CHAPTER XXIII.

WOMAN AND THEOLOGY.

Returning from Europe in the autumn of 1883, after visiting a large

circle of relatives and friends, I spent six weeks with my cousin,

Elizabeth Smith Miller, at her home at Geneva, on Seneca Lake.

Through Miss Frances Lord, a woman of rare culture and research, my

daughter and I had become interested in the school of theosophy, and

read "Isis Unveiled," by Madame Blavatsky, Sinnett's works on the

"Occult World," and "The Perfect Way," by Anna Kingsford. Full of these

ideas, I soon interested my cousins in the subject, and we resolved to

explore, as far as possible, some of these Eastern mysteries, of which

we had heard so much. We looked in all directions to find some pilot to

start us on the right course. We heard that Gerald Massey was in New

York city, lecturing on "The Devil," "Ghosts," and "Evil Spirits"

generally, so we invited him to visit us and give a course of lectures

in Geneva. But, unfortunately, he was ill, and could not open new fields

of thought to us at that time, though we were very desirous to get a

glimpse into the unknown world, and hold converse with the immortals. As

I soon left Geneva with my daughter, Mrs. Stanton Lawrence, our occult

studies were, for a time, abandoned.

My daughter and I often talked of writing a story, she describing the

characters and their environments and I attending to the philosophy and

soliloquies. As I had no special duties in prospect, we decided that

this was the time to make our experiment. Accordingly we hastened to the

family homestead at Johnstown, New York, where we could be entirely

alone. Friends on all sides wondered what had brought us there in the

depth of the winter. But we kept our secret, and set ourselves to work

with diligence, and after three months our story was finished to our

entire satisfaction. We felt sure that everyone who read it would be

deeply interested and that we should readily find a publisher. We

thought of "Our Romance" the first thing in the morning and talked of it

the last thing at night. But alas! friendly critics who read our story

pointed out its defects, and in due time we reached their conclusions,

and the unpublished manuscript now rests in a pigeonhole of my desk. We

had not many days to mourn our disappointment, as Madge was summoned to

her Western home, and Miss Anthony arrived armed and equipped with

bushels of documents for vol. III. of "The History of Woman Suffrage."

The summer and autumn of 1884 Miss Anthony and I passed at Johnstown,

working diligently on the History, indulging only in an occasional

drive, a stroll round the town in the evening, or a ride in the open

street cars.

Mrs. Devereux Blake was holding a series of conventions, at this time,

through the State of New York, and we urged her to expend some of her

missionary efforts in my native town, which she did with good results.

As the school election was near at hand Miss Anthony and I had several

preliminary meetings to arouse the women to their duty as voters, and to

the necessity of nominating some woman for trustee. When the day for

the election arrived the large upper room of the Academy was filled with

ladies and gentlemen. Some timid souls who should have been there stayed

at home, fearing there would be a row, but everything was conducted with

decency and in order. The chairman, Mr. Rosa, welcomed the ladies to

their new duties in a very complimentary manner. Donald McMartin stated

the law as to what persons were eligible to vote in school elections.

Mrs. Horace Smith filled the office of teller on the occasion with

promptness and dignity, and Mrs. Elizabeth Wallace Yost was elected

trustee by a majority of seven. It is strange that intelligent women,

who are supposed to feel some interest in the question of education,

should be so indifferent to the power they possess to make our schools

all that they should be.

This was the year of the presidential campaign. The Republicans and

Democrats had each held their nominating conventions, and all classes

participated in the general excitement. There being great

dissatisfaction in the Republican ranks, we issued a manifesto: "Stand

by the Republican Party," not that we loved Blaine more, but Cleveland

less. The latter was elected, therefore it was evident that our efforts

did not have much influence in turning the tide of national politics,

though the Republican papers gave a broad circulation to our appeal.

Dowden's description of the poet Shelley's efforts in scattering one of

his suppressed pamphlets, reminded me of ours. He purchased bushels of

empty bottles, in which he placed his pamphlets; having corked them up

tight, he threw the bottles into the sea at various fashionable watering

places, hoping they would wash ashore. Walking the streets of London in

the evening he would slip his pamphlets into the hoods of old ladies'

cloaks, throw them in shop doors, and leave them in cabs and omnibuses.

We scattered ours in the cars, inclosed them in every letter we wrote or

newspaper we sent through the country.

The night before election Mr. Stanton and Professor Horace Smith spoke

in the Johnstown courthouse, and took rather pessimistic views of the

future of the Republic should James G. Blaine be defeated. Cleveland was

elected, and we still live as a nation, and are able to digest the

thousands of foreign immigrants daily landing at our shores. The night

of the election a large party of us sat up until two o'clock to hear the

news. Mr. Stanton had long been one of the editorial writers on the New

York Sun, and they sent him telegrams from that office until a late

hour. However, the election was so close that we were kept in suspense

several days, before it was definitely decided.

