There are many incidents in the New Testament which might betaken as starting points in tracing a close analogy between thephenomenal events which are associated with the early days ofChristianity, and those which have perplexed the world inconnection with modern Spiritualism. Most of us are prepared toadmit that the lasting claims of Christianity upon the human raceare due to its own intrinsic teachings, which are quiteindependent of those wonders which can only have had a use instartling the solid complacence of an unspiritual race, and sodirecting their attention violently to this new system ofthought. Exactly the same may be said of the new revelation. The exhibitions of a force which is beyond human experience andhuman guidance is but a method of calling attention. Torepeat a simile which has been used elsewhere, it isthe humble telephone bell which heralds the all-importantmessage. In the case of Christ, the Sermon on the Mount was morethan many miracles. In the case of this new development, themessages from beyond are more than any phenomena. A vulgar mindmight make Christ's story seem vulgar, if it insisted upon loavesof bread and the bodies of fish. So, also, a vulgar mind maymake psychic religion vulgar by insisting upon moving furnitureor tambourines in the air. In each case they are crude signs ofpower, and the essence of the matter lies upon higher planes.It is stated in the second chapter of the Acts of theApostles, that they, the Christian leaders, were all "with oneaccord" in one place. "With one accord" expresses admirablythose sympathetic conditions which have always been found, inpsychic circles, to be conducive of the best results, and whichare so persistently ignored by a certain class of investigators. Then there came "a mighty rushing wind," and afterwards "thereappeared cloven tongues like unto fire and it sat upon each ofthem." Here is a very definite and clear account of aremarkable sequence of phenomena. Now, let us compare with thisthe results which were obtained by Professor Crookes in hisinvestigation in 1873, after he had taken every possibleprecaution against fraud which his experience, as an accurateobserver and experimenter, could suggest. He says in hispublished notes: "I have seen luminous points of light dartingabout, sitting on the heads of different persons" and then again:

"These movements, and, indeed, I may say the same of every classof phenomena, are generally preceded by a peculiar cold air,sometimes amounting to a decided wind. I have had sheets ofpaper blown about by it. . . ." Now, is it not singular, notmerely that the phenomena should be of the same order, but thatthey should come in exactly the same sequence, the wind first andthe lights afterwards? In our ignorance of etheric physics, anignorance which is now slowly clearing, one can only say thatthere is some indication here of a general law which links thosetwo episodes together in spite of the nineteen centuries whichdivide them. A little later, it is stated that "the placewas shaken where they were assembled together." Many modernobservers of psychic phenomena have testified to vibration of thewalls 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 samewords. In connection with the signs of the pentecost, I can mosttruly say that I have myself experienced them all, the coldsudden wind, the lambent misty flames, all under the mediumshipof Mr. Phoenix, an amateur psychic of Glasgow. The fifteensitters were of one accord upon that occasion, and, by acoincidence, it was in an upper room, at the very top of thehouse.In a previous section of this essay, I have remarked that nophilosophical explanation of these phenomena, known as spiritual,could be conceived which did not show that all, however differentin their working, came from the same central source. St. Paulseems to state this in so many words when he says: "But allthese 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 justenumerated the various gifts, and we find them very close tothose of which we have experience. There is first "the word ofwisdom," "the word of knowledge" and "faith." All these taken inconnection with the Spirit would seem to mean the highercommunications from the other side. Then comes healing, which isstill practised in certain conditions by a highly virile medium,who has the power of discharging strength, losing just as much asthe weakling gains, as instanced by Christ when He said: "Whohas touched me? Much virtue" (or power) "has gone out of me." Then we come upon the working of miracles, which we should callthe production of phenomena, and which would cover many differenttypes, such as apports, where objects are brought from adistance, levitation of objects or of the human frame into theair, the production of lights and other wonders. Then comesprophecy, which is a real and yet a fitful and often delusiveform