Modern Spiritualism by Editor

Pacific Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Oakland, California · Aug 28, 1879

Modern Spiritualism.

By Editor

(Continued.)

DOCTRINES OF DEVILS.

3. They deny the plainest principles of morality. "If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?" God requires us to perfect holiness in his sight, and to purify our souls in obeying the truth; but if there is no choice of action, or no difference worthy of notice between the principles of truth and error, right and wrong, how shall we assure our hearts before God? The teachings of Spiritualism are truly destroying the foundations, by denying the distinctions of right and wrong, and affirming that no evil consequence can result from any course of action.

We call the especial attention of all to this, as it is a point that interests all. Men who deny the Bible, who deny God, who deny Christ, will, in general, acknowledge some principles of right—some rules of morality to which they are ready to admit all should conform. This is "the work of the law written in the heart," more generally acknowledged than any written revelation that ever was given. In all ages it has been the same. No considerable body of people, especially of those claiming the advantages of civilization, have ever denied this, except the Spiritualists of the present time. If we do not make good this charge by sufficient proofs, we stand ready to be impeached. But this we firmly believe, that all history does not show a parallel to the teachings of this class, though among them may be found the learned, the refined, and the professedly pious. Believing thus, it becomes us to speak plainly, if haply any may be saved from the snare. The peril is too imminent, the hazard too great, and the time too far spent, to daub with untempered mortar.

We have quoted from the "Healing of the Nations," which says God does not condemn any creature. This is certainly just and true if the following is true, found on page 169 of the same book:—

"Unto God there is no error: all is comparative good."

And of an inspired teacher, it says:— "He vieweth error as God vieweth it, as undeveloped good." A. J. Davis says:— "Sin, indeed, in the common acceptation of that term, does not really exist."—Nat. Div. Rev., page 521. "The innate divineness of the spirit prohibits the possibility of spiritual wickedness, or unrighteousness."—Id., page 413.

Dr. Hare has a set of "theological axioms," of which he says the affirmative is "as evidently true as any of the axioms of Euclid." In them he says:— "May not devotion to God be shown, Whether through Christ or Mohammed known? Whether men die in holy war, Or kneel to be crushed by Juggernaut's car?"

Another of his axioms is that God would not leave men in error, and then punish for the error; but if God sends them truth and light, and they choose darkness, and despise the truth, and defy his authority, would he not be just in punishing them? Does not the very idea of government, and the welfare of the subjects at large, demand the punishment of the rebellious? Do not such false reasonings tend to lawlessness and anarchy?

The doctor evidently regarded everything as devotion to God which professes to be devotional, even though it lead men to sacrifice their own or others' lives. Perhaps he was moved by the spirit that dictated the "Healing of the Nations," and so considered war undeveloped peace! And may they not also excuse the falsehoods in which their teachings and communications abound as undeveloped truth?

On page 230, he says:— "As respects free-will, Dr. Johnson shrewdly said that all practice is in its favor, all theory against it; but whatever view may be taken on this subject, no one can deny that so far as it is possible for sin to be avoided, it must be within the power of God to make men virtuous. The fact that they are not sinless, must arise either from his not wishing to make them more virtuous, or from his inability to make them so. That he does not make them from sin, implies either a want of will or a want of power."

But is it not possible for God to constitute man free to choose his course of action? and does not our very consciousness combine with "all practice" to prove it true? This is a thought which Spiritualists will not entertain; and why? Because it makes man accountable for his crimes, and so disturbs their self-complacency. So they will plead that God had not power to do as he pleased, or that everything, filthy and abominable as it may be, is pleasing to him. This fully justifies our parody of the doctor's argument on the existence of the devil. War, murder, slavery, fraud, licentiousness, are "undeveloped good," and according to the will of God, for which he "doth not condemn." If any think this is unjustly severe, let them note what follows. On page 402, Dr. Hare says:— "That anything should, even for an instant, be contrary to his will, is inconsistent with his foresight and omnipotency. It would be a miracle that anything counter to his will should exist." With this agree the words of A. J. Davis:— "In the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures it is affirmed that sin is the transgression of the law. But by an examination of nature, the true and only Bible, it will be seen that this statement is erroneous. It gives a wrong idea both of man and law. . . It will be found impossible for man to transgress a law of God."

