Moses Harman Reviews Koreshanity & Cyrus Teed

Six articles republished from our predecessor publication Lucifer the Light Bearer

New Orleans Notes — “Koreshanity” – Lucifer the Light Bearer 2/17/1900

Our meeting at the Hall of the Spiritualist Association, located at 321 Camp Street, on the evening of
Sunday, February 4, was fairly well attended. The subject, as published in the daily papers, was “Fakes
and Fakirs, including the ‘Trusts.’” The fact that two other Chicagoans—F. Cordon White, Spiritualist
lecturer and medium, and Cyrus R. Teed, author of the so-called Cellular Cosmogony—were addressing
meetings in other parts of the city at the same time doubtless detracted, more or less, from the attendance
at the hall on Camp Street. Notwithstanding these counter-attractions, added to the fact that all the various
churches hold open services at the same hour, the number of auditors and participants in discussion at
our meeting was about as large as the average attendance at radical lectures in Chicago or in any other
city of my acquaintance—such as the meetings of the Society of Anthropology, the Lucifer Circle, the
Chicago Vegetarian Society, etc., etc. The attention given to the opening address on “Fakes and Fakirs”
was all that could be desired, and was followed by the usual free discussion and customary comments
and criticisms by the auditors. Among the criticisms was this: “I came expecting to see or hear some ‘tests.’”
To this I replied, briefly, that the phenomenal side of Spiritualism, though interesting as proof that we do
not die when the breath leaves our bodies, has long ceased to be a subject of prime attraction to me. I
am much more interested in making a heaven on earth than in any possible heaven in the next world,
admitting all that is claimed by believers in the doctrine of a future life for mortals. Believing heaven to
be a mental condition far more than a locality or physical environment, I am trying to do what I can to
arouse my fellow human beings to see the truth that ignorance and mental stupidity lie at the bottom
of all the evils that afflict human life. Get the mind right; remove ignorance and slavish submission to
authority, and the physical and moral ills will rapidly disappear.

The institutions—social and governmental—of any people are as good and as bad as the people who make
them or submit to them. If this saying be true, and all experience proves its truth, then the best way to improve
these institutions is to make better people. Nature’s way of making better people is by generation, or borning,
not by regeneration or reborning. Right generation—right borning—needs no regeneration, no second birth.
Give us, then, free and responsible womanhood, free and responsible motherhood, as the prime conditions
or factors in making better people and in making heaven in this world. Then, if heaven in the next world be a
mental condition rather than a physical environment, there need be no anxious thoughts about what the next
world is to be. Heaven in the hereafter will be the natural sequence—the necessary, the logical, the inevitable
result of heaven in the here and the now; and hell in the hereafter will be the natural sequence—the necessary,
the logical, the inevitable result of hell in the here and the now. Of course I do not mean to reproduce the exact
language used in the impromptu replies to criticism. But little exception was taken to the lecture, and the meeting
closed at the usual hour, with a cordial invitation by the secretary, Mr. William Brodie—who was also president
pro tem.—that I let him know when next I visit New Orleans or vicinity. Impressions of New Orleans Altogether,
my week in the Queen City of the South was a very enjoyable one, and, it is hoped, not an unprofitable one,
though a considerable portion of the time was taken up in rest, in visiting old acquaintances, and in forming
new friendships. My boarding place, 634 South Street, on the south side of Lafayette Place (or Park), was all
that could be desired for healthfulness and beauty of outlook, and for convenience of location for exercise in
the open air and sunshine, as well as for access to business thoroughfares and places of interest generally.
The famous St. Charles Hotel is close by, as is Lee’s Circle, containing the colossal bronze statue of Gen.
Robert E. Lee, placed upon a shaft of marble blocks 106 feet high. The only monuments in Lafayette Park
are those of Benjamin Franklin and John McDonough.

The people of New Orleans naturally feel a warm affection for the bachelor millionaire who left his accumulations
as a gift for educational purposes to New Orleans and to Baltimore, his native place. Every year, on the anniversary
of the death of John McDonough, the schoolchildren of the city decorate with flowers the handsome monument
erected by them to the memory of their benefactor. For a very interesting account of the life and death of this
remarkable man, including the romantic and pathetic episode that caused him to become a miserly philanthropist,
the reader is referred to the Tourist’s Guide to New Orleans for the year 1900, published by the Picayune Company
of that city. This book of 200 pages, descriptive and historical of New Orleans and Louisiana, is gotten up in the
best style of the printer’s and engraver’s art, and is well worth the price asked for it—twenty-five cents, or thirty
cents by mail. Newspapers and Editors New Orleans is well supplied with newspapers, at least so far as number
and variety of political and religious complexion are concerned. Chief among these should be mentioned The
Picayune and the Times-Democrat. The Picayune is the oldest political paper in Louisiana printed in the English
language. It was founded in 1837. For a full history of this influential and venerable institution, see the Tourist’s
Guide just mentioned. For an extended description of the Times-Democrat, the reader is referred to the National
Printer-Journalist, published by the J. W. Butler Paper Company of Chicago, January 1900. The Times-Democrat
dates back to 1863 and now claims to have the largest circulation south of the Ohio and Potomac rivers. To the
editor-in-chief of the Times-Democrat, Mr. Page M. Baker, and also to Mr. Burbank, editor of The Picayune, I am
indebted for courteous treatment at their editorial rooms and for valuable information in regard to New Orleans
and the State of Louisiana. Hearing the Apostle of Koreshanity Wishing to hear all sides of all questions, I spent
two evenings of my week in New Orleans listening to the apostle of Koreshanity.

Cyrus R. Teed—sometimes called “Dr.” Teed. Why called doctor I do not know, unless because every teacher is
a doctor. Whether the new gospel or new cosmogony—for it claims to be both—is founded in the facts of nature
or is wholly a delusion, simply an attempt to found a new hierarchy for the personal advantage or aggrandizement
of its founders, is a question I am not prepared to answer. If, as is claimed, the most carefully conducted experiments
by competent men and with the most skillfully constructed mechanical instruments prove the earth to be a hollow
sphere—prove that the surface of the earth is not convex but concave—this discovery would certainly be the
most astounding and important in the domain of cosmic science since the first circumnavigator demonstrated the
earth’s rotundity. The fact, however, that this alleged discovery is made the basis not only of a new cosmogony,
or theory of the physical universe, but also of a new theogony—a new theological or theocratic propaganda
differing but little from that of the Hebrew Bible—is certainly not encouraging to the student of physical science
pure and simple; to investigators who, like Darwin, Haeckel, Tyndall, Huxley, and Laplace, can see no need of
the theological hypothesis as a basis for a system or theory of cosmic phenomena. Believers in the doctrine
of man’s right to self-government will not take kindly to the dogmatic assertion of the Koreshan fraternity that the
cosmos is an “imperialism,” and that it has no room or use for such heresies as democracies or republics.
Notwithstanding the rapid strides made in recent years in the United States toward imperialism in civil government
and social institutions, the average American mind still cherishes the ideal promulgated by Thomas Jefferson,
Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman, and other apostles of human liberty—that man needs no
rulers, no hierarchies, no monarchies, no aristocrats, but that each should be sovereign over his or her own
person and acts, so long as he does not invade the equal rights of others.

