{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_30306/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_30306","id":"gutenberg_30306","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/30306","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Psychiatry/Psychology","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Sex -- Religious aspects"],"text":"THE OPEN MIND LIBRARY\n\n  BEING A SERIES OF WORKS DEALING WITH\n  QUESTIONS AS HANDLED BY DIFFERENT\n  SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT, IN RELIGION,\n  ETHICS, PHILOSOPHY & PSYCHOLOGY\n\n\n\n\n        RELIGION & SEX\n\n   STUDIES IN THE PATHOLOGY\n   OF RELIGIOUS DEVELOPMENT\n       BY CHAPMAN COHEN\n\n    T. N. FOULIS, PUBLISHER\n  LONDON, EDINBURGH, & BOSTON\n\n\n_Published October 1919_\n\n_Printed by_ MORRISON & GIBB LIMITED, _Edinburgh_\n\n\n\n\nTHE LIST OF CHAPTERS\n\n\n     I. SCIENCE & THE SUPERNATURAL              _page_ 1\n\n    II. THE PRIMITIVE MIND & ITS ENVIRONMENT          35\n\n   III. THE RELIGION OF MENTAL DISEASE                51\n\n    IV. SEX & RELIGION IN PRIMITIVE LIFE              89\n\n     V. THE INFLUENCE OF SEXUAL & PATHOLOGIC\n         STATES ON RELIGIOUS BELIEF                  120\n\n    VI. THE STREAM OF TENDENCY                       145\n\n   VII. CONVERSION                                   169\n\n  VIII. RELIGIOUS EPIDEMICS                          205\n\n    IX. RELIGIOUS EPIDEMICS--(_concluded_)           226\n\n     X. THE WITCH MANIA                              243\n\n    XI. SUMMARY & CONCLUSION                         269\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE\n\n\nIn spite of all that has been done in the way of applying scientific\nprinciples to religious ideas, there is much that yet remains to be\naccomplished. Generally speaking science has only dealt with the subject\nof religion in its more normal and more regularised forms. The last\nhalf-century has produced many elaborate and fruitful studies of the\norigin of religious ideas, while comparative mythology has shown a close\nand suggestive relationship between creeds and symbols that were once\nbelieved to have nothing in common. But beyond these fields of research\nthere is at least one other that has hitherto been denied the attention\nit richly deserves. When the anthropologist has described those\nconditions of primitive culture amid which he believes religious ideas\ntook their origin, and the comparative mythologist has shown us the\nsimilarities and inter-relations of widely separated creeds, religious\nbeliefs have yet to submit to the test of a scientific psychology, the\nfunction of which is to determine how far the same principles apply to\nall phases of mental life whether religious or non-religious. Moreover,\nin addition to the normal psychical life of man, there is that vast\nborderland in which the normal merges into the abnormal, and the healthy\nstate into a pathologic one. That there is a physiology of religion is\nnow generally admitted; but that there is also a pathology of religion\nis not so generally recognised. The present work seeks to emphasise this\nlast aspect. It does not claim to be more than an outline of the\nsubject--a sketch map of a territory that others may fill in more\ncompletely.\n\nFrom another point of view the following pages may be regarded as an\nattempt more completely to apply scientific principles to religious\nbeliefs. And it would be idle to hope that such an attempt could be made\nwithout incurring much hostile criticism. In connection with most other\nsubjects the help of science is welcomed; in connection with religion\nscience is still regarded as more or less of an intruder, profaning a\nsacred subject with vulgar tests and impertinent enquiries. This must\nalmost inevitably follow when one has to face the opposition of\nthousands of men who have been trained to regard themselves as the\nauthorised exponents of all that pertains to religion, but whose\ntraining fails to supply them with a genuine scientific equipment. It\nshould, however, be clear that an attitude of hostility to science,\nveiled or open, cannot be maintained. Mere authority has fallen on evil\ndays, and in all directions is being freely challenged. There is\nincreasing dislike to systems of thought that shrink from examination,\nand to conclusions that cannot withstand the most rigorous\ninvestigation. And if science really has anything of value to say on\nthis question it cannot be held to silence for ever. Sooner or later the\nneed for its assistance will be felt, and the self-elected authority of\nan order must give way. It is, moreover, impossible for science with its\nclaim, sometimes avowed, but always implied, to cover the whole of life,\nto forego so large a territory as that of religion. For there can be no\nreasonable question that religion has played, and still plays a large\npart in the life of the race. Whatever be the nature of religion,\nscience is bound either to deal with it or confess its main task to be\nhopeless.\n\nWhether or not it is possible to apply known scientific principles to\nthe whole of religion will be a matter of opinion; but the attempt is at\nleast worth making. So much that appeared to be beyond the reach of\nscience has been ultimately brought within its ken, so many things that\nseemed to stand in a class by themselves have been finally brought under\nsome more comprehensive generalisation, and so become part of the\n'cosmic machine,' that one is impelled to believe that given time and\nindustry the same will result here. And it should never be forgotten\nthat one aspect of scientific progress has been the taking over of large\ntracts of territory that religion once regarded as peculiarly its own;\nand just as psychology and pathology were found to hold the key to an\nunderstanding of such a phenomenon as witchcraft, so we may yet realise\nthat a true explanation of religious phenomena is to be found, not in\nsome supernatural world, but in the workings of natural forces\nimperfectly understood.\n\nThe defences set up by theologians against the scientific advance may be\nsummarised under two heads. It is claimed that the 'facts' of the\nreligious life belong to a world of inner experience, to a state of\nspiritual development which brings the subject into touch with a\nsuper-sensuous world not open to the normal human being, and with which\nscience, as ordinarily understood, is incompetent to deal. In essence\nthis is a very old position, and contains the kernel of 'mysticism' in\nall ages, from the savage state onward. This position involves a very\nobvious begging of the question at issue. It assumes that all attempts\nto correlate religious phenomena with phenomena in general have failed,\nand that all future attempts are similarly doomed to failure. Of course\nnothing of the kind has been shown. On the contrary, the aim of the\npresent work is to show that no dividing line can be drawn between those\nstates of mind that have been and are classed as religious, and those\nthat are admittedly non-religious. For various reasons I have dealt\nalmost entirely with those conditions that are admittedly pathological,\nbut I believe it would be possible to prove the same of all normal\nframes of mind and emotional states. Any human quality may be enlisted\nin the service of religion, but there are none that are specifically\nreligious. It is a pure assumption that the religious visionary\npossesses qualities that are either absent or rudimentary in other\npersons. Human faculty is everywhere identical although the form in\nwhich it is expressed differs according to education, the presence of\ncertain dominating ideas, and the general influence of one's\nenvironment. To admit the claim of the mystic is to surrender all hope\nof a scientific co-ordination of life. It is quite fatal to the\nscientific ideal and involves the re-introduction into nature of a\ndualism the removal of which has been one of the most marked advantages\nof scientific thinking.\n\nMoreover, whatever views we may hold as to the ultimate nature of 'mind'\nthe dependence of all frames of mind upon the brain and nervous system\nis now generally accepted. We may hold various theories as to the nature\nof mind, we may, with the late William James, treat the brain as merely\na 'transmissive' organ, but even on that assumption--on behalf of which\nnot a shred of positive evidence has been offered--the frames of mind\nexpressed are determined by the nervous mechanism, and thus the laws of\nmental phenomena become ultimately the laws of the operation of the\nnervous system. The 'facts' of the religious life thus become part of\nthe facts of psychology as a whole. Its 'laws' will form part of\npsychological laws as a whole, and religious experiences must be handed\nover for examination and classification to the psychologist who in turn\nrelies for help and understanding on various associated branches of\nscience.\n\nClosely allied to the claim of the 'mystic' that his experiences bring\nhim into touch with a world of super-sensuous reality, is the attempt to\nprove that science is incapable of dealing with anything but \"in the\nfirst place, the endless ascertainment of facts and the physical\nconditions under which they occur, and in the second place to the\ncriticism of error.\" Well, no one denies that it is part of the work of\nscience to ascertain facts, or even that its work consists in\nascertaining facts and framing 'laws' that will explain them. But why\nare we to limit science to _physical_ facts only? All facts are not\nphysical. If I have a head-ache, the unpleasant feeling is a fact. If I\nfeel hot or cold, angry or pleased, think one thing ugly or another\nbeautiful, my feelings are as much 'facts' as anything else that exists.\nNay, if I fancy I see a ghost, or a vision, these also are 'facts' so\nfar as my mental state at the time is concerned. So also are my beliefs\nabout all manner of things, and often the most important facts with\nwhich I am connected. Facts may be objective or subjective. They may\nexist in relation to all minds normally constituted, or they may exist\nin relation to my own mind only; or, yet again, they may exist only in\nrelation to certain states of mind, but they do not, nevertheless, cease\nto be facts.\n\nNow the business of science is to collect facts--all facts--classify\nthem, and frame generalisations that will explain their groupings and\nmodes of operation. It talks of the facts of the physical world, the\nfacts of the biological world, the facts of the psychological world, and\nso forth. This last group comprises all sorts of feelings and ideas,\nbeliefs and experiences. Some of these facts it calls false, others it\ncalls true--that is, they are true when they hold good of all men and\nwomen normally constituted, they are not true when they hold good of\nisolated individuals only, and can be seen to be the product of\nmisinterpreted experience, or arise from a derangement--permanent or\ntemporary--of the nervous system. But true or false they remain facts of\nthe mental life. They must be collected, grouped, and explained exactly\nas other facts are collected, grouped, and explained. They fall within\nthe scope of science, to be dealt with by scientific methods.\n\nThere is really no escape from the position that so far as religious\n'facts' are parts of mental life, religion becomes logically a\ndepartment of psychology. The substantial identity of all mental facts\nis quite unaffected by their being directed to this or that special\nobject. As mental facts they are part of the material that it is the\nwork of science to reduce to order. And as mental facts religious\nphenomena are seen to follow the same 'laws' that govern mental\nphenomena in general. It is perfectly true that we cannot test and\nmeasure the material of psychology with the same definiteness and\naccuracy that the chemist applies to the subject-matter of his\ndepartment; but that may be due to want of knowledge, or to the extreme\ncomplexity and variability of the matter with which we are dealing. And\nif it were true that the same tests could not be applied in psychology\nthat are applied elsewhere, this would be no cause for scientific\ndespair. It would only mean that fresh tests would have to be devised\nfor a new group of facts, as every other science has already, as a\nmatter of fact, created its own special standard of value.\n\nThe second of the two lines of defence consists in the bold assertion\nthat the religious interpretation of subjective phenomena is itself in\nthe nature of a true scientific induction. The methods of science are\nnot repudiated, but welcomed. But it is argued that the non-religious\nexplanation of religious phenomena breaks down hopelessly, while the\nreligious explanation fully covers and explains the facts. If this were\ntrue, nothing more remains to be said, and we must accept this dualistic\nscheme, however repugnant it may be to orthodox scientific ideas. But is\nit true? Is it a fact that the non-religious explanation breaks down so\ncompletely? Hitherto the course of events has been in the contrary\ndirection. It is the religious explanation that has, over and over\nagain, been shown to be unreliable, the non-religious explanation that\nhas been finally established. Insanity and epilepsy, once universally\nascribed to a supernatural order of being, have been reduced to the\nlevel of nervous disorders. All the phenomena of 'possession' are still\nwith us, it is only our understanding of them that has altered. And\nbefore it is admitted that the phenomena described as religious can\nnever be affiliated to the phenomena described as non-religious, it must\nbe shown--beyond all possibility of doubt--that their explanation in\nterms of known forces is impossible. As I have said in the body of this\nwork, the question at issue is essentially one of interpretation. The\n'facts' of the religious life are admitted. Science no more questions\nthe reality of the visions of the medieval mystic than it questions the\nvisions of the non-mystic admittedly suffering from neural derangement.\nThe crucial question is whether we have any good reason for separating\nthe two, and while we dismiss the one as hallucination accept the other\nas introducing us to another order of being? I do not think there is the\nslightest ground for any such differentiation, and I have given in the\nfollowing pages what I conceive to be good reasons for so thinking. And\nI hope that the fact of the explanations there offered running counter\nto the traditional one will not prevent readers weighing with the utmost\ncare the proofs that are offered.\n\n\n\n\nRELIGION AND SEX\n\nCHAPTER ONE\n\nSCIENCE AND THE SUPERNATURAL\n\n\nAccepting Professor Tylor's famous minimum definition of religion as\n\"the belief in Spiritual Beings,\" it is safe to say that religious\nbelief constitutes one of the largest facts in human history. No other\nsingle subject has occupied so large a share of man's conscious life, no\nother subject has absorbed so much of his energy. In very early stages\nof culture religious belief is universal in the fullest sense of the\nword. It shapes all primitive institutions; it dominates life from the\ncradle to the grave, and creates a shadow-land beyond the grave from\nwhich the dead continue to influence the actions of the living. At a\nlater stage of culture we see a distinction being drawn between the\nnatural and the supernatural, the secular and the spiritual, and the\nbeginning of an antagonism that is still with us. Of all antagonisms\nconceived by the brain of man this is the deepest and the most\nirreconcilable. Each feels that the growth of the other threatens its\nown supremacy, with the result that advance from either side has been\ncontested with the greatest obstinacy and determination. And although it\nis true that at present the supernatural is very largely \"suspect,\" it\nis still powerful. Nor is its influence confined to the lower strata of\nEuropean society. It has very many representatives among the higher\nculture, disguised it may be under various pseudo-philosophic forms.\nAltogether we may say that the supernatural has never been without its\n\"cloud of witnesses.\" At all times there have been individuals, or\ngroups of individuals, who have believed themselves, and have been\nbelieved by others, to be in touch with another order of existence than\nthat with which people are normally in contact. And apart from these\nspecially favoured persons, the wide vogue of the belief in good and\nevil portents, in lucky and unlucky days, the attraction of the \"occult\"\nin fiction and in fact, all serve as evidence that belief in the\nsupernatural is still a force with which one has to reckon.\n\nTo what causes are we to attribute the persistence of this belief in the\nsupernatural? It is useless replying that its persistence is evidence of\nits truth. That clearly begs the whole question at issue. Mere social\nheredity will doubtless count for much in this direction. Men do not\nstart their thinking afresh with each generation. It is based upon that\nof preceding generations; it follows set forms, and is generally\ninfluenced by that network of ideas and beliefs into which we are born\nand from which none of us ever completely escapes. Still that is hardly\nenough in itself to account for the persistence of supernaturalism.\nAssuming that originally there existed what was accepted as good\nevidence for the existence of a supernatural, it is hardly credible that\nevery subsequent generation went on accepting it merely because one\ngeneration received evidence of its existence. As organs atrophy for\nwant of exercise, so do beliefs die out in time for want of proof. Some\nkind of evidence must have been continually forthcoming in order to keep\nthe belief alive and active. It is not a question of whether the\nevidence was good or bad. All evidence, it is important to bear in mind,\nis good to some one. The \"facts\" upon which thousands of people were put\nto death for witchcraft would not be considered evidence to anyone\nnowadays, but they were once accepted as good ground for conviction.\n\nWhat kind of evidence is it, then, that has been accepted as proof of\nthe supernatural? Or, to return to Tylor's definition of religion,\nseeing that the belief in spiritual beings has persisted in every\ngeneration, upon what kind of evidence has this belief been nourished?\nVarious replies might be given to this question, all of which may\ncontain some degree of truth, or an aspect of a general truth. In the\npresent enquiry I am concerned with one line of investigation only, one\nthat has been strangely neglected, but which yet, I am convinced,\npromises fruitful results. In other directions it has been established\nthat a great aid to an understanding of the human organism in times of\nhealth is to study its activities under conditions of disease. Abnormal\npsychology is now a recognised branch of psychology in general, and a\nglance through almost any recent text-book will show that the two form\nparts of a natural whole. The normal and the abnormal are in turn used\nto throw light on each other. And it appears to the present writer that\nin the matter of religious beliefs a much clearer understanding of their\nnature, and also of some of the conditions of their perpetuation, may be\ngained by a study of what has happened, and is happening, in the light\nof mental pathology.\n\nTo some, of course, the bare idea of there being a pathology of religion\nwill appear an entirely unwarrantable assumption. On the other hand, the\nscientific study of all phases of religions having made so great headway\nit is hoped that a larger number will be prepared for a discussion of\nthe subject from a point of view which, if not quite new, is certainly\nnot common. Of course, such a discussion, even if the author quite\nsucceeds in demonstrating the truth of his thesis, will still leave the\norigin of the religious idea an open question. For the present we are\nnot concerned directly with the origin of the religious idea, but with\nan examination of some of the causes that have served to perpetuate it,\nand to trace the influence in the history of religion of states of mind,\nboth personal and collective, that are now admittedly abnormal or\npathological in character. The legitimacy of the enquiry cannot be\nquestioned. As to its value and significance, that every reader must\ndetermine for himself.\n\nOne may put the essential idea of the following pages in a\nsentence:--Given the religious idea as already existing, in what way,\nand to what extent has its development been affected by forces that are\nnot in themselves religious, and which modern thought definitely\nseparates from religion?\n\nUnder civilised and uncivilised conditions we find religious beliefs\nconstantly associated with various forces--social, ethical, and\npsychological. Very seldom is there any serious attempt to separate them\nand assign to each their respective value; nor, indeed, is the task at\nany time an easy one. The difficulty is made the greater by the way in\nwhich writers so enlarge the meaning of \"religion\" that it is made to\ninclude almost everything for which one feels admiration or respect.\nThis practice is neither helpful nor accurate. Human nature under all\naspects of intellectual conviction presents the same fundamental\ncharacteristics, and a definition to be of value, while of necessity\ninclusive, must also be decisively exclusive. It must unite, but it must\nalso separate. And many current definitions of religion, while they may\nbear testimony to the amiability of those who frame them, are quite\ndestitute of scientific value. In any case, the association of the\nreligious idea with non-religious forces is a fact too patent to admit\nof denial; and the important task is to determine their reciprocal\ninfluence. In actual life this separation has been secured by the\ndevelopment of the various branches of positive thought--ethics,\npsychology, etc., all of which were once directly under the control of\nreligion. What remains to be done is to separate in theory what has\nalready been separated in fact, with such additions as a more critical\nknowledge may suggest as advisable.\n\nFar more suggestive, however, than the association of religion with what\nwe may call the normal social forces, is its connection with conditions\nthat are now clearly recognised as abnormal. From the earliest times we\nfind the use of drugs and stimulants, the practice of fasting and\nself-torture, with other methods of depressing or stimulating the action\nof the nervous system, accepted as well-recognised methods of inducing a\nsense of religious illumination, or the feeling that one is in direct\ncommunion with a supernatural order of existence. Equally significant is\nthe world-wide acceptance--right up to recent times--of purely\npathological states as evidence of supernatural intercourse. About these\ntwo sets of facts there can be no reasonable doubt. Over and over again\nwe can observe how the promptings of disease are taken for the voice of\ndivinity, and men and women who to-day would be handed over to the care\nof the physician hailed as an incarnation of deity. In modern asylums\nwe find one of the commonest of delusions to be that of the insane\nperson who imagines himself to be a specially selected instrument of\ndeity. In such instances the causal influence of pathological conditions\nis admitted. On the other hand, we have belonging to the more normal\ntype the person who claims a supernatural origin for many of his actions\nand states of mind. And between these two extremes lie a whole series of\ngradations. They exist in all stages of culture, and it is difficult to\nsee by what rule of logic or of experience one can say where the normal\nends and the abnormal begins. If we assume the inference of the normal\nperson concerning the origin of his mental states to be correct, it\nseems difficult to deny the possibility of those of the insane person\nhaving a similar origin, although distorted by the influence of disease.\nIf, on the other hand, we say the insane person is wholly wrong as to\nthe origin of his mental states, may we not also assume that the normal\nperson has likewise erred as to the cause of his emotions or ideas?\n\nTwo considerations may be urged in support of this conclusion. In the\nfirst place, there is the fact of the fundamental identity of human\nqualities under all conditions of their manifestation. It is too often\nassumed--sometimes it is explicitly claimed--that one with what is\ncalled \"a strong religious nature\" possesses some quality of mind absent\nor undeveloped in those of an opposite type. This assumption is quite\nunwarrantable. The religious man is marked off from the non-religious\nman, not by the possession of distinct mental qualities, but solely by\nholding different ideas concerning the cause and significance of his\nmental states. There is no such thing as a religious \"faculty,\" but\nonly qualities of mind expressed in terms of the religious idea. If I am\nconscious of a strong desire to work on behalf of the social betterment\nof my fellows, I may account for this either by attributing it to having\ninherited a nature modified by generations of social intercourse, or on\nthe hypothesis that I am an instrument in the hands of a superhuman\npersonality. But in either case the qualities manifested remain the\nsame. Love and hatred, fear and courage, honesty and roguery, with all\nother human qualities, may be expressed in terms of religion, or they\nmay be expressed in non-religious terms. It is the cause to which they\nare attributed, or the object to which they are directed, that marks off\nthe religious from the non-religious person.