IS IT THE SECOND DAWN?
There are many incidents in the New Testament which might be taken as
starting points in tracing a close analogy between the phenomenal
events which are associated with the early days of Christianity, and
those which have perplexed the world in connection with modern
Spiritualism. Most of us are prepared to admit that the lasting claims
of Christianity upon the human race are due to its own intrinsic
teachings, which are quite independent of those wonders which can only
have had a use in startling the solid complacence of an unspiritual
race, and so directing their attention violently to this new system of
thought. Exactly the same may be said of the new revelation. The
exhibitions of a force which is beyond human experience and human
guidance is but a method of calling attention. To repeat a simile
which has been used elsewhere, it is the humble telephone bell which
heralds the all-important message. In the case of Christ, the Sermon
on the Mount was more than many miracles. In the case of this new
development, the messages from beyond are more than any phenomena. A
vulgar mind might make Christ's story seem vulgar, if it insisted upon
loaves of bread and the bodies of fish. So, also, a vulgar mind may
make psychic religion vulgar by insisting upon moving furniture or
tambourines in the air. In each case they are crude signs of power,
and the essence of the matter lies upon higher planes.
It is stated in the second chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, that
they, the Christian leaders, were all "with one accord" in one place.
"With one accord" expresses admirably those sympathetic conditions
which have always been found, in psychic circles, to be conducive of
the best results, and which are so persistently ignored by a certain
class of investigators. Then there came "a mighty rushing wind," and
afterwards "there appeared cloven tongues like unto fire and it sat
upon each of them." Here is a very definite and clear account of a
remarkable sequence of phenomena. Now, let us compare with this the
results which were obtained by Professor Crookes in his investigation
in 1873, after he had taken every possible precaution against fraud
which his experience, as an accurate observer and experimenter, could
suggest. He says in his published notes: "I have seen luminous points
of light darting about, sitting on the heads of different persons" and
then again:
"These movements, and, indeed, I may say the same of every class of
phenomena, are generally preceded by a peculiar cold air, sometimes
amounting to a decided wind. I have had sheets of paper blown about by
it. . . ." Now, is it not singular, not merely that the phenomena
should be of the same order, but that they should come in exactly the
same sequence, the wind first and the lights afterwards? In our
ignorance of etheric physics, an ignorance which is now slowly
clearing, one can only say that there is some indication here of a
general law which links those two episodes together in spite of the
nineteen centuries which divide them. A little later, it is stated
that "the place was shaken where they were assembled together." Many
modern observers of psychic phenomena have testified to vibration of
the walls of an apartment, as if a heavy lorry were passing. It is,
evidently, to such experiences that Paul alludes when he says: "Our
gospel came unto you not in word only, but also in power." The preacher
of the New Revelation can most truly say the same words. In connection
with the signs of the pentecost, I can most truly say that I have
myself experienced them all, the cold sudden wind, the lambent misty
flames, all under the mediumship of Mr. Phoenix, an amateur psychic of
Glasgow. The fifteen sitters were of one accord upon that occasion,
and, by a coincidence, it was in an upper room, at the very top of the
house.
In a previous section of this essay, I have remarked that no
philosophical explanation of these phenomena, known as spiritual, could
be conceived which did not show that all, however different in their
working, came from the same central source. St. Paul seems to state
this in so many words when he says: "But all these worketh that one
and the selfsame spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will."
Could our modern speculation, forced upon us by the facts, be more
tersely stated? He has just enumerated the various gifts, and we find
them very close to those of which we have experience. There is first
"the word of wisdom," "the word of knowledge" and "faith." All these
taken in connection with the Spirit would seem to mean the higher
communications from the other side. Then comes healing, which is still
practised in certain conditions by a highly virile medium, who has the
power of discharging strength, losing just as much as the weakling
gains, as instanced by Christ when He said: "Who has touched me? Much
virtue" (or power) "has gone out of me." Then we come upon the working
of miracles, which we should call the production of phenomena, and
which would cover many different types, such as apports, where objects
are brought from a distance, levitation of objects or of the human
frame into the air, the production of lights and other wonders. Then
comes prophecy, which is a real and yet a fitful and often delusive
form of mediumship--never so delusive as among the early Christians,
who seem all to have mistaken the approaching fall of Jerusalem and the
destruction of the Temple, which they could dimly see, as being the end
of the world. This mistake is repeated so often and so clearly that it
is really not honest to ignore or deny it. Then we come to the power
of "discerning the spirits," which corresponds to our clairvoyance, and
finally that curious and usually useless gift of tongues, which is also
a modern phenomenon. I can remember that some time ago I read the
book, "I Heard a Voice," by an eminent barrister, in which he describes
how his young daughter began to write Greek fluently with all the
complex accents in their correct places. Just after I read it I
received a letter from a no less famous physician, who asked my opinion
about one of his children who had written a considerable amount of
script in mediaeval French. These two recent cases are beyond all
doubt, but I have not had convincing evidence of the case where some
unintelligible signs drawn by an unlettered man were pronounced by an
expert to be in the Ogham or early Celtic character. As the Ogham
script is really a combination of straight lines, the latter case may
be taken with considerable reserve.
Thus the phenomena associated with the rise of Christianity and those
which have appeared during the present spiritual ferment are very
analogous. In examining the gifts of the disciples, as mentioned by
Matthew and Mark, the only additional point is the raising of the dead.
