Man's ancient truth and its place in democracy

Preface

In the preparation of this little book, the writer has had two chief objects in view : Firstly, to stimulate and incite the thought and reflection of the reader along the lines herein set forth, in the hope that his mind may be quickened in the Truth, and that, in consequence, our great democracy may receive his much needed assistance in its toilsome efforts to arrive at a more adequate and fairer system of human government; and, secondly, to point out the evils which have always threatened and will continue to threaten the existence of all governments, especially every variety of democracy.

In emphasizing these national perils, the writer frankly ventures to express the hope that the tireless vigilance of all our people, without respect to religious or political affiliation, will safeguard the great and vital principles of our federal constitution and place them above all other, debatable considerations, to the end that our growing republic may, under the guidance of a merciful Providence, escape from the destructive pitfalls into which so many great states have previously been precipitated and lost.

In these pages no criticism is intended of the inner truth of the various systems of spiritual culture and development, which have characterized the different ages of the world, but aJlusion is made rather to the external corruptions which have always encumbered and will continue to encumber these systems, and which spring from the nature of man.

Man is a compound of Spirit and Matter, of Truth and Falsehood, of Good and Evil, and thus constitutes the battle field upon which the contending principles of his nature are in constant and mutual conflict. Every human institution, or every institution with which man has to do, must, in the nature of things, bear the impress more or less distinct of both principles of his being. Therefore, when mention is made of the baneful influences of untoward ecclesiasticism, reference is intended to the corruptions which have grown up about it and not to its sincere interpretations of divine truth or to its altruistic efforts to elevate mankind.

Further, the word ecclesiasticism is used in its broadest sense as applicable to every system of religious thought, past and present.

In hinting at some of the chief functions of all democratic governments, the writer is conscious of the fact that some of the ideas submitted may be considered by many as Utopian and impracticable, but he consoles himself with the reflection that every logical conception of man will eventually find a practical expression in human life and yield its fruits in the days to come.

He also indulges the hope that necessary repetitions will not prove irksome to the reader. They have been introduced with a view to fixing certain facts in the memory.

This is the day of small books. The busy man has neither the time nor inclination to delve in long treatises outside of his chosen field of action, but demands that all subject-matters desiring his attention shall be brought quickly and easily within his grasp. Hence, it is devoutly hoped that the brevity of this volume will prove consoling to the patience of the general reader, for whom it has been especially prepared.

New Orleans, La.

Chapter V The Biblical Narrative of Creation . . . pages 56 to 62

Chapters VI to IX

The Scientific Narrative of Creation . . . pages 63 to 93

Chapter IX Summary pages 94 to 98

Chapter X

Darwinian Evolution Not Proven .... pages 99 to 111

Chapter XI Ante-Diluvian Life pages 112 to 115

Chapters XII and XIII

The Deluge pages 116 to 129

Chapter XIV Post-Diluvian Life pages 130 to 133

Chapter XV

The Final Triumph of Truth pages 134 to 137

PART II MAN'S RELATION TO MAN Chapter XVI

Introduction pages 141 to 144

Chapter XVII

The Forms of Government pages 145 to 147

Chapters XVIII to XXIV

The Functions of Democracy pages 148 to 192

Chapter XXIV

The Perils of Democracy, and the Hopes of Our

Republic pages 193 to 201

GLOSSARY

Era

A Grand Division of the Earth's History with its Accompanying Rock and Life Systems.

A Division of an Era with the Accompanying Rock Series.

A Part of a Rock Series.

A Rock Stratum.

The Wearing of Rock into Sediment.

A Great Physical Change in the Earth's Surface.

The Vegetable and Animal Life of an Era or Period, Characterized by its Dominant Types.

The System of Animal Life.

The System of Vegetable Life.

The Regular Grading of One Formation into Another.

The Confused and Irregular Arrangement of Formations.

A Stratum or Group of Strata Characterized by the Presence of a Particular Fossil not Found in the Underlying or Overlying Beds, or a Particular Assemblage of Fossils.

