The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1888-05-12
GLADSTONE AND INGERsOLL.

In the May number OF the North
American Review, Hon. W. E. Glad
stone, M. p, offers some remarks on the
reply of Col. Ingersoll to DR.. Field. 1t
is doubtful if Mr. Gladstone would en-
ter the lists in England in the defense
of Christian religion against the as
saults of Charles Bradlaugh, but it
seems that he regards the great Amer
lean unbeliever and agnostic as wor-
thy of attention. The ex-premier of
Great Britain describes himself as
listening from across the broad Allan
tic to the clash of arms in the combat
between Col. Ingersoll and DR.. Field.
He subjects the remarkable reply of
the former to an examination on GER
tain lines where we think our doughty
Colonel cannot follow successfully. Mr..
Ingersoll is entirely at home in sweep
ing statements which give due rein to
his powers of brilliant invective, but
when it comes to close analysis and
due measurement Of words, he fails
where Mr.. Gladstone is strongest.
On one point-and it is the only one
which we propose to notice at the pres
emit time-we find that Mr.. Gladston 9
represents fngersoll as substantially
holding to an Interpretation of Christi
anity which is partial, untenable and en-
tirely one sided. 1t is substantially the
point which has been repeatedly urged
against Ingersoll's writings by Univer-
salists and Unitarians, who have assert
ed that he gives only that view Of
Christianity which furnishes him the
best ground for his eloquent invective
and sarcasm.
On this point Mr.. Gladstone says that
1--WE may resolutely decline to be held
bound to tenets or to consequences of
tenets which represent not the great
Christendom Of the past or present, but
only some hole or corner Of its vast Or
ganization, and not the heavenly treas
ure, but the rust or the canker to which
that treasure has been exposed through
the incidents of its custodies in earthen
vessels"
81 do not," Mr.. Gladstone continues,
remember ever to have read compo-
sition, in which the merely local
coloring of particular and even very
limited sections of Christianity was
more systematically used as if it had
been available and legitimate argument
against the whole, than in the reply be-
fore US. Col. Ingersoll writes with rare
and enviable brilliancy, but also with
an impetus which he seems unable to
control. Denunciation, sarcasm, and
invective may be said to constitute the
staple of his work, and, if argument or
some favorable admission here and
there peep out for moment, the writer
soon leaves the dry and barren heights
for his favorite and more luxurious
galloping grounds beneath"
This is only asserting in very choice
language, that Mr.. Ingersoll, when he
would attack Christianity levels his
eloquence and sarcasm at Calvinism
and its abhorent doctrines, in serene
Indifference to the fact that any more
honorable Interpretation of Christianity
ever found favor among mankind. 1t
is the God of Calvinism and not the
God of Christianity that Ingersoll makes
the object of his virile attacks.
Quoting the words Of Mr.. Ingersoll,
1.-THE mysteries of life and death, of
good and evil, have never yet been
solved" Mr.. Gladstone remarks that
these are grand, wise words. "But,
coming at the close of the controversy,
have they not some of the Intellectual
features of death-bed repentance ?"
And he closes his paper with this OBJ
servatiOn
Whereas we are placed in an atmos-
phere of mystery, relieved only by a
little sphere of light around each one
of US, we find here assumed by par
ticular person the character of a uni
versal judge without appeal. And,
whereas the highest self-restraint is
necessary in these dark, but therefore
all the more exciting, inquiries, in Or
der to maintain the ever quivering bal
ance of our faculties, the writer chooses
to ride an unbroken horse and to throw
the reins upon the neck"