often to make no distinction 'oetween
substance and attribute, but to identify every attribute with
every other, and each with substance. She avows at times
that she resolves things into thoughts. Compare what she
calls a definition of God, on p. 9. "God=Principle, Life,
Truth, Love, Soul, Spirit, Mind." She is not always con-
sistent, but speaks sometimes as if she held to absolute
Pantheistic Idealism.
These quotations show that creation by God was turned
into emanation from God, by her, another ear-mark of the
Pantheist. (See pp. 50 and 51 of this lecture).
They teach that, separated from man, God would be a
non-entity; that He and man, His universe, are necessarily
co-eternal.
These quotations show that God had no personality in
Mrs. Eddy's conception; that he was only Truth, Love, In-
telligence, Spirit, Principle. She more clearly teaches tlie
same view, when she declares, that God is identical with
nature. . . . that God is natural Good (p. 13); when
she stigmatizes the orthodox idea of God as personal, as
''anthropomorphism, or humanization of Deity" (p. 510);
and when she contrasts "interpreting God as a corporeal
Savior" (a misrepresentation of the orthodox view), and as
"the saving Principle" (p. 181).
She betrays her Pantheism in another way:
In addition to that which has been incidentally brought
out as to her views of man's being, she teaches: "Man is
neither young nor old. He has neither birth nor death.
He is not a beast, a vegetable, or a migratory mind. He
does not pass from the mortal to the immortal, from evil to
good, or from good to evil" (p. 140). "When God ex-
pressed in man the infinite idea, forever developing itself,
broadening and rising higher and higher from a boundless
basis, He created everything that is to be found in the
60 Some Modern Isms.
Kingdom of Mind. We know no more of man's individual-
ity, as the true divine image and likeness, than we know of
God's" (p. 154). Men "represents the sum of all substance
or infinite Mind" (p. 155). "Rightly understood, instead
of possessing a sentient material form, man has a sensation-
less body, and God, the Soul of man and of existence, is
perpetual in His own individuality, harmony and immor-
tality, thus perpetuating these qualities in man" (p. 176).
"Man is spiritual. He is not God, Spirit. If man were
Spirit, then men would be spirits, gods" (p. 259). "God is
the principle of Man; and the Principle of man rendering
perfect its idea, or reflection — man — remains perfect. Man
is the expression of God's being. If there was ever a mo-
ment when man expressed not this perfection, he could not
have expressed God; and there would have been a time
when Deity was without entity. Being. If man has lost
perfection, he has lost his Principle, or Mind. If man ever
existed without Principle, or Mind, then his existence was
a myth" (p. 466). "Man is the idea of divine Principle,
not physique. He is the compound idea of God, including
all right ideas; the generic term for all that reflects God's
image and likeness; the conscious identity of Being, as found
in Science, where man is the reflection of God or Mind, and
therefore is eternal; that which has no separate mind from
God; that which has not a single quality underived from
Deity; that which possesses no life, intelligence, or creative
power of his own, but reflects all that belongs to his Maker.
Man is incapable of sin, sickness and death, inas-
much as he derives his essence from God, and possesses not
a single original, or underived power" (p. 471). "Man is
the infinite idea of infinite Spirit" (p. 582).
From these and scores of similar passages, it is clear, again,
that Mrs. Eddy is a Pantheist. If she represents in one
breath, man as God's eternal idea, not God Himself, in the
Some Modern Isms. 61
next she teaches that man has no separate mind from God;
that man's intelligence is God's intelligence; that in man
resides the "conscious identity of being," that is, that the
only consciousness which God has of His own identity is
the consciousness which man has. True she sometimes con-
tradicts herself roundly, as when she says: "God is the
Only Life, and Life is no more in the forms which express
it than substance is in the shadow" (p. 226); or when she
says again? "Man reflects and expresses the divine Sub-
stance or Mind; but God is not in his reflection any more
than man is in the mirror which reflects his image," (pp.
196-197). She even tells us why she denies the immanence
of God in man: that, "if He dwelt within what He creates,
God would not be reflected, but absorbed," and so forth (p.
226). She contradicts herself but what are contradictions
to this prophetess? Her insane egotism makes her regard-
less of the eternal laws of thought. She speaks and expects
human sheep to bleat an amen.
3d. From the passages quoted, and more like them, she
teaches the impersonality of man: "He is the infinite idea
of the infinite God." U a person at all, since he is an
infinite idea, he would be an infinite person, and God being
infinite, we would have two infinite persons. But we have
already seen that Mrs. Eddy rejects the notion of person-
ality as applied to God as anthropomorphic. Of man she is
willing to predicate a sort of individuality but no personality.
From this point of view it is hard to understand her
fear of anthropomorphism, should she predicate the per-
sonality of God. Man she denies to be personal.
She teaches that man was never created, never fell, never
recovered to communion with God, is eternal, sinless, per-
fect, non-personal, unaccountable. In making each of these
predications, she would force us to deny the teachings of
Scripture, uninspired history, personal experience, or con-
62 So:me Modern Isms.
sciousness, and sometimes all of them. Thus she asserts
man's sinlessness, which is contradicted by the teachings
of Scripture, histor)-, consciousness and conscience.
4th. (Passing now to her ontology of the unreal) :
"On these questions of ontology, Mortal mind hath wrought
vast confusion, "according to Mrs. Eddy. She tells us:
"The term mortal mind is a solecism in language; and in-
volves an improper use of the word mind. As mind is im-
mortal, the phrase mortal mind implies something untrue
and therefore unreal; and as the phrase is used in teaching
Christian Science, it is meant to designate something which
has no real existence'' (p. 8) : "Mortal mind and body are
one. Neither exists without the other. . . . Mortal
matter, or body, is but a false concept of mortal mind. It
(mortal mind) builds its own superstructure, of which the
material body is the grosser and more basal portion; but
from first to last this body is only a material and sensuous
belief" (p. 70). "The fading forms of matter, the mortal
body and earth are the fleeting thoughts of the human mind"
(p. 160).
Truly mortal mind is a strange sort of tiling — identical
with body, which is its own false concept, self-evolving, hav-
ing in the body its grosser and more basal portion, this body
being only a material and sensuous belief!
This unreal thing — unlike anything, I freely grant, in
the whole realm of substantive, or factual existence — is re-
sponsible, according to the much married prophetess for a
vast number of things which people of common-sense regard
as realities, which she considers as utter unrealities.
She makes mortal mind responsible for Adam and every-
thing which has sprung from him. Hear some of her sage
statements: "The word Adam is from the Hebrew Adamah,
signifying the red color of the ground, dust, nothingnesis.
Divide the name Adam into two syllables, and it reads a
Some Modern Isms. 63
dam, or obstruction. This suggests the thought of some-
thing fluid, of mortal mind in solution, of the darkness which
seemed to appear, when 'darkness was upon the face of the
deep,' and matter stood as opposed to Spirit, as that which
is accursed; and from this earth, or matter, sprang Adam"
(p. 233). "Adam, the synonym for error, stands for a be-
lief of material mind. He begins his reign over man some-
what mildly, but increases in falsehood as his days become
shorter' (p. 522).
5th. Not only does mortal, or material mind produce mat-
ter and Adam, Mrs. Eddy claims that it has been "Scienti-
fically established that leprosy was a creation of mortal
mind" (p. 217), that "if the lungs are disappearing, this
is but one of the beliefs of mortal mind;" that "mortal man
will be less mortal when he learns that the lungs never sus-
tained existence, and can never destroy God who is our
Life" (p. 423). "From human belief comes the reproduc-
tion of the species. . . . This embryotic and material-
istic belief in turn fills itself with thoughts of pain and
pleasure, of life and death, and arranges itself into five
senses, which presently measure belief by the size of a brain,
called mind, and the bulk of a body called matter.'' "Human
birth, growth and decay are as the grass springing from
the soil, with beautiful green blades — afterwards to wither
and to return to its native nothingness. This mortal seem-
ing is temporal, and never emerges into immortal being" (p.
....). It makes us believe that we are "fatigued" (p. 113),
or that we are sinful.
Some of these vaporings would seem to come of her
premises. She holds that God is all, that God is good, that
God is Spirit and life, that God is unchangeable. Hence, for
her, there can be no real weariness, sickness, or sin, and no
body or matter; but her premises are wrong and her inferences
untrust worth}- and contradictory to the views of God (as ex-
64 Some Modern Isms.
pressed in His word) and of man. Her teachings on on-
tology are a dump-heap of worthless and conflicting imagin-
ings.
III. Her substitutes for the doctrines of the Christian
Scriptures.
We shall group these under the heads: 1st, Theological
(in the narrow sense); 2d, Anthropological; 3d, Soteriologi-
cal; 4th, Ecclesiological ; 5th, Eschatological.
1st. Theological:
(1) We have already seen that she teaches Pantheism. She
says further, on page 8, of Rudiments and Rules, "I prefer
to retain a proper sense of deity by using the phrase an
individual God, rather than a personal God." She seemed
unable to conceive of personality except as united to body,
which she regarded as an illusion.
(2) She says of the Trinity: "The theory of three per-
sons in one God (that is a personal Trinity, or Triunity),
suggests heathen Gods, rather than the one ever-present I
Am" (p. 152). "Life, Truth and Love constitute the triune
God, or triply divine Principle. They represent a trinity
in unity; three in one — the same in essence, though multi-
form in office: God the Father; Christ the type of Sonship;
Divine Science, or the Holy Comforter" (p. 227).
When it is shown, as will be done a little later, that Christ
was, in her view, an emanation similar to your self, as she sees
things, but recognizing better its character; and when you
remember that the Divine Science, which is Christian Science,
is the Holy Ghost, you will, of course, see that the Christian
doctrine of the Trinity has been swept away.
(3) Mrs. Eddy lucubrates about what she calls creation.
She says, e. g., "Mind creates its own likeness in ideas, and
the substance of an idea is very far from being the supposed
substance of non-intelligent matter. Hence the Father of
Mind is not the Father of matter. The material .senses and
Some Modern Is:Nrs. 65
human conceptions would translate spiritual ideas into ma-
terial beliefs, and say that an anthropomorphic god, instead
of infinite Principles, is the Fatlier of the brain" (p. 155).
"Is Spirit the source, or creator, of matter? Science reveals
nothing in Spirit out of which to create matter. Science re-
pudiates matter (p. 174). She does not seem to have caught
the conception of de nihilo creation. In this passage she
talks as if creation were a mere making. So, again, she
says: "Does God create man, who is called material, out
of Himself, Spirit? . . . Can evil be derived from
good? (p. 302). She betrays her Pantheism, showing that
her notion of creation is that of the Pantheists, in passages
not a few, e. g., in this: "According to Christian Science,
the true senses of man are spiritual, emanating from the
divine mind" (p. 180).
(4) As for Providence, she has no place for it and, in-
deed, denies that there are special providences (pp. 648 and
13). She is consistent here. The Pantheist can know no
providence. He says: "God goes on eternally, necessarily,
but God is all."
How different is this theology proper from that of the
Christian Scriptures :
"God is a spirit, infinite, eternal and unchangeable, in his
being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth."
"There are three persons in the Godhead, the Father, the
Son and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one God, the
same in substance, equal in power and glory."
"God's work of creation is his making all things of noth-
ing by the word of his power, in the space of six days, and
all very good."
"God's works of providence are his most holy, wise, and
powerful, preserving and governing all his creatures and all
their actions."
It is convenient to notice her treatment of angels and
demons, at this point.
66 Some Modern Isms.
She says: "Angels are God's impartations to man — not
messengers, or persons, but messages of the true idea of
divinity, flowing into humanity" (p. 195). "Jacob was
alone, wresting with error . . . when an angel, a mes-
sage from Truth and Love, appeared to him, and smote the
sinew, or strength of his error, till it was powerless'' (p. 204).
According to her, the devil is "personified evil" (p. 302).
She defines "Devil" as "Evil," a lie, error; neither corpo-
reality nor mind; the opposite of truth; a belief in sin,
sickness and death; animal magnetism; the lust of the flesh,
which saith: "I am life and intelligence in matter. There
is more than one mind, for I am mind — a wicked mind, self-
made or created by Jehovah, and put into the opposite of
mind termed matter, thence to reproduce a mortal universe,
including man, not after the image and likeness of Spirit,
but after my own image" (p. 575).
According to the Scriptures, Angels are pure spiritual per-
sonal beings, and the Devil, is one who was such a being,
but who plunged into sin.
2d. Anthropological, or the doctrines concerning man
when first created, concerning his fall, concerning man as
a sinner.
(1) We have clearly seen that, according to Mrs. Eddy,
man is not a creation of a different substance, or substances,
from God, but an eternal emanation from God, His infinite
idea, or reflection; that man is not to be described as per-
sonal, we being no more able to see what constitutes per-
sonality in his case than in God's; that he is as unchange-
able as God; that he cannot be a sinner, since God cannot
sin and God is the substance of man.
(2) We have already seen, that according to her evil-
spiritual, or physical — is an illusion, a non-entity. But hear
her further:
"Since God is x\ll, there is no room for his opposite. He
Some Modern Isms. 67
alone created the real, and it is good; therefore evil, being
the opposite of goodness is unreal" (p. 234). "Evil has
no reality. It is neither person, place, nor thing, but is
simply a belief, an illusion of material sense" (p. 237).
Contrast with this Scriptural Anthropology:
"God created man after his own image, in knowledge,
righteousness and holiness, with dominion over the crea-
tures."
"Man being left to the freedom of his own will, fell
from the estate wherein he was created into an estate of sin
and misery by sinning against God."
"Sin is any want of conformity unto or transgression of
the law of God."
"The sinfulness of that estate whereunto man fell con-
sists in the guilt of Adam's first sin, the want of original
righteousness, and the corruption of his whole nature, which
is commonly called original sin, together with all actual
transgressions which do proceed from it."
"All mankind by their fall lost communion with God,
are under his wrath and curse, and so made liable to all
the miseries of this life, to death itself and to the pains of
hell forever."
"God having out of his mere good pleasure, from all
eternity, elected some to everlasting life, did enter into a
covenant of grace to deliver them out of the estate of sin
and misery and to bring them into an estate of salvation
by a Redeemer."
3d. Ethical Doctrines.
Mrs. Eddy's ethical doctrines may be summed up in the
maxim: Gather dollars for the Christian Science Monopoly
— for Mrs. Eddy and her glory. Mark twain puts the
motto of Christian Science as follows: "Do anything and
everything your hand may find to do; and charge cash for
it; and collect the monev for it in advance (Christian
68 Some Modern Isms.
Science, p. 79), He might have added to this motto: In
gathering the cash, despise all laws of God or man, as
far as is compatible with safety.
She contributed nothing to the relief of the poor, nor
taught her disciples to do so. Says Mark Twain:
"No charities to support. No, nor even to contribute to.
One searches in vain the Trust's advertisements and the
utterances of its organs for any suggestion that it spends
a penny on orphans, wadows, discharged prisoners, hospitals,
ragged schools, night missions, city missions, libraries, old
peoples- homes, or any other object that appeals to a human
being's purse through his heart.
'T have hunted, hunted and hunted, by correspondence
and otherwise, and have not yet got upon the track of a
farthing that the Trust has spent upon any worthy ob-
ject. Nothing makes a Scientist so uncomfortable as to
ask him if he knows of a case where Christian Science has
spent money on a benevolence, either among its own adher-
ents or elsewhere. He is obliged to say "No." And then
one discovers that the person questioned has been asked the
question many times before, and that it is getting to be a
sore subject wdth him. Why a sore subject? Because he
has written his chiefs and asked with high confidence for
an answer that will confound these questioners — and the
chiefs did not reply. He has written again, and then
again — not with confidence, but humbh', now — and has
begged for defensive ammunition in the voice of supplica-
tion. A reply does at last come — to this effect: 'We
must have faith in our Mother, and rest content in the
conviction that whatever She does with the money it is in
accordance with orders from Heaven, for She does no act
of any kind without first 'demonstrating over' it."
"That settles it — as far as the disciple is concerned. Hi^
i^iind is satisfied with that answer; he gets down his Annex
Some Modern Isms. 69
and does an incantation or two, and that mesmerizes liis
spirit and puts that to sleep — brings it peace. Peace and
comfort and joy, until some inquirer punctures the old sore
again.
"Through friends in America, I asked some questions,
and in some cases got definite and mfomiing answers; in
other cases the answers were not definite and not valuable.
To the question, 'Does any of the money go to charities?'
the answer from an authoritative source was : 'No, not in
the sense usually conveyed by this word.' (The italics are
mine). That answer is cautious. But definite, I think —
utterly and unassailably definite — although quite Christian-
Scientifically foggy in its phrasing. Christian Science testi-
mony is generally foggy; generally diffuse, generally garrul-
ous. The writer was aware that the first word in his phrase
answered the question which I was asking, but he could not
help adding nine dark words. Meaningless ones, unless ex-
plained by him. It is quite likely, as intimated by him, that
Christian Science has invented a new class of objects to
apply the word "charity" to, but without an explanation we
cannot know what they are. We quite easily and naturally
and confidently guess that they are in all cases objects which
will return five hundred per cent, on the Trust's investment
in them, but guessing is not knowledge; it is merely, in
this case, a sort of nine-tenths certainty deducible from
what we think we know of the Trust's trade principles, and
its sly and furtive and shifty ways" (Christian Science, pp.
75-78).
4th. Soteriological doctrines, or her doctrines of Salvation.
(1) Mrs. Eddy gives to Jesus Christ small place in man's
salvation. She could not openly displace him absolutely
without handicapping herself in the endeavor to win nomi-
nal Christians to her false and anti-Christian ism. She
needed them in order to get their verv material dollars.
70 Some Modern Isms.
She teaches that in Christ Jesus there were two elements.
Hear her: "Jesus was the highest human concept of a per-
fect man. He was inseparable from Christ, the Messiah —
the divine idea of God — outside the flesh. This also ena-
bled him to demonstrate, above all other men, his control
over matter. . . . Angels announced to the wise men
of old this dual appearing, and they whisper it, through faith
to the hungering heart in every age" (p. 478). "The Christ
element in the Messiah made him the way, the Truth, and
Life (p. 184); "That saying of our Master, T and my
Father are one, 'separated them from the scholastic theology
of the Rabbis. ... He knew of but one Mind, and
laid no claim to any other" (p. 210). "Jesus was born
of Mary, Christ was born of God. Jesus was a mediator
between humanity and Spirit" (p. 227). "The divine idea,
or Christ, was, and is, and ever will be inseparable from its
divine Principle, God" (p. 229). "Christ is the idea of
Truth, and this idea comes to heal sickness and sin, through
Christian Science, which denies corporeal power. Jesus is
the name of the man who has presented, more than all
other men, this idea of God, for he came healing the sick
and the sinful, and destroying power of death" (p. 469).
As to the errors in this basket of trash : I shall deal with
only one of them. She abuses John 10:30, "I and the
Father are one" to try to get out of it support for the cro-
chet that there is but one mind. These words of Christ
are full of meaning: "It is I, not the Son, the Father, not
my Father; one essence (Hen, Vulg. Unum) ; not one person
(Heis, Gal. 3:28, unus); are not am." Christ is here re-
vealed of the substance of the Godhead. But the passage
does not at all teach that there is only one mind or soul,
which is God, in all men. The context makes it plain that
the thought was quite otherwise. The Jews were just then
giving evidence of their unbelief and hostility.
Some Modern Isms. 71
Mrs. Eddy almost always keeps far away from Scripture.
She was evidently much more afraid of it than of the Devil,
evil or anything for which the Devil stands, in her voca-
bulary. But whenever she touches it, she muddies it.
(2) His work was that of the "Way-shower," according
to Mrs. Eddy's teaching, that of a Mrs. Eddy before Mrs.
Eddy's time, less perfect than she, as he labored under the
"illusion" that he had a body and that there were such
realities as sin and death. He made an atonement between
man and God, in that he "taught and demonstrated" man's
oneness with the Father — "Man's unity with God, whereby
he reflects divine Truth, Life and Love" — in that he showed
that man is not, and cannot be a sinner, since God is his
substance, and he God's eternal idea. She teaches that his
atonement destroys belief in matter (pp. 324, 325); destroys
selfishness (p. 326), destroys sin, sickness and death (p.
3.24), shows mortals how to do their work (p. 323) ; but she
denied that he suffered vicariously; "Final deliverance from
error — whereby we rejoice in immortality, boundless free-
dom, and sinless sense — is neither reached through paths of
flowers, nor by pinning one's faith to vicarious effort. Who-
soever believeth that wrath is righteous, or that divinity is
appeased by human suffering, does not understand God" (p.
327). "That God's wrath should be vented on his beloved
Son is divinely unnatural. Such a theory is man-made.
The atonement is a hard problem in theology; but its more
reasonable explanation is, that suffering is an error of sinful
sense, which Truth destroys, and that eventually both sin
and suffering will fall at the feet of everlasting love" (p.
328).
This is another basket of trash: That "Christ was less
perfect than Mrs. Eddy; that he made atonement only "by
teaching and demonstrating man's oneness with the Father,
showing that man cannot be a sinner since God is his sub-
72 Some Modern Isms.
stance; that he did not suffer vicariously for men; that God's
wrath could never have been poured out on his Son, or on
man; that suffering is no reality.
It deserves nothing but a puff of contempt. It is sup-
ported solely by Mrs. Eddy's assertions.
(3) She teaches accordingly that "with God there is no
such thing as pardon. Divine love destroys death. Truth
destroys error, and Love destroys hate. Being destroyed, sin
needs no other form of forgiveness" (p. 234). "Sin is for-
given only as it is destroyed by Christ — Truth, Love." . . .
"The divine Love corrects and governs man. Men may
pardon, but this divine Principle alone reforms the sinner.
God is not separate from the wisdom He bestows. The
talents he gives we must improve. Calling on him to for-
give our work badly done or left undone, implies the vain
supposition that we have nothing to do but to ask pardon,
and that afterwards we shall be free to repeat the offence"
(p. 311). "To reach Heaven, the Harmony of Being, we
must understand the divine Principle of being" (p. 311),
This shuts everybody out of heaven.
(4) Salvation, she teaches, is to be sought through re-
form and good works. Thus she says: "By interpreting
God as a corporeal Savior" (she means personal Savior),
"but not as the saving Principle, we shall continue to seek
salvation through pardon, and not through reform, and re-
sort to matter, instead of Spirit, for the cure of the sick"
(p. 181). "We must work out our own salvation" (pp.
651 and 424).
She must be classed roughly with Pelagians on this point.
(5) The great saving instrumentality is not faith, ac-
cording to Mrs. Eddy, but understanding. She says:
"Faith advanced to spiritual understanding, is the evidence
gained from Spirit, which rebukes material beliefs, and
establishes the claims of God.
Some Modern Isms. 73
"In Hebrew, Greek, Latin and English, faith and the
words corresponding thereto, have these two definitions,
trustfulness and trustworthiness. One kind of faith trusts
our welfare to another being. The other kind of faith un-
derstands how to work out one's own 'salvation, with fear
and trembling.' 'Lord, I believe, help, thou, my unbelief I'
expresses the helplessness of a blind faith; whereas the in-
junction, 'Believe and thou shalt be saved,' demands self-
reliant trustworthiness which includes the understanding and
confides all to God.
"The Hebrew verb to believe means also to be P.rm or to
be constant. This certainly applies to Truth and Love, un-
derstood and practiced. Firmness in error will never save
from sin, disease and death."
"Acquaintance with the original texts, and willingness to
give up human beliefs (established by hierarchies and insti-
gated sometimes by the worst passions of men), open the
way for Christian Science to be understood and make the
Bible the chart of Life, to mark healing currents and buoys
of Truth" (pp. 328-329). "Spirit understands, and thus
precludes the need of believing. . . . The believer and
belief are one, and are mortal mind. . . . The under-
standing that Life is God lengthens our days by strength-
ening our trust in the deathless reality of life, its Almighty-
ness and immortality" (p. 483).
Thus we have a false gnosis put in the place of faith of
mind and heart and will.
(6) She makes the Holy Ghost, as we have seen, Divine
Science (p. 579).
(7) It has become abundantly clear that that which man
is to be saved from is his illusions of sin, sickness and
death. He is to learn that there are no realities correspond-
ing to these terms.
Contrast the Biblical soteriology:
74 Some Modern Isms.
"The only Redeemer of God's elect is the Lord Jesus
Christ, who being the eternal Son of God, became man and
so was and continued to be God and man in two distinct
natures and one person forever." "Christ executeth the
office of a prophet in revealing to us, by his word and
spirit, the will of God for our salvation." "Christ execut-
eth the office of a Priest in his once offering up of him-
self, a sacrifice to satisfy divine justice and reconcile us to
God, and in making continued intercession for us. Christ
executeth the office of a King in subduing us unto himself
in ruling and defending us, and in restraining and con-
quering all his and our enemies." Him "God hath set
forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to
declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are
past, through the forbearance of God." "By grace are ye
saved through faith and that not of yourselves; it is the
gift of God; not of works lest any man should boast."
"Faith in Jesus Christ is a saving grace whereby we re-
ceive and rest on Christ for salvation as he is offered to us
in the Gospel."
"Effectual calling is the work of God's Spirit, whereby
convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds
in the knowledge of Christ and renewing our wills, he doth
persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ freely of-
fered to us in the Gospel."
5th. Ecclesiological doctrines.
(1) Mrs. Eddy defines the Church as "the structure of
Truth and Love; whatever rests upon and proceeds from
divine Principle." "The Church is that institution which
affords proof of its utility, and is found elevating the race,
rousing the dormant understanding from material beliefs, to
the apprehension of spiritual ideas and the demonstration
of Divine Science, thereby casting out devils, or error, and
healing the sick" (p. 574).
