intervention is possible, or assert that it is improbable. They must
concede its possibility, its probability, and its susceptibility of
proof; and therefore when the evidence in any particular instance is
sufficient to establish the reality of any other class of facts, they
are bound, as reasonable beings, to admit it. To them there is, and can
be no _à priori_ difficulty, for they already believe in the reality of
demonic agents adequate to produce the mysterious phenomena that they
are called upon to accept. Hence, in those ages and countries in which
nobody doubted Christianity, all men of science, physicians,
magistrates, as well as the clergy and the people, readily admitted the
demonic character of the phenomena like those produced in our day by
mesmerism.
But, if the belief in the reality of demonic intervention is integral in
Christianity, the most obvious way of getting rid of Christianity and
its restraints would be to deny that reality, and to explain the
phenomena commonly held as evidence of such intervention, on
physiological and other natural principles. This has been the aim of
science, especially medical science, during the last two hundred years.
This aim was adopted by the so-called wits and philosophers of the last
century, and during this it has begun to be adopted by jurisprudence,
and even to be acquiesced in by a large portion of professed Christian
ministers. Literary men, like Sir Walter Scott; founders of new sects,
like the late Hosea Ballou, of Boston; neologist theologians everywhere;
and that “fourth estate,”—journalism, have all combined to reason,
explain, or laugh away, every thing pertaining to demonology, and to
make the world believe that there is no devil, that evil spirits are
only the creatures of a disordered brain, that apparitions or ghosts are
only hallucinations, possession a peculiar kind of madness or insanity,
and magic mere charlatanry or sleight-of-hand. All this, for an
anti-Christian purpose, was admirable, since even the conservative
portion of the clergy seemed to acquiesce in it.
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