Koreshan Trust – Lucifer the Light Bearer 4/28/1900

At New Orleans in February last, I wasted-or “improved,” as the case may be-two evenings in hearing Cyrus
Teed, the founder and expounder of what he calls “Koresh- anity.” That I may do Mr. Teed and his followers no
injustice I will quote at some length his and their definition of what Koreshanity is. On page eleven of the book
called “Cellular Cosmogony or the Earth a Concave Sphere,” Mr. Teed says: Koreshanity includes both the
science of life and its application, and comprises the scientific religion of succeeding ages. It deals generally
and specifically with every department and phase of universal form and function, and is therefore universology,
and the only system that can be thus nomenclatured. Unlike all the presumptuous figments and vagaries of
pretended science, the Koreshan Universology has for its major premise a geo- metric figure embracing the
union of three simple elements, positive and absolute in their form, relation, and application. This geometric
foundation of the Koreshan System en braces the chord, radius, and arc, not in thecretical geometry, but in
its positive application to earth measurement, by which is deter- mined the contour of the surface of the earth in
which we dwell. Like most founders, or attempted founders, of new systems, Mr. Teed begins by denouncing all
conflicting systems and theories as “presumptuous figments and vagaries of pretended science.” Continuing, he says:
The earth is a concave sphere, the ratio of curvature being eight inches to the mile, thus giving a diameter of eight
thousand miles, and a corresponding circumference of about twenty-five thousand miles. This fact is physically and
mechanically demonstrated by placing a perpendicular post at any point on the surface of the earth (though it were
better to place it by the side of a surface of water), and extending a straight line at right angles from this perpendicular.

The line thus extended will strike the surface at any distance proportionate to the height of the vertical post.
The Roman Catholic Church quotes the Nazarene as saying, “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build
my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Brother Cyrus Teed posits, as the foundation stone
of a new astronomy and a new religion, the alleged fact that the earth’s surface “curvates” upward, not downward,
at the rate of eight inches per mile; and judging from the manner of his utterances—such as “the gigantic fallacy
and farce of the benighted Copernicus”—he is quite as sure as was the most bigoted and fanatical religious
hierarch that the “gates” of modern “infidel,” or irreligious, science cannot prevail against his cellular cosmogony.
Equally sure is he that none of the older religious sects, or interpretations of the Christian Bible, can prevail
against his own interpretation: “All that is opposed to Koreshanity is Antichrist.” (p. 9) “The Koreshan system
alone scientifically defends the Scriptures. The Bible is scientifically correct; Koresh, the divine and natural
scientist, is its sole interpreter and expositor.” (p. 184) Just here it might be well to say a word in answer to a
pertinent inquiry: “Why devote the space of Lucifer to exposing a scheme, transparent fake, so monstrously
absurd that no man in his right senses could by any possibility be imposed upon thereby?” To this question I reply:
First, in numbers and intelligence of adherents; in amount of literature published and distributed; in numbers of
cooperative colonies now in successful operation; in amount of material wealth placed at the disposal of the
leaders by admiring adherents; and in the space or recognition given to this cult by the daily and weekly press
of this country and of foreign lands—in all these particulars the Koreshans are not to be despised or ignored
by those who would keep abreast of the world’s humanitarian movements.

Second, I am interested in their attempts to inaugurate and practicalize equitable cooperation, the “labor exchange,”
freedom and self-ownership for woman, communal life, etc., etc., and would be glad to see and compare the results
of their efforts with those of other experiments along the same lines of human endeavor. With this end in view I
attended two of the public meetings of the Koreshans, held in the large and commodious parlors of Mrs. and Capt.
Massie, at whose home I was very kindly and hospitably entertained during my stay in the Crescent City one year
ago. I was informed that Mr. Teed, who calls himself “Koresh,” and is generally known as Mr. Teed, and a lady lecturer
known as “Rev.” E. M. Castle, had been holding public meetings in New Orleans for some two months, twice a
week or oftener, and that they had made quite a number of converts, among whom were believed to be our good
friends, the Massies. After hearing two lectures from “Koresh,” and after hearing the main points of Koreshanity
explained by himself and his coadjutor, Mrs. Castle, and after a somewhat careful perusal of the book whose title
has just been quoted, and of copies of their weekly paper or magazine, called The Flaming Sword, I have come to
the conclusion that Koreshanity, like Christianity (Roman Catholicism), and the parent of Christianity, Judaism, and like
its sister cult, Mohammedanism, and like its daughter cults—Episcopalianism (Church of England), Presbyterianism
(Church of Geneva), Mormonism (Church of Latter Day Saints), Christian Science (Church of Mrs. Eddy)—like all these
and many more that might be named, is simply another attempt to found a new religious trust, a new theocracy, with
Cyrus Teed as the chief hierarch, or visible head and representative on earth of the alleged divine creator and ruler
of the universe; and with the usual characteristics or accompaniments, namely: power, rulership, honors, wealth, ease,
privileges, and perquisites without end for the priesthood and the hierarchs; while for the rank and file, the common
followers, there will be obedience, servility, self-denial, small pay with plenty of hard work in this world, but large
promises of crowns, scepters, principalities, honors, ease, and rewards without end—in the next.