If any of them besides their great leader did in truth rise to this
height of power, where life was actually extinct, then he, undoubtedly,
far transcended anything which is recorded of modern mediumship. It is
clear, however, that such a power must have been very rare, since it
would otherwise have been used to revive the bodies of their own
martyrs, which does not seem to have been attempted. For Christ the
power is clearly admitted, and there are little touches in the
description of how it was exercised by Him which are extremely
convincing to a psychic student. In the account of how He raised
Lazarus from the grave after he had been four days dead--far the most
wonderful of all Christ's miracles--it is recorded that as He went down
to the graveside He was "groaning." Why was He groaning? No Biblical
student seems to have given a satisfactory reason. But anyone who has
heard a medium groaning before any great manifestation of power will
read into this passage just that touch of practical knowledge, which
will convince him of its truth. The miracle, I may add, is none the
less wonderful or beyond our human powers, because it was wrought by an
extension of natural law, differing only in degree with that which we
can ourselves test and even do.
Although our modern manifestations have never attained the power
mentioned in the Biblical records, they present some features which are
not related in the New Testament. Clairaudience, that is the hearing
of a spirit voice, is common to both, but the direct voice, that is the
hearing of a voice which all can discern with their material ears, is a
well-authenticated phenomenon now which is more rarely mentioned of
old. So, too, Spirit-photography, where the camera records what the
human eye cannot see, is necessarily a new testimony. Nothing is
evidence to those who do not examine evidence, but I can attest most
solemnly that I personally know of several cases where the image upon
the plate after death has not only been unmistakable, but also has
differed entirely from any pre-existing photograph.
As to the methods by which the early Christians communicated with the
spirits, or with the "Saints" as they called their dead brethren, we
have, so far as I know, no record, though the words of John:
"Brothers, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they
are of God," show very clearly that spirit communion was a familiar
idea, and also that they were plagued, as we are, by the intrusion of
unwelcome spiritual elements in their intercourse. Some have
conjectured that the "Angel of the Church," who is alluded to in terms
which suggest that he was a human being, was really a medium sanctified
to the use of that particular congregation. As we have early
indications of bishops, deacons and other officials, it is difficult to
say what else the "angel" could have been. This, however, must remain
a pure speculation.
Another speculation which is, perhaps, rather more fruitful is upon
what principle did Christ select his twelve chief followers. Out of
all the multitudes he chose twelve men. Why these particular ones? It
was not for their intelligence or learning, for Peter and John, who
were among the most prominent, are expressly described as "unlearned
and ignorant men." It was not for their virtue, for one of them proved
to be a great villain, and all of them deserted their Master in His
need. It was not for their belief, for there were great numbers of
believers. And yet it is clear that they were chosen on some principle
of selection since they were called in ones and in twos. In at least
two cases they were pairs of brothers, as though some family gift or
peculiarity, might underlie the choice.
Is it not at least possible that this gift was psychic power, and that
Christ, as the greatest exponent who has ever appeared upon earth of
that power, desired to surround Himself with others who possessed it to
a lesser degree? This He would do for two reasons. The first is that
a psychic circle is a great source of strength to one who is himself
psychic, as is shown continually in our own experience, where, with a
sympathetic and helpful surrounding, an atmosphere is created where all
the powers are drawn out. How sensitive Christ was to such an
atmosphere is shown by the remark of the Evangelist, that when He
visited His own native town, where the townspeople could not take Him
seriously, He was unable to do any wonders. The second reason may have
been that He desired them to act as His deputies, either during his
lifetime or after His death, and that for this reason some natural
psychic powers were necessary.
The close connection which appears to exist between the Apostles and
the miracles, has been worked out in an interesting fashion by Dr.
Abraham Wallace, in his little pamphlet "Jesus of Nazareth."[6]
Certainly, no miracle or wonder working, save that of exorcism, is
recorded in any of the Evangelists until after the time when Christ
began to assemble His circle. Of this circle the three who would
appear to have been the most psychic were Peter and the two
fellow-fishermen, sons of Zebedee, John and James. These were the
three who were summoned when an ideal atmosphere was needed. It will
be remembered that when the daughter of Jairus was raised from the dead
it was in the presence, and possibly, with the co-operation, of these
three assistants. Again, in the case of the Transfiguration, it is
impossible to read the account of that wonderful manifestation without
being reminded at every turn of one's own spiritual experiences. Here,
again, the points are admirably made in "Jesus of Nazareth," and it
would be well if that little book, with its scholarly tone, its breadth
of treatment and its psychic knowledge, was in the hands of every
Biblical student. Dr. Wallace points out that the place, the summit of
a hill, was the ideal one for such a manifestation, in its pure air and
freedom from interruption; that the drowsy state of the Apostles is
paralleled by the members of any circle who are contributing psychic
power; that the transfiguring of the face and the shining raiment are
known phenomena; above all, that the erection of three altars is
meaningless, but that the alternate reading, the erection of three
booths or cabinets, one for the medium and one for each materialised
form, would absolutely fulfil the most perfect conditions for getting
results. This explanation of Wallace's is a remarkable example of a
modern brain, with modern knowledge, throwing a clear searchlight
across all the centuries and illuminating an incident which has always
been obscure.
When we translate Bible language into the terms of modern psychic
religion the correspondence becomes evident. It does not take much
alteration. Thus for "Lo, a miracle!" we say "This is a
manifestation." "The angel of the Lord" becomes "a high spirit."