Miss Anthony left in December, 1884, for Washington, and I went to work

on an article for the North American Review, entitled, "What has

Christianity done for Women?" I took the ground that woman was not

indebted to any form of religion for the liberty she now enjoys, but

that, on the contrary, the religious element in her nature had always

been perverted for her complete subjection. Bishop Spaulding, in the

same issue of the Review, took the opposite ground, but I did not feel

that he answered my points.

In January, 1885, my niece Mrs. Baldwin and I went to Washington to

attend the Annual Convention of the National Woman Suffrage Association.

It was held in the Unitarian church on the 20th, 21st, and 22d days of

that month, and went off with great success, as did the usual reception

given by Mrs. Spofford at the Riggs House. This dear friend, one of our

most ardent coadjutors, always made the annual convention a time for

many social enjoyments. The main feature in this convention was the

attempt to pass the following resolutions:

"Whereas, The dogmas incorporated in religious creeds derived from

Judaism, teaching that woman was an after-thought in the creation,

her sex a misfortune, marriage a condition of subordination, and

maternity a curse, are contrary to the law of God (as revealed in

nature), and to the precepts of Christ, and,

"Whereas, These dogmas are an insidious poison, sapping the

vitality of our civilization, blighting woman, and, through her,

paralyzing humanity; therefore be it

"_Resolved_, That we call on the Christian ministry, as leaders of

thought, to teach and enforce the fundamental idea of creation,

that man was made in the image of God, male and female, and given

equal rights over the earth, but none over each other. And,

furthermore, we ask their recognition of the scriptural declaration

that, in the Christian religion, there is neither male nor female,

bond nor free, but all are one in Christ Jesus."

As chairman of the committee I presented a series of resolutions,

impeaching the Christian theology--as well as all other forms of

religion, for their degrading teachings in regard to woman--which the

majority of the committee thought too strong and pointed, and, after

much deliberation, they substituted the above, handing over to the Jews

what I had laid at the door of the Christians. They thought they had so

sugar-coated my ideas that the resolutions would pass without

discussion. But some Jews in the convention promptly repudiated this

impression of their faith and precipitated the very discussion I

desired, but which our more politic friends would fain have avoided.

From the time of the decade meeting in Rochester, in 1878, Matilda

Joslyn Gage, Edward M. Davis, and I had sedulously labored to rouse

women to a realization of their degraded position in the Church, and

presented resolutions at every annual convention for that purpose. But

they were either suppressed or so amended as to be meaningless. The

resolutions of the annual convention of 1885, tame as they are, got into

print and roused the ire of the clergy, and upon the following Sunday,

Dr. Patton of Howard University preached a sermon on "Woman and

Skepticism," in which he unequivocally took the ground that freedom for

woman led to skepticism and immorality. He illustrated his position by

pointing to Hypatia, Mary Wollstonecraft, Frances Wright, George Eliot,

Harriet Martineau, Mme. Roland, Frances Power Cobbe, and Victoria

Woodhull. He made a grave mistake in the last names mentioned, as Mrs.

Woodhull was a devout believer in the Christian religion, and surely

anyone conversant with Miss Cobbe's writings would never accuse her of

skepticism. His sermon was received with intense indignation, even by

the women of his own congregation. When he found what a whirlwind he had

started, he tried to shift his position and explain away much that he

had said. We asked him to let us have the sermon for publication, that

we might not do him injustice. But as he contradicted himself flatly in

trying to restate his discourse, and refused to let us see his sermon,

those who heard him were disgusted with his sophistry and

tergiversation.

However, our labors in this direction are having an effect. Women are

now making their attacks on the Church all along the line. They are

demanding their right to be ordained as ministers, elders, deacons, and

to be received as delegates in all the ecclesiastical convocations. At

last they ask of the Church just what they have asked of the State for

the last half century--perfect equality--and the clergy, as a body, are

quite as hostile to their demands as the statesmen.

On my way back to Johnstown I spent ten days at Troy, where I preached

in the Unitarian church on Sunday evening. During this visit we had two

hearings in the Capitol at Albany--one in the Senate Chamber and one in

the Assembly, before the Committee on Grievances. On both occasions Mrs.

