knowledge connected with them. Indeed their knowledge of astronomy was almost nil until the Greeks conquered them. It would seem that, in just the same way as they had retained the constellations, but lost the principles of astronomy, so they had also lost the religious significance which they were intended to set forth, and many idolatrous mythologies were invented to explain them. I have for some considerable time been impressed with the probability that some of the most powerful and widespread heathen systems owed their origin to the dispersion of the two Hebrew kingdoms. The literary influence, both of Israel and of Judah, would seem to have been great upon their conquerors, and we find, as a matter of fact, that the conquest of Israel was followed by the remarkable literary development of Assyria under Ashurbanipal, and the conquest of Judah by a similar development in Babylon; just as the conquest of Greece by Rome gave rise to the literary development of the latter nation. I think it probable that the spiritual influence of the Hebrews was more powerful even than their intellectual, and that apostate Hebrews, having the light and knowledge derived from the law and the prophets, but giving themselves up to idolatry, were in effect the creators of the great religious cults. The reality of the truths which they held in perverted form sufficed to give vitality to the idolatries which they embraced, and we may probably see in Mithraism, the outcome of the golden calves of Bethel and of Dan. Here then I think is the root of theosophy, in which there is much subtlety and knowledge, as well as evil; hence its danger and its importance. In my mind the two most important things are Religion and Science, and both are eminently sane and eminently reasonable. I do not think theosophy either the one or the other.

Lieut.-Colonel MACKINLAY said:-I wish to add my thanks for the able paper which we have just heard. On pages 34 and 35 our author tells us Theosophy teaches that in His divine incarnation the Christ is not an antagonistic concept to Krishna and Buddha. But according to the New Testament "God was manifest in the flesh" (1 Tim. iii, 16), and according to Ex. xx, 3-5, there is but one God and He a jealous one. Christ Himself said, "All that ever came before Me are thieves and robbers," John x, 8. Antagonism is expressed, all through the Scriptures, between the religion of the true God and any other.

"By their fruits ye shall know them." Theosophy has been practised for ages in the east. What is the situation in India to-day? is it not parallel with that of the inhabitants of Palestine who, on account of their wickedness, were dispossessed of their land by the Hebrews? The theosophy, philosophy and idolatry of India have not enabled its rulers to retain the Government which, falling from their weak and enervated grasp, has been seized by the English. But let the English beware lest they follow the example of the Hebrews, and become entangled with the philosophies of the conquered races and share their woes.

It is a

Mr. DAVID HOWARD said: I always feel some disappointment in reading modern theosophists' ideas such as those we have had brought before us this afternoon. There is really nothing new, everything is to be found in what Buddha said, or Confucius, or Plato, only Plato said it better than it is said to-day. reproduction of the Gnostic teaching of the time of Irenaeus ; he was extremely clear in his pronouncements on Gnosticism, but did not claim to understand it, it was too indefinite. Lucretius made wonderful guesses, so could all the old alchemists, vying with the sounder guesses of Sir William Crooks to-day. Paracelsus wrote a great deal of mysticism, or humbug: Which? The sound thinkers work on clear, sound, open methods, the theosophist tries by the back door, or hidden ways to ascertain the mysteries of Science. To the old problems of the human heart were offered the old cures. Do Buddha, Confucius or Plato really answer these problems of the human heart? No one really understands their mysticism, though Christians under the guidance of St. Paul saw what Plato was aiming at, and could supply the real answer. Would not Buddha, if he had met our Lord, have seen in him the answer to his longings? We have the fuller revelation, why turn back to ancient unsatisfactory exhausted myths? We know that boiling oil was an antiseptic, wine was aseptic, but do we turn back to these from Pasteur and Lister, dare we go back from the revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ, who was the Way, that Buddha could not find, the Truth that was always just beyond Plato, and the Life, for it is this life which He can give which is lacking in all these ancient systems.

Mrs. SHARPE said she had listened with great interest to the lecture and speeches that afternoon. She could not avoid feeling

surprised at some of the remarks that had been made in such a Society in this twentieth century about a system which perhaps those who had criticised it did not sufficiently understand. Surely any system of religion and ethics should be judged by the effect it had upon the lives of its adherents, and Theosophy had held the minds and hearts of millions of earnest thinkers throughout the world's history. It had been stated that the Christ was antagonistic to all forms of faith but His own, but she was convinced that it was impossible for Him to be antagonistic towards anything, even though He might not agree. There was never anyone in the world who cared less about doctrine and forms than the Christ. Various of His sayings had been quoted that afternoon: there was another beginning "Other sheep I have which are not of this fold." He recognised as His sheep, not those who followed any special doctrine, but who partially understood and tried to follow His spirit of absolute tolerance and charity. Mrs. Sharpe said she was a theosophist of nearly twenty years standing, and could say from her own experience that hundreds even in this country had found a refuge in Theosophy, not only from the unbelief which is so common to-day, but from the illogical beliefs which are driving so many away from religion. The Theosophical Society contains members of every great religion and of almost every creed, and many Christians as well as members of other faiths have found that Theosophy enabled them to hold to Christianity or their other faith with a devotion, a certainty, a steadfastness that had not been possible before.