Where we talked of "a voice from heaven," we say "the direct voice."
"His eyes were opened and he saw a vision" means "he became
clairvoyant." It is only the occultist who can possibly understand the
Scriptures as being a real exact record of events.
There are many other small points which seem to bring the story of
Christ and of the Apostles into very close touch with modern psychic
research, and greatly support the close accuracy of some of the New
Testament narrative. One which appeals to me greatly is the action of
Christ when He was asked a question which called for a sudden decision,
namely the fate of the woman who had been taken in sin. What did He
do? The very last thing that one would have expected or invented. He
stooped down before answering and wrote with his finger in the sand.
This he did a second time upon a second catch-question being addressed
to Him. Can any theologian give a reason for such an action? I hazard
the opinion that among the many forms of mediumship which were
possessed in the highest form by Christ, was the power of automatic
writing, by which He summoned those great forces which were under His
control to supply Him with the answer. Granting, as I freely do, that
Christ was preternatural, in the sense that He was above and beyond
ordinary humanity in His attributes, one may still inquire how far
these powers were contained always within His human body, or how far He
referred back to spiritual reserves beyond it. When He spoke merely
from His human body He was certainly open to error, like the rest of
us, for it is recorded how He questioned the woman of Samaria about her
husband, to which she replied that she had no husband. In the case of
the woman taken in sin, one can only explain His action by the
supposition that He opened a channel instantly for the knowledge and
wisdom which was preter-human, and which at once gave a decision in
favor of large-minded charity.
It is interesting to observe the effect which these phenomena, or the
report of them, produced upon the orthodox Jews of those days. The
greater part obviously discredited them, otherwise they could not have
failed to become followers, or at the least to have regarded such a
wonder-worker with respect and admiration. One can well imagine how
they shook their bearded heads, declared that such occurrences were
outside their own experience, and possibly pointed to the local
conjuror who earned a few not over-clean denarii by imitating the
phenomena. There were others, however, who could not possibly deny,
because they either saw or met with witnesses who had seen. These
declared roundly that the whole thing was of the devil, drawing from
Christ one of those pithy, common-sense arguments in which He excelled.
The same two classes of opponents, the scoffers and the diabolists,
face us to-day. Verily the old world goes round and so do the events
upon its surface.
There is one line of thought which may be indicated in the hope that it
will find development from the minds and pens of those who have studied
most deeply the possibilities of psychic power. It is at least
possible, though I admit that under modern conditions it has not been
clearly proved, that a medium of great power can charge another with
his own force, just as a magnet when rubbed upon a piece of inert steel
can turn it also into a magnet. One of the best attested powers of D.
D. Home was that he could take burning coals from the fire with
impunity and carry them in his hand. He could then--and this comes
nearer to the point at issue--place them on the head of anyone who was
fearless without their being burned. Spectators have described how the
silver filigree of the hair of Mr. Carter Hall used to be gathered over
the glowing ember, and Mrs. Hall has mentioned how she combed out the
ashes afterwards. Now, in this case, Home was clearly, able to convey,
a power to another person, just as Christ, when He was levitated over
the lake, was able to convey the same power to Peter, so long as
Peter's faith held firm. The question then arises if Home concentrated
all his force upon transferring such a power how long would that power
last? The experiment was never tried, but it would have borne very,
directly upon this argument. For, granting that the power can be
transferred, then it is very clear how the Christ circle was able to
send forth seventy disciples who were endowed with miraculous
functions. It is clear also why, new disciples had to return to
Jerusalem to be "baptised of the spirit," to use their phrase, before
setting forth upon their wanderings. And when in turn they, desired to
send forth representatives would not they lay hands upon them, make
passes over them and endeavour to magnetise them in the same way--if
that word may express the process? Have we here the meaning of the
laying on of hands by the bishop at ordination, a ceremony to which
vast importance is still attached, but which may well be the survival
of something really vital, the bestowal of the thaumaturgic power?
When, at last, through lapse of time or neglect of fresh cultivation,
the power ran out, the empty formula may have been carried on, without
either the blesser or the blessed understanding what it was that the
hands of the bishop, and the force which streamed from them, were meant
to bestow. The very words "laying on of hands" would seem to suggest
something different from a mere benediction.
Enough has been said, perhaps, to show the reader that it is possible
to put forward a view of Christ's life which would be in strict accord
with the most modern psychic knowledge, and which, far from supplanting
Christianity, would show the surprising accuracy of some of the details
handed down to us, and would support the novel conclusion that those
very miracles, which have been the stumbling block to so many truthful,
earnest minds, may finally offer some very cogent arguments for the
truth of the whole narrative. Is this then a line of thought which
merits the wholesale condemnations and anathemas hurled at it by those
who profess to speak in the name of religion? At the same time, though
we bring support to the New Testament, it would, indeed, be a
misconception if these, or any such remarks, were quoted as sustaining
its literal accuracy--an idea from which so much harm has come in the
past. It would, indeed, be a good, though an unattainable thing, that
a really honest and open-minded attempt should be made to weed out from
that record the obvious forgeries and interpolations which disfigure
it, and lessen the value of those parts which are really above
suspicion.