Mary Seymour Howell, Mrs. Devereux Blake, Mrs. Caroline Gilkey Rogers,

and I addressed the Committee. Being open to the public, the chamber was

crowded. It was nearly forty years since I had made my first appeal in

the old Capitol at Albany. My reflections were sad and discouraging, as

I sat there and listened to the speakers and remembered how long we had

made our appeals at that bar, from year to year, in vain. The members of

the committee presented the same calm aspect as their predecessors, as

if to say, "Be patient, dear sisters, eternity is before us; this is

simply a question of time. What may not come in your day, future

generations will surely possess." It is always pleasant to know that

our descendants are to enjoy life, liberty, and happiness; but, when one

is gasping for one breath of freedom, this reflection is not satisfying.

Returning to my native hills, I found the Lenten season had fairly set

in, which I always dreaded on account of the solemn, tolling bell, the

Episcopal church being just opposite our residence. On Sunday we had the

bells of six churches all going at the same time. It is strange how long

customs continue after the original object has ceased to exist. At an

early day, when the country was sparsely settled and the people lived at

great distances, bells were useful to call them together when there was

to be a church service. But now, when the churches are always open on

Sunday, and every congregation knows the hour of services and all have

clocks, bells are not only useless, but they are a terrible nuisance to

invalids and nervous people. If I am ever so fortunate as to be elected

a member of a town council, my first efforts will be toward the

suppression of bells.

To encourage one of my sex in the trying profession of book agent, I

purchased, about this time, Dr. Lord's "Beacon Lights of History," and

read the last volume devoted to women, Pagan and Christian, saints and

sinners. It is very amusing to see the author's intellectual wriggling

and twisting to show that no one can be good or happy without believing

in the Christian religion. In describing great women who are not

Christians, he attributes all their follies and miseries to that fact.

In describing Pagan women, possessed of great virtues, he attributes all

their virtues to Nature's gifts, which enable them to rise superior to

superstitions. After dwelling on the dreary existence of those not of

Christian faith, he forthwith pictures his St. Teresa going through

twenty years of doubts and fears about the salvation of her soul. The

happiest people I have known have been those who gave themselves no

concern about their own souls, but did their uttermost to mitigate the

miseries of others.

In May, 1885, we left Johnstown and took possession of our house at

Tenafly, New Jersey. It seemed very pleasant, after wandering in the Old

World and the New, to be in my own home once more, surrounded by the

grand trees I so dearly loved; to see the gorgeous sunsets, the

twinkling fireflies; to hear the whippoorwills call their familiar note,

while the June bugs and the mosquitoes buzz outside the nets through

which they cannot enter. Many people complain of the mosquito in New

Jersey, when he can so easily be shut out of the family circle by nets

over all the doors and windows. I had a long piazza, encased in netting,

where paterfamilias, with his pipe, could muse and gaze at the stars

unmolested.

June brought Miss Anthony and a box of fresh documents for another

season of work on vol. III. of our History. We had a flying visit from

Miss Eddy of Providence, daughter of Mrs. Eddy who gave fifty thousand

dollars to the woman suffrage movement, and a granddaughter of Francis

Jackson of Boston, who also left a generous bequest to our reform. We

found Miss Eddy a charming young woman with artistic tastes. She showed

us several pen sketches she had made of some of our reformers, that were

admirable likenesses.

Mr. Stanton's "Random Recollections" were published at this time and

were well received. A dinner was given him, on his eightieth birthday

(June 27, 1885), by the Press Club of New York city, with speeches and

toasts by his lifelong friends. As no ladies were invited I can only

judge from the reports in the daily papers, and what I could glean from

the honored guest himself, that it was a very interesting occasion.

Sitting in the summerhouse, one day, I witnessed a most amusing scene.

Two of the boys, in search of employment, broke up a hornets' nest.

Bruno, our large Saint Bernard dog, seeing them jumping about, thought

he would join in the fun. The boys tried to drive him away, knowing that

the hornets would get in his long hair, but Bruno's curiosity outran his

caution and he plunged into the midst of the swarm and was soon

completely covered. The buzzing and stinging soon sent the poor dog

howling on the run. He rushed as usual, in his distress, to Amelia in

the kitchen, where she and the girls were making preserves and ironing.

When they saw the hornets, they dropped irons, spoons, jars, everything,

and rushed out of doors screaming. I appreciated the danger in time to

get safely into the house before Bruno came to me for aid and comfort.

At last they played the hose on him until he found some relief; the

maidens, armed with towels, thrashed right and left, and the boys, with

evergreen branches, fought bravely. I had often heard of "stirring up a

hornets' nest," but I had never before seen a practical demonstration of

its danger. For days after, if Bruno heard anything buzz, he would rush

for the house at the top of his speed. But in spite of these occasional

lively episodes, vol. III. went steadily on.