Connecting-Link The Form Connecting the Life-System of one Era with the Dominant Type of the Life- System of the Succeeding Era.

Period . . .

Formation .

Sedimentation Erosion . .

Revolution .

Life-System .

Fauna . . .

Flora . . .

Conformity .

Unconformity

Horizon . .

Fossil

The Petrified Remains of Animal or Vegetable

Life.

DEDICATION to all who labor for the restitution of man's ancient truth, and for the development of a rational Democracy, wherever its principles may inspire the hearts of men, this little volume is respectfully dedicated

PART I MAN'S RELATION TO DEITY

Introduction

The question may be logically asked, what is Truth? Many answers have been given to this question, but the most rational would appear to be that Truth is the infallible process of the infinite mind. Again, it may be asked what is man's ancient Truth? The proper answer is: Man's immemorial intuitive conception of the Divine process.

Reason is the power bestowed upon the finite mind by the Infinite Mind to enable man to revive or restore his Primitive Intuitions, and this faculty proclaims these Primitive Intuitions to be the foundation of man's entire knowledge. Every scientific fact, however new it may appear to be, is but a restoration of a primitive intuition — an intuition rekindled and revived by the faculty of reason. Man, through the process of reason, steadily opens his mind to the restoration of his Primitive Intuitions, and hence his knowledge of the universe continually grows and broadens. He is, indeed, approaching nearer to the Infinite through a process of gradual disillusionment.

Reason teaches that the finite world, man included, has sprung from the infinite world, and possesses only what it has derived from that infinite source ; in other words, that the finite, formative and changeable world is the creation by progressive emanative materialization and differentiation of the formless, changeless, infinite Pleroma. This is an unavoidable conclusion of the human mind. It is the only conclusion, in fact, to which reason, tradition, the Holy Writings, and intuition unerringly lead us.

No attempt will be made in this work to discuss in detail the varied differentiations of Truth in the Divine government of the universe, for that labor must be left to the disposition of each individual, whether he be an independent seeker after Truth, or a willing follower of others. But Truth must here be considered from its broadest aspect as an attribute of the Divine Mind.

In its practical essence it constitutes the underlying foundations of the doctrines of the Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of man. From the birth of the Caucasian race, so sacred tradition and the Holy Writings inform us, to the present time, it has constituted the fundamental concept of the human mind — has been the fountain source of man's knowledge and the basis of his civilization and has ever dominated his attitude toward God and his fellowmen. There is no authenticated record, anywhere discovered, that during the long twilight of the passing ages there was ever a dissenting voice raised against it. It may have been subjected to varying interpretations and constructions relative to its application in the life of the world, but the essential Truth itself was never doubted. It has been left to the comparatively recent period of the last twenty-four centuries for this Primitive Truth to meet with skepticism and doubt ; why, we cannot explain, except upon the hypothesis of man's progressive materialization. As he has proceeded farther into contact and experience with the physical world and has, by mental development, discovered more and more of the laws underlying its processes, he has steadily centered his attention on the physical and lost sight of the Absolute from which all else has sprung — ■ to which, in truth, all physical phenomena owe their origin. He has come, at last to regard Matter as the pleroma of all things; in other words, he has deified the physical world with its forms and changes and thus denies the existence of God — the formless and changeless Absolute.

From the doctrine of the Fatherhood of God spring man's true ideas of Philosophy and Religion, while from that of the Brotherhood of Man come all his private and public ethics. Thus while various religious and ethical systems have directed the conduct of man in different nations and ages of the world, the underlying truth in all was identical and had its origin in the Primitive, or Intuitive Truth which was stamped and impressed upon the consciousness of Man at his creation.

But let us at once proceed to a brief study of this Ancient Truth as it appeals to our reason, and at the same time attempt to combat some of the modern influences which tend to corrupt, if not to destroy it.