Is it necessary, for example, to be told, as an inspired fact from
Christ's own lips, that Zacharias, the son of Barachias,[7] was struck
dead within the precincts of the Temple in the time of Christ, when, by
a curious chance, Josephus has independently narrated the incident as
having occurred during the siege of Jerusalem, thirty-seven years
later? This makes it very clear that this particular Gospel, in its
present form, was written after that event, and that the writer fitted
into it at least one other incident which had struck his imagination.
Unfortunately, a revision by general agreement would be the greatest of
all miracles, for two of the very first texts to go would be those
which refer to the "Church," an institution and an idea utterly
unfamiliar in the days of Christ. Since the object of the insertion of
these texts is perfectly clear, there can be no doubt that they are
forgeries, but as the whole system of the Papacy rests upon one of
them, they are likely to survive for a long time to come. The text
alluded to is made further impossible because it is based upon the
supposition that Christ and His fishermen conversed together in Latin
or Greek, even to the extent of making puns in that language. Surely
the want of moral courage and intellectual honesty among Christians
will seem as strange to our descendants as it appears marvellous to us
that the great thinkers of old could have believed, or at least have
pretended to believe, in the fighting sexual deities of Mount Olympus.
Revision is, indeed, needed, and as I have already pleaded, a change of
emphasis is also needed, in order to get the grand Christian conception
back into the current of reason and progress. The orthodox who,
whether from humble faith or some other cause, do not look deeply into
such matters, can hardly conceive the stumbling-blocks which are
littered about before the feet of their more critical brethren. What
is easy, for faith is impossible for reflection. Such expressions as
"Saved by the blood of the Lamb" or "Baptised by His precious blood"
fill their souls with a gentle and sweet emotion, while upon a more
thoughtful mind they have a very different effect.
Apart from the apparent injustice of vicarious atonement, the student
is well aware that the whole of this sanguinary metaphor is drawn
really from the Pagan rites of Mithra, where the neophyte was actually
placed under a bull at the ceremony of the TAUROBOLIUM, and was
drenched, through a grating, with the blood of the slaughtered animal.
Such reminiscences of the more brutal side of Paganism are not helpful
to the thoughtful and sensitive modern mind. But what is always fresh
and always useful and always beautiful, is the memory of the sweet
Spirit who wandered on the hillsides of Galilee; who gathered the
children around him; who met his friends in innocent good-fellowship;
who shrank from forms and ceremonies, craving always for the inner
meaning; who forgave the sinner; who championed the poor, and who in
every decision threw his weight upon the side of charity and breadth of
view. When to this character you add those wondrous psychic powers
already analysed, you do, indeed, find a supreme character in the
world's history who obviously stands nearer to the Highest than any
other. When one compares the general effect of His teaching with that
of the more rigid churches, one marvels how in their dogmatism, their
insistence upon forms, their exclusiveness, their pomp and their
intolerance, they could have got so far away from the example of their
Master, so that as one looks upon Him and them, one feels that there is
absolute deep antagonism and that one cannot speak of the Church and
Christ, but only of the Church or Christ.
And yet every Church produces beautiful souls, though it may be debated
whether "produces" or "contains" is the truthful word. We have but to
fall back upon our own personal experience if we have lived long and
mixed much with our fellow-men. I have myself lived during the seven
most impressionable years of my life among Jesuits, the most maligned
of all ecclesiastical orders, and I have found them honourable and good
men, in all ways estimable outside the narrowness which limits the
world to Mother Church. They were athletes, scholars, and gentlemen,
nor can I ever remember any examples of that casuistry with which they
are reproached. Some of my best friends have been among the parochial
clergy of the Church of England, men of sweet and saintly character,
whose pecuniary straits were often a scandal and a reproach to the
half-hearted folk who accepted their spiritual guidance. I have known,
also, splendid men among the Nonconformist clergy, who have often been
the champions of liberty, though their views upon that subject have
sometimes seemed to contract when one ventured upon their own domain of
thought. Each creed has brought out men who were an honour to the
human race, and Manning or Shrewsbury, Gordon or Dolling, Booth or
Stopford Brooke, are all equally admirable, however diverse the roots
from which they grow. Among the great mass of the people, too, there
are very many thousands of beautiful souls who have been brought up on
the old-fashioned lines, and who never heard of spiritual communion or
any other of those matters which have been discussed in these essays,
and yet have reached a condition of pure spirituality such as all of us
may envy. Who does not know the maiden aunt, the widowed mother, the
mellowed elderly man, who live upon the hilltops of unselfishness,
shedding kindly thoughts and deeds around them, but with their simple
faith deeply, rooted in anything or everything which has come to them
in a hereditary fashion with the sanction of some particular authority?
I had an aunt who was such an one, and can see her now, worn with
austerity and charity, a small, humble figure, creeping to church at
all hours from a house which was to her but a waiting-room between
services, while she looked at me with sad, wondering, grey eyes. Such
people have often reached by instinct, and in spite of dogma, heights,
to which no system of philosophy can ever raise us.
