THEOSOPHY.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 20087, 17 November 1930, Page 16

THEOSOPHY.

RELATION TO CHRISTIANITY SERMON BY ARCHDEACON TAYLOR. That Theosophy and its teaching was totally non-Christian —in -fact, -antiChristian —and that those who believe in Christianity cannot subscribe to it and remain true to their faith, was the statement of the \en. Archdeacon.! 1 . X. Taylor in his sermon at St. Luke's Anglican Church last evening. Archdeacon Taylor took as his text the Bth and 9tb verses of the Epistle to the Colossians: "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of men, and not after Christ. For in Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." "The fake philosophies that St. Paul criticised in those verses," said Archdeacon Taylor, "were a mixture of Judaism, Greek philosophy, aa»d- Oriental mysticism, and they ranged from eccentric intellectualism to magic. It was this type of gnosticism that wanted to include Christianity. It was not exclusive, and said that it would embrace Christianity, as it had done the other-beliefs. Christians, how- 1 ever,- refused" to be niisled, -"and.dared to say that Christianity was exclusive. It could not put its faith on a level with Plato, Moses, and the others. That movement then was not at all unlike that which we have today in our midst. It disappeared from view for a long period,, .Jill old horesies it reappeared. It is, an . ancient Question and one which is the basis of Christian Science, Theosophy, and new- thought. They are doing work against Christianity, and inviting it at the same time to join , in.: .1 Theosophy is first and; foremaat an opposition to Jesus Christ. Gnostics say that the spirit left Jesus at Getbsemane, and the crucified was Jesus the man only. The same applies to theosophists to-day. They say it was mere-appear-; ance. If that is -so there is 110- hope for peop.le or for Christianity. Claims of Knowledge.' " The members of gnostic organisa'tions say that we say; 'we believe,' while tiiey say 'wo inow!' Their knowledge, however, as they state, i 3 only available to a few belonging to the inner circle. It is not at the disposal of the world. Theosophy claims a knowledge that iB superior. It is not a knowledge gained at schools or -cblI leges or in life, but comes to a select ! few from great masters. It is said 'to come from Tibet. Well, if they wanted to choose a country they could, npt have chosen a better one, as no- one is I allowed to enter Tibet. They say that they have the knowledge" that- "Jesus ! Christ lived 76 "years after. the time the Christians believe He did. Yet wo -have all the historical verification' of our belief. But their superior and select' knowledge from r ar source " unknown is better appraised of the truth! "That is the type of thing we have to deal with. If you argue with an ordinary --nan you can get down to fact. That does not apply to the Theosophist. They say that there is no accessible authority to verify their statements. It is from Tibet. ; Not Compatible with Christianity. : "It is not the habit of our Church to be controversial —we want to be positive, not we are not afraid of our true believers-fceing led away; but in the circumstances. -this criticism is thrust upon us. Theosophy claims to bo compatible with Christianity. If it was entirely different; we could not denounce it, as each and every one is entitled-to a belief, and we could not complain of a man taking a public hall and lecturing on that belief, blit when it is said that a Christian can support such a movement as that of the Theosophists and still remain loyal to the Church as we know it, the position is utterly impossible. It is a belief which 'is entirely non-Christian. Further, it is anti-Christian. The Moral. "The fundasiental belief of the Christian Church Is that Jesus was the Son of God. The Theosophists do not believe that. If one can be persuaded to say so, it is only in terms which appear to include that belief —a mere jugglery of words. The message we must draw from all this is that we must understand our own religion better, and there is not one of these new cults which .has not risen to rebuke us. We are apt to scorn a little real devotion. . .We have neglected to some extent the ceremonial. These sects are the nemesis of that neglect. We must develop our religion and refuse to join or subscribe with any belief that poses under ■' a guise of Christianity." -