As already said, this Primitive Truth presents two aspects — the Fatherhood of God, or man's relations to his Creator; and the

Brotherhood of man, or his relations to his fellowmen. The former concerns man's religion, his responsibility to the Deity; the latter has to do with his government his responsibility to his fellowmen.

We will now take up the study of the first of these aspects — the Fatherhood of God — and endeavor to trace it to a logical conclusion. But this doctrine presupposes the existence of Deity. The question, then, naturally arises: Is there really a God, and if so, what relation does He bear to the universe?

It has been the peculiar province of Philosophy and its antecedents, the Ancient Mysteries, to serve as willing instruments for the preservation and transmission of the Primitive Truth from generation to generation, to the end that man in his spiritual darkness might not lose a conscious hold on the Infinite. The careful study and reflection of the reader is, therefore, earnestly solicited for the following pages in the hope that, though he may not accept all the opinions therein presented, he may, at least, be lead into a profounder investigation of the subject, which will result in far more tangible good to mankind than can be expected of this limited effort.

There are two great questions which from the nature of things, have always occupied and must always occupy, a conspicuous place in human thought: Is there a God? and if so, what relation does He bear to the universe? Do what we may or turn where we will, these great questions continually thrust themselves upon our attention and demand our most earnest consideration. Not only do they claim our thoughts and reflections today but, they have agitated the mind of man from time immemorial. Every age of the world has had its philosophers and scientists, who have pondered these questions for the benefit of their fellowmen, although they may have failed to fully satisfy the spirit of inquiry.

The ancient Egyptian Philosophers recognized one God under the name of On or Ra, Who manifested Himself in a triune power.

The ancient Hindu Philosophers worshipped one God under the name Brahm or Om, Who manifested Himself in triune power.

The ancient Babylonians recognized the Deity under the name of Aor, Who expressed His power in triune form.

The Hebrews worshipped one God under the name of Aur, in triune activity.

Zoroaster taught that the Deity expressed His creative power in the form of two contrary principles, the Positive and Negative, Light and Darkness, Good and Evil, Spirit and Matter; and that Man, as a compound of these two principles, must ultimately achieve his emancipation, by struggling upward through the prevailing darkness into the supernal light.

Thales, of Miletus, the founder of the Ionic School of Greek philosophy, taught one Deity, and said that He was that which neither had beginning nor end.

Anaximander, also of Miletus, the pupil and friend of Thales, held that the material cause and first element of things is the Infinite Substance. He says: "This is eternal and ageless and incompasses the whole world."

Anaximenes, also of Miletus, and a member of the school of Thales, agreed with Anaximander that there was an infinite substance, but held that that substance was air.

Pythagoras, of Samos and afterward of Croton, southern Italy, maintained that numbers were the symbols of "The Infinite — the Supreme Being — the Soul of the universe — resembling light."

Zenophenes, of Colophon, Asia Minor, the founder of the Eleatic School of Greek philosophy, says: "There is one God, the greatest among gods and men. He sees over all, thinks over all, and hears over all."

Heracleitus, of Ephesus, says: "It is wise to hearken not unto me but my argument and to confess that all things are one. The one is made of all things and all things issue from the oife. You must couple together whole things and things not whole; what is drawn together and what is drawn asunder, the harmonious and the discordant."

Parmenides, of Elea, says : "The universe is a unity." He held that there were crowns close together and inserted in one another formed of the rare and dense elements respectively, and that between these were other mixed crowns made up of light and darkness. That which surrounds them all is solid like a wall and under it a fiery crown. That which is the midmost of all crowns is also solid and surrounds it in turn by a fiery circle. The central circle of the mixed crown is the cause of movement and the coming to all the rest. He calls it: "The Goddess who directs their course. The Key-bearer and Necessity."

Bmpedocles, of Agrigentum, Sicily, says: "I shall tell thee a two-fold tale. At one time things grew to be one only out of many: at another, that divided up to be many instead of one. There is a double becoming of perishable things and a double passing away." He declares: "Love and strife, harmony and discord, are the active factors in the changes of the universe.'

