from century to century, from age to age, and is perhaps itself a mere molecule within some higher mind."-[Winwood Reade: "Martyrdom of Man"; New York ed.: pp. 394-5, 243-4.

XLVIII. p. 99.-"The word of Schleiermacher: 'in the midst of finiteness to become one with the Infinite, and to be eternal in every moment': this is all which modern science knows how to say concerning Immortality.

"Herewith is our task for the present ended. While eternity is the unity in all things, in its aspect as a future life it is the last enemy which speculative criticism has to fight, and if possible to overcome.' -[Strauss: "Christliche Glaubenslehre": Band II.: S. 739.

XLIX. : p. 99.—“ Children, and the lower classes of most countries, seem to be actually fond of dirt; the vast majority of the human race are indifferent to it; whole nations of otherwise civilized and cultivated human beings tolerate it in some of its worst forms, and only a very small minority are consistently offended by it. . . In the times when mankind were nearer to their natural state, cultivated observers regarded the natural man as a sort of wild animal, distinguished chiefly by being craftier than the other beasts of the field; and all worth of character was deemed the result of a sort of taming, a phrase often applied by the ancient philosophers to the appropriate discipline of human beings. . . The most criminal actions are to a being like man not more unnatural than most of the virtues. . . The mere cessation of existence is no evil to any one; the idea is only formidable through the illusion of imagination": though the loss of friends, dying before us "will always suffice to keep alive in the more sensitive natures the imaginative hope of a futurity, which, if there is nothing to prove, there is as little in our knowledge and experience to contradict. . . It seems to me not only possible but probable, that in a higher, and above all a happier condition of human life, not annihilation but immortality may be the burdensome idea."-[John Stuart Mill: "Essays on Religion"; New York ed., 1874: pp. 48, 46, 62, 122.

It was of Mill that Holyoake wrote: "No more generous, self-reliant, self-regardless thinker than he ever entered the adventurous pass of Death!"-[Essay on Mill: London, 1873: p. 29.

28

NOTES TO LECTURE IV.

NOTE I.: PAGE 104.-"I myself, when a young man, used sometimes to go to the sacrilegious entertainments and spectacles; I saw the priests raving in religious excitement, and heard the choristers; I took pleasure in the shameful games which were celebrated in honor of gods and goddesses, of the virgin Cœlestis, and Berecynthia, the mother of all the gods. And on the day consecrated to her purification, there were sung before her couch productions so obscene and filthy to the ear-] do not say of the mother of the gods, but of the mother of any senator or honest man-nay, so impure that not even the mother of the foulmouthed players themselves could have formed one of the audience." -[Augustine, Civ. Dei: II.: 4.

II.: p. 104.—“They [the Christians] affirmed this to have been the whole of their guilt, or their error, that they were accustomed to meet, on a stated day, before it was light, and to sing a hymn responsively among themselves to Christ, as to God; binding themselves also, by a solemn oath, not to do any wickedness, but that they would not commit any fraud, theft, or adultery, would not falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called to account for it; after which it was their custom to separate, and then to reässemble, to eat in common a harmless meal. After this I judged it the more necessary to seek what the truth might be, by putting to the torture two female servants who were said to officiate among them [probably as deaconesses]. But I found nothing else than a perverse and extravagant superstition."-[Pliny: Ep.: X. XCVII.

III. p. 104.-"Let us pass on,' says he [Celsus], 'to another point. They [Christians] cannot tolerate temples, altars, or images. In this they are like the Scythians, the nomadic tribes of Libya, the Seres who worship no god, and some other of the most barbarous and impious nations of the world. . . Celsus proceeds to say that we 'shrink from raising altars, statues, and temples; and this,' he thinks, 'has been agreed upon among us as the badge or distinctive mark of a secret and forbidden society.'"-[Origen, adv. Celsus: vII.: 62; vII.: 17.

"Hence we are called Atheists. And we confess that we are Athe

(434)

ists, so far as gods of this sort are concerned, but not with respect to the most true God, the Father of righteousness and temperance, and the other virtues, who is free from all impurity. But both Him and the Son who came forth from Him, . . and the prophetic Spirit, we worship and adore, knowing them in reason and in truth."-[Justin Martyr: Apol. I.: vi.

IV.: p. 104. The figure referred to is well enough represented in Lundy's "Monumental Christianity" [New York ed., 1876], p. 61. The stucco which contains it is preserved in the museum of the Vatican, as a precious relic of early Christianity at Rome; and the words of Tertullian would seem to indicate that such a figure was understood by some in his time to represent the Lord of the Christians:

"Like some others, you are under the delusion that our god is an ass's head. Cornelius Tacitus first put this notion into people's minds. .. But the said Tacitus (the very opposite of tacit in telling lies) informs us that when C. Pompeius captured Jerusalem, he entered the temple to see the arcana of the Jewish religion, but found no image there. Yet surely if worship were rendered to any visible object, the very place for its exhibition would be the shrine. Perhaps it is this which displeases you in us, that while your worship [of beasts] is universal, we worship only the ass!"-[Apolog. XVI.