Some Modern Isms. 75
''Jesus Christ purposed founding his society, not on the
personal Peter, as a mortal man, but on the God power which
lay behind his confession of the Messiah" (p. 31).
(2) Mrs. Eddy established an absolutely autocratic gov-
ernment in her Church. (Cf. M. Twain. Ibid., p. 167).
(a) She herself assumed the humble-proud title of Pastor-
emeritus; but she kept all power in her own hands.
(b) Science and Health was made Universal Pastor of
the Supreme Church in Boston, and in all Branch Churches.
The term of that pastorate to be forever.
(c) She provided for two Readers in every Christian
Science pulpit, a man and a woman. She allows no talk-
ers, no preachers in any pulpit — readers only. Readers of
her books and the portions of the Scriptures which she has
adapted, no others may be heard. She allowed no commen-
tators to print or write without her supervision.
(d) She formed the order of worship — for all Christian
Science Churches — determined its readings, hymns, thinking
substitute for prayers, and Sacred Breakfast. She permits
no changes.
(e) She wrote its creed and allows no other.
Mrs. Eddy was the whole power in the Church while she
lived. (See Manual of the First Church of Christ, Scientist).
True, she had Boards of Directors, Boards of Education,
Boards of Finance, etc. But no member could be elected
without her approval. No member could hold his seat for
one minute longer than she pleased. Every member was a
puppet through whom she indicated her will. Mark Twain
says:
"Mrs. Eddy is the sovereign; she devised that great place
for herself, she occupies that throne.
"In 1895, she wrote a little primer, a little body of auto-
cratic laws, called the Manual of the First Church of Christ,
Scientist, and put those laws in force, in permanence. Her
76 Some Modern Isms.
government is all there; all in that deceptively innocent-
looking little book, that cunning little devilish book, that
slumbering little brown volcano, with hell in its bowels. In
that book she has planned out her system, and classified and
defined its purpose and powers.
"Main Parts of the Machine.
"A Supreme Church. At Boston.
"Branch Churches. All over the world.
"One pastor for the whole of them; to-wit, her book.
Science and Health. Term of the book's office — forever.
"In every C. S. pulpit, two 'Readers,' a man and a woman.
No talkers, no preachers, in any Church — readers only.
Readers of the Bible and her books — no others. No com-
mentators allowed to write or print.
"A Church Service. She has framed it — for all the C S.
Churches — selected its readings, its prayers, and the h}Tnns
to be used, and has appointed the order of procedure. No
changes permitted.
"A Creed. She wrote it. All C. S. Churches must sub-
scribe to it. No other permitted.
"A Treasury. At Boston. She carried the key.
"A C. S. Book-Publishing House. For books approved
by her. No others permitted.
"Journals and Magazines. These are organs of hers, and
are controlled by her.
"A College. For teaching C. S.
"Distribution of the Machine's Powers and Dignities.
"Supreme Church.
"Pastor Emeritus — Mrs. Eddy.
"Board of Directors.
"Board of Education.
"Board of Finance.
"College Faculty.
"Various Committees.
Some ^Modern Isms. 77
"Treasurer.
*'Clerk.
"First Members (of the Supreme Church).
"Members of the Supreme Church.
"It looks fair, it looks real, but it is all a fiction.
"Even the title 'Pastor Emeritus' is a fiction. Instead of
being merely an honorary and ornamental official, Mrs.
Eddy is the only official in the entire body that has the
slightest power. In her Manual, she has provided a prodi-
gality of ways and forms whereby she can rid herself of
any functionary in the government whenever she wants to.
The officials are all shadows, save herself; she is the only
reality. She allows no one to hold office more than a year —
no one gets a chance to become over-popular or over-useful,
and dangerous. "Excommunication" is the favorite pen-
alty — it is threatened at every turn. It is evidently the pet
dread and terror of the Church's membership.
"The member who thinks, without getting his thought
from Mrs. Eddy before uttering it, is banished permanent-
ly. One or two kinds of sinners can plead their way back
into the fold, but this one, never. To think — in the Supreme
Church — is the New Unpardonable Sin.
"To nearly every severe and fierce rule, Mrs. Eddy adds
this rivet: 'This by-law shall not be changed without the
consent of the Pastor Emeritus.
"Mrs. Eddy is the entire Supreme Church, in her own
person, in the matter of powers and authorities.
"Although she has provided so many ways of getting rid
of unsatisfactory members and officials, she was still afraid
she might have left a life-preserver lying around somewhere,
therefore she devised a rule to cover that defect. By ap-
plying it, she can excommunicate (and this is perpetual
again), every functionary connected with the Supreme
Church, and every one of the twenty-five thousand members
78 Some Modern Isms.
of that Church, at an hour's notice — and do it all by her-
self without anybody's help.
"By authority of this astonishing by-law, she has only to
say a person connected with that Church is secretly prac-
tising hypnotism or mesmerism; whereupon, immediate ex-
communication without a hearing, is his portion! She does
not have to order a trial and produce evidence — her accusa-
tion is all that is necessary.
"Where is the Pope? and where the Czar? As the ballad
says:
'Ask of the winds that far away
With fragments strewed the sea!'
"The Branch Church's pulpit is occupied by two 'Read-
ers.' Without them the Branch Church is as dead as if
its throat had been cut. To have control, then, of the Read-
ers, is to have control of the Branch Churches. Mrs. Eddy
has that control — a control wholly without limit, a control
shared with no one.
"1. No Reader can be appointed to any Church in the
Christian Science world without her express approval.
"2. She can summarily expel from his or her place any
Reader, at home or abroad, by a mere letter of dismissal,
over her signature, and without furnishing any reason for
it, to either the congregation or the Reader.
"Thus she has an absolute control over all Branch
Churches as she has over the Supreme Church. This power
exceeds the Pope's.
"In simple truth, she is the only absolute sovereign in
all Christendom. The authority of the other sovereigns has
limits, hers has none. None whatever. And her yoke does
not fret, does not offend. Many of the subjects of the other
monarchs feel their yoke, and are restive under it; tlieir
loyalty is insincere. It is not so with this one's human
property; their loyalty is genuine, earnest, sincere, enthusi-
Some Modern Isms. 79
\ astic. The sentiment which they feel for her is one which
goes out in sheer perfection to no other occupant of a
throne; for it is love, pure from doubt, env}-, exaction, fault-
seeking, a love whose sun has no spot — that form of love,
strong, great, compassable by no word but one, the prodigious
word. Worship. And it is not as a human being that her
subjects worship her, but as a supernatural one, a divine
one, one who has comradeship with God, and speaks by
His voice.
"Mrs. Eddy has herself created all these personal grand-
eurs and autocracies — with others which I have not (in this
article) mentioned. They place her upon an Alpine soli-
tude and supremacy of power and spectacular show not
hitherto attained by any other self-seeking enslaver disguised
in the Christian name, and they persuade me that, although
she may regard "self-deification as blasphemous," she is as
fond of it as I am of pie." (Christian Science, pp. 343-349),
Since her death her power of government is vested in the
Board of Directors of the First Church, Scientist, Boston.
(3) As to the rites of Baptism and the Lord's Supper:
fa) She does not acknowledge the propriety of baptism with
water (matter). She defines baptism as "Purification by the
Spirit" (Christian Science), "submergence in Truth." (b)
The Lord's Supper (she declares is not needed) (p. 339).
But she has instituted a breakfast "to commemorate Christ's
ascension above matter" (p. 340).
(4) For worship she has read portions of Science and
Health and portions of the Scriptures selected and adapted
by herself; and substitutes a thinking exercise for prayer.
This exercise of the understanding may be illustrated by her
version of the "Lord's Prayer," which is as follows :
"Our Father and Mother God, all harmonious.
"Adorable One.
"Ever just and omnipotent.
80 Some Modern Isms.
"Thy supremacy appears as matter disappears.
"Thou fillest our famished affections
"And love is reflected in love
"And leadest us not in temptation, but preservest us from
sin, sickness and death;
"For thou art all Substance, Life, Truth and Love for-
ever. So be it." Science and Health, Edition 1886.
She has no use for prayer, can't abide it. Listen to these
words :
"God is love. Can we ask Him to be more? God is in-
telligence. Can we inform the Infinite Mind or tell him
anything he does not comprehend? Do we hope to change
perfection? Shall we plead for more at the open fount,
which always pours forth more than we receive? Does
spoken prayer bring us nearer the source of all existence and
blessedness?" (p. 3.08).
Her definition of the Church makes it a different insti-
tution from that founded in the family of Abraham, cradled
in the wilderness, developed under David, reformed at Penta-
cost and spread over all continents through much tribulation
and toil as the ages have passed.
Her scheme of government is antipodal to the spiritual
republic enjoined in God's word.
The simple rites of baptism and the Lord's Supper, were
to be, by the authority of Jesus, administered throughout
this world age till he should come again.
Prayer, including petition, supplication, and intercession,
were enjoined by Apostles, and by Christ himself as of per-
petual obligation.
6th. Eschatological doctrines:
1. She teaches of death that it is a mere illusion: Thus
she says: "The fact that Christ, or Faith, overcame death,
proves the King of terrors to be but a mortal belief, or error,
which Truth destroys with the spiritual evidences of Life;
Some Modern Isms. 81
and this shows that what appears to the senses to be death
is but a mortal illusion; for to the real man and the real
universe there is no death process."
"The belief that matter has life results, by the universal
law of mortal mind, in a belief in death. So man, tree and
flower are supposed to die; but the fact remains, that God's
universe is spiritual and immortal." .
"Matter and death are mortal illusions" (p. 185). "Death
will be found at length to be a mortal dream, which comes
in darkness and disappears with the light" (p. 347). "Man
is immortal, and the body cannot die, because it has no life
to surrender. The illusions named death, disease, sickness
and sin are all that can be destroyed" (p. 424).
This illusion seems to have caught up Mrs. Eddy her-
self and whisked her away. Every Christian Scientist prac-
tically gives the lie to the doctrine, though he profess it with
lip: when death comes and breaks up the castle of the
soul of a friend, the Christian Scientist believes that there
has been a real dissolution of a real body, and shows it by
his acts. He lays the body in a grave.
2. As to the second coming of Christ, she teaches that!
His second coming was in the coming of "Christian Science"/
(p. 599). With which compare pp. 43 and 293.
3. Of the resurrection, she declares that it is "Spirituali-
zation of thought; a new and higher idea of immortality, or
spiritual existence; material belief yielding to spiritual un-
derstanding" (p. 584).
But while the Scripture sometimes uses the word resurrec-
tion in a metaphorical sense, it often uses it of a raising lit-
erally of a literal man (a spiritual and corporeal being).
Thus the Bible predicates the raising of Lazarus from bod-
ily death. See John XL Thus it teaches the resurrection
of Christ. Thus it teaches that the resurrection of all men
is to occur.
82 Some Modern Isms.
4. As to future suffering, she says: "Science reveals the
necessity of sufficient suffering, either before or after death
to quench the love of sin. To remit the penalty due for sin
would be for Truth to pardon error" (p. 341).
But "Science" "reveals" a great jumble; for it reveals
that man cannot suffer, that he is the reflection of God—
the infinite idea of the infinite God— ever blessed and per-
fect; that "he is incapable of sin as well as of sickness and
death, inasmuch as he derives his essence from God," that
"he cannot depart from holiness" (p. 471). Yet as above,
"Science reveals the necessity of sufficient suffering, either
before or after death to quench the love of sin. To remit
the penalty due for sin would be for Truth to pardon error"
(p. 341).
5th. As to the Judgment, she teaches:
"No final judgment awaits mortals; for the judgment day
of Wisdom comes hourly and continually, even the judg-
ment by which mortal man is divested of all material error.
As for spiritual error, there is none" (p. 182).
But, says Paul, God "hath appointed a day in the which
he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom
he hath ordained whereof he hath given assurance, in that
he hath raised him from the dead." Acts 17 :31.
Further, why does Mother Goose (Eddy) talk of sin, if
there be no "spiritual error?"
How different the eschatology of the Scriptures:
"The souls of believers are at their death made perfect
in holiness, and do immediately pass unto glory; and their
bodies being still united to Christ, do rest in their graves
till the resurrection. At the resurrection, believers being
raised up in glory, shall be openly acknowledged and ac-
quitted in the day of judgment and made perfectly blessed
in the full enjoying of God to all eternity."
IV. Christian Science as a System of Healing.
Some Modern Isms. 83
Christian Scientists are wont to declare that there is no
need for physicians, that the profession of the Surgeon might
be abolished for the good of humanity, "that Science" can
cure every disease that man suffers from without the aid of
medicine or knife.
Mrs. Eddy says:
"My first plank in the platform of Christian Science is as
follows: There is no life, truth, or substance in matter."
"Matter is unreal and temporal."
"God is all and in all. What can be more than all?
Nothing; and this is just what I call matter — nothing."
"Here is found the pith of the basal statement of the
cardinal point of Christian Science, that matter and evil
(including all inharmony, sin, disease, death) are unreal."
"Sin, sickness, and death ... are without real
origin, or existence. They have neither principle nor perm-
anence, but belong with all that is material or temporal, to
the nothingness of error which imitates the creation of deity."
With this creed, it is not to be wondered that Mrs. Eddy
and her followers should array themselves against all the
intelligence and real science of mankind. If her creed be
correct, no sickness ever existed, no broken arm ever needed
setting, no teeth ever needed pulling, no member ever needed
amputation. Do you wonder that her creed was not rectified
by her senses? She denies the existence of the senses. Hear
her words:
"Any supposed information coming from the body or from
inert matter, as if they were intelligent, is an illusion of the
mortal mind — one of its dreams. Realize that the evidence
of the senses is not to be accepted in the case of sickness
any more than in the case of sin."
No wonder that Mrs. Eddy and her followers oppose tlie
medical fraternity, boards of health, and municipal hygiene.
Though she reiterates, over and over again, that there is
84 Some Modern Isms.
no such thing as disease, she gives careful instructions for
the healing of various diseases. See, e. g., pages 422 and
423 of ^'Science mid Health," her instructions as to the treat-
ment of consumption:
"If the case to be mentally treated is consumptive, take
up the leading points included (according to belief) in this
disease. Show that it is not inherited; that inflammation,
tubercles, hemorrhage and decomposition are beliefs, images
of mortal thoughts, superinduced upon the body; that they
are not the Truth of man; that they should be treated us
error,' and put out of thought. Then these ills will disap-
pear. If the lungs are disappearing, this is but one of the
beliefs of mortal mind. Mortal mind will be less mortal
when it learns that lungs never sustained existence and can
never destroy life, who is God. When this is understood,
man will be more godlike. What if the lungs are ulcerated?
God is more to a man than his lungs; and the less we
acknowledge matter and its laws, the more immortality we
possess. Never believe that lungs or any portion of the
body can destroy you."
Is this the raving of an insane person? May you live
without lungs your present life? Is the ^^•ay to rid \our-
self of disease to think that there is nothing the matter
with you?
Such "scientific" instructions as the following are given
to Mrs. Eddy's disciples:
"He who is ignorant of what is termed hygienic law is
more receptive of spiritual power and faith in one God than
the devotee of this supposed law" (p. 381).
"The less we know or think about hygiene, the less v,e
are predisposed to sickness" (p. 388).
"Physiology is one of the apples of the Tree of Knowl-
edge — error declared that eating this fruit would open man"-
eyes and make him a god. Instead of so doing, it clo-t-
Some Modern Isms. 85
man's eyes to man's God-given dominion over the earth.
Obedience to the so-called physical laws of health have not
checked sickness."
''Physiology exalts matter and dethrones mind" (p. 43).
"When there are fewer doctors and less thought given to
sanitary subjects there will be better constitutions and less
disease" (p. 67).
"In families where laws of health are strictly observed
there is most sickness." (Miscellaneous Writings, p. 6)-
No wonder, we repeat, that Christian Scientists neglect
all precautions against the spread of disease, and disregard
the sanitary laws of towns, clash with boards of health, and
let many of their patients die for lack of simple and ac-
cessible remedies.
Do Christian Scientists do cures?
Yes, on hypochondriacs.
Mark Twain tells us of his experiences:
"The Christian Scientist was not able to cure my stomach
ache and my cold; but the horse doctor did it. This con-
vinces me that Christian Science claims too much. In my
opinion it ought to let diseases alone and confine itself to
surgery. There it would have everything its own way.
"The horse doctor charged me thirty kreutzers, and I paid
him; in fact, I doubled it and gave him a shilling. Mrs.
Fuller brought in an itemized bill for a crate of broken
bones mended in two hundred and thirty-four places — one
dollar a fracture.
"Nothing exists but Mind?"
"Nothing," she answered, "All else is substanceless, all
else is imaginary."
'T gave her an imaginary check, and now she is suing me
for substantial dollars. It looks inconsistent." (Christian
Science, p. 38). See also Ibid., p. 64-65.
Christian Science may also encourage the really sick to
hope for health and thus help cure them.
86 Some Modern Isms.
The like cures have been wrought throughout the ages.
V. The System Known By Its Fruits.
Bom at Bow, near Concord, New Hampshire, July 16,
1821, Mary Baker grew up an agile, lithe, graceful girl,
with an imperious will and a nervous hysterical tempera-
ment. She was married first in 1843, to George Washing-
ton Glover, a young brick-layer, who died about one year
later. She bore one child to this husband. For that child
she "never showed any affection." For some years she lived
with her old father and during the whole period punctured
the time with nervous collapses. In 1853 she was mar-
ried a second time, to Dr. Daniel Patterson, who bore
with her tantrums for some years. In 1862 she visited "Dr."
Quimby, of Portland, Maine, who practiced mind-healing;
claimed to have been healed by him, and became his en-
thusiastic admirer and disciple. She taught the Quimby
method of healing up to about 1868 or 1870. About the
year 1870, she began to represent herself as having re-
ceived, in 1866, by special revelation from God, the system
of Christian Science. She published her book Science and
Health, in 1875, a book which she had to revise many
times, notwithstanding the fact that it was "given by im-
mediate revelation." She married, in 1877, A. G. Eddy,
who died in 1882. Between 1870 and the end of her life,
she became immensely wealthy.
Her life, after she developed her system, showed no im-
provement in character. She was a liar, and an impostor
to the end, full of arrogance, and all impiety, making her-
self a greater than Christ.
Her dishonesty is evidenced by the following: In 1887,
in the June issue of the Christian Science Journal, she af-
firms: "As long ago as 1844, I was convinced that mortal
mind produced all disease." "In 1862 I was proclaiming
that Science must govern all healing," but in the first edi-
Some Modern Isms. 87
tion of Science and Health, issued in 1875, it is stated that
its author first learned in 1864 that "Science mentally ap-
plied would heal the sick." She has affirmed again: "It
was in Massachusetts, February, 1866, and after the death
of the magnetic doctor, Mr. P. P. Quimby, whom Spiritual-
ists would associate therewith, but who was in no wise con-
nected with this event, that I discovered the Science of Meta-
physical Healing, which I afterwards named Christian
Science." (Marsden, The Mask of Christian Science, pp.
43-44).
Mark Twain, after an exhaustive study of Mrs. Eddy's
known writings and comparison of them with Science and
Health, sums up his conclusions:
"Inasmuch as — in my belief — the very first editions of
the book Science and Health, were far above the reach of
Mrs. Eddy's mental and literary abilities, I think she has
from the very beginning been claiming as her own another
person's book and wearing as her own property laurels right-
fully belonging to that person — the real author of Science
and Health. And I think the reason — and the only reason —
that he has not protested, is because his work was not ex-
posed to print until after he was safely dead." M. Twain,
Christian Science, p. 292, Cf., also pp. 289-292.
As illustrative of her arrogant and blasphemous claims
may be cited, from Science and Health, pp. 551-552, the
following :
"The twelfth chapter of the Apocalypse — or Revelation of
Saint John — has a special suggestiveness in connection with
the nineteenth century. In the opening of the Sixth Seal,
typical of six thousand years since Adam, the distinctive
feature has special reference to the present age.
"Revelation 12:1. And there appeared a great wonder in
Heaven — a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under
her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars."
83 Some Modern Isms.
Another instance:
"While we entertain decided views . . . and shall
express them as duty demands, we shall claim no special gift
from our divine origin" (cited from her Miscellaneous Writ-
ings, by M. Twain, Christian Science, p. 149).
Another instance:
"No person can take the individual place of the Virgin
Mary. No person can compose or fulfill the individual
mission of Jesus of Nazareth. No person can take the
place of the author of Science and Health, the discoverer
and founder of Christian Science. Each individual must fill
his own niche in time and eternity." Autobiography, p. 96,
quoted in M. Twain. Ibid, p. 146. See also :M. Twain.
Ibid., pp. 22-24, 44-46, 67-70.
Another instance:
"It is often asked why Christian Science was revealed to
me — as one annihilating the false testimony of the physical
senses. . . • No one else can drain the cup which I
have drunk to the dregs, as the discoverer and teacher of
Christian Science; neither can its inspiration be gained with-
out tasting the cup. ... No mortal could have first
informed the human mind of what the mortal and carnal
cannot discern."
Another instance:
" 'In the Christian Science Journal for April, 1889, when
it was her property, and published by her, it was claimed
for her, and with her sanction, that she was equal with Jesus.
and elaborate effort was made to establish the claim.' "
"'Mrs. Eddy has distinctly authorized the claim in her
behalf, that she herself was the chosen successor to and
equal of Jesus.' "
"The following remark in that April number, quoted by
Mr. Peabody, indicates that her claim had been previously
made, and had excited 'horror' among some 'good people':
Some Modern Isms. 89
" 'Now, a word about the horror many good people have
of our making, the author of Science and Health 'equal with
Jesus.' "
"Surely, if it had excited horror in ISIrs. Eddy also, she
would have published a disclaimer. She owned the paper;
she could say what she pleased in its columns. Instead of
rebuking her editor, she lets him rebuke those 'good people'
for objecting to the claim.
"These things seem to throw light upon those words 'our
(my) divine origin." Christian Science, pp. 354-355.
Mark Twain has given the following brief description of
Mrs. Eddy's character after a study extending through sev-
eral years:
"Grasping, sordid, jenurious, famishing for everything she
sees — money, power, glory — vain, untruthful, jealous, de-
spotic, arrogant, insolent, pitiless where thinkers and hypno-
tists are concerned, illiterate, shallow, incapable of reason-
ing outside of commercial lines, immeasurably selfish."
Christian Science, p. 285.
"By their fruits ye shall know them," says a better author-
ity than Mrs. Eddy.
How are you to meet Christian Science in a community
infected :
Take Luther's method of dealing with the Zwickan
Prophets :
1. He did not name the cattle.
2. He preached the truth which they misinterpreted, and
they fled.
II. To put this suggestion otherwise:
1. Christian Science denies the doctrine of Providence.
Preach that doctrine and the comfort it gives to the child
of God, as it is set forth in Rom. 8.
2. Christian Science denies sin, preach that doctrine and
90 Some Modern Isms.
prove it from history, consciousness, and God's word. You
will carry conviction.
.3. Christian Science magnifies its cures. Show that
throughout the ages similar cures have been wrought — cures
of hypochondriacs, and cures of persons really ill, but who
needed not only physical remedies but the aid of the will
to live and of hope to live. For the influence of the mind
over the bodv is considerable.
Some Modern Isms. 91
The Unity School of
Christianity;
and New Thoughtism
92 Some Modern Isms.
Wayward Children of Mother Eddy:-
Mrs. Eddy has some bastard ecclesiastical offspring.
Amongst these is the Unity School of Christianity, with its
headquarters in Kansas City, Mo. This School claims a
devotion to what it terms "Practical Christianity and Chris-
tian Healing". It claims to be an exponent of the doctrine
of Jesus Christ, to apply that teaching to the affairs of daily
life, to explain how it affects the body, producing sickness
or health, and to show how man may produce conditions of
health, happiness and prosperity in his life here and now.
That it is a child of Christian Science is proven by many
marks: its peculiar form of pantheism, its doctrine of provi-
dence, its doctrine of mortal mind, its doctrine of salvation,
its doctrine of the Devil, its doctrine as to the power of af-
firmations and denials, its doctrine of faith. These un-
mistakably point to ^lother Eddy as parent, notwithstand-
ing elements of change which have been introduced.
The doctrine of prayer is not as annihilative of the ex-
ercise as Mrs. Eddys. There is an independence of Mrs.
Eddy's government. There is an effort at an independent
exposition of Scripture and of philosophy. There is an
irenicism toward Christian sects more honest than Mrs.
Eddy's; but the school or schools, for the unity is only a
claimed one, is at bottom Eddyite.
It hardly calls for separate refutation. The refutation
of Christian Science is the refutation of The Unity School
of Christianity. The literature of the school may be hap-
pily sampled in Cady: Lesson in Truth, Fillmore: Chris-
tian Healing.
Another bastard child of Mrs. Eddy's is New Thought.
For an illustration of New Thought teaching see Paul
Ellsworth's The Gist of New Thought. According to this
Some Modern Isms. 93
booklet: Our well being is to be attained only by recogniz-
ing that "man is but the outward terminal of an inner
life and power, and that fully and perfectly to express this
unseen life, he must bring his desires and activities into
harmony with its purposes and laws of action" ^that
we are modes of God and have all the forces of the divine
nature on which to draw, in order to the reaching of our
highest well being. Morning and night, therefore, we are
to make the following statement ours: "/ am an expression of
Divine life, and in vitality, in body, and affairs I shou
forth the limitless love, power and wisdom of my Father.''
"The only limit in regard to Mind Power is that it must
be used creatively." This follows from "The fact of oneness
of all life." Hence man should school himself to sav
"Thou in me art creative love, and in every thought, desire
and action I express thy nature."