\n\nThe second point is that the whole issue arises on a conflict of\ninterpretations. If I question the reality of the visions or states of\nillumination experienced by Santa Teresa, I am not questioning that, so\nfar as the saint herself was concerned, these states of exaltation were\nreal. All mental states--whether arising under normal or abnormal\nconditions--are quite real to those who experience them. The visions of\nthe hashish-eater are real, while they last; so are those of the victim\nof delirium tremens. All I question is their genuineness as\ncorresponding to an objective reality. Over the mind of the subject\nthese visions may exercise an absolute sway. As to their occurrence, he\nor she is the final and absolute authority. There can be no question\nhere. But when we proceed from the occurrence of these visions to the\nquestion of their causation, then we are on entirely different ground.\nHere it is not a question of their genuineness, or of their power, but\na question of how we are to interpret them. The honesty and\nsinglemindedness of these \"inspired\" characters may be admitted, but\nhonesty or singlemindedness is no guarantee of accuracy. We do not need\nto ask whether the peasant girl of Lourdes experienced a vision of the\nMadonna, but we do need to ask whether there was anything in her mental\nhistory, social surroundings, or nervous state that would account for\nthe vision. All the \"facts\" of the religious life may be admitted; the\nsole question at issue is whether an adequate interpretation of at least\nsome of them may not be found in terms of a purely scientific\npsychology.\n\nTaking, then, the religious idea as already existing, the following\npages will be devoted to an examination of the extent to which this idea\nhas been associated with forces and conditions that were plainly\npathological. In very many individual cases it will not be difficult to\ntrace a vivid sense of the supernatural to the presence of abnormal\nnervous states, sometimes deliberately induced, at other times arising\nof themselves. And it is a matter of mere historical observation that\nsuch individual cases have operated most powerfully to strengthen the\nbelief in the supernatural with others. The example of Lourdes is a case\nin point. All Protestants will agree that the peasant girl's vision was\na sheer hallucination. And yet there can be no question that this vision\nhas served to strengthen the faith of many thousands of others in the\nnearness of the supernatural. And it needs but little effort of the\nimagination to realise how powerful such examples must have been in ages\nwhen medical science was in its infancy, and the more subtle operations\nof the nervous system completely unknown.\n\nThis question, I repeat, is distinct from the much larger and wider\nenquiry of the origin of religion. A fairly lengthy experience of the\ncapacity of the general mind for missing the real point at issue\nprevents my being too sanguine as to the efficiency of the most explicit\navowal of one's purpose, but the duty of taking precautions nevertheless\nremains. And in elaborating an unfamiliar view of the nature of much of\nthe world's so-called religious phenomena, the possibility of\nmisconception is multiplied enormously. Still, a writer must do what he\ncan to guard against misunderstanding, and in the most emphatic manner\nit must be said that it is not my purpose to prove, nor is it my belief,\nthat religion springs from perverted sexuality, nor that the study of\nreligion is no more than an exercise in pathology. Nothing is further\nfrom the writer's mind than so essentially preposterous a claim. Neither\nsexuality, no matter how powerful, nor disease, no matter how\npronounced, can account for the religious idea. That has an entirely\nseparate and independent origin. This should be plain to anyone who has\nbut a merely casual acquaintance with the history of religion. It is,\nhowever, a very different thing to enquire as to the part played in the\nhistory of religion by morbid nervous states or perverted sexual\nfeeling. That is an enquiry both legitimate and desirable; and it is one\nthat promises to shed light on aspects of the subject otherwise very\nobscure. And certainly, if so-called religious feelings do not admit of\nexplanation in terms of a scientific psychology, nothing remains but to\nrecognise religion as something quite apart from normal life, to hand\nit over to the custody of word-spinning \"Mystics,\" and so surrender all\npossibility of a rational understanding of either its nature or its\nhistory.\n\nIn saying what I have concerning the probability of misconception, I\nhave had specially in mind the attack made by the late Professor William\nJames on what he called the \"medical materialists.\" In that remarkable\npiece of religious yellow-journalism, _The Varieties of Religious\nExperience_, Professor James says of those who take up the position that\na great deal of what has been accepted by the world as religious\ninspiration or exaltation can be accounted for as the products of\ndisordered nervous states or perverted sexual feeling, \"We are surely\nall familiar in a general way with this method of discrediting states of\nmind for which we have an antipathy. We all use it in some degree in\ncriticising persons whose states of mind we regard as overstrained. But\nwhen other people criticise our own exalted soul-flights by calling them\n'nothing but' expressions of our organic disposition, we feel outraged\nand hurt, for we know that, whatever be our organism's peculiarities,\nour mental states have their substantive value as revelations of the\nliving truth; and we wish that all this medical materialism could be\nmade to hold its tongue.\" Again, \"Few conceptions are less instructive\nthan this re-interpretation of religion as perverted sexuality.... It is\ntrue that in the vast collection of religious phenomena, some are\nundisguisedly amatory--_e.g._ sex deities and obscene rites in\npolytheism, and ecstatic feelings of union with the Saviour in a few\nChristian Mystics. But then why not equally call religion an aberration\nof the digestive functions, and prove one's point by the worship of\nBacchus and Ceres, or by the ecstatic feelings of some other saints\nabout the Eucharist?\" Or, seeing that the Bible is full of the language\nof respiratory oppression, \"one might almost as well interpret religion\nas a perversion of the respiratory function.\" And if it is pointed out\nthat active interest in religion synchronises with adolescence, \"the\nretort again is easy.... The interest in mechanics, physics, chemistry,\nlogic, philosophy, and sociology, which springs up during adolescent\nyears along with that in poetry and religion, is also a perversion of\nthe sexual instinct.\"[1]\n\nExcellent fooling, this, but little else. I do not know that anyone has\never claimed that religion took its origin in sexual feeling, or that\nthis would alone provide an explanation of historical religion. All that\nanyone has ever urged is that a deal of so-called religious feeling,\npast and present, can be shown to be due to unsatisfied or perverted\nsexual feeling--which is a very different statement, and one of which\nthe truth may be demonstrated from Professor James's own pages. But\nbetween saying that certain feelings are wrongly interpreted in terms of\nan already existing idea, and saying that the idea itself is nothing but\nthese same feelings transformed, there is an obvious and important\ndifference. In every case the religious idea is taken for granted. Its\norigin is a quite different subject of enquiry. But once the idea is in\nexistence there is always the probability of evidence for its truth\nbeing found in the wrong direction. The analogy of the digestive and\nrespiratory organs is clever, but futile. The belief that much which\nhas passed for religious feeling is perverted sexuality is not based\nmerely upon the language employed. The language is only symptomatic. The\nterminology of respiration and digestion when used in connection with\nreligion is frankly and palpably symbolic. That of sexual love is as\noften frankly literal, and can be correlated with the actual state of\nthe person using it. Digestion and respiration must go on in any case;\nbut it is precisely the point at issue whether with a different sexual\nlife these so-called religious ecstatic states would have been\nexperienced. When we find religious characters of strongly marked\namorous dispositions, but leading an ascetic life, using toward the\nobject of their adoration terms usually associated with strong sexual\nfeeling, it does not seem extravagant to find here a little more than\nwhat may be covered by mere symbolism. Would the medieval monk have been\ntempted by Satan in the form of beautiful women had he been happily\nmarried? Would Santa Teresa or Catherine of Sienna have used the\nlanguage they did use to express their relations to Jesus had they been\nwives and mothers? Such questions admit of one answer, which is, in its\nway, decisive. Professor James admits that modern psychology holds as a\ngeneral postulate \"there is not a single one of our states of mind, high\nor low, healthy or morbid, that has not some organic process as its\ncondition.\"[2] The 'medical materialist' can ask for no more than this.\nBut this being granted, on what ground are we to be forbidden finding in\nthese same organic processes the condition of the visions and ecstatic\nstates with which _The Varieties of Religious Experience_ is so largely\nconcerned?\n\nAgain, it may be granted that adolescence brings with it an awakening of\nthe whole mental life, not of religion alone. But the analogy goes no\nfurther, and, in any case, it begs the question. The full significance\nof the connection will be seen when we come to deal with initiation in\nprimitive times and conversion in the modern period. At present it\nsuffices to point out that the interest in art, in science, in\nliterature, in sociology, are ends in themselves, and one need go no\nfurther than the developing mental life for an explanation. But the\nessential question here is whether this growing life can or cannot find\ncomplete satisfaction quite apart from religion. A developing interest\nin the larger social life is common to all, and to some extent this is\nsecured by the pressure of forces that are simply inescapable. On the\nother hand, an interest in religion only exists with some, and then it\nmay usually be traced to a conscious direction of their energies.\nMoreover, those who show no special interest in religion evince no lack\nof anything--save in religious terms. In every respect they exhibit the\nsame mental and emotional qualities as their fellows. The only\ndiscernible difference is that while in the one case adolescent nature\nis expressed in terms of religion, in the other case it is expressed in\nterms of a larger social life.\n\nThe question here might be put thus: Given a generation not taught to\nexpress its growing life in terms of religion, could adequate and\nsatisfactory expression be found in the social life to which adolescence\nis unquestionably an introduction? Many would answer unhesitatingly,\nyes. They would argue that what are called the religious feelings, are\nnormal social feelings exploited in the interests of the religious idea.\nThey would deny that there is any such thing as a religious quality of\nmind. Any mental quality may be directed to a religious end, but all may\nfind complete expression and satisfaction in a non-religious social\nlife. This is the real question at issue, and yet Professor James never\nonce, in the whole of his 500 pages, addresses himself to it.\n\nApart from sex, there is the important question of the relation between\nabnormal and morbid nervous states and religious illumination. How far\nhas the one been mistaken for the other? To what extent have people\naccepted the outcome of pathological conditions as proofs of intercourse\nwith an unseen spiritual world? There is no doubt that among uncivilised\npeople this is usually, if not invariably, the case. And our knowledge\nof the relations between the nervous system and mental states--imperfect\nas it still is--is so recent, that it is not surprising that fasting,\nself-torture, solitary meditation, etc., because of the states of mind\nto which they give rise, have been universally valued as aids to the\nreligious life. Dr. D. G. Brinton says:--\n\n\"When I say that all religions depend for their origin and continuation\ndirectly upon inspiration, I state an historic fact. It may be known\nunder other names, of credit or discredit, as mysticism, ecstasy,\nrhapsody, demoniac possession, the divine afflatus, the gnosis, or, in\nits latest christening, 'cosmic consciousness.' All are but expressions\nof a belief that knowledge arises, words are uttered or actions\nperformed not through conscious ideation or reflective purpose, but\nthrough the promptings of a power above or beyond the individual\nmind.\"[3]\n\nThe connection between very many, at least, of these inspirational moods\nand pathological states is too obvious to be ignored. Professor James\nadmits that \"we cannot possibly ignore these pathological aspects of the\nsubject.\" His notice of them, however, reminds one of the preacher who\nadvised his hearers to look a certain difficulty boldly in the face--and\npass on. No serious attempt is made to deal with them. A huge mass of\n\"religious experiences\" is thrown at the reader's head without any\nadequate explanation. It is a glorified revival meeting in an expensive\nvolume. The testimony of a crowd of religious enthusiasts of all ages is\naccepted at practically face value. Thus, a religious writer who\nexperiences the fairly common feeling of exaltation during a storm at\nsea, and explains his carelessness of danger as resulting from his\n\"certainty of eternal life,\"[4] is gravely cited as evidence of the\nworking of the religious consciousness. What, then, are we to make of\nthose who experience a similar feeling, but who are without the\ncertainty of eternal life? The declaration of St. Ignatius that a single\nhour of meditation taught him more of the truth of \"heavenly things than\nall the teachings of the doctors\" is given as evidence of mystic\nillumination.[5] So with numerous other cases. We are even informed that\n\"nitrous oxide and ether, especially nitrous oxide, when sufficiently\ndiluted with air, stimulate the mystical consciousness in an\nextraordinary degree.\"[6] There seems no reason why the same claim\nshould not be made on behalf of whisky. If one were not assured to the\ncontrary, one might conclude that Professor James wrote this volume to\npoke fun at the whole tribe of mystics and their followers.\n\nThe use made by Professor James of his long list of cases is the more\nremarkable, since he quite correctly points out that there are no\nreligious feelings, only feelings directed towards a religious end. But\nif this be so, how are we justified in taking the accounts of religious\nvisionaries as correct descriptions of the nature of their own mental\nstates? Clearly, we need a study of these cases quite apart from the\nmystical interpretation of them. Instead of a study Professor James\npresents us with a catalogue--useful from a documentary point of view,\nbut useless to any other end. And he is so averse to subjecting his\nexamples to analysis that, when the extravagance of certain cases are\nglaring, he warns us that it is unfair to impute narrowness of mind as a\nvice of the individual, because in \"religious and theological matters he\nprobably absorbs his narrowness from his generation.\"[7] Granted; only\none would like to know what reason there is for not deriving virtues as\nwell as vices from the same source? And, deeper enquiry still, may not\nthe religious interpretation itself be a product of the special\nenvironment of the period?\n\nThe study of religious phenomena from the point of view above indicated\nis of first-rate importance. But although much has been said,\nparenthetically and inferentially, on the subject by various writers,\nthe enquiry has never been exhaustively or systematically pursued. This\nis not due to any lack of material; that is abundant among both savage\nand civilised peoples. Perhaps it is because, while it has been\nconsidered permissible to point out that certain individuals have\nmistaken their own morbid states for evidence of divine illumination,\ntoo much ill-will would have been aroused had the powerful part played\nby this factor in religious development as a whole been pointed out.\nStill less admissible would it have been to point out, as will be done\nin succeeding chapters, that the deliberate culture of abnormal states\nof mind has been a part of the ritual of religions from the most\nprimitive to the most recent times. In this connection it is worth\nnoting that a very clear and shrewd essay on the connection between love\nand religious devotion by Isaac d'Israeli, which appeared in the first\nissue of the _Miscellanies of Literature_, was quietly eliminated from\nsubsequent editions.\n\nMy purpose, therefore, is to give Professor James's query--\"Under just\nwhat biographic conditions did the sacred writers bring forth their\ncontributions to the holy volume? and what had they exactly in their\nseveral individual minds, when they delivered their utterances?\"[8]--a\nwider scope. What are the conditions, biographic and social, under which\ncertain persons have imagined themselves, and have been believed by\nothers, to be specially favoured with divine illumination? The majority\nof people, it may safely be said, are conscious of no such experience.\nIn what respect, then, do the favoured few differ from their fellows?\nMust we assume that by some rare quality of natural endowment, or by\nsome unusual development of faculty, they are brought into touch with a\nwider and deeper reality? Or are we to seek a less romantic explanation\nwith the aid of known tendencies and forces in human nature? And,\nfurther, as this minority are not conscious of divine illumination all\nthe time, what is it that differentiates their normal state from their\nabnormal condition?\n\nThese are pertinent questions, and demand answer. But no answer of real\nvalue will be found in ordinary religious writings. Rhapsodical eulogies\nof religion tell us nothing; less than nothing that is useful, since\ntheories that obtain in such quarters are based upon the absolute\nveracity of the phenomena under consideration. We may gather from this\ndirection what religious people say or do, but not why they say or do\nthese things. A description of the states of mind of religious people,\nsuch as is given by Professor James, is interesting enough, but it is\ntheir causation that is of fundamental importance. And their causation\nis only to be understood by associating them with other and more\nfundamental processes. Within recent years psychology owes much of the\nadvance made to a closer study of the physiology of the nervous system,\nand if genuine advance is to be made in our understanding of religious\nphenomena we must adopt the same plan of investigation. We do not, for\nexample, understand the nature of demoniacal possession by a mere\ncollation of cases. It is only when we put them side by side with\nsimilar cases that now come under the control of the physician, and\nassociate them with certain peculiar nervous conditions, and a\nparticular social environment, that we find ourselves within sight of a\nrational explanation. Without adopting this plan we are in the position\nof one trying to determine the nature of a locomotive in complete\nignorance of its internal mechanism. Yet this is precisely the position\nof the professional exponent of religion. As a student the budding\ndivine has his head filled with historic creeds, and texts, and dogmas,\nand doctrines, none of which can possibly tell him anything of the real\nnature of religion. On the contrary, they act as so many obstacles to\nhis acquiring real knowledge in later life. And it is a striking fact\nthat while the professional astronomer, biologist, or physicist each\nadds to our knowledge of the subject that falls within his respective\ndepartment, we owe little or nothing of our knowledge of the nature of\nreligion to the professional theologian.\n\nTo put the whole matter in a sentence, the study of religion must be\naffiliated to the study of life as a whole. If possible, we must get at\nthe determining factors that lead one person to expend his energy on\nreligion and see supernatural influence in a thousand and one details of\nhis life, while another person, with apparently the same mental\nqualities, finds complete satisfaction in another direction, and is\nconscious of no such supernatural influence. It is scientifically\ninadmissible to posit a \"religious faculty\" organically ear-marked for\nreligious use. Something of this kind is evidently in the minds of those\nwho explain Darwin's agnosticism as due to atrophy of his religious\nsense, consequent on over-absorption in scientific pursuits, and who\nalso argue that the \"religious faculty,\" like a physiological structure,\nincreases in efficiency with use and atrophies with disuse. There is no\nreason for believing that, had Darwin been profoundly religious, his\nmental qualities would have been different to what they were. They would\nhave been expressed in a different form, that is all. As I have already\nsaid, there are no such things as specifically religious qualities of\nthe mind. There may be hope or fear or love or hatred or terror or\ndevotion or wonder in relation to religion, but they are precisely the\nsame mental qualities that meet us in relation to other things. The old\n\"faculty\" psychology is dead, and the religious faculty must go with\nit.[9] Mental qualities may be roused to activity in connection with a\nbelief in the supernatural, or they may be expressed in connection with\nmundane associations. Even the belief in the supernatural is only an\nexpression of the same qualities of mind that with fuller knowledge\nresult in a scientific generalisation. Whatever be the exciting cause,\nmental qualities themselves remain unchanged.\n\nIn the present enquiry we are not concerned with a disproval of the\nreligious idea, but with an examination of the conditions of its\nexpression; less with the varieties of religious experience than with\nthe nature of its manifestations. How far may religious experience be\nexplained as a misinterpretation of normal non-religious life? To what\nextent have pathological nervous states influenced the building up of\nthe religious consciousness? There can be no question that the\nlast-named factor is an important one. This is admitted by Professor\nJames in the following passage:--\n\n\"You will in point of fact hardly find a religious leader of any kind in\nwhose life there is no record of automatisms. I speak not merely of\nsavage priests and prophets, whose followers regard automatic utterance\nand action as by itself tantamount to inspiration, I speak of leaders of\nthought and subjects of intellectualised experience. St. Paul had his\nvisions, his ecstasies, his gifts of tongues, small as was the\nimportance he attached to the latter. The whole array of Christian\nsaints and heresiarchs, including the greatest, the Bernards, the\nLoyolas, the Luthers, the Foxes, the Wesleys, had their visions, voices,\nrapt conditions, guiding impressions, and 'openings.' They had these\nthings because they had exalted sensibility, and to such things persons\nof exalted sensibility are liable.\"[10]\n\nThe fact is unquestionable, but the question remains, In what sense were\nthese people exalted? Did their exalted sensibility really bring them\ninto touch with a form of existence hidden from persons of a coarser\nfibre? Or did it belong to a class of cases which in a more violent form\ncomes within the province of the physician? The subjects, says Professor\nJames, \"actually feel themselves played upon by powers beyond their\nwill. The evidence is dynamic; the god or spirit moves the very organs\nof their body.... We have distinct professions of being under the\ndirection of a foreign power, and serving as its mouthpiece.\" Of course\nwe have, but for diagnostic purposes such professions are quite\nvalueless. What these people are conscious of, and all they are\nconscious of, is a series of feelings of a more or less unusual kind.\nEqually convinced was the medieval demoniac that a spirit moved the very\norgans of his body. Equally convinced is the modern spiritualist medium\nthat his body is controlled by a disembodied spirit. It is not a\nquestion of the actuality of certain states, but of their origin. The\nintense conviction of the subject of the seizure is, as evidence, quite\nirrelevant. The subjective state is always real, whether it belongs to a\nsaint in ecstasy or a drunkard in delirium tremens. There are no states\nof mind more \"real\" while they last than those due to opium or hashish.\nBut it is never suggested that this is evidence of their veracity. In\nsuch cases the testimony of a skilled outsider is of far greater value\nthan the conviction of the visionary. We are bound to appeal to Paul,\nand Loyola, and Fox, and Wesley to know what their feelings were,\nbecause here they are the supreme authorities. But we must consult\nothers to discover why they experienced these feelings. An illusion is\nno more than a false interpretation of a real subjective experience;\nalthough many are inclined to treat the rejection of the interpretation\nas equivalent to a charge of imposture or deliberate lying.\n\nIt is also a matter of demonstration that these religious experiences\nare strictly determined by environmental conditions. Thousands of\nChristians have been favoured with visions of Jesus or of the Christian\nheaven in their dying moments. Millions of Jews and Mohammedans have\nlived and died without any such experience--the very persons to whom,\nfrom an evidential point of view--such visions would be most useful. The\nspiritual experience is determined by the pre-existing religious belief.