So Caecilius says, in the "Octavius" of Minucius Felix:

"I hear that they [Christians] adore the head of an ass, that basest of creatures, consecrated by I know not what silly persuasion,—a worthy and appropriate religion for such manners.”—[IX.

The reference of the Palatine graphite to Christ is not, however, universally conceded by the students of Christian antiquities.

V.: p. 105.-"And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles, or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying AMEN; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succors the orphans and widows, and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds, and the strangers sojourning

among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sun day is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day, on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead."-[Justin Martyr: Apol. I.: LXVII.

VI.: p. 107. "To maintain that the sacrifice of atonement was the only original offering of the Greeks, and to derive all other forms from it, would be inadmissible. To acknowledge in practice the supremacy and power of the divinity, to present it with a pledge, as it were, of homage and subjection to its will, to return thanks for gifts received, or protection afforded,-this was the primitive signification of many sacrifices... Even the Greek idea of the envy of the gods, and the necessity of appeasing this jealousy by a voluntary cession of a portion of their goods, was the foundation of many sacrifices. . . It was the prevalent idea, that for a man to obtain any thing of the gods, he must of necessity make them an offering to correspond. 'Presents win the gods, as well as kings,' was an old proverb."-[Döllinger: "The Gentile and the Jew"; London ed., 1862: Vol. 1: pp. 229, 233–4.

VII. p. 108.--"In the provinces 1,500 temples are dedicated to his [Confucius'] worship, where on the first and fifteenth day of each month sacrificial services are performed before his image, and once in the spring and the autumn the local officials go in state to take part in acts of specially solemn worship. According to the Shing meaou che, or 'History of the Temples of the Sage,' as many as 6 bullocks, 27,000 pigs, 5,800 sheep, 2,800 doer, and 2,700 hares, are sacrificed on these occasions; and at the same time 27,000 pieces of silk are offered on his shrine."-[Douglas: "Confucianism and Taouism"; London ed., 1879:

p. 165.

The religion of Zoroaster is often praised for the care which it en joined in the treatment of certain animals, especially the cow, the cock and the dog. One occasion of this was the importance of such animals to a pastoral people: as Auramazda says in the Vendidad of the Avesta, 'No thief or wolf comes to the village or the fold and carries away anything unobserved, if the dog is healthy, in good voice, and among the flocks. The houses would not stand firm upon the earth if there were not dogs in the villages and flocks.' Therefore the dogs must receive good food; especially the watch-dog must be provided with milk, fat, and flesh, his 'proper food.' Dogs with young are to be treated as carefully as pregnant women: sick dogs, with the same medicines as sick men. All men who beat dogs are warned that their sculs will go from the world full of terror and sick. To kill a waterdog is the greatest of crimes. Yet Athenæus tells us that with the

King of Persia a thousand animals were daily slaughtered in sacrifice. camels, hares, oxen, apes, deer, and especially sheep: and Herodotus says that when Xerxes marched into Hellas the Magians sacrificed a thousand oxen on the summit of Pergamos, soliciting victory.-[See Duncker: "History of Antiquity"; London ed., 1881: Vol. 5: pp. 208-9, 174.

"The Rig-Veda was mainly a collection of sacrificial chants and ritual. Brahmans, no less than Kshatriyas and Vaiçyas, were accustomed to invoke the spirits of light in the early dawn, to offer gifts at morning, mid-day, and evening, to Agni: above all to celebrate sacri fices at the changes of the moon or the seasons. The idea that every sacrifice when offered correctly was efficacious, that a magic power resided in it, that the assistance and therefore a part of the divine power or nature was gained by the sacrifice, could not fail to retain the service of sacrifice in full force in the new doctrine. We see from the rules of the Brahmanas that offerings, consecrations, and sacrifices were not diminished but rather increased by the idea of Brahman, and the number of the sacrificing priests was greater. An incorrect word, a false intonation, may destroy the efficacy of the entire sacrifice. For this reason the rules for the great sacrifice, especially for the sacrifice of horses, fill up whole books of the Brahmanas."-[Duncker: "History of Antiquity"; London ed., 1880: Vol. IV.: pp. 162, 273-4.

"In fine, a great many of these sacrifices [the Vedic] require animal victims. In the domestic ritual the act of sacrificing them is resolved for the most part into a purely symbolic act, but in the developed ritual it remained longer in force. Several ishtis are very bloody. . . In general, the more recent the texts are the more does the number of the symbolic victims increase, and that of the real ones diminish; but even with these abatements the Brahmanical cultus remained for long an inhuman one."-[A. Barth: "Religions of India"; Boston ed., 1882: : p. 57.

"Dr. Haug maintains that some hymns of a decidedly sacrificial character should be ascribed to the earliest period of Vedic poetry. He takes, for instance, the hymn describing the horse sacrifice, and he concludes from the fact that seven priests only are mentioned in it by name, and that none of them belongs to the class of the Udgâtars (singers) or Brahmans (superintendents), that this hymn was written before the establishment of these two classes of priests. As these priests are mentioned in other Vedic hymns, he concludes that the hymn describing the horse sacrifice is of a very early date. Dr. Haug strengthens his case by a reference to the Zoroastrian ceremonial."Max Müller: "Chips," etc.; New York ed., 1881: Vol. 1: p. 105.