The above is from a lecture on the "Philosophy of Reform," given in New York City; but if this is true, is there neither need nor chance for reform, unless it is God's will that needs reforming! But he goes further, and says:— "Reformers need to understand that war is as natural to one stage of human development as peace is natural to another. My brother has the spirit of revenge. Shall I call him a demon? Is not his spirit natural to his condition? War is not evil or repulsive except to a man of peace. Who made the warrior? Who made the non-resistant? Polygamy is as natural to one stage of development as oranges are natural to the South. Shall I grow indignant, and because I am a monogamist, condemn my kinsman of yore? Who made him? Who made me? We both came up under the confluence of social and political circumstances; and we both represent our conditions and our teachers. The doctrine of blame and praise is natural only to an unphilosophical condition of mind. The spirit of complaint—of attributing 'evil' to this and that plane of society—is natural; but is natural only to undeveloped minds. It is a profanation—a sort of Atheism of which I would not be guilty. And all our religions, all our schemes of reformation, operating on this superficial plane, need the very elements which are necessary to reform."

So revenge, war, polygamy, and every violation of the principles of morality, may not be blamed. According to "the true and only Bible," it is impossible to do wrong! To call murder and adultery evil is "a sort of Atheism." It seems quite unnecessary to pursue this point further. Any further "progress" in this direction is impossible. They may go some further in practice than they have gone, but the theory of lawlessness is fully developed.

A. P. McCombs, a Spiritualist, in a tract entitled "Whatever Is, Is Right, Viadicated," says:— "I will not contend about how Pope or anybody else viewed the axiom, or into what departments of God's universe they give it entrance; I believe that 'Whatever is, is Right,' in its fullest and broadest sense, covering every act in the past, present, and future."

For an utter contempt of Bible truth and of the authority of God, for an open rejoicing in iniquity, the following has few parallels. It is from a defense of the theater, by Mrs. Crowell, in Chicago:— "The first woman plucked of the fruit of the tree of knowledge and gave it to the first man to eat, and thus brought death (a doubtful evil) into the world; ergo, woman ought to be abolished. But I, a woman, uphold and glory in the deed of the first of my sex. . . Woman plucked from the tree of knowledge—not from the tree of life. Sublime choice!"

Publishing this, the editor of the Religio-Philosophical Journal (Chicago Spiritualist) made the following comment:— "But what is stranger than all, if God drove the first woman out of Eden for the act referred to, that he should have restrained his vengeance toward this woman who publicly glories in these acts. Lo! these are strange times upon which we have fallen, and 'straws show which way the wind blows.'"

These extracts remind us of the blasphemous utterances of the "French Revolution;" but instead of disproving that scripture, as the editor intimates, it proves the truth of another most clearly: "Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil." Eccl. 8:11.

Dr. A. B. Child is a well known Spiritualist, and one of the most popular of their authors. His work entitled "Christ and the People" was published at the office of the Banner of Light, and highly recommended by that paper. It was also strongly recommended by Moses Hull in his paper. In this book Dr. Child said:— "A religion more spiritual will be discovered and acknowledged. . . a religion without written laws, without commandments, without creeds—a religion too sacred to be spoken, too pure to be defiled, too generous to be judged, resting upon no uncertain outside standard of rectitude, upon no dogma of another, no purity of earthly life, no glory of earthly perfection—a religion that every soul possesses by natural endowment, not one more than another. "This religion is simply desire. "With every one, desire is spontaneous and sincere, pure and holy; no matter what the desire is, whether it be called good or bad, it is the natural, God-given religion of the soul." Pages 28, 29.

He occupies a chapter in deriding justice; he scoffs at holiness, and exalts sin, as the following brief extracts show:— "Ere long, man will come to see that all sin is for his spiritual good. . . To see that holiness lays up treasures on earth. . . Sin destroys earthly treasures, and causes them to be laid up in Heaven." Pages 32, 33. "There is no criminal act that is not an experience of usefulness. The tracks of vice and crime are only the tracks of human progress. . . There has been no deed in the catalogue of crime that has not been a valuable experience to the inner being of the man who committed it." Page 137. "Man has yet to learn and yet to admit that all sins which are committed are innocent, for all are in the inevitable rulings of God." Page 175. "He who wars with sin leaves nothing lovely in his tracks." Page 191.

These extracts show the character of the book; and the Banner of Light, in its notice says: "This book should find its way to every family. . . It is born of Spiritualism." We think so; nothing could be found outside of Spiritualism to equal it in recklessness and blasphemy; for it is but blasphemy to connect the name of Christ with such impious immorality. "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness." Isa. 5:20. Read Mal. 2:17.

EDITOR.