\nWhen belief in a personal devil was general, visions of Satan were\ncommon. The evidence for personal conflicts with Satan is of precisely\nthe same nature and strength as is the evidence for intercourse with\ndeity. When the belief in Satan died out, visions and conflicts with him\nceased. How can we discriminate between the two classes of cases? Why\nshould the testimony of a great Christian character that he is conscious\nof intercourse with deity be more authoritative than the testimony of,\nperhaps, the same person on other occasions, of conflict with a personal\ndevil? Moreover, visions and a sense of contact with a super-normal\nworld are not peculiar to the religious character. It is a common\nfeature of a general psychopathic condition. Medical works are filled\nwith such instances. And it is only to be expected that when the\npsychopath is of a deeply religious nature the affection will find a\nreligious expression. What is clearly needed is an explanation that will\ncover the phenomenon as it appears in both a religious and a\nnon-religious form.\n\nWe may take as illustrative of what has been said the following case as\ngiven by Dr. W. W. Ireland. It is that of a Berlin bookseller who placed\non record a clear description of his impressions while in ill-health,\nand which entirely ceased on recovery. His delusions mostly took the\nform of human figures; of these he says:--\n\n\"I saw, in the full use of my senses, and (after I had got the better of\nthe fright which at first seized me, and the disagreeable effects which\nit caused) even in the greatest composure of mind, for almost two\nmonths, constantly and involuntarily, a number of human and other\napparitions--nay, I even heard their voices. For the most part I saw\nhuman figures of both sexes; they commonly passed to and fro, as if they\nhad no connection with each other, like people at a fair where all is\nbustle. Sometimes they appeared to have business with one another. Once\nor twice I saw amongst them persons on horseback, and dogs and birds;\nthese figures all appeared to me in their natural size, as distinctly as\nif they had existed in real life, with the several tints on the\nuncovered parts of the body, and with all the different kinds and\ncolours of clothes.\"[11]\n\nHere we have the case of a man who was under no misconception as to the\nnature of his visions. But it is safe to say that had he been of a less\npractical and analytic turn of mind, had he been, moreover, deeply\ninterested in religious matters, we might have had an altogether\ndifferent presentation of the facts.\n\nIn the next instance, also given by Dr. Ireland, we have a religious\nexplanation given of somewhat similar experiences:--\n\n\"A poor woman complained to me that she was continually persecuted by\nthe devils who let loose at her all sorts of blasphemies, and, indeed,\nall the worse the more she exerted herself not to attend to them; but\noften, also, when she was talking and active. She had already been to a\nclergyman who should exorcise the devil, and who had judiciously\ndirected her to me. I asked in which ear the devil always talked to her.\nShe was surprised at the question, which she had never started for\nherself, but now recognised that it always occurred in the left ear. I\nexplained to her that it was an affection of the ear which now and then\noccurs, but she was doubtful.\"[12]\n\nHere we have a distinctly physical affection ascribed to supernatural\nagency. In this case the inference is promptly corrected by the\nphysician. But given a different environment, an atmosphere permeated\nwith a belief in the supernatural, an absence of adequate scientific\nadvice, and the more primitive explanation is certain to prevail. In the\nnext instance--that of Martin Luther--we have just this conjuncture of\ncircumstances, with the inevitable result. Writing of his experience in\n1530, Luther says:--\n\n\"When I was in Coburg in 1530, I was tormented with a noise in my ear,\njust as though there was some wind tearing through my head. The devil\nhad something to do with it.... When I try to work, my head becomes\nfilled with all sorts of whizzing, buzzing, thundering noises, and if I\ndid not leave off on the instant I should faint away. For the last two\nor three days I have not been able to even look at a letter. My head has\nlessened down to a very short chapter; soon it will be only a paragraph,\nthen only a syllable, then nothing at all. The day your letter came from\nNuremberg I had another visit from the devil.... This time the evil one\ngot the better of me, drove me out of my bed, and compelled me to seek\nthe face of man.\"[13]\n\nThere is no need to quote more of this class of cases, at least for the\npresent. Their name is legion. One could, in fact, construct an\nascending series of cases, all agreeing in their symptom, and differing\nonly in the explanation offered. The series would commence with the\nexplanation of a possessing spirit, and end with that of a deranged\nnervous system. Ignorant of the nature, or even of the existence, of a\nnervous system, primitive man explains abnormal mental states as due to\na malignant spirit. Martin Luther, George Fox, or John Bunyan, living at\na time when the activity of evil spirits was a firmly held doctrine,\nattribute their infirmities to satanic influence. We are in the true\nline of descent. To-day we have with us every one of the phenomena on\nwhich the satanic theory rested, but they are described, and prescribed\nfor, in medical works instead of manuals of exorcism. The\nsupernaturalist theory gives way to that of the expert neurologist. The\nexorcist is replaced by the physician. Instead of expelling an intruding\ndemon, we have to repair a deranged system. We cannot argue that while\nthese affections remain constant in character their causes may have been\ndifferent in other ages from what they are now. That is pure absurdity.\nTo claim that the religious mystic is in moments of exaltation brought\ninto contact with a \"deeper reality\" is to invite the retort that one\nmight make a similar claim on behalf of the inmates of a lunatic asylum.\nWe cannot, with any pretence to rationality, accept the verdicts of both\nthe neurologist and the exorcist. If we agree that certain states of\nmind to-day have their origin in neural disorder, on what ground can we\nbelieve that similar mental states occurring a thousand or two thousand\nyears ago were due to supernatural stimulation? We may be told that\nthere are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamed of in our\nphilosophy. This may be true, and while it is an observation that would\nnot occur to a fool, it needs no supreme wisdom for its excogitation,\nand as generally used it is an excuse for idle speculation and grotesque\ntheory. Far more useful is the lesson, sadly needed, that there are few\nthings in heaven or earth that will not yield their secret to a method\nof investigation that is sanely conceived and diligently employed.\n\nThe utter uselessness of accepting at its face value anyone's\nexplanation of the nature of his subjective experience, is well shown by\nthe once universal belief in witchcraft. If there is a single belief on\nbehalf of which a mass of apparently unimpeachable evidence could be\nproduced, it is this one. It has run its course throughout the whole\nworld. It is still accepted by probably half the human race. In our own\ncountry eminent men, not alone theologians, but doctors, lawyers,\nstatesmen, and men of letters, have given their solemn testimony in its\nfavour. Thousands of people have been bewitched, and their symptoms\ndescribed by thousands of others. More remarkable still, those accused\nhave often enough confessed their guilt. Every possible corroboration\nhas been given to this belief, and yet it is now scouted by educated\npersons all over the civilised world. Even religious teachers accept the\nexplanation that these witchcraft cases were due to distinctly\npathological conditions, and to the power of suggestion operating upon\nuninformed minds during an unenlightened age. But communications with\nspiritual beings rest on no better foundation than communication with\nSatan. Whether the alleged illumination be diabolic or angelic, the\nevidence for either, or both, is the same. The testimony of a man like\nthe Rev. R. J. Campbell that he is conscious of a divine influence in\nhis life is of no greater value than that of the medieval peasant who\nfelt himself tormented by Satan. The one person is no better authority\nthan is the other on such a topic. Both are the heirs of the ages,\ninheritors of a superstition that goes back to the most primitive ages\nof mankind, only modified in its expression by the culture of\ncontemporary life.\n\nThere is nothing new under the sun, and human nature remains\nsubstantially unchanged generation after generation. All the phenomena\non which the belief in witchcraft was based, remain. Cases of delusion\nare common, and the power of suggestion is an established fact in\npsychology. All that has happened is this: taking the facts on which the\nbelief was based, modern science has shown them to be explainable\nwithout the slightest reference to the supernatural. And this is the\nprinciple that must be applied in other directions. Old occurrences must\nbe explained in the light of new knowledge. This is the accepted rule in\nother directions, and it is of peculiar value in relation to religious\nbeliefs. To know what religious people have thought and felt and said\ngives us no more than the data for a scientific study of the subject. To\nknow _why_ they thought and felt and spoke thus is what we really need\nto understand. But if we are to do this we must relate phases of mind\nthat are called religious to other phases of a non-religious character.\nI believe it is quite possible to do this. From medical records and from\nnumerous biographies it is possible to parallel all the experiences of\nthe religious mystic. We can see the same sense of exaltation, the same\nconviction of illumination, the same belief that one is the tool of a\nsuperior power. Take, as merely illustrative of this, the case of J.\nAddington Symonds, as narrated by Professor James, who cites it as an\nexample of a \"mystical experience with chloroform.\" Symonds tells us\nthat until he was twenty-eight years of age he was liable to extreme\nstates of exaltation concerning the nature of self. (It is worth while\npointing out that Sir James Crichton-Browne expresses the opinion that\nSymonds's higher nerve centres were in some degree enfeebled by these\nabnormal states.) In addition to this confession he placed on record an\ninteresting experience while under the influence of chloroform. He\nsays:--\n\n\"After the choking and stifling had passed away, I seemed at first in a\nstate of utter blankness; then came flashes of intense light,\nalternating with blankness, and with a keen sense of vision of what was\ngoing on in the room around me, but no sensation of touch. I thought\nthat I was near death; when suddenly my soul became aware of God who was\nmanifestly dealing with me, handling me, so to speak, in an intense\npersonal reality. I felt him streaming in like light upon me.... I\ncannot describe the ecstasy I felt. Then, as I gradually awoke from the\ninfluence of the an\u00e6sthetic, the old sense of my relation with the world\nbegan to return, the new sense of my relation to God began to fade....\nOnly think of it. To have felt for that long dateless ecstasy of vision\nthe very God, in all purity, tenderness, and truth, and absolute love,\nand then to find that I had after all had no revelation, but that I had\nbeen tricked by the abnormal excitement of my brain.\"\n\nWith a slight variation of expression this confession might have come\ndirect from the lips of the most pronounced mystic. There is no question\nof the intense reality of the experience. That was as vivid as anything\nthat ever occurred to any saint in the calendar. Still, no one will\ndream of claiming that the way to get _en rapport_ with the higher\nmysteries is by way of a dose of chloroform. The distinction here is\nthat Symonds knew and described the cause of his experience. And no one\nwill question that the phrase \"tricked by the abnormal excitement of my\nbrain\" covers the ground. Of course, there is always the easy retort\nthat saints and mystics did not use chloroform to produce their visions.\nTrue, but chloroform is not the only agent by means of which a person\nmay be thrown into an abnormal state. Other means may be used; and as a\nmatter of fact, the use of herbs and drugs, as methods of producing\necstatic states, have obtained in religious ceremonies from the most\nprimitive times. As we shall see later, tobacco, hashish, coca, laurel\nwater, and similar agents have been largely utilised for this purpose.\nAnd when this plan is not adopted--although very often the two things\nrun side by side--we find fasting and other forms of self-torture\npractised because of the abnormal conditions produced.\n\nIt is not argued or implied that in all this there was of necessity\ndeliberate imposture. That would imply the possession of greater\nknowledge than actually existed. But it was known that ecstatic states\nfollowed the use of certain drugs, or were consequent on certain\nausterities, and they were valued because they were believed to bring\npeople into communion with a hidden spiritual world. In this way there\nhas always been going on a more or less deliberate culture of the\nsupernatural, in more primitive times by crude and easily recognisable\nmeans, later by methods that are more subtle in character and more\ndifficult of detection. But the method of inducing a sense of\n\"spiritual\" illumination by means of practices alien to the normal life\nof man remains unchanged throughout. The collation of the conditions\nunder which mystical states of mind are experienced among savages with\nsimilar experiences among the higher races, proves at once that this\nstatement contains no exaggeration of the facts.\n\nThe continuity of the phenomena is, indeed, of profound significance,\nand is too often ignored. It is often asserted that we have to explain\nthe lower by the higher, and we can only understand the significance of\nreligion in its lower forms by bearing in mind the higher\nmanifestations. This is sheer fallacy. In nature the higher develops out\nof the lower, of which it is compounded. In biology, for example, it is\nnow generally conceded that the secret of animal life lies in the cell.\nThis may be modified in all kinds of directions, the resulting organic\nstructure may be of the utmost complexity, but the basis remains\nunchanged. So, too, with a great deal of so-called religious phenomena.\nThe story is not only continuous, but the same elements remain unchanged\nwith only those modifications initiated by a changed environment. And\njust as we are driven back to the cell to explain organic structure, so\nfor an understanding of the phenomena under consideration we must study\ntheir primitive elements. Analysis must precede synthesis here as\nelsewhere.\n\nA survey of the subject is not at all exhausted by a study of abnormal\nconditions, so far as these have entered into the life of religion.\nThere still remains the study of perfectly normal frames of mind that\nare misinterpreted and diverted into religious channels. The importance\nof this will be seen more clearly when we come to deal with the subject\nof conversion. That \"conversion\" is a phenomenon of adolescence is now\nsettled beyond all reasonable doubt. Statistics are conclusive on this\npoint. But the advocate of revivalism quite misses the true significance\nof the fact. Current religious literature is full of quite meaningless\nchatter concerning the change of view, the larger and more unselfish\nactivities, that arise as a consequence of conversion. There is really\nno evidence that the changes indicated have any connection with\nconversion. All that does happen can be more simply and more adequately\nexplained as resulting from physiological and psychological changes in\nterms of racial and social evolution. The whole significance of\nadolescence lies in the bursting into activity of feelings hitherto\ndormant, and the quickening of a desire for communion with a larger\nsocial life. The individual becomes less self-centred, more alive to,\nand more responsive to the claims of others; he displays tendencies\ntowards what the world calls self-sacrifice, but which mean, in the\ntruest sense, self-realisation. That these changes are often expressed\nin terms of religion is undeniable. This, however, may be no more than\nan environmental accident, quite as much so as was the case when\nepilepsy was explained in terms of possession.\n\nSo far as one can see, there are no feelings or impulses characteristic\nof adolescence that could not receive complete satisfaction in a\nrationally ordered social life. To-day it usually happens that the\nstrongest expressed influences brought to bear upon the individual are\nof a religious kind, with the result that adolescent human nature is\nmost apt to express itself in religious language. It must always be\nborne in mind that we are all as dependent upon our environment for the\nform in which our explanation of things is cast, as we are for the\nlanguage in which we express those ideas. The whole enquiry opened is a\nvery wide one, with which I can only deal parenthetically. It is really\nan enquiry as to how far the religious theory of human nature rests upon\na wrong interpretation of perfectly normal feelings, or to what extent\nsupernaturalistic ideas are perpetuated by the exploitation--innocent\nexploitation, maybe--of man's social nature. It is extremely probable\nthat a deeper knowledge, a more accurate analysis of human qualities,\nwill disclose the truth that man is a social animal in a much more\nprofound sense than has usually attached to that phrase, and the\nexpression of these qualities in terms of religious beliefs, or in terms\nof non-religious beliefs, is wholly determined by the knowledge current\nin the society in which he moves.\n\nI conclude this chapter with one more attempt to avoid misunderstanding.\nFor purposes of clarity it will be necessary to consider various factors\nout of relation to other factors. But it should hardly need pointing out\nthat in actual life such a separation does not obtain. The organism\nfunctions as a whole; each part acts upon and is acted upon by every\nother part. Life in action is a synthesis, and one resorts to analysis\nonly for the purpose of more adequate comprehension. It is not,\nmoreover, pretended that any one of the factors described in the\nfollowing pages will explain religion, nor even that all of them\ncombined will do so. The origin of the religious idea is a quite\ndifferent enquiry, and is adequately dealt with in the writings of men\nlike Tylor, Frazer, Spencer, and other representatives of the various\nschools of anthropologists. My present purpose is of a more restricted\nkind. It is that of tracing the operation of various processes, some\nnormal, but most of them abnormal, that have in all ages been accepted\nas evidence for the supernatural. That the religious idea has been\nassociated with these processes, and that for multitudes they have\nserved as strong evidence of its truth, cannot be denied. And an\nexamination of this aspect of the history of religion ought not to be\nignored, however unpalatable such a study may be to certain\nsupersensitive minds.\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[1] _Varieties of Religious Experience_, pp. 11-3.\n\n[2] _Varieties_, p. 14.\n\n[3] _Religions of Primitive Peoples_, p. 50.\n\n[4] Page 288.\n\n[5] Page 410.\n\n[6] Page 387.\n\n[7] Page 370.\n\n[8] _Varieties_, p. 4.\n\n[9] \"The hypothesis of faculties ... must be regarded as productive of\nmuch error in psychology. It has led to the false supposition that\nmental activity, instead of being one and the same throughout its\nmanifold phases, is a juxtaposition of totally distinct activities,\nanswering to a bundle of detached powers, somehow standing side by side,\nand exerting no influence on one another. Sometimes this absolute\nseparation of the parts of mind has gone so far as to personify the\nseveral faculties as though they were distinct entities.\"--Sully,\n_Outlines of Psychology_, p. 26.\n\n[10] _Varieties_, p. 478.\n\n[11] _The Blot upon the Brain_, p. 4.\n\n[12] _The Blot upon the Brain_, p. 16.\n\n[13] Cited by Dr. Ireland, p. 49.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER TWO\n\nTHE PRIMITIVE MIND & ITS ENVIRONMENT\n\n\nEver since the time of Aristotle it has been an accepted truth that man\nis a social animal. Not only is individual human nature such that it\ncraves for intercourse with its kind, but it can only be effectively\nunderstood in the light of those thousands of generations of associated\nlife that lie behind us all. As an isolated object, considered, that is,\napart from his fellows, man is more or less of a myth. At any rate, he\nwould not be the man we know and so may well be left out of account. Man\nas we know him is essentially a member of a group; he is a part of a\nreally organic structure inasmuch as the characteristics of each part\nare determined by its relations to the whole, and the characteristics of\nthe whole determined by a synthesis of the qualities of the parts.\n\nBut while there is agreement in the fact, there is a considerable\ndivergence of opinion as to its nature. What is the nature of this fact\nof sociability? What is the character of the force that binds the\nmembers of a group so closely together? By some, the cause of\nsociability is found in the pressure exerted upon all by purely external\nforces. The need for protection, it is said, drives human beings\ntogether, and thus in course of time the feeling of sociability is\ndeveloped. This seems much like mistaking a consequence for a cause. It\ncertainly leaves unanswered the question _Why_ should people have drawn\ntogether in the face of danger? Most certainly collective action\nstrengthens the capacity for defence; and it also increases the\ncertainty of obtaining the means of subsistence. Such consequences\nfurnish a justification, so to speak, of group life, but they disclose\nneither its nature nor its cause. And most certainly they do not bring\nus into touch with the fundamental qualities of _human_ society. The\nneed for food, shelter, or protection will not differentiate the\ngregarious from the non-gregarious forms of life, nor the social from\nthe merely gregarious. All forms of life require food, protection, and\nshelter; they are part of animal economics. There is nothing\nspecifically human about them.\n\nWe may reach what I conceive to be the truth in another way. Environment\nis to-day almost a cant word. It is very largely used, and, as one might\nexpect, largely misunderstood. Without actually saying it in so many\nwords, a vast number of people seem to conceive the environment as\nconsisting of the purely material surroundings of man. This is to\noverlook a most important fact. Even in the lowest stages of human\nsociety, where man's power over natural forces is of the poorest kind,\nit is not an exact statement of the case, and it is profoundly untrue\nwhen we take society in its higher developments. If we take the lowest\nexisting savage race we find that its attitude towards life, what it\ndoes, and what it refrains from doing, is the product of a certain\nmental attitude, which is itself the outcome of a number of inherited\nideas and customs. A number of white people, placed in exactly the same\nmaterial environment and faced with exactly the same external\ncircumstances, bring a different psychological inheritance into play,\nand act in an entirely different manner. If we transport a Chinaman into\nEngland, or an Englishman into China, we find that both of them possess\nthe same biological and material needs whether in their native country\nor elsewhere. Yet this community of needs does not make the Chinaman a\nmember of English society, nor an Englishman a member of Chinese\nsociety. They are one in virtue of certain broad human characteristics;\nthey are divided by certain qualities characteristic of their special\ngroups. Each society is marked by the possession of certain\npsychological characteristics--a number of specific beliefs and\nemotional developments--without which its distinctive group character\ndisappears. This is true of groups within the State; it is true of the\nState as a whole; it is true, on the most general scale of all, of the\nrace.\n\nIn other words, the distinguishing feature of human society is the\npossession of a psychological medium. The adaptations that the human\nbeing must make are mainly of a psychological character. Their _form_\nmay be partly determined by external conditions, but this does not\naffect the general truth. Whether we take man in a civilised or in an\nuncivilised state we find the important thing about him to be his\nrelations to his fellows. He is not merely a member of a tribe or a\nsociety, but he thinks that society's thoughts, he feels their emotions,\nhis individual life is an expression of the psychical life of the group\nto which he belongs. And his transactions with nature are an expression\nof the ideas and beliefs current in the society of which he is a part.