My suffrage sons and daughters through all the Northern and Western

States decided to celebrate, on the 12th of November, 1885, my

seventieth birthday, by holding meetings or sending me gifts and

congratulations. This honor was suggested by Mrs. Elizabeth Boynton

Harbert in _The New Era_, a paper she was editing at that time. The

suggestion met with a ready response. I was invited to deliver an essay

on "The Pleasures of Age," before the suffrage association in New York

city. It took me a week to think them up, but with the inspiration of

Longfellow's "Morituri Salutamus," I was almost converted to the idea

that "we old folks" had the best of it.

The day was ushered in with telegrams, letters, and express packages,

which continued to arrive during the week. From England, France, and

Germany came cablegrams, presents, and letters of congratulation, and

from all quarters came books, pictures, silver, bronzes, California

blankets, and baskets of fruits and flowers. The eulogies in prose and

verse were so hearty and numerous that the ridicule and criticism of

forty years were buried so deep that I shall remember them no more.

There is no class who enjoy the praise of their fellow-men like those

who have had only blame most of their lives. The evening of the 12th we

had a delightful reunion at the home of Dr. Clemence Lozier, where I

gave my essay, after which Mrs. Lozier, Mrs. Blake, Miss Anthony, "Jenny

June," and some of the younger converts to our platform, all made short

speeches of praise and congratulation, which were followed by music,

recitations, and refreshments.

All during the autumn Miss Anthony and I looked forward to the spring,

when we hoped to have completed the third and last volume of our

History, and thus end the labors of ten years. We had neither time nor

eyesight to read aught but the imperative documents for the History. I

was hungering for some other mental pabulum.

In January, 1886, I was invited to dine with Laura Curtis Bullard, to

meet Mme. Durand (Henri Gréville), the novelist. She seemed a politic

rather than an earnest woman of principle. As it was often very

inconvenient for me to entertain distinguished visitors, who desired to

meet me in my country home during the winter, Mrs. Bullard generously

offered always to invite them to her home. She and her good mother have

done their part in the reform movements in New York by their generous

hospitalities.

Reading the debates in Congress, at that time, on a proposed

appropriation for a monument to General Grant, I was glad to see that

Senator Plumb of Kansas was brave enough to express his opinion against

it. I fully agree with him. So long as multitudes of our people who are

doing the work of the world live in garrets and cellars, in ignorance,

poverty, and vice, it is the duty of Congress to apply the surplus in

the national treasury to objects which will feed, clothe, shelter, and

educate these wards of the State. If we must keep on continually

building monuments to great men, they should be handsome blocks of

comfortable homes for the poor, such as Peabody built in London. Senator

Hoar of Massachusetts favored the Grant monument, partly to cultivate

the artistic tastes of our people. We might as well cultivate our tastes

on useful dwellings as on useless monuments. Surely sanitary homes and

schoolhouses for the living would be more appropriate monuments to wise

statesmen than the purest Parian shafts among the sepulchers of the

dead.

The strikes and mobs and settled discontent of the masses warn us that,

although we forget and neglect their interests and our duties, we do it

at the peril of all. English statesmen are at their wits' end to-day

with their tangled social and industrial problems, threatening the

throne of a long line of kings. The impending danger cannot be averted

by any surface measures; there must be a radical change in the relations

of capital and labor.

In April rumors of a domestic invasion, wafted on every Atlantic breeze,

warned us that our children were coming from England and France--a party

of six. Fortunately, the last line of the History was written, so Miss

Anthony, with vol. III. and bushels of manuscripts, fled to the peaceful

home of her sister Mary at Rochester. The expected party sailed from

Liverpool the 26th of May, on the _America_ After being out three days

the piston rod broke and they were obliged to return. My son-in-law,

W.H. Blatch, was so seasick and disgusted that he remained in England,

and took a fresh start two months later, and had a swift passage without

any accidents. The rest were transferred to the _Germanic_, and reached

New York the 12th of June. Different divisions of the party were

arriving until midnight. Five people and twenty pieces of baggage! The

confusion of such an invasion quite upset the even tenor of our days,

and it took some time for people and trunks to find their respective

niches. However crowded elsewhere, there was plenty of room in our

hearts, and we were unspeakably happy to have our flock all around us

once more.

I had long heard so many conflicting opinions about the Bible--some

saying it taught woman's emancipation and some her subjection--that,

during this visit of my children, the thought came to me that it Would

be well to collect every biblical reference to women in one small

compact volume, and see on which side the balance of influence really

was. To this end I proposed to organize a committee of competent women,

with some Latin, Greek, and Hebrew scholars in England and the United

States, for a thorough revision of the Old and New Testaments, and to

ascertain what the status of woman really was under the Jewish and

Christian religion. As the Church has thus far interpreted the Bible as

teaching woman's subjection, and none of the revisions by learned

ecclesiastics have thrown any new light on the question, it seemed to me

pre-eminently proper and timely for women themselves to review the book.

