A Reply to Dr. Lightfoots Essays

A Reply to Dr. Lightfoot's Essays

Project Gutenberg's A Reply to Dr. Lightfoot's Essays, by Walter R.
Cassels This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and
with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.net
Title: A Reply to Dr. Lightfoot's Essays
Author: Walter R. Cassels
Release Date: September 24, 2004 [EBook #13433]
Language: English
Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A REPLY
TO DR. LIGHTFOOT'S ESSAYS ***

Produced by David Ross and
Freethought Archives

PRODUCTION NOTES: A Reply to Dr Lightfoot's Essays by Walter
R. Cassels (4-Sep-1826 to 10-Jun-1907) Originally published
anonymously in 1889. Transcribed by the Freethought Archives


A REPLY TO DR LIGHTFOOT'S ESSAYS
BY THE AUTHOR OF "SUPERNATURAL RELIGION"

LONDON 1889

INTRODUCTION.
I sincerely rejoice that Dr. Lightfoot has recovered from his recent
illness. Of this restoration the vigorous energy of his preface to his
republication of the Essays on Supernatural Religion affords decided
evidence, and I hope that no refutation of this inference at least may be
possible, however little we may agree on other points.
It was natural that Dr. Lightfoot should not be averse to preserving the
more serious part of these Essays, the preparation of which cost him so
much time and trouble; and the republication of this portion of his reply
to my volumes, giving as it does the most eloquent and attractive
statement of the ecclesiastical case, must be welcome to many. I cannot
but think that it has been an error of judgment and of temper, however,
to have rescued from an ephemeral state of existence and conferred
literary permanence on much in his present volume, which is mere
personal attack on his adversary and a deliberate attempt to discredit a
writer with whom he pretends to enter into serious argument. A
material part of the volume is composed of such matter. I cannot
congratulate him on the spirit which he has displayed. Personally I am
profoundly indifferent to such attempts at detraction, and it is with
heretical amusement that I contemplate the large part which purely
individual and irrelevant criticism is made to play in stuffing out the
proportions of orthodox argument. In the first moment of irritation, I
can well understand that hard hitting, even below the belt, might be
indulged in against my work by an exasperated theologian--for even a
bishop is a man,--but that such attacks should not only be perpetuated,
but repeated after years of calm reflection, is at once an error and a
compliment for which I was not prepared. Anything to prevent readers
from taking up _Supernatural Religion_: any misrepresentation to
prejudice them against its statements. Elaborate literary abuse against
the author is substituted for the effective arguments against his
reasoning which are unhappily wanting. In the later editions of my
work, I removed everything that seemed likely to irritate or to afford
openings for the discussion of minor questions, irrelevant to the main
subject under treatment. Whilst Dr. Lightfoot in many cases points out
such alterations, he republishes his original attacks and demonstrates
the disparaging purpose of his Essays by the reiterated condemnation of
passages which had so little to do with the argument that they no longer

exist in the complete edition of Supernatural Religion. Could there be
more palpable evidence of the frivolous and superficial character of his
objections? It is not too much to say that in no part of these Essays has
Dr. Lightfoot at all seriously entered upon the fundamental proposition
of Supernatural Religion. He has elaborately criticised notes and
references: he has discussed dates and unimportant details: but as to the
question whether there is any evidence for miracles and the reality of
alleged Divine Revelation, his volume is an absolute blank. Bampton
Lecturers and distinguished apologetic writers have frankly admitted
that the Christian argument must be reconstructed. They have felt the
positions, formerly considered to be impregnable, crumbling away
under their feet, but nothing could more forcibly expose the feebleness
of the apologetic case than this volume of Dr Lightfoot's Essays. The
substantial correctness of the main conclusions of Supernatural
Religion is rendered all the more apparent by the reply to its reasoning.
The eagerness with which Dr. Lightfoot and others rush up all the side
issues and turn their backs upon the more important central proposition
is in the highest degree remarkable. Those who are in doubt and who
have understood what the problem to be solved really is will not get
any help from his volume.
The republication of these Essays, however, has almost forced upon me
the necessity of likewise republishing the reply I