Anderson's theological writings

[ChrisGeorge]

Hello Chris,

Thanks for this input, and I apologise for not pre-warning you that I would name you in my posting.. it completely skipped my mind. No offense old chap.

kindly

Phil

No problem whatsoever, my friend.

Chris

[jason_c]

Hello Jason,

As much as I admire the attempted finding of a phrase that could give rise and hope to a more positive view, (in my own eyes at least ) of Anderson in reference to his role in the WM and his views on Jews on a professional point, this one line taken from thousands of lines on his religious and social views is really nowhere near enough. I found some of the stuff he wrote indicates strong Anti-Zionist views. However...

I have read my way through only one of his religious books and attempted a 2nd. I mistakenly thought I could review his work.. and present a kind of independant review.. but the task was frankly.. too much. Probably THE most laborious task in literature I have ever attempted, and have read many many thousands of books in my 53 years on this planet, I can assure you old chap. I have discussed this briefly with Chris George recently, and we have both come to the conclusion that he may well have been an extreme product of his time.. regarding the Empire, the attitudes of the higher society against foreigners and in particular perhaps, the Jews in Whitechapel.

One has to have a definitive religious persuasion I'd wager to be able to wade through all the stuff he wrote with any conviction (which I am not).
It is tiresome, boring and very very deep in its meanings, in my honest opinion.

I found it extremely boring. Because I haven't read ALL his works that are religiously based, I can't say for certain that he was Anti Jewish.. but I did find indications that incline me on towards path.. on balance. His own views in particular, towards his own form of religion, seem very at odds with the Jewish religion.

I must add that I didn't write any of these kines or quotes down, perhaps someone else has. I had enough trouble wading through the stuff. It really was awful stuff to read. If you attempt it, and I really do mean this.. good luck.


kindly


Phil

Its actually a more nuanced view of Anderson, and yes perhaps a more positive one too that im hoping for. Im not wishing to start a firefight but from the rest of your post I can barely hope for even a nuanced view from you of Anderson let alone a positive one.


These anti-semitic quotes would have been of interest. If anyone has them can they please post them.

[Supe]

During my doctoral studies I had to read many New England Puritan sermons from the 17th C. Anderson can't possibly be any heavier, so once Issue 1 of the Review is out (soon) I will give a few of his books a go. Promise.

Don.

[Phil Carter]

Its actually a more nuanced view of Anderson, and yes perhaps a more positive one too that im hoping for. Im not wishing to start a firefight but from the rest of your post I can barely hope for even a nuanced view from you of Anderson let alone a positive one.


These anti-semitic quotes would have been of interest. If anyone has them can they please post them.

Hello Jason,

No firefight and anti feeling intended.. I genuinely tried to find reason and rhyme in Anderson's work.. positive and negative. I just gave in. It was extremely heavy reading, and as said.. very boring indeed to my mind.


kindly

Phil

[Phil Carter]

During my doctoral studies I had to read many New England Puritan sermons from the 17th C. Anderson can't possibly be any heavier, so once Issue 1 of the Review is out (soon) I will give a few of his books a go. Promise.

Don.

Hello Don,

I wish you luck.

best wishes

Phil

[Archaic]

During my doctoral studies I had to read many New England Puritan sermons from the 17th C. Anderson can't possibly be any heavier, so once Issue 1 of the Review is out (soon) I will give a few of his books a go. Promise.

Don.

Hi Soup.

Anderson penned more theological works than you can shake a stick at, but I found 'Human Destiny' (1887) to have some interesting content and to be more accessible than many of the others.

(Maybe Anderson was in a gentler mood in 1887 than he was in later years.)

Best regards,
Archaic

[Phil Carter]

Hello Bunny,

He was also known for being hard of hearing too. Some people suffering from that problem speak louder without knowing it. His sermons, if given with this affliction in later years, must have been pretty interesting!

kindly

Phil

[Archaic]

Hi Phil.

- What?



Archaic

[auspirograph]

Anderson? He is not read, but sleepeth...

I wonder how Martin Fido managed to stay awake reading Anderson's theological writings to see if he was telling the truth.

As it appears to be of some interest, my new book, Jack the Ripper: Victorian Conspiracy Theories, Secret Societies and the Supernatural Mystique of the Whitechapel Murders, was a chance to review Anderson's religious output.

Rather than a mind-numbing analysis of his theology, it is a survey of his approach and of the influences that led to his prolific output in context of his position at Scotland Yard.

Robert Anderson approached theological subjects as he did criminal cases and investigations; by the rules of evidence. The influences on his theological writings was derived from a wide reading of scientific and biblical studies of the late Victorian period.

He actually established quite a reputation during the period, and since, as an evangelical scholar and preacher, and it is in this regard, that a deeper insight may be gained of the man who wrote it as, "...a definitely ascertained fact" that the Ripper was a poor Polish Jew.

[Phil Carter]

Hi Phil.

- What?



Archaic

Hello Bunny... yes you... Bunny.. read my lips...lol


We can't hear you at the back.


kindly

Phil

[mariab]

SRA is faster than Nembutal and not habit-forming.

Even thinking about them can someti

;-)

One has to have a definitive religious persuasion I'd wager to be able to wade through all the stuff he wrote with any conviction (which I am not).

Precisely, and I can't think of a worse candidate than myself.