Anaxagoras, of Clazomenae and afterwards of Athens, preceptor of Pericles, says: "All things were together infinite in number and smallness — for the small, too, was infinite — and when all things were together none of them could be distinguished because of their smallness. And Nous (mind) had power over the whole revolution, so that it began to revolve in the beginning. And all the things that are mingled together and separated off and distinguished are all known by Nous."

Zeno, of Blea, maintained the same doctrine as Parmenides.

Melissos says: "But nothing which has a beginning or end is either eternal or infinite. For, if it is infinite, it must be one; for if it were two, it could not be infinite; for, then, it would be bounded by another. And since it is one, it is alike throughout; for if it were unlike, it would be many and not one. So, then, it is eternal and infinite and one and all alike."

Socrates, of Athens, taught the unity and infinity of the Divine, Leucippus and Democritus taught that all things were derived from atoms and that the universe as a whole is the result of the mechanical motion and combinations of these purposeless atoms. Plato, of Athens, taught that ideas are the potentialities of being, and that the actuality followed the potentiality or idea — that Deity is the intelligent cause from which all spiritual and material things come — God and Matter — as infinite mind and infinite substance.

Diogines, of Athens, belonging to the School of Cynics, taught that there were two principles in the universe, the active and passive — God and substance.

Zeno, of Citium in Cyprus, founder of the School of Stoics, also taught two principles in the universe, active and passive — God and sutstance.

Aristotle, of Athens, preceptor of Alexander, maintained: "That Primary Substance is the highest cause. But of the continual coming into existence of things in different ways, both the primary substance and the primary energy would be the cause. Since that which has motion imparted to it and which in turn imparts motion can only be a medium, there is, therefore, something which, not being acted upon, yet acts, which is eternal and at the same time both substance and energy."

Pyrrho, of Elea, 340 B. C, founder of the Skeptics, doubted all existence and cause.

Lucretius, of Rome, believed the universe the result of purposeless atoms.

Pliny the elder, of Rome, deified the physical universe.

Philo Judaeus, in speaking of the Creation as described by Moses, says: "And He says the world was made in six days, not because the Creator stood in need of a length of time (for it is natural that God should do everything at once, not merely by uttering a command, but by even thinking of it); but because the thing created required arrangement; and number is akin to arrangement; and of all numbers from the unit upwards it is the first perfect one, being made equal to all its parts and being made complete by them; the number three being half of it and the number two a third of it and a unit a sixth of it and, so to say, it is formed so as to be both male and female and is made up of the power of both natures; for in existing things the odd number is the male and the even number is the female; accordingly, of odd numbers the first is the number three and of even numbers the first is two and the two numbers multiplied together make six. It was fitting, therefore, that the world, being the most perfect of created things, should be made according to the perfect number, namely, six — and, as it was to have in it the causes of both which arise from combination, it was fitting that it should be formed according to a mixed number, the first combination of odd and even numbers."

Epictetus, who lived the latter part of the first century, A. D., taught the unity of God. He says: "If a man should be able to assent to this doctrine as he ought, that we all sprang from God in a special manner and that God is the father of both men and gods, I suppose that he would never have any ignoble or mean thoughts about himself."

Marcus Aurelius taught two principles in the universe which jointly constituted the Primal Cause or God.

Tertulian, in the second century A. D., in speaking of the persecutions of the Christians at Rome, says: "We give offense in preaching God as the one God under the One Name of God from Whom all things are and under Whom is the whole body of things."

Origen, who lived in the first quarter of the third century, says: "First, that there is one God Who created and arranged all things and Who, when nothing existed, called all thing sinto being."

Cyprian, of Carthage, who lived and taught in the early part of the third century A. D., says: "There is One Body and One Spirit even as ye are called in One Hope of your calling; One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism, One God."

Athanasius, of Alexandria, says: "We believe in one unbegotten God, the Omnipotent Father, the Creator of all things, visible and invisible."

