are worth anything--if he has fought his
way to those opinions at the bayonet's point--he will not be scared off
from them by the whole bench of Bishops on the one side, or the College
of Surgeons on the other. Not that I for one moment plead guilty to
heterodoxy, either scientific or theological. I am not, as I have said
several times, a philosopher, but I believe it is scientific to hold as
established what you can prove by experiment. I don't think my creed
contains a jot or tittle beyond this. And as for theological orthodoxy,
I simply take my stand upon the Canons of the Church of England. If all
this spiritual business is delusion, how comes it that No. 72 of the
Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical says: "Neither shall any
minister, not licensed, attempt, upon any pretence whatever, either of
possession or obsession, by fasting or prayer, to cast out any devil or
devils?"

The question, however, is not of this kind of orthodoxy. It rather
refers to the creed of spiritualism. The question, in fact, to which I
and the many who think with me pause for a reply, is:--Allowing, as we
do, some of the phenomena--but considering the pneumatological
explanation hypothetical only--and therefore any identification of
communicating intelligence impossible--are we (for I am sincerely tired
of that first person singular, and glad to take refuge in a community),
are we, or are we not, spiritualists?

So far was I able to commit myself in my address to the spiritualists of
Harley Street. I was, I confess, greatly pleased when, in 1869, the
Dialectical Society took up this matter, because I felt they were just
the people to look into it dispassionately. They were bound to no set of
opinions, but regarded everything as an open question, accepting nothing
save as the conclusion of a logical argument. I joined the
Society--straining my clerical conscience somewhat to do so--and
eventually formed one of the committee appointed by the Society to
inquire into the matter, and having a sub-committee sitting at my own
house. This, however, broke up suddenly, for I found even philosophers
were not calm in their examination of unpalatable facts. One gentleman
who approached the subject with his mind fully made up, accused the lady
medium of playing tricks, and me of acting showman on the occasion. As
there was no method of shunting this person, I was obliged to break up
my sub-committee. To mention spiritualism to these omniscient gentle