\n\nThe recognition of this truth was one of the outstanding contributions\nof Herbert Spencer to the science of sociology. Whereas other writers\nhad stressed the power of the environment, as a purely material thing,\nin shaping human institutions, Spencer placed chief stress upon the\nemotional and intellectual life of primitive man as determining their\nbeginnings. He showed how man's feelings and beliefs about himself, and\nabout his fellows, and about the world of living forces with which he\nbelieved himself to be surrounded, were the all-important factors of\nsocial evolution. And the subsequent history of society has been such\nthat scientific sociology is very largely the study of the growth and\nelaboration of an essentially psychical environment. The lower animal\nworld--except so far as we allow for the operation of instincts--has,\nbroadly, only the existence of other animals and the physical\nsurroundings for its environment. With man it is vastly different. Owing\nprimarily to language, the environment of the man of to-day is made up\nin part of the ideas of men who lived and died thousands of years ago.\nThe use of clothing and the invention of tools would alone make mind a\ndominant fact in human life. But apart from these things, the great fact\nof social heredity, in virtue of which one generation enjoys the\nacquired culture of preceding generations, and without which\ncivilisation would have no existence, is a great and dominant _mental_\nfact. Our institutions, our customs, are transmitted to us as so many\npsychic facts. Every new invention, every fresh culture acquisition, is\nhelping to strengthen and broaden the psychical environment of man. Each\nnewcomer is born into it; it moulds his nature and determines his life,\nas his own career and his own acquisition help to mould the life of his\nsuccessors. Whether the phenomena be simple or complex, whether we are\ndealing with man in a civilised or in an uncivilised state, there is no\nescape from the general truth that man is everywhere under the\ndomination of his mental life.\n\nSo far as this enquiry is concerned, we need only deal with one aspect\nof the psychological medium in which primitive human life moves. And so\nfar as primitive mankind seeks to control the movements of social life,\nthere can be no question that this is done under the impulsion of that\nclass of beliefs which we call religious. The operation of religious\nbelief in savage society is neither spasmodic nor local. It is, on the\ncontrary, universal and persistent. It influences every event of daily\nlife with a force that the modern mind finds very difficult to\nappreciate. In almost every action the savage feels himself to be in\ntouch with a supersensual world of living beings that exert a direct and\ninescapable influence. And any study of human evolution that is to be of\nreal value must take this circumstance into consideration to a far\ngreater extent than is usually done. Professor Frazer, dealing with the\norigin of various social institutions, rightly observes that \"we are\nonly beginning to understand the mind of the savage, and therefore the\nmind of our savage forefathers who created these institutions and handed\nthem down to us,\" and warns us that \"a knowledge of the truth may\ninvolve a reconstruction of society such as we can hardly dream of.\" He\nalso warns us that we have at all times, in dealing with social origins,\nto \"reckon with the influence of superstition, which pervades the life\nof the savage and has contributed to build up the social organism to an\nincalculable extent.\"[14]\n\nIn emphasising this it must not be taken to imply that because social\ninstitutions and human actions are in primitive times moulded by\nreligious beliefs, they stand to them in a relation of complete\ndependence. It only means that the psychological medium is of such a\ncharacter that supernaturalistic reasons are found for doings things\nthat are susceptible to a totally different explanation. The facts of\nlife are expressed in terms of supernaturalism. Birth, marriage, death,\nsocial cohesion, leadership, health and disease, are all natural facts,\nand the mere play of social selection determines the weeding out of\npractices that are sufficiently adverse to tribal well-being to threaten\nits security. But in primitive times all these facts are allied with\nreligious beliefs, and to the primitive mind the religious belief\nbecomes the chief feature connected with them. As a matter of fact, this\nis far from an uncommon feature of social life to-day. The amount of\nsupernaturalism current is still very large; and one still finds people\nexplaining some of the plainest facts of social life in terms of\nsupernaturalistic beliefs. It is all part of the truth that man is\nalways under the domination of the psychological forces.\n\nThis being granted, the enquiry immediately presents itself, How comes\nit that the facts of social life should be expressed in terms of\nsupernaturalism? Why do these facts not immediately present themselves\nin their true nature? To answer this question one must bear in mind a\nyet further truth. This is that the explanation which man offers to\nhimself or to others of phenomena must always be in terms of current\nknowledge. A modern called upon to explain a storm, an eclipse, or a\ndisease, does so in terms of current physical or biological science.\nThis is done in virtue of a mass of prepared knowledge, slowly\naccumulated by preceding generations, and which forms part of his social\nheritage. Primitive man likewise explains things in terms of current\nknowledge, but in his case the amount of reliable information is of a\nvery scanty and generally erroneous description. The inherited knowledge\nwhich enables a modern schoolboy to start life with what would have been\nan outfit to an ancient philosopher, had yet to be created. Instead of\nfinding, as we find, tools ready to hand, replies prepared to questions\nthat may arise, primitive mankind must create its own tools and prepare\nits own answers. And in consequence of this the social environment,\nwhich at all times determines the form of man's mental output, is with\nprimitive man radically different from our own. But however the form\nvaries there is agreement on this one point--in both cases phenomena are\nexplained in terms of known forces; the reasoning of each is determined\nby the knowledge of each. The laws of mental life remain the same in all\nstages of culture. The brain functions identically whether we take the\nsavage or the scientist. In a general way the savage intelligence is as\nrational as that of a modern thinker. The difference is dependent upon\nthe accuracy and extent of the information possessed by each. Hence the\nvital difference in the conclusions reached. Hence, too, the dominance\nof supernaturalism in primitive times.\n\nThe great distinction between primitive and scientific thinking may be\nexpressed in a sentence--the modern mind explains man by the world,\nprimitive thought explained the world by man. In the one case we move\nfrom within outward, in the other from without inward. We are not now\nconcerned with semi-metaphysical idealistic theories that would reduce\nthe \"whole choir of heaven and furniture of earth\" to the creation of\nmental activity, but with the plain, understandable truth that the\nhuman organism is fashioned by the environment in which it dwells. And\nthere is amongst those capable of expressing an authoritative\nopinion--an agreement supported by evidence that has simply nothing\nagainst it--that the world of primitive man is overpoweringly animistic.\nIn the absence of that mass of scientifically verified knowledge which\nforms part of our social heritage, humanity commences its intellectual\ncareer by endowing natural forces with the qualities possessed by\nitself. The forces conceived are living ones. They are to be dreaded\nexactly as human beings are to be dreaded; to be appeased or\ncircumvented by the same methods that man applies to his fellows. The\nproblem before the savage is thus a very real one. In essence it is the\nproblem that is ever before humanity--that of subjugating forces to its\nown welfare. Primitive man is not, however, concerned with the\nelaboration of theories; nor is he consumed with vague 'spiritual\nyearnings.' His difficulty is how to control or placate those invisible\nbut very real powers upon which he believes everything depends. He would\nwillingly ignore them if he could, and would cheerfully dispense with\ntheir presence altogether if he believed that things would proceed as\nwell in their absence. But there they are, inescapable facts that have\nto be reckoned with.\n\nThe general outlook of the primitive mind is well put by Miss Mary\nKingsley in the following passage:--\n\n\"To the African the Universe is made up of matter permeated by spirit.\nEverything happens by the direct action of spirit. The thing he does\nhimself is done by the spirit within him acting on his body ...\neverything that is done by other things is done by their spirit\nassociated with their particular mass of matter.... The native will\npoint out to you a lightning-stricken tree and tell you that its spirit\nhas been killed. He will tell you, when the earthen cooking pot is\nbroken, it has lost its spirit. If his weapon fails him, it is because\nsomeone has stolen its spirit or made it weak by means of his influence\non spirits of the same class.... In every action of his life he shows\nyou how he lives with a great spirit world around him. You see him\nbefore he starts out to fight rubbing stuff into his weapon to\nstrengthen the spirit that is in it; telling it the while what care he\nhas taken of it.... You see him leaning over the face of the water\ntalking to its spirit with proper incantations, asking it when it meets\nan enemy of his to upset his canoe and destroy him.... If a man is\nknocked on the head with a club, or shot by an arrow or a bullet, the\ncause of death is clearly the malignity of persons using these weapons;\nand so it is easy to think that a man killed by the falling of a tree,\nor by the upsetting of a canoe in the surf, or in a whirlpool in the\nriver is also a victim of some being using these things as weapons. For\na man holding this view, it seems both natural and easy to regard\ndisease as a manifestation of the wrath of some invisible being, and to\nconstruct that intricate system which we find among the Africans, and\nagree to call Witchcraft, Fetish, or Juju.\"[15]\n\nMiss Kingsley is here dealing specifically with West Africa, but her\ndescription applies in a general way to uncivilised people all over the\nworld. There is much closer resemblance between the beliefs of\nuncivilised peoples than between civilised ones, because the conditions\nare much more alike. And under substantially identical conditions the\nhuman mind has everywhere reached substantially identical conclusions.\nThe philosophy of the savage is simple, comprehensive, and, given the\ndata, logical. He does not divide the world into the natural and the\nsupernatural; it is all one. At most, he has only the seen and the\nunseen. The supernatural, as a distinct category, only appears when a\ndefinite knowledge of the natural has arisen to which it can be opposed.\nHe has no such distinction as that of the material and the immaterial;\nso far as he thinks of these things, the invisible is only a finer form\nof the visible. Of one thing, however, he is perfectly convinced, and\nthis is that he is at all times surrounded by a host of invisible\nagencies to which all occurrences are due, and with whom he must come to\nterms. Even death wears a different aspect to the primitive mind from\nthat which it presents to the modern. To us death puts a sharp and\nabrupt termination to life. To the primitive mind death involves no such\nending.[16] Death is no more of a break than is sleep; and at all times\nthe conception of an annihilation of personality requires a marked\ndegree of mental power. So with the savage--the 'dead' man simply goes\non living. He may be incarnated in some natural object, or he may simply\ngo on living as one of the innumerable company of tribal ghosts. But he\nremains a force to be reckoned with, and the need for dealing with these\nghostly personages is one of the ever-present problems of primitive\nsociology, and brings us very near the beginnings of all religious\nbeliefs and ceremonies--if it does not form their real starting-point.\n\nOn one point all modern schools of anthropologists are agreed. This is\nthat man's first conception of the supernatural--or what afterwards\nranks as such--is derived from a purely mistaken interpretation of\nnatural phenomena. In this they have returned to the standpoint of\nHobbes, that \"fear of things invisible\" forms the \"natural seed of\nreligion.\" One source of origin of this belief in a supernatural world\nis certainly found in the phenomena of dreaming. To the savage his\ndreams are as real as his waking experiences. He does not _dream_ he\ngoes to distant places; he goes there during his sleep. He does not\n_dream_ that people visit him; they actually come. If a West African\nwakes up in the morning with a tired, bruised feeling, this arises, as\nMiss Kingsley says, from his 'soul' having been out fighting and got\nill-treated. The only philosophy of dreaming amongst savage races is\nthat of the excursions and incursions of a 'soul' or double.\n\nAnother powerful factor in the development of belief in the supernatural\nis that of man's attempt to explain natural happenings. Why do things\nhappen? Why does the sun rise and set, why does rain fall, thunder\ncrash, rivers flow? Note the way in which a child answers similar\nquestions, and one is on the track of the primitive intelligence. If\nman's own movements are caused by a 'soul' or double, then other things\nmust also move because they possess a 'soul.' If an answer is to be\nfound at all, it is only along these lines that the primitive mind is\nable to find it. And, once the answer is given, there are a thousand\nand one things occurring that lend it apparent support. Resemblances in\nnature, coincidences, echoes, shadows, etc., all give their support to\nthis primitive hypothesis--the only one possible in the circumstances,\nand the one still endorsed by the majority of the world's population.\n\nParticularly strong endorsement of this belief is supplied by disease\nand abnormal nervous states. Instances to illustrate this are\ninnumerable, but from the numerous cases cited by Spencer I select the\nfollowing: Among the Amazulus convulsions are believed to be caused by\nancestral spirits. With Asiatic races epileptics are regarded as\npossessed by demons. With the Kirghiz the involuntary muscular movements\nof a woman in childbirth are believed to be caused by a spirit taking\npossession of the body. The Samoans attribute all madness to possession.\nThe Congo people have the same notion of epilepsy. The East Africans\nbelieve that falling sickness is due to spirits.[17] In Rajputana, says\nMr. W. Crooke, disease is generally attributed to Khor or the agency of\noffended spirits. The Mahadeo Kolis of Ahmadnagar believe that every\nmalady or disease that seizes man, woman, or child, or cattle, is caused\neither by evil spirits or by an angry god. The Bijapur Veddas have a\nyearly feast to their ancestors to prevent the dead bringing sickness\ninto the house.[18] \"A Catholic missionary,\" says Professor Frazer,\n\"observes that in New Guinea the _nepir_, or sorcerer, is everywhere....\nNothing happens without the sorcerer's intervention; wars, marriage,\ndeath, expeditions, fishing, hunting, always and everywhere the\nsorcerer.\"[19]\n\nIn Ancient Egypt, Chaldea, and Assyria there is ample evidence that the\nsame belief flourished. Everywhere we find the exorcist and the\nwitch-doctor existing as natural consequents of the belief that disease\nhas a supernatural origin. We see it in both the teaching and practice\nof the early Christian Church. That great father of the Church, Origen,\nsays: \"It is demons which produce famine, unfruitfulness, corruption of\nthe air, and pestilence.\" St. Augustine said that \"All diseases of\nChristians are to be ascribed to demons.\" The Church of England still\nretains in its Articles an authorisation for the expulsion of demons;\nand a number of charms yet in wide use amongst civilised nations show\nhow persistent is this belief. For centuries there existed all over\nEurope sacred pools, wells, grottos, etc., all bearing eloquent witness\nto the deep-seated belief that disease was of supernatural origin, and\nwas to be conquered by supernatural means.\n\nEnough has been said to indicate the kind of environment in which\nprimitive man moves, and also to understand why ideas concerning the\nsupernatural exert such an enormous influence in early society. In a\nworld where everything was yet to be learned, man's first attempts at\nunderstanding himself and his fellows were necessarily blundering and\ntentative. His first attempts at explanation are expressed in terms of\nhis own nature. He sees himself, his own passions, strengths, and\nweaknesses reflected in the nature around him. This is the outstanding,\ndominating fact in primitive life. Leave out this consideration and\nprimitive sociology becomes a chaos. Admit it, and we see the reason why\nsocial institutions assumed the form they took, and also a key to much\nthat happens in subsequent human history. In primitive life religious\nbeliefs are not something separate from other forms of social life; so\nfar as man seeks consciously to shape that life they are to him an\nessential part of it. And the mistake once made is perpetuated. The\ninitial blunder once committed, daily experience seems to give it\nconstant justification. In the absence of knowledge concerning natural\nforces every event,--particularly if unusual,--every case of disease,\nendorses and strengthens the mistake made. A psychological fatality\ndrives the human race along the wrong path of investigation, and only\nvery slowly is the mistake rectified. One cannot see how it could have\nbeen otherwise. The only corrective is knowledge, and knowledge is a\nplant of slow growth. This psychological first step was man's first\nattempt to frame a theory of things satisfactory to his intellect--an\nattempt that, beginning in the crude animism of the savage, ends in the\nverifiable laws of modern science.\n\nFrom the point of view of our present enquiry two things are to be\nnoted. The first is that man's conviction of the nearness of a\nsupernatural world began in his lack of knowledge concerning the nature\nof natural forces. Of this there can be little doubt. One can take all\nthe facts upon which primitive mankind built, and still builds, its\ntheories of supernaturalism, and show that they may be explained in a\nquite different manner. The movements of the planets, the rush of\ncomets, the presence of disaster, the thousand and one operations of\nnatural forces no longer suggest to educated minds the action of\npersonal beings. The whole data of the primitive theory of things have\nbeen rejected. The premises were false, and the conclusions necessarily\nfalse also.\n\nThe second point is that from the earliest times one of the strongest\nproofs of human contact with a supernatural world has been found in the\nexistence of abnormal or pathological states of mind. These may have\nsometimes arisen quite naturally; at other times they have been\ndeliberately induced. How much the perpetuation of religious beliefs as\na whole owes to this factor has never yet been adequately realised. That\nit has had a very great influence seems beyond dispute. For it seems\ncertain that had not \"proofs\" of a supernatural world been offered in\nthe shape of visions, ecstatic states, etc., religious beliefs would\nhardly have exercised the power that has been theirs. The number of\npeople who are able to maintain a strong consciousness of the truth of\nreligion, merely looking at it as a philosophy of existence, is\nnaturally very few. The great majority require more tangible evidence if\ntheir belief is to be kept alive and active. And curiously enough, the\nvery growth of a naturalistic explanation has driven a great many to\nfind the evidence they desired in those abnormal states of mind that\nseemed to defy scientific analysis. In succeeding chapters evidence will\nbe given to show to what extent this kind of evidence for the\nsupernatural has been offered and accepted. It will be seen, as\nProfessor Tylor points out, that the line of religious development is\ncontinuous. The latest forms stretch back in an unbroken line to the\nearliest. And if this proves nothing else, it at least proves that\nconsequences do not always die out with the conditions that gave them\nbirth. It was the world of the savage that gave birth to the\nsupernatural. But the supernatural is still with us, even though the\nworld that gave it birth has disappeared. We retain conclusions based on\nadmittedly false premises.\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[14] _Lectures on the Early History of the Kingship_, pp. 36-7.\n\n[15] _West African Studies_, pp. 394-6.\n\n[16] See an interesting article on this point by W. H. R. Rivers on \"The\nPrimitive Conception of Death,\" in _The Hibbert Journal_ for Jan. 1912.\n\n[17] _Principles of Sociology_, vol. i.\n\n[18] _Popular Religion and Folklore of Northern India_, i. p. 124.\n\n[19] _Golden Bough_, 3rd ed., i. 337.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER THREE\n\nTHE RELIGION OF MENTAL DISEASE\n\n\n\"It is an interesting problem,\" says Professor J. H. Leuba, \"to\ndetermine what influences have led theologians to anchor their beliefs\nupon the proposition that religious experience differs from other forms\nof consciousness in that it gives one an _immediate_ knowledge of the\nexternal existence of certain objects of belief, although they do not\nfall under the senses, and an immediate knowledge of the truth of\ncertain historical facts.\"[20] This is, indeed, an interesting problem,\nand, we may add, one of growing importance, since there is a pronounced\ntendency on the part of present-day exponents of religion to rest their\ncase almost entirely upon the immediacy of their religious\nconsciousness. This conception of a certain order of experience,\nhowever, is not and cannot have always existed. A belief may be so\nwidely and so generally diffused that it is accepted without resistance,\nand, as it would almost seem, in the absence of evidence. But its\nintuitive character is only superficial, and disappears on careful\nexamination. The mere vogue of a belief constitutes in itself a kind of\nevidence, and for many people the most powerful kind of evidence. But\nthe conviction itself has a history, and it is in the unravelling of\nthat history, in the discovery of the class of facts upon which the\nconviction has been built, that the work lies. And when this is done it\nwill be found that our intuitions are invariably based upon a\ncontinuous--even though partly unconscious--appeal to facts. Sometimes\nit will, of course, be found that a renewed and deliberate appeal to the\nfacts in question will justify the conviction. At other times it will\nbe found that the facts demand an altogether new interpretation. For\ncenturies all the observed facts supported a conviction that the earth\nwas flat. It was a fresh scrutiny of the facts in the light of a new\nconception that revolutionised human opinion on the subject.\n\nWhat, then, is the history, and what are the facts upon which the belief\nthat religious experience brings man into contact with a kind of\nexistence not given in ordinary experience, is based? The kind of answer\nthat will be given to this question has already been indicated.\nReligious beliefs are in their origin of the nature of an induction from\nan observed order. The induction is not the result of that careful\ncollection of facts, leading up to an equally careful generalisation and\nsubsequent verification, which is a characteristic of modern science,\nbut it is an induction none the less. The primitive mind is not so much\nengaged in seeking an explanation of certain experiences, as it has an\nexplanation forced upon it. To picture the savage as inventing a theory\nin the sense in which Darwin propounded the theory of Natural Selection\nis to quite misconceive the nature of the savage intelligence. But to\nconceive the savage as having a certain explanation suggested by the\npressure of repeated experiences, and that this explanation subsequently\nassumes the character of a fixed belief, is well within the scope of the\nfacts known to us. In this stage of culture the existence of\nsupernatural beings is as much a deduction from experience as any modern\nscientific generalisation. Certain things are seen, certain feelings are\nexperienced, and the conclusion is that they are the products of\nsupernatural agency. From this point of view religion is no more than a\nprimitive science. It is the first stage of that long series of\ngeneralisations which, beginning with crude animism, ends with the\ndiscoveries of a Copernicus, a Newton, a Darwin, or a Spencer. It is a\nhistory that begins with vitalism and ends with mechanism. We commence\nwith a world in which there exists a chaotic assemblage of independent\npersonal forces, and end with a universe that is self-acting,\nself-adjusting, self-contained, and in which science makes no allowance\nfor the operation of intelligence save such as meets us in animal\norganisation.\n\nNow amongst the facts that suggest to the primitive intelligence the\noperation of 'spiritual' forces are those connected with the human\norganism itself in both its normal and abnormal states. But it is\nimportant to note--particularly so for the understanding of the part\nplayed by ecstatic religious phenomena in comparatively recent\ntimes--that once the occurrence of a certain state of mind is conceived\nas the product of intercourse between man and spirits, there is every\ninducement to cultivate these frames of mind whenever renewed\nintercourse is desired. This does not imply, at least in the earlier\nstages, conscious imposture. Generally the operator imposes on himself\nas much as he imposes on others. Noting that privation of body, or\ntorture of mind, or the use of certain herbs is followed by visions or\necstasy, it is believed, not that the vision is the product of the\npractice, but that the practice is the condition of illumination.