The true Adept and Christian endeavors to enlighten, moralize, and civilize mankind; but for one whom he is able to enlighten, there are millions who die every year without the light having reached them. What is to be the fate of these milions? Are they to be treated as reprobates? and, if they are not to be so treated, how have they deserved to be placed in the category with those who have become enlightened and moralized?

What is to be the fate of children who die before they have been able to do good or evil? If they are to be received among the supremely happy, why should this favor be granted to them without their having done anything to deserve it? And in virtue of what privilege are they exempted from undegoing the tribulations of the earthly life?

Which of the doctrines hitherto propounded can solve these problems? But, if we admit the fact of our consecutive existences, all these problems are solved in conformity with the divine justice. What we are not able to do in this existence we do in another. None are exempted from the action of the law of progress; everyone is rewarded progressively, according to his deserts, but no one is excluded from the eventual attainment of the highest felicity, no matter what may be the obstacles he has to encounter on the road.

The questions growing out of the subject we are considering might be multiplied indefinitely, for the psychological and moral problems which can only find their solution in the plurality of existence are innumerable. In the present considerations I have restricted my inquiry to those which are most general in their nature. But it may still be urged by some objectors, "whatever may be the arguments in its favor, the doctrine of reincarnation is not admitted by the church; its acceptance would therefore be the overthrow of religion."

It is not my intention to treat the question, in this place, under the special aspect suggested by the foregoing objection; it is sufficient for the present purpose to have shown the eminently moral and rational character of the doctrine we are considering. But it may be confidently asserted, that a doctrine which is both moral and rational cannot be antagonistic to a religion which proclaims the Divine Being to be the most perfect goodness and the highest reason. What; may we ask in our turn, would have become of the church, if, in opposition to the convictions of mankind and the testimony of science, it had persisted in rejecting overwhelming evidence, and had cast out from its bosom all who did not believe in the movement of the Sun or in the six days of creation? What would be the credit or authority possessed among enlightened nations by a religious system that should inculcate manifest errors as articles of belief? Whenever any matter of evidence has been established, the Church has wisely sided with the evidence.

If it be proved that the facts of human life are irreconcilable, on any other supposition, with a belief in the justice of God - if various points of the Christian dogma can only be explained with the aid of this doctrine, the Church will be compelled to admit its truth, and to acknowledge that apparent antagonism between them is only apparent. Religion has no more to fear from the acceptance of this doctrine than from the discovery of the motion of the earth and of the periods of geological formation, which, at first sight, appears to contradict the statement of the Bible. Moreover, the principle of reincarnation is implied in many passages of Holy Writ, and is explicitly formulated in the Gospel.

When they came down from the mountain (after the transfiguration), Jesus gave this commandment, and said to them - "Speak to no one of what you have just seen, until the Son of Man shall have been resuscitated from among the dead."

His disciples thereupon began to question Him, and inquired, "Why, then, do the Scribes say that Elias must first come?" But Jesus replied to them, "It is true that Elias must come, and that he will reestablish all things. But I declare to you that Elias has already come, and they did not know him, but have made him suffer as they listed. It is thus that they will put to death the Son of Man." Then His disciples understood that He spoke to them of John the Baptist. (St. Matthew, chap. XVII.)

Since John the Baptist is declared by Christ to have been Elias, it follows that the spirit or soul of Elias must have been reincarnated in the body of John the Baptist.

But whatever may be your opinion in regard to reincarnation, whether you accept it or whether you reject it, it is certain that you shall have to undergo it, if it really exists, notwithstanding any belief of yours to the contrary. The point which I here desire to establish is this, viz, that the teaching of the spirits who proclaim it is eminently Christian, that it is founded on the doctrines of the immortality of the soul, of future rewards and punishments, of the justice of God, of human free-will, and the moral code of Christ; and that, therefore, it cannot be anti-religious.

I have written this knowledge, as I remarked above, without reference to statements made by spirits; such statements being, for many minds, without authority. If I, and so many others, have adopted the hypothesis of the plurality of existence, I have done so not merely because it has been proclaimed by spirits, but because it has been revealed to me to be eminently true, and because it solves problems that are insoluble by the opposite hypothesis. Had it been suggested to me by a mere mortal, I should, therefore, have adopted it with equal confidence, renouncing, with equal promptitude, my preconceived opinions on the subject; for when an opinion has been shown to the erroneous, even self-love has more to lose than gain by persisting in holding it. In like manner, I should have rejected the doctrine of reincarnation, even though proclaimed by spirits, if it had appeared to me to be contrary to reason, as, indeed, I have rejected many other ideas which spirits have sought to inculcate, for I know, by experience, that I can no more give a blind acceptance to ideas put forth by spirits than I can to those put forth by men.

The principal merit of the doctrine of reincarnation is, then, to our minds, that it is supremely rational. But it has also in its favor the confirmation of facts - facts positive and, so to say, material, which is apparent to all who study the question with patience and perseverance, and in presence of which all doubt as to the reality of the law in question is impossible. When the appreciation of these facts shall have become popularized, like those which have revealed to us the formation and rotation of the earth, they who oppose this doctrine will be compelled to renounce their opposition.

To sum up: I assert that the doctrine of the plurality of existence is the only one that explains what, without this doctrine, is inexplicable; that it is at once eminently consolatory and strictly conformable with the most rigorous justice; and that it is the anchor of safety which God in His Mercy has provided for mankind.

The words of Jesus Himself are explicit as to the truth of this last assertion; for we read in the third chapter of the gospel according to St. John that Jesus came replying to Nicodemus and thus expressed himself: "Verily, verily, I tell thee that, if a man be not born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God!9 And when Nicodemus inquires, "how can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter again into his mother's womb and be born a second time?" Jesus replies, "Except a man be born of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God. What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the spirit is spirit. Be not amazed at what I have told thee; you must be born again"