A few only of the proofs that lead to this conclusion, besides the quotations already made, can here be mentioned.
First—Titles. Jesus, the alleged founder of the religion, the cult that superseded Judaism, was surnamed the Christ
—whence the name Christianity. Cyrus Teed, the founder of the religion, the cult that is expected to supersede
Christianity, signs himself Koresh—whence the name Koreshanity. Mrs. Castle, who seems to be the most popular
Koreshan lecturer next to “Koresh” himself, takes the title “Rev.,” as do nearly all the priests and prophets of the
various Christian hierarchies. How many more “reverends” have been ordained to preach the new gospel I do not
happen to know, but notice in the list of contributors to The Flaming Sword the name of Rev. Bertha S. Boomer.
Another titled personage is “Victoria Gratia, Pre-Eminent of the Koreshan Unity”—similar, it is to be inferred, to
the titles “Very Reverend” and “Right Reverend” in the Roman Catholic hierarchy; or perhaps this title has been
suggested by the fact that Victoria, Queen of England, is, “by the Grace of God,” head of the Anglican hierarchy.
Time and space permitting, I propose to have more to say in regard to the Koreshans, and other religious trusts
encountered while on my late southern trip, but for this issue am compelled abruptly to close.

A Religious Trust – Lucifer the Light Bearer, 5/5/1900

Regarding as I do the Koreshan trust as typical of all religious guilds or hierarchies, I ask the forbearance of our
readers while continuing a little further the discussion of this modern Christian cult. Please read what here follows
in connection with what was said in the last issue. Second. Another circumstantial proof that the Koreshan cult is
simply a new religious trust, similar to its many predecessors, is the method adopted by its apostles in conducting
their meetings. At the close of the two lectures mentioned in last week’s issue, no invitation was extended to persons
in the audience to ask questions, or to say a word of dissent or of approval. Whether “Koresh” was not willing to
have the psychological effect of his lecture marred or weakened by embarrassing questions, or because he did
not wish his auditors to go away from the meeting with the conviction that there are two sides to the question upon
which he had been instructing them, I do not know; but my habit of looking for causes of human actions suggests
these as the most probable causes of his failure to invite others to speak. At the close of the first of the lectures
named I ventured to ask permission to make a brief announcement, which having been granted, I invited all
present to meet me the next Sunday evening at the hall on Camp Street and take part in discussion of “Motherhood
in Freedom,” saying I preferred not to do all the talking myself, but wished to compare views with other investigators
and thinkers. Then, without rising from my seat—the audience was small and my position therein a prominent one
—I related the story of the seven blind Hindu philosophers who were so very sure they knew “all about the elephant”
until, on comparison of notes, they found that each knew only a section or fragment of the beast. Before I could
finish the story, “Koresh” sprang to his feet and, speaking with energy, not to say excitedly, said: “Ah! I see! You are a
‘post’! You have got only a fragment of the truth. We have got it all! I want to say here and now,” he continued, “that
it is impossible to know a part of truth till you are in possession of all truth. You must know all its relations to all other
truths before you can say you are in possession of any truth.”

Then “Rev.” Mrs. Castle took up the refrain and repeated, in almost the exact language, the same statement.
Seeing the utter uselessness of argument with people who are absolutely sure they know it all, I followed the
suggestion of my friends and quietly withdrew, with the impression uppermost that the evangelists of Koreshanity
dread nothing so much as free and fair discussion of their peculiar views. In reply to this last remark it will probably
be answered that the evangelists do sometimes answer questions, as for instance, at the close of a lecture in
Savannah, Ga., as per report in the Morning News of that city—quoted in The Flaming Sword, June 30, ’99:
“At the conclusion of the regular lecture, Rev. Castle answered the questions of those in the audience who
cared to propound them, and not for a single moment was she caught napping. When her questioners would
think they had her, she would get out of her apparent confusion by saying that the premise upon which they
relied had been disproved by the Koreshans, and that a fact accepted was not a fact at all.” This is certainly a
very convenient, not to say original, way of answering puzzling questions. I was myself treated to a specimen
of the lady’s peculiar method of argumentation when I asked her how she disposed of certain astronomical facts
that militate against the cellular theory. Her reply was: “Ah! the Koreshans have anticipated all these difficulties.
They have a satisfactory answer for every alleged fact in favor of the Copernicans. We have no trouble with the
real scientific defenders of that theory. It is only with the unscientific—those who do not themselves understand
the theory they defend—that we have trouble.” Not claiming to be a scientific defender of the Copernican cosmogony,
there was nothing left for me to do but to accept my defeat—my punishment—with the best grace possible and
again to quietly withdraw. Quoting again from the book Cellular Cosmogony, page 24:

“We are now approaching a great biologic conflagration. Thousands of people will dematerialize, through biological
electro-magnetic vibration. This will be brought about through the direction of one mind, the only one who has a
knowledge of the law of this bio-alchemical transmutation. The change will be accomplished through the formation
of a biological battery, the laws of which are known only to one man. This man is Elijah the prophet, ordained of
God, the Shepherd of the Gentiles and the central reincarnation of the ages. From this conflagration will spring the
sons of God, the divine offspring of the Lord Jesus, the Christ and Son of God.” From this paragraph, and others of
like purport—also from the language used by “Koresh” in his oral discourses—I infer that Cyrus Teed claims to be the
“one mind, the only one who has knowledge of the law of this bio-alchemical transmutation”—the great “conflagration,”
out of which, or after which, shall come the “new heaven and new earth, in which dwelleth righteousness.” It will
doubtless be objected that my showing the Koreshan cult to be a religious trust does not disprove the truth of their
claim that the earth is a hollow sphere and that we are living on the inside thereof instead of on the outside of a
solid globe. As the Koreshans seem to have rules of logic all their own, I do not expect to convince them of error,
but will simply state a few of the facts and arguments that seem to me to show the cellular cosmos to be improbable,
if not impossible. If the earth “curvates” upward at the rate of eight inches the first mile, thirty-two inches for the
second mile, seventy-two inches for the third mile, as claimed by the Koreshans, then the elevation of an object
thirty miles away, at this rate of increase, would be about six hundred feet above the horizon of the first mile. This
would enable the Chicagoans to see the east coast of Lake Michigan with great distinctness on a clear day. For a like
reason, the main bulk of Pike’s Peak, in the clear atmosphere of Colorado, could be seen long before its topmost
cone when the observer approaches from the level plain on the east; whereas the reverse of this is the well-known
fact. Second. The analogies of nature are against the cellular concept. The hollow cell is not the type of nature’s
formations, the exact reverse being the almost universal fact, so far as we know.