To transform a life of failure, sickness or disappoint-
ment into one of glorious success, advantage must be taken
of two principles: (1) Man has not within his boundaries
all the materials for mastery. Beyond and above him is
his own Greater Self, his Spiritual Self, which is one with
the Father, and only as he- finds himself in this higher cen-
tre of consciousness can he speak with authority. (2)
Truth never changes or diminishes, but only the part of it
ivhich we put to work is of avail to us. We must address
this living but unseen presence "which is one with us in
all that is real and eternal in our being and claim this
unity by saying, e. g. "/ am in Thee, and Thou in me."
"Thou art in me glorious health." By bringing ourselves
into use of our "subjective" or subconscious mind, into the
use of the Father we can speak with authority, speak as
God.
The results will not come at once, but come they will.
To get away from sickness you must get out of the
94 Some Modern Is>.rs.
world. And the key here is affirmation, the direct and
dynamic statement of Truth. The truth is that as the child
of God you are not subject to sickness. The Father, work-
ing in and through you, is Health, and Power, and Joy.
It is only your limited, personal self that builds sickness and
imperfection. In order to heal "Take any direct and simple
statement of your unity with him. Thou in me are glorious
health, or / am in Thee and Thou in Me. "In the work
of healing or bodily regeneration your power lies in the
fact that you are the expression of infinite resources. And
you are to apply this power first by accepting it and putting
it into the dynamic form of affirmation; second, by visualiz-
ing it, seeing your body vibrant wath the divine life which
you are, third, by feeding it, searching out those life vi-
brations which have been long sending you their message
of co-operation, but which you have ignored; and fourth,
by making such readjustments in your habits of thinking,
feeling and doing as the Spirit of Wisdom teaches you- to
make."
The truth that frees is to be gotten not by observation nor
by reason but by wisdom, the influx into the soul of Di-
vine Light.
To realize wisdom affirm:
"Thou in me art illumination, and through Thee I know
the truth which frees from every limitation.
"I am the light of the world; if any man follow me,
he shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of
life." .. .•
"Man has a providence, faculty or center within him,
which, when connected directly with the central power-house
of Divine Mind will unfailingly attend to the work of ma-
terial supply."
"Here are some key thoughts to help you quicken this
providing faculty:"
Some Modern Isms. 95
"Thou art my filling supply, and in Thee I express hnan-
cial mastery."
"I thank Thee, Father, that even now Thou dost bring
into visibility in my life all that I desire."
'T am creative mastery and financial success; abundant
supply comes naturally and unfailingly to me, because I
am attractive to it."
"Here are a few affirmations for bringing out creative
mastery."
"It is not I but the Father in me who doeth this work."
I can do all things through the Christ life which quick-
enth me.
"Thou in me art glorious power, creative mastery, and in
Thee I work swiftly and perfectly.
"Thou are the reality of my being, and Thou are glorious
health, masterful expression and abounding financial suc-
cess.
Remarks :
1st. It is clear that Ellsworth's New Thought is pan-
thesim, and of the Christian Science type, fundamentally;
God is the one reality. Men and things are God's expression.
2nd. The same absurd system of healing, essentially is
taught, to wit, by thinking that you are God and that, as God
cannot be sick, you cannot be sick.
The similarilty to Christiaii Science is such that we
easily accept the historic evidence as valid, that New
Thought is the bastard child of Mother Eddv.
96 Some Modern Isms.
Russeilism
This is one of the most insidious
of all the modernisms
Some Modern Isms. 97
Literature on Russellism
C. T. Russell, Studies in the Scriptures, 6 Series.
Lawyer, A Great Ecclesiastical Battle in the Heavens.
Haldeman, Two Men and Russellism.
Haldeman, A Great Counterfeit, or The False and Blasphe-
mous, Religion Called Russellism and Millennial Dawn-
ism.
Haldeman, Millennial Dawnism, the Blasphemous Religion
Which Teaches the Annihilation of Jesus Christ.
Chas. C. Cook, More Data on Pastor Russell
I. I. Ross, Some Facts and More Facts about the Self-Styled
Pastor Russell {of Millennial Dawn Fame.)
Chas C. Cook, All About One Russell.
98 Some Modern Isms.
Russellism
By Russellism is meant the teaching of Charles T. Rus-
sell, as set forth in his work, once published in (six) vol-
umes, entitled "Millennial Dawn," and later published un-
der the caption "Studies in the Scriptures."
This work claims for itself publication under the auspices
of the "International Bible Students Association, Brooklyn,
London, Melbourne, Bremen, Elberfield, Orebro, Christina."
The copyright is held by "Watch Tower Bible and Tract
Society, Brooklyn, U. S. A." A note on the reverse of the
title page of volume I, asserts that "This volume can also
be supplied in the German, Swedish, Dano-Norwegian, Fin-
nish, French, Greek, Italian, Hungarian, Hollandish, Span-
ish, Polish, Slovak, Arabic, Chinese and Japanese languages,
also in Braille (for the blind)."
There are reasons why this ism should be given a degree
of study: (1) It has been given the shrewdest and most
efficient advertising over vast areas of this earth's surface.
The books are sold at a nominal price. There is an edition
which may be had for twenty-five cents per volume. They
are given to persons who wish them, but are too poor to buy
' them. The views set forth in them are published also in
millions of tracts and in the official paper, or magazine,
known as "The Herald of Christ's presence." (2) The ism
^ makes a powerful appeal to people, of small capacity to
reason, or small disposition to study God's word in a his-
toric way, of large credulity, of readiness to follow the
teacher who will speak with an air of prophetic certainty, or
reason plausibly — to such people, when conscious of sin and
in dread of its consequences. (3) It has already infected
Some Modern Is:ms. 99
and unsettled vast numbers of such people; and it has both-
ered many of a different and nobler type. The latter have
not yet received it, but for lack of time, or conveniences, they
have not been able to appraise Russellism in a satisfactory
way, and to fix upon a proper course of conduct to be pur-
sued with reference to it. (4) It is a pernicious, blasphemous
and Satanic teaching — lulling to sleep multitudes, many of
whom might, but for it, be led to seek life eternal in Christ
Jesus.
For these and kindred reasons the following sketch and
criticism of Russellism has been made.
1. 0/ Russell's Theology Proper, or his doctrine, as to
the existence and attributes of the Gods, as to the Plan of
the Supreme God; as to creation and as to Providence.
1st. His doctrine of the Gods:
1. With some considerations of force and with others des-
titute of either force or plausibility, Russell teaches that the
light of nature discloses the existence of a supreme intelli-
gent creator, of immeasurable power and wisdom, benevo-
lence and justice, who will make known to his intelligent
creatures his plan concerning them in "some such revela-
tion as the Bible claims to be; and maintains the view that
the Bible is a divinely inspired revelation."
Notwithstanding this expressed view of the Bible, we must
beware of thinking that he gives the Bible the premier place
in the teaching of theological truth. On page 198, of his
^'Watch Tower" of the issue of September 15, 1910, it is
written concerning his books:
"If the six volumes of 'Scripture Studies' are practically
the Bible, topically arranged, with Bible proof texts given,
we might not improperly name the volumes, 'The Bible in
Arranged Form.' That is to say, they are not merely com-
ments on the Bible, but they are practically the Bible itself.
"Furthermore, not only do we find that people
100 Some Modern Isms.
cannot see the divine plan in studying the Bible by itself,
but we see also that if any one lays the 'Scripture Studies'
aside, even after he has used them, after he has become
familiar with them, after he has read them for ten years — if
he lays them aside and ignores them and goes to the Bible
alone, though he has understood his Bible for ten years, our
experience shows that within two years, he goes into dark-
ness. On the other hand, if he had merely the Scripture
studies, with their references and had not read a page of
the Bible as such he would be in the right at the end of
the two years, because he would have the light of the
Scriptures." (Quoted in Chas. C. Cook's "All About One
Russell," pp. 13-14).
It thus appears that the Bible is light-giving according
to Russell, only as interpreted by himself.
From the Scriptures thus "reasonably interpreted" (i. e.,
interpreted according to Russell's views), and from many in-
terpolations from his own "reason" such as to give the Scrip-
tures the sense which he wishes to find in them, he pro-
ceeds to set forth his views concerning the nature of the
Gods.
2. Of "the God," the one Almighty God, Russell teaches
that He has "mind and body." He says: "Some may be
a little startled by this expression, 'a divine body,' but we
are told that Jesus is the express image of his Father's
person. . . . We could not imagine either our divine
Father or our Lord Jesus as merely great minds without
bodies," p. 200, Vol I., "Studies in the Scriptures."
Now, God, in His word, not only gives us no ground for
regarding Him as having a body, but represents himself as
pure spirit, ascribing to Himself attributes such as unchange-
ableness, unity, omnipresence, which body cannot have. "God
is a Spirit," John 4:24; "The heaven and heaven of heav-
ens cannot contain Thee," I Kings 8:27; "Who (the Son)
Some Modern Isms. 101
is the image of the invisible God," Col. 1:15; "the invisible,"
I Tim. 1:17; "As seeing Him who is invisible," Heb. 11:27.
3. Russell, in his further teaching concerning God, mis-
represents ridicules and denies the doctrine of the Trinity.
(1) He misrepresents the doctrine of the Trinity, which
he calls "this confusing doctrine of men" (Vol. 5, p. 54),*
and declares that for it "no authority can be found in the
word of God." That he misrepresents, ridicules and denies
the doctrine is clear from the following quotations:
"How could there be three Gods and yet only one God.
If there are three Gods, "equal in power and glory," as the
catechisms declare, then it is untrue to say there is only
one God. If there is only "one God, the Father of whom
are all things," as St. Paul asserts; and if, as Jesus de-
clared, the Father is greater than his honored Son; and if
the Father raised his Beloved Son from the dead, and exalted
him on high, honored him, and has appointed for him a
Kingdom; and if ultimately the Son will deliver up the
Kingdom again to the Father, that he may be all in all;
then it cannot be true that there are several Gods of equal
po%ver. Nevertheless, we shall show conclusively in the suc-
ceeding chapter that our Lord Jesus Christ is a God, but
that . . . still the united voice of the Scriptures most
emphatically assert that there is but one Almighty God, the
Father of whom are all things," Vol. 5, p. 55.
"Moreover, the words 'Father' and 'Son' imply a differ-
ence and contradict the thoughts of the Trinity and one-
ness of person, because the word "father" signifies life-giver,
while the word 'son' signifies the one who has received life
from another," Vol. 5, p. 60.
"The idea of claiming three Gods, and at the same time
claiming that the three were only one God, was no doubt
considered a masterstroke in theology by which the views
•These references to volumes and pages are to the volumes and pages
of "Studies in the Scriptures," by Russell.
102 Some Modern Isms.
of believers converted from amongst the Jews could be
brought into closer accord with the general sentiments of
the Gentiles, who, it was desired, should be pleased and
brought into the Church." Vol. 5, p. 63.
''At the same time it is admitted that the doctrine is in-
comprehensible, and therefore that nobody really believes it,
because nobody can, in a true sense, believe an incompre-
hensible thing. And various doctrines and practices, not
only of Protestantism, but also of Catholicism, deny the doc-
trine of the Trinity: note, for instance, that all Protestants
pray to the Father, 'in the name of Jesus/ 'for Jesus' sake,'
etc., thus recognizing the fact that there are two separate
persons and not one person. Vol. 5, p. 64.
Again, he speaks of "the unreasonable and unscriptural
doctrine of a Trinity — three Gods in one person." Vol. 5,
p. 76.
Quotations of like character might be multiplied in sup-
port of our present contention that he misrepresents and the
ridicules and denies the doctrine of the Trinity. To them
might be added his teachings that the Son, prior to his being
made man, existed only as a cieated, angelic existence, and
that the Holy Spirit is nothing more than the influence, cr
power, of God, that He has no distinct personal existence.
Quotations showing unmistakably that he does these latter
things are to be given later.
(2) Contrast now the true orthodox doctrine of the Trin-
ity as held by the Greek and Roman Catholic Churches.
"There are three persons in the Godhead: the Father, the
Son, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one God, the
same in substance, equal in power and glory."
This is no doctrine of tritheism — that there are three in-
dividual Gods. We shall find Russell teaching, that there
is a plurality of Gods now — that the Almighty, the God who
always has been, exists now; and that the Lord Jesus Christ
Some Modern Isms. 103
has been made a God, and exists as such now; and, appar-
ently that true believers who sacrificed their lives in the
gospel age have been made Gods and exist as such now.
But of this hereafter. Observe that in his pantheon there are
at least two Gods — the eternal self-existent God and a be-
ing who has been created a God. His view of Christ ap-
proaches that of the heretic Arius. He is a kind of ditheist.
The orthodox doctrine distinguishes between substance and
person, a distinction to which Russell seems to be dead;
it affirms one substance but a three-fold personal distinction
in this one substance. The church was driven to this doc-
trine by the clear Scripture teaching that God is one, and
yet that the Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy
Spirit is God. It does, of course, not teach that God is
one and three in the same sense. It is guilty of no contra-
diction, just as it is guilty of no contradiction when it as-
serts that man is dual as to substance unitary as to per-
sonality.
The evidences for the truth of a doctrine may be the
strongest and yet the doctrine incomprehensible. Here is
John Smith, who teaches that a Jersey cow feeding on a
blue grass field, turns some portions of her feed into con-
stituents of milk and other portions into fat and others into
muscles. Now, must I wait till I can comprehend every-
thing about these processes — how they are carried on — be-
fore believing what said Smith teaches as to the cow's uses
of the grass in these ways. Further, C. T. Russell should,
of all men, for his own sake, avoid teaching that a man
cannot believe what he cannot comprehend. For he teaches
amongst many incomprehensible things concerning his Christ
some impossible things, e. g., that he was changed from a
"spirit being" into a "human being," which, he teaches, is
not a spirit, even in part, teaches that that human being,
Jesus, died, became non-existent, and remains so forever; and
104 Some Modern Isms.
that Jesus Christ was called into existence at tlie end of
three days, as a Spirit, lives today and ever will as a Spirit
being, and of a type infinitely higher than that of his former
spirit being, having been elevated to the divine nature. Rus-
sell's teachings teem not only with incomprehensibles, but
with real impossibles and contradictories; but let us now
to his doctrine of the Son.
4. Russell teaches of the Lord Jesus Christ. Hear his
words :
''Some claimed that he (Christ) was an impostor: Some
that he was merely a good man : some that he had a miracul-
ous birth, but never had a pre-existence; and others held the
truth, viz., that he had pre-existence as a Son of God on a
spiritual plane, that he became the Son of God on a human
plane, in order to redeem mankind and that now he is high-
ly exalted, so that all are commanded to honor "the Son
even as they honor the Father." Vol. 5, pp. 62, 63.
"Searching the Scriptures carefully to note just what they
do say, and what they do not say, respecting our Lord Jesus,
we find their testimony ver}^ explicit, harmonious and satis-
factory. We will first state in synoptical form, what we find
to be the Scriptural teachings, the proofs of which we will
give further along:
"(1) Our Redeemer existed as a spirit being before he
was made flesh and dwelt amongst men.
"(2) At that time, as well as subsequently, he was prop-
erly known as 'a god' — a mighty one. As chief of the
angels and next to the Father, he was known as the Arch-
angel (highest angel or messenger), whose name, Michael,
signifies, 'Who is God,' or God's representative.
"(3) As he was the highest of all Jehovah's creation, so
also he was the first, the direct creation of God, the only
begotten and then he, as Jehovah's representative, and in
the exercise of Jehovah's power, and in his name, created
Some Modern Isms. 105
all things — angels, principalities and powers, as well as the
earthly creation. . . .
♦'(4) This humiliation to Man's condition was not in-
tended to be perpetual. It accomplished its purpose when
our Lord had given himself, a human being, as our ransom,
or * 'corresponding price." Hence, his resurrection was not
in the flesh, but, as the Apostle declares, "He was put to
death in the flesh, but quickened in Spirit.' I Pet. 3:18.
"(5) His resurrection not only restored to him a spirit
nature, but in addition conferred upon him a still higher
honor, and, as the Father's reward for his faithfulness, made
him partaker of the divine nature — the very highest of the
Spirit natures, possessed of immortality." Vol. 5, pp. 83,
84. Cf., also, Vol. I., pp. 176, 179.
The meaning of these statements is made clearer by other
statements of Russell's. Thus he writes :
"Nor do the Scriptures in any place intimate that the
existence of the Only Begotten ever ceased from the time
it began, as "the beginning of the creation of God," until
it ceased at Calvary for three days; after which he was
raised from the dead to die no more, death having never
more dominion over him." Vol. 5, p. 90.
Commenting on John 1:11, "The logos was made flesh
and dwelt among us," he writes:
"The comLion thought in respect to our Lord's manifesta-
tion in the flesh is usually expressed in the word incaryiation.
This usual thought we believe to be wholly incorrect, un-
scriptural." (He proceeds to show that he does not under-
stand the orthodox doctrine of the incarnation, and to con-
demn his misconceived doctrine), (p. 94, Vol. 5).
"There was no sham about it: it was not that he merely
appeared to humble himself, while really retaining his glory
and powder: it was not that he seemed to become poor for
our sakes, yet actually remained rich in the possession of
;106 Some Modern Isms.
the higher spiritual nature all the time; it was not that he
merely put on the clothing, the livery, of a servant. No, but
he actually became a man — "the man Christ Jesus who gave
himself a ransom for all.' I Tim. 2:5."
"We shall see subsequently, \^hen we come to consider par-
ticularly the ransom feature of his work, that it was abso-
lutely necessary that he should be a man — neither more nor
less than a perfect man — because it was a man that sinned,
a man that was redeemed, and the divine law required that
a man's life should pay the redemption price of a man's
life." Vol. 5, p. 95.
"Nor could our Lord have been raised from the dead a
man, and yet have left with Justice our ransom-price: in
order to the release of Adam and his condemned race from
the sentence and prison-house of Death, it was necessary
not only that the man Christ Jesus should die, but just as
necessary that the man Christ Jesus should never live again,
should remain dead, should remain our ransom-price to all
eternity." Vol. 5, p. 454.
He teaches that Christ's "human existence ended on the
cross," that "after being dead three days, he was raised to
life — to the perfection of spirit being — born of the Spirit —
'the first-born from the dead' — . . . Jesus, therefore,
at and after his resurrection, was a spirit — a spirit being,
and no longer a human being in any sense." Vol. 1, pp.
230-231.
He writes:
"Our Lord's being or soul was non-existent during the
period of death. 'He poured out his soul unto death; he
made his soul an offering for sin.' But his soul (being)
was revived in resurrection, being granted a new spiritual
body." Vol. 5, p. 362.
He defines soul as "sentient being, intelligence, the man
himself, the being, or soul." Vol. 5, p. 308.
Some Modern Isms. 107
"Man's superiority over the beast, according to the ac-
count given in Genesis, consists not in his having a different
kind of breath or spirit, but in his having a higher form, a
superior body, a finer organism — endowed with a brain or-
ganism which enables him to reason upon planes far above
and beyond the intelligence of the lower animals of the brute
creation." Vol. 5, p. 310.
He teaches that our Lord Jesus "is no longer a man but
a spirit being, whom no man hath seen nor can see v.ithout
a miracle." Vol. 2, p. 131.
"Our Lord's human body was, however, supernatuvally re-
moved from the tomb ; because had it remained there it would
have been an insurmountable obstacle to the faith of the
disciples, who were not yet instructed in spiritual things — for
the spirit was not yet given." (John 7:39). We know-
nothing about what became of it, except that it did not
decay or corrupt. (Acts 2:27, 31). Whether it was dis-
solved into gasses or whether it is still preserved somewhere
as the grand memorial of God's love, of Christ's obedience
and of our redemption, no one knows." Vol. 2, p. 129.
"Neither was Jesus a combination of two natures, human
and spiritual. The blending of two natures produces neither
the one nor the other, but an imperfect, hybrid thing, which
is obnoxious to the divine arrangement. When Jesus was
in the flesh he was a perfect human being; previous to that
time he was a perfect spiritual being; and since his resur-
rection he is a perfect spiritual being of the highest or
divine order. It was not until the time of his consecra-
tion even unto death, as typified in his baptism — at thirty
years of age (manhood, according to the law% and therefore
the right time to consecrate himself as a man) — that he re-
ceived the earnest of his inheritance, divine nature. (Matt.
3:16, 17). The human nature had to be consecrated to death
before he could receive even the pledge of the divine nature.
108 Some Modern Isms.
And not until that consecration was actually carried out and
he had actually sacrificed the human nature, even unto death,
did our Lord Jesus become a full partaker of the divine
nature. After becoming a man he became obedient unto
death; wherefore, God hath highly exalted him to the divine
nature. (Phil 2:8, 9). If this Scripture is true, it follows
that he was not exalted to the divine nature until the human
nature was actually sacrificed — dead."
"Thus we see that in Jesus there was no mixture of
natures, but that twice he experienced a change of nature,
first from spiritual to human; afterward from human to the
highest order of spiritual nature, the divine; and in each
case the one was given up for the other." Vol. I., pp.
179-180.
Russell teaches also an inclusive Christ, or an extended
Christ: that "Christ includes all anointed of the Spirit"
(Vol. 1, p. 85); that "the Christ (the Anointed) is not one
member but many." Vol. 1, p. 82.
"The great work before this glorious anointed company —
the Christ — necessitates their exaltation to the divine nature;
no other than divine power could accomplish it. Theirs is
a work pertaining not only to this world, but to all things
in heaven and earth — among spiritual as well as among
human beings." Vol. 1, pp. 289, 290.
Russell thus teaches: (1) That Christ before his advent
was not God, but a created angel. (2) That when he was
in the earth he was neither God, nor a spirit of any order
of being, but a human being, body with the spirit of Ufe,
or breath of life, in it. (3) That his atonement was ex-
clusively human, a mere man's. (4) That since his resur-
rection — really creation with a consciousness precisely like
that with which Jesus passed into non-existence — he is a
God — a made God. (5) That Jesus' body was not raised
[from the dead. (6) That his soul became non-existent and
must continue so forever.
Some Modern Isms. 109
The orthodox Christology which Russell either miscon-
ceives, or intentionally misrepresents, is briefly set forth in
the answer to question 21 of the Westminster Shorter Cate-
chism: "The only Redeemer of God's elect is the Lord
Jesus Christ, who being the eternal Son of God, became man,
and so was and continued to be God and man in two dis-
tinct natures and one person forever."
The bare statement of Russell's Christology as has been
done above, first in his own v.'ords, and then, in more com-
pact form, in our words, should be enough to kill it. The
indulgent hearer will, however, it is hoped, pardon a shot
or two at these positions of Russell.
(1) John 1:1 says, "The word was God." Reverent and
real scholarship says of this passage, "The predicate (God)
stands emphatically first, as in 4:24. It is necessarily with-
out the article Theos, not ho Theos, inasmuch as it describes
the nature of the Word and does not identify His Person. It
would be pure Sabellianism to say "the word was ho Theos."
No idea of inferiority of nature is suggested by the form of
expression which simply affirms the true deity of the Word,"
{Cannon Westcott, following the great current of thoughtful
and learned Bible students of all the ages). Three majestic
truths are set forth in this passage: (a) The eternity of
the Word. In beginning {without the article) was (not
came into existence) the Word. Timeless existence is predi-
cated of him. (b) The eternal personal existence is set forth.
He was with God. By the Word all things were created and
enlightened, (c) His deity is taught. "And the Word was
God."
(2) If Christ was an honest man, he was also more than
man — was God — when on earth. For he said, "It is written,
'Thou shalt worship the Lord, thy God, and him only shalt
thou serve,' and yet he said, 'the Father judgeth no man,
but hath committed all judgment unto the Son, that all men
'i
110 Some Modern Isms.
should honour the Son even as they honour the Father.' He
said, "Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden
and I will give you rest." How could a mere man so
speak without sheer impiety? How, as a mtre man, could
he make himself the very object of supreme worship in the
Lord's Supper, saying, "This do in remembrance of me?''.
The like argument might be made from many passages of
Scripture. Truly, the attributes, works and worship predi-
cated of Christ in the Scriptures represent him to be very
God of very God, as well as man.
' In denying that Jesus Christ is tlie eternally generated Son
of God, w^ho took a perfect human nature into union with
himself, that he was at once the Son of God and the Son
of Man, Russellism accuses Christ of falsehood and treason
1 against the Most High; and brings him before man as the
worst fraud, hypocrite and deceiver of the world's history
idown to the time of Mrs. Eddy. For he set himself up to
be the God of the Universe.
(3) If he was a mere creature he could have no imputa-
ble obedience, active or passive; and could work out no re-
demption, The Scriptures say, "God sent forth from him-
self his Son, born of a woman born under the law, to re-
deem them that were under the law," Gal. 4:4, 5. This
Scripture cannot be true if Russellism be true. Again, if
he was a mere creature, how could Paul say, "In him dwell-
eth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." Col. 2:9. How-
could we explain Isaiah 9:6, "His name shall be called
wonderful, counselor, the mighty God?"
(4) The Scriptures teach not that the Son is a made God,
but that being in the form of God, he humbled himself for
man's salvation; and hath, in consequence, been given Media-
torial lordship, Phil. 2:6-11. "The form of a thing is the
mode in which it reveals itself; and that is determined by
its nature." Chrysostom said: "It is not possible to be
Some Modern Isms. Ill
of one essence and to have the form of another/' He was
"God over all blessed forever." Rom. 9:5. See here "Funda-
mentals," Vol. VII., pp. 109-110.
