Mystic London; or, Phases of occult life in the metropolisDavies, Charles Maurice
History
Mystic London; or, Phases of occult life in the metropolis
Davies, Charles Maurice
London (England) -- Description and travel; London (England) -- Social life and customs -- 19th century; Occultism
really that I have set myself up like an animated ninepin to be knocked
down by the first thorough-going spiritualist who cares to bowl at me.
But whatever else they think of me--sceptical though they deem me on
subjects where perhaps you are, many of you, a little prone to
dogmatize--I claim the character at least of an honest sceptic. I do not
altogether disavow the title, but I understand it to mean "inquirer." I
confess myself, after long years of perfectly unbiassed inquiry, still
an investigator--a sceptic. It is the fashion to abuse St. Thomas
because he sought sensible proofs on a subject which it was certainly
most important to have satisfactorily cleared up. I never could read the
words addressed to him at all in the light of a rebuke--"Because thou
hast seen thou hast believed." The Church of England treats the doubt of
St. Thomas as permitted by God "for the more confirmation of the faith;"
and I feel sure that professed spiritualists will not be so inconsistent
as to censure any man for examining long and carefully matters which
they believe to admit of demonstration. I heard the most eloquent of
their advocates say, when comparing spiritual with credal conviction,
"Our motto no longer is 'I believe,' but 'I know.'" Belief may be
instantaneous, but knowledge will be gradual; and so it is that,
standing at a certain fixed point in very many years' study of
spiritualism, I pause, and--so to say, empanelling a jury--ask the
question it seems I ought to answer at others' asking--Am I a
Spiritualist?
One word of apology further before entering on the details of the
matter. It will be inevitable that the first personal pronoun shall
recur frequently in the course of this paper, and that so the paper
shall seem egotistical. The very question itself sounds so. I am not
vain enough to suppose that it matters much to anybody here whether I am
a spiritualist or not, except in so far as I may be in any sense a
representative man. I believe I am. That is, I believe, nay, am sure,
that a great many persons go as far as I do, and stop where I stop.
There is a largish body of investigators, I believe, dangling there,
like Mahomet's coffin, between heaven and earth, and it would be a
charity to land them somewhere. Of the clerical mind, I do _not_ claim
to be a representative, because the clerical mind, qua clerical, has
made up itself that the phenomena in question are diabolical. Of course
if I accepted this theory my question would be utterly irrelevant, and I
should claim a place among the spiritualists at once. The diabolical
people not only accept the phenomena, but admit their spiritual origin,
and, more than this, identify the spirits. They are in point of fact the
most thorough-going spiritualists of all.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account