Third. The Koreshans say that the Copernican concept is based upon unsupported assumption. Can there be an
assumption more completely unsupported by proof than the claim that the earth’s crust is about one hundred miles
thick, and that outside of this crust there is nothing—not even space? “There is nothing on the outside—no heat,
cold, light, darkness, temperature, condition, entity, quality of substance—nothing. There couldn’t be. There is
nothing outside to attract the earth, and hence it can never move out of the only space-place there is.” (pp. 166
–167) The defenders of the Copernican concept of astronomy do not claim to know it all. They are modest enough
to admit that many theories are mere hypotheses. In thus acknowledging ignorance their wisdom is shown. It is
the beginner in science who claims to know it all. The sophomore—“wise fool,” or second-year man in our colleges
—is much wiser, in his own opinion, than is the senior or the fourth-year man. Franklin was much more modest
in his method of argument in his maturity than in middle age. The same is true of Isaac Newton and of others
whose names are regarded as among the wisest of men.

Science and Theology — Koreshanity – Lucifer the Light Bearer 11/24/1900

Under the head “Still Looking for Causes,” an attempt is made in this week’s issue to show that our present and
popular methods of dealing with crime and criminals are unwise, irrational, unscientific, and unphilosophic—in
fact, that our attempts to cure social ills only aggravate the disease and make it inveterate; make it more universal
and more incurable. At the close of said article it is intimated that the only real cure for our social ills must come
through a larger freedom for woman, and that freedom for woman is and will be opposed by all the privileged
classes, and especially by the clergy, because it is mainly through the subordination of woman to man that the
clergy hold their power over the race of humankind. In this article I propose to show some of the methods by
which some of the clergy obtain their ends and accomplish their purpose. To do this more clearly, I take the
utterances of one of the more modern hierarchies, or priestly orders. I take the utterances of the self‑styled
Koreshans because they are the only sect or organization of people that now seriously attempts to reconcile
the facts of nature, as discovered by modern physical science, with the teachings of that incongruous collection
of ancient manuscripts called the Christian Bible. Other reasons why I take the teachings of this sect as an object
lesson in theology are because the sociological and political reforms advocated by this sect are, in the main, very
similar to those advocated by many, if not most, of Lucifer’s readers, and also because, just now, the Society of
Anthropology of Chicago is giving special attention to this comparatively new theological cult. Last Sunday this
society gave a hearing to the founder of Koreshanity, Cyrus Teed, or “Koresh,” as he calls himself, and will give
him another hearing next Sunday afternoon at three o’clock. For this issue, then, we shall do little more than
present to our readers a synopsis of the leading points of the Koreshan system or systems—its interpretation
of the observed facts of nature and the governmental and theological systems deduced therefrom.

The Koreshans publish a weekly journal called The Flaming Sword. In this journal is a summary entitled “A Glance
at Koreshanity,” from which we select a few of the more important paragraphs: Cosmogony The universe is a cell,
a hollow globe, the physical body of which is the earth; the sun is at the center. We live on the inside of the cell; and
the sun, moon, planets, and stars are all within the globe. The universe is eternal, a great battery, and perpetually
renews itself through inherent functions, by virtue of which it involves and evolves itself. Theology God is personal
and biune, with a trinity of specific attributes. God, in his perfection and power, is the God‑man or the man‑God, the
seed of universal perpetuity. Jesus the Christ was God Almighty; the Holy Spirit was the product of his transmutation,
or the burning of his body. Messianic Law The coming of the Messiah is as inevitable as the reproduction of the
seed. The divine seed was sown nineteen hundred years ago; the first fruit is another Messianic personality. The
Messiah is now in the world, declaring the scientific Gospel. The Bible The Bible is the best written expression of
the divine mind; it is written in the language of universal symbolism, and must be scientifically interpreted. Koreshanity
demonstrates the truth and scientific accuracy of the Scriptures, and proves its astronomy, alchemy, theology,
ethnology, etc. There is no conflict between the Bible and genuine science; the Bible and the natural universe
must agree in their expression of the divine mind. Church and State The true form of government is the divine
imperialism, the unity of church and state; such will be the Kingdom of God on earth. The Koreshan government
is the unity of the empire and the republic, involving the principles of all present forms of government, which
are but fragments of the perfect system which existed in ancient times—in the Golden Age of the past. The
government of the universe is imperialistic; and humanity will constitute a unit only when every class is emplaced
at rest and liberty, as are the strata, stars, and spheres of the physical cosmos.

From these paragraphs it is seen that Koreshanity teaches the hollow‑globe theory of the earth; the personal
‑God theory, with incarnations of the personal God—Jesus and “Koresh,” that is, Cyrus R. Teed; says there is
no “conflict between the Bible, the book of the Jews and Christians, and true science;” says the “true form of
government is the divine imperialism, the unity of church and state,” etc. In another paragraph it is said the “new
religion [Koreshanity] must supplant Christianity as Christianity supplanted Judaism.” The closing sentences
of the preface to the book entitled Cellular Cosmogony read as follows: To know the Lord Christ absolutely is to
be in the consciousness of Deity; and to become like him is to sit upon the throne of his glory. This knowledge is
so related to the structured alchemico‑organic macrocosm that to know of the earth’s concavity and its relation
to universal form is to know God; while to believe in the earth’s convexity is to deny him and all his works. All
that is opposed to Koreshanity is Antichrist. These are the words of “Koresh” himself. The closing paragraph of
the book is in these words: To determine its accuracy, the Bible must be tested, not by the current and popular
fallacy, but by a system of science, the fundamentals of which are susceptible of absolute demonstration. The
Koreshan system alone scientifically defends the Scriptures. The Bible is scientifically correct; Koresh, the divine
and natural scientist, is its sole interpreter and expositor! This is the language of Mr. Teed or of his editor, Mr.
Morrow. Briefly, we may say that whatever else the Koreshans lack, they are not lacking in self‑assertion or in
dogmatic assumption. In this they show themselves true theologians. As all theology is assumption, the more
arrogant and dogmatic the assumption, the more consistent it is with the basic theory. When the second address
before the Society of Anthropology shall have been delivered by the founder of Koreshanity, we shall probably
have more to say on the subject.