of mediumship--never so delusive as among the earlyChristians, who seem all to have mistaken the approaching fall ofJerusalem and the destruction of the Temple, which they coulddimly see, as being the end of the world. This mistake isrepeated so often and so clearly that it is really not honest toignore or deny it. Then we come to the power of "discerning thespirits," which corresponds to our clairvoyance, and finally thatcurious and usually useless gift of tongues, which is also amodern phenomenon. I can remember that some time ago I read thebook, "I Heard a Voice," by an eminent barrister, in which hedescribes how his young daughter began to write Greek fluentlywith all the complex accents in their correct places. Just afterI read it I received a letter from a no less famous physician,who asked my opinion about one of his children who had written aconsiderable amount of script in mediaeval French. These tworecent cases are beyond all doubt, but I have not had convincingevidence of the case where some unintelligible signs drawn by anunlettered man were pronounced by an expert to be in the Ogham orearly Celtic character. As the Ogham script is really acombination of straight lines, the latter case may be taken withconsiderable reserve.Thus the phenomena associated with the rise of Christianityand those which have appeared during the present spiritualferment are very analogous. In examining the gifts of thedisciples, as mentioned by Matthew and Mark, the only additionalpoint is the raising of the dead. If any of them besides theirgreat leader did in truth rise to this height of power, wherelife was actually extinct, then he, undoubtedly, far transcendedanything which is recorded of modern mediumship. It is clear,however, that such a power must have been very rare, since itwould otherwise have been used to revive the bodies of their ownmartyrs, which does not seem to have been attempted. For Christthe power is clearly admitted, and there are little touches inthe description of how it was exercised by Him which areextremely convincing to a psychic student. In the account of howHe raised Lazarus from the grave after he had been four daysdead--far the most wonderful of all Christ's miracles--it isrecorded that as He went down to the graveside He was"groaning." Why was He groaning? No Biblical student seems tohave given a satisfactory reason. But anyone who has heard amedium groaning before any great manifestation of power will readinto this passage just that touch of practical knowledge, whichwill convince him of its truth. The miracle, I may add, is nonethe less wonderful or beyond our human powers, because it waswrought by an extension of natural law, differing only in degreewith that which we can ourselves test and even do.Although our modern manifestations have never attained thepower mentioned in the Biblical records, they present somefeatures which are not related in the New Testament. Clairaudience, that is the hearing of a spirit voice, is commonto both, but the direct voice, that is the hearing of a voicewhich all can discern with their material ears, is a well-authenticated phenomenon now which is more rarely mentioned ofold. So, too, Spirit-photography, where the camera records whatthe 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 severalcases where the image upon the plate after death has not onlybeen unmistakable, but also has differed entirely from any pre-existing photograph.As to the methods by which the early Christians communicatedwith the spirits, or with the "Saints" as they called their deadbrethren, we have, so far as I know, no record, though the wordsof John: "Brothers, believe not every spirit, but try thespirits whether they are of God," show very clearly that spiritcommunion was a familiar idea, and also that they were plagued,as we are, by the intrusion of unwelcome spiritual elements intheir intercourse. Some have conjectured that the "Angel of theChurch," who is alluded to in terms which suggest that he was ahuman being, was really a medium sanctified to the use of thatparticular congregation. As we have early indications ofbishops, deacons and other officials, it is difficult to say whatelse the "angel" could have been. This, however, must remain apure speculation.Another speculation which is, perhaps, rather morefruitful is upon what principle did Christ select his twelvechief followers. Out of all the multitudes he chose twelve men. Why these particular ones? It was not for their intelligence orlearning, for Peter and John, who were among the most prominent,are expressly described as "unlearned and ignorant men." It wasnot for their virtue, for one of them proved to be a greatvillain, and all of them deserted their Master in His need. Itwas not for their belief, for there were great numbers ofbelievers. And yet it is clear that they were chosen on