But making full allowance for the high products of every creed, which
may be only, a proof of the innate goodness of civilised humanity, it
is still beyond all doubt that Christianity has broken down, and that
this breakdown has been brought home to everyone by the terrible
catastrophe which has befallen the world. Can the most optimistic
apologist contend that this is a satisfactory, outcome from a religion
which has had the unopposed run of Europe for so many centuries? Which
has come out of it worst, the Lutheran Prussian, the Catholic Bavarian,
or the peoples who have been nurtured by the Greek Church? If we, of
the West, have done better, is it not rather an older and higher
civilisation and freer political institutions that have held us back
from all the cruelties, excesses and immoralities which have taken the
world back to the dark ages? It will not do to say that they have
occurred in spite of Christianity, and that Christianity is, therefore,
not to blame. It is true that Christ's teaching is not to blame, for
it is often spoiled in the transmission. But Christianity has taken
over control of the morals of Europe, and should have the compelling
force which would ensure that those morals would not go to pieces upon
the first strain. It is on this point that Christianity must be
judged, and the judgment can only be that it has failed. It has not
been an active controlling force upon the minds of men. And why? It
can only be because there is something essential which is wanting. Men
do not take it seriously. Men do not believe in it. Lip service is
the only service in innumerable cases, and even lip service grows
fainter.
Men, as distinct from women, have, both in the higher and lower classes
of life, ceased, in the greater number of cases, to show a living
interest in religion. The churches lose their grip upon the
people--and lose it rapidly. Small inner circles, convocations,
committees, assemblies, meet and debate and pass resolutions of an ever
narrower character. But the people go their way and religion is dead,
save in so far as intellectual culture and good taste can take its
place. But when religion is dead, materialism becomes active, and what
active materialism may produce has been seen in Germany.
Is it not time, then, for the religious bodies to discourage their own
bigots and sectarians, and to seriously consider, if only for
self-preservation, how they can get into line once more with that
general level of human thought which is now so far in front of them? I
say that they can do more than get level--they can lead. But to do so
they must, on the one hand, have the firm courage to cut away from
their own bodies all that dead tissue which is but a disfigurement and
an encumbrance. They must face difficulties of reason, and adapt
themselves to the demands of the human intelligence which rejects, and
is right in rejecting, much which they offer. Finally, they must
gather fresh strength by drawing in all the new truth and all the new
power which are afforded by this new wave of inspiration which has been
sent into the world by God, and which the human race, deluded and
bemused by the would-be clever, has received with such perverse and
obstinate incredulity. When they have done all this, they will find
not only that they are leading the world with an obvious right to the
leadership, but, in addition, that they have come round once more to
the very teaching of that Master whom they have so long misrepresented.
APPENDICES
A
DOCTOR GELEY'S EXPERIMENTS
Nothing could be imagined more fantastic and grotesque than the results
of the recent experiments of Professor Geley, in France. Before such
results the brain, even of the trained psychical student, is dazed,
while that of the orthodox man of science, who has given no heed to
these developments, is absolutely helpless. In the account of the
proceedings which he read lately before the Institut General
Psychologique in Paris, on January of last year, Dr. Geley says: "I do
not merely say that there has been no fraud; I say, 'there has been no
possibility of fraud.' In nearly every case the materialisations were
done under my eyes, and I have observed their whole genesis and
development." He adds that, in the course of the experiments, more
than a hundred experts, mostly doctors, checked the results.
These results may be briefly stated thus. A peculiar whitish matter
exuded from the subject, a girl named Eva, coming partly through her
skin, partly from her hands, partly from the orifices of her face,
especially her mouth. This was photographed repeatedly at every stage
of its production, these photographs being appended to the printed
treatise. This stuff, solid enough to enable one to touch and to
photograph, has been called the ectoplasm. It is a new order of
matter, and it is clearly derived from the subject herself, absorbing
into her system once more at the end of the experiment. It exudes in
such quantities as to entirely, cover her sometimes as with an apron.
It is soft and glutinous to the touch, but varies in form and even in
colour. Its production causes pain and groans from the subject, and
any violence towards it would appear also to affect her. A sudden
flash of light, as in a flash-photograph, may or may not cause a
retraction of the ectoplasm, but always causes a spasm of the subject.
When re-absorbed, it leaves no trace upon the garments through which it
has passed.
This is wonderful enough, but far more fantastic is what has still to
be told. The most marked property of this ectoplasm, very fully
illustrated in the photographs, is that it sets or curdles into the
shapes of human members--of fingers, of hands, of faces, which are at
first quite sketchy and rudimentary, but rapidly coalesce and develop
until they are undistinguishable from those of living beings. Is not
this the very strangest and most inexplicable thing that has ever yet
been observed by human eyes? These faces or limbs are usually the size
of life, but they frequently are quite miniatures. Occasionally they
begin by being miniatures, and grow into full size. On their first
appearance in the ectoplasm the limb is only on one plane of matter, a
mere flat appearance, which rapidly rounds itself off, until it has
assumed all three planes and is complete. It may be a mere simulacrum,
like a wax hand, or it may be endowed with full power of grasping
another hand, with every articulation in perfect working order.
The faces which are produced in this amazing way are worthy of study.
They do not appear to have represented anyone who has ever been known
in life by Doctor Geley.[8] My impression after examining them is that
they are much more likely to be within the knowledge of the subject,
being girls of the French lower middle class type, such as Eva was, I
should imagine, in the habit of meeting. It should be added that Eva
herself appears in the photograph as well as the simulacra of humanity.