Augustine, of Numidia, North Africa, who lived about the latter part of the fourth century A. D., says: "The spirit of life, therefore, which quickens all things and is the creator of the body and of every created spirit, is Gcd Himself, the Uncreated Spirit."

Thomas Aquinas, in the thirteenth century A. D., says: "There must be found in the nature of things one first immovable being, a primary cause, necessarily existing, not created; existing the most wisely good, even the best possible; the first ruler through the intellect and the ultimate end of all things, which is God."

Descartes, in the sixteenth century A. D., proclaimed: "And, in truth, it is not to be wondered at that God at my creation implanted this idea in me that it might serve, as it were, for the mark of the workman impressed on his work; and it is not only necessary that the mark should be something different from the work itself; but considering only that God is my Creator, it is highly probable that He, in some way, fashioned me after his own likeness in which is contained the idea of God by the same faculty by which I apprehend myself — that I could not be possibly of such a nature as I am and yet have in my mind the idea of God, if God did not really exist."

Spinosa, in the seventeenth century, declares: "God, or Substance, consisting of infinite attributes, of which each expresses eternal and infinite essentiality, necessarily exists."

Leibnitz, in the eighteenth century, says : ' 'And thus it is that the final cause of things must be found in a necessary substance in which the detail of changes exists only transcendantally, as in their source, and this is what we call God."

Thus we find that the human mind in all ages has struggled with these great questions — to reach an understanding of the ultimate cause and government of the material universe.

In the remotest antiquity when man was nearer the time of his creation, but few denied the existence of Deity and His gracious supervision over the world. This great truth was universally conceded, and the only difference of opinion among men was as to the proper methods of worship. But as man receded from the time of his creation, and came more completely under the domination of the finite, these original inspirations became weakened, and a time finally arrived, near the middle of the fourth century B. C., when the Greek mind dared to question the Great Truth and cast a skeptical element into the subsequent discussions of the great question. Prior to this time, as above intimated, the Original Truth which had been registered in the inner consciousness of man at his creation, was rarely or never questioned; but now when these impressions had degenerated and were felt more weakly, the honest Greek mind endeavored to prove by reason alone what the human mind had previously known by both intuition and reason, and, laboring in this effort, cast a shadow of skepticism over this Intuitive Knowledge of man. The question has since been discussed with fluctuating conviction between truth and skepticism down to our own times when the doctrine of unbelief appears to be markedly in the ascendency. Modern man has allowed his consciousness of this great Intuitive Truth to atrophy to such an extent that he has well-nigh lost his conviction of it. This unfortunate situation has been induced not only by the constantly increasing play of external impressions upon his consciousness, incidental to his material development, thus tending to stifle, in a large measure, impressions from the Infinite stowed in his inner consciousness, but those agencies which he trusted to keep alive these Primitive Truths in his soul proved recreant to the trust, and the wicked alliance of a corrupt Church and a tyrannical State have well-nigh completed the ruin of the glorious fabric of Primitive Knowledge. The human mind, rebelling at last against the slavish oppressions of a tyrannical and corrupt Church and state and, failing to observe the truth concealed in the dross of superstition and ignorance, went to the extreme of denying its existence and thus gave an impetus to renewed skepticism. This spirit pervaded all the thinking classes, and the ignorant classes only clung to the Original Truth by the flimsy cord of ignorant faith.

In the midst of this unstable mental atmosphere, science itself became skeptical and interpreted all natural phenomena in terms of blind physical force. This reaction from mental servitude was but natural and, under the psychological laws of man's being, had to occur.

Modern science, then, assumes the theory of Darwinian evolution to be true and endeavors to explain all life phenomena in terms of it; that is to say, that present life has evolved from insensate matter through blind and unintelligent forces inherent in that dead and inert substance; in other words, that there has been no intelligent creation. It assumes this theory to be true although admitting it unproven.