Freedom of Woman & Koreshanity – Lucifer the Light Bearer 12/29/1900

The editor of the Flaming Sword (Chicago), organ of “Koreshanity,” in his issue of November 30, has this to say
in reply to Lucifer’s statement in regard to the attitude of the Koreshans toward the freedom-for-women question:
The editor of Lucifer has commenced a series of articles to show how the clergy of Christendom hold power over
the world through the subordination of woman; and “the more clearly to do this,” he takes “the utterances of one
of the more modern hierarchies or priestly orders”—Koreshanity. Just how he will proceed to connect Koreshanity
with the subordination of woman, he does not reveal. We will say for the benefit of some readers of Lucifer, and for
its editor in particular, that Koreshanity not only proposes the abolition of the present order of masculine dominancy,
and to achieve the great victory for woman, but also purposes placing the world specifically under the control of
woman. This is a clear, specific, and emphatic point in Koreshan Theology. Woman will mold the new order, for
she is the matrix of the New World. Koreshanity is dogmatic, because a dogma is a doctrine of genuine truth;
Koreshanity is positive. A theory is not worth anything for certain and effective application for the benefit of
humanity if it is not absolutely true. Who could work out a mathematical problem by disregarding all mathematical
principles? Who can free woman from her bondage but the Man who knows that he is right, and that he is able
to achieve the Victory? Does Lucifer dare assert that the theory it advocates involves the remedy—that is, the
absolute? Has it read the whole, that it might with certainty reveal the truth of a part? If it is true that reform must
obtain in the plane of sex commerce, it is also true that reform must begin in the human will, human desire, back
of creative power. If it is true that reform must come to the field of marital relations, it is also true that reform must
obtain in the human heart and mind, and in all planes of human relationships. Koreshanity covers the entire field of
reform; it contains the whole; it has no hobby!

Yes, it is true that I began a series of articles to show how woman has been enslaved by all religions, and that
I made reference to Koreshanity as furnishing no exception to the general rule. In a recent issue of Lucifer,
December 15, I showed, at considerable length, the status accorded to woman by the Hebrew and Christian
textbooks called the “Old and New Testament.” I quoted, in previous issues of Lucifer, the endorsement of this
collection by Koreshans, including the closing sentence of the book called Cellular Cosmogony: “The Bible is
scientifically correct; Koresh [Cyrus R. Teed] is its sole interpreter and expositor.” In each issue of the Flaming
Sword is published “A Glance at Koreshanity.” Under this head is found the statement that: The saving of human
life consists in the conservation and appropriation of life in humanity. To become immortal, one must cease to
propagate life on the plane of mortality. The standard of Koreshan purity is the virgin life of Jesus the Messiah.
The Central Order of the Koreshan Unity is celibate and communistic. Celibacy obtains in the central nucleus,
never in the world at large. If I correctly understand these words, they mean that Koreshanity follows Roman
Catholicism in demanding a celibate life—an ascetic life so far as sex and reproduction are concerned—for its
priesthood, male and female. Celibacy for woman and man, and especially for woman, is an abnormal, an
unhealthful, an anti-natural condition. Under the Roman Catholic regime, celibacy is an important factor or
element in woman’s enslavement, woman’s subordination to man. So far as I have seen the working of the
Koreshan system, there is no essential difference between the Koreshan hierarchy and that of the Roman
Catholic Church in regard to the relative position of woman and man. The Roman Church, in theory, honors
woman. It worships Mary, the “Virgin Mother of God,” but in practice woman is degraded and enslaved by the
Roman hierarchy. The chief interpreter of the “divine mind” and chief ruler of the Roman Church is a man.

Likewise, the founder, the chief interpreter of the “divine mind,” and the chief ruler of the Koreshan Church is
a man. “Who can free woman from her bondage but the Man who knows that he is right and that he is able
to achieve the victory?” asks the editor of the Flaming Sword. To my thinking, woman must free herself from
bondage—if ever freed—and the first and most important step in this self-emancipation must be the freeing
of her own mind from its ages-old dependence upon man for a creed, for a belief in gods, angels, devils, etc.
—beings of superhuman and supernatural powers. When woman has successfully vindicated her ability to walk
alone; to walk without leaning upon man for guidance and instruction in regard to things natural and supernatural,
she will have truly and really begun the work of self-emancipation, of self-redemption—and not till then. It has
been asked more than once, “Why devote so much of Lucifer’s limited space to a self-evident delusion? Why
notice the Koreshans at all?” My reply is that quite a considerable number of Lucifer’s subscribers and patrons
are readers and patrons of the Flaming Sword, and endorse, more or less completely, the doctrines of the
Koreshans. Among these is a good lady friend in Wisconsin who, while renewing subscription for Lucifer two
years ahead, writes as follows: My sister and I have read the Flaming Sword for nearly ten years. We very
much appreciate the style of language used. Don’t you? It seems to me you ought to work in harmony. Koresh
has exalted woman to the highest pinnacle in his Proclamation and Judgment. Does not his theory of the
Universe seem plausible, more so than the endless world-on-world theory? Is not his reasoning on the
evolution of the successive kingdoms of nature irrefutable? Others have talked to us in the same strain,
saying that Lucifer cannot afford to ignore the Flaming Sword and its work; that the aims of both papers
are one and the same—the emancipation of the race through free, intelligent, and responsible motherhood.
Also that the economic teachings of both journals are similar, if not identical, etc.

I have met Mr. Teed at the home of mutual friends; have listened attentively to four of his lectures; have
invited the editor of the Sword to explain his system of cosmogony, etc., at our home before the Lucifer
club. We have printed at considerable length extracts from the book Cellular Cosmogony, written by Mr.
Teed and by the editor of the Sword, Mr. U. G. Morrow. After giving Koreshanity and its leading exponents
what seems to me a fair and impartial examination and hearing, my opinion is something like this: The founder
of Koreshanity and the editor of the Sword are by no means fools; neither are they knaves, as these words
are commonly understood. From their standpoint they are straightforward, honorable men, working for the
good of humanity at large more than for their own narrowly selfish aggrandizement. So much for their motives.
As to their methods, I am compelled to judge them as I find them. “By their fruits ye shall know them.”
Confucius, when asked for a single word expressing the most generally useful rule of conduct, replied:
“Reciprocity!” If Confucius was right, then the Koreshan leaders are wrong in their methods. They have
never reciprocated the courtesies shown them, so far as I know. They have never invited us to occupy
their platform, nor have they ever quoted a single paragraph of Lucifer’s teachings while criticizing us.
When accepting the invitation to address the Society of Anthropology of this city, Mr. Teed was neither
courteous nor fair, as I understand courtesy and fairness. His method of treating his hearers was that
of the pedant, the dogmatist. His address was full of self-assertion, of assumption, and of arrogance,
bordering on the insolent and impudent. When telling us what the leaders of modern science taught,
he utterly forgot to quote a single book or paragraph. Such tactics as these are doubtless fair, honest, and
honorable from Mr. Teed’s standpoint. Like most theologians, Koresh’s standard of honesty and fairness
is not that of reciprocity, not that of equal rights and privileges for all, but reads something like this:
“On one side of the discussion it’s me and God; on the other side it is the devil and the other fellow!