The faces are, on the whole, both pretty and piquant, though of a
rather worldly and unrefined type. The latter adjective would not
apply to the larger and most elaborate photograph, which represents a
very beautiful young woman of a truly spiritual cast of face. Some of
the faces are but partially formed, which gives them a grotesque or
repellant appearance. What are we to make of such phenomena? There is
no use deluding ourselves by the idea that there may be some mistake or
some deception. There is neither one nor the other. Apart from the
elaborate checks upon these particular results, they correspond closely
with those got by Lombroso in Italy, by Schrenk-Notzing in Germany, and
by other careful observers. One thing we must bear in mind constantly
in considering them, and that is their abnormality. At a liberal
estimate, it is not one person in a million who possesses such
powers--if a thing which is outside our volition can be described as a
power. It is the mechanism of the materialisation medium which has
been explored by the acute brain and untiring industry of Doctor Geley,
and even presuming, as one may fairly presume, that every materialising
medium goes through the same process in order to produce results, still
such mediums are exceedingly, rare. Dr. Geley mentions, as an
analogous phenomenon on the material side, the presence of dermoid
cysts, those mysterious formations, which rise as small tumors in any
part of the body, particularly above the eyebrow, and which when opened
by the surgeon are found to contain hair, teeth or embryonic bones.
There is no doubt, as he claims, some rough analogy, but the dermoid
cyst is, at least, in the same flesh and blood plane of nature as the
foetus inside it, while in the ectoplasm we are dealing with an
entirely new and strange development.
It is not possible to define exactly what occurs in the case of the
ectoplasm, nor, on account of its vital connection with the medium and
its evanescent nature, has it been separated and subjected to even the
roughest chemical analysis which might show whether it is composed of
those earthly elements with which we are familiar. Is it rather some
coagulation of ether which introduces an absolutely new substance into
our world? Such a supposition seems most probable, for a comparison
with the analogous substance examined at Dr. Crawford's seances at
Belfast, which is at the same time hardly visible to the eye and yet
capable of handling a weight of 150 pounds, suggests something entirely
new in the way of matter.
But setting aside, as beyond the present speculation, what the exact
origin and nature of the ectoplasm may be, it seems to me that there is
room for a very suggestive line of thought if we make Geley's
experiments the starting point, and lead it in the direction of other
manifestations of psychomaterial activity. First of all, let us take
Crookes' classic experiments with Katie King, a result which for a long
time stood alone and isolated but now can be approached by intermittent
but definite stages. Thus we can well suppose that during those long
periods when Florrie Cook lay in the laboratory in the dark, periods
which lasted an hour or more upon some occasions, the ectoplasm was
flowing from her as from Eva. Then it was gathering itself into a
viscous cloud or pillar close to her frame; then the form of Katie King
was evolved from this cloud, in the manner already described, and
finally the nexus was broken and the completed body advanced to present
itself at the door of communication, showing a person different in
every possible attribute save that of sex from the medium, and yet
composed wholly or in part from elements extracted from her senseless
body. So far, Geley's experiments throw a strong explanatory light
upon those of Crookes. And here the Spiritualist must, as it seems to
me, be prepared to meet an objection more formidable than the absurd
ones of fraud or optical delusion. It is this. If the body of Katie
King the spirit is derived from the body of Florrie Cook the psychic,
then what assurance have we that the life therein is not really one of
the personalities out of which the complex being named Florrie Cook is
constructed? It is a thesis which requires careful handling. It is
not enough to say that the nature is manifestly superior, for supposing
that Florrie Cook represented the average of a number of conflicting
personalities, then a single one of these personalities might be far
higher than the total effect. Without going deeply into this problem,
one can but say that the spirit's own account of its own personality
must count for something, and also that an isolated phenomenon must be
taken in conjunction with all other psychic phenomena when we are
seeking for a correct explanation.
But now let us take this idea of a human being who has the power of
emitting a visible substance in which are formed faces which appear to
represent distinct individualities, and in extreme cases develop into
complete independent human forms. Take this extraordinary fact, and
let us see whether, by an extension or modification of this
demonstrated process, we may not get some sort of clue as to the modus
operandi in other psychic phenomena. It seems to me that we may, at
least, obtain indications which amount to a probability, though not to
a certainty, as to how some results, hitherto inexplicable, are
attained. It is at any rate a provisional speculation, which may
suggest a hypothesis for future observers to destroy, modify, or
confirm.
The argument which I would advance is this. If a strong
materialisation medium can throw out a cloud of stuff which is actually
visible, may not a medium of a less pronounced type throw out a similar
cloud with analogous properties which is not opaque enough to be seen
by the average eye, but can make an impression both on the dry plate in
the camera and on the clairvoyant faculty? If that be so--and it would
not seem to be a very far-fetched proposition--we have at once an
explanation both of psychic photographs and of the visions of the
clairvoyant seer. When I say an explanation, I mean of its superficial
method of formation, and not of the forces at work behind, which remain
no less a mystery even when we accept Dr. Geley's statement that they
are "ideoplastic."
Here we have, I think, some attempt at a generalisation, which might,
perhaps, be useful in evolving some first signs of order out of this
chaos. It is conceivable that the thinner emanation of the clairvoyant
would extend far further than the thick material ectoplasm, but have
the same property of moulding itself into life, though the life forms
would only be visible to the clairvoyant eye. Thus, when Mr. Tom
Tyrrell, or any other competent exponent, stands upon the platform his
emanation fills the hall. Into this emanation, as into the visible
ectoplasm in Geley's experiments, break the faces and forms of those
from the other side who are attracted to the scene by their sympathy
with various members of the audience. They are seen and described by
Mr. Tyrrell, who with his finely attuned senses, carefully conserved
(he hardly eats or drinks upon a day when he demonstrates), can hear
that thinner higher voice that calls their names, their old addresses
and their messages. So, too, when Mr. Hope and Mrs. Buxton stand with
their hands joined over the cap of the camera, they are really throwing
out a misty ectoplasm from which the forms loom up which appear upon
the photographic plate. It may be that I mistake an analogy for an
explanation, but I put the theory on record for what it is worth.