(5) The Scriptures ■ teach that the body of Jesus was"
raised from the dead. "Reach hither thy linger, and be-
hold my hands; and reach hither thy hand and thrust it
into my side; and be not faithless but believing." See
also John 20:24-28; Luke 24:39, etc. Shall we believe
Ch'rist, or C. T. Russell? Christ or the seller of miracle
wheat at $60.00 a bushel? " In denying the bodily resurrec-
tion of Christ, Russellism reached a pitch of extreme audacity
and falsehood. The doctrine of the resurrection is basal to
Christianity. If Christ be not risen then Christians are of
all men in a most pitiable and deceived condition. The
lie invented by the chief priests that his disciples stole his
body away during the night while the soldiers slept is not
so shocking as this baseless speculation. Baseless it is. God
had predicted His resurrection a thousand years before it
occurred (Ps. 16:9; Acts 2:26-28). The gospel proof of
the resurrection is bomb-proof. It was testified to by a
large body of disciples, plain, competent, capable men who
had ample opportunity to ascertain its reality, and were of
honesty undoubted which assures us that they testified to
fact as they saw it. (See "Fundamentals" VII., pp. 115-
116). In his eft'orts to interpret away the Scriptural teach-
ing as to Christ's resurrection, Russell ignores the fact that
the Lord's resurrection body, while retaining its identity,
was a spiritual body (I. Cor. 15:44), perfectly adapted to
the Spirit, and not under the sway of natural laws which
govern our ordinary bodies.
(6) Russell teaches that Jesus Christ passed into non-
existence on Golgotha. Christ said to the repenting thief,
"This day shalt thou be with me in paradise.; If their
personalities became non-existent at death, they could not
112 Some Modern Isms.
be together, for they were not. Who was right? Jesus or
the man who said under oath, in the course of the same
hour, that he knew the Greek language and that he was
not familiar with it, and who appeared devoid of ability
to name the letters of the Greek alphabet, on page 447, of
Westcott and Hort's Greek Testament, when asked to do
it in court? More, the Christ, which now is, according to
Russellism, is a brand new one. The other gone forever.
He was annihilated.
(7) Our Lord has two natures and not one as Russell-
ism affirms. We read in John 1:14, "And the Word be-
came flesh and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory,
the glory as of the only begotten of the Father), full of
grace and truth. Notice: (a) The Word became flesh, he
did not cease to be God in doing so. He was not changed
into a man, a mere man. (b) He did not cease to be the
Word, "He dwelt among us." The pronoun He has the
Word for its antecedent, (c) The term "dwelt," literally is
tabernacled, an allusion to the tabernacle of the Wilderness.
God said, "And let them make me a sanctuary that I may
dwell among them." Compare I John 1:1-3, where John
summonses the three most trustworthy of our senses, hear-
ing, sight and touch, to bear witness to the reality and pres-
ence of the Word of life, as dwelling among us.
See also John 16:28. "I came forth from the Father,
and am come into the world: Again I leave the world and
go unto my Father," which teaches eternal son-ship, sojourn
in the world, return to the Father, of Jesus Christ.
See also I Tim. 3:16: "God was manifested in the
flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, believed on in
the world, received up into glory."
(8) The doctrine of the extended Christ is a diabolical
abolition of the distinction between Christ and ourselves as
Efeneric.
Some Modern Isms. 113
Russell's Christology is an impious jumble, somewhat akin
to unitarianism, more akin to Arianism, but much less
worthy of respect than either and supported by an interpre-
tation of Scripture wholly arbitrary — a reading into Scrip-
ture of notions foreign to it, that he may fool the people.
5, Russell's teaching concerning the Holy Spirit.
He says:
"This subject of the Holy Spirit, its office and operation,
has been grievously misunderstood by many of the Lord's
people for centuries: and only in the light of the rising; Sun
of Righteousness — in the light of the parousia of the Son of
Man — is this subject becoming thoroughly clear and reas-
onable, as it evidently was to the early Church, and in
harmony with all the various Scriptural testimonies pertain-
ing to it. . . .
"There is consistency in the Scripture teaching that the
Father and the Son are in full harmony and oneness of
purpose and operation, as we have just seen. And equally
consistent is the Scripture teaching respecting the Holy
Spirit — that it is not another God, but the spirit influence
or power exercised by the one God, our Father, and by his
only Begotten Son — in absolute oneness, therefore, with both
of these, who also are at one or in full accord. But how
different is this unity of the Father, the Son and the Holy
Spirit, from that held and taught under the name of Trini-
tarian doctrine, which in the language of the Catechism
(Questions 5 and 6), declares: "There are three persons
in the one God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost:
These three are one God, the same in substance, equal in
power and glory." This view suited well 'the dark ages'
which it helped to produce. The period in which mysteries
were worshipped instead of unravelled, found a most choice
one in this theory, which is as unscriptural as it is un-
reasonable. How could the three be one person, in substance?
114 SoiME Modern Isms.
And if 'one in substance,' how could they be equal? Does
not every intelligent person know that if God is one in per-
son, he cannot be three? and that if three in person there
can be only one sense in which the three could be 07te,
and that not in person but in purpose, in mind, in will, in
co-operation? Verily, if it were not for the fact that this
trinitarian nonsense was drilled into us from our earliest
infancy, and the fact that it is soberly taught in Theologi-
cal Seminaries by gray haired professors, in many other
ways apparently wise, nobody would give it a moment's con-
sideration." Vol. 5, pp. 165-166.
"It is impossible to harmonize these various statements"
(The Holy Spirit of God, etc.), with the ordinary idea of a
third God." Vol. 5, p. 168.
"In the light of the Scripture we may understand the Holy
Spirit to mean:
(a) God's power exercised in any manner, but always ac-
cording to lines of justice and love, and hence always a
holy power.
(b) This power may be an energy of life, a physically
creative power, or a power of thought, creating and inspir-
ing thoughts and words, or a quickening life-giving power,
as it was manifested in the resurrection of our Lord, and
will again be manifested in the resurrection of the Church,
his body.
(c) "The begetting or transforming power or influence of
the knowledge of the Truth." Vol. 5, p. 183.
"It would be strange indeed if one member of a co-equal
Trinity of equal gods referred to another as able and willing
to give the third as earthly parents are to give bread, fish
and eggs to their children." Vol. 5, p. 224.
In these passages Russell betrays anew his misconception
of, or his caricaturing, of the doctrine of the trinity. He
speaks as if Trinitarians were Tritheists — as if they held
Some Modern Isms. 115
that the several persons of the Godhead were related as three
individual men are related, as if they were three individual
beings, with substance the same in kind. Whereas the Trini-
tarian holds that the one substance of the deity exists in a
three- fold mode — which modes are more nearly like that of
personality in man than anything else with which man has
to compare them. Hear the clear statement: "There are
three persons in the Godhead, the Father, the Son and the
Holy Ghost, and these three are one God, the same in sub-
stance, equal in power and glory."
That the Holy Spirit is represented as personal, as dis-
tinguished from the Father and the Son, and as divine, is
the clear teaching of the word. The Scriptures say that
the Holy Ghost "teaches" and "reveals," John 14:26; I
Cor. 2:13; John 15:25, 26; I Tim. 4:1; that He searches
the decrees of God, I Cor. 2:10; that He calls to special
work in the Church, to special work in the ministry. Acts
13:2; that he distributes gifts as He will, I Cor. 12:10;
and exercises many other personal agencies; that He exer-
cises the active feelings of a person, Eph. 4:30. Scripture
distinguishes Him alike from Father and Son and represents
Him as sharing in honors and acts undoubtedly personal to
them. Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14. Pneuma though neuter,
is construed with a masculine pronoun, John 16:3. He is
irepresented as lied to, and therefore as personal, Acts 5:3.
These are but a few of the indications of his personality.
They suffice.
His Divinity is so clearly set forth that Russell does not
question that, only endeavoring to show that he is a Divine
influence.
The subordination of the Holy Ghost as well as that of
the Son is evidently that of economy. The three modes of
the divine existence — three persons — are to be treated each
with the same honor. They are therefore equal in honor,
116 So^tE Modern Isms.
though subordinating themselves in a given order in the
outworking and application of redemption.
2d. The plan of God.
Russell teaches that God planned three great dispensa-
tions: The first "lasting from man's creation to the flood,
1656 years; the second, from the flood to the commence-
ment of the millennial reign of Christ, at his second ad-
vent, 4344;* and the third, or "Dispensation of the Fulness
of Times,' lasting from the beginning of Christ's reign for
'ages to come'." Vol. 1, p. 219.
He teaches that, in each of these three dispensations, "God's
plan with reference to men has a distinct and separate out-
line;" that "the dispensation before the flood was under the
supervision and special ministration of angels, who were
permitted to try what they could do to recover the fallen
and degenerate race." Vol. 1, p. 220. That during the
second dispensation, 'the present evil world,' up to 1874, man
was permitted to try governing himself; but by reason of
the fall he was under the control of Satan, the "prince of
this world;" that "this dispensation was to end in the great-
est time of trouble the world ever saw;" that this dispensa-
tion was composed of three distinct ages; the age of the
patriarchs from the flood to the death of Jacob; the Jewish
age, and the Gospel age; that in this gospel age, "We had
the 'royal priesthood,' composed of all those who offered them-
.selves to God," living sacrifices, 'holy and acceptable through
Jesus Christ," that during this period "the body of Christ
was called out of the world, and shown ... the ex-
ceeding great and precious promises whereby (by obedience
to the call and its requirements) they might become partak-
ers of the divine nature." Vol. 1, pp. 221-22. That 'the
third great dispensation is to be composed of many ages,'
that the first of these is the Millennial age; that "it is the
^This dispensation ended in 1874.
Some Modern Isms. 117
thousand years during which Christ will reign over and
thereby bless all the families of the earth, accomplishing
the restitution of all things spoken by the mouth of all the
holy prophets. During that age, sin and death shall be
forever blotted out." Vol. 1, p. 222.
"The ages to come following the great reconstruction
period, are to be ages of perfection, blessedness and happi-
ness, regarding the work of which the Scriptures are silent."
Vol. 1, p. 223.
"Each of these dispensations has its distinct seasons for
the beginning and development of its work, and each ends
with a harvest manifesting its fruits. The harvest at the
close of the Jewish age was a period of forty years, lasting
from the beginning of Jesus' ministry. ... A. D. 29,
until the destruction of Jerusalem, A. D. 70. Vol. 1, p. 223.
"x\ harvest constitutes the closing period of the Gospel
age also, during which there is again a lapping of the
two ages — the Gospel age ending, and the Restitution or
Millennial age beginning. The Gospel age closes by stages,
as did its pattern or 'shadow,' the Jewish age. As then,
the first seven years of the harvest were devoted in a special
sense to a w^ork in and for Israel after the flesh, and were
years of favor, so here we find a similar seven years indi-
cated as having the same bearing upon the Gospel Church,
to be followed by a period of trouble (fire) upon the world
as a punishment for wickedness, and a preparation for the
reign of righteousness." Vol. I, p. 224.
He teaches that God planned that during the Jewish age
some persons might avail themselves of God's overtures of
mercy and win for themselves, the title to recreation in
the millennial age, as perfect human beings; that God planned
that a few persons in the Gospel age, through faith and the
sacrifice of their human lives, might w^in the title to a call
into spiritual existence and elevation to the Divine nature
118 Some Modern Isms.
in the millennial age; that in the Millennial age all the
hosts of those who have died shall be "resurrected" (created)
and given a trial full and sufficient, when, if they choose
to serve Christ, they shall be made perfect with the perfec-
tion with which Adam started. (See Vol. 2.)
He says, "Let us not be misunderstood. We have hereto-
fore shown that God's plan does not extend to the con-
verting of the world during the Gospel Age. He did not
intend to do so, but merely designed the selection and trial
of the Church now, and the blessing of the world through
the Church, the Christ, in an age to follow this. We do not
contradict this when we say that the Elijah (Christ in the
flesh), has tried to convert the world and failed
for though God knew and foretold that our mission to the
world would be largely a failure, except in selecting of a
choice little flock, yet knowing that the effort would react
favorably upon ourselves, his commission to us through our
Lord Jesus Christ was to try to convert the world, when
he said, 'Go ye into all the world and preach the good
tidings to every creature'." Vol. 2, p. 252.
He says with regard to election and free grace:
"If the distinctive features of the epochs and dispensa-
tions outlined in a preceeding chapter be kept in mind, and
all the passages relating to election and free grace be ex-
amined and located, it will be found that all those which
treat of election apply to the present. (Gospel and past ages,
while those which teach Free Grace are fully applicable to
the next age."
"Since the fall of man into sin, to the present time, cer-
tain of God's favors have been restricted to specify indi-
viduals, nations and classes, while in the next age all the
world will be invited to share the favors then offered, then
made known to all, and whosoever will may come and drink
at life's fountain freely." Vol. 1, pp. 96, 97.
Some Modern Isms. 119
"That the Christian Church, the body of Christ, is an
exception to God's general plan for mankind, is evident from
the statement that its selection was detennined in the divine
plan before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4, 5), at
which time God not only foresaw the fall of the race into
sin, but also predetermined the justification, the sanctifica-
tion and the glorification of this class, which during the
Gospel age, he has been calling out of the world to be con-
formed to the image of his Son, to be partakers of the
divine nature and to be fellow heirs with Jesus Christ of
the Millennial Kingdom for the establishment of universal
righteousness and peace."
"This shows that the election, or choice, of the Church
was a pre-determined thing on God's part: but mark, it is
not an unconditional election of the individual members of
the Church. Before the foundation of the world God de-
termined that such a company should be selected for such
a purpose within a specific time — the Gospel Age. While
we cannot doubt that God could have foreseen the action of
each individual member of the Church, and could have fore-
known just who would be worthy and therefore constitute
the members of that 'little flock,' yet this is not the way
in which God's word presents the doctrine of election. It
was not the thought of an individual predestination which
the Apostles sought to inculcate, but that a class was pre-
destined in God's purpose to fill the honorable position, the
selection of which would be upon conditions of severe trials
of faith and obedience and the sacrifice of earthly privileges
even unto death. Thus by an individual trial, and by in-
dividually 'overcoming' the individual members of the pre-
determined class are being chosen or accepted into all bless-
ings and benefits predetermined of God for this class."
"In selecting the little flock, God makes a very general
call — ^manv are called." . . . "But even of those who
120 Some Modern Isms.
hear and come, all are not worthy. Wedding garments are
provided, but some will not wear them, and must be re-
jected; and of those who do put on the robes of justifica-
tion, and who receive the honor of being begotten to a new-
nature, some fail to make their calling and election sure
by faithfulness to their covenant." (Vol. 1, pp. 193-195).
According to this plan, Jesus, Russell teaches, was to be-
come present (spiritually) October, 1874; "Israel after the
Spirit" was to obtain from the death of Jesus till 1878; her
period of favor was thus to cover 1845 years; the nominal
house of Sons, or the Christian Church, was then to be
spewed out, in A. D., 1878; she was to be thirty-seven years
in falling, and was to fall in 1915, the end of an age of
harvest of 40 years — a harvest extending from the year 1874
to the end of 1914, or to 1915. Vol. 2, pp. 246, 247.
Here, again, the statement of this plan of the modes of
the dispensation, of how God related himself to the world
in the several ages, should be enough to kill it. But, ex
abundantia a few weaknesses may be pointed out.
1st. Russell's teaching that, in the first dispensation, God
let the angels see what they could do toward man's recovery,
is a vain dream of his. The Scriptures which he cites in
support of this teaching are Job 38:7, which tells of the
joy of the angels at the creation of the lower universe; and
Heb. 2:5, "Unto the angels hath he not put in subjection
the world to come." If from the assertion, that God hath
not subjected the world to come to angels, there be a legiti-
mate inference that he hath subjected a certain other world
to angels, it is that he hath subjected the world of the
Jewish age to angels. For in the context we are taught
that he had promulgated the law through them; and in
the context it is precisely a contrast between the Mosaic
dispensation and the Christian dispensation that the Apostle
means, and not a contrast between the Antediluvian and
later ages.
Some Modern Isms. 121
2d. Russell's teaching that God does not intend the con-
version of the world in the Gospel age — that he intends
that in the Millennial age; that Christ commissioned the
Church not to convert world in the Gospel age — but to try
to convert it in that age, is supported by the kind of eisegesis
that permits and exacts the gratuitous interpolation of the
word try into the very language of the great commission.
In that commission Christ said: "Go ye, therefore, and
make disciples of all nations;" and, to guarantee success in
that effort, Christ, to whom all authority in heaven and
earth had been given, added, "Lo, I am with you always,
even unto the end of the world." It is supported also by
an eisegesis that turns Christ's visible coming into an invisi-
ble coming; and by an eisegesis which represents Christ as
having thus come in 1874, as having assumed the power
and title of king in 1878, and as having accomplished utter-
ly the destruction of the nominal Christian Church in the
next "thirty-seven years," or in 1915. Vol. 2, p. 247.
3d. Russell's teaching that God has planned to restore,
in the Millennial age, all men who have not in previous
ages accepted Christ, to the perfection of nature with w^hich
Adam was naturally endowed, is supported with similar
eisegesis, and with utter disregard both of God's sanity and
of the havoc such teaching, if believed, would make of men's
morals: No sane ruler, wishing his righteous laws obeyed,
would advertise to his subjects that the only penalty of sin
would be temporary annihilation, coupled with a recall into
existence and a new period of probation vastly more favor-
able. No righteous ruler would hold such a prospect out
before sinful men; and so encourage universal license in a
race set in sin. But, more, the Bible teaches nothing of a
salvation which shall result in the status of Adamic per-
fection. It teaches only of a salvation to the life which is
life — heirship with Christ to eternal glory.
122 Some Modern Isms.
4th. Russell minimizes the number of the saved in the
Gospel age, by stressing isolated texts. It is with him al-
ways the "little flock" that is saved. Now, the Bible does
not teach that every man is to be saved, but it does teach
that a great multitude that no man can number is to be
saved; that a number so vast as to justify our Lord in
saying, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw
all men unto me."
5th. Russell's teaching that there is a future probation
for all who do not accept Christ in the Gospel age is with-
out Biblical warrant, or any warrant in reason. He has no
more evidence from either source than the average assertor
of future probation, which in the face of Scripture teaching
is nil. In 2 Cor. 5:10, for example, "For we must all ap-
pear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one
may receive the things done in the body, according to that
he hath done, whether it be good or bad," we are taught
that in the great award the things done here and now are
determinative of our future. In 2 Cor. 6:2, "Now is the
day of salvation; behold now (in the Gospel Age), is
the day of salvation," the same truth is reiterated. So also
in Matt. 28:19, 20, in connection with Matt 24:3, 6, 14.
Many other passages show that the time of salvation is
now, till the end of the world — till Christ's second coming.
6th, Russell's teaching that election is not of individuals
but of classes, is a form of Pelagianism; and is refuted by
the usual arguments against Pelagianism, e. g., by the
fact that Scriptural language shows that individuals not
classes possessing given characteristics were elected to sal-
vation. See Rom. 8:29, ff., et passim.
In identifying election with "acceptance into all blessings
and benefits predetermined of God for this class," the bald-
ness of his Pelagianism appears.
7th. In teaching the doctrine of falling from justification,
Russell follows the Pelagian error.
SoiME Modern Isms. 123
8th. The facts of history as well as the teachings of Scrip-
ture show to be false the dates which Russell fixes upon
for the coming of Christ and Christ's spewing out the Church
and the utter collapse of the Church.
3d. RusselVs Doctrine of Creation.
He seems to reduce creation to formation; at least, to be
unwilling to teach de nihilo creation. He says, "The wise
will not attempt to guess that which God has not revealed
respecting how he previously gathered together earth's
atoms.'' Vol. 6, p. 23. He teaches that a personal God
framed "the universe, man excepted, out of these atoms,
probably by a method of evolution. He teaches that "man
was a direct and perfect creation" (Vol. 1, p. 32); but by
this creation he seems to mean nothing more than formation
of his body out of earthy particles and vivifying it with
the breath of life, i. e., with that vitality (as he explains),
that man shares along with the lower animals.
Here the author intermingles senile dreams with nonsense,
which he reads into the word of God in order to support his
theory.
4th. Russell's doctrine of providence resembles as far as
his peculiar crotchets allow, the Semi-Pelagian view, and
therefore, calls for no specific representation or refutation,
that having been done in the regular course in theology.
II. RiisselVs Anthropology; or Doctrine of Man's Origin,
Constitution, Soul, Original Moral Character, Fall, Sin, Pen-
alty, Destiny.
1. As has just been shown, Russell teaches that God cre-
ated (formed) man by an immediate exertion of his own
power, as the crown of material creation.
2. He teaches that man consists of body and the spirit
of life; that man's body is the most perfect of animal or-
ganisms; and that the spirit is simply vital, animal energy.
Thus he says:
124 Some Modern Isms.
"Man's superiority over the beast, according to the ac-
count given in Genesis, consists not in his having a different
kind of breath or spirit, but in his having a higher form,
a superior body, a finer organism — endowed with a brain
organism which enables him to reason upon planes far above
and beyond the intelligence of the lower animals, the brute
creation. We find that in these respects man was created
a fleshly likeness of his Creator, who is a Spirit being.''
Vol. 5, p. 310.
"But as we have found, and as all men are witnesses,
each has a different bodily organism which gives to each
his different characteristics, and which alone constitutes one
higher and the other lower in the scale of intelligence."
Vol. 5, p. 327.
In support of these teachings, he quotes amongst other
passage, Eccles. 3:21, "Who knoweth the spirit of man
whether it goeth upward?" He endeavors to break the
force of Eccles. 12:7, "The dust returneth to the earth as
it was, and the spirit returneth to God who gave it," by
making spirit to mean "the privilege of living the power or
permission of living." But, in the 5th verse, the writer
says, "because man goeth to his everlasting home." How
can man be said to go to his everlasting home, if his body
goes back to the dust and his spirit is nothing but "per-
mission to live." In that case man is not. He has no home.
He has become non-existent.
3. He teaches that the soul of man is a resultant quality
or condition from the injection of spirit (vital energy) into
the body; that a soul is a sentient being. He says:
"Examining this question from the Bible standpoint, we
will find that man has a body and has a spirit ('vital force,')
but is a soul. Science concurs with the Scriptures in this.
Indeed, one of the sciences, Phrenology, undertakes to treat
the skulls and lower animals as indexes and to read there-
Some Modern Isms. 125
from the natural traits and characteristics of the own-
ers." . . .
"The word 'soul' as found in the Scriptures, signifies
sentient being; that is a being possessed of powers of sense,
sense-perception. Witli minds freed from prejudice, let us
go with this definition to the Genesis account of man's cre-
ation, and note that (1) the organism, or body, was formed;
(2) 'the spirit of life,' 'called Breath of life,' was communi-
cated, (3) living soul, or sentient being resulted. This is
very simple and easily understood. It shows that the body
is not the soul, nor is the spirit or breath of life the soul;
but that when these two were united, the resultant quality,
or condition, was living man, living being — a living soul,
possessed of perceptive powers." Vol. 5, pp. 322-323.
Over against this: (1) Set the words of our Lord. "Fear
not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the
soul; but rather fear him, which is able to destroy both
soul and body in hell." Matt. 10:28. Such is the common
representation in Scriptures. The body and soul are set
forth as distinct substances; Christ also represents Dives and
Lazarus as living in the unseen world. Their bodies were
in the grave. (2) There is another class of passages which
equally refutes this point in Russellism. These passages
represent the body as a garment which is to be laid aside — a
house in which the soul dwells. Peter says that he "must
shortly put off this tabernacle." Paul says, "If our earthly
house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building
of God," 2 Cor. 5:1-9; and in the same connection he speaks
of being unclothed and clothed upon with our house which
is from heaven.
^^hiie soul is often used in Scripture with special refer-
ence to man's sensuous and perceptive faculties, and spirit
is often used with special reference to his higher faculties.
the words are often used as equivalent and of a substance
126 Some Modern Isms.
and not of a mere vital energy, albeit the substance is quali-
fied with vital energy, of a kind.
4. Russell teaches that man was good — morally good — as
he came originally from the hands of God. He apparently
holds a position as close to the Wesleyan Arminians as his
crochets will allow on this point.
5. With regard to the Fall, Russell teaches the fact of
it as well as the morally excellent character of Adam prior
to the fall, in the following words:
"Mental and physical perfection, under the conditions pre-
sented in the divine account of the creation, clearly and
positively imply moral perfection; for we are to remember
that, according to the Scriptures, moral obliquity and con-
sequent degradation had not set in. Nor is it supposable
that man, without moral elements to his mental develop-
ment, would be described in the Scriptures as a "very good"
man, or as an image of his Creator." .
"The death sentence, or 'curse,' pronounced against Adam,
viz.: 'Dying thou shalt die' (Gen. 2:17, margin), was not
merely against his muscles and physical frame — it included
the entire man, the mental as well as the physical; and this
also included the moral qualities, because they are a part
of the mental. It is in full confirmation of this that we
see today that man is a fallen being in every sense of the
word. Physically he is degenerated, and his average of life
has fallen, under most favorable conditions, to thirty-three
years; mentally and morally we also see that he is very
deficient, yet possessing organs capable of much higher de-
velopment than his short life will permit." Vol. 5, p. 407.
To one who is sufficiently superficial this quotation may
appear to be a simple, pious statement of the teaching of
the Scriptures on the subject; but let him begin to think,
and it will appear unworthy of respect. What right has
Russell to contrast in these words the physical and the
Some Modern Isms. 127
mental, since he teaches that man consists simply of matter
organized in given ways and vital, animal energy. For
that is physical too, only physical according to Russell.
6. Russell falsely resolves sin into that which produces
unhappiness. Thus he says: "We distinguish these op-
posite principles of right and wrong by their effects when
put into action. That principle which, when active, is bene-
ficial and productive of ultimate order, harmony and happi-
ness we call a right principle; and the opposite, which is
productive of discord, unhappiness and destruction, we call
a wrong principle. The results of these principles in action
we call good and evil, and the intelligent being, capable of
discerning the right principle from the wrong, and volun-
tarily governed by the one or the other, we call virtuous or
sinful." Vol. 1, pp. 118, 119.