Such a position is clearly unscientific; for the word science is derived from a Latin word meaning "to know." Science, then is what we know and not what we believe. Roger Bacon, in speaking of the true nature of science, says: "The first is that in order to be a science, a subject must be sufficiently understood to be mathematically stated." And yet we are expected to accept an unproven theory as true.

So modern thought assumes the doctrine of evolution of life on the earth to be true and interprets all scientific facts in accordance therewith, even to the extent of believing that in Matter alone reside the promise and potency of all phenomena. But we must not forget that science can only deal with secondary causes and must leave the consideration of first causes to philosophy. The trouble has been not so much in faulty observation of physical phenomena, as in the faulty interpretation of them. But science, in its efforts to interpret the action of secondary causes, has assumed for itself an undue importance. It has ignored the position of philosophy and even assumes toward it an attitude of intolerance. To this extent, it ignores the importance of primary causes which constitute the very basis of secondary causes and their effects. To center attention upon blind, inert matter and to ignore the intelligent forces outside and behind it is to shut out of consideration the ultimate source of things and to restrict human thought to the limited and conditioned rather than to allow it to penetrate into the fields of the Infinite which of necessity must be the fountain source of all natural phenomena. Such a view would reduce man to the attitude of the swine which gathers fruit beneath the overspreading beech, but never inquires whence it comes. The human mind can never be content with such an outlook.

One of the great errors of the evolutionist is the effort to limit the action of natural forces. He affirms that the forces now operating on and in the earth have always been the same, have never changed, have never been greater nor less. He declares that nature has always been uniform in action, and that, therefore, there never could have been any sudden universal calamity nor will there ever be. What an appalling attitude for the finite to assume toward the Infinite; for the conditioned to assume toward the Unconditioned or Absolute. Truly, the presumptions of the evolutionist grow pari passu with his assumptions. But this doctrine is disproved by the very phenomena which he relies upon to prove his case. Geological history is replete with many instances of great changes on the earth, if we are to accept the scientific dictum of the day. For instance, how can we account for the fossils of tropical and semi-tropical fauna and flora about the north pole now covered by Artie ice? How was it that the animals did not escape southward to warmer climates, and the plant life did not become extinct or adapt itself to changing conditions, if the present climate of the Artie region was a slow growth? Does not the finding of these tropical and semi-tropical animal and plant remains everywhere in the Artie regions, now covered with ice, prove there must have been some sudden change which imprisoned them in their present glacial tombs? And yet this change was universal over the northern latitudes of both continents. What, then, becomes of the evolutionist's claim of nature's uniformity? Here, at any rate, is a very conspicious instance of a break in nature's uniformity.

The forerunners of this scientific skepticism, though doubtless honest and earnest minds, were imbued with the skeptical principles of the times. The Truth, concealed by the vestments of centuries of corruption, was repudiated, and the human mind was athirst for something new. Then came Cuvier's dictum of four epochs of Creation which proved the entering wedge. He was followed by Lyell who proclaimed the doctrine of nature's uniformity, apparently proving the impossibility of a great deluge. Then Agassiz presented his doctrine of a geological succession of life on the globe, though he denied the possibility of evolution. After Agassiz came Darwin who taught the doctrine of evolution. Then, soon after, followed Spencer and Haeckel, presenting the doctrine of fullfledged modern skepticism. This skepticism was abundantly strengthened by the labors of Charles Darwin whose name is inseparably connected with all these materialistic speculations. In addition to the above mentioned exponents of the so-called new doctrine, may be classed the philosophers, Locke, Hobbs, Hume and Kant, who unconsciously, perhaps, encouraged the onslaught upon the old system of thought.

TITLE

CHAPTER II The Philosophic Proof of the; Existence; of Deity

With the preceding preliminary remarks, let us now proceed to study the first of the two questions with which we started and endeavor to elucidate some of the evidences and proofs of the existence of a wise and benevolent Creator.

Man is the only earthly student of finite phenomena. It is a law of the human mind to proceed from the simple to the complex. Let us, then, in the study of the great Truths of the universe, begin with the finite and proceed, if possible, upward to the Infinite.