B
A PARTICULAR INSTANCE
I have been in touch with a series of events in America lately, and can
vouch for the facts as much as any man can vouch for facts which did
not occur to himself. I have not the least doubt in my own mind that
they are true, and a more remarkable double proof of the continuity of
life has, I should think, seldom been published. A book has recently
been issued by Harpers, of New York, called "The Seven Purposes." In
this book the authoress, Miss Margaret Cameron, describes how she
suddenly developed the power of automatic writing. She was not a
Spiritualist at the time. Her hand was controlled and she wrote a
quantity of matter which was entirely outside her own knowledge or
character. Upon her doubting whether her sub-conscious self might in
some way be producing the writing, which was partly done by planchette,
the script was written upside down and from right to left, as though
the writer was seated opposite. Such script could not possibly be
written by the lady herself. Upon making enquiry as to who was using
her hand, the answer came in writing that it was a certain Fred
Gaylord, and that his object was to get a message to his mother. The
youth was unknown to Miss Cameron, but she knew the family and
forwarded the message, with the result that the mother came to see her,
examined the evidence, communicated with the son, and finally,
returning home, buried all her evidences of mourning, feeling that the
boy was no more dead in the old sense than if he were alive in a
foreign country.
There is the first proof of preternatural agency, since Miss Cameron
developed so much knowledge which she could not have normally acquired,
using many phrases and ideas which were characteristic of the deceased.
But mark the sequel. Gaylord was merely a pseudonym, as the matter was
so private that the real name, which we will put as Bridger, was not
disclosed. A few months after the book was published Miss Cameron
received a letter from a stranger living a thousand miles away. This
letter and the whole correspondence I have seen. The stranger, Mrs.
Nicol, says that as a test she would like to ask whether the real name
given as Fred Gaylord in the book is not Fred Bridger, as she had
psychic reasons for believing so. Miss Cameron replied that it was so,
and expressed her great surprise that so secret and private a matter
should have been correctly stated. Mrs. Nicol then explained that she
and her husband, both connected with journalism and both absolutely
agnostic, had discovered that she had the power of automatic writing.
That while, using this power she had received communications purporting
to come from Fred Bridger whom they had known in life, and that upon
reading Miss Cameron's book they had received from Fred Bridger the
assurance that he was the same person as the Fred Gaylord of Miss
Cameron.
Now, arguing upon these facts, and they would appear most undoubtedly
to be facts, what possible answer can the materialist or the sceptic
give to the assertion that they are a double proof of the continuity of
personality and the possibility of communication? Can any reasonable
system of telepathy explain how Miss Cameron discovered the intimate
points characteristic of young Gaylord? And then, how are we
afterwards, by any possible telepathy, to explain the revelation to
Mrs. Nicol of the identity of her communicant, Fred Bridger, with the
Fred Gaylord who had been written of by Miss Cameron. The case for
return seems to me a very convincing one, though I contend now, as
ever, that it is not the return of the lost ones which is of such
cogent interest as the message from the beyond which they bear with
them.
C
SPIRIT PHOTOGRAPHY
On this subject I should recommend the reader to consult Coates'
"Photographing the Invisible," which states, in a thoughtful and
moderate way, the evidence for this most remarkable phase, and
illustrates it with many examples. It is pointed out that here, as
always, fraud must be carefully guarded against, having been admitted
in the case of the French spirit photographer, Buguet.
There are, however, a large number of cases where the photograph, under
rigid test conditions in which fraud has been absolutely barred, has
reproduced the features of the dead. Here there are limitations and
restrictions which call for careful study and observation. These faces
of the dead are in some cases as contoured and as recognisable as they
were in life, and correspond with no pre-existing picture or
photograph. One such case absolutely critic-proof is enough, one would
think, to establish survival, and these valid cases are to be counted
not in ones, but in hundreds. On the other hand, many of the
likenesses, obtained under the same test conditions, are obviously
simulacra or pictures built up by some psychic force, not necessarily
by the individual spirits themselves, to represent the dead. In some
undoubtedly genuine cases it is an exact, or almost exact, reproduction
of an existing picture, as if the conscious intelligent force, whatever
it might be, had consulted it as to the former appearance of the
deceased, and had then built it up in exact accordance with the
original. In such cases the spirit face may show as a flat surface
instead of a contour. Rigid examination has shown that the existing
model was usually outside the ken of the photographer.
Two of the bravest champions whom Spiritualism has ever produced, the
late W. T. Stead and the late Archdeacon Colley--names which will bulk
large in days to come--attached great importance to spirit photography
as a final and incontestable proof of survival. In his recent work,
"Proofs of the Truth of Spiritualism" (Kegan Paul), the eminent
botanist, Professor Henslow, has given one case which would really
appear to be above criticism. He narrates how the inquirer subjected a
sealed packet of plates to the Crewe circle without exposure,
endeavoring to get a psychograph. Upon being asked on which plate he
desired it, he said "the fifth." Upon this plate being developed,
there was found on it a copy of a passage from the Codex Alexandrinus
of the New Testament in the British Museum. Reproductions, both of the
original and of the copy, will be found in Professor Henslow's book.