\n\nThis attitude of mind is fairly paralleled by what takes place at the\nordinary spiritualistic _seance_. Those attending are advised that the\nchief condition of a communication with the inhabitants of the other\nworld is a passive state of mind. This passivity cannot exclude\nexpectancy, since it is only assumed in order that something may occur.\nIf nothing occurs, if no communications are received, it is because the\nrequisite conditions have not been fulfilled, and the sceptic is met\nwith much semi-scientific jargon as to conditions being necessary to\nevery scientific investigation. The fact that this passivity and\nexpectancy, with other attendant circumstances, not the least of which\nis the contagious influence of a number of people with a similar mental\ndisposition, opens the way to self-delusion is ignored. Then when the\nexpected and desired result follows, the mental attitude cultivated is\ntaken as the condition of communication with the spiritual world,\ninstead of its being, in all probability, the true cause of what is\nexperienced. In this way the story of supernatural intercourse runs\nclear and unbroken from primitive savagery to its survival in modern\ncivilisation. When Professor Tylor says, \"The conception of the human\nsoul is, as to its most essential nature, continuous from the philosophy\nof the savage thinker to that of the modern professor of theology,\"[21]\nhe makes a statement that is true of the whole story of supernatural\nintercourse in all its varied manifestations.\n\nThe chief distinction between primitive and modern man lies in the\nconsideration that in the first case the blunder is inevitable, in the\nlatter case the remedy lies to hand. How could primitive man be aware of\nthe real connection between the use of certain drugs or herbs and an\nexcitation or depression of the activities of the nervous system? He\ndoes observe consequences, but he is quite ignorant of causes. Even\nto-day their full consequences are unknown; and it is absurd to expect\nthat savage humanity should have been better informed. And even when a\nmore rational theory exists, the practice persists under various forms.\nThis is a principle that receives vivid illustration from the history of\nreligions. The modern believer in mystical states of consciousness no\nlonger advocates the use of drugs, and even fasting is going out of\nfashion. But we still have a continuation of the primitive practice in\nthe shape of insistence on the cultivation of abnormal frames of mind if\nwe are to experience a consciousness of communion with an alleged\nsupersensible reality. That is, we are to achieve by a mental discipline\nwhat the savage or the medieval monk achieved by coarser and more\nobvious methods. To withdraw the mind from the normal influence of\neveryday life is to expose it to the play of hallucination and delusion.\nThere is really no vital difference between unhealthy, solitary brooding\non a given subject and drugging the mind with hashish. This class of\nmodern mystic is one with the savage in an inability to recognise that\nthe illumination is the product of the discipline, not the mere\ncondition of its possession. Between the drug of the savage, the fasting\nand self-torture of the medieval monk and the prayerful meditation of\nthe modern mystic, the difference is only that of changed times and\naltered conditions. The method is the same throughout.\n\nThe truth of this has been well put by Tylor:--\n\n\"The religious beliefs of the lower races are in no small measure based\non the evidence of visions and dreams, regarded as actual intercourse\nwith spiritual being. From the earliest stages of culture we find\nreligion in close alliance with ecstatic physical conditions. These are\nbrought on by various means of interference with the healthy action of\nbody and mind, and it is scarcely needful to remind the reader that,\naccording to philosophic theories antecedent to those of modern\nmedicine, such morbid disturbances are explained as symptoms of divine\nvisitation, or at least of superhuman spirituality. Among the strongest\nmeans of disturbing the functions of the mind so as to produce ecstatic\nvision, is fasting, accompanied, as it usually is, with other\nprivations, and with prolonged solitary contemplation in the desert or\nin the forest. Among the ordinary vicissitudes of savage life, the wild\nhunter has many a time to try involuntarily the effects of such a life\nfor days together, and under these circumstances he soon comes to see\nand talk with phantoms which are to him invisible spirits. The secret of\nspiritual intercourse thus learnt, he has thence-forth but to reproduce\nthe cause in order to renew the effects.\"[22]\n\nAs a means, then, of strengthening and perpetuating a consciousness of\nintercourse with the spiritual world, we have to reckon with, not merely\nthe accidental occurrence of abnormal nervous conditions, but with their\ndeliberate cultivation. The practice is world-wide, and persists in some\nform or other in all ages. Thus we find the Australians and many tribes\nof North American Indians use tobacco for this purpose. In Western\nSiberia a species of fungi, the 'fly Agaric,' so called because it is\noften steeped and the solution used to destroy house flies, is used to\nproduce religious ecstasy. Its action on the muscular system is\nstimulatory, and it greatly excites the nervous system.[23] An early\nSpanish observer says of the ancient Mexicans that they used a kind of\nmushroom, \"which are eaten raw, and on account of being bitter, they\ndrink after them, or eat with them a little honey of bees, and shortly\nafter they see a thousand visions.\"[24] The mushroom was called the\n\"bread of the gods.\" The Californian Indians give children tobacco, in\norder to receive instruction from the resulting visions. North American\nIndians held intoxication by tobacco to be supernatural ecstasy, and the\ndreams of men in this state to be inspired. The Darien Indians use the\nseeds of the Datura Sanguinea to induce visions. In Peru the priests\nprepared themselves for intercourse with the gods by partaking of a\nnarcotic drink from the same plant. In Guiana the priest was prepared\nfor his functions by fasting and flagellation, and was afterwards dosed\nwith tobacco juice.[25] In India the Laws of Manu give explicit\ninstructions as to the means of producing visions. Chief of these is the\nuse of the 'Soma' drink. This is prepared from the flower of the lotus.\nThe sap of this, says De Candolle, would be poisonous if taken in large\nquantities, but in small doses merely induces hallucination. Opium and\nhashish, a preparation of the hemp plant, have been in general use among\nEastern peoples, as a means of producing ecstasy from remote antiquity.\nOpium, it is well known, produces an extraordinary state of exaltation,\nintensifying the sense of one's personality, and inducing a pleasurable\nconsciousness of mental strength and clarity. Under its influence, as De\nQuincey said, time lengthens to infinity and space swells to\nimmensity.[26] Belladonna, a drug much used by medieval witches and\nsorcerers, has also had its vogue for purely religious purposes. With\nthe Greeks the laurel was sacred to \u00c6sculapius. Those who wished to ask\ncounsel of the god appeared before the altar crowned with laurel and\nchewing its leaves. Before prophesying, the Greek priestesses drank a\npreparation of laurel water. This contains, although it was, of course,\nunknown to them, two toxic substances--prussic acid and the volatile oil\nof laurel. The first would induce convulsions, the second, hallucinatory\nvisions. The two combined were calculated to produce with both subject\nand observer a profound impression of spiritual illumination and\npossession.\n\nIt is unnecessary to multiply examples of the action of various drugs or\nherbs on the nervous system, or to cite the people who use them. Enough\nhas been said to indicate how widespread is the practice, and the\nconsequences are not hard to foresee. A very moderate development of\nintelligence would enable men to associate certain consequences with the\nuse of particular drugs, but a very considerable amount of knowledge\nwould be required to explain why these consequences were produced. In a\nsocial environment saturated with superstition the explanation lies\nready to hand, and is accepted without question. A people that sees\nspiritual agency in all the familiar phenomena of nature are certainly\nnot less likely to trace its influence in the mysterious and\nunaccountable effects of narcotics and stimulants. And each repeated\nexperiment provides additional proof. Man thus not only believes himself\nto be surrounded by a spiritual world; he is actually able to enter into\ncommunication with it by methods that are defined in the clearest\npossible manner. Every repetition strengthens the delusion and even\nwhen the delusion, as such, is exploded, the temper of mind induced by\nit persists.\n\nVarious other methods are employed to induce a feeling of religious\nexaltation. Prominent among these are dancing and singing. Dancing in\nconnection with religious ceremonies is now generally outgrown in the\ncivilised world, but singing is still the vogue. That is, singing is\nnot, it must be remembered, practised from any desire to cultivate a\nlove of music, although it may appeal to music-lovers. Still, its avowed\npurpose is to induce a feeling of devoutness in the congregation. The\nhypnotic consequences of a body of people singing in unison, or the\nsoothing, mystical effect of certain airs from a choir upon a\ncongregation, are recognised in practice if not in theory. This is a\nphenomenon that is not, of course, exclusively associated with religion.\nIn this as in other instances religion only utilises the ordinary\nqualities of human nature. But in all cases the purpose and the result\nare the same. That is, the subject is placed for the time being in a\nsupernormal condition, and the mild state of passivity or enthusiasm\ncreated makes him more susceptible to the influence brought to bear upon\nhim. This is true of religious singing and chanting, from the forest\ngatherings of the primitive savage down to the more sedate and elaborate\nassemblages in church or chapel.\n\nPrimitive dancing had both a sexual and religious significance,\nalthough, as will be seen later, in the primitive mind the sexual\nfunctions themselves are very closely associated with supernatural\nagency. Tylor is of opinion that originally men and women dance in order\nto express their feelings and wishes,[27] but it is certain it very\nearly and universally became associated with religious ceremonies, and\nthat because of the ecstasy induced. In some cases drug-taking and\ndancing go together. In others, reliance is placed on dancing alone.\nThis latter is the case with the 'devil dancers' of Ceylon. In Africa\nthe witch doctor discovers who has been guilty of sorcery by the aid of\ninspiration furnished during a dance. The whirling dance of the Eastern\ndervish is well known. Dancing also figures in the Bible. The Jews\ndanced around the golden calf (Ex. xxxii. 19) in a state of nudity.\nDavid, too, danced naked before the Lord. Dancing was also part of the\nreligious ceremonies attendant on the worship of Dionysos or\nBacchus.[28] Along with the drinking of certain vegetable decoctions,\ndancing formed an important part of the witches' saturnalia during the\nmedieval period. When in a state of frenzy, partly drug induced and\npartly the product of exhilaration caused by wild dancing, visions of\nSatan followed. In the dancing mania of the fourteenth century, the\nsufferers saw visions of heaven opened, with Jesus and the Virgin\nenthroned. Dancing was one of the prominent characteristics of the\nFrench Convulsionnaires in the eighteenth century. In more recent times\nwe have the dancing and singing connected with the Methodist revival. In\nmodern instances the dancing seems to have been consequent on religious\nexcitement rather than precedent to it, but in earlier times there is no\ndoubt that it was deliberately practised as a means of producing a state\nof exaltation.\n\nAmong the commonest methods of inducing a sense of religious exaltation\nis the practice of fasting. In various guises, this is the most\npersistent form of religious self-torture. Amongst more civilised people\nthe reason given for fasting is that it is a form of repentance, the\ngenuineness of which is attested by voluntary punishment. But originally\nthere seems little reason to doubt that it was adopted for a different\npurpose. It was valued not because the fasting person felt that he had\ndone anything for which it was necessary to repent, but because it was\nbelieved to bring people into closer touch with the spiritual world.\nThere is, of course, a very obvious reason for this belief. A lowered\nvitality is favourable to hallucinations of every description. A\nshipwrecked sailor is placed, by no act of his own, in precisely the\nsame condition as is the primitive medicine man or the medieval saint by\nhis own volition. It has always been recognised, and by none more\nreadily than by the great religious teachers of the world, that a\nwell-nourished body is inimical to what they chose to term \"spiritual\ndevelopment.\" The historic Christian outcry against fleshly indulgence\nhas much more in it than a revolt against mere sensualism. A well-fed\nbody has been deprecated because it closed the avenue to spiritual\nillumination. Hence it is that fasting has found such favour in all\nreligious systems. The ascetic saw more because, by reducing the body to\nan abnormal state, he provided the conditions for seeing more. The Zulu\nmaxim, \"A stuffed body cannot see secret things,\" really expresses in a\nsentence the philosophy of the matter.\n\nAmong the Blackfoot Indians of North America, when a boy reaches puberty\nhe is sent away from his father's lodge in search of a spiritual\nprotector or totem. Seeking a secluded spot, he abstains from food until\nhe is favoured in a dream with a vision of some animal or bird, which is\nat once adopted by him.[29] This custom obtains with most of the North\nAmerican tribes. Among these tribes, also, the soothsayer prepares\nhimself by fasting for the ecstatic state in which the spirits give\ntheir messages through him. The ordinary member of the tribe who wants\nanything will fast until he is assured in a dream that it will be\ngranted him. Similarly, the Malay, to procure supernatural intercourse,\nretires to the jungle and abstains from food. The Zulu doctor prepares\nfor intercourse with the tribal spirits by spare diet or solitary fasts.\nFasting is part of the ordinary regimen of the Hindu yogi. Of certain\nIndian tribes we are told that before proceeding on an expedition they\n\"observe a rigorous fast, or rather abstain from every kind of food for\nfour days. In this interval their imagination is exalted to delirium;\nwhether it be through bodily weakness or the natural effect of delirium,\nthey pretend to have strange visions. The elders and sages of the tribe,\nbeing called upon to interpret these dreams, draw from them omens more\nor less favourable to the success of the enterprise; and their\nexplanations are received as oracles, by which the expedition will be\nfaithfully regulated.\"[30] Amongst the Samoans, when rain was required,\nthe priests blackened themselves all over, exhumed a dead body, took the\nskeleton to a cave and poured water over it. They had to fast and remain\nin the cave until it rained. Sometimes they died under the experiment,\nbut they generally chose the showery months for their rain-making.[31]\n\nIn both the Old and New Testaments fasting figures largely. The\nencounter of Jesus with Satan is preceded by a forty days' fast. St.\nCatherine of Sienna began regular fasts at a very early age. Santa\nTeresa kept lengthy fasts every year. The fasting of the monks and nuns\nduring the epidemic period of monasticism is too well known to call for\nmore than a mere reference. Perhaps the most curious religious reason\ngiven for fasting is that cited by a writer from a monkish chronicler:--\n\n\"As a coach goes faster when it is empty, a man by fasting can be better\nunited to God; for it is a principle with geometers that a round body\ncan never touch a plane except in one point.... A belly too well filled\nbecomes round, it cannot touch God except in one point; but fasting\nflattens the belly until it is united with the surface of God at all\npoints.\"[32]\n\nGeorge Fox, the founder of the Society of Friends, confesses that he\n\"fasted much\" and \"walked abroad in solitary places,\" and \"frequently in\nthe night walked about mournfully by myself.\" After much brooding and\nfasting, he heard a voice which said, \"There is one, even Jesus Christ,\nthat can speak to thy condition.\" Such an experience is not at all\nsurprising, seeing the method pursued to acquire it. Less fasting and\nbrooding, with more genial intercourse with his fellows, might easily\nhave prevented Fox, as it has prevented others, hearing heavenly voices\nproffering him counsel. Such an experience is well within the reach of\nanyone who cares to acquire it. Tylor has well said that \"So long as\nfasting is continued as a religious rite, so long the consequences in\nmorbid mental exaltation will continue the old savage doctrine that\nmorbid phantasy is supernatural experience. Bread and meat would have\nrobbed the ascetic of many an angel's visit; the opening of the\nrefectory door must many a time have closed the gate of heaven to his\ngaze.\" No one will question the truth of this principle, so long as we\nare dealing with uncivilised mankind. Many, however, shrink from\nacknowledging that the practices current in more civilised times are\ndisguised illustrations of the same principle of interpretation, which\ndescends direct from savages, and but for them would never have existed.\n\nCommenting on the practices of certain savage medicine-men, a missionary\nremarks:--\n\n\"It always appeared probable to me that these rogues, from long fasting,\ncontract a weakness of brain, a giddiness, a kind of delirium, which\nmakes them imagine that they are gifted with superior wisdom, and give\nthemselves out for physicians. They impose upon themselves first, and\nafterwards upon others.\"[33]\n\nThis is shrewdly said, and is a good example of the readiness with which\nobvious truths are recognised when they do not clash with religious\nprepossessions. The difficulty for others is to discern any real line of\ndemarcation between the practices of civilised and uncivilised. So far\nas one can see, the only real distinction is that the method employed by\nsavages is open. That followed by civilised people is more or less\ndisguised. But derangement of function is derangement of function, no\nmatter how produced. And if we decline to believe that a savage holds\ngenuine intercourse with a spiritual world, as a consequence of this\nderangement, in what way are we justified in accepting the testimony of\na Christian visionary to similar intercourse, when the derangement is in\nhis case no less clear? It is a case of accepting both, or neither. The\nsane and scientific conclusion seems to lie in the following from Dr.\nHenry Maudsley:--\n\n\"Now that the mental functions are known to be inseparably connected\nwith nervous substrata, disposed and united in the brain in the most\norderly fashion, superordinate, co-ordinate, and subordinate--the whole\na complex organisation of confederate nerve centres, each capable of\nmore or less independent action--a natural interpretation presents\nitself. The extraordinary states of mental disintegration evince the\nseparate and irregular function of certain mental nerve tracts, or\ngrouped nerve tracts with which goes necessarily a coincident\nsuspension, partial or complete, of the functions of all the rest; the\nsupernatural incubus, therefore, neither demoniac nor divine, only\nmorbid. Thus the strange nervous seizures, with their mental\nconcomitants, not being outside the range of positive research, but\ninteresting events within it, become useful natural experiments to throw\nan instructive light upon the intricate functions of the most complex\norgan in the world--the human brain. Steadily are the researches of\npathology driving the supernatural back into its last and most obscure\nretreat; for they prove that in the extremest ecstasies there is neither\n_theolepsy_ nor _diabolepsy_, nor any other _lepsy_ in the sense of\npossession of the individual by an external power; what there is truly\nis a _psycholepsy_.\"[34]\n\nStates of exaltation produced by the aid of drugs, fasting, or other\nforms of self-torture come naturally under the category of deliberately\ninduced states of mind, owing to the conviction that spiritual knowledge\nmay be gained in this way. But there are other states that arise\nnaturally and which foster the same conviction. It has already been\npointed out that the generally accepted theory with uncivilised peoples\nis that all disease is due to the action of malevolent spirits. There is\nno need now to repeat proof of this, and in any case it lies to hand in\nany work that deals with uncivilised life. Nor need we go back to\nuncivilised times for evidence. One requires only to look but a very\nlittle way into the history of any country to find the supernaturalistic\ntheory of disease in full swing, and even to-day one may discover\nindications of its once general rule. Its importance to the present\nenquiry lies in the part it has played in building up in the religious\nconsciousness a general conviction of religious truth that does not\ndisappear even when it is seen that the evidence upon which it rests is\nfaulty. Just as the inhabitants of a Welsh village have their general\nbelief in religion strengthened by the semi-hysterical speeches of an\nEvan Roberts, and the convulsive capers of a whole congregation, so in\nall ages people have found endorsement of their belief in a supernatural\nworld in the existence of cases the pathological nature of which admits\nof no doubt. Belief in the supernatural character of specific nervous\nconditions or mental states may disappear, but the fact that this\nbelief has been general for a time leaves behind a certain psychological\nresiduum in favour of supernaturalism in general.\n\nThe connection between the priest and the physician is naturally a very\nancient one. The priest, indeed, is the primitive physician, the belief\nthat diseases are supernaturally caused indicating him as the agent of\ntheir cure. And it is only to be expected that when the attempt is made\nto divert the treatment of disease from priestly hands the effort should\nbe met with determined opposition. Quite naturally, too, the first\ngropings after a scientific theory of disease show a curious mixture of\nrationalism and superstition. Thus, in Greece, the temple hospitals\ndevoted to the mythical \u00c6sculapius, which were situated at Epidaurus,\nPergamus, Cyrene, Corinth, and many other places, served as colleges,\nhospitals, and places of worship. Sufferers slept in the temples in the\nhopes of receiving messages from the gods, and the priests themselves\nprofessed to have ecstatic visions which enabled them to prescribe for\nthose afflicted.[35] Great emphasis was placed on bathing, light, air,\nand food, and it is pretty clear that the priests had begun to mix both\nfaith and physic in a most perplexing manner.\n\nThe definite separation of medicine from magic and religion begins with\nHippocrates. His theory of disease was simple. He did not deny that\nthere might be a supernatural side to disease; he insisted that there\nwas always a natural one, and that this was the side with which we\nshould be concerned. Each disorder, he said, had its own physical\nconditions, and he laid down the rule that we \"ought to study the nature\nof man, what he is with reference to that which he eats and drinks, and\nto all his other occupations and habits, and to the consequences\nresulting from each.\"[36] In Egypt, also, very considerable advance was\nmade in the same direction. Probably a good deal of their knowledge\nresulted from the practice of embalming, in spite of the priestly\ninterdict on dissection. At all events, there is no doubt that\nconsiderable advance had been made. Herophilus and Erasistratus wrote of\nthe structure of the heart, and described its connection with the veins\nand arteries. The two kinds of nerves, motor and sensory, were\ndescribed, and the influence of foods, etc., as influencing health,\ndwelt on. Insanity was also dealt with as due to natural and\ncontrollable causes, and the effects of colour and music in dealing with\nmania noted.[37] Had this advance been followed, the history of European\ncivilisation might have been different from what it was. Plagues,\nepidemics, and diseases, with their far-reaching social and political\nconsequences,--consequences that are too little noted, or even\nunderstood, by historians,--might have met with adequate resistance, and\nsome would never have occurred.\n\nThe Pagan schools of medicine came to an untimely, although in some\ncases a lingering, end. \"The introduction of Christianity,\" says a\nmedical writer, \"had an undoubted influence on the course of medical\nscience; for the Christian was taught to recognise, in every bodily\ninfirmity, the dispensation of the Almighty, and in the calm, abstracted\npursuits of those holy men who passed their time in prayer and\nmeditation, a propitiation: hence medicine fell into the hands of monks\nand anchorites, who assumed to themselves, exclusively, the power of\ninterpreting all natural phenomena as indications of the Divine Will,\nand pretended to possess some occult and supernatural means of curing\ndisease.