TCDE-Team: Created page with "''Sir Conan Doyle and Spiritualism'' is an article published in The Times on 20 october 1919. == Sir Conan Doyle and Spiritualism == [[The Times (20 october 1919, p. 4)]] '''REPLY TO CHURCH CONGRESS CRITICISMS.''' SIR ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE, in a speech at Leicester yesterday, replied to criticisms of his views on spiritualism which were made at last wee..."

2026-05-05T15:11:23Z

Created page with "''Sir Conan Doyle and Spiritualism'' is an article published in The Times on 20 october 1919. == Sir Conan Doyle and Spiritualism == thumb|250px|right|[[The Times (20 october 1919, p. 4)]] '''REPLY TO CHURCH CONGRESS CRITICISMS.''' SIR ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE, in a speech at Leicester yesterday, replied to criticisms of his views on spiritualism which were made at last wee..."

New page

''Sir Conan Doyle and Spiritualism'' is an article published in [[The Times]] on 20 october 1919.

== Sir Conan Doyle and Spiritualism ==
[[File:the-times-1919-10-20-p4-sir-conan-doyle-and-spiritualism.jpg|thumb|250px|right|[[The Times]] (20 october 1919, p. 4)]]

'''REPLY TO CHURCH CONGRESS CRITICISMS.'''

[[Sir Arthur Conan Doyle|SIR ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE]], in a speech at Leicester yesterday, replied to criticisms of his views on spiritualism which were made at last week's meeting of the Church Congress.

Having explained the general philosophy of the spiritualistic movement and the evidence upon which it was based, the speaker proceeded to deal with the recent discussion at the Church Congress. Nowhere among the speakers did he recognize a strong, clear conviction like that of the late Archdeacon Colley, whose name would live as a fearless pioneer of the truth. Archdeacon Wilberforce seemed also to have left no adequate successor. At the same time every spiritualist would be grateful to the Dean of Manchester for the moderation and sanity with which he discussed the question. The admission that the explanation by fraud is utterly out of date was an honest and clear one. Though they were unfortunately not represented among the speakers, this philosophy claimed many adherents and some leaders among the clergy. The Rev. Mr. Tweedale, Mr. Cobbe, the late Mr. Chambers, Mr. Fielding Ould, and many other Anglican clergymen knew the truth, and were fearless in asserting it. In Mr. Vale Owen, vicar of Oxford, were to be found the highest powers of automatic writing possessed by any medium in Britain. The lecturer had read in script a long and detailed account of the next world written by Mr. Vale Owen's hand, through the impulse of a spiritual guide, and he could only say that it was one of the most remarkable and inspiring narratives he had ever encountered. He hoped it would soon be avail- able for all the world, and it could not full to produce a profound sensation.

Referring to Dr. Inge's criticism, Sir Arthur said that as the Dean had been totally wrong in saying that the war could not end in military victory, the public might well distrust his judgment when he poured abuse upon what he called "necromancy." As a scholar, Dr. Inge should know that the word necromancy means sorcery connected with a corpse. Far from attaching any importance to the dead body, the spiritualist looked upon it as a mere collection of chemical elements for the use of nature, with no future function at all. It was entirely superseded by what St. Paul called the spiritual body. There were some bitter opponents in the Church, who were probably more noisy than numerous, but they were the lineal descendants of the men who burned the witches, who scourged the Quakers, who cast the Dissenters into gaol, and who drove the Pilgrim Fathers out of the country. They had not progressed, but the public had progressed, and they were impotent to do harm.

'''MEDIUMS AND INSANITY.'''

Commenting upon the remark of Canon McClure, that mediums were neurotic beings, Sir Arthur said that no doubt the man with psychic powers, whether it was John of the Revelation, or Ezekiel, or any other, seemed neurotic to the more earthly souls around them. As far as physical health went, he could testify that the leading mediums of Great Britain, most of whom he knew personally, would compare very favourably, both men and women, with the average citizen. As to sanity, he had never met a more sane set of people than the spiritualists. The people who did and said wild things were those who had developed some individual twist of their own which had no relation to the spiritual philosophy or the spiritual community. Fuller knowledge would have steadied their minds. The rate of lunacy among spiritualists was abnormally low, and the late Dr. Forbes Winslow before his death admitted that he had been entirely mistaken in his assertion to the contrary.

Spiritualism had come as an ally to Christianity in confuting materialism and proving the continuity of life and the evil effects of sin. It was evident to anyone that materialism had been steadily winning since the days of Hume and Voltaire, and the reason was clear. When called upon for a sign, the Church had none. It could only make assertions, and it could not prove them. Spiritualism came along with proofs, and, if it saw the great Christian episode from an angle of its own, the vital point was that its doctrine was absolutely fatal to materialism. This should merit some better return from the Church than ignorant clamour and accusations of necromancy. As to the assertion, on the authority of Professor Jacks, that spiritualists once converted never change, this should not be a reproach, but should be a sign of those objective proofs which make change impossible. When a man had again and again, beyond all doubt or question, spoken face to face with the so-called dead, as he, the speaker, had done, how would it be possible for him afterwards to yield to the arguments of those who had not had so sacred an experience ?

{{footer_periodicals}}

Sir Conan Doyle and Spiritualism - Revision history