I have myself been to Crewe and have had results which would be amazing
were it not that familiarity blunts the mind to miracles. Three marked
plates brought by myself, and handled, developed and fixed by no hand
but mine, gave psychic extras. In each case I saw the extra in the
negative when it was still wet in the dark room. I reproduce in Plate
I a specimen of the results, which is enough in itself to prove the
whole case of survival to any reasonable mind. The three sitters are
Mr. Oaten, Mr. Walker, and myself, I being obscured by the psychic
cloud. In this cloud appears a message of welcome to me from the late
Archdeacon Colley. A specimen of the Archdeacon's own handwriting is
reproduced in Plate II for the purpose of comparison. Behind, there is
an attempt at materialisation obscured by the cloud. The mark on the
side of the plate is my identification mark. I trust that I make it
clear that no hand but mine ever touched this plate, nor did I ever
lose sight of it for a second save when it was in the carrier, which
was conveyed straight back to the dark room and there opened. What has
any critic to say to that?
By the kindness of those fearless pioneers of the movement, Mr. and
Mrs. Hewat Mackenzie, I am allowed to publish another example of spirit
photography. The circumstances were very remarkable. The visit of the
parents to Crewe was unproductive and their plate a blank save for
their own presentment. Returning disappointed, to London they managed,
through the mediumship of Mrs. Leonard, to get into touch with their
boy, and asked him why they had failed. He replied that the conditions
had been bad, but that he had actually succeeded some days later in
getting on to the plate of Lady Glenconnor, who had been to Crewe upon
a similar errand. The parents communicated with this lady, who replied
saying that she had found the image of a stranger upon her plate. On
receiving a print they at once recognised their son, and could even see
that, as a proof of identity, he had reproduced the bullet wound on his
left temple. No. 3 is their gallant son as he appeared in the flesh,
No. 4 is his reappearance after death. The opinion of a miniature
painter who had done a picture of the young soldier is worth recording
as evidence of identity. The artist says: "After painting the
miniature of your son Will, I feel I know every turn of his face, and
am quite convinced of the likeness of the psychic photograph. All the
modelling of the brow, nose and eyes is marked by illness--especially
is the mouth slightly contracted--but this does not interfere with the
real form. The way the hair grows on the brow and temple is noticeably
like the photograph taken before he was wounded."
D
THE CLAIRVOYANCE OF MRS. B.
At the time of this volume going to press the results obtained by
clients of this medium have been forty-two successes out of fifty
attempts, checked and docketted by the author. This series forms a
most conclusive proof of spirit clairvoyance. An attempt has been made
by Mr. E. F. Benson, who examined some of the letters, to explain the
results upon the grounds of telepathy. He admits that "The tastes,
appearance and character of the deceased are often given, and many
names are introduced by the medium, some not traceable, but most of
them identical with relations or friends." Such an admission would
alone banish thought-reading as an explanation, for there is no
evidence in existence to show that this power ever reaches such
perfection that one who possesses it could draw the image of a dead man
from your brain, fit a correct name to him, and then associate him with
all sorts of definite and detailed actions in which he was engaged.
Such an explanation is not an explanation but a pretence. But even if
one were to allow such a theory to pass, there are numerous incidents
in these accounts which could not be explained in such a fashion, where
unknown details have been given which were afterwards verified, and
even where mistakes in thought upon the part of the sitter were
corrected by the medium under spirit guidance. Personally I believe
that the medium's own account of how she gets her remarkable results is
the absolute truth, and I can imagine no other fashion in which they
can be explained. She has, of course, her bad days, and the conditions
are always worst when there is an inquisitorial rather than a religious
atmosphere in the interview. This intermittent character of the
results is, according to my experience, characteristic of spirit
clairvoyance as compared with thought-reading, which can, in its more
perfect form, become almost automatic within certain marked limits. I
may add that the constant practice of some psychical researchers to
take no notice at all of the medium's own account of how he or she
attains results, but to substitute some complicated and unproved
explanation of their own, is as insulting as it is unreasonable. It
has been alleged as a slur upon Mrs. B's results and character that she
has been twice prosecuted by the police. This is, in fact, not a slur
upon the medium but rather upon the law, which is in so barbarous a
condition that the true seer fares no better than the impostor, and
that no definite psychic principles are recognised. A medium may under
such circumstances be a martyr rather than a criminal, and a conviction
ceases to be a stain upon the character.
[1] "The Reality of Psychic Phenomena." "Experiences in Psychical
Science." (Watkins.)
[2] See Appendix.
[3] See Appendix D.
[4] The details of both these latter cases are to be found in "Voices
from the Void" by Mrs. Travers Smith, a book containing some well
weighed evidence.
[5] For Geley's Experiments, Appendix A.
[6] Published at sixpence by the Light Publishing Co., 6, Queen
Square, London, W.C. The same firm supplies Dr. Ellis Powell's
convincing little book on the same subject.
[7] The References are to Matthew, xxiii 35, and to Josephus, Wars of
the Jews, Book IV, Chapter 5.
[8] Dr. Geley writes to me that they are unknown either to him or to
the medium.