\"[38] Reversing the natural order of things, the physician was\nreplaced by the priest. The supernaturalistic theory was revived, and\nheld its own for well on a thousand years. For every complaint the\nChurch provided a specific in the shape of a charm, an incantation, or a\nsaint. St. Apollonia for toothache, St. Avertin for lunacy, St. Benedict\nfor stone, St. Clara for sore eyes, St. Herbert for hydrophobia, St.\nJohn for epilepsy, St. Maur for gout, St. Pernel for agues, St.\nGenevieve for fevers, St. Sebastian for plague, etc.[39] The height of\nabsurdity was reached when, in spite of the monopoly of the treatment of\ndisease by the priesthood, the Council of Rheims (1119) actually forbade\nmonks to study medicine. This was followed by the Council of Beziers\n(1246) prohibiting Christians applying for relief to Jewish physicians,\nat a time when practically the only doctors of ability in Christendom\nwere Jews. In 1243 the Dominicans banished all books on medicine from\ntheir monasteries. Innocent III. forbade physicians practising except\nunder the supervision of an ecclesiastic. Honorius (1222) forbade\npriests the study of medicine; and at the end of the thirteenth Century\nBoniface VIII. interdicted surgery as atheistical. The ill-treatment and\nopposition experienced by the great Vesalius at the hands of the Church,\non account of his anatomical researches, is one of the saddest chapters\nin the history of science.[40]\n\nWhen the sight of bodily disease strengthened and confirmed belief in\nthe supernatural, mental disease must have offered still more convincing\nevidence. Among uncivilised people we know that this is so. To quote\nagain from the indispensable Tylor:--\n\n\"The possessed man ... rationally finds a spiritual cause for his\nsufferings.... Especially when the mysterious unseen power throws him\nhelpless on the ground, jerks and writhes him in convulsions, makes him\nleap upon the bystanders with a giant's strength and a wild beast's\nferocity, impels him with distorted face and frantic gesture, and voice\nnot his own nor seemingly even human, to pour forth wild incoherent\nraving, or with thought and eloquence beyond his sober faculties to\ncommand, to counsel, to foretell--such a one seems to those who watch\nhim, and even to himself, to have become the mere instrument of a spirit\nwhich has seized him or entered into him, a possessing demon in whose\npersonality the patient believes so implicitly that he often imagines a\npersonal name for it, which it can declare when it speaks in its own\nvoice and character through his organs of speech.\"[41]\n\nIt was this conception of insanity, universally current in the\nuncivilised world, that was revived with fearful intensity in the early\nChristian Church, and which certainly served its purpose in intensifying\nthe genuine belief in supernaturalism. Jesus had given His followers\npower to expel demons \"In My name,\" and this power of exorcism was one\nupon which the early Christians specially prided themselves. It is with\nunconscious sarcasm that Dean Trench puts the question, If one of the\ndisciples \"were to enter a madhouse now, how many of the sufferers there\nhe might recognise as 'possessed'?\"[42] One may safely say that he would\nregard all as under the dominion of evil spirits. No other cause of\ninsanity appears to have been recognised, and the Church devised the\nmost elaborate formul\u00e6 for casting out demons. The assumed demoniac was\nprayed over, incensed, and evil-smelling drugs burned under his nose. A\nset form of objurgation then followed:--\n\n\"Thou lustful and stupid one.... Thou lean sow, famine-stricken and most\nimpure.... Thou wrinkled beast, of all beasts the most beastly.... Thou\nbestial and foolish drunkard.... Thou sooty spirit from Tartarus.... I\ncast thee down, O Tartarean boor, into the infernal kitchen....\nLoathsome cobbler ... filthy sow ... envious crocodile.... Malodorous\ndrudge ... swollen toad ... lousy swineherd,\" etc. etc.[43]\n\nThen followed the exorcism proper:--\n\n\"By the Apocalypse of Jesus Christ, which God hath given to make known\nunto His servants those things which are shortly to be ... I exorcise\nyou, ye angels of untold perversity.... May all the devils that are thy\nfoes rush forth upon thee and drag thee down to hell!... May the Holy\nOne trample on thee and hang thee up in an infernal fork, as was done to\nthe five kings of the Amorites!... May God set a nail to your skull, and\npound it with a hammer as Jael did to Sisera!... May Sother break thy\nhead and cut off thy hands, as was done to the cursed Dagon!... May God\nhang thee in a hellish yoke, as seven men were hanged by the sons of\nSaul!\"[44]\n\nMarcus Aurelius mentions as one of his debts to the philosopher\nDiognetus that he had taught him \"not to give credit to vulgar tales of\nprodigies and incantations, and evil spirits cast out by magicians or\npretenders to sorcery, and such kind of impostors.\"[45] What would have\nbeen the thoughts of the great emperor, could he have revisited the\nearth two centuries after his death and seen the then civilised world\nenveloped in a mental atmosphere in which such ideas as those above\ndescribed could live?\n\nAll over Europe for centuries lunatics were whipped, and otherwise\nill-treated, in the hopes of expelling the demons that were troubling\nthem. The seventy-second Canon of the Church of England still provides\nthat no unlicensed person shall \"cast out any devil or devils\" under\npain of penalties prescribed. A Bishop of Beauvais, in the fifteenth\ncentury, not only caused five devils to come out of one person, but\nactually induced them to sign a document promising not to molest this\nparticular sufferer again. Tremendous, again, were the labours of the\nJesuit Fathers of Vienna, who boasted that they had cast out no less\nthan 12,652 'living devils.' Such arithmetical exactitude silences all\nhostile comment. In some parts of Scotland, as late as 1783, lunatics\nwere left all night in the churchyard, with a holy bell over their\nheads. In Cornwall, St. Nun's pool was famous for the cure of lunatics.\nThe poor devils were tied hand and foot and doused in the water until\nthey were cured--or killed. Even the embraces of prostitutes, for some\npeculiar reason, were recommended as a cure for insanity.[46] In 1788,\nin Bristol, a drunken epileptic, one George Larkins, was brought into\nchurch, and seven clergymen solemnly set themselves to the task of\nexorcising the possessing demon. Whereupon Satan swore 'by his infernal\nden'--an oath, says the chronicler, nowhere to be found but in Bunyan.\nUnder date of October 25, 1739, John Wesley also relates how he was sent\nfor and assisted at the expulsion of a demon from the body of a young\ngirl.\n\nOf all nervous diseases that of epilepsy appears to have been most\nfavourable to the encouragement of a belief in spiritual agency. One\nmedical authority whose experience enables him to speak with a peculiar\ndegree of authority has pointed out that with epilepsy there is often an\nexaltation of the religious sentiments.[47] A more recent writer, Dr.\nBernard Hollander, asserts that epileptics are \"highly religious.\"[48]\nSir T. S. Clouston also points out that strong religious emotionalism\noften accompanies epilepsy.[49] Another eminent physician, while\npointing out that \"a high degree of intelligence, amounting even to\ngenius, has in some cases been associated with epilepsy,\" observes that\n\"the epileptic is apt to be influenced greatly by the mystical and\nawe-inspiring, and he is disposed to morbid piety.\"[50]\n\nEvery medical man is acquainted with the close relation that exists\nbetween epilepsy and all kinds of hallucinations and delusions, and it\nwould be more than surprising if in an environment where the religious\ninterpretation of things is paramount, or with a patient of strong\nreligious convictions, these delusions did not take a religious form.\nAnd of all nervous disorders epilepsy seems most favourable for\nproducing this. Under its influence hallucination attacks every one of\nthe senses with a varying degree of intensity. \"The patient hears\nvoices, and generally words expressing definite ideas, though he is\noften unable to properly refer them to any speaking person. Sometimes\ninstead of external sounds or voices, the patient has a consciousness of\nan internal voice that may be as real to him as any external auditory\nperception. At first the voices may be indistinct, but upon constant\nrepetition and evolution from sub-conscious thought they acquire\nintensity, eventually dominating the life of the individual.\"[51] Dr.\nBall says: \"One patient perceives at the beginning of the attack a\ntoothed wheel, in the middle of which there appears a human face making\nstrange contortions; another sees a series of smiling landscapes. In\nsome cases it is the sense of hearing which is affected;--the patient\nhears voices or strange noises. Others are warned by the sense of smell\nthat the fit is going to commence.\"[52]\n\nSometimes these hallucinations of sight and hearing are in curious\ncontrast with each other. \"Not rarely,\" says Dr. Conolly Norman, \"a\npatient has visual hallucinations of a cheering kind--as of God or\nangels; yet his auditory hallucinations are full of blasphemy, mockery,\nand insult.\"[53]\n\nDr. Maudsley thus describes the general symptoms accompanying an\nepileptic attack:--\n\n\"The patient's senses are possessed with hallucinations, his ganglionic\ncentral cells being in a state of what may be called convulsive action;\nbefore the eyes are blood-red flames of fire, amidst which whoever\nhappens to present himself appears as a devil or otherwise horribly\ntransformed; the ears are filled with a terribly roaring noise, or\nresound with a voice imperatively commanding him to save himself; the\nsmell is one of sulphurous stifling, and the desperate and violent\nactions are the convulsive reaction to such fearful hallucinations.\"[54]\n\nIf anyone will bear in mind the numerous descriptions of religious\nvisions, written in all good faith, and the behaviour of many an assumed\n'inspired' character, he will have little difficulty in realising how\neasily, to a people unacquainted with the real character of such\nphenomena, epilepsy lends itself to a religious interpretation. It must\nalso be borne in mind that the consequences of vivid hallucinations\nexperienced during epilepsy do not always disappear with the attack to\nwhich they were originally due.\n\nIt is certain that from the earliest times cases of what are undoubtedly\nepilepsy have been taken as positive indications of supernatural\ninfluence. \"There is,\" says Emanuel Deutsch, \"a peculiar something\nsupposed to inhere in epilepsy. The Greeks called it a divine disease.\nBacchantic and chorybantic furor were God-inspired stages. The Pythia\nuttered her oracles under the most distressing signs. Symptoms of\nconvulsion were ever needed as a sign of the divine.\"[55] Much of the\nevidence for the supernatural in the New Testament rests upon cases that\nare obviously pathological in character. A man brings his son to Jesus\nand describes how \"ofttimes he falleth into the fire, and oft into the\nwater\" (Matt. xvii. 15), and in another place (Mark ix. 18) the same\npatient is described as having a dumb spirit, \"and wheresoever he taketh\nhim, he teareth him; and he foameth, and gnasheth with his teeth, and\npineth away.\" The response to the father's appeal for help is an\nexorcism of the possessing spirit such as one meets with in all savage\nculture. Between possession by a malignant spirit and domination by a\ngod, the difference is clearly one of terminology alone. And at the\nside of the New Testament case just cited one may place this account\nfrom Polynesia, written by a very competent observer, and a\nmissionary:--\n\n\"As soon as the god was supposed to have entered the priest, the latter\nbecame violently agitated and worked himself up to the highest pitch of\napparent frenzy; the muscles of the limbs seemed convulsed, the body\nswelled, the countenance became terrific, the features distorted, the\neyes wild and strained. In this state he often rolled on the earth,\nfoaming at the mouth, as if labouring under the influence of the\ndivinity by whom he was possessed, and in shrill cries, and often\nviolent and indistinct sounds, revealed the will of the god.\"[56]\n\nAdvancing to a higher culture stage than that indicated in the last\npassage, there is much evidence that Mohammed was subject to\nhallucinations, and many authorities have indicated epilepsy as their\nsource. There is a tradition that someone who saw Mohammed while he was\nreceiving one of his revelations observed that he seemed unconscious and\nwas red in the face. Mohammed himself said:--\n\n\"Inspiration descendeth upon me in two ways. Sometimes Gabriel cometh\nand communicateth the revelation unto me, as one man unto another, and\nthis is easy; at other times it affecteth me like the ringing of a bell,\npenetrating my very heart, and rending me as it were in pieces; and this\nit is which grievously afflicteth me.\"\n\nEmanuel Deutsch, although, in a passage already cited, recognising the\nreligious significance attached to epilepsy, has the following curious\ncomment:--\n\n\"Mohammed was epileptic; and vast ingenuity and medical knowledge have\nbeen lavished upon this point as explanatory of Mohammed's mission and\nsuccess. We, for our own part, do not think that epilepsy ever made a\nman appear a prophet to himself or even to the people of the East; or,\nfor the matter of that, inspired him with the like heart-moving words\nand glorious pictures. Quite the contrary. It was taken as a sign of\ndemons within--demons, 'Devs,' devils to whom all manner of diseases\nwere ascribed throughout the antique world.\"\n\nThis seems very largely to miss the point at issue. Of course, no one\nwould claim that Mohammed's success was due to epilepsy, or even that\nthe very severe forms of epilepsy were favourable to inducing a\nconviction of revelation. But the disease assumes various forms, and in\nsome cases it is expressed in the form of a period of mental excitement\nand general irritability. All that is claimed is that, given the\ncomplaint in its less severe forms in one with whom religious beliefs\nare strong, there are present all the conditions for attributing the\nresulting hallucinations to personal revelation or ecstatic vision. And\nit is also true that while some patients after emerging from a fit of\nepilepsy are in a dazed or confused condition, others have a very clear\nrecollection of all they have seen and heard. Mohammed simply took the\ncurrent explanation of cases of nervous derangement, and being a man of\nstrong religious feeling, naturally gave his visions a religious\ninterpretation. All the rest has to be explained in terms of the innate\ngenius of the man and of the circumstances of his time.\n\nA similar case to the above is that of Emanuel Swedenborg. His followers\nnaturally resent the ascription of his visions and voices to a\npathologic origin, and point to his pronounced mental ability. And\ncertainly no one who is at all acquainted with the writings of\nSwedenborg will question his great mental power, amounting at times to\npositive genius. But here, again, we have strong religious conviction in\nalliance with pathological conditions. Swedenborg's communications with\ncelestial beings were of a more frequent and more ordered character than\nMohammed's, but there is the same general likeness between them. Of his\nfirst revelation he writes:--\n\n\"At ten o'clock I lay down in bed and was somewhat better; half an hour\nafter I heard a clamour under my head; I thought that then the tempter\nwent away; immediately there came over me a rigor so strong from the\nhead and the whole body, with some din, and this several times. I found\nthat something holy was over me. I thereupon fell asleep, and at about\ntwelve, one, or two o'clock in the night there came over me so strong a\nshivering from head to foot, as if many winds rushed together, which\nshook me, was indescribable, and prostrated me upon my face. Then, while\nI was prostrated, I was in a moment quite awake, and saw that I was cast\ndown, and wondered what it meant. And I spoke as if I was awake, but\nfound that the word was put into my mouth, and I said, 'Omnipotent Jesus\nChrist, as of Thy great grace Thou condescendest to come to so great a\nsinner, make me worthy of this grace!' I held my hands together and\nprayed, and then came a hand which squeezed my hands hard; immediately\nthereupon I continued in prayer.\"[57]\n\nSwedenborg confessed to repeated walks and talks with celestial\nvisitants, and, of course, all thought of imposture must be put on one\nside. What one has to consider is whether we are to accept these\nexperiences as hallucinations or not. On the one side no further\nevidence seems possible than the profound faith of the man himself, his\nrecognised mental ability, and the belief of his followers. And against\nthis it must be urged that the most complete honesty is no guarantee\nagainst self-deception, while ability and even genius are not at all\nincompatible with a pathologic strain. And in addition it must be borne\nin mind that these hallucinations are, after all, part of a very large\nclass. Men of very little ability and influence experience substantially\nthe same visions; they occur all over the world, under all conditions of\nculture, and always express the personal idiosyncrasies of the subject\nand reflect the character of his social environment. One may safely say\nthat had Swedenborg lived a century later, while he might still have\ngone through the same mental and physical experiences, he himself would\nhave given a very different interpretation of them.\n\nSt. Paul, Professor James points out, \"certainly had once an epileptoid,\nif not an epileptic seizure.\" One needs to add to this that the seizure\noccurred at the one critical moment of his life which eventuated in his\nconversion from Judaism to Christianity. Mary Magdalene, the first who\nbrought tidings of the resurrection, had been delivered of seven\ndevils. Luther's religious opinions were, of course, quite apart from\nhis physical state, sound or unsound. Still, even with him the reality\nof supernatural intercourse became intensely vivid as a result of\nnervous affections. His latest biographer points out that as a youth\nwhile in the monastery he was seized with something that might well have\nbeen an epileptic fit, and that although there is no record of a return\nof this, he did suffer from ordinary fits of fainting.[58] He confesses\nto have been much troubled, at twenty-two years of age, with giddiness\nand noises in the ear, which he attributed to the devil. And right\nthrough his life he attributed similar experiences to the same source.\nBunyan confesses that even during childhood the Lord \"did scare and\naffright me with fearful dreams, and did terrify me with dreadful\nvisions.\" George Fox, founder of the Society of Friends, describes how,\nin the middle of winter, when approaching Lichfield, \"the Word of the\nLord was like a fire in me,\" and as he went through the town, \"there\nseemed to me to be a channel of blood running down the streets, and the\nmarket-place appeared like a pool of blood.\" Reflecting on the meaning\nof the vision, he remembered that, \"In the Emperor Diocletian's time a\nthousand Christians were martyred at Lichfield. So I was to go without\nmy shoes through the channel of their blood in the market-place, that I\nmight raise up the blood of these martyrs which had been shed above a\nthousand years before.\"[59]\n\nIn none of these cases could it be fairly claimed that the religious\nconviction, as such, was the consequence of the hallucinations\nexperienced. But it can scarcely be questioned that these served to\nstrengthen it to an enormous extent. These trances, ecstasies, visions,\nwere accepted by the subjects as proofs of their 'divine mission,' and\nwere so accepted by multitudes of their followers. In their absence\nreligion would most probably have failed to be the fiercely irruptive\nforce in life that it has been. The religious idea has, so to speak\ngiven hallucination a standing and an authority in life it would not\nhave possessed in its absence. In the case of men of ordinary capacity\nthese visions possess little authority. But in the case of men of\nextraordinary capacity, men like Luther, Mohammed, Fox, Swedenborg,--who\nmust in any case have stood superior to their fellows,--these\nhallucinations are then under favouring social conditions invested with\nenormous authority. And there is no doubt about the fact that religious\nleaders have been peculiarly subject to these psychical variations. This\nis pointed out by Professor James in the following passage:--\n\n\"Even more perhaps than other kinds of genius, religious leaders have\nbeen subject to abnormal psychical visitations. Invariably they have\nbeen creatures of exalted emotional sensibility. Often they have led a\ndiscordant inner life, and had melancholy during a part of their career.\nThey have known no measure, been liable to obsessions and fixed ideas;\nand frequently they have fallen into trances, heard voices, seen\nvisions, and presented all sorts of peculiarities which are ordinarily\nclassed as pathological. Often, moreover, these pathological features in\ntheir career have helped to give them their religious authority and\ninfluence.\"[60]\n\nWell, in what way are we to discriminate between the visions of a\nreligious person, admittedly of an abnormal disposition, subject to fits\nof melancholy, etc., and presenting \"all sorts of peculiarities\nordinarily classed as pathological,\" and the hallucinations of an\nadmittedly pathologic subject? Why should the ordinary classification\nbreak down at this point? Dr. Granger, dealing with this aspect of the\nquestion, says: \"The religious genius is not proved to be morbid by the\nextent to which he diverges from the average type.\"[61] Quite so, genius\n_must_ depart from the average type in order to be genius. But the\nstatement is quite beside the point at issue. It is not a mere\ndivergence from the average type that warrants one in assuming that much\npassing for divine illumination owes its origin to pathological\nconditions, but the fact that it is possible to affiliate certain cases\nof religious exaltation with these conditions. Hallucinations are common\nto all forms of ecstasy, and ecstasy is not confined to religion. Given\na one-sided mental activity, intense concentration on one or a few\nanalogous ideas, combined with a lowered nervous sensibility, and we\nhave all the conditions present favourable to hallucination.[62] These\nhallucinations may occur in connection with any topic that engrosses the\nsubject's mind. In every other direction their true nature is recognised\nand admitted. In connection with religious belief alone, it is held that\nthey bring the subject into touch with a supersensual world of reality.\nWhat possible scientific warranty is there for any such distinction?\n\nLet us take, as an example, one of James's own cases, which he admits is\n'distinctly pathological,' but without allowing this admission to\ndisturb his general conclusion. The case is that of Suso, a famous\nfourteenth-century mystic. As a young man he wore a hair shirt and an\niron chain next the skin. Later he had made a leathern garment studded\nwith one hundred and fifty nails, points inward. The garment was made\nvery tight, and he used it to sleep in. To prevent himself throwing it\noff during sleep he procured a pair of leather gloves studded with\ntacks, so that if he attempted to get rid of the dress the tacks would\npenetrate his flesh. Next he had made a wooden cross, with thirty\nprotruding nails, to emulate the sufferings of Jesus. He procured an old\ndoor to sleep on. In winter he suffered from the frost. His feet were\nfull of sores, his legs became dropsical, his knees bloody and seared,\nhis loins covered with scars, his hands tremulous. During twenty years\nhe fed scantily upon the coarsest food, slept in the most uncomfortable\nplaces, and during the whole of the time never took a bath. No wonder\nthat after his fortieth year he was favoured with a series of visions\nfrom God. Would not one be surprised if any other result than this had\nbeen achieved? And Suso's case is only one of thousands, many of not so\nextreme a character, others quite as bad.\n\nIn the case of Catherine of Sienna the austerities began earlier than\nwith Suso. As a child she flogged herself, and was favoured with visions\nbefore she reached her teens. Santa Teresa, as a young woman, prayed to\nGod to send her an illness, and describes how she remained for days in a\ntrance, during which time her tongue was bitten in many places. She\ndescribes how, during these trances, her body became to her light, and\nshe remained rigid. \"It was altogether impossible for me to hinder it;\nfor my world would be carried absolutely away, and ordinarily even my\nhead, as it were, after it.\"[63] These are typical examples from a very\nlarge number of cases. The annals of monasticism are filled with\naccounts of self-inflicted tortures, with the one end in view, and in\nserious belief that their experiences brought them into touch with a\nreality denied them under normal conditions. The practice not only\nquickened their own sense of the reality of religion, it served the same\npurpose for thousands of others pursuing the course of ordinary social\nexistence. \"Religious teachers,\" says Francis Galton, \"by enforcing\ncelibacy, fasting, and solitude, have done their best towards making men\nmad, and they have always largely succeeded in inducing morbid mental\nconditions among their followers.