urch? Is it for the sake of deceiving the public? To
teach art, or science, or literature, is not religion. Why, then, define
as a Church people who meet on a Sunday to hear lectures on science,
literature, and art? Undoubtedly, people may do worse on a Sunday night,
but in listening to such lectures they have no right to say they are at
church.

Mr. George Jacob Holyoake is also one of their lecturers; and if he be
not antagonistic, what is he? Of all irrepressible men Mr. Holyoake is
undoubtedly the most so. You meet him everywhere. Not a social science
meeting, nor a political gathering, nor a philosophical discussion exists
within reach of London but he is present at it, to take part in its
discussions as the exponent of the views, and feelings, and desires of
the British working man. If London is demonstrative, as when a Garibaldi
appears upon the stage, foremost of those who meet to do him honour is
Mr. Holyoake. In the House of Commons he is similarly prominent. In the
Speaker's gallery or in the lobby you may see him all night long, here
speaking to a member, there listening to one as if the care of all the
country rested on his shoulders. I don't fancy Mr. Holyoake is the great
man he takes himself to be. I deny his right to be the exponent of the
class of whom he condescends to be the ornament and shield. I admit his
boundless activity, his wonderful talent for intrusion, the cleverness of
his talk. I admit, too, the energy with which in the course of a now
extended career he has travelled the land, with a view to convince his
fellow-men that there is no future, that he who says there is but repeats
the old worn-out fiction of the priests, and that it is for this world
rather than the next that we must labour and strive. Undoubtedly for Mr.
Holyoake some extenuation must be made. A man may well doubt the
Christianity which instead of removing his religious doubts throws him
into gaol for the crime of expressing them. Nevertheless, I may doubt,
if not the sincerity,--for about that there can be no question--at any
rate the truth and wisdom of his creed; and may, after all, prefer the
light of the Gospel to that which he asks me to admire. I may admit that
there have been quacks, and impostors, and charlatans in the religious
world--that the Church has fearfully failed in its mission--that, armed
with the sword of the State, it has been often a curse and a blight--but
it does not follow that the