In existographies, Charles Bradlaugh (1833-1891) (FA:107) was an English political and atheism activist noted for []
Overview
As a youth, was kicked out of his family for questioning things in Sunday school, such as discrepancies between the 39 articles of the Anglican Church and the Bible; at 17, gave his first public lecture on atheism and published A Few Words on the Christian Creed (1850), Who Was Jesus Christ, and What Did He Teach (1860), and A Plea for Atheism (1864). Bradlaugh wrote that a large part of his atheism was based on having glimpsed Benedict Spinoza’s Ethics, in secondary sources, and found that he was in agreement with the view that the universe is one, and has no other mystical part. [1]
In his lectures, Bradlaugh attracted audiences members that had been followers of Robert Owen, but who were being retooled by George Holyoake as secular clubs; in 1858, Bradlaugh replaced Holyoake as president of the London Secular Club. [1]
In 1868, Bradlaugh won some sort of law that granted the right of atheists to "affirm" in court cases, rather than to swear.
In 1880, Bradlaugh gained notoriety, when, after being elected to a seat in Parliament, he was kicked out for refusing to take the Oath of Allegiance, which invoked god: [2]
“I, (Insert full name), do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Victoria, her heirs and successors, according to law. So help me god.”
Legal battle ensued over the next five years, culminating in the Oaths Act of 1888. (Ѻ)
Besant
In the early 1870s, Bradlaugh met Annie Besant (1847-1933) (Ѻ), noted for the following lecture views:
“An atheist is one of the grandest titles. It is the order of merit of the world heroes: Copernicus, Spinoza, Voltaire, Paine.”
— Annie Besant (1876), “The Gospel of Atheism”
In 1883, Bradlaugh and Besant co-authored The Freethinker’s Textbook, which seems to be aimed at attacking Christianity as a barrier to social progress. [3]
Doubts in Dialogue
In 1884, Bradlaugh, in his “Christian Priest and Unbeliever”, gave the following humorous take between a priest and an unbeliever: [2]
Christian Priest: At least, belief is the safe side. When you die, if your unbelief be right, there is an end of you and of all your heresy ; and if it is wrong, there is eternal torment as your sad lot (see: Pascal’s wager).
Unbeliever: Hardly so. If I am right, my unbelief will live after me, in its encouragement to others to honest protest against the superstitions which hinder progress.
Christian Priest: But you, at any rate, may be wrong, and belief is, therefore, safest for you.
Unbeliever: Which belief? Must I accept alike all creeds?
Christian Priest: No ; that is not possible. You are asked to accept the true Christian faith.
Unbeliever: Why not the true Jewish faith?
Christian Priest: A new dispensation was given through Jesus.
Unbeliever: Why not the true Mahommedan faith?
Christian Priest: Muhammad was an impostor (see: three impostors).
Unbeliever: About two hundred millions of human beings now believe that he was the prophet of god, and that the Koran is a divine revelation.
Christian Priest: He was a false prophet. His pretence that the Koran was revelation was an imposture.
Unbeliever: Then it would not be safe for me to believe in Mahommed?
Christian Priest: Certainly not ; you must believe in Christ and in the Gospels.
Unbeliever: Would it not be enough to believe in Buddha, and the blessing of eternal repose in Nirvana?
Christian Priest: Buddhism is the equivalent of atheism. Nirvana is another word for annihilation.
Unbeliever: But some four hundred millions are Buddhists, and the character of Buddha is placed very high.
Christian Priest: The true faith is that in Jesus, and in him crucified.
Unbeliever: Do you mean the man Jesus in whom the Unitarians believe?
Christian Priest: Unitarians! Do you not know that there is a special canon of the law-established Church against ‘the damnable and cursed heresie of Socinianism’? It is belief in Jesus as god, the second person in the Holy Trinity.
Unbeliever: In the Trinity as painted at Holyrood? or in the new Cathedral at Moscow?
(add)
Hypatia Bonner
Bradlaugh, of note, named his daughter Hypatia Bradlaugh Bonner (1858-1935) (Ѻ) after Greek philosopher Hypatia. In 1891, the daughter Hypatia penned Did Charles Bradlaugh Die an Atheist? to rebut rumors that he had a deathbed conversion back to theism. She later edited some of Thomas Paine's works and was friends with Ernestine Rose. [1] In her last year, one of her last statements was the following:
“Now, in my seventy-eighth year, being of sane mind, I declare without reserve or hesitation that I have no belief, and never had any belief, in any of the religions which obsess and oppress the minds of millions or more or less unthinking people throughout the world. Away with these gods and godlings; they are the worse than useless. I take my stand by truth.”
— Hypatia Bonner (1935) statement (Ѻ)(Ѻ)(Ѻ) to rebut any rumors
(add)
References
1. Hecht, Jennifer M. (2003). Doubt: A History: The Great Doubters and Their Legacy of Innovation from Socrates and Jesus to Thomas (pg. 413-17). HarperOne.
2. (a) Bradlaugh, Charles. (1884). “Christian Priest and Unbeliever”, National Reformer, Aug 31; in: Doubts in Dialogue; Originally appeared (Ѻ) in the National Reformer, Aug 31, 1884-Jan 11, 1891; Watts, 1909.
(b) Hecht, Jennifer M. (2003). Doubt: A History: The Great Doubters and Their Legacy of Innovation from Socrates and Jesus to Thomas (pg. 414). HarperOne.
3. (a) Bradlaugh, Charles and Besant, Annie. (1883). The Freethinker’s Textbook. Freethought Publishing Co.
(b) Hecht, Jennifer M. (2003). Doubt: A History: The Great Doubters and Their Legacy of Innovation from Socrates and Jesus to Thomas (pg. 414). HarperOne.
Further reading
● Palmer, Michael. (2013). Atheism for Beginners: a Coursebook for Schools and Colleges (Bradlaugh, pgs. 202-03). Lutterworth Press.
External links
● Charles Bradlaugh – Wikipedia.