someprinciple of selection since they were called in ones and intwos. In at least two cases they were pairs of brothers, asthough some family gift or peculiarity, might underlie thechoice.Is it not at least possible that this gift was psychic power,and that Christ, as the greatest exponent who has ever appearedupon earth of that power, desired to surround Himself with otherswho possessed it to a lesser degree? This He would do for tworeasons. The first is that a psychic circle is a great source ofstrength to one who is himself psychic, as is shown continuallyin our own experience, where, with a sympathetic and helpfulsurrounding, an atmosphere is created where all the powers aredrawn out. How sensitive Christ was to such an atmosphere isshown by the remark of the Evangelist, that when He visited Hisown native town, where the townspeople could not take Himseriously, He was unable to do any wonders. The second reasonmay have been that He desired them to act as His deputies, eitherduring his lifetime or after His death, and that for this reasonsome natural psychic powers were necessary.The close connection which appears to exist between theApostles and the miracles, has been worked out in an interestingfashion by Dr. Abraham Wallace, in his little pamphlet "Jesus ofNazareth."[6] Certainly, no miracle or wonder working, save thatof exorcism, is recorded in any of the Evangelists until afterthe time when Christ began to assemble His circle. Of thiscircle the three who would appear to have been the most psychicwere Peter and the two fellow-fishermen, sons of Zebedee,John and James. These were the three who were summoned when anideal atmosphere was needed. It will be remembered that when thedaughter of Jairus was raised from the dead it was in thepresence, and possibly, with the co-operation, of these threeassistants. Again, in the case of the Transfiguration, it isimpossible to read the account of that wonderful manifestationwithout being reminded at every turn of one's own spiritualexperiences. 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 psychicknowledge, was in the hands of every Biblical student. Dr.Wallace points out that the place, the summit of a hill, was theideal one for such a manifestation, in its pure air and freedomfrom interruption; that the drowsy state of the Apostles isparalleled by the members of any circle who are contributingpsychic power; that the transfiguring of the face and the shiningraiment are known phenomena; above all, that the erection ofthree altars is meaningless, but that the alternate reading,the erection of three booths or cabinets, one for the medium andone for each materialised form, would absolutely fulfil the mostperfect conditions for getting results. This explanation ofWallace's is a remarkable example of a modern brain, with modernknowledge, throwing a clear searchlight across all the centuriesand illuminating an incident which has always been obscure.

[6] Published at sixpence by the Light Publishing Co., 6,Queen Square, London, W.C. The same firm supplies Dr. EllisPowell's convincing little book on the same subject.

When we translate Bible language into the terms of modernpsychic religion the correspondence becomes evident. It does nottake much alteration. Thus for "Lo, a miracle!" we say "This isa manifestation." "The angel of the Lord" becomes "a highspirit." Where we talked of "a voice from heaven," we say "thedirect voice." "His eyes were opened and he saw a vision" means"he became clairvoyant." It is only the occultist who canpossibly understand the Scriptures as being a real exact recordof events.There are many other small points which seem to bring thestory of Christ and of the Apostles into very close touch withmodern psychic research, and greatly support the closeaccuracy of some of the New Testament narrative. One whichappeals to me greatly is the action of Christ when He was asked aquestion which called for a sudden decision, namely the fate ofthe woman who had been taken in sin. What did He do? The verylast thing that one would have expected or invented. He stoopeddown before answering and wrote with his finger in the sand. This he did a second time upon a second catch-question beingaddressed to Him. Can any theologian give a reason for such anaction? I hazard the opinion that among the many forms ofmediumship which were possessed in the highest form by Christ,was the power of automatic writing, by which He summoned thosegreat forces which were under His control to supply Him with theanswer. Granting, as I freely do, that Christ was preternatural,in the sense that He was above and beyond ordinary humanity inHis attributes, one may still inquire how far these powers werecontained always within His human body, or how far He referredback to spiritual reserves beyond it. When He spoke merely fromHis human body He was certainly open to