“The prejudices of children, and ideas that have grown with them, are, I think, ineradicable in many cases.

“Let us take three instances of such ordinary conceptions—­’Grace,’ ‘the Resurrection of the Body,’ ‘The Holy Spirit.’

“Here are three vast conceptions.  The anxious parent endeavours to explain them to the child:  who, in his turn, receives three grotesque and whimsical ideas which represent themselves to him something in the following shape: 

“Grace.  The quality which he detests in his schoolfellows; in which the ‘model boys’ are pre-eminent; which he knows he dislikes and loathes, and yet is rather ashamed to say so.  The boy who ‘rebukes’ his schoolfellows for irreverent or loose conversation, the boy who is always ready in his odious way to do a kindness, the boy who is never late for school—­these seem to him to be the kind of figures that the clergyman is holding up in his sermon as ideal types of character, to be imitated and reverenced, and for whom he has in his young soul the most undisguised and wholesome loathing.

“Of course it is a misconception—­but whose fault?  Do you blame a tender wayward mind for not having a philosophical grasp of the ideal?  Whereas, if you weren’t ashamed to let him understand that the young rascal who is always in mischief and behindhand with his work, but who is yet affectionate, generous, and pure, though he is quarrelsome and not particular in his talk, is a far finer fellow, both in point of view of this world and the next than the smooth-faced prig who thanks his Lord that he is not as this publican.

“The Resurrection of the Body.  Intelligent people who are also reverent and good, in their anxiety to be faithful to the letter of dogma as well as to its spirit, prefer to cling to these words rather than confess, what is quite certain, that an absolutely literal sense was attached to these words by the framers of them; they were scientifically ignorant of the fact that matter is disintegrated and disseminated so rigorously that there may be component particles of a hundred of his predecessors in one human body now existent.  No symbolical interpretation of the words nowadays will account for their being the expression of what was erroneously believed to be a possibility; and to say, as I have heard a Church dignitary of poetical and metaphysical mind say, that the phrase means that the power resident in every individuality to assimilate to itself certain particles will not desert the individuality even after death, but will continue to assert itself in some way—­possibly in a spiritual or unmaterial manner—­to say this, is to state a strong scientific probability; but, after all, it is only a probability at best, and is certainly not what the words as they stand in the Creed were meant to mean by the persons who framed them and the first worshippers who repeated them.  In the case of children the effect is at once laughable