How very absurd it would be to admit the devil and the other fellow to equality of rights and privileges
with me and God!” An illustration of this theologic code of ethics was shown by Mr. Teed’s reply to the
parody of Mr. Crane, printed in a recent issue of Lucifer. Said Koresh: “When a man feels himself beaten
in argument he invariably resorts to ridicule,”—apparently quite forgetful of the fact that when trying to
show the falsity of the Copernican cosmogony he himself depends largely upon the use of ridicule.
What is sauce for the Copernican goose is by no means sauce for the Koreshan gander. Not wishing
to tire the patience of our readers, I close for this issue by saying that whether the Copernican system
taught by our fathers and mothers is to be superseded by the “Hollow World” theory—though interesting
as a cosmical study—it is a matter of small importance to humanity when compared to the theologic
and ethical aspects of the problem. If, with the Cellular Cosmogony, we must be chained to the chariot
wheels of the Jehovah God of Abraham—“father of the faithful”—who is claimed by Koresh to be his
own “archetype,” and with Cyrus R. Teed for captain-general, then some of us prefer to take to the
woods of “infidel” agnosticism and of equal rights for all, and fight it out on that line though it take all
the summers and all winters of this mortal life.

Agnosticism – Gnosticism – Koreshanity – Lucifer the Light Bearer 3/16/1901

Under the head, “In the Editorial Perspective,” the editor of The Flaming Sword, U. G. Morrow, has this to say
in reply to a plea for “reciprocity,” previously made in Lucifer’s columns: The editor of Lucifer makes a plea for
reciprocity—exchange of ideas, courtesies, suggestions, etc.—between the advocates of the Koreshan system
and himself. Thanks for the suggestion; but we cannot conceive of the possibility of science and agnosticism
getting along together very well on any basis, unless the agnostic submits himself to the only kind of reciprocity
which truth knows—teaching for obedience. Lucifer may desire to know the truth concerning the things of life;
but sometimes its editor makes an accidental slip of the pen, which either belies him or tells the truth. Just how
nearly he may come to lining up with the Koreshan plumb-line may be seen from the following: “Whether the
Copernican system taught by our fathers and mothers is to be superseded by the ‘hollow world’ theory—though
interesting as a cosmical study—is a matter of small importance when compared with the theologic and ethical
aspects of the problem. If with the Cellular Cosmogony we must be chained to the chariot wheels of the Jehovah
God of Abraham—‘father of the faithful,’ who is claimed by Koresh to be his own ‘archetype’—and with CYRUS
R. TEED for captain-general, then some of us prefer to take to the woods of ‘infidel’ agnosticism and equal rights
for all, and fight it out on that line though it takes all the summers and all the winters of this mortal life.” It is obvious
that Universology would be of no use to a man whose determinations are to utterly disregard all logical conclusions
from the basis of the demonstrated laws of cellular life. Woman, whom Lucifer presumes to teach how to be free, may
here observe the expressed purpose of its editor to continue a line of unscientific reform, even in the beginning of the
twentieth century! The above lines have been in type in our office for several weeks, as a text waiting for comment.

The needed comment has not been forthcoming for two reasons mainly: first, the press of other, and as I believe
more important, matter; and second, the difficulty of formulating a suitable answer—an answer that in few words
would show the attitude of Lucifer’s editor towards a phase of gnosticism, phenomenal if not unparalleled for
arrogance, for self-conceit, for bigotry, for dogmatic assumption of superior wisdom. To begin, let me say that
controversy, as such, is not to my taste. It is so very, very hard to eliminate the personal element or factor; so
easy to lose sight of what should be the only object of discussion—the discovery of truth—and to think mainly
of victory in argument. It is so easy to sink the philosopher (lover of wisdom) in the metaphysical wrangler; and
hence, as a rule, I much prefer to make a plain, straightforward statement of principles or opinions, asking each
reader and hearer to form her or his own conclusions, unbiased by personal or factional considerations. However,
I fully recognize that controversy, criticism, thrust-and-counter-thrust have their legitimate place in the search for
truth, and therefore should not be wholly ignored. In order that the best results from such methods of search
should be realized, it is always best, as I think, to begin with a clear definition of terms. Without such definition,
the investigation is apt to degenerate into a mere war of words, the disputants constantly getting farther and
farther apart, instead of approaching a common ground of understanding. AGNOSTIC – AGNOSTICISM While
adopting no labels or tags, as such, it is very difficult to avoid them altogether. Names, phrases, titles—all have
their limitations and are very apt to be misleading. While not calling myself an agnostic in any technical or partisan
sense, I have no objection to the term when used in a rational sense. By derivation the word means one who
does not know—from the Greek verb to know and a, meaning not. That is to say, an agnostic is one who does
not know everything, and is honest enough to confess his lack of universal knowledge.

In this sense, the etymological sense, I freely acknowledge myself an agnostic. I claim that every honest student is
an agnostic. I claim that conscious, honest agnosticism is essential to all progress. It is the beginning of wisdom. It
is akin to the saying, “Doubt is the beginning of wisdom.” Hence, to be an agnostic is to be a doubter—a skeptic.
The origin of the word skeptic is to look, to see, to investigate; hence, to try to find out that concerning which we
are in doubt. GNOSTIC – GNOSTICISM These words mean, of course, the exact opposite of agnosticism. The
gnostic is one who knows—one who knows it all. He does not need to investigate—why should he? Hence, to
him there is no further progress in the realm of science—knowledge. The Koreshans do not call themselves gnostics,
but by their attitude towards agnostics they necessarily “line up” with the gnostics. That this is their true mental
alignment we have only to read their books and papers. In the utterance just quoted Mr. Morrow declares himself
a gnostic of the gnostics—a gnostic of the most inveterate, not to say incurable, type. If further evidence of this fact
is needed, take the following from their chief textbook, Cellular Cosmogony. In answer to the question, “What is
on the outside of the hollow globe you call the earth?” Mr. Morrow and “Koresh” reply: The shell of the earth is
the circumference—the limit of the universe. It environs all that exists. Outside of the environ or limit of existence,
there is nothing. There is no infinite space. Space is measure and dimension of things that are; it is definite.
Limitation is a factor of form; form is a factor of existence. Hence, if the universe exists, it is limited, beyond
which there is no existence. There is nothing on the outside—no heat, cold, light, darkness, temperature, condition,
entity, quality of substance—nothing. There could not be. Nothing cannot extend at all; matter could not extend
eternally. No matter how absurd this may be to the average person, sufficient thought on the problem will
reveal the fact that our conclusions as to what is not on the outside are reasonable, logical, and absolute.