error, like the restof us, for it is recorded how He questioned the woman of Samariaabout her husband, to which she replied that she had no husband. In the case of the woman taken in sin, one can only explain Hisaction by the supposition that He opened a channel instantly forthe knowledge and wisdom which was preter-human, and which atonce gave a decision in favor of large-minded charity.It is interesting to observe the effect which thesephenomena, or the report of them, produced upon the orthodox Jewsof those days. The greater part obviously discredited them,otherwise they could not have failed to become followers, or atthe least to have regarded such a wonder-worker with respect andadmiration. One can well imagine how they shook their beardedheads, declared that such occurrences were outside their ownexperience, and possibly pointed to the local conjuror who earneda few not over-clean denarii by imitating the phenomena. Therewere others, however, who could not possibly deny, because theyeither saw or met with witnesses who had seen. These declaredroundly that the whole thing was of the devil, drawing fromChrist one of those pithy, common-sense arguments in which Heexcelled. The same two classes of opponents, the scoffers andthe diabolists, face us to-day. Verily the old world goes roundand so do the events upon its surface.There is one line of thought which may be indicated in thehope that it will find development from the minds and pens ofthose who have studied most deeply the possibilities of psychicpower. It is at least possible, though I admit that under modernconditions it has not been clearly proved, that a medium of greatpower can charge another with his own force, just as a magnetwhen rubbed upon a piece of inert steel can turn it also into amagnet. One of the best attested powers of D. D. Home was thathe could take burning coals from the fire with impunity and carrythem in his hand. He could then--and this comes nearer to thepoint at issue--place them on the head of anyone who was fearlesswithout their being burned. Spectators have described how thesilver filigree of the hair of Mr. Carter Hall used to begathered over the glowing ember, and Mrs. Hall has mentioned howshe combed out the ashes afterwards. Now, in this case,Home was clearly, able to convey, a power to another person, justas Christ, when He was levitated over the lake, was able toconvey the same power to Peter, so long as Peter's faith heldfirm. The question then arises if Home concentrated all hisforce upon transferring such a power how long would that powerlast? The experiment was never tried, but it would have bornevery, directly upon this argument. For, granting that the powercan be transferred, then it is very clear how the Christ circlewas able to send forth seventy disciples who were endowed withmiraculous functions. It is clear also why, new disciples had toreturn to Jerusalem to be "baptised of the spirit," to use theirphrase, before setting forth upon their wanderings. And when inturn they, desired to send forth representatives would not theylay hands upon them, make passes over them and endeavour tomagnetise them in the same way--if that word may express theprocess? Have we here the meaning of the laying on of hands bythe bishop at ordination, a ceremony to which vast importance isstill attached, but which may well be the survival ofsomething really vital, the bestowal of the thaumaturgic power? When, at last, through lapse of time or neglect of freshcultivation, the power ran out, the empty formula may have beencarried on, without either the blesser or the blessedunderstanding what it was that the hands of the bishop, and theforce which streamed from them, were meant to bestow. The verywords "laying on of hands" would seem to suggest somethingdifferent from a mere benediction.Enough has been said, perhaps, to show the reader that it ispossible to put forward a view of Christ's life which would be instrict accord with the most modern psychic knowledge, and which,far from supplanting Christianity, would show the surprisingaccuracy of some of the details handed down to us, and wouldsupport the novel conclusion that those very miracles, which havebeen the stumbling block to so many truthful, earnest minds, mayfinally offer some very cogent arguments for the truth of thewhole narrative. Is this then a line of thought which merits thewholesale condemnations and anathemas hurled at it by thosewho profess to speak in the name of religion? At the sametime, though we bring support to the New Testament, it would,indeed, be a misconception if these, or any such remarks, werequoted as sustaining its literal accuracy--an idea from which somuch 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 theobvious forgeries and interpolations which disfigure it, andlessen the value of those parts which are really above suspicion.

