FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90  
91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   >>   >|  
here will ever be a millennium, and if so how will it come about? _Answer_. It will probably start in Meriden, as I have been informed that Lansing is going to leave. _Question_. Is there anything else bearing upon the question at issue or that would make good reading, that I have forgotten, that you would like to say? _Answer_. Yes. Good-bye. --_The Sunday Union_, New Haven, Conn., April 10, 1881. BEACONSFIELD, LENT AND REVIVALS. _Question_. What have you to say about the attack of Dr. Buckley on you, and your lecture? _Answer_. I never heard of Dr. Buckley until after I had lectured in Brooklyn. He seems to think that it was extremely ill bred in me to deliver a lecture on the "Liberty of Man, Woman and Child," during Lent. Lent is just as good as any other part of the year, and no part can be too good to do good. It was not a part of my object to hurt the feelings of the Episcopalians and Catholics. If they think that there is some subtle relation between hunger and heaven, or that faith depends upon, or is strengthened by famine, or that veal, during Lent, is the enemy of virtue, or that beef breeds blasphemy, while fish feeds faith--of course, all this is nothing to me. They have a right to say that vice depends upon victuals, sanctity on soup, religion on rice and chastity on cheese, but they have no right to say that a lecture on liberty is an insult to them because they are hungry. I suppose that Lent was instituted in memory of the Savior's fast. At one time it was supposed that only a divine being could live forty days without food. This supposition has been overthrown. It has been demonstrated by Dr. Tanner to be utterly without foundation. What possible good did it do the world for Christ to go without food for forty days? Why should we follow such an example? As a rule, hungry people are cross, contrary, obstinate, peevish and unpleasant. A good dinner puts a man at peace with all the world--makes him generous, good natured and happy. He feels like kissing his wife and children. The future looks bright. He wants to help the needy. The good in him predominates, and he wonders that any man was ever stingy or cruel. Your good cook is a civilizer, and without good food, well prepared, intellectual progress is simply impossible. Most of the orthodox creeds were born of bad cooking. Bad food produced dyspepsia, and dyspepsia produced Calvinism, and Calvinism is the can
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90  
91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
Answer
 

lecture

 

Buckley

 
Calvinism
 

dyspepsia

 
produced
 

depends

 

hungry

 

Question

 

Savior


Christ

 
follow
 

contrary

 

obstinate

 

peevish

 

people

 

memory

 

foundation

 

informed

 
Meriden

divine

 

supposed

 
demonstrated
 

unpleasant

 

Tanner

 

utterly

 

overthrown

 
supposition
 

prepared

 
intellectual

progress

 

civilizer

 

wonders

 

stingy

 
simply
 

impossible

 

cooking

 
millennium
 

orthodox

 

creeds


predominates

 
generous
 

natured

 

dinner

 

instituted

 

kissing

 

bright

 

future

 

children

 

Liberty