Immortality Proved by the Testimony of Sense

LETTER I.. In Reply to a Friend, Who Had Expressed His Desire and That

In reply to a friend, who had expressed his desire and that of others, that the account of the Spectre might not be made public.

My Dear Sir:--In our last interview, you favored me with the suspense of your judgment with regard to the Spectre, which has produced so much altercation in this part of the land.

I am therefore encouraged to ask your further attention to this affair, contemptible as it must appear, if you believe but a part of the misrepresentation now propagated. These, with modern incredulity, now form the general opinion of the wise and unwise, the learned and unlearned, that this whole affair is mischief and artifice, practised by one or more of Mr. B’s family, and particularly by the young woman, whose marriage was responsive to the prediction and direction of the Spectre. Thus stands the vision of Hosea in the view of our Deists. They consider it a thousand times more probable that the good man was some how or other deceived by those licentious women, than that he ever received such direction from the invisible world. Now while my own opinion is entirely the reverse--while I view that family and their neighbors who vindicate them as unjustly censured; shall I appear the sang froid spectator? Perish rather my own reputation with theirs.

But this notwithstanding, dear sir, you will not fail to mention the ardent sensations of gratitude and esteem which I entertain for those pious and judicious persons, who have expressed their generous anxiety for my character and usefulness.

It is not so much the matter or style of the pious discourse of the Spectre which demands our attention, as the enquiry whether there was any Spectre or not. She taught the same truth which we find in our Bible. She proclaimed no new doctrine. Had she done this, it would have occasioned a great objection against her. She exhorted the young people to read the Bible as their sure guide to eternal life. And her requirements were defended by the Scriptures whenever the propriety of any of them was doubted, to shew that her directions agreed with the law and the testimony.

In the style of her discourse, there was nothing of elegance or sublimity, more or less than we observe among common people in that pious and familiar conversation in which passages of Scripture are frequently introduced.

This, they say, is a great objection: a person from the invisible state would never have conversed with the people in such an ordinary style. But had she excelled in the elegant or sublime, objection would not have been silent. It would have been said that she was not the person she professed to be: for the employment of that person had never been the study of Sheridan or Longinus: on earth she was below it, in heaven above it. The Spectre came not with the excellency of speech, which man teaches, nor with the sublimity of those prophecies which describe the rise and ruin of empires; for empires were not her subject; and there was perfect propriety in her using such language as would subserve two of her designs: which were to manifest who she was, and to render herself as familiar as possible to those common people with whom she conversed. Accordingly her mention of certain articles of property which she had left, was by no means an ultimate design, as she herself declared; but this, and her reasonable disposal of them, were more clearly to convince her family that she had been their daughter and sister. For the same reason the features of her face were observed to be like those of the person she professed to be, by some who knew her in her life time. And though her voice had no indication of breath and was inimitably distinct from any voice of the living, yet it had the same sound which she had uttered in her last hours, as they, who attended her in her last sickness have testified. Sometimes a part of the company could understand her words without the least difficulty; while others with advantages of hearing, every way equal, perceived only a sound, without the least articulation whatever. Thus the men who were with Paul at the time of his conversion, heard a voice, but saw no man, and they saw the light, but heard not the articulate voice of the speaker.

Such was the various experience of the people on these occasions. Some of them heard and understood plainly, but saw nothing: others heard a voice, but no speaking voice: others again saw a light, but no person: while they had no impediments natural or accidental; yet far the greater number heard the words distinctly, and clearly saw a personal form. And the very same persons, who could not see, nor hear intelligibly at one time, would at another time, and even at a greater distance see, hear and understand without the least difficulty: while others of the company, who had clearly seen and understood at the previous interview, could now only see a light and hear a sound.

It was to render herself familiar that she frequently introduced herself, as we do, by the token of knocking.

When Peter knocked at the house of Mary, the disciples thought it was his angel, that is to say, they thought that a Spirit might come to the house and knock. They more easily believed that a Spirit was at the door, than that Peter had escaped from prison. We should in this age more easily believe the contrary. But the disciples were no philosophers.

For the same reason she endeavored to dispel the fears of those who conversed with her. “Do not be afraid,” she would say, “I have not come to hurt you. You need not be afraid at all.” Utterly opposite, you observe, to the conduct of those who personate apparitions. They generally aim to keep their dupes in fear and at a convenient distance.

So the angel addressed the shepherds, “Fear not.” “I do not stand too near you, do I?” said a person unsuspected. “No,” was the reply, “stand as near as you please.”

Hence also the reason why she did not commonly begin to speak, till she was addressed. I say, commonly, for there were some exceptions. The voice of a Ghost responsive, is not so unexpected, and, of course, not so suddenly terrific as the same voice would be without previous address. This may serve to remove that objection of the Encyclopedia: “It is an odd circumstance, say they, that ghosts have no power to speak till they are addressed.” But this odd circumstance is not occasioned by their want of power; but by their tenderness for the persons who receive their messages. This was the very reason she once expressly gave for not speaking where she once appeared. Hence we may, if we choose, see one reason why she spoke so frequently in the cellar. It is easy to see, if we choose, that the idea of a Spectre coming into the room where the family commonly resided for labor, sleep, or other refreshment was distressing to them: for this was their refuge, their place of retreat. Accordingly when, upon a certain day, she appeared among them in one of the lower rooms, they all left the house. The Spectre, therefore, out of tenderness to them, commonly, though not always, conversed in the cellar, that they might seem to have a place of retreat. The next question is, why then did she not commonly speak in one of the chambers or in the open field? But the chambers were the apartments of repose, and the field was inconvenient by the weather. She did however, sometimes speak in the chambers, and in the lower rooms, and in other houses of the neighborhood, and several times in the open field.

A cellar, such as that was, is a place where deceivers, imitating her realities would find difficulty. A ventriloquist might indeed speak there. But how? Not so that a part of the company shall hear and understand distinctly, while the other part with advantages of hearing every way equal, and giving equal attention, shall not understand a single word. If a ventriloquist could perform this, we should have known it before this time.

No white garments can appear white in a dark cellar at midnight, and suppose any lucid substance could have been used, then, when it first appeared a mere shapeless mass, who formed it in a moment into personal shape, face and features? Who caused it to speak and desired to be handled? and when this desire was complied with, why did not the hand undeceive the eyes? Now admit the possibility of a magic lantern, where did it move, and where stood the upright plane for the representation, when by the order of the Spectre, the company of about twenty persons formed an Ellipsis within which she passed and re-passed from end to end several times. You must inform me too how some eyes saw the form so clearly, while others with advantages of sight every way equal, saw nothing.

Continue reading Immortality Proved by the Testimony of Sense free in the Wunder reader →