Stewart send me some time back an image of a letter from Anderson to Chief Rabbi Hermann Adler, so they were friends and correspondents at least on theological matters. Of course that doesn't mean that this buddy buddy correspondence warmed the cold chambers of Sir Robert's heart in terms of alleviating the hard stance he took about Jews' refusal to work with Gentile justice. And in fact we know of course that Adler in 1888 and later Mentor, the editorialist with the Jewish Chronicle in 1910, vociferously resisted the police ideas about finding a connection of the murders to the Jews. Clearly Mentor (i.e., the editor Leopold Greenberg) felt that bigotry was at work in Anderson's attitude toward the low class Jews of the East End, if not Jews in general.

Agree with every single word of this post.

During my doctoral studies I had to read many New England Puritan sermons from the 17th C.

Wow, not a big surprise then that you later decided to leave that dissertation for other plans. For the initial chapters of my dissertation I had to go through an endless amount of articles, announcements, proclamations published during the first years of the French Revolution and they were for the most part fascinating (if not a bit repetitive), but going through several dozen (semi-identical) opera scores reflecting the ideas of the French Revolution on the stage got super B-O-R-I-N-G very quickly. I remember I got severely depressed and unable to get up in the morning while trying to work on this in Paris, but possibly it was sheer laziness. ;-)

[Jonathan H]

To Phil Carter

No, I just mean that the idea that Anderson was a typical, clumsy, anti-Semitic, Puritan, one who would believe anything evil of the tribe, eg. the Ripper was a Jew and the witness was a Jew, who refused to co-operate with 'Gentile Justice', is arguably not borne out by a more nunaced understanding of this chief's theological beliefs (albeit narrowly sectarian against Catholics) and his character as a diligent and honest, professional policeman.

That his memoirs show a person who would be be suspicious of the mob's accusations against a mentally-deranged, poor, foreigner, and a Hebrew. Therefore, for Anderson, nevertheless, to have chosen a Polish Jew -- whatever the merits or demerits of the case against him to which we are not completely privy -- goes against the expected bias.

It means that the criticism he received from English Jews must have been sincerely moritifiying, and privately distressing, for Anderson -- but he had expressed himself clumsily.

Yet, painful criticism to one side, he had chosen this Polish Jew based, as he perceived it, on the weight of the evidence.

I think the reason Anderson could not bring, presumbly 'Kosminski', to justice was, as he implied in the magazine version, that the prime suspect was already 'safely caged' in an asylum. That's not a fact, just an interpretation of limited and contradictory data.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Jonathan,

Thank you for the explanation and the reply. I am now clear as to your meanings.

kindly

Phil

[ChrisGeorge]

To Phil Carter

No, I just mean that the idea that Anderson was a typical, clumsy, anti-Semitic, Puritan, one who would believe anything evil of the tribe, eg. the Ripper was a Jew and the witness was a Jew, who refused to co-operate with 'Gentile Justice', is arguably not borne out by a more nunaced understanding of this chief's theological beliefs (albeit narrowly sectarian against Catholics) and his character as a diligent and honest, professional policeman.

That his memoirs show a person who would be be suspicious of the mob's accusations against a mentally-deranged, poor, foreigner, and a Hebrew. Therefore, for Anderson, nevertheless, to have chosen a Polish Jew -- whatever the merits or demerits of the case against him to which we are not completely privy -- goes against the expected bias.

It means that the criticism he received from English Jews must have been sincerely moritifiying, and privately distressing, for Anderson -- but he had expressed himself clumsily.

Yet, painful criticism to one side, he had chosen this Polish Jew based, as he perceived it, on the weight of the evidence.

I think the reason Anderson could not bring, presumbly 'Kosminski', to justice was, as he implied in the magazine version, that the prime suspect was already 'safely caged' in an asylum. That's not a fact, just an interpretation of limited and contradictory data.

Hi Jonathan

We don't know Sir Robert Anderson's reasons for suspecting Kosminski, presumably meaning Aaron Kosminski, beyond the notion that the suspect was recognized by a fellow Jew, presumably as most of us think, Joseph Lawende.

But I would submit to you that his contention that no Jew would give another Jew up to Gentile justice and that his own people were protecting him, might be at the heart of how he felt about the East End Jews, and that he thought in the first place that the killer was likely to have been a Jew.

I would suggest that due to his attitude toward the low class immigrant Jews the early suspicion that the Ripper could have been a Jew, i.e., Leather Apron, was believed by Anderson, and that he hung onto that suspicion particularly when a likely candidate such as Kosminski was identified as the possible murderer. Thus what you say about Anderson's claim that Kosminski "goes against the expected bias" is quite the opposite: a deranged Jew is the type of man Anderson would have suspected as the killer all along.

Best regards

Chris George

[jason_c]

Hi Jonathan

We don't know Sir Robert Anderson's reasons for suspecting Kosminski, presumably meaning Aaron Kosminski, beyond the notion that the suspect was recognized by a fellow Jew, presumably as most of us think, Joseph Lawende.

But I would submit to you that his contention that no Jew would give another Jew up to Gentile justice and that his own people were protecting him, might be at the heart of how he felt about the East End Jews, and that he thought in the first place that the killer was likely to have been a Jew.

I would suggest that due to his attitude toward the low class immigrant Jews the early suspicion that the Ripper could have been a Jew, i.e., Leather Apron, was believed by Anderson, and that he hung onto that suspicion particularly when a likely candidate such as Kosminski was identified as the possible murderer. Thus what you say about Anderson's claim that Kosminski "goes against the expected bias" is quite the opposite: a deranged Jew is the type of man Anderson would have suspected as the killer all along.

Best regards

Chris George

Except we dont know when he came to believe that low class Polish Jews did not give each other to Gentile justice. Anderson was writing at the end of his career. Did he come to believe this in 1888? 1892? 1902? Neither you or I know for sure when his bias came about.