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)