--Truth is tough.It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day, like a football, and it will be round and full at evening.Does not Mr.Bryant say, that Truth gets well if she is run over by a locomotive, while Error dies of lockjaw if she scratches her finger? [Would that this was so:--error, superstition, mysticism, authoritarianism, pseudo-science all have a tenacity that survives inexplicably.D.W.] I never heard that a mathematician was alarmed for the safety of a demonstrated proposition.I think, generally, that fear of open discussion implies feebleness of inward conviction, and great sensitiveness to the expression of individual opinion is a mark of weakness.
--I am not so much afraid for truth,--said the divinity-student,--as for the conceptions of truth in the minds of persons not accustomed to judge wisely the opinions uttered before them.
Would you, then, banish all allusions to matters of this nature from the society of people who come together habitually?
I would be very careful in introducing them,--said the divinity-student.
Yes, but friends of yours leave pamphlets in people's entries, to be picked up by nervous misses and hysteric housemaids, full of doctrines these people do not approve.Some of your friends stop little children in the street, and give them books, which their parents, who have had them baptized into the Christian fold and give them what they consider proper religious instruction, do not think fit for them.One would say it was fair enough to talk about matters thus forced upon people's attention.
The divinity-student could not deny that this was what might be called opening the subject to the discussion of intelligent people.
But,--he said,--the greatest objection is this, that persons who have not made a professional study of theology are not competent to speak on such subjects.Suppose a minister were to undertake to express opinions on medical subjects, for instance, would you not think he was going beyond his province?
I laughed,--for I remembered John Wesley's "sulphur and supplication," and so many other cases where ministers had meddled with medicine,--sometimes well and sometimes ill, but, as a general rule, with a tremendous lurch to quackery, owing to their very loose way of admitting evidence,--that I could not help being amused.
I beg your pardon,--I said,--I do not wish to be impolite, but I was thinking of their certificates to patent medicines.Let us look at this matter.
If a minister had attended lectures on the theory and practice of medicine, delivered by those who had studied it most deeply, for thirty or forty years, at the rate of from fifty to one hundred a year,--if he had been constantly reading and hearing read the most approved text-books on the subject,--if he had seen medicine actually practised according to different methods, daily, for the same length of time,--I should think, that if a person of average understanding, he was entitled to express an opinion on the subject of medicine, or else that his instructors were a set of ignorant and incompetent charlatans.
If, before a medical practitioner would allow me to enjoy the full privileges of the healing art, he expected me to affirm my belief in a considerable number of medical doctrines, drugs, and formulae, Ishould think that he thereby implied my right to discuss the same, and my ability to do so, if I knew how to express myself in English.
Suppose, for instance, the Medical Society should refuse to give us an opiate, or to set a broken limb, until we had signed our belief in a certain number of propositions,--of which we will say this is the first:
I.All men's teeth are naturally in a state of total decay or caries, and, therefore, no man can bite until every one of them is extracted and a new set is inserted according to the principles of dentistry adopted by this Society.
I, for one, should want to discuss that before signing my name to it, and I should say this:--Why, no, that is n't true.There are a good many bad teeth, we all know, but a great many more good ones.You must n't trust the dentists; they are all the time looking at the people who have bad teeth, and such as are suffering from toothache.
The idea that you must pull out every one of every nice young man and young woman's natural teeth! Poh, poh! Nobody believes that.This tooth must be straightened, that must be filled with gold, and this other perhaps extracted, but it must be a very rare case, if they are all so bad as to require extraction; and if they are, don't blame the poor soul for it! Don't tell us, as some old dentists used to, that everybody not only always has every tooth in his head good for nothing, but that he ought to have his head cut off as a punishment for that misfortune! No, I can't sign Number One.Give us Number Two.
II.We hold that no man can be well who does not agree with our views of the efficacy of calomel, and who does not take the doses of it prescribed in our tables, as there directed.
To which I demur, questioning why it should be so, and get for answer the two following:
III.Every man who does not take our prepared calomel, as prescribed by us in our Constitution and By-Laws, is and must be a mass of disease from head to foot; it being self-evident that he is simultaneously affected with Apoplexy, Arthritis, Ascites, Asphyxia, and Atrophy; with Borborygmus, Bronchitis, and Bulimia; with Cachexia, Carcinoma, and Cretinismus; and so on through the alphabet, to Xerophthahnia and Zona, with all possible and incompatible diseases which are necessary to make up a totally morbid state; and he will certainly die, if he does not take freely of our prepared calomel, to be obtained only of one of our authorized agents.