A peculiarity of his doctrine of sin is his representing it
as an "asset" for all those who are not received into the
"little flock." He tells us that in the millennium all those
who have not been received into this body shall be called
into existence ("resurrected") and given a new trial; where-
upon he says: "The experience with evil, contrasted w'ith
the experience with good, which will come to each during
the trial of the coming age, will constitute the advantage
by reason of which the results of the second trial will differ
so widely from the results of the first." Vol. 1, p. 151.
Teach this doctrine to men and women — of unrenewed
hearts — teach them that sin is a "valuable asset" — no matter
what sort of sin — teach this doctrine along with Russell's
doctrine that death is going into non-existence — that it in-
volves the saint and the sinner in exactly the same penalty,
and you will incite those so taught toward the grossest wick-
edness.
7. Of the penalty of sin, Russell writes:
"It should be remembered, however, that it is not the pain
128 Some Modern Isms.
and suffering in dying, but death — the extinction of life — in
which dying culminates, that is the penalty of sin. The
suffering is only incidental to it, and the penalty falls on
many with but little or no suffering. ... In the
penalty pronounced there was no intimation of rel^ease.
(Gen. 2:17). Vol. 1, p. 154.
"What, then, dies? We answer that it is the soul that
dies — the sentient being ceases. Let us remember that the
sentient being was produced by the union of the breath, or
spirit of life, with an organism, and that the dissolution, or
separation, of these two causes the cessation of being the
soul — death. That this is true of the lower animals, none
would for a moment question; but is it not equally true of
man, the highest animal, created in the intellectual image
and moral likeness of God?" Vol. 5, p. 341.
Remark :
This is utterly unbiblical. We read in that book that
Abraham "died in a good old age . . . and was gath-
ered to his father." A little later we read that his sons
"buried him in the cave of Machpelah. Gen. 25:8, 9. His
people were not buried "in the cave of Machpelah; he while
buried there, was gathered unto his fathers." The meaning
must be that he was buried as to his body in Machpelah
and gathered as to his soul to his fathers. His soul survived
the shock of death. So Samuel is represented as surviving
the shock of death. He came up at the interview of Saul
with the witch of Endor. I Sam. 29:15.
Our Lord Jesus Christ represents Abraham, a dead beggar,
Lazarus, and a rich man as all existing in Hades — Abraham
and Lazarus as in one portion of Hades and Dives as in
another portion. Our Lord teaches of the rich man that lie
survived and suffered, of Abraham and Lazarus, that they
survived and were happy.
The Apostle John, saw. Rev. 6., the souls of multitudes
Some Modern Isms. 129
who had been beheaded in the great transgression, existing
and full of activity. See also 2 Cor. 5:1-9; Phil. 1:23.
In addition, the absolute unity and indivisibility of the
substance of the soul to which a sound philosophy points
would seem to show that there can be no such thing as
the extinction of the soul.
Russell's teaching that suffering is no part of the pen-
alty due to sin is shown to be false by the language of the
curse pronounced up the first pair. Gen. 3:16-19. The
ills of the sinner's life are but stages in his dying. Rus-
sell's teaching that an organism may not have life, is con-
trary to the fact. It is always a living thing. It is growth
regulated by a vital principle. Let that principle depart
and the remains begin to fall to pieces.
8. Russell teaches of man's destiny as follows:
"Paul says that the first man (who was a sample of
what the race will be when perfect) was of the earth,
earthy; and his posterity, with the exception of the Gospel
Church, will in the resurrection, still be earthy, human,
adapted to the earth (1. Cor. 15:38, 44.) Vol. 1, p. 191.
"While Jesus as a man was an illustration of perfect
human nature, to which the mass of mankind will be re-
stored, yet since his resurrection he is the illustration of
the glorious divine nature, which the overcoming Church
will, at the resurrection, share with him.
"Because the present age is devoted mainly to the develop-
ment of this class which is offered a change of nautre, and
because the apostolic epistles are devoted to the instruction
of this "little flock", it should not be inferred that God's
plans end with the completion of this chosen compan}'.
Nor, on the other hand, should we go to the opposite ex-
treme, and suppose the promises of the divine nature, spirit-
ual promises, etc., made to these, are God's design for all
mankind. To these are the "exceeding great and precious
130 Some Modern Isms.
promises", over and above the precious promises made to
all mankind. To rightly divide the word of truth, we should
observe that the Scriptures recognize the perfection of the
divine nature in the "little flock" and the perfection of the
human nature in the restored world, as two separate things."
Vol. 1. p. 180. Cf. p. 191.
"The conditions on which the Church may be exalted with
her lord to the divine nature (2 Pet. 1:4), are precisely the
same as the conditions on which he received it, even by
following in his footprints (1 Pet. 2:21), presenting her-
self a living sacrifice, as he did, and then faithfully car-
rying out that consecration even until the sacrifice termi-
nates in death. This change of nature from human to divine
is given as a reward to those who, within the Gospel age,
sacrifice the human nature, as did our Lord, with all its in-
terests, hopes and aims, present and future — even unto death.
In the resurrection such will awake, not to share with the
rest of mankind in the blessed restoration to human per-
fection and all its accompanying blessings, but to share the
likeness and glory and joy of the Lord, as partakers with
him of the divine nature." Vol. 1, 195.
Thus, according to Russell, here, two great classes of man-
kind are destined to two respective stages of salvation : ( 1 )
"the little flock", to elevation to the divine nature; (2)
The great body of mankind to Adamic perfection. Tht^re
is still a third class, a small class, the members of which
will not avail themselves of salvation through Christ either
in the Gospel age, or in the Millennium.
In regard to Russell's teaching on this subject of the
destiny of men, we remark:
1st. He uses the same sort of eisegesis in support of it
for which he is remarkable in all his teaching. Take, for
example, his dealing with 1. Cor., 15:38, 44. He refers to
it in support of his doctrine that the major part of Adam's
Some Modern Isms. 131
race will be, in th resurrection, "earthy, human, adapted to
the earth". Now, verse 38, "God giveth it a body as it
hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body," simply
teaches that God gives to all products of the earth each its
own form" and " that therefore, at the resurrection He may
give to man's body the form He pleases to give it. One
cannot infer from looking at a seed what form the plant
is to have. No more can he infer the form of the resurrec-
tion body from our present body." Verse 44, "It is sown a
natural body, it is raised a spiritual body", teaches that
the resurrection body shall be a body, adapted to the spirit,
and which from Paul's description we know to be incor-
^ptible, glorious, powerful and adapted to the heavenly
stage existence," teaches that just as certainly as we have
bodies adapted to our present existence so certainly shall
the saint have bodies adapted to their future existence. The
passage does not support Russell's contention, at all. (See
also 1. Cor. 15:48; Hodge in loco.)
2d. Russell gives no proof that Jesus, prior to his death,
had the very kind of human nature in all its accidents to
which the mass of mankind are to be elevated.
3d. Another radically false teaching of Russell's here is
that some men— those who constitute the "little flock"— are
to be elevated to the divine nature. The finite nature can-
not be turned into the infinite nature. The created nature
cannot be turned into the uncreated nature. Man cannot
become the highest order of spirit. This is impossible even
by Almighty power.
Russell misunderstands and vastly overworks 2 Pet. 1:4:
"That ye may be partakers of the divine nature." The
meaning is: That ye may grow into holiness as perfect for
finite beings as that which belongs to God is for Him. (Cf.
Heb. 12:10; but he chastens 'us for our profit that we might
be partakers of his holiness'). The remaining clause in 2
132 Some Modern Isms.
Pet. 1 :4, "having escaped the corruption that is in the world
through lust," makes clear the fact, that the Apostle has in
mind in the foregoing clause the getting back the likeness
to God, whose image was lost through sin. It is an exchange
of the quality of sin for the quality of holiness that Peter
holds before his readers, not at all a change of the substan-
tial nature — from the created to the uncreated — a thing im-
possible to be wrought by Divine power even.
III. Russell's Soteriology: or His Teaching Concerning
the Covenant Between the Father and the Son; the Nature
of the Mediator, the Nature of his Sacrifice; the Results of
His Sacrifice; Christ's Humiliation and Exaltation; Two
Kinds of Salvation; Regeneration; Salvation by Works —
Three Ways: Faith, Repentance, Justification; Sanctifica-
tions and Good Works.
1. Russell, of course, can know nothing of a Covenant of
Redemption between the persons of the trinity, since, as we
have seen he teaches that there was no trinity of persons in
the Godhead. He teaches that the God determined to ransom
Adam's race through the angel Michael as ransomer, and
that, accordingly. He turned Michael into a human being.
Russell says of the ransomer: "When he was made flesh,
to be our Redeemer, it was not of compulsion, but as a
voluntary matter, the result of his complete harmony with
the Father, and his joyful acquiescence in carrying out every
feature of the divine will — which he had learned to respect
and love." Vol. 5, p. 84.
This twaddle not only gives us no eternal understanding
and harmony of purpose between the Father and the Son
as to redemption, but gives us only a creature redeemer — a
redeemer incompetent to the work of redemption, as shall
be brought out subsequently. If this contention that Christ
is a mere creature could be made good, this would be a
death blow to the doctrine of the atonement.
Some Modern Isms. 133
2. As to the nature of the Mediator, Russell teaches noth-
ing of the unity of the divine and human natures in one
personality in Christ. In Russell's view Christ is a pure
spirit being "before the incarnation (so-called), a purely
animal being of the human class during the period of his
incarnation (so-called), and a pure "spirit being" of the
highest or divine type after his "resurrection" and "eleva-
tion." Jesus of Nazareth, while on the earth, had no other
nature than an animal nature. See quotations on page 5,
of this paper.
But see for the annihilation of this twaddle such passages
of Scripture as John 3:13, "No man hath ascended up to
heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son
of Man, which is in heaven." Christ could only be in
heaven, while on earth in virtue of his possession of the
divine nature. See also remarks on p. 112, of this paper, in
proof that Jesus Christ was God as well as man.
3. Russell teaches as to the nature of the sacrifice of our
Lord: that "Jesus presented His perfect humanity a sacri-
fice, laying down all right and claim to future existence,"
(Vol. 1, p. 199); that "his human existence ended on the
cross (Vol. 1, 230), that "our Lord's being or soul was non-
existent during the period of death: "He poured out his
soul unto death: He made his soul an offering for sin."
Vol. 5, p. 362.
Russell teaches that God willed that Jesus should thus be
come non-existent, and that, therefore, it is right. He asks
whether God "may not do what He will with His own.''
In regard to this impiety, remark:
1st. If Christ became non-existent on the cross, then the
Christ, in glory is not the same Christ at all. He could not
rise again for he was not. The so-called Christ in glory,
is a brand new being. It is purely arbitrary to regard him
as in any way connected with the Christ on earth. In order
134 Some Modern Isms.
to a resurrection from the dead somewhat must remain in
being after death. According to Russell, Jesus passed into
non-existence. Then Christ "is not risen," and, according
to Paul, if this be so, "ye are yet in your sins." But this
by the way.
2d. It is more important to notice that Russell's doctrine
on this subject flatly contradicts the Scriptures which teach
that Christ was to be in paradise the very day of his death,
not another being but he, the same, that subsequently he
appeared to his disciples and identified himself as the very
being who had been crucified, who bore the wound prints
in hands and feet and side. Russell reduces sober and blessed
history to a fraud.
4. Russell teaches as to the results of Christ's sacrifice:
"Our Lord Jesus Christ, 'the man Christ Jesus,' himself un-
blemished, approved, and with a perfect seed or race in him,
unborn, likewise untainted with sin, gave his all of human
life and title as the full ransom price for Adam and the
race or seed in him when sentenced. Having thus fully
purchased the lives of Adam and his race, Christ offers to
adopt as his seed, his children, all of Adam's race who will
accept the terms of his new Covenant and thus by faith come
into his family — the family of God — and receive everlast-
ing life. Thus the Redeemer will see 'his seed' (as many
of Adam's seed as will accept adoption upon his condi-
tions), and prolong his days (resurrection to a higher than
human plane, being granted him by the Father as a reward
for his obedience), and all in the most unlikely way — by
the sacrifice of life and posterity. And thus it is written:
"As all in Adam die, even so all in Christ shall be made
alive."
"The injury we received through Adam's fall (we suf-
fered no injustice) is by God's favor, to be more than offset
with favor through Christ; and all will sooner or later (in
Some Modern Isms. 135
God's due time), have a full opportunity to be restored to
the same standing that Adam enjoyed before he sinned.
Those who do not receive a full knowledge and, by faith,
an enjoyment of this favor of God in the present time (and
such are the great majority, including children and heathen),
will assuredly have these privileges in the next age, or
"world to come," the dispensation or age to follow the pres-
ent. To this end, all that are in their graves .
shall come forth." "As each one becomes aware of the
ransom price given by our Lord Jesus, and of his subse-
quent privileges, he will be considered as again on trial, as
Adam was; and again obedience will bring everlasting life,
and disobedience everlasting death — the 'second death.' Per-
fect obedience without perfect ability to render it, will not
be required of any. Under the New Covenant, the Church,
during the Gospel age, have had the righteousness of Christ
imputed to them by faith, to make up their unavoidable de-
ficiencies through the weakness of the flesh; and this same
grace will operate toward 'whoever will' of the world during
the millennial age. Not until physical perfection is reached
(which will be the privilege of all before the close of the
millennial age), will absolute moral perfection be required.
This new trial, the result of the ransom and the New Cove-
nant, will differ from the trial in Eden, in that in it the
acts of each one will affect only his own nature. Vol. 1,
pp. 129, 130.
Thus Russell teaches that the satisfaction rendered by
Jesus Christ (whom he represents as a mere man — ^the high-
est type of the animal kingdom), resulted in a new trial
to the children of Adam individually and in a lowered de-
mand for obedience on their part till they have perfect abil-
ity to render perfect obedience restored to them in the millen-
nial age; that Christ in this work, not only sacrifices him-
self but a "race which is in him — sacrifices his "life and
136 Some Modern Isms.
posterity;'' and that Adam's posterity because of their ac-
quaintance with sin and the more lenient conditions of the
second trial are much more likely to come through suc-
cessfully.
Remark :
(1) That this doctrine involves the doctrine of salvation
by works in a bald form. Through Christ a new opportunity
to win salvation is offered and the conditions under which
it may be won are made more favorable; but to get either
of two salvations offered, a man must work it out himself.
(2) That his doctrine of a lowered demand for obedience
to righteous law is dishonoring to God, who cannot demand
less than perfect righteousness, from every moral creature, ex-
cept at the cost of abdicating His throne of holiness.
(3) That to teach that one mere rational creature can
atone for the guilt of another is stultifying, if God be just.
The creature however holy and exalted is under obligation
to give his utmost service to God on his own account. He
can make satisfaction for the guilt of no other creature.
(4) His exegesis of "As all in Adam die, so, all in Christ,"
etc., is incorrect. Dr. Chas. Hodge says of this passage:
"That the word all in the latter part of this verse is to
be restricted to all believers (or rather, to all people of Christ,
as infants are included), is plain: 1. Because the word in
both clauses is limited. It is the all who are in Adam that
die; and the all who are in Christ who are made alive. As
union with Christ is made the ground of the communication
of life here spoken of, it can be extended only to those who
are in him. But according to the constant representation of
the Scriptures, none are in him but his own people. "If
any man be in Christ, he is a new creature." 2. Cor. 5:17.
2. Because the verb zooppoiatha here found is never used of
the wicked. Whenever employed in reference to the work
of Christ it alwavs means to communicate to them that life
SoAiE Modern Isms. 137
of which he is the source, John 5:21, 6:63; Rom. 8:11; I
Cor. 15:45; Gal. 3:21. The real meaning of the verse,
therefore, is, 'As in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be
made partakers of a glorious and everlasting life.' Unless,
therefore, the Bible teaches that all men are in Christ, and
that all through him partake of eternal life, the passage
must be restricted to his own people. 3. Because, although
Paul elsewhere speaks of a general resurrection both of the
just and of the unjust. Acts 24:15, yet, throughout this
chapter he speaks only of the resurrection of the righteous.
4. Because, in the parallel passage in Rom. 5:12-21, the
same limitation must be made. In verse 18 of that chap-
ter, it is said, "As by the offence of one judgment came upon
all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of
one the free gift came upon all men to justification of life.'
That is, as for the offence of Adam, all men were condemned,
so for the righteousness of Christ, all men are justified. The
context and the analogy of Scripture require us to under-
stand this to mean, as all who are in Adam are condemned,
so all who are in Christ are justified. No historical Chris-
tian church has ever lield that all men indiscriminately are
justified. For whom God justifies them he also glorifies."
Rom. 8:30." See Hodge, Commentary on I Corinthians, I
Cor. 15:22.
5. Russell teaches concerning Christ's humiliation and ex-
altation, that it consists in his being turned from a high
angelic spirit being into a human being, i. e., into the highest
type of animal being, his living the human animal life, and
his passing at the crucifixion into absolute non-existence,
never as a man to live again; and that his exaltation con-
sists in his being called into existence again as a spirit be-
ing and being "elevated" into the divine nature — the highest
type of existence.
Quotations already adduced make this plain. Scriptures
138 SoisiE Modern Isms.
already adduced also make it equally plain that this teach-
ing conflicts with Scripture. They teach that he continued
to exist and that his body was resurrected from the dead.
Hear him say to the Apostles: "Behold my hands and my
feet, that it is I myself: handle me and see; for a spirit hath
not flesh and bones, as ye see me have." Luke 24:39, etc.
Common sense teaches also that Russellism at this point
is nonsense. According to Russellism the unite is changed
into the infinite — an impossibility as has been already pointed
out.
6. Russell teaches four kinds of salvation — a salvation to
opportunity to all, and a salvation of the "little flock" to
the divine nature, and a salvation of certain Church mem-
bers, justified but not sanctified to a spiritual but not divine
nature, and the salvation of the great majority to Adamic
perfection. Thus he says:
" "We see, then, that the general salvation, which will come
to every individual, consists of light from the true light, and
an opportunity to choose life; and as the great majority of
the race is in the tomb, it will be necessary to bring them
from the grave, in order to testify to them the good tidings
of a Savior; also that the special salvation which believers
now enjoy in hope (Rom. 8:24); and the reality of which
will, in the millennial age, be revealed also, to those who
'believe in that day,' is a full release from the thraldom of
sin, and the corruption of death, into the glorious liberty
of the children of God. But attainment to all these bless-
ings will depend upon hearty compliance with the laws of
Christ's Kingdom — the rapidity of the attainment of perfec-
tion indicating the degree of love for the King and for his
law of love." Vol. 1, p. 107.
"This change of nature from human to divine is given as
a reward to those who, within the Gospel age, sacrifice the
human nature, as did our Lord, with all its interests, hopes
Some Modern Isms. 139
and aims, present and future — even unto death. In the
resurrection such will awake, not to share with the rest of
mankind in the blessed restitution to human perfection and
all its accompanying blessings, but to share the likeness and
glory and joy of the Lord, as partakers with him of the
divine nature." Vol. 1, p. 196. Cf., also pp. 153 and 211.
Russell teaches that there are believers "who shrink from
the death of the human will" but whom God still loves and
will therefore bring "by the way of adversity and trouble
to the perfect spiritual plane. But they will have lost the
right to the throne of glory."
He endeavors to support his doctrine of these different
types of salvation by an eisegesis. of such texts as I Tim.
2:10: "The Saviour of all men, especially of those that
believe"; John 3:6, etc., and by the assertion that the only
Scripture quoted to prove that this life is the only period
of probation is Eccles. 11:3, "Where the tree falleth, there
it shall lie."
Now this latter assertion is that of an ignoramus or a
falsifier. "Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now
is the day of salvation (2 Cor. 6:2) is another text: "For
we (men) must all appear before the judgment seat of
Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his
body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good
or bad" (2 Cor. 5:10), is another; and there are others and
good ones; and if this be the only period of probation Rus-
sellism at this point has a broken neck.
Russell and the Lord Jesus Christ do not harmonize on
the subject of whether there is a class of the saved who are
not joint heirs with Jesus Christ. In Matt. 25:31 ff., Christ
presents only two classes as obtaining after the judgment
the saved and the lost — the heirs of eternal life and the
"Kingdom," and the doomed to everlasting punishment. If
there are two kinds of salvation of so diverse a nature, why
140 Some Modern Isms.
does Christ say nothing of the fact, why do the apostles say
naught of it?
The texts from Timothy and John referred to above, teach
indeed that in some sense Christ ransomed the world, that
Christ died for the world, and has he not by his death
staved off the world's doom, made the world happier, given
many privileges to the world, died sufficiently for all the
world? Yes; has he not wrought out redemption for all the
world as far as by faith it will receive it, as Russell's creature
Christ, his merely animal Christ, his good beast Christ
could never have done? Is it blasphemous so to speak
of Christ? But that is Russellism.
7. Russell teaches concerning the transformation of those
who constitute the "little flock."
"The beginning and development of the new nature is
likened to the beginning and development of human life.
As in the one case there is a begetting and then a birth, so
in the other. The saints are said to be begotten of God
through the truth. That is, they receive the first impulse
in the divine life from God through his Word. When hav-
ing been justified freely by faith in the ransom, they hear
the call, "Present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy (ran-
somed, justified — and therefore) acceptable unto God, which
is your reasonable service" (Rom. 12:1); and when in
obedience to that call, they fully consecrate their justified
humanity to God a living sacrifice, side by side with that
of Jesus, it is accepted of God; and in that very act the
spiritual life is begun. Sufli find themselves at once think-
ing and acting as the new (transformed) mind prompts,
even to the crucifixion of the human desires."
"Thus to these embryo "new creatures" old things (human
hopes, plans, etc.), pass away, all things become new."
"The birth of the 'new creature' is in the resurrection
(Col. 1:18); . . . It should be remembered that we
Some Modern Isms. 141
are not actually spirit beings until the resurrection." . . .
"When we become spirit beings actually, that is when we
are born of the Spirit, we will no longer be fleshly beings;
for that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." Vol 1, pp.
196, 197.
He thus represents the change as begun and carried on
by man on occasion of God's giving an impulse through his
truth, up to death and as completed by God in the "resur-
rection."
On this remark :
(1) That the spirit being (said here to be born) is not
the same with that human animal in which begetting is
said to be begun of God. The one passed into non-existence
absolute and eternal. Such is his teaching. There is no
regeneration of one being. The begettal process goes on in
one being. The birth of the new creature is that of a sub-
ject belonging to another category of being. The new being
to be called into existence is not I and has none but an
absolutely arbitrary connection with me who am, if Rus-
sellism be true, to go out into blank non-entity? Russell
gives us here more intolerable tom-foolery.
(2) The process, so far as carried out this side of the
grave, is one in which God's part is moral suasion, and
man's part the real outworking of the saving process. But
this contradicts Paul's teaching, Romans 8:29 ff., where we
are taught that every part of the saving process is carried
on efficiently by God.
8. Russell magnifies man's part in his own salvation. He
says: "The conditions on which the Church may be ex-
alted with her Lord to the divine nature (2 Pet. 1:4), are
precisely the same as the conditions on which he received
it; even by following in his footprints (I Peter 2:21), pre-
senting herself a living sacrifice, as he did, and then car-
rying out that consecrated vow until the sacrifice terminates
in death." Vol. 1, p. 196.
142 Some Modern Isms.
Through Vol. 1, pp. 231-241, Russell teaches that the
individuals of the three several classes of the saved, each
work out their own salvation not instrumentally, but effi-
ciently. He says that there are four classes in the nominal
Gospel Church; that one class consists of those who "are
fulfilling their covenant and are dead with Christ to earthly
will, aims, and ambitions," that this class is to receive ele-
vation to the divine nature; that a second class consists of
those who believe and are justified, but do not sacrifice them-
selves and all that they have to God; that through belief,
after passing through adversity and trouble, they shall be
elevated to spiritual natures, though they shall fail of ele-
vation to the divine nature; that the third class consists of
those who are justified but not sanctified, not fully conse-
crated to God, and not begotten, therefore, not spirit beings,
that, if they improve their opportunities in the millennial
age, they shall be rewarded with human Adamic perfection;
and that there is still another class, consisting of those who
do not even believe on Jesus, that these, if they do not im-
prove their probation in the millennial, shall be annihilated.
Russell teaches, accordingly, that there are three ways to
salvation: (1) The "narrow way to life" — a way full of
"dangers and difficulties" — the way to salvation to the di-
vine nature, Vol. 1, p. 207ff.; (2) the same way less stren-
uously pursued to salvation to spiritual nature not so high
as the divine, and (3) the high way to holiness." He writes
of this latter way: "The way back to actual human per-
fection is to be made very plain and easy; so plain that none
may mistake the way; so plain that the way- faring man,
and those unacquainted therewith, shall not go astray."
This magnification of man's part in salvation aligns Rus-
sell so far with Pelagians ; and is at war with the monergism
of salvation, in its initial stages taught in the Scriptures.
The un-Biblical character of the doctrine that men are
Some Modern Isms. 143
saved to one or other of these different sorts of salvation,
two of them involving the substitution of a different sub-
stance for the human is without warrant in the word of
God — a piece of heathenism — a form of Gnosticism rivaling
the forms current in second and third centuries.
9. Russell seems to teach that repentance and faith are
produced simply by the operation of suitable divine truth.
He says: "We now suggest that only the few have ever
had a sufficiency of light to produce full faith, repentance
and reformation." Vol. 1, p. 158.
But the Scriptures teach that faith is the activity of a
regenerate heart, and is the gift of God, not through the
truth, but on occasion of the presentation of truth.
10. Russell teaches concerning justification as follows:
"The condition upon which (in this age) we come to the
justified or perfect human plane is that Christ died for
our sins, redeemed us and lifted us up, 'through faith in
his blood' to the perfect plane from which, in Adam, we
fell. And being justified by faith, we have peace 'with
God' (Rom. 5:1), and are no longer esteemed by God as
enemies, but as justified human sons, on the same plane as
Adam and the Lord Jesus, except that they were actually
perfect, while we are merely reckoned so by God." Vol. 1,
p. 232. Cf. 236.