If this is not gnosticism in its baldest form, then it would be hard to imagine anything more unblushingly gnostic.
Often have I heard “Koresh”—Cyrus R. Teed—use words like these: “We have got it all! It is impossible to know
any subject till we know its relations to all other subjects; hence to know anything is to know everything.” As to
whether Lucifer’s editor shows “a determination to disregard all logical conclusions from the basis of demonstrated
laws” or not, let Lucifer’s readers decide. We all know that the best way to get at a man’s mental and moral status
is to get him to talk of other people. Invariably he gives a reading of himself—his own inner consciousness.
In this connection, I will ask all readers of this week’s Lucifer to hunt up the two last issues and read the articles,
“Reaction against Materialism” and “The Rise and Persistence of Hierarchies.” These were both written with
reference to this discussion of “Teedism”—Koreshanity. To close for this week, I insert part of a letter—one of
many—written us some weeks ago in reference to the religious and “scientific” claims of the founders and
expounders of a cult or ism that is now receiving considerable attention from thoughtful people, here in
Chicago and elsewhere. Permit me to thank you for your kind explanations, Lucifer, under date of the 26th
Before I received this copy, I asked The Flaming Sword to explain the origin of meteors. Another series of
questions went forward yesterday, with request for public answer in case they had never been asked before:
“Have not straight lines been projected by engineers? Is it not a fact that in the construction of long tunnels,
at times the work is carried on from both sides of the mountain, the tunnels meeting midway, the sides
approximating with great accuracy? Is not this the driving of a straight line through solid rock, as it were?
If the tunnels be driven from equal altitudes above sea level, and meet in the center, would the tunnel,
under present engineering practice, be straight, or would it curve in conformity with the curvature of the
earth’s surface? If straight, could a person using a powerful telescope at one end, directing its axis parallel
with the sides of the tunnel, see through the tunnel?”

Kindly take no present notice of the foregoing questions, but would ask that you wait and see what disposition
is made of them by Prof. Morrow. In the meantime, will appreciate any comment you can make on them yourself.
Understand I want to be common-sense, actual and factual, as it were, and along this line wish to serve humanity.
Do not wish to go wandering off into space—whether space is within or without our earth. The question of the
form of the earth’s surface is, however, one of surpassing interest. Why does not Teed, instead of wandering off
into space and occult things and leaving the common-sense things to be discovered by others, outline his work
in a practical manner? There must certainly be some practical method of demonstrating the shape of the surface
of the earth. Next week, time and space permitting, some attempt will be made to show why I do not accept the
“scientific,” theological, and moralistic tenets of the Koreshans.

Dowieism, Eddyism, Teedism, Mormonism, etc. – Lucifer the Light Bearer 8/21/1902

While writing a few cards at the post office desk in Benton Harbor the other day, a stranger asked,
“Is that your crutch standing near you?” “Yes,” said I. “I see you are busy,” said he, “and I do not wish to take
your time, but want very briefly to call your attention to some facts that may be of service to you; facts that
may convince you that there is no need that any one should be lame, or sick, or afflicted in any way.” He then
showed me a copy of Leaves of Healing, a large, well‑printed weekly magazine edited by John Alexander
Dowie, of whose fame most of our readers have doubtless heard. The first four pages of this magazine,
dated August 2, are taken up with an elaborated description of the case of John Easton, of Toronto, Canada,
who, according to the account, was instantly healed and made strong, active, and well after having lain with
a broken back, encased in a jacket made of plaster of Paris, for six years and six months—healed by the
“Power of the Holy Spirit,” after prayers and laying on of hands by the “Zion Seventies” in Toronto, and after
being instructed in the “Faith” by the magazine Leaves of Healing. The story is a truly remarkable one, and is
corroborated by a long quotation purporting to be taken from the Toronto Evening Telegram of February 15, 1902.
After glancing over the article I told Mr. Easton (if I understood him aright, he claimed to be the identical man
so miraculously healed) that I had no reason to doubt the substantial truth of the story, but that I had a different
explanation for the wonderful result; that such cures were by no means new, and by no means peculiar to any
one religious cult—that such occurrences, quite as well attested, were told by Spiritualists, by Mental Scientists,
by Christian Scientists, etc. I might have added Mormons, Buddhists, Roman Catholics, Shakers, and some
Protestant sects. This assertion of mine Mr. Easton most vigorously denied; also denied that these cures were
probably done by self‑psychologization, by hypnotic power, by mental suggestion, declaring that such cures
could not be done by any other power than that of God Himself through His chosen instruments—His servants
ordained to do this work.

At the urgent request of Mr. Easton I brought the magazine home with me and have given it a somewhat careful
perusal, trying to find, if possible, the secret of the wonderful power the man Dowie exerts over his followers—a
power that seems, judging from results, far greater than that of Mrs. Eddy, Cyrus Teed, Madame Blavatsky, or
even Brigham Young and Joseph Smith, over their respective adherents. None of these have succeeded, in
so short a time, in building up a church or sect that so closely resembles, in devotion and enthusiasm, the early
Christian church as related by the semi‑mythical Christian records—resembles the early Christian cult in everything
except one thing, and that is the accumulation of money and other substantial property in the hands of one man,
and the very evident disregard of the injunctions of Jesus and of His immediate followers to shun riches, to “take
no thought of the morrow,” to “sell all that thou hast and give to the poor,” etc., etc. The chief difference between
Dowie’s teaching and that of Jesus would seem to be that instead of selling all and giving to the poor, “The General
Overseer of the Christian Catholic Church” would have his followers sell all they possess and give to “Zion”—which
means, Give to Dowie! Am I wrong in this conclusion? If so, I wish to be set right. I wish not to misrepresent any
man, but want to treat others as I would myself be treated. The fairest way, in a case like this, is to let the man
speak for himself; and though our space is small, I here introduce several paragraphs from a discourse delivered
by Dowie at Shiloh Tabernacle, Zion City, Illinois, July 17, 1902, and reported in Leaves of Healing, August 2: “I
have no hatred against men. When a man, however, becomes the incarnation and embodiment of apostasy,
hypocrisy, and deviltry, then that man has to stand aside, or else I have to put him aside. “Zion must march on,
and no man, and no church, and no king, and no nation, and no people, shall be allowed to obstruct the onward
march of Zion; for it is the onward march of God.” (Amen. Applause.)