Is it necessary, for example, to be told, as an inspired factfrom Christ's own lips, that Zacharias, the son of Barachias,[7]was struck dead within the precincts of the Temple in the time ofChrist, when, by a curious chance, Josephus has independentlynarrated the incident as having occurred during the siege ofJerusalem, thirty-seven years later? This makes it very clearthat this particular Gospel, in its present form, was writtenafter that event, and that the writer fitted into it at least oneother incident which had struck his imagination. Unfortunately,a revision by general agreement would be the greatest of allmiracles, for two of the very first texts to go would be thosewhich refer to the "Church," an institution and an idea utterlyunfamiliar in the days of Christ. Since the object of theinsertion of these texts is perfectly clear, there can beno doubt that they are forgeries, but as the whole system of thePapacy rests upon one of them, they are likely to survive for along time to come. The text alluded to is made furtherimpossible because it is based upon the supposition that Christand His fishermen conversed together in Latin or Greek, even tothe extent of making puns in that language. Surely the want ofmoral courage and intellectual honesty among Christians will seemas strange to our descendants as it appears marvellous to us thatthe great thinkers of old could have believed, or at least havepretended to believe, in the fighting sexual deities of MountOlympus.

[7] The References are to Matthew, xxiii 35, and to Josephus,Wars of the Jews, Book IV, Chapter 5.

Revision is, indeed, needed, and as I have already pleaded, achange of emphasis is also needed, in order to get the grandChristian conception back into the current of reason andprogress. The orthodox who, whether from humble faith or someother cause, do not look deeply into such matters, can hardlyconceive the stumbling-blocks which are littered about before thefeet of their more critical brethren. What is easy, for faith isimpossible for reflection. Such expressions as "Saved by theblood of the Lamb" or "Baptised by His precious blood" fill theirsouls with a gentle and sweet emotion, while upon a morethoughtful mind they have a very different effect.Apart from the apparent injustice of vicarious atonement, thestudent is well aware that the whole of this sanguinary metaphoris drawn really from the Pagan rites of Mithra, where theneophyte was actually placed under a bull at the ceremony of theTAUROBOLIUM, and was drenched, through a grating, with the bloodof the slaughtered animal. Such reminiscences of the more brutalside of Paganism are not helpful to the thoughtful and sensitivemodern mind. But what is always fresh and always useful andalways beautiful, is the memory of the sweet Spirit who wanderedon the hillsides of Galilee; who gathered the childrenaround him; who met his friends in innocent good-fellowship; whoshrank from forms and ceremonies, craving always for the innermeaning; who forgave the sinner; who championed the poor, and whoin every decision threw his weight upon the side of charity andbreadth of view. When to this character you add those wondrouspsychic powers already analysed, you do, indeed, find a supremecharacter in the world's history who obviously stands nearer tothe Highest than any other. When one compares the general effectof His teaching with that of the more rigid churches, one marvelshow in their dogmatism, their insistence upon forms, theirexclusiveness, their pomp and their intolerance, they could havegot so far away from the example of their Master, so that as onelooks upon Him and them, one feels that there is absolute deepantagonism 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 maybe debated whether "produces" or "contains" is the truthfulword. We have but to fall back upon our own personalexperience if we have lived long and mixed much with our fellow-men. I have myself lived during the seven most impressionableyears of my life among Jesuits, the most maligned of allecclesiastical orders, and I have found them honourable and goodmen, in all ways estimable outside the narrowness which limitsthe world to Mother Church. They were athletes, scholars, andgentlemen, nor can I ever remember any examples of that casuistrywith which they are reproached. Some of my best friends havebeen among the parochial clergy of the Church of England, men ofsweet and saintly character, whose pecuniary straits were often ascandal and a reproach to the half-hearted folk who acceptedtheir spiritual guidance. I have known, also, splendid men amongthe Nonconformist clergy, who have often been the champions ofliberty, though their views upon that subject have sometimesseemed to contract