This teaching jumbles the Scriptural teaching concern-
ing justification. Scripture represents justification as pardon
plus 'grant of title to eternal blessedness. Russell says,
justification restores, "reckonedly" to Adamic perfection.
The Scriptures teach that justification is forgiveness of sins
and an inheritance among the saints. See such texts as
Gal. 4:5, "God sent forth his Son . . . that he might
redeem them that were under the law, that we might re-
ceive the adoption of sons."
Russell's doctrine makes faith the ground of justification
also. In this he is Arminian.
144 Some Modern Isms.
Russell says, Vol. 5, p. 241: "Actual justification will
be the route of approach toward God during the millen-
nium, under the guidance and help of the great mediator."
He teaches that in that age most men will, when standing
probation, succeed, that the law will be lowered proportion-
ately to man's weakened powers, and rise only with the rise
of his powers — that justification will be a man's own work-
in addition to all its other follies, his doctrine here is
strongly Pelagian.
11. Russell teaches of Sanctification and Good-works, in
general, as a Semi-Pelagian, but his teachings has its own
peculiarities. The members of the "little flock" may carry
on their sanctification to the point of "sinless perfection."
The merely justified may fail altogether to improve their
opportunities in this life or even in the Millennium, and
so fail to win Adamic perfection. On the other hand, they
may in the millennial age reach "Adamic perfection."
Everything rests with them.
Not to go into further details Russell's Soteriology is a
soteriology without a redeemer competent to man's redemp-
tion, without a recreative agent competent to renew man's
nature — a soteriology Pelagian and heathen.
IV. Russell's Doctrine of the Sacraments, Baptism and
the Lord's Supper.
He holds that immersion is the proper mode of symboli-
cal, or water, baptism; and that it should be applied to be-
lievers only. He represents water baptism as symbolical
of the burial of the believer into Christ.
There is nothing in these contentions that is probably
correct, though there is nothing which is new or peculiar to
this heretic.
He holds that the Lord's Supper is a memorial of the
anti-typical lamb — of Christ (repudiates the doctrine of the
Roman Catholic Mass). His presentation of the sacraments
is feeble.
Some Modern Isms. 145
V. Russell's Eschatology, or his teaching concerning
Death, the Resurrection, the Return of Christ, the Millen-
nium, the General Judgment, Eternal Life, the Punishment
of the Incorrigible, etc.
1. Russell teaches of death that it is "non-existence," or
"extinction of being.'' Thus he says: "I should be further
remembered that when Adam forfeited life, he forfeited it
forever; and not one of his posterity has ever been able to
expiate his guilt or to regain the lost inheritance. All the
race are either dead or dying. And if they could not expiate
their guilt before death, they certainly could not do it when
dead — when not in existence." Vol. 1, p. 154.
"However, none can appreciate this Scriptural argument
who do not admit the Scriptural statement that death — ex-
tinction of being — is the wages of sin. Those who think of
death as life in torment not only disregard the meaning of
the words death and life, which are opposites, but involve
themselves in two absurdities." Vol. 1, p. 159.
But Abraham, Dives, Lazarus, Moses, Samuel, Christ,
the penitent thief on the cross, and others, are all re-
presented as being, or about to live, after "death" and
prior to any resurrection or restitution. Paul wrote, "I am
in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart and be
with Christ" (Phil. 1:23); "to be absent with the body is
to be present with the Lord," 2 Cor. 5:8. Paul plainly
had no such view of death as C. T. Russell. The Lord
Jesus Christ taught that "God is the God of the living."
Russell has an easy way of obviating the force of incon-
venient texts. For example, in handling the account of the
rich man and Lazarus, he makes Lazarus represent the Gen-
tiles who have received the Gospel, while the rich man stands
for Judah and Benjamin, and his five brothers for the re-
maining ten tribes. Hear some further of his lucubrations
on the same storv.
146 Some Modern Isms.
"Only very recently we have had an exhibition of how
this rich man (Israel), dead as a nation, but alive as a
people, has appealed to father Abraham to have Lazarus
cool his tongue with a drop of water. Of course the thought
would not be that a spirit finger should take a literal drop
of water to cool a literal tongue. The interpretation must
be looked for along the lines of a parable. The fulfillment
came when the Jews of this country, in a general petition,
requested the president of the United States to co-operate
with other Christiari nations and intercede on behalf of their
members in Russia that they might have more liberty and
less persecution, that their torments might be cooled." Vol.
1, No. 4, of People's Pulpit, column 1, p. 2.
2. Russell teaches concerning the Resurrection :
"Believers can for themselves (and by a knowledge of
God's plan, for others also), commit their spirits (their
power of life) to God's hand also, as did our Lord and as
did Stephen — full of faith that God's promise of a resur-
rection would be fulfilled. A resurrection will mean to the
world a reorganization of a human body, and its vivify-
ing or quickening with life-energy, the spirit of life (Heb.
ruach Greek, pneuma. To the Gospel Church, sharers
in the "first (chief) resurrection," it will mean the impar-
tation of the spirit of life energy (Heb. ruach, Greek
pneuma) to a spirit body. I Cor. 13:42-45; Vol. 5, p. 316.
There are, therefore, according to Russell, two kinds of
"resurrection," one of the sharers in the "first resurrection" —
the "impartation of the spirit of life," or "life energy," to
a "spirit body," the other a reorganization of a human body,
and its vivifying, or quickening with life energy. There
is no resurrection here of the bodies of saints according to
Russell's own terms." Their resurrection he says consists
in the impartation of life energy to a "spirit body." Their
old body was dissolved into atoms and they passed into
Some Modern Isms. 147
non-existence, a new body, of an altogether different nature
is, in "due time," brought into existence instead of the old,
and life-energy introduced into it. This new being to take
the place of C. F. Russell, has no more connection with
him than has the angel Gabriel. Suppose he begins to think
as C. F. Russell ceased to think and suppose he shall carry
on the same lines of deception and suppose he turn out to
be just as resourceful as the notorious C. T. Russell, and
be dubbed C. T. Russell, will he be the C. T. Russell, of
Pittsburg, Brooklyn? No; Russell tells us that that Russell
of Pittsburg, etc., at death ceases to exist.
The "resurrection" of the man of the world will also, if
Russell's teaching be true, not be a resurrection of the man
of the world who died, but a creation of some one else in his
place, who will have a chance at an individual probation in
the millennium. The man of the world at death became
non-existent. He never could rise.
Russell should call his "resurrection" by some other name.
He hangs to the Bible word, but puts into it a meaning at
war with the Bible meaning of the word.
The Bible view of the resurrection is illustrated in the
account of our Lord's resurrection. He is represented as con-
tinuing to exist in his spiritual nature in and through death,
as resurrected as to his body, that body being raised from
a state of death.
3. Russell teaches as to the return of Christ, that "He
(our Lord), is no longer human in any sense or degree; for
we must not forget what we have learned (see Vol. 1., Chap.
10), that natures are separate and distinct. Since he is no
longer in any sense or degree a human being, we must not
expect him to come again as a human being, as at the first
advent. His second coming is to be in a different manner
as well as for a different purpose." Vol. 2, p. 107.
"Though our Lord at his second advent will not mani-
148 Some Modern Isms.
fest his presence in the same way that he did during those
forty days after his resurrection, yet we have his assurance
that the 'Brethren shall not be in darkness.' Nay, more,
we shall have an aid, which they could not and did not
have to help them during those forty days, viz., "power
from on high," to guide us into the understanding of every
truth due to be understood, and even as promised to show
us things to come. Hence in due season we shall have full
understanding of the manner, time and attendant circum-
stances of his appearing." Vol. 2, p. 122.
"It is the Lord's plan that his spiritual Kingdom shall
communicate, operate and manifest its presence and power
through human, earthly agencies." Vol. 2, p. 123.
"No one properly recognizing his great exaltation can ex-
pect at his second coming the man Christ Jesus in the body
of flesh prepared for sacrifice and wounded and given in
death as our ransom." Vol. 2, p. 135.
"We should expect that Christ would be manifest in the
flesh of mankind in the same manner that, when the Word
was made flesh, and dwelt among men, God was manifest
in his flesh."
"Mankind in general, as its members come gradually back
to the long-lost image of God, will be fleshly images and
likenesses of the Father and of Christ. At the very be-
ginning of the Millennium, as we have seen, there will be
samples of perfect manhood before the world (Vol. 1, pp.
287-293) ; Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and the holy prophets,
already tried and approved, will be the 'princes' among men,
the exponents and representatives of the spiritual invisible
Kingdom. In these Christ will be manifested — in their
flesh. And as 'Whosoever will, reaches perfection and comes
into full harmony with the will of Christ, every such one
will be an image of God and of Christ, and in each of these
Christ will be manifested." Vol. 2, p. 136.
Some Modern Isms. 149
"The Christ 'changed' made partakers of the divine na-
ture, shall be spirit beings as truly as is Satan and equally
invisible to men. Their operations will be similar in man-
ner, though directly opposite in character and results, their
honored agents not bound and made slaves by ignorance and
weakness, as are most of the servants of Satan, but made
perfect, and 'free indeed,' will act intelligently and har-
moniously, from choice and from love; and their appoint-
ments will be rewards of righteousness." Vol. 2, p. 137.
Thus Russell denies a bodily return of Christ. Christ
is to come back — rather Russell teaches that he came back
in 1874 — and manifest himself through perfect human be-
ings.
Tell Russell that the Scriptures represent the return of
Christ as in bodily form — that men shall see him, he will
carry you drearily through pages endeavoring to explain
that men shall see Christ on his second advent only through
their mind's eyes. Passages that are to be taken literally
as the contexts show, he takes figuratively.
4. Russell teaches, concerning the millennium, that the
Bible "shows that all who do not see or appreciate the
blessed privilege of entering shall in due time be brought to
a full knowledge and appreciation (of the 'door of hope').
The only way by which any and all of the condemned race
may come to God, is not by meritorious works, neither by
ignorance, but by faith in the precious blood of Christ,
which taketh away the sin of the world." Vol. 1, p. 104.
He teaches that all who ever have lived, are living or shall
live between the beginning and the Millennium and had no
knowledge or appreciation of Christ are to be "resurrected"
from non-existence and given a good long trial in the mil-
lennial age, and that the most of them will avail themselves
of that opportunity for restoration to the Adamic perfec-
tion. He builds very largely on I. Timothy 2:5, 6: "There
150 Some Modern Isms.
is one God, and one Mediator between God and man, the
man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all, to
be testified in due time." He says, "God has a time for
everything. He could have testified to these in their past
life-time. But since he did not, it proves their due time must
be future." Vol. 1, p. 105. Russell has a great way of
reading into Scripture words not found. E. g., on p. 107
of Vol. 1, he has to be testified to all in due time.
Now this verse teaches that the oneness of the Mediator,
who gave himself a ransom for all by his death, was the
great truth which when the fulness of time was come and
onward to the time of Christ's return, was to be testified of
by Apostles, evangelists, ministers — the Church which was
commissioned to make disciples of all nations.
No exegesis of this and the other passages adduced can
get out of it and them any support for the doctrine of a
publication of the Gospel to all the Millennium who have
not believed in this life. For this text must be taken in
the light of 2 Cor. 5:10; 2 Cor. 5:11; Luke 16:26;
Isa. 38:11. For a discussion of Second Probation, see Asa E.
House, The Homilist, pp. 183, ff., and the whole Bible.
Russell meanders on: "God thus limits the evil which
he permits, by providing that the millennial reign of Christ
shall accomplish the full extinction of evil and also of wilful
evil-doers, and usher in an eternity of righteousness, based
upon full knowledge and perfect free-will obedience by per-
fect beings." (Vol. 1, p. 133).
Our Lord Jesus Christ, on the other hand, says of some
that they "shall go away into everlasting punishment."
Matt. 25:46.
In teaching that the second advent of Christ took place
in 1874, that those who were asleep in Christ — "the little
flock" — experienced their resurrection in 1878, and that the
time of the Church of Christ expired in October, 1914, that
Some Modern Isms. 151
the overthrow of Christendom immediately followed; that
"the present governments must all be overturned about the
close of A. D. 1915" (Vol. 2, p. 243), he teaches what his-
tory has not confirmed, but apparently refuted. If Christ
came in any special way in 1874, that remains to be proved;
if the resurrection of the "little flock" took place in 1878, we
want proof; if the Christian Church no longer exists since
1914, there are millions of honester people than Russell
either mistaken or intentionally lying. They represent the
Church as active today. There is a good deal of commotion
amongst the governments, but certainly the most of them
were not aware of having been overturned at the close of
1915.
5. Russell resolves the day of judgment into a probation-
ary trial (millennium). (See Vol. 1, pp. 137-143). He
says: "The second trial will be more favorable than the
first, because of the experience gained under the results of
the first trial" (that in Adam). "Unlike the first trial,
the second trial will be one in which every man will stand
the test for himself alone, and not for another. None will
then die because of Adam's sin, or because of inherited im-
perfections. . . . Under the reign of Christ mankind
will gradually be educated, trained and disciplined until
they reach perfection. And when they have reached per-
fection, perfect harmony with God will be required, and
any who then fall short of perfect obedience will be cut off,
being judged unworthy of life. The sin which brought death
to the race through Adam was simply one disobedient act;
but by that act he fell from his perfection. God had a right
to demand perfect obedience of him, since he was created
perfect; and he will demand the same of all men when the
great work of restoring them is complete." Vol. 1, pp. 143-4.
Now, over against this Russellite doctrine which resolves
the judgment into another period of probation, we set Paul,
152 Some Modern Isms.
2 Cor. 5:10: "We must all be made manifest before the
judgment seat of Christ; that each one may receive the things
done in the body, according to what he hath done, whetler
it be good or bad," and Matt. 25:31-46. These and other
passages make it plain that there is to be a real forensic
judgment, and that men are to be judged for what they have
done in the body. These passages do not speak of a pro-
bationary period; but a day of declaration of awards.
6. Russell teaches concerning "eternal life," that it is
mere existence, exclusively a quantity not a quality of life,
that it is not something now won by faith, but a future in-
heritance conditioned upon good conduct and character dur-
ing a period of probation.
But John 3:36, says: "He that believeth on the Son hath
eternal life." "Nothing certainly is so evident as that, in
the Bible, 'life' means a spiritual state (with its 'physical-
counterpart, of course) marked by intensive quality, and de-
riving this quality from the relationship in which the liv-
ing person is conceived as standing to the living God. 'Life'
is used frequently as the equivalent of 'eternal life,' that is,
it connotes blessedness, activity and vigor of which the be-
liever is participant in virtue of his unity with God through
Christ." Mackintosh, Immortality and the Future, p. 214.
7. Russell teaches of the punishment of the incorrigible,
of the millennial period — of those who will not when given
individual trial avail themselves of their opportunities for
life — that they are annihilated. He says, after this future
probation, "Then those who prove themselves unworthy of
life will die again — the second death — from which there will
be no redemption, and consequently no resurrection. .
The death which comes as a result of individual, wilful
apostasy is final. This sin hath never forgiveness, and its
penalty, the second death, will be everlasting — not everlast-
ing dying, but everlasting death — a death unbroken by a
resurrection." Vol. 1, p. 158.
Some Modern Isms. 15«^
Death, remember, according to Russell, is non-existence.
Not so according to the Bible. The Biblical meaning of life
fixes that of death. "Death is the absence of all that forms
the specific content of life. It is the withdrawal of every-
thing that imparts value to life for the religious mind. Con-
tact with God is lost, and with it all that is wrapped up
in the word 'blessedness.' No terms of description are too
vivid or powerful to paint its misery and ruin. It is de-
struction, perishing, the last calamity. . . . But the
definite loss of consciousness is nowhere associated with it.
As Prof. A. B. Davidson has said of the writers of the Old
Testament: 'For all that appears, the idea that any person
should become extinct or be annihilated never occurred to
them.' In their view to survive apart from God is to abide
in death. Because death is 'abiding,' and not non-existence.
New Testament writers can speak of men as having passed
'from death unto life,' and can ascribe tribulation and anguish
to the life of the lost in the world to come. In short, to
render life and death as existence and non-existence is to
represent the Bible as fixing its chief interest not in spiritual
realities but in a bare and hard ontology. Death is to be
undone, to be in ruin, to miss everything that can be called
well-being; but it is not to vanish in extinction. Thus one
of the main pleas of annihilationism, that to call death what
is a kind of suffering life is absurd, will not bear scrutiny
for a moment in the light of Bible teaching. Even common
speech refutes it. We speak of a dead tree, or dead flesh,
because these things have parted with all that constituted
their value or charm; but they have not ceased to be. What
has happened is a rupture of the tie linking them to life."
Mackintosh, Immortality and the Future, pp. 214-215.
Christ says of some that they "shall go away into ever-
lasting punishment," Matt. 2v3:46.
VI. The Fruit of Russellism does not speak well for the
moral worth of the ism.
154 Some Modern Isms.
It is fair to test the character of a system by its fruits.
This was a method of the Master.
Russell in his later years may be taken as a fair sample
of the kind of man Russellism tends to make: and, unless
he has been grossly slandered his character would indicate
that the teaching is not good.
1. He could hardly have been a worthy husband. In
1879 he had married Miss Maria F. Ackley. She divorced
him after many years of married life, on the ground of
cruelty and of having wrong relations with other women.
In court she proved improprieties between him and a woman
named Rose Bell.
2. He has changed the name of his publications at least
three times. He is charged with having done this, in part,
to frustrate the verdict of the court in giving his wife ali-
mony, and in part to prevent his publication business from
suffering because of his shady reputation.
3. He has deceived a wide public by publishing his
writings under the appellation of the "International Bible
Students' Association." People have been led by this title
to believe that a great body of accredited scholars represent-
ing many nations is back of these views. But the title is
a misnomer. The views are those of C. T. Russell. The
Brooklyn Eagle charged him with giving out that he was
an interdenominationalist, whereas he was connected with
none but opposed to all.
4. The same paper charged him with publishing him-
self as having given addresses to great crowds in important
places, whereas he had not spoken in those places at all.
5. It charged him with seeking to dupe certain ministers
into supporting daring transactions connected with lead,
asphalt and turpentine companies.
6. It charged him with selling or causing to be sold
"Miracle Wheat," at $60.00 a bushel, with influencing the
Some Modern Isms. 155
sick and dying to make their wills in his favor, with engi-
neering the sale of a property worth $35,000 for $50, for
the purpose of defrauding another. (See Some Facts and
More Facts about the Self-Styled "Pastor" 'Charles T.
Russell.)
7. It is charged that he has contradicted himself repeatedly
while under oath — that he has been guilty of perjury re-
peatedly. (Facts and More Facts, pp. 18, 19).
8. It is charged that he became very wealthy and yet
that he posed as poor, holding his properties not in his
own name.
9. It is charged that he has belittled the labors and ser-
vices of the greatest servants of Christ throughout the ages;
that notably he has endeavored to belittle modern mission-
aries and their labors. (See C. C. Cook's "All About One
Russell," pp. 20 ff.) to belittle the labors of Carey, Jud-
son, Morrison, Livingston, and the like.
He had met but two missionaries in all his travels — had
not talked on missions with them — knew nothing of missions.
10. His advertisements of himself as Pastor Russell, "of
the Brooklyn Tabernacle," and of the "London Tabernacle,"
were misleading.
11. He lacked forms of ministry to human need.
12. He is charged with blasphemy, or slander of God and
his Word. On page 298, of his Watch Tower, of the issue
of September 15, 1910, it is written, concerning his books:
"If the six volumes of 'Scripture Studies' are practically
the Bible, topically arranged, with Bible proof texts given,
we might not improperly name the volumes 'The Bible in
an arranged form.' That is to say, they are not mere com-
ments on the Bible, but they are practically the Bible itself.
Furthermore, not only do we find that people cannot see
the Divine plan in studying the Bible by itself, but we
see also, that if any one lays the 'Scripture Studies' aside,
156 Some Modern Isms.
even after he has used them, after he has become familiar
with them, after he had read them for ten years — if he
then lays them aside and ignores them and goes to the Bible
alone, though he has understood his Bible for ten years,
our experience shows that within two years he goes into
darkness. On the other hand, if he had merely read the
'Scripture Studies' with their references and had not read a
page of the Bible as such, he would be in the light at the
end of two years, because he would have the light of the
Scriptures." (Facts and More Facts about Pastor Russell,
p. 42). Is he not an anti-Christ?
It should be noted that when Russell sued the Brooklyn
Eagle for $100,000, the court gave judgment against him,
thus justifying the Eagle for exposing this impostor.
Russell's no-hell doctrine may have been begotten in part
by the wish that there be no hell for such sinners as himself.
In fine:
Russellism is one of the most blasphemous and destructive
of all heresies. It contradicts almost every fundamental doc-
trine of the Christian faith. It boldly denies the proper
deity, incarnation, resurrection, ascension and priestly in-
tercession of Jesus Christ. It teaches that he perished —
passed into non-existence — is eternally dead. It denies the
personality and work of the Holy Ghost, and makes the
Holy Ghost a mere influence. It degrades man to the level
of an animal, robs him of spirit dowered with endless exist-
ence, turns the penalty for sin into annihilation. It gives
us a creature savior impotent to bring us to God, vitiates the
Scriptural doctrines of regeneration, faith, repentance, justi-
fication. It perverts the doctrine of Christ's second coming,
the judgment to come, life eternal, and everlasting death.*
•See Summary of Millennial Dawnism, in C. C. Cook's, "All About One
Russell." pp. 18, 19.
Some Moder:n Isms. 157
Nietzscheism :
or the Will to Power
Recent world movements give to Nietzshe's teaching an
interest of no mean kind.
158 Some Modern Isms.
Literature on Nietzscheism
The Complete Works of Friedrich Nietzsche.
The first complete and authorized English translation.
Edited by Dr. Oscar Levy, in 18 volumes. Edinburgh
and London. 1909-1913, is a convenient version.
Lichtenberger, Henri: The Gospel of Superman. 1910.
London.
Figgis, J. N., D. D., Litt. D.: The Will to Freedom. (An
able book).
Mugge, M. A.: Friedrich Nietzsche.
Some Modern Isms. 159
Nietzscheism : or the Will to Power
I. Who was Nietzsche?
Friedrich Nietzsche was born October 15, 1844, in the
village of Rocken, in the Prussian province of Saxony. His
father, a son and grandson of ministers, was Karl Ludwig
Nietzsche, who became mentally deranged and died while
Friedrich was still a small boy; his mother was Franziska
Oehler, a daughter and granddaughter of ministers, a woman
of apparent piety, who reared her son with care, saw his
development into apostasy, his lapse into lunacy, and tended
him with devoted solicitude in his years of insanity. Frau
Nietzsche, on the death of her husband, removed with her
two children, Friedrich and Elizabeth, to Naumburg, and
brought them up in a pious and respectable circle.
Friedrich, as a boy, disliked vulgarity, made few friends,
but formed some passionate attachments, did well as a
student in the local school. From Naumburg he was sent
to the ancient and famous public school at Pforta — a school
in which boys were prepared for a university course — a
school which endeavored to mold the life as well as to in-
form the mind. He was regarded as a brilliant student in
everything but mathematics, got into one serious scrape, at
least, for drunkenness, received the stamp of the school — a
kindled desire to achieve a reputation for himself regard-
less of cost. Here he lost his inherited faith. He had
been brought up in the externals of the Lutheran religion.
The higher criticism expounded by one or two of his masters
bore its legitimate fruit in the soil of his heart. He hauled
up the anchors of his ship, left the moorings of the word of
God and sailed forth on the sea of doubt without chart, or
compass.
160 Some Modern Isms.
From Pforta he proceeded to Bonn, in 1864, became a
typical university student, given to beer-drinking, singing,
and duelling as much as to study, but, after a little, wearied
of this life, turned more to the study of philology, and for
recreation, to music. While studying here, he wrote to his
sister, who was worrying over his religious, or irreligious
attitude: "If you desire peace of soul and happiness, be-
lieve; if you want to be a disciple of truth, search." In the
fall of 1865, he went to Leipsic, where he studied philology
hard for two years, came under the influence of Schopen-
hauer, whose philosophy as set forth in "The World as' Will
and Idea," revolutionized his outlook on life, and cut every
remaining fibre binding him to Christianity. True, he was
for the most part professedly to repudiate this system, and
to bedevil sympathy and resignation of which Schopenhauer
makes so much; but he received indelible marks from the
hand of Schopenhauer.
In 1867, he had, though short-sighter, to fulfill the obliga-
tion to one year's military service. He turned out to be a
promising soldier, was an excellent horseman, and developed
a fondness for war and an itch for class distinction; but an
accident, the laceration of pectoral muscles while mounting
his horse, put a stop to his military career.
Returning to Leipsic, he gave himself with great energy
and brilliancy to philology; became acquainted with Wag-
ner's music and enamored of Wagner himself; was recom-
mended by his professor Ritschl for the Chair of Classical
Philogy in the University of Basle, and, though only
twenty-four years of age, and, as yet, without a doctor's
degree, was elected to the chair. There, in the course of
1869, he is found lecturing to eight students in philology.
Wagner was now the idol of Nietzsche — an idol whom he
called, in 1888, "a clever rattlesnake, a typical decadent."
During the Franco-Prussian war of 1870, although
Some Modern Isms. 161
Nietzsche had become, in order to serve as Professor in Basle,
a citizen of Switzerland, he obtained leave to go to the
front as a nurse. While employed in caring for wounded
German soldiers, he contracted from them dysentery and
diptheria. Returning to his professorship before his health
was sufficiently restored, he fell ill, suffered from insomnia,
indigestion, eye trouble, neuralgia. After ten years of pro-
fessorial life, his state of health compelled him to resign,
in 1879.