\"[64]\n\nThe phenomenon is thus continuous and, in its essentials, unchanging.\nFrom the most primitive times there has been a close association between\nthe belief in divine illumination and spiritual intercourse, and mental\nstates that are unquestionably pathological. Following this there has\nbeen a more or less deliberate cultivation of these states in the desire\nto renew communion with a spiritual world hidden from man's normal\nsenses. In this there need be no deliberate imposture. When imposture\ndoes occur, it would be at a later culture stage. At the beginning\nthere is nothing but misunderstanding. First in order of time comes the\ncrude animistic interpretation of almost every phase of human activity.\nSo far as primitive life is concerned, the evidence of this is simply\noverwhelming. Next, as Tylor has pointed out, from believing that the\noccurrence of certain mental states provides the conditions of\ncommunication with an unseen world to the deliberate creation of those\nstates is a natural and an easy step. There is thus set on foot a\ndeliberate culture of the supernatural. This cultivation of abnormal\nstates of mind once initiated persists, now in one form, now in another,\nbut is substantially the same throughout. Whether we are dealing with\nthe crude practices of the savage, the less crude, but still obvious\nmethods of solitary living and bodily maceration of the medieval monk,\nor the morbid and unhealthy dwelling upon a single idea which remains\none of the conditions of 'illumination' to-day, we are confronted with\nthe same thing. In every case the object--unconscious, maybe--is the\nprovision of conditions that render hallucination and illusion a\npractical certainty. In connection with non-religious matters the\nunhealthiness of mind, distortion of vision, and unreliability of\njudgment induced by methods akin to those named is now generally\nrecognised. We have yet to see the same thing as generally recognised in\nconnection with religious beliefs. We see in addition that a great many\nof those experiences, once accepted as clear evidence of supernatural\ncommunication, are more properly explainable in terms of nervous\nderangement. In such cases there is neither celestial illumination nor\ndiabolic communion, neither--to use Maudsley's phrase--theolepsy nor\ndiabolepsy, only psycholepsy. In the present chapter we have been\nstriving to apply this principle to a little wider field than is usual.\nWe have been studying the misinterpretation, in terms of religion, of\nabnormal or pathological states of mind, and observing how far these\nhave contributed to building up and perpetuating a conviction of the\npossibility of supernatural intercourse. We have yet to trace the same\nprinciple of misinterpretation in the sexual and social life of mankind.\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[20] _A Psychological Study of Religion_, p. 234.\n\n[21] _Primitive Culture_, i. p. 501.\n\n[22] _Primitive Culture_, ii. p. 410.\n\n[23] Some very curious information concerning the use of this and other\nfungi is given by Dr. J. G. Bourke in his _Scatologic Rites_, pp. 69-75.\n\n[24] Cited by Bourke, p. 90.\n\n[25] Tylor, ii. pp. 417-9.\n\n[26] For a clear account of the effects of hemp preparations, calculated\nto produce a feeling of religious ecstasy, the reader should consult Dr.\nHale White's _Text-Book of Pharmacology_, 1901, pp. 318-22. The effects\nof opium are thus described by another writer: \"Opium, in those who are\ncapable of stimulation by it, gives rise to a pleasurable feeling,\nsomething like that which is produced by wine in not excessive doses;\nbut the excitement derived from it, instead of tending to some highest\npoint, remains stationary for hours, and in place of the slight\nincoherence of thought always present in those who are exhilarated with\nwine, the most perfect harmony is established among all the conceptions.\nThere is an extraordinary stimulation of the pure intellect, and not\nmerely of the power of expression. The opium-eater seems to have had the\neyes of his spirit opened, to have acquired a gift of insight into\nthings that to mere mortals are inexplicable. The most remote parts of\nconsciousness come into clear light; the finer shades of personality,\nthose that had been unknown even to the opium-eater himself, are brought\ninto view and become distinct; the smallest details of the things around\ntake new significance, and are seen to be profoundly important; their\nanalogies with other phenomena of nature are revealed. It is the same\nwith the moral as with the intellectual being; that also becomes\nindefinitely exalted. An absolute balance of the faculties seems to have\nbeen attained. The whole man _is_ what in his ordinary state he only\ntends to be; he has realised the highest perfection of which he is\ncapable; only his 'best self' now remains; his lower self has been left\nbehind without need of the purgatorial fire of contention with the\nenvironment to destroy it.\"--T. Whittaker, _Essays and Notices,\nPsychological and Philosophical_, p. 367.\n\n[27] _Anthropology_, p. 296.\n\n[28] For a general account of religious dances, see Major-General\nForlong's _Faiths of Man_, art. \"Dancing.\"\n\n[29] Catlin, _North American Indians_, i. p. 36.\n\n[30] Cited by Frazer, _Taboo and the Perils of the Soul_, p. 161.\n\n[31] Turner's _Samoa_, p. 345-6.\n\n[32] Brady, _Clavis Calendaria_, vol. i. p. 223.\n\n[33] Cited by Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, ii. pp. 412-3.\n\n[34] _Natural Causes and Supernatural Seemings_, p. 277.\n\n[35] A very good account of the methods followed in these places will be\nfound in Miss Hamilton's _Incubation, or the Cure of Diseases in Pagan\nTemples and Christian Churches_, 1906.\n\n[36] Grote, _History of Greece_, vol. i. p. 359 and vol. v. p. 232.\n\n[37] \"The ancient Egyptians and Greeks,\" says Dr. Maudsley, \"used humane\nand rational methods of treatment; it was only after the Christian\ndoctrine of possession by devils had taken hold of the minds of men that\nthe worst sort of treatment, of which history gives account, came into\nforce\" (_Pathology of Mind_, p. 523). For a general account of Egyptian\nmedicine see the chapter on Egypt in Dr. Berdoe's _Origin and Growth of\nthe Healing Art_.\n\n[38] Meryon, _The History of Medicine_, vol. i. p. 67.\n\n[39] _Ibid._, vol. i. p. 104.\n\n[40] See Sir Michael Foster's _Lectures on the History of Physiology_,\nchap. i.\n\n[41] _Primitive Culture_, ii. 124.\n\n[42] _On the Miracles_, p. 168.\n\n[43] Cited by White, who gives original authorities, _Warfare of Science\nwith Theology_, ii. 107.\n\n[44] White, ii. 108.\n\n[45] _Meditations_, bk. i.\n\n[46] Fort's _Medical Economy during the Middle Ages_, p. 345.\n\n[47] Dr. Howden, Medical Superintendent of the Montrose Lunatic Asylum,\nin _Journal of Mental Science_, 1873.\n\n[48] _First Signs of Insanity_, p. 293.\n\n[49] _Clinical Lectures on Mental Diseases_, p. 428. The whole of\nchapter xi. is very pertinent.\n\n[50] Dr. R. Jones, in Allbutt's _System of Medicine_, vol. viii. p. 335\n\n[51] Dr. Hollander, _First Signs of Insanity_, pp. 64-5.\n\n[52] Cited by Ireland, _The Blot on the Brain_, p. 39.\n\n[53] Allbutt's _System of Medicine_, viii. 395.\n\n[54] _Physiology of Mind_, p. 251. See also Dr. Mercier's _The Nervous\nSystem and the Mind_, p. 55.\n\n[55] _Literary Remains_, p. 83.\n\n[56] W. Ellis, _Polynesian Researches_, ii. 235-6.\n\n[57] Dr. H. Maudsley has gone fully into the case of Swedenborg in an\narticle in the _Journal of Mental Science_ for July and October 1869,\nsince reprinted in his _Body and Mind_.\n\n[58] See _Luther_, by H. Grisar, 1913, vol. i. pp. 16-7.\n\n[59] For other cases, and a general account of the relations between\npathologic states and religious delusion, see Lombroso, _Man of Genius_,\nchap. iv. pt. iii.\n\n[60] _Varieties of Religious Experience_, pp. 6-7.\n\n[61] _The Soul of a Christian_, p. 13.\n\n[62] See Parish's _Hallucinations and Illusions_, pp. 38-9.\n\n[63] _Saint Teresa_, by H. Joly, pp. 25, 26, and 58.\n\n[64] _Inquiries into Human Faculty_, 1883, p. 68.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER FOUR\n\nSEX & RELIGION IN PRIMITIVE LIFE\n\n\nThe connection between sexual feeling and religious belief is ancient,\nintimate, and sustained. It has impressed itself on many observers who\nhave approached the subject from widely different points of view. Some\nhave treated the connection as purely accidental, and as having no more\nthan a mere historical interest. Others have used it as illustrating the\nway in which so sacred a subject as religion may suffer degradation in\ndegenerate hands. Others of a more scientific temper have dealt with the\nrelations between sexualism and religion as illustrations of a mere\nperversion. A deal may be said in favour of this last point of view. We\nknow, as a matter of fact, that such cases of perversion do exist, in\nwhat form and to what extent will be discussed later. We are also aware\nthat strong feeling which cannot find vent in one direction will secure\nexpression in another. The annals of Roman Catholicism contain accounts\nof numerous persons who have sought refuge in a monastery or a nunnery\nas the result of disappointment in love, and it would be foolish to\nconclude that strong amorous feelings are annihilated because there is a\nchange in the object to which they are directed. Paul was not a\ndifferent man from the Saul of pre-conversion days, but the same person\nwith his energies directed into a new channel. Protestantism is without\nthe obvious outlets for unsatisfied sexual feeling such as is provided\nby Roman Catholicism, but it provides other outlets. Religious service\nas a whole remains, and intense religious devotion may very often owe\nits origin to sources undreamt of by the devotee.\n\nBetween religious beliefs and sexual feelings the connection is,\nhowever, wider and deeper, than the relation expressed by mere\nperversion. Neither is the relation one of mere accident. An examination\nof the facts in the light of adequate scientific knowledge, combined\nwith a due perception of primitive human psychology and sociology, have\nshown that the two things are united at their source. One eminent\nmedical writer asserts that \"in a certain sense, the history of religion\ncan be regarded as a peculiar mode of manifestation of the human sexual\ninstinct.\"[65] Another writer substantially endorses this by the remark\nthat \"in a certain sense the religious life is an irradiation of the\nreproductive instinct.\"[66] How easily one glides into the other very\nlittle observation of life or study of history will show. The language\nof devotion and of amatory passion is often identical, and seems to\nserve equally well for either purpose. The significance of this fact is\noften obscured by our having etherealised the conception of love, and so\nlosing sight of its physiological basis. And, having hidden it from\nsight, we, not unnaturally, fail to give it due consideration. This is,\nin its way, a fatal blunder. The sex life of man and woman is too large\na fact and too pervasive a force to be ignored with safety. Ignorance\ncombined with prudery conspires to perpetuate what ignorance alone\nbegan; and the sex life, in both its normal and abnormal manifestations,\nhas been perpetually exploited in the interests of supernaturalism.\n\nThe evidence that may be adduced in favour of what has been said is\nvast, and covers a wide range. Historically it covers such facts as the\nrelations between primitive religious beliefs and the sexual life, and\nthe multiplication of sects of a markedly erotic character during\nperiods of religious enthusiasm. \"Even the most casual students of\nreligion,\" says Professor G. B. Cutten, \"must have observed an\napparently intimate connection between religious and sexual emotions,\nand not a few have read with amazement the abnormal cults which have had\nthe sexual element as a foundation for their denominational\ndissent.\"[67] A phenomenon so striking as to force itself on the notice\nof the most 'casual students' raises the presumption that the relation\nbetween the two sets of facts is rather more than that of 'apparent'\nintimacy. When in the course of history two things appear together over\nand over again, one is surely justified in assuming that there is some\nunderlying principle responsible for the association. The search for\nthis principle leads to the next class of evidence--the psychological.\nIn this we are concerned with the relation between the sexual feelings\nand the religious idea, an association not always expressed through the\ncomparatively harmless medium of language. And, finally, we have the\nevidence derived from pathology, where we are able to discern a\nperverted sexuality masquerading as religious fervour.\n\nIn a previous chapter there has been pointed out the kind of mental\nenvironment in which primitive man moves. As one of the earliest forms\nof systematised thinking, religion dominates all other forms of mental\nactivity. In savage culture there is hardly a single event into which\nreligious considerations do not enter. The savage does not merely\nbelieve in a supernatural world, he lives in it; it is as real to him as\nanything around him, and far more potent in its action. Above all, it is\nimportant to bear in mind that although one is compelled to speak of the\nnatural and the supernatural when dealing with early beliefs, no such\nseparation is present to the primitive intelligence. The division\nbetween the natural and the supernatural in the external world is the\nreflection of a corresponding division in the world of thought, and this\narises only at a subsequent stage. What is afterwards recognised as the\nsupernatural pervades everything. In a sense it is everything, since\nmost of what occurs is by the agency or connivance of animistic forces.\n\nIn such a world, where even the ordinary events of life have a\nsupernatural significance, the strange and sometimes terrifying\nphenomena of sexual life carry peculiarly strong evidences of\nsupernatural activity. Events which are to the modern mind the most\nobvious consequences of sex life are to the primitive mind proofs of\nsupernatural or ghostly agency. Nothing, for example, would appear less\nopen to misconception than the connection between sexual relations and\nthe birth of children. Yet, on this head, Mr. Sidney Hartland has\nproduced a mass of evidence, gathered from all parts of the world, and\nleading to the conclusion that in the most primitive stages of human\nculture, conception and birth are ascribed to direct supernatural\ninfluence. Setting out from a study of the world-wide vogue of the\nbelief in supernatural birth--contained in the author's earlier work,\n_The Legend of Perseus_--Mr. Hartland finds in this a survival of a\nculture stage in which all birth is believed to be supernatural.\nSurvivals of this belief that birth is a phenomenon independent of the\nunion of the sexes are found in the existence of numerous semi-magical\ndevices to obtain children, still practised in many parts of Europe, and\nwhich were practised on a much more extensive scale during the medieval\nperiod; in the ignorance of man concerning physiological functions in\ngeneral, the existence of Motherright which appears to have universally\nantedated Fatherright--the origin of which he traces to economic causes,\nand to the animistic nature of primitive beliefs in general.[68]\n\nSuch a conclusion is not without verification from the beliefs of\nexisting savages. The Bahau of Central Borneo have no notion of the real\nduration of pregnancy, and date its commencement only from the time of\nits becoming visible. The Niol-Niol of Dampier Land in North-Western\nAustralia hold birth to be independent of sexual intercourse. It is\nengendered by a pre-existing spirit through the agency of a medicine\nman. The North Queenslanders have a similar belief. They believe a child\nto be sent in answer to the husband's prayer as a punishment to his wife\nwhen he is vexed with her. On the Proserpine River the Blacks believe\nthat a child is the gift of a supernatural being called Kunya. In South\nQueensland the Euahlayi believe that spirits congregate at certain spots\nand pounce on passing women, and so are born. On the Slave Coast of West\nAfrica the Awunas say that a child derives the lower jaw from the\nmother; all the rest comes from the spirits. Among these people and\nothers that might be named paternity exists in name, but it implies\nsomething entirely different to what it afterwards connotes. Mr.\nHartland gives numerous instances of this curious fact, and points out\nthat \"the attention of mankind would not be early or easily fastened\nupon the procreative process. It is lengthy, extending over months\nduring which the observer's attention would be inevitably diverted by a\nvariety of objects, most of them of far more pressing import.... The\nsexual passion would be gratified instinctively without any thought of\nthe consequences, and in an overwhelming proportion of cases without the\nconsequence of pregnancy at all. When that consequence occurred it would\nnot be visible for weeks or months after the act which produced it. A\nhundred other events might have taken place in the interval which would\nbe likely to be credited with the result by one wholly ignorant of\nnatural laws.\"\n\nThere seems, therefore, fair grounds for Mr. Hartland's conclusion\nthat:--\n\n\"for generations and \u00e6ons the truth that a child is only born in\nconsequence of an act of sexual union, that the birth of a child is the\nnatural consequence of such an act performed in favouring circumstances,\nand that every child must be the result of such an act and of no other\ncause, was not realised by mankind, that down to the present day it is\nimperfectly realised by some peoples, and that there are still others\namong whom it is unknown.\"\n\nThis, however, is but one of the ways in which supernatural beliefs\nbecome associated with sexual phenomena. In truth, there is not a stage\nof any importance in the sexual life of men and women where the same\nassociation does not transpire. There is, for example, the important\nphenomenon of puberty--important from both a physiological and\nsociological point of view. Pubic ceremonies of some kind are found all\nover the world, and in all forms, from those current amongst savages up\nto the contemporary practice of confirmation in the Christian Church. At\nall stages the period of puberty is the time of initiation. With\nuncivilised peoples a very general rule is the separation of the sexes,\nwith fasting. Mr. Stanley Hall in his elaborate work on _Adolescence_\nhas dealt very exhaustively with these customs, with which we shall be\nmore closely concerned when we come to deal with the subject of\nconversion. At present it is only necessary to point out that the\ngoverning idea is that at puberty the boy and the girl are brought into\nspecial relationship with the tribal spirits, the proof of which\nrelationship lies in the sexual functions originated.\n\nWith boys, once puberty is attained, the sexual development is orderly\nand unobtrusive. In the case of girls certain recurring phenomena make\nthe essential fact of sex much more impressive to the primitive mind,\nwith far-reaching sociological consequences. \"Ignorance of the nature of\nfemale periodicity,\" says A. E. Crawley, \"leads man to consider it as\nthe flow of blood from a wound, naturally, or more usually,\nsupernaturally produced.\"[69] In Siam an evil spirit is believed to be\nthe cause of the wound. Amongst the Chiriguanas the girl fasts, while\nwomen beat the floor with sticks in order to drive away \"the snake that\nhas wounded the girl.\" Similar beliefs are found very generally among\npeople in a low stage of culture, and customs and beliefs still\nsurviving among people more advanced point to the conclusion that\nconvictions of the same kind were once fairly universal. It is this\nfunction, combined with the function of childbirth, that brings woman\ninto close contact with the supernatural world, makes her an object of\nfear and wonder to primitive man, accounts for a number of the customs\nand beliefs associated with her, and finally helps to determine her\nsocial position. It is because her periodicity is taken as evidence of\nher communion with spiritual forces that special precautions have to be\ntaken concerning her. She becomes spiritually contagious. Thus, the\nnatives of New Britain, while engaged in making fish-traps, carefully\navoid all women. They believe that if a woman were even to touch a\nfish-trap, it would catch nothing. Amongst the Maoris, if a man touched\na menstruous woman, he would be taboo 'an inch thick.' An Australian\nblack fellow, who discovered that his wife had lain on his blanket at\nher menstrual period, killed her, and died of terror himself within a\nfortnight. In Uganda the pots which a woman touches while the impurity\nof childbirth or menstruation is on her, are destroyed. With many North\nAmerican Indians the use of weapons touched by women during these times\nwould bring misfortune. A menstruating woman is with them the object\nthey dread most. In Tahiti women are secluded. In some cases she is too\ndangerous to be even touched by others, and food is given her at the end\nof a stick. With the Pueblo Indians contact with a woman at these times\nexposes a man to attacks from an evil spirit, and he may pass on the\ninfection to others.[70]\n\nIt is needless to multiply instances; the same general reason governs\nall, and this has been clearly expressed by Dr. Frazer:--\n\n\"The object of secluding women at menstruation is to neutralise the\ndangerous influence which is supposed to emanate from them at such\ntimes. The general effect of these rules is to keep the women suspended,\nso to say, between heaven and earth. Whether enveloped in her hammock\nand slung up to the roof, as in South America, or elevated above the\nground in a dark and narrow cage, as in New Zealand, she may be\nconsidered to be out of the way of doing mischief, since being shut off\nboth from the earth and from the sun, she can poison neither of these\ngreat sources of life by her deadly contagion. The precautions thus\ntaken to isolate and insulate the girl are dictated by regard for her\nown safety as well as for the safety of others.... In short, the girl is\nviewed as charged with a powerful force which, if not kept within\nbounds, may prove the destruction both of the girl herself and all with\nwhom she comes in contact. To repress this force within the limits\nnecessary for the safety of all concerned is the object of the taboos in\nquestion.\"\n\nThe savage is far too logical in his methods to allow such an idea to\nend here. If a woman is so highly charged with spiritual infection as to\nbe dangerous at certain frequently recurring periods, she may be more or\nless dangerous between these periods. As Havelock Ellis says: \"Instead\nof being regarded as a being who at periodic intervals becomes the\nvictim of a spell of impurity, the conception of impurity becomes\namalgamated with the conception of woman; she is, as Tertullian puts it,\n_Janua diaboli_; and this is the attitude which still persisted in\nmedieval days.\"[71] This is to be expected from what one knows of the\nworkings of the primitive intelligence, but it is surprising to find Mr.\nEllis continue by saying, on apparently good grounds, that \"the belief\nin the periodically recurring impurity of women has by no means died out\nto-day. Among a very large section of the women of the middle and lower\nclasses of England and other countries it is firmly believed that the\ntouch of a menstruating woman will contaminate; only a few years since,\nin the course of a correspondence on this subject in the _British\nMedical Journal_ (1878), even medical men were found to state from\npersonal observation that they had no doubt whatever on this point.\nThus, one doctor, who expressed surprise that any doubt could be thrown\non the point, wrote, after quoting cases of spoiled hams, etc., presumed\nto be due to this cause, which had come under his own personal\nobservation: 'For two thousand years the Italians have had this idea of\nmenstruating women. We English hold to it, the Americans have it, also\nthe Australians. Now, I should like to know the country where the\nevidence of any such observation is unknown.'\" Evidently animism is a\nmore persistent frame of mind than most people are inclined to believe.\n\nIt is certain, however, that this conception of woman's nature is\ndominant in the lower stages of culture. She is spiritually dangerous,\nand the principle of 'taboo' is made to cover a great many of her\nrelations to man. In Tahiti a woman was not allowed to touch the weapons\nor fishing implements of men. Amongst the Todas women are not permitted\nto touch the cattle. If a wife touches the food of her husband, among\nthe Hindus, the food is unfit to be eaten. An Eskimo wife dare not eat\nwith her husband. In New Zealand wives were not allowed to eat with the\nmales lest their taboo should kill them. Many tribes are careful to\nrefrain from contact with women before going to fight. They believe that\nthis would rob them and their weapons of strength. Other practices\nfollowed by savages before going to war forbid one assuming that this\nabstention is due to any rational fear of dissipating their energies.\nInstead of conserving their strength they weaken themselves by the many\nprivations they undergo before fighting, in order to ensure victory.