when one ventured upon their own domain ofthought. Each creed has brought out men who were an honour tothe human race, and Manning or Shrewsbury, Gordon orDolling, Booth or Stopford Brooke, are all equally admirable,however diverse the roots from which they grow. Among the greatmass of the people, too, there are very many thousands ofbeautiful souls who have been brought up on the old-fashionedlines, and who never heard of spiritual communion or any other ofthose matters which have been discussed in these essays, and yethave reached a condition of pure spirituality such as all of usmay envy. Who does not know the maiden aunt, the widowed mother,the mellowed elderly man, who live upon the hilltops ofunselfishness, shedding kindly thoughts and deeds around them,but with their simple faith deeply, rooted in anything oreverything which has come to them in a hereditary fashion withthe sanction of some particular authority? I had an aunt who wassuch an one, and can see her now, worn with austerity andcharity, a small, humble figure, creeping to church at all hoursfrom a house which was to her but a waiting-room betweenservices, while she looked at me with sad, wondering, grey eyes. Such people have often reached by instinct, and in spite ofdogma, heights, to which no system of philosophy can everraise us.But making full allowance for the high products of everycreed, which may be only, a proof of the innate goodness ofcivilised humanity, it is still beyond all doubt thatChristianity has broken down, and that this breakdown has beenbrought home to everyone by the terrible catastrophe which hasbefallen the world. Can the most optimistic apologist contendthat this is a satisfactory, outcome from a religion which hashad the unopposed run of Europe for so many centuries? Which hascome out of it worst, the Lutheran Prussian, the CatholicBavarian, or the peoples who have been nurtured by the GreekChurch? If we, of the West, have done better, is it not ratheran older and higher civilisation and freer political institutionsthat have held us back from all the cruelties, excesses andimmoralities which have taken the world back to the dark ages? It will not do to say that they have occurred in spite ofChristianity, and that Christianity is, therefore, not to blame. It is true that Christ's teaching is not to blame, for it isoften spoiled in the transmission. But Christianity hastaken over control of the morals of Europe, and should have thecompelling force which would ensure that those morals would notgo to pieces upon the first strain. It is on this point thatChristianity must be judged, and the judgment can only be that ithas failed. It has not been an active controlling force upon theminds of men. And why? It can only be because there issomething essential which is wanting. Men do not take itseriously. Men do not believe in it. Lip service is the onlyservice in innumerable cases, and even lip service grows fainter.

Men, as distinct from women, have, both in the higher and lowerclasses of life, ceased, in the greater number of cases, to showa living interest in religion. The churches lose their grip uponthe people--and lose it rapidly. Small inner circles,convocations, committees, assemblies, meet and debate and passresolutions of an ever narrower character. But the people gotheir way and religion is dead, save in so far as intellectualculture and good taste can take its place. But when religion isdead, materialism becomes active, and what activematerialism may produce has been seen in Germany.Is it not time, then, for the religious bodies to discouragetheir own bigots and sectarians, and to seriously consider, ifonly for self-preservation, how they can get into line once morewith that general level of human thought which is now so far infront of them? I say that they can do more than get level--theycan lead. But to do so they must, on the one hand, have the firmcourage to cut away from their own bodies all that dead tissuewhich is but a disfigurement and an encumbrance. They must facedifficulties of reason, and adapt themselves to the demands ofthe human intelligence which rejects, and is right in rejecting,much which they offer. Finally, they must gather fresh strengthby drawing in all the new truth and all the new power which areafforded by this new wave of inspiration which has been sent intothe world by God, and which the human race, deluded and bemusedby the would-be clever, has received with such perverse andobstinate incredulity. When they have done all this, they willfind not only that they are leading the world with anobvious right to the leadership, but, in addition, that they havecome round once more to the very teaching of that Master whomthey have so long misrepresented.