A defence of modern spiritualismWallace, Alfred Russel
Religion
A defence of modern spiritualism
Wallace, Alfred Russel
Spiritualism
Modern Spiritualism dates from March, 1848; it being then that, for the
first time, intelligent communications were held with the unknown cause
of the mysterious knockings and other sounds, similar to those which had
disturbed the Mompesson and Wesley families in the seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries. This discovery was made by Miss Kate Fox, a girl
of nine years old, and the first recognized example of an extensive
class now known as mediums. It is worthy of remark that this very first
“modern spiritual manifestation” was subjected to the test of unlimited
examination by all the inhabitants of the village of Hydesville, New
York. Though all were utter skeptics, no one could discover any cause
for the noises, which continued, though with less violence, when all the
children had left the house. Nothing is more common than the remark that
it is absurd and illogical to impute noises, of which we cannot discover
the cause, to the agency of spirits. So it undoubtedly is when the
noises are merely noises; but is it so illogical when these noises turn
out to be signals, and signals which spell out a fact, which fact,
though wholly unknown to all present, turns out to be true? Yet, on this
very first occasion, twenty-six years ago, the signals declared that a
murdered man was buried in the cellar of the house; it indicated the
exact spot in the cellar under which the body lay; and upon digging
there, at a depth of six or seven feet, considerable portions of a human
skeleton were found. Yet more: the name of the murdered man was given,
and it was ascertained that such a person had visited that very house
and had disappeared five years before, and had never been heard of
since. The signals further declared that he, the murdered man, was the
signaller; and as all the witnesses had satisfied themselves that the
signals were not made by any living person or by any assignable cause,
the logical conclusion from the facts was, that it _was_ the spirit[2]
of the murdered man; although such a conclusion might be to some in the
highest degree improbable, and to others in the highest degree absurd.
Footnote 2:
It may be as well here to explain that the word “spirit,” which is
often considered to be so objectionable by scientific men, is used
throughout this article (or at all events in the earlier portions of
it) merely to avoid circumlocution, in the sense of the “intelligent
cause of the phenomena,” and not as implying “the spirits of the
dead,” unless so expressly stated.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account