Meantime he had begun to write books. Late in 1879,
his "The Birth of Tragedy" had appeared— a Wagnerite
tract. In it he contrasts Greek culture before and after So-
crates. The culture, the civilization before Socrates was
strong, cruel, grand; the culture after Socrates was "impious,
bloodless, feeble." "Socrates was a degenerate." The cul-
ture of the writer's own age is pronounced to be decadent,
Socratic, not Dionysian. The author seems to teach that
the tragic, cruel, grand age will return if the voice of Wag-
ner's great, mystic, music be heeded. The philosophic stand-
point of the book is seen in these statements: "Only as
aesthetic phenomena existence and the world appear justi-
fied." "Art supplies man with the necessary veil of illusion
which is required for action. For the true knowledge of the
awfulness and absurdity of existence kills action." He be-
trays, even in this work, himself as wanting in a sense of
right.
Between 1873 and 1876, he published four long essays
which were entitled Thoughts Out of Season. In the first he
trounces the shallowness and self-sufficiency of his con-
temporary German teaching; in the second he excoriates
his contemporaries and those professors who make historic
learning an idol, and by it destroy illusions and rob existing
things thus of the only conditions in which they can live;
in the third, he extols Schopenhauer as the great philosopher
162 Some Modern Isms.
and type of the future man, and skins the state-paid servile
university professor; in the fourth, he lauds Wagner as the
discoverer of art. He says of Wagner: "No artist of what
past soever has yet received such a remarkable portion of
genius." As yet Nietzsche regarded Wagner as a great anti-
Christian force. As Wagner began to adopt at least senti-
mental reverence for Christianity, Nietzsche began to cool in
admiration for the great musician, and to regard him as a
corrupter and seducer. Some years later, in his Ecce Homo
he represents himself as portraying Nietzsche the Philosopher,
and Nietzsche the Musician, under the names of "Schopen-
hauer" and "Wagner."
In Human, All-too-Human, a new Nietzsche appeared,
one who would purge himself of all inherited ideals, of all
faith and morals — a writer of aphorisms, thirteen hundred
of them — some of them profound, some full of folly and
madness and hate.
In The Dawn of Day, in 1881, we have the rudiments
of what may be called his own philosophy, hidden in a
vast mass of aphorisms dealing with as many subjects. That
philosophy is marked by its hatred for Christianity. He
is a Julian the Apostate of the 19th century: "Christianity"
has developed into soft moralism." Another marked char-
acteristic is materialism. The materials for a correct philoso-
phy are to be found only in "physiology and medicine." An-
other characteristic is zeal for eugenics; and still another is
the doctrine of an eternal recurrency, which he thought to
be original with him. He says that "with this book he
opened his campaign against morality." Ecce Homo, p. 91).
In The Joyful Wisdom, the superman is brought to the
fore, the man who shall down all obstacles, all forces, all
weaker men, and grow stronger and stronger. He "dances
freely on the corpse of morality." (See Ecce Homo, p. 96).
Thus Spake Zarathustra was written and published in
Some Modern Isms. 163
1883 and 1884. Having thrown behind him for the time the
hopeless mechanism of the eternal recurrence, he affirms, in
the earlier portion of this work, clearly the ideal of the
superman as a goal toward which all master-men should
strive. *7 teach to you the Superman. Man is something
that is to be surpassed. What have ye done to surpass
man? All beings hitherto have created something beyond
themselves, and ye want to be the ebb of that great tide,
and would rather go back to the beast than surpass man?
The superman is the meaning of the earth. Let your will
say: The superman shall be the meaning of the earth!
I conjure you, my brethren, remain true to the earth, and
believe not those who speak unto you of super-earthly hopes."
Later, in the same work, his chariot wheels are clogged by
the return of the doctrine of the Eternal Recurrence. He
jumbles his doctrine of immoral Will to power with a
doctrine of an eternal physical round — the physical being
the all.
This work he, with unmeasured egotism, pronounced the
deepest book and the greatest g\i': ever granted to men.
In 1886, Beyond Good and Evil, a ''Prelude to a Philoso-
phy of the Future" — his teaching as a whole which he
planned to set forth as a system — was published. Interest-
ing features of this work are his attitude of super-national-
ism, his anti-English attitude. He says of the English:
"They are a fundamentally mediocre species,
ponderous, conscience-stricken, herding animals." Of Shake-
speare he speaks as that marvelous, Spanish-Moorish-Saxon
synthesis of taste, over whom an ancient Athenian of tho
circle of Aeschylus would have half-killed himself with
laughter or irritation," of Carlyle, as "the absurd muddle-
head." In his own view "this book is a criticism of modern-
ity, embracing the modern sciences, arts, even politics, to-
gether with certain indications as to a type which should
164 Some Modern Isms,
be the reverse of modern man, or as little like him as
possible." (Ecce Homo, p. 113).
Since his death the notes intended to furnish materials
for his "The Will to Power," have been published. In
this work he had set out to show, that the will to Power,
and not the struggle for existence is the life principle; that
socialism is the tyranny of the meanest and most brainless;
that Christianity is the greatest curse that has fallen upon
the world; that English philosophy is worthless trash. He
was thus to prepare the way for the Super-man.
In his "The Genealogy of Morals," published in 1887,
Nietzsche raises the question: "Under what conditions did
Man invent for himself those judgments of values, Good
and Evil? And what value do they possess? This work
contains his guesses as to "evolution" of guilt, bad con-
science, punishment, mingled with insane estimates of his
own powers and place. (Cf. Ecce Homo, p. 117).
In 1888 we have his The Case of Wagner, in which Wag-
ner is described as "an actor not a musician; a symptom of
impoverished life, a clever rattle-snake, a typical decadent."
On the heels of this we have his The Twilight of Idols — a
hilarious, super-egotistical bookj in which he knocks Car-
lyle, and all free-thinking moral fanatics. Next came his
The Antichrist, in which he represents Christianity as "the
one great curse, the one enormous and innermost perversion,
the one great instinct of revenge, full of lies and more dan-
gerous to life than any other religion. Next came from his
pen Ecce Homo, in which he represents himself as the great-
est of men to date. The chapter headings are: "Why am I
so wise? Why am I so clever? Why write I such excellent
books?" He says: "I did a host of things of the highest
rank — things that no man can do nowadays." . . . "To
take up my books is one of the rarest honors that a man can
pay himself. . . . Before my time there was no psy-
chology."
Some Modern Isms. 165
He went mad in January, 1889, he proclaimed himself
God.
Before long his aged mother began caring for him again.
After her death his sister took him in charge. He con-
tinued to exist till August 25th, 1900.
II. What did he dream of doing?
Chiefly, he dreamed of leading master-men to the de-
velopment of the superman. Hear him. He says:
"My life-task is to prepare for humanity one supreme
moment in which it can come to its senses, a Great Noon
in which it will turn its gaze backwards and forwards, in
which it will step from under the yoke of accident and of
priests, and for the first time settle the question of the "Why
and Wherefore of humanity as a whole — this life taisk
naturally follows out of the conviction that mankind does
not get on the right road of its own accord. (Ecce Homo,
93, I).
"/ teach yoii the Superman. Man is something that is
to be surpassed. What is the ape to man? A laughing-
stock, a thing of shame. And just the same shall man be
to the Superman: a laughing-stock, a thing of shame." (Thus
spaze Zarathustra, p. 6).
"The Superman is the meaning of the earth. Let your
will say : The Superman shall be the meaning of the earth 1
I conjure you, my brethren, remain true to the earth, and
believe not those who speak unto you of super-earthly hopes!
Poisoners are they whether they know it or not." {Ibid, p. 7).
"I love him who liveth in order to know, and seeketh to
know in order that the Superman may hereafter live. I
love him who laboreth and inventeth that he may build the
house for the Superman and prepare for him earth, animal
and plant." {Ihid., p. 10). "Lo, I am a herald of the
lightning, and a heavy drop out of the cloud: the lightning,
however, is the Superman." {Ibid, p. 11).
166 Some Modern Isms.
He would lift the naturally strong to greater strength and
to the production of still stronger men — men of more effi-
cient bodies and more efficient minds — men beyond good and
evil — amoral men, using without scruple any means to ac-
complish their ends — greater Borgias, greater Napoleons.
He talks at times of redeeming men; but that of which
he thinks is developing some strong men into power and the
evolution of Superman.
To clear the way for a development of an amoral race
of Supermen, he teaches that God is dead and that the uni-
verse is simple energy, "a sea of forces storming and raging
in itself," "forever rolling back over incalculable ages to
recurrence with an ebb and flow of its forms"
''world of eternal self-creation, of eternal self-destruction"
. without aim unless there is an aim in the bliss of
the circle; without will, unless a ring must by nature keep
good will to itself;" that "This world is . . . the
Will to Power — and nothing else" (Will to Power, IL,
431); — a clock running down and, of its self- self-winding
to the same recurrence; and that the ethical prison house
built on faith in God has been demolished (Joyful Wisdom,
167); that master men may therefore do anything neces-
sary, and that they should do everything and suffer every
hardship in order, to the fuller, more powerful life of the
Supermen; that they should court danger and adventure,
overcome pity, and that they should above all be valorous.
He says of his disciples: To such ... "I wish
suffering, desolation, sickness, ill-treatment, indignities of
all kinds. I wish them to be acquainted with profound self-
contempt, with the martyrdom of self-distrust, with the mis-
ery of the defeated; I have no pity for them: because I
wish them to have the only thing which today proves whether
a man has any value or not, namely, the capacity of stick-
ing to his guns." (Will to Power, IL, 333). (Here
Some Modern Isms. 167
Nietzsche borrows the Christian doctrine of suffering as a
means of developing holy character; perverts it and prosti-
tutes it . . . to a place in his doctrine of the develop-
ment of the Superman).
To stick to one's guns through thick and thin is to be a
mighty incarnation of Will to Power, which is the one real-
ity. This is to be a mighty man, it is to help bring into
being the Superman.
But this exhortation to develop the Superman is a thing
to which Nietzsche is logically incompetent. In his sys-
tem individuals have no reality. At best they are soap-
bubbles blown by the Will to Power, they are what they are
because of the eternal energy; the Superman himself is
but a large and highly colored soap bubble. As the wheels
of the universe turn, he will come of necessity if he come
at all. He has come if he is to come.
His attacks on "decadent ethics," "ethics as set forth by
Schopenhauer, Kant, or Christ, because forsooth they are a
"no-saying to life," a crushing of Will to Power," "a curb-
ing of the strong in favor of the weak"— all these attacks are
practical denials, of his doctrine that there is only one real-
ity — the blind will to power; and that therefore men are but
bubbles upon the current of life or the Will to Power. He
forgot in them the half of his teaching.
Overlook for the time this conflict between his views of
what men ought to do, and their being no men to do those
things, forget not that he claims as his mission, the holding
forth the Superman as the ideal which strong men should
strive to produce. He held, also, that in order to the in-
bringing of Supermen the strong need protection against
the jealousy of the weak who are powerful in numbers.
"The end can be reached only by securing a ruling race,
or class, and by such subordination and breeding as will
keep the individualities strong." This ruling class, in train-
168 Some Modern Isms.
ing itself, must be Spartan, and must shrink at nothing, set
aside old rules of morals, regard morality as existing only
for the mediocre — the herd, the world. The world is run-
ning to the mediocre — but there is at present a master caste
of free adventurous spirits, defining itself ever more plainly.
They prepare the way for the Superman.
They (the Supermen) are to have no more sympathy for
common men than we have for the pigs we eat. They will
live aloof from the common men — in lonely grandeur. They
"will retranslate the word good into its older and more
pagan equivalents, notable, proud, courageous, barbarous."
They will be free of morals — amoral — save that they must
be courageous, self-controlled. They will be adventurous,
fine in manners, able to command.
Recruited upon blood and training, resting upon a slave
system, kept pure by eugenic methods, they will develop
forms of culture higher than anything hitherto known — and
carry forward the work of the Romans as they might have
carried it had it not been for the curse of Christianity. They
will not be the servants but the masters of society.
The production of these lords is worth all it will cost in
blood and suffering and servitude of the weak, he teaches.
The Superman will take what he wants and let others have
as and only as he pleases. His development Nietzsche
longs for. He is said to have declared that the Kaiser Wil-
"helm II. would understand the Will to Power.
Again, we remark the utter illogical character, the in-
compatibles, of his teaching: The Superman ought to be
produced. Master Spirits must work for his production.
But there is nothing new; things are eternally recurring. The
Supermen that have not been, have been. So Nietzsche.
His teaching is as full of incompatibles as Mrs. Eddy's.
There is no good, no bad for master men; courage is of
moral worth, all other qualities are without moral value.
Some Modern Isms. 169
"Live dangerously," live differently from others. Be a big,
tiger among all the tigers of earth. So live as to develop
a race of super-tigers, is Nietzsche put baldly. Everything
that is to be, it has been; and what has been will be.
III. Nietzsche's Attitude Toward Christianity.
So far as it is a doctrine of a life beyond this, Nietzsche
regarded Christianity as a pack of lies. As a way of life,
a system of ethics, he regarded it as the worst curse which
man has incurred. He regarded it as one of his own most
original services to estimate Christian ethics as he did.
He says in Ecce Homo:
"No one hitherto has felt Christian morality beneath him;
to that end there were needed height; remoteness of vision,
and an abysmal psychological depth not believed to be possi-
ble hitherto. Up to the present. Christian morality has been
the Circe of all thinkers — they stood at her service. What
man before my time has descended into the underground
caverns from out of which the poisonous fumes of this ideal —
of this slandering of the world, burst forth?" (Ecce Homo,
138).
"What separates us, is not that we do not rediscover any
God, either in history or in nature or behind nature — but
that we recognize what was worshipped as God not as
"divine," but as pitiable, as absurd, as injurious — not only
as an error, but as a crime against life. We deny God as
God. If this God of the Christians were proved to us, we
should still less know how to believe in him. In a formula :
Deus qualem Paulus creavit, Dei negatio." (Antichrist, 316).
"That which defines me, that which makes me stand
apart from the whole rest of humanity is the fact that I
unmasked Christian morality . . . Christian morality
is the most malignant form of all falsehood, the actual Circe
of humanity, that which has corrupted mankind." (Ecce
Homo, 139).
170 Some Modern Isms.
It is worth remarking that the God Nietzsche fights against
and whose ethics he despises is not the God of the Bible,
but the caricature of Him set up by modern German theo-
logians, and his ethics a caricature of Bible ethics made by
multitudes of modern Christians, and these caricatures of
God and ethics vitiated and caricatured still further by
Nietzsche himself, at the dictate of his theory of Will to
Power. Naturally no man was more given to caricature,
since for him truth was "only useful illusion." Hear him
further :
''Whenever the will to power declines in any way, there
is always a physiological retrogression, a decadence. The
deity of decadence pruned of his manliest virtues and im-
pulses, henceforth, becomes necessarily the God of the phy-
siologically retrograde, the weak. They do not call them-
selves the weak, they call themselves the good.
How can one defer so much to the simplicity of Christian
theologians as to decree with them that the continuous de-
velopment of God from the "God of Israel, from the national
God to the Christian God, to the essence of everything good,
is a progress? But so does even Renan. . . . It is
just the very opposite that strikes the eye. When the pre-
suppositions of ascending life, when everything strong, brave,
domineering and proud has been eliminated out of the con-
cept of God, when he sinks step by step to the symbol of a
staff for the fatigued, a sheet anchor for all drowning ones,
when he becomes the poor people's God, the sinner's God,
the God of the sick par excellence and when predicate of
the Savior is left as the sole divine predicate, what does
such a change speak of? Such a reduction of the divine?
To be sure the kingdom of God has thereby become greater.
Formerly he had only his 'chosen people.' Since then he
has gone abroad in his travels, quite like his people itself,
since then he has never again settled down quietly in any
Some Modern Isms. 171
place, until he has finally become at home everywhere, the
great 'Cosmopolitan' — till he has gained over 'the great
number,' and the half of the earth to his side. But the
God of the 'great number,' the democrat among the Gods,
became nevertheless, no proud pagan God, he remained a
Jew, he remained the God of the woods, the God of all
dark corners, and of all unhealthy quarters throughout the
world. . . . His world empire is still, as formerly an
underworld empire, a hospital, a subterranean empire, a
Ghetto empire. . . . And he himself, so pale, so weak,
so decadent. Even the palest of the pale still become master
over him — the Metaphysicians, the conceptual Albinos. They
spun around about him so long, until hypnotized by their
movements he became a cob-web-spinner, a meta-physician
himself. Henceforth, he spun the world anew out of him-
self — sub specie Spinozae — henceforth he transfigured him-
self always into the thinner and paler, he became 'ideal,'
he became 'pure spirit,' he became 'absolutism,' he became
'thing in itself,' ruin of a God. . . . God became thing
in itself.
"The Christian concept of God — God as God of the
sick, God as cob-web spinner, God as spirit — is one of the
most corrupt concepts of God ever arrived at on earth; it
represents perhaps the low-water in the descending develop-
ment of the God-type — God degenerated to the contradiction
of life, instead of being its transfiguration and its eternal
yea! . . . . God as the formula for every calumny of
'this world,' for every lie of 'another world.' In God noth-
ingness deified, the will to nothingness declared holy!"
"This hybrid image of ruin derived from nullity, con-
cept, and contradiction, in which all decadent instincts, all
cowardices, and lassitudes of soul have their sanction."
(Antichrist, 260-2).
Thus he mixes the Bible conception of God with every
172 Some Modern Isms.
nominally Christian speculator's conception of God — cari-
catures the God of the Scriptures. Thus deals he with the
morals of the Scriptures. He treats with contempt his cari-
catures, deservedly. No doubt he hated also the Scriptural
elements in his caricature with intense hatred. Had he, in-
stead of caricaturing the true God of the Scriptures, and
criticizing that, confined his polemics to the misconceptions
of God by philosophic speculators, and the theological and
popular misconceptions of God by which He is turned into
a goody-goody old grandmother, or into some other such
idol, Nietzsche's work would have had its value; but he
hates every glimpse he gets of God as revealed in Christ
and bedevils Him, while he is laughing to scorn these fancies
as to what God is like. He hates Christian morals as
boulders in the way of the ruthless struggle of the strong
man to develop the Superman.
He holds that Christianity is the weapon with which the
slave races have conquered their captors — the strong men.
Hence he hates it — every shade of it which he has caught
sight of. Holding that morality is the denial of the Will
to Power, he vomits venom on what he takes for Christian-
ity — Christian ethics.
For the Christian conceptions of right and wrong he would
substitute radically different conceptions. Power, satisfied,
triumphant, embodied in a conquering race, "the splendid
blond beast," calls all its own characteristics good. Good
meant in the first instance the quality of a ruling class. It
is the same as noble and implies courage and enduring will,
pride and self-sufficiency. Its opposite is the character of
the enslaved people, base, mean, villainous. Thus goodness
has nothing to do with love, humility, justice, or self-denial.
These qualities are displayed by the down-trodden or at
least admired by them. Do unto others as you would have
them do unto you is the maxim of the herd, the helot, the
outcast, the Chandala.
Some Modern Isms. 173
According to Nietzsche: "Morality is the idiosyncracy
of the decadent revenging themselves upon life." This pe-
culiarity reached its highest incarnation in Jesus of Naza-
reth, who asserted the superiority before God of the 'poor,
the maimed, the halt, the blind,' and denied the claims of
the rulers; and by his crucifixion and the doctrine of his
resurrection and reign as risen Savior, secured for two mil-
lenniums the triumph of slave morality." Nietzsche holds
that the world was in a state at the time of Christ that fav-
ored the triumph of this morality, that multitudes of slaves
filled the Empire, that they eagerly fell in with it as a
system which would restore their dignity, that the mixture
of races throughout the Empire brought with it a physio-
logical depression, which mistaken for a sense of sin, made
men eager for a salvation cult; that Socrates and Plato, the
great "Greek decadents," had long corrupted the pagan mind
with notions of goodness, justice, and the eternal world,
that a dozen other tendencies wrought together to secure
the triumph of this system over the Pagan Empire, "the
proudest and most valuable organization of the Will to
Power, which the world had known to that time; that this
victory of morality is the victory of decadence; that "ascend-
ing life is ever pitiless and proud;" that Christian morality
is useful for the herd, making life tolerable for them; and
to be tolerated among the herd by strong men that the herd
may be more content to serve as slaves of the strong; but
that the strong should develop into the amoral class.
Nietzsche, as is clear from the above statements, either
misunderstood, or deliberately misrepresented the Christian-
ity of the New Testament. He perhaps never had any real
comprehension of it, having been brought up only in the
soulless externalities of the type of Christianity prevailing
in Germany in his early years. It is certain that he aposta-
tized from the type with Vv'hich he was acquainted with all
174 Some Modern Isms.
the energy of a Julian the Apostate. We are not grieved
at his attacks on much of what he supposes to be Christian-
ity. Let him vent his venom on the ethics of Strauss, or
Schopenhauer, or the ethics of the downy beds of ease Chris-
tians, we shall not raise a hand in defense; but his con-
fusing of the true Christian ethics with these isms, and his
attacks on genuine elements of the Christian ethics should
be countered.
Remark :
1st. He is false in representing Christian ethics as work-
ing toward decadence in those under its influence. The New
Testament says: "Quit you like men: be strong." It says:
"Endure hardness as good soldiers." Given to the decay-
ing, rotting, Greeco-Roman world, it gave hope and courage
to that world, helped to develop masterful spirits in that
world. True it developed, regard for the rights of others,
justice, love, and humility before the infinitely perfect, sweet-
ness of disposition; but these qualities are compatible with
strength. Nietzsche should have acquainted himself with
Puritanism of the sixteenth and the seventeenth centuries
in Great Britain and the Netherlands. Had his prejudices
against the English allowed him to see at all, he would have
seen a type of Christianity, nearer to the ideal set up in the
Scriptures and that it was making strong men. He would
have seen that it was giving a dignity to these men, turning
them into "a holy nation, and a royal priesthood, a peculiar
people." A fair study of the Christian ethics would have
shown him that in the two-fold end it assigns to man, one
element is his own well-being. This fair study would have
shown him that Christianity is a "yea-saying," to use his
own jargon, to life, to every thing approvable in man, and
a "nay saying" only to what ought to die. That he is false
in teaching that Christianity cultivates only anaemic vir-
tues is shown by such products as Cromwell, Gustavus
Some Modern Isms. 175
Adolphus, R. E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, Chinese Gordon,
and the great leaders and the great led of the Aglo-Saxons
and their allies of today.
2d. Nietzsche is false in representing Christian ethics as
purely altruistic. Nominally Christian ethical philosophers,
here and there, may present systems of pure altruism; such
is not the Christian system. That system teaches to love
one's neighbors as ourselves. There is a legitimate love of
self and it is given a distinct place. Moreover, in Christian
ethics, a distinction is made between the love of benevolence
and the love of moral approbation, and men are taught to
stand with iron strength against being swayed by mere be-
nevolence to go against the right. Christianity frowns on
the doting indulgence of the grandmamma, and holds to
the fore that love which is heroically controlled by regard
to inexorable and eternal right.
3d. Nietzsche is false in representing Christianity as op-
posed to culture. Historical Christianity has not been op-
posed to culture. The Christian culture has been the noblest
in the world. New Testament Christianity is not opposed to
the culture of the best and highest in man. It does oppose
all pandering to unworthy lusts.
4th. Neitzsche is false in representing Christianity as teach-
ing that all men are equal before God — that there is no such
thing as aristocracy of character. So far is this from the
truth, that Christianity teaches that there are different de-
grees of excellence of character, both on earth and in heaven.
The New Testament never asserts an identity of gifts for all
men. It affirms the contrary. Not all are Pauls, or Peters.
The New Testament does indeed assert the worth of every
individual and vindicates to him certain rights; but it subor-
dinates some to others, e. g., in the home, and in the
state, and in the Church. It represents Christians as having
gifts differing according to the grac^ eiven unto them.
176 Some Modern Isms.
5th. Nietzsche would substitute for Christianity — a way
of life that would result in the development of Napoleans
and Borgias. In denying that it is adapted to the de-
velopment of such monsters as he would develop, he pays
the highest tribute possible for him to Christianity. In
speaking of Jesus of Nazareth as a "decadent," a "madman,"
"the most ill-natured of all men, suffering from a lunatic
pride which delighted in humility," he writes himself down
as a decadent, as insane, as full of the poison of asps, as
a bladder blown with gas of Hell's own make. (See Anti-
christ, pp. 314, 316).
6th. Nietzsche denies what Christianity affirms, the rights
of man as man. He teaches that the Master man may use
as he would a hoe or spade or steam-engine, any other man
weaker than himself — without regard to any so-called rights
in that other. Your conscience and mine condemn this
utterly. Nietzsche has no Gospel for the poor, for the vast
majority of men. He has for them only a message of con-
tempt.
IV. Where did Nietzsche get the stuff which he belched
forth against Christianity and in advocacy of the onbring-
ing of the Superman ?