The Rev. W. J. STUART WEIR said: In my opinion Theosophy is explicable in the natural reaction between Eastern and Western thought. In the West the intellectual bias has always been material and the over-accentuation of that bias has given rise to materialism. On the other hand the Eastern intellect has been concentrated on the spiritual aspect of human thought. It has been mainly introspective and the over-accentuation of this bias is represented by Theosophy. The solution of the whole problem lies in the true balance between the two extremes.

Colonel ALVES asked Mrs. Sharpe what good effect Theosophy ever had on the degraded specimens of humanity; it had gained acceptance of people of respectable position; but had it ever done anything to relieve the masses? The Gospel of Jesus Christ on the other hand raised men from the lowest condition; and it is evident

that that same Gospel to-day possesses like power. The revivals in Wales and Cornwall in the eighteenth century and those of recent years all emphasize this point.

Mr. WEDGWOOD said he was a theosophist and Christian, and Mrs. Sharpe had asked him to reply to the question of the last speaker. He had been in India and had studied Theosophy at headquarters there. He had seen its effect for good on men of all classes in India. For example: a servant who had been neglecting his work, when rebuked, begged forgiveness for his shortcomings and the prayers of his mistress, explaining that if he neglected his work in this life he would again be born a servant in his next life on earth. The immense hope given by the doctrine of reincarnation had great influence for good, bringing happiness and an understanding of life to quite the lower strata of society, they know that they will have a chance of bettering themselves in future incarnation. The theosophists had schools for the outcast classes in India. It was true that Theosophy has not done much in the lower strata of society in England, that was because the Theosophical Society was of recent origin. Its membership was less than 2,000 in number, but theosophists are doing their best to work for the uplifting of humanity, and although Theosophy had exercised a great influence on contemporary thought, it was early yet to expect much marked result amongst the great mass of the people.

The speaker said he had formed the impression from what had been said that afternoon that Theosophy was looked upon as a species of spirit communication or automatic writing. That was

not so.

It was true that theosophical teachings were, in the first instance, gained from those whom theosophists called the adepts, who had climbed up through evolution and reincarnation to a superhuman level, but the details were worked out by superphysical observation on the part of clairvoyant investigators. They had developed in themselves by training the psychic faculties latent in all men, so that they could investigate the higher planes of nature in the same manner as the scientist investigated physical plane phenomena. The important researches on the atoms, for instance, referred to by the lecturer, were in no sense the result of revelation, but were observations as fallible and subject to revision as any other scientific observation. Dr. Anna Kingsford was not a representative

theosophist, but had left the Society at an early stage because she disagreed with it. Theosophists did not encourage passive mediumship. Indeed, there had been quite a feud between spiritualists and theosophists; the theosophists held that instead of drawing down spirits to the earth plane to communicate through mediums, it was better to exalt one's own consciousness into the spiritual sphere, where first-hand knowledge could be gained now as of old. This could be done by training.

The CHAIRMAN, in calling upon Mr. Coles to reply, said: We have before us to-day two rival claims to inspiration; one, Theosophy, which claims to have inspired communications from above through Mahatmas, and Christianity, which claims that the Bible is inspired by the Spirit of God. He would be glad if Mr. Coles would point out the real distinction between the two subjects of theosophical reincarnation and Christian resurrection.

Mr. COLES, in reply, said: At the time of the Exodus God revealed Himself to Moses as the God of his fathers, the Patriarchs, as the God of resurrection.

The Egyptians had changed this truth of resurrection into a doctrine of reincarnation. It was a great calamity to an Egyptian if his body was not preserved by embalming, but allowed to turn to dust. When Moses and Aaron miraculously produced life from the dust of the earth, the magicians failed to do so with their enchantments, and they told Pharaoh that that was "the finger of God"—to bring life out of death was not within their

power.

Reincarnation relates to this fallen creation. By resurrection there is a passing into a higher sphere of existence. The Christian who is in his spirit life "risen with Christ" is on a higher plane, and would therefore never accept the doctrine of reincarnation. Christ is the "Resurrection and the Life." He Himself, in His risen human nature, is the "Firstborn from the dead."

Professor LANGHORNE ORCHARD writes:-The imaginative theory known as "Theosophy" originated in the East, probably (as is Mr. Maunder's suggestion) through the corruption of the truth by the Israelites carried into captivity.

Theosophy is a mixture of good and evil. It appears to hold, in some dim way, the fact that man has fallen and needs to be restored, and that he is responsible for his conduct (karma). It affirms his future existence; it recognises that selfishness is wrong,