the Essenes, who, according to Josephus, considered swearing worse than perjury, for they say that he who cannot be believed without swearing by God is already condemned.'1

Disavowing the vindictive spirit of Mosaic legislation, in harmony with the principles and practice of Essene peace-makers, Jesus was betrayed by the feminine softness of his nature into unconditional acceptance of the doctrinaire illusion-Peace at any price, which, socially, encourages rogues and ruffians to prey upon the industry of honest and peaceable men, and, politically, invites the aggression of foreign enemies eager for the spoliation of states which see in force no remedy. Eminent apologists assure us that, in commanding us to turn our cheek to the smiter, and surrender our garments to the spoiler, Jesus merely gives forcible expression to the obligations of humanity through an impossible ideal. On the contrary, he personally sanctions the practice of the Essenes, who, according to Josephus, neither bought nor sold anything to each other, but every one of them gave what he had to him that needed it, and received from him in exchange what was convenient for himself; and although there may be no requital made, they are fully allowed to take what they want of whomsoever they please.' This form of socialism was, doubtless, possible in a limited community of pious ascetics, controlled by the laws and customs of the association, but is absolutely irreconcilable with the social and political existence of nations composed of ordinary Humanity. Jesus, however, fell into the serious error of preaching Essene communism to the multitude. And as he personally

2

acted on the principle of non-resistance throughout the most important events of his career, we necessarily grant him the privilege of meaning what he says, in preference to accepting the unattested theories of apologetic theologians, piously attempting to prove that Jesus was infallible.

Those modern Essenes, the Society of Friends, however they may differ from their ancient prototypes in devotion to commerce, adopt the theory of non-resistance, but, with characteristic prudence, profess these principles as citizens of a powerful empire, which guarantees domestic security of life and property, and shields the Civis Britannicus in distant lands with the national prestige, won by the un-Essene heroism of generations, to whom the dream of non-resistance and the fiction of non-intervention would have been but empty sounds. The Society of Friends could, therefore, more effectually test the virtues of modern Essenism by emigrating in a body, with all their possessions, to Central Africa, and there founding a model colony on the principle of nonresistance; where, if exposed to the violence of savages, who still believe in force, they could at least enjoy the pleasing consciousness of proving, at their own expense, the sincerity of their convictions.

A time came when evangelical Essenism proved disastrous to Humanity, as primitive Christians beheld with apathy, or even satisfaction, the appalling calamity of Roman civilisation overwhelmed by savage barbarism. And when, in later generations, the military genius of Mahomedanism threatened Christianity with destruction, if its priests had not disavowed the teaching of Jesus in a policy as warlike as that of Joshua or David,

the crescent would now surmount the cathedrals of Europe, thronged by the disciples, not of Jesus, but of Mahomed.

The pernicious tendency of political Essenism, in modern times, receives lamentable illustration in the culpable leniency extended to the military insubordination of Arabi Bey, whose prompt deposition and enforced exile would have spared the civilised world the appalling spectacle of Alexandria in flames as the funeral pyre of massacred citizens.

Jesus again speaks as a true Essene in commendation of benevolence, but fails to attain the moral height of an Aurelius when he holds out the hope of rewards in heaven as the inducement for deeds of charity. Had he taught men to practise the ennobling duties of humanity without one thought of reward here or hereafter, Christianity might have escaped the medieval scandal of sinners selfishly pauperising their neighbours for the salvation of their own souls.

Jesus followed the Pharisees in teaching the duty and efficacy of prayer, and concurred with the son of Sirach in condemning vain repetitions. The heathen might importune the gods with tedious volubility, but the worshippers of the true Deity must not trifle with Omnipotence by vainly seeking to participate in the providential government of the world. The Father knows what is best for his children who should, therefore, wisely confide in the guardianship of divine wisdom. In illustration of his meaning, Jesus compiled from extant liturgies the brief formula known as his prayer, the simplicity of which should have for ever excluded ritualistic worship from the Christian Church.

If Jesus, revisiting the earth, were to enter our modern churches, and listen to the litanies flowing from the lips of avowedly miserable but apparently selfsatisfied sinners, how great would be his amazement in learning that all this pious verbiage is addressed to the Almighty in his name who so emphatically condemned all vain repetitions!

If we had never heard anything more of the opinions of Jesus on the subject of prayer, we might assume that he had almost grasped the scheme of providential government through immutable laws. But the Evangelist depicts him declaring in the same discourse that all things are attainable through prayer; and, at a later period of his ministry, he makes the startling announcement, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place, and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impos sible unto you. (Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.)' If this language be authentic, its extravagance indicates that Jesus had not risen above the popular superstition which depicts the vacillating gods disturbing the natural sequence of events in response to human wishes, which, in their capricious diversity, would necessarily evoke universal chaos. But, as the bracketed words are an ecclesiastical interpolation, the entire passage may be quite as apocryphal as its final clause.

1

Ecclesiastical legends sustain the most extravagant views attributed to Jesus by numerous miracles assignable to the prayers of saints and martyrs: but, if these exceptional powers were not purely imaginary, they

1 Matt. xvii. 20, 21.

cannot have been withdrawn from modern saints, whose prayers should, therefore, cause so appreciable a variation in physical phenomena as to render science an impossibility. Modern physicists engaged in original research, however, fail to trace the abnormal variations due to prayer; and, when they attain attested knowledge of a natural law, its immutable action persistently discredits the pious theory of miraculous variation.

Faith in prayer, in fact, means nothing more than ignorance of law. Each addition to scientific knowledge of causation is a fresh encroachment on the domain of prayer; and Piety, convinced of the naturally inevitable, seeks divine intervention only under conditions of obscure causation, apparently amenable to the supernatural. Threatened by devastating floods, men do not pray that water may flow up instead of down hills; but terrified by storms, they implore divine intervention with the winds, because imperfect knowledge of the laws controlling their action fosters faith in the supernatural direction of their forces.

Piety, from time immemorial, has claimed the couch of the sick and the dying as the special domain of prayer, which reigns supreme in medical, but proves quite inefficacious in surgical cases. No prayer is uttered for the miraculous restoration of a shattered limb; but if, after inevitable amputation, fever should intervene, and demand the presence of a physician, Piety forthwith resorts to prayer and implores divine assistance, because the uncertain course and doubtful result of the disease supplies credulity with the materials of constructive miracles. The Deity, therefore, declines to interfere with the knife of the surgeon, but imparts divinely