He claimed that he got it by "Inspiration." Hear him:
"Has any one at the end of the nineteenth century any
distinct notion of what poets of a stronger age understood
by the word inspiration? If not, I will describe it. If
one had the smallest vestige of superstition left in one, it
would hardly be possible completely to set aside the idea
that one is the mere incarnation, mouthpiece, or medium of
an almighty power. The idea of revelation, in the sense
that something which profoundly convulses and upsets one
becomes suddenly visible and audible with indescribable
certainty and accuracy, describes the simple fact. One hears
— one does not seek — one takes — one does not ask who gives;
Some Modern Isms. 177
a thought suddenly flashes up like lightning, it comes with
necessity, without faltering — I have never had any choice
in the matter. There is an ecstacy so great that the im-
mense strain of it is sometimes relaxed by a flood of tears,
during which one's steps now involuntarily rush and now
involuntarily lag. There is the feeling that one is utterly
out of hand with the very distinct consciousness of an end-
less number of fine thrills and titillations descending to one's
very toes; there is a depth of happiness in which the most
painful and gloomy parts do not act as antitheses to the
rest, but are produced and required as necessary shades of
color in such an overflow of light. There is an instinct for
rhythmic relations which embraces a whole world of forms
(length, the need of a wide embracing rhythm, is almost the
measure of the force of an inspiration, a sort of counterpart
to its pressure and tension). Everything happens quite in-
voluntarily as if in a tempestuous outburst of freedom, of
absoluteness, of power and divinity. The involuntary nature
of the figures and similes is the most remarkable thing; one
loses all perception of what is imagery and metaphor, every-
thing seems to present itself as the readiest, truest and
simplest means of expression. It actually seems to use one
of Zarathustra's own phrases, as if all things come to one
and offered themselves as similes. ("Here do all things
come caressingly to thy discourse and flatter thee, for they
would fain ride upon thy back. On every simile thou ridest
here unto every truth. Here fly open unto thee all the
speech and word shrines of the world, here would all exist-
ence become speech, here would all becoming learn of thee
how to speak.") This is my experience of inspiration. I
do not doubt but that I should have to go back thousands
of years before I could find another who could say to me:
'It is mine also!' (Ecce Homo, 101-103).
"This work (Thus Spake Zarathustra) stands alone. Do
178 Some Modern Isms.
not let us mention the poets in the same breath. Nothing
perhaps has ever been produced out of such a super-abund-
ance of strength. My concept 'Dionysian' here becomes the
highest deed; compared with it, everything that other men
have done seems poor and limited. The fact that a Goethe
or a Shakespeare would not for an instant have known how
to take breath in this atmosphere of poison and the heights;
the fact that by the side of Zarathustra, Dante is no more
than a believer, and not one who first creates the truth —
that is to say not a world-ruling spirit, a Fate; the fact
that the poets of the Veda were priests and not even fit to
unfasten Zarasthustra's sandal — all this is the least of things
and gives no idea of the distance, of the azure solitude in
which this work dwells. . . . If all the spirit and
goodness of every great soul were collected together, the
whole could not create a single one of Zarathustra's dis-
courses. . . . Until his coming no one knew what was
height or depth and still less what was truth. There is not
a single passage in this revelation of truth which had al-
ready been anticipated and divined by even the greatest of
men. Before Zarathustra there was no wisdom, no probing
of the soul, no art of speech; in his book the most familiar
and the most vulgar thing utters unheard of words. The
sentence quivers with passion. Eloquence has become music.
Forks of lightning are hurled towards futures of which no
one has ever dreamed before. The most powerful use of
parables that has ever existed is poor beside it, and mere
child's play compared with this return of language to the
nature of imagery. (Ecce Homo, 106-108.)
Hear a sample of this revelation:
"With the new morning, however, there came unto me a
new truth: then did I learn to say: 'Of what account to
me are market-place and populace and populace-noise and
long populace-ears!'
Some Modern Isms. 179
"Ye higher men, learn this from me: On the market-
place no one believeth in higher men. But if ye will speak
there, very well! The populace, however, blinketh: 'We
are all equal.'
" 'Ye higher men' — so blinketh the populace — 'there are
no higher men, we are all equal; man is man, before God —
we are all equal ! '
"Before God! — Now, however, this God hath died. Be-
fore the populace, however, we will not be equal. Ye higher
men, away from the market-place.
"Before God! — Now however this God hath died! Ye
higher men, this God was your greatest danger.
"Only since he lay in the grave have ye again arisen.
Now only cometh the great noontide, now only doth the
higher man become — master!
"Have ye understood this word, O my brethren? Ye
are frightened: do your hearts turn giddy? Doth the abyss
here yawn for you? Doth the hell-hound here yelp at you?
"Well! Take heart! ye higher men! Now only travail-
eth the mountain of the human future. God hath died; now
do we desire — the Superman to live. . . .
"The most careful ask today: 'How is man to be main-
tained?' Zarathustra however asketh, as the first and only
one: 'How is man to be surpassed?'
"The Superman, I have at heart; that is the first and
only thing to me — and not man; not the neighbour, not the
poorest, not the sorriest, not the best —
"O my brethren, what I can love in man is that he is
an over-going and a down-going. And also in you there
is much that maketh me love and hope.
"In that ye have despised, ye higher men, that maketh
me hope. For the great despisers are the great reverers.
"In that ye have despaired, there is much to honour. For
ye have not learned to submit yourselves, ye have not learned
petty policy.
ISO Some Modern Isms.
"For today have the petty people become master: they
all preach submission and humility and policy and diligence
and consideration and the long et cetera of petty virtues.
"Whatever is of the effeminate type, whatever originateth
from the servile type, and especially the populace-mismash —
that wisheth now to be master of all human destiny — O dis-
gust ! Disgust ! Disgust !
"That asketh and asketh and never tireth: 'How is man
to maintain himself best, longest, most pleasantly?' There-
by — are they the masters of today.
"These masters of today — surpass them, O my brethren —
these petty people : they are the Superman's greatest danger !
"Surpass, ye higher men, the petty virtues, the petty policy,
the sand-grain considerateness, the ant-hill trumpery, the
pitiable comfortableness, the 'happiness of the greatest num-
ber!'
"And rather despair than submit yourselves. And verily,
I love you, because ye know not today how to live, ye higher
men! For thus do ye live — best! .
"Have ye courage, O my brethren? Are ye stout-hearted?
Not the courage before witnesses, but anchorite and eagle
courage, which not even a God any longer beholdeth?
"Cold souls, mules, the blind and the drunken, I do not
call stout-hearted. He hath heart who knoweth fear, but
vanquisheth it; who seeth the abyss, but with pride.
"He who seeth the abyss, but with eagle's eyes — he who
with eagle's talons graspeth the abyss: he hath courage.
" 'Man is evil' — so said to me for consolation, all the
wisest ones. Ah, if only it be still true today! For the
evil is man's best force.
" 'Man must become better and eviler' — so do I teach.
The evilest is necessary for the Superman's best.
"It may have been well for the preacher of the petty
people to suffer and be burdened by men's sin. I, however,
rejoice in great sin as my great consolation.
Some Modern Isms. 181
"Such things, however, are not said for long ears. Every
word, also, is not suited for every mouth. These are fine,
far-away things: at them sheep's claws shall not grasp!"
Thus spake Zarathustra, pp. 350-353.
The contents of his writings, notwithstanding his extrava-
gant claims, include nothing original. "His works are a
veritable whispering gallery of literary echoes" (Figgis, 169).
He borrowed from Machiavelli and Gobineau, from many
strains of German literature (Thiele), from those Scriptures
which he abhorred, from La Rochefoucauld, from Luther,
Zoroaster. As for his originality in philosophy, M. Fouillee
writes (International Journal of Ethics, 1903, p. 13):
"Nietzsche has not the supreme originality which he claims
for himself. Mix Greek sophistry and Greek scepticism with
the materialism of Hobbes and the monism of Schopenhauer,
corrected with the paradoxes of Rousseau and of Diderot'
and the result will be the philosophy of Zarathustra."
He writes again: "He fancies himself secure from the
prejudices which emanate from the "herd," or are due to
environment, and yet no one more than this singer of the
praises of force and of war has gathered together into a
single heap all the gregarious prejudices from Germany
still feudal in the midst of the nineteenth century, all those
dominant ideas which spring from the race, the environment
and the moment, and combined with them corresponding
ideas from antiquity, the Middle Ages and the Renaissance"
(Ibid, 17).
He was a man of violent admirations; and is found ap-
propriating, unconsciously from each of the personages to
whom for the time he was a devotee. One day he is Wag-
nerite, the next, under the influence of Paul Ree, the day
following the disciple of Darwin, and on the subsequent day
bubbling with enthusiasm over Schopenhauer, and on a
still later day decrying Kant and borrowing from him in cr.e
182 Some Modern Isms.
breath.
No man had more contempt for the logical understanding
than Nietzsche. According to him the whole method of
logical reasoning is without any reference to reality. Logic
is the cutting of the world into bits. It is not a guide to
reality. We are driven to it by fatigue, not by love of knowl-
edge, by the Will to Power.
"In order to be able to think and to draw conclusions, it
is necessary to acknowledge that which exists: Logic only
deals with formulae for things which are constant. That
is why this acknowledgment would not in the least prove
reality: That which is is part of our optics." {The Will
to Power, II., 33).
" 'Truth' is the will to be master over the manifold sensa-
tions that reach consciousness; it is the will to classify phe-
nomena according to definite categories."
"The criterion of truth lies in the enhancement of the feel-
ing of power.
"According to my way of thinking, 'truth' does not neces-
sarily mean the opposite of error, but in the most fundamental
cases, merely the relation of different errors to each other;
thus one error might be older, deeper than another, perhaps
altogether ineradicable, one without which organic creatures
like ourselves could not exist; whereas other errors might
not tyrannize over us to that extent as conditions of exist-
ence, but when measured according to the standard of those
other tyrants could even be laid aside." (The Will to Power,
IL,49).
" 'Man projects his instinct of truth' (that form of illusion
which enables one to live), his 'aim,' to a certain extent be-
yond himself, in the form of a metaphysical world of Being,
a 'thing in itself,' a world already to hand. His require-
ments as a creator make him invent the world in which he
works in advance; he anticipates it; these anticipations (this
faith in truth) is his mainstay." (Ibid, 61).
Some Modern Isms. 183
He attempts to explain the growth of intellect as a develop-
ment of the Will to Power. In the attempt he is largely
swayed by the theory of biological evolution, and the belief
that intellect is itself a product of those physical forces seen
in natural development.
At the same time he betrays the influence of Kant in mag-
nifying the human forms involved in all knowledge.
Again, denying the "thing in itself" he dragged it back
into existence in the shape of the Will Power. In other par-
ticulars he shows the influence of Kant.
Similarly Nietzsche, at one time a devotee at the shrine
of Schopenhauer, came violently to differ. Still he never
shook off the influence of the sage of pessimism. Along with
Schopenhauer he taught a monism of the will, as Hegel had
taught a monism of thought. Nietzsche is often utterly in-
consistent but on the whole his philosophy is "monism with
the individual a mere bubble on the stream of the Will to
Power." While not a pessimist in the Schopenhaur sense
his Amor Fati — love of recurrence — is a "counsel of despair."
His differences with Schopenhauer have been explained as
due largely to what he borrowed from Charles Darwin, whom
nevertheless he also treated with great professed contempt.
"Nietzsche's conception of the world as physiological de-
velopment only — ^his never ceasing belief in evolution — even
his belief in the struggle for power as the keyword to all de-
velopment are really Darwin with a difference" (Figgis, The
Will to Freedom, 193). It is claimed that he was proba-
bly indebted for his notion of the Superman indirectly to
Darwin's Origin of Species. Dr. George Brandes, who has
been called the discoverer of Nietzsche, teaches that his
whole system of ethics is merely the translation into ethical
terms of the Bismarckian Era.
If he was very marked for originality, the world has been
slow to see it, except in his insane condemnation of morality.
184 Some Modern Isms.
V. How does it come about that Nietzsche has won so
considerable a follo^ving?
He has won no small following, not only young men and
young women who wish to live free of traditional restraints,
but philosophic "students" who differ with him on some
points radically, and professed Christians who deny the
truth of his central teachings. Musicians and educators ad-
mire him for his introduction of them to wide horizons of
culture and for his advocacy of the cultivation of positive
energy. It is said that Thus Spake Zarathustra has reached
a circulation of about 140,000; and that quite a library of
books has been written on Nietzsche.
The explanation of the Nietzsche vogue may be in part:
1st. The enthusiastic dogmatism with which he sets forth
the views which he for the time holds. He appears to be
full of dead certainty that his illusions are the most useful
possible for human life. No man ever thought more highly
of his own mental children than Nietzsche of his "illusions."
No man ever assumed a more dogmatic tone. He spake with
the air of a prophet. He boasted of his prophetic gift. He
blew his own horn as no other man ever did. In an age of
negation the crowd is hungry for dogmatic affirmation.
2d. His imaginative, romantic, concrete, sensuous way of
expressing himself has brought him into favor with many
people. These qualities may be illustrated by the Night
Song of Zarathustra:
" 'Tis night; now do all gushing fountains speak louder.
And my soul also is a gushing fountain.
"'Tis night: now only do all songs of the loving ones
awake. And my soul also is the song of a loving one.
"Something unappeased, unappeasable, is within me; it
longeth to find expression. A craving for love is within me,
which speaketh itself the language of love.
"Light am I: ah, that I were night! But it is my lone-
someness to be begirt with light!
Some Modern Isms. 185
"Ah, that I were dark and nightly! How would I suck
at the breasts of light!
"And you yourselves would I bless, ye twinkling starlets
and glow-worms aloft! — and would rejoice in the gifts of
your light.
"But I live in mine own light, I drink again into myself
the flames that break forth from me.
"I know not the happiness of the receiver; and oft have
I dreamt that stealing must be more blessed than receiving.
"It is my poverty that my hand never ceaseth bestowing;
it is mine en\y that I see waiting eyes and the brightened
nights of longing.
"Oh, the misery of all bestowers! Oh, the darkening of
my sun! Oh, the craving to crave! Oh, the violent hunger
in satiety!
"They take from me: but do I yet touch their soul? There
is a gap 'twixt giving and receiving; and the smallest gap
hath finally to be bridged over.
"A hunger ariseth out of my beauty: I should like to in-
jure those I illumine; I should like to rob those I have
gifted — thus do I hunger for wickedness.
"Withdrawing my hand when another hand already
stretcheth out to it; hesitating like the cascade, which hesi-
tateth even in its leap — thus do I hunger for wickedness!
"Such revenge doth mine abundance think of: such mis-
chief wclleth out of my lonesomeness.
"My happiness in bestowing died in bestowing; my virtue
became weary of itself by its abundance !
"He who ever bestoweth is in danger of losing his shame;
to him who ever dispenseth, the hand and heart becomes
callous by very dispensing.
"Mine eye no longer overfloweth for the shame of sup-
pliants; my hand hath become too hard for the trembling of
filled hands.
186 Some Modern Isms.
"Whence have gone the tears of mine eye, and the down
of my heart? Oh, the lonesomeness of all bestowers! Oh,
the silence of all shining ones!
"Many suns circle in desert space: to all that is dark do
they speak with their light — but to me they are silent.
"Oh, this is the hostility of light to the shining one: un-
pityingly doth it pursue its course.
"Unfair to the shining one in its innermost heart, cold to
the suns — thus travelleth every sun.
"Like a storm do the suns pursue their courses: that is
their travelling. Their inexorable will do they follow: that
is their coldness.
"Oh, ye only is it, ye dark, nightly ones, that extract
warmth from the shining ones! Oh, ye only drink milk
and refreshment from the light's udders!
Ah, there is ice around me; my hand burneth with the ici-
ness! Ah, there is thirst in me; it panteth after your thirst I
" 'Tis night: alas, that I have to be light! And thirst
for the nightly! And lonesomeness!
" 'Tis night: now doth my longing break forth in me as
a fountain — for speech do I long.
" 'Tis night: now do all gushing fountains speak louder.
And my soul also is a gushing fountain.
" 'Tis night: now do all songs of loving ones awake.
And my soul also is the song of a loving one." (Thus Spake
Zarathustra, pp. 124-126).
There can hardly be a doubt that he understood the value
of words, and that he handled them with the skill of a
wizard. He had a good opinion of his style. He says:
"I will now pass just one or two general remarks about
my art of style. To communicate a state, an inner tension
of pathos by means of signs including the tempo of these
signs — that is, the meaning of every style; and in view of
the fact that the multiplicity of inner states in me is enorm-
Some Modern Isms. 187
ous, I am capable of many kinds of style — in short, the
most multifarious art of style that any man has ever had at
his disposal. Any style is good which genuinely communi-
cates an inner condition, which does not blunder over the
signs, over the tempo of the signs, or over moods — all the
laws of phrasing are the outcome of representing moods
artistically. Good style, in itself, is a piece of sheer foolery,
mere idealism, like 'beauty in itself,' for instance, or 'good-
ness in itself,' or 'the thing-in-itself.' All this takes for
granted, of course, that there exist ears that can hear, and
such men as are capable and worthy of a like pathos, that
those are not wanting unto whom one may comm.unicate
one's self. Meanwhile my Zarathustra, for instance, is still
in quest of such people — alas I he will have to seek a long
while yet! A man must be worthy of listening to him. . . .
And, until that time, there will be no one who will under-
stand the art that has been squandered in this book. No
one has ever existed who has had more novel, more strange,
and purposely created art forms to fling to the winds. The
fact that such things were possible in the German language
still awaited proof; formerly, I myself would have denied
most emphatically that it was possible. Before my time
people did not know what could be done with the German
language. The art of grand rhythm, of grand style in
periods, for expressing the tremendous fluctuations of sublime
and superhuman passion, was first discovered by me: with
the dithyramb entitled, 'The Seven Seals,' which constitutes
the last discourse of the third part of Zarathustra, I soared
miles above all that which heretofore has been called
poetry." (Ecce Homo, pp. 62-64).
Professor Henri Lichtenberger says:
"His 'writing' is so neat and coloured, so nervous and
flexible, so rich in picturesque expressions and in formulae,
written and rewritten, chiselled with exquisite munuteness
by a virtuoso of the pen."
188 Some Modern Isms.
There is evident to the reader of the English translations
a wierd music in some of Nietzsche's writings. Pictures,
too, troop upon the heels of pictures. When one can forget
the soaring self-magnification, the insane self-deification, and
the Satanic impiety, the lure of Nietzsche's style is not in-
considerable. His pages are a rare picture-show, scene fol-
lowing scene with startling rapidity. He had the capacity
of dealing even with dry academic subjects in the freshest
way, placing them in beautiful settings, and throwing them
into sensuous dress.
3d. He had the power of camouflaging the essentials of a
subject with which he was dealing. In other words, he was
a sophist of the first water. In profession he eschewed dia-
lectic. In practise he was greatly given to a false dialectic.
Thus, in picturing Christ he takes for his materials those
passages in which Christ has been thought, by some, to teach
the doctrine of non-resistance — takes them as teaching non-
resistance — passes by the stern side of Christ, and, conse-
quently, pictures him as a teacher of non-resistance pure and
simple. Thus also, when opposing a series of arguments
against a position he would maintain, he demolishes the
weak and worthless so effectually as to make the superficial
reader forget the strong arguments which he leaves discreet-
ly untouched. He thus misleads many silly sheep.
4th. Dr. Figgis asserts that Nietzsche has power with
men because he delivers them from the tyranny not only
of the heaven above, but of the earth beneath; because he
teaches them to live as though nothing were inevitable, as
masters and not slaves of the universe, to find in it, even
if they are worsted, a noble foe, to be ready for the new,
the unknown, the exceptional, to climb daily fresh Alpine
heights of danger — enslaved neither to priest nor to philoso-
pher, nor even to scientific dogmatist. He says: "Jacob
earned his royal title by wrestling with a supernatural be-
Some Modern Isms. 189
ing: Nietzsche, who denies the supernatural, would win for
his pupils a like principality by teaching them to wrestle
with natural reality. Rightly or wrongly, many have won
this way a sense of freedom, of the worth of life and of
trying" (Figgis, The Will to Freedom, p. 240-241). Yet Dr.
Figgis himself teaches rightly that Nietzsche's cardinal te-
nets deny the possibility of this very freedom.
Figgis further claims that Nietzsche was the John the
Baptist of the Twentieth Century — a new age:
" 'Repent,' he might cry, 'of your absurd morality. Rend
all your garments, and live naked to the real wind. Rid
yourself of shams; away with your conventional lies, your
worship of comfort, your domestic pettiness, and above all
your wallowing in pity. Be something. Look down, down on
the herd, which you disown. Kill all this sentimental cul-
ture, this passion for the past, and join in the great gamble
for the future, when every valley shall be a gulf, and every
hill a Himalaya; when the crooked shall be twisted round,
and the rough places become rocks. For Man, Man alone,
shall be exalted in that day — for the Superman cometh, he
Cometh to judge the world, and with violence shall he rule
the world and reprove with terror for the proud of the car^h.'
"This note of appeal to the will, this sense that man-
kind is in the making, ushered in the twentieth century.
The spirit of scepticism, of decadence had hold of many,
or else a mere conservatism, Nietzsche was like the wild
northeaster, and he was, in his own words, 'the voice of
the day after tomorrow.' " (Figgis, The Will to Freedom,
pp. 250-251. Cp. Ibid., 263).
5th. Without doubt his preaching of the class distinction
between slave men and master men has been a trump card
with junkers, and men anywhere suffering under the delu-
sion of being "master men," or possibly supennen. It has
been grateful to their egotism. They wish to see the age
190 Some Modern Isms.
of Dionysius come and the age of Christianity go — the age
of the mastery of master men come and the age of regard
for weaklings and slaves go; because forsooth they are the
master men.
6th. His immoralism has given him popularity with some.
It enables the reader to bait Christians, and to deluge with
contempt solemn academic moralists, who bethink themselves
in no wise indebted to Christianity, though teaching its
ethics. It enables some to give loose reign to every lust
deemed fitted to build them up in bodily efficiency or any
other sort of mastery.
Nietzsche is the apostle of positive ungodliness in revolt
against the negative ungodliness of the scientists, philoso-
phers, and critics of the nineteenth century. He was not
only an open foe to Godliness, but he was a foe to this
negative ungodliness. These critics had taken away the
world's stimulus to life. Nietzsche did not restore the true
stimulus — the Christian faith, hope and love. Woe is his
that he did not. Into this negatively ungodly world he
threw his stimulus, the hope of bringing in the Superman.
7th. In .short, Nietzsche had the kind of stuff vast num-
bers of people in this age want — ungodly, atheistic, amoral,
or immoral, dogmatic humbuggery — arid and bitter, desert
sands in which they can bury their ostrich heads — that not
beholding the great realities of life, they may live as though
these realities were not.
VI. What sort of fruits may be looked for from Nietzsche?
1. The trampling of moral obligation in the dust.
If morality be due simply to the herd instinct, if the
Superman is to be beyond good and evil every asinus hominis
who fancies himself a master man, will tend to act as a
Caesar Borgia, or a Napoleon, as the Junkers of Germany
acted in Belgium and northern France — to use any means
by which his ends may be accomplished. Man can only be-
Some Modern Isms. 191
come great at the cost of becoming morally terrible accord-
ing to Nietzsche.
"Man is a combination of the beast and the super-beast;
higher man a combination of the monster and the Super-
man; these opposites belong to each other. With every de-
gree of a man's growth towards greatness and loftiness he
also grows downward into the depths and into the terrible.
We should not desire the one without the other; or, better
still, the more fundamentally we desire the one, the more
completely we shall achieve the other.
"Terribleness belongs to greatness: Let us not deceive
ourselves." (The Will to Power, 405).
Their acceptance of his philosophy would explain all the
sensual barbarism displayed by the German armies during
the past four years. In further confirmation of this hear his
words :
"The state, or unmorality organized, is from within — the
police; the penal code, status, commerce, and the family;
and from without, the will to war, to power, to conquest, to
revenge.
"A multitude will do things an individual will not, be-
cause of the division of responsibility, of command, and of
execution; because the virtues of obedience, duty, patriotism
and local sentiment are all introduced; because feelings of
pride, severity, strength, hate and revenge — in short, all
typical traits are upheld, and these are characteristics utterly
alien to the herd-man." (Will to Power, 184).
"The maintenance of the military state is the last means
of adhering to the great tradition of the past, or where it
has been lost, to revive it. By means of it, the superior or
strong type of man is preserved, and all institutions and
ideas which perpetuate enmity and order of rank in states,
such as national feeling, protective tariffs, etc., may on
that account seem justified."
192 Some Modern Isms.
He justifies beforehand every Machiavellian diplomatic
move, the making of treaties to be treated as scraps of paper,
and all beastliness of which Germany has been guilty.
2d. This world war — a war for world dominion is the
fruit of his teaching, in part. He predicted it and furthered
it by his teaching of amorality, his unceasing exhortation
to the master class, to will to power, and by his magnifica-
tion beyond m.easure of the inequality of races and indi-
viduals and his recognition of authority in any man's hands
as in direct proportion to his power to secure the carrying
out of his wishes.
VII. What incidental benefits has Nietzsche conferred on
Christianity ?
He has given occasions for Christians to see,
1st. That it is impossible to maintain Christian ethical
standards without the Christian faith, that the ethics and
doctrines are parts of one whole.
2d. That hatred to the Christian faith on the part of the
natural man is a fact, that it will show itself in persecution
again, as it has done before in case the type of Christianity
becomes decided, and the natural man have the opportunity.
3d. That Christians, who profess to regard their fellows
as equally entitled to life, liberty, and religion with them-
selves, should treat their fellows practically as if they be-
lieved it.
5th. That the Church and the world should be clearly
demarked.
6th. That Nietzsche should be regarded as symptomatic
of the time — a period of pagan-reaction against Christianity.
7th. That he has, by his caricature of Christianity occa-
sioned a return from the Christianity that regards God as
an indulgent old grandmother to a Christianity with a God
merciful and terrible.
Date Due
Je 2c '3
VAOil:
If 27 •»
^ "^ ••' — *
'i
i;
'%S:, IS
My 11 i-
Ikki. u.
Ap te.
£;
— ^ 3 'i
Ji 6- 'i^
r '• 1
AV- --
i
^•f '■' ' ' '^
%AnULT^
/
AJr .. ^
L'Ul 3n'5R
Ap 2 s
»W»»gfp.
|v
^::2g^ft
f)