“There is to be one head, and not a dozen. The day for diversity has gone by. The day has come for unity, and
I say to my God reverently, as Ulysses Grant said to President Lincoln: ‘I will not take the command; I will not
lead the army of the United States unless you give me all the money and all the men I need, and back me up
every step of the way.’ “I have the promise from God that I shall get all the men and all the money, and I am
going on, but I will have no interference. God made me the leader just as He made Ulysses Grant Lieutenant
‑General of the United States Army. Grant would take no nonsense from the President himself, from Sheridan,
or from Sherman, from Buell, or from Meade, or any one else. God had given to him the command, and the
rebellion could only be crushed by a united body carrying out a united policy. “This work cannot be done unless
there be one leader under God. If I am not that leader, go away and find him. If I am that leader, follow me.”
(Amen. Applause.) “Hunger, thirst after the righteousness which is of God by faith; which is of God by practice;
which is of God by realization; and has the power of God in every step that you take. “The strength of a man
is not the strength of his individuality, mentality, or the power that he wields socially or financially. The strength
of a man is that, although he stands alone, he knows that God is with him, and that one man with God on his
side is forever an absolute majority upon any question. “But one man with thousands, tens, hundreds of thousands,
and millions of men who have God on his side becomes a million times stronger. Give me that, O God, and if
You do not give it me, take me to heaven, because I do not want to stay here and fool around like any miserable
Methodist parson.” (Laughter. Applause.) Having heard Dowie preach, I can testify that the above paragraphs
fairly represent the style of the man. Very evidently the “General Overseer” believes in Dowie, and this self
‑confidence, as I take it, is the main secret of his phenomenal success in making converts and in building a
city of several thousand people a few miles northward from Chicago, also a large sanitarium, publishing
house, and bank in the great “Windy City” itself.

And this same self‑confidence, I feel sure, accounts for most of the success of such theocrats as Mrs. Eddy,
Cyrus Teed, Brigham Young, and others I might name, of ancient as well as modern times. The great masses
of mankind have no confidence in themselves; no feeling of self‑reliance, and no desire, even, to be self‑owning,
self‑controlling. All their lives they have been told that they are “miserable worms of the dust,” sinners with no
power to redeem or save themselves. Hence they fall easy victims to the ambitious self‑seeker, the man of
strong, positive will—one with the electric temperament of body; one who by his egoistic, self‑assertive, self
‑reliant, self‑sufficient manner of speaking and acting, and by his electric emanations, readily becomes a good
healer of bodily infirmities. It does not need that a large number of patients should be healed, or even benefited.
A very few exceptional cases, like that of John Easton, are sufficient to establish the fame of the prophet and to
induce the credulous masses to accept him as their Moses, their Elijah, their “John the Precursor,” or even as
the reincarnation of the Nazarene himself. Most men and nearly all women are born worshipers—God‑worshipers,
authority‑worshipers, hero‑worshipers. They all, or nearly all, worship ideals of some sort; and if these ideals
are clothed in mortal flesh and made visible and tangible to the senses, so much the better. Most men and nearly
all women are also born worshipers of wealth, of money, and of the power, the splendor, the pageantry that
money enables its possessors to wield, to exhibit, to indulge themselves in. This is one of the chief means
relied on by the Roman Catholic Church to attract and to hold the ignorant and superstitious masses. Hence
the concentration of wealth in the hands of the bishops, the archbishops, and the pope, and hence the use
—the skillful use—that is made of wealth to dazzle the eyes and fire the imaginations of the masses aforesaid.
John Alexander Dowie evidently understands all this, and hence the “pomp and circumstance” that attend his
public ministrations—the long and costly robes worn by himself, the uniforms in which his choristers are clothed,
the decorations of his tabernacles—the precursors, doubtless, of more splendid temples of worship later on.

The Mormon hierarchy, the Protestant Christian hierarchies—in fact, all the leading hierarchies of ancient and
modern times—have well understood the power of concentrated wealth as a help to control the masses; and
therefore it is not at all strange that the paying of “tithes” is one of the first and chief conditions of membership
in all or nearly all religious organizations. Immediately after the report of the discourse from which I have made
selections appears the following paragraph in large type and double‑leaded: “Has God blessed you in tithing?
Have you realized a fulfillment of God’s promise to those who ‘bring the whole tithe to the storehouse’? If so,
let others know how true the promise is. Write your testimony and send it to Rev. William Hamner Piper,
Overseer‑at‑Large of the Christian Catholic Church in Zion, 1201 Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Illinois. Let
your testimonies be brief and straight to the point.” The intention of Dowie to found a hierarchy similar to
that of the Roman Catholic Church seems clearly indicated by the title he has chosen for his organization:
“The Christian Catholic Church in Zion.” Verily this man Dowie—the product of ages of conflict with poverty
and want upon the bleak and sterile hills of Scotland—is making his mark in this our land of vast resources
and boundless opportunities, not the least of which opportunity is that referred to by Phineas T. Barnum
when he said, “The Americans like to be humbugged.” Not that I think Dowie an impostor, a fraud, or even
consciously deceiving people in order to benefit them—as the wise physician is sometimes obliged to do. I
think it most probable that he is a combination of religious enthusiast, benevolent humanitarian, and shrewd
business man, with a keen eye for the interests of “No. 1.” And this estimate of John Alexander Dowie will
apply, as I think, with slight variations, to Cyrus Teed (“Koresh”), to Mrs. Eddy, to Mrs. Wilmans‑Post, to
“Prof.” Weltmer, to “Rev.” Shelton, editor of The Christian, and to hundreds of others more or less known
to fame as “healers” and teachers of the “New Thought,” etc. As I have often said before, I blame no one;
I judge no one; I impugn no man’s motives, no woman’s motives.

I do not say, and do not believe, that Dowie and the others named are doing no good, nor that they are doing
more harm than good. I honestly think they are doing much good by showing people that when sick they can
get well without the use of drugs, and that there is no need of surgery in most cases where the surgeon’s knife
is now used. If, in fine, with all the charlatanism, the lack of anatomical and hygienic knowledge that confessedly
attaches to the theory and practice of most, if not all, of the persons named—if with all these drawbacks they
succeed in breaking the monopoly of the healing art now claimed and directed for their own benefit by the “drug
doctors,” and especially if these “reformers” succeed in abolishing compulsory vaccination in the schools, prisons,
and public reformatories, and if they help to bring into disrepute the horrible practice known as vivisection—which
practice is mostly the work of the medical monopolists just referred to—then we may truly say, as I think, that
Dowieism, Eddyism, Teedism, Weltmerism, Sheltonism, etc., etc., are not unmixed evils.