As they are now studying theology in many institutions of learning,

asking to be ordained as preachers, elders, deacons, and to be admitted,

as delegates, to Synods and General Assemblies, and are refused on Bible

grounds, it seemed to me high time for women to consider those

scriptural arguments and authorities.

A happy coincidence enabled me at last to begin this work. While my

daughter, Mrs. Stanton Blatch, was with me, our friend Miss Frances

Lord, on our earnest invitation, came to America to visit us. She landed

in New York the 4th of August, 1886. As it was Sunday she could not

telegraph, hence there was no one to meet her, and, as we all sat

chatting on the front piazza, suddenly, to our surprise and delight, she

drove up. After a few days' rest and general talk of passing events, I

laid the subject so near my heart before her and my daughter. They

responded promptly and heartily, and we immediately set to work. I wrote

to every woman who I thought might join such a committee, and Miss Lord

ran through the Bible in a few days, marking each chapter that in any

way referred to women. We found that the work would not be so great as

we imagined, as all the facts and teachings in regard to women occupied

less than one-tenth of the whole Scriptures. We purchased some cheap

Bibles, cut out the texts, pasted them at the head of the page, and,

underneath, wrote our commentaries as clearly and concisely as possible.

We did not intend to have sermons or essays, but brief comments, to keep

"The Woman's Bible" as small as possible.

Miss Lord and I worked several weeks together, and Mrs. Blatch and I,

during the winter of 1887, wrote all our commentaries on the Pentateuch.

But we could not succeed in forming the committee, nor, after writing

innumerable letters, make the women understand what we wanted to do. I

still have the commentaries of the few who responded, and the letters of

those who declined--a most varied and amusing bundle of manuscripts in

themselves. Some said the Bible had no special authority with them;

that, like the American Constitution, it could be interpreted to mean

anything--slavery, when we protected that "Institution," and freedom,

when it existed no longer. Others said that woman's sphere was clearly

marked out in the Scriptures, and all attempt at emancipation was flying

in the face of Providence. Others said they considered all the revisions

made by men thus far, had been so many acts of sacrilege, and they did

hope women would not add their influence, to weaken the faith of the

people in the divine origin of the Holy Book, for, if men and women

could change it in one particular, they could in all. On the whole the

correspondence was discouraging.

Later Miss Lord became deeply interested in psychical researches, and I

could get no more work out of her. And as soon as we had finished the

Pentateuch, Mrs. Blatch declared she would go no farther; that it was

the driest history she had ever read, and most derogatory to women. My

beloved coadjutor, Susan B. Anthony, said that she thought it a work of

supererogation; that when our political equality was recognized and we

became full-fledged American citizens, the Church would make haste to

bring her Bibles and prayer books, creeds and discipline up to the same

high-water mark of liberty.

Helen Gardener said: "I consider this a most important proposal, and if

you and I can ever stay on the same side of the Atlantic long enough, we

will join hands and do the work. In fact, I have begun already with

Paul's Epistles, and am fascinated with the work. The untenable and

unscientific positions he takes in regard to women are very amusing.

Although the first chapter of Genesis teaches the simultaneous creation

of man and woman, Paul bases woman's subjection on the priority of man,

and because woman was of the man. As the historical fact is that, as far

back as history dates, the man has been of the woman, should he

therefore be forever in bondage to her? Logically, according to Paul, he

should."

I consulted several friends, such as Dr. William F. Channing, Mr. and

Mrs. Moncure D. Conway, Gertrude Garrison, Frederick Cabot, and Edward

M. Davis, as to the advisability of the work, and they all agreed that

such a volume, showing woman's position under the Jewish and Christian

religions, would be valuable, but none of them had time to assist in the

project. Though, owing to all these discouragements, I discontinued my

work, I never gave up the hope of renewing it some time, when other of

my coadjutors should awake to its importance and offer their services.

On October 27, 1886, with my daughter, nurse, and grandchild, I again

sailed for England. Going out of the harbor in the clear early morning,

we had a fine view of Bartholdi's statue of Liberty Enlightening the

World. We had a warm, gentle rain and a smooth sea most of the way, and,

as we had a stateroom on deck, we could have the portholes open, and

thus get all the air we desired. With novels and letters, chess and

whist the time passed pleasantly, and, on the ninth day, we landed in

Liverpool.