\nProfessor Frazer well says:--\n\n\"When we observe what pains these misguided savages took to unfit\nthemselves for the business of war by abstaining from food, denying\nthemselves rest, and lacerating their bodies, we shall probably not be\ndisposed to attribute their practice of continence in war to a rational\nfear of dissipating their bodily energies by indulgence in the lusts of\nthe flesh.\"[72]\n\nThe conception of woman as one heavily charged with supernatural\npotentialities, and, therefore, a source of danger to the community,\nseems to lie at the basis of the widespread belief in the religious\n'uncleanness' of women. The real significance of the word 'unclean' in\nreligious ritual has been obscured by our modern use of it in a hygienic\nor ethical sense. In reality it is but an illustration of the principle\nof 'taboo,' and 'taboo' may extend to anything, good or bad, useful or\nuseless, hygienically clean or unclean. The primary meaning of 'taboo,'\na Polynesian word, is something that is set aside or forbidden. The\nfield covered by this word among savage and semi-savage races is, as\nRobertson Smith points out, \"very wide, for there is no part of life in\nwhich the savage does not feel himself surrounded by mysterious agencies\nand recognise the need of walking warily.\"[73] Anything may thus become\nthe object of a 'taboo.' Weapons, food, animals, places, special\nrelations of one person to another at certain times and under certain\nconditions. It is enough that some special or particular degree of\nsupernatural influence is associated with the object in question. The\nancient Jews, for example, in prohibiting the eating of swine's flesh,\nwere as far as possible removed in their thought from any connection\nwith dietetics. They were simply following the well-known savage custom\nthat the totem of a tribe is sacred. The pig was a totem with many of\nthe Semitic tribes, and must not, therefore, be eaten.[74] It was not an\nunclean animal, in the modern sense, it was a 'holy' animal. With the\nSyrians the dove was so holy that even to touch it made a man 'unclean'\nfor a whole day. No North American Indian will eat of the flesh of an\nanimal that is a tribal totem, except under grave necessity, and even\nthen with elaborate religious ceremonies. So, \"a prohibition to eat the\nflesh of an animal of a certain species, that has its ground not in\nnatural loathing but in religious horror and reverence, implies that\nsomething divine is ascribed to every animal of the species. And what\nseems to us to be a natural loathing often turns out, in the case of\nprimitive peoples, to be based on a religious _taboo_, and to have its\norigin not in feelings of contemptuous disgust, but of reverential\ndread.\"[75]\n\nThe real significance of 'unclean' in connection with religious ritual\nis 'holy', something that partakes in a special manner of supernatural\ninfluence and therefore involves a certain danger in contact. As the\nwriter just cited observes:--\n\n\"The acts that cause uncleanness are exactly the same which among savage\nnations place a man under taboo.... These acts are often involuntary,\nand often innocent, or even necessary to society. The savage,\naccordingly, imposes a taboo on a woman in childbed, or during her\ncourses ... simply because birth and everything connected with the\npropagation of the species on the one, and disease and death on the\nother hand, seem to involve the action of supernatural agencies of a\ndangerous kind. If he attempts to explain, he does so by supposing that\non these occasions spirits of deadly power are present; at all events\nthe persons involved seem to him to be sources of mysterious danger,\nwhich has all the characters of an infection, and may extend to other\npeople unless due precautions are observed.... It has nothing to do with\nrespect for the gods, but springs from mere terror of the supernatural\ninfluences associated with the woman's physical condition.\"[76]\n\nIt is interesting to observe the manner in which this notion of the\nsacramentally 'unclean' nature of woman has affected her religious\nstatus, and by inference, her social status likewise. Among the\nAustralians women are shut out from any part in the religious\nceremonies. In the Sandwich Isles a woman's touch made a sacrifice\nunclean. If a Hindu woman touches a sacred image the divinity is\ndestroyed. In Fiji women are excluded from the temples. The Papuans have\nthe same custom. The Ainus of Japan allow a woman to prepare the\nsacrifice, but not to offer it. Women are excluded from many Mohammedan\nmosques. Among the Jews women have no part in the religious ceremonies.\nIn the Christian Church women were excluded from the priestly office. A\nCouncil held at Auxerre at the end of the sixth century forbade women\ntouching the Eucharist with their bare hands, and in various churches\nthey were forbidden to approach the altar during Mass.[77] In the\ngospels Jesus forbids the woman to touch Him, after the resurrection,\nalthough Thomas was allowed to feel His wounds. \"The Church of the\nMiddle Ages did not hesitate to provide itself with eunuchs in order to\nsupply cathedral choirs with the soprano tones inhering by nature in\nwomen alone.\"[78] The 'Churching' of women still in vogue has its origin\nin the same superstition that childbirth endows woman with a\nsupernatural influence which must be removed in the interests of others.\nThis ceremony was formerly called \"The Order of the Purification of\nWomen,\" and was read at the church door before the woman entered the\nbuilding. Its connection with the ideas indicated above is obvious. The\nTahitian practice of excluding women from intercourse with others for\ntwo or three weeks after childbirth, with similar practices amongst\nuncivilised peoples all over the world, led with various modifications\nup to the current practice of churching. They show that in the opinion\nof primitive peoples \"a woman at and after childbirth is pervaded by a\ncertain dangerous influence which can infect anything and anybody she\ntouches; so that in the interests of the community it becomes necessary\nto seclude her from society for a while, until the virulence of the\ninfection has passed away, when, after submitting to certain rites of\npurification, she is again free to mingle with her fellows.\"[79] The\ngradual change of this ceremony, from a getting rid of a dangerous\nsupernatural infection to returning thanks for a natural danger passed,\nis on all fours with what takes place in other directions in relation to\nreligious ideas and practices.\n\nThe important part played by this conception of woman's nature may be\ntraced in the fierce invective directed against her in the early\nChristian writings. Of course, by that time society had reached a stage\nwhen the primitive form of this belief had been outgrown, but ideas and\nattitudes of mind persist long after their originating conditions have\ndisappeared. In this particular case we have the primitive idea\nexpressed in a form suitable to altered circumstances, and the primitive\nfeeling seeking new warranty in ethical or social considerations. But in\nthe main the old notion is there. Woman is a creature threatening\ndanger to man's spiritual welfare.[80] In this connection we may note\nan observation of Westermarck's during his residence among the country\npeople of Morocco. He was struck, he says, with the superstitious fear\nthe men had of women. They are supposed to be much better versed in\nmagic, and therefore one ran greater danger in offending them. The\ncurses of women are, generally, much more feared than those of men. To\nthis we have a parallel in Christianity which so often revived and\nstrengthened the lower religious beliefs. During the witch mania an\noverwhelming proportion of those charged with and executed for sorcery\nwere women. As a matter of fact, women were more prone than men to\ncredit themselves with possessing supernatural power. But the\ntheological explanation was that the devil had more power over women\nthan men. This was, obviously, a heritage from the primitive belief\nabove described.[81]\n\nAnother way in which religion becomes closely associated with sexualism\nis through the widely diffused phallic worship. The worship of the\ngenerative power in the form of stones, pillars, and carved\nrepresentations of the male and female sexual organs plays an\nunquestionably important part in the history of religion, however hardly\npressed it may have been by some enthusiastic theorisers. \"The farther\nback we go,\" says Mr. Hargrave Jennings, \"in the history of every\ncountry, the deeper we explore into all religions, ancient as well as\nmodern, we stumble the more frequently upon the incessantly intensifying\ndistinct traces of this supposedly indecent mystic worship.\"[82] On the\nlower Congo, says Sir H. H. Johnston:--\n\n\"Phallic worship in various forms prevails. It is not associated with\nany rites that might be called particularly obscene; and on the coast,\nwhere manners and morals are particularly corrupt, the phallus cult is\nno longer met with. In the forests between Manyanga and Stanley Pool it\nis not rare to come upon a little rustic temple, made of palm fronds and\npoles, within which male and female figures, nearly or quite life size,\nmay be seen, with disproportionate genital organs, the figures being\nintended to represent the male and female principle. Around these carved\nand painted statues are many offerings, plates, knives, and cloth, and\nfrequently also the phallic symbol may be seen dangling from the\nrafters. There is not the slightest suspicion of obscenity in all this,\nand anyone qualifying this worship of the generative power as obscene\ndoes so hastily and ignorantly. It is a solemn mystery to the Congo\nnative, a force but dimly understood, and, like all mysterious natural\nmanifestations, it is a power that must be propitiated and persuaded to\nhis good.\"[83]\n\nThe Egyptian religion was permeated with phallicism. In India phallic\nworship is widely scattered. In Benares, the sacred city, \"everywhere,\nin the temples, in the little shrines in the street, the emblem of the\nCreator is phallic.\" Symbols of the male and female sexual organs, the\nLingam and the Yoni, have been objects of worship in India from the\nearliest times. With the Sakti ceremonies, Hindu religion dispenses with\nsymbols, and devotion is paid to a naked woman selected for the\noccasion.[84] This worship of a nude female is a very familiar\nphenomenon in the history of religion. Some of the early Christian sects\nwere said to have practised it, and it is a feature of some Russian\nreligious sects to-day. The subject will be dealt with more fully\nhereafter.\n\nIn ancient Rome, in the month of April, \"when the fertilising powers of\nnature begin to operate, and its powers to be visibly developed, a\nfestival in honour of Venus took place; in it the phallus was carried in\na cart, and led in procession by the Roman ladies to the temple of Venus\noutside the Colline gate, and then presented by them to the sexual part\nof the goddess.\"[85] In the Greek Bacchic religious processions huge\nphalli were carried in a chariot drawn by bulls, and surrounded by women\nand girls singing songs of praise. Phallic worship was also associated\nwith the cults of Dionysos and Eleusis. It is met with among the ancient\nMexicans and Peruvians, and also among the North American tribes. The\nfamous Black Stone of Mecca, to which religious honours are paid, is\nalso said by authorities to be a phallic symbol. The stone set up by\nJacob (Gen. xxviii. 18-9) falls into the same category. References to\nphallic worship may be found in many parts of the Bible, and\nauthoritative writers like Mr. Hargrave Jennings and Major-General\nForlong have not hesitated to assert that the god of the Jewish Ark was\na sexual symbol. Seeing the extent to which phallic worship exists in\nother religions, it would be surprising did this not also exist in the\nearly Jewish religion.\n\nIn Christendom we have evidence of the perpetuation of the phallic cult\nin the decree of Mans, 1247, and of the Synod of Tours, 1396, against\nits practice. Quite unsuccessfully, however. Indeed, the architecture of\nmedieval churches bear in their ornamentation numerous evidences of the\nfailure at suppression. Of course, much of this ornamentation may have\nbeen due to mere imitation, but often enough it was deliberate. \"The\nscholar,\" says Bonwick, \"who gazed to-day at the roof of Temple Church,\nLondon, had the illustration before him. A symbol there, repeatedly\ndisplayed, is the popular Hindu one to express sex worship.\"[86] The\nbelief found expression in other ways than ornamentation. When Sir\nWilliam Hamilton visited Naples in 1781 he found in Isernia a Christian\ncustom in vogue which he described in a letter to Sir William Banks, and\nwhich admitted of no doubt as to its Priapic character. Every September\nwas celebrated a festival in the Church of SS. Cosmus and Damianus.\nDuring the progress of the festival vendors paraded the streets offering\nsmall waxen phalli, which were bought by the devout and placed in the\nchurch, much as candles are still purchased and given. At the same time,\nprayers are offered to St. Como by those who desire children. In\nMidlothian, in 1268, the clergy instructed their flock to sprinkle water\nwith a dog's phallus in order to avert a murrain. The same practice\nexisted in Inverkeithing, and in Easter week priest and people danced\nround a wooden phallus.[87] Mr. Westropp, quoting an eighteenth-century\nwriter,[88] says: \"When the Huguenots took Embrun, they found among the\nrelics of the principal church a Priapus, of three pieces in the ancient\nfashion, the top of which was worn away from being constantly washed\nwith wine.\" The temple of St. Eutropius, destroyed by the Huguenots, is\nsaid to have contained a similar figure. From Mr. Sidney Hartland's\ncollection of practices for obtaining children I take the following:--\n\n\"At Bourg-Dieu, in the diocese of Bourges, a similar saint\" (similar to\nthe priapean figure previously described) \"was called Guerlichon or\nGreluchon. There after nine days' devotions women stretched themselves\non the horizontal figure of the saint, and then scraped the phallus for\nmixture in water as a drink. Other saints were worshipped elsewhere in\nFrance with equivalent rites. Down to the Revolution there stood at\nBrest a chapel of Saint Guignolet containing a priapean statue of the\nholy man. Women who were, or feared to be, sterile used to go and scrape\na little of the prominent member, which they put into a glass of water\nfrom the well and drank. The same practice was followed at the Chapel of\nSaint Pierre-\u00e0-Croquettes in Brabant until 1837, when the arch\u00e6ologist\nSchayes called attention to it, and thereupon the ecclesiastical\nauthorities removed the cause of scandal. Women have, however, still\ncontinued to make votive offerings of pins down almost, if not quite, to\nthe present day. At Antwerp stood at the gateway to the Church of Saint\nWalburga in the Rue des P\u00eacheurs a statue, the sexual organ of which\nhad been entirely scraped away by women for the same purpose.\"[89]\n\nFrom what has been said, it will not be difficult to understand the\nexistence of the custom of religious prostitution. Considering the\nsexual impulse as specially connected with a supernatural force, man\npays it religious honour, and comes to identify its manifestations as an\nexpression of the supernatural and also as an act of worship towards it.\nIn India the practice existed, when most temples had their 'bayad\u00e8res.'\nIn ancient Chaldea every woman was compelled to prostitute herself once\nin her life in the temple of the goddess Mylitta--the Chaldean Venus.\nThis custom existed elsewhere, and by it the woman was compelled to\nremain within the temple enclosures until some man chose her, from whom\nshe received a piece of money. The money, of course, belonged to the\ntemple.[90] In Greece, Carthage, Syria, etc., we find the same custom.\nAmong the Jews, so orthodox a commentary as Smith's _Bible Dictionary_\nadmits that the 'Kadechim' attached to the temple were prostitutes. The\nfrequent references to the service of the 'groves' surrounding the\ntemple irresistibly suggest their likeness to the groves around the\ntemples of Mylitta, and their use for the same purpose.\n\nThere is no necessity to prolong the subject,[91] nor is it necessary to\nmy purpose to discuss the origin of phallic worship. It is enough to\nhave shown the manner in which, from the very earliest times, religious\nbelief and sexual phenomena have been connected in the closest possible\nmanner. In this respect it is only on all fours with the relation of\nreligion to phenomena in general, but here the attitude of mind is\naccentuated and prolonged by the startling facts of sexual development.\nThe connection becomes consequently so close it is not surprising to\nfind that the association has persisted down to the present time, and\nmoods that have their origin in the sexual life are frequently\nattributed to religious influences. The primitive intelligence, frankly\nseeing in the phenomena of sex a manifestation of the supernatural, sees\nhere a continuous endorsement of religious life. The more sophisticated\nmind raised above this point of view continues, with modifications, the\nprimitive practices, and in ignorance of the physiological causes of its\nown states is only too ready to interpret ebullitions of sex feeling as\nevidence of the divine.\n\n\nNOTE TO PAGE 104.\n\n      It is strange that so little attention has been paid to\n      these primitive beliefs as important factors in determining\n      the social position of women. It is too generally assumed\n      that because woman is physically weaker than man it is her\n      weakness that has determined her subordination. Both the\n      advocates and the opponents of 'Woman's Rights' appear to\n      have reached a common agreement on this point. During some\n      of the debates in the House of Commons, for example, it was\n      openly stated by prominent politicians, as an axiom of\n      political philosophy, that all laws rest upon a basis of\n      force, and if men say they will not obey woman-made laws\n      there is no power that can compel them to do so. On the\n      other side, women, while appealing to what they properly\n      call higher considerations, themselves dwell upon the\n      physical weakness of woman as the reason for her\n      subordination in the past. Both parties are helped in their\n      arguments by the facile division of social history into two\n      periods, an earlier one in which club law plays the chief\n      part, and a later period when mental and moral qualities\n      assume a dominating position. The consequence is, runs the\n      argument, that each sex has to battle with the dead weight\n      of tradition and custom. The woman is oppressed by the\n      tradition of subordination to the male; the man is inspired\n      by that of dominance over the female.\n\n      It is when we ask for evidence of this that we see how\n      flimsy the case is. Social phenomena in either civilised or\n      uncivilised society furnishes no proof that institutions\n      and customs rest upon a basis of physical force. The\n      rulership of a tribe often rests with the old men of a\n      tribe; with some tribes the women are consulted, and\n      invariably custom and tradition plays a powerful part. The\n      notion that the primitive chief is the primitive strong man\n      of the tribe is as baseless as the belief in an original\n      social contract, and owes its existence to the same kind of\n      fanciful speculation. As Frazer says, \"it is one of those\n      facile theories which the arm-chair philosopher concocts\n      with his feet on the fender without taking the trouble to\n      consult the facts.\" The primitive chief may be a strong\n      man. The tribal council or chief may use force or rely upon\n      physical force to enforce certain decrees, just as the\n      modern king or parliament may call on the help of policeman\n      or soldier, but this no more proves that their rule is\n      based upon force than Mr. Asquith's premiership proves his\n      physical superiority to the rest of the Cabinet.\n\nAll political life, and to a smaller degree all social life, involves\nthe direction of force, but neither appeal to force for an ultimate\njustification, nor do social institutions originate in an act of force.\nIt is one of the commonplaces of historical study that when an\ninstitution is actually forced upon a people it very quickly becomes\ninoperative. Other things equal, one group of people may overcome\nanother group because of physical superiority, but the conquest over,\nthe question as to which group shall really rule, or which set of\ninstitutions shall survive, is settled on quite different grounds. The\nhistory of almost any country will give examples of the absorption of\nthe conqueror by the conquered, and the bringing of imported\ninstitutions into line with native life and feeling. Fundamentally the\nrelations binding people together into a society are not physical, but\npsychological. Society rests upon the foundations of a common mental\nlife--upon sympathy, beliefs, the desire for companionship, etc. As\nProfessor J. M. Baldwin puts it, the fundamental social facts are not\n_things_, but _thoughts_.[92] As a member of a social group man is born\ninto an environment that is essentially psychological, and his attitude\nnot only towards his fellow human beings, but towards nature in general,\nis determined by the psychological contents of the society to which he\nbelongs.\n\nNow if the relation of one man to another is not determined by physical\nsuperiority and inferiority, if the relations of classes within a\nsociety are not determined in this manner, why should it be assumed that\nas a sex woman's position is fixed by this means? It seems more\nreasonable to assume that some other principle than that of club law, a\nprinciple set in operation very early in the history of civilisation,\nfixed the main lines upon which the relations of the sexes were to\ndevelop, however much other forces helped its operation. I believe this\ndesired factor is to be found in the superstitious notions savages\ndevelop concerning the nature and function of woman, and which society\nonly very slowly outgrows. For, as Frazer says: \"The continuity of human\ndevelopment has been such that most, if not all, of the great\ninstitutions which still form the framework of a civilised society have\ntheir roots in savagery, and have been handed down to us in these later\ndays through countless generations, assuming new outward forms in the\nprocess of transmission, but remaining in their inmost core\nsubstantially unchanged.\"\n\nIn considering the play of primitive ideas as determining the lines of\nhuman evolution several things must be kept clearly in mind. One is that\nthe course of biological development has made woman, as a sex, dependent\nupon man, as a sex, for protection and support. This is true quite apart\nfrom economic considerations or from those arising from the relative\nphysical strength of the sexes. The prime function of woman,\nbiologically, is that of motherhood. She is, so to speak, mother in a\nmuch more important and more pervasive sense than man is father. In the\ncase of woman, her functions are of necessity subordinated to this one.\nWith man this is not the case. It is with the woman that the nutrition\nof the child rests before birth, and a large portion of her strength is\nexpended in the discharge of this function. The same is true for some\nperiod immediately after birth. Again to use a biological illustration,\nduring the period of child-bearing and child-rearing the relation of the\nman to the woman may be likened to that which exists between the germ\ncells and the somatic cells. As the latter is the medium of protection\nand the conveyer of nutrition in relation to the former, so it falls to\nthe male to protect and in some degree to provide for the woman as\nchild-bearer. It would not, of course, be impossible for woman to\nprovide for herself, but it would detract so considerably from social\nefficiency that any group in which it was done would soon disappear. It\nis the nature and supreme function of woman that makes her dependent\nupon man. And even though the dreams of some were realised, and society\nas a whole cared for woman in the discharge of this function, the issue\nwould not be changed. It would mean that instead of a woman being\ndependent upon one man she would be dependent upon all men. Nor are the\nsubstantial facts of the situation changed by anyone pointing out that\nall women do not and cannot under ordinary circumstances become wives\nand mothers. Human nature will always develop on the lines of the normal\nfunctions of men and women, and there can be no question in this case as\nto what these are.\n\nI have used the word 'dependence,' but this does not, of necessity,\ninvolve either subordination or subjection. It may provide the condition\nof either or of both, but the dependence of the woman on the man is, as\nI have said, biologically inescapable. Her subjection is quite another\nquestion. Dependence may be mutual. One class of society may be\ndependent upon another class, but the two may move on a perfect level of\nequality. And with uncivilised peoples the evidence goes to prove that,\nwhile the spheres of the sexes are more clearly differentiated than with\nus, this difference is seldom if ever expressed in terms of superior and\ninferior. Savages would say, as civilised people still say, there are\nmany things that it is wrong for a woman to do, and they would add there\nare also things that a man must not do. They would be as shocked at\nwoman doing certain things as some people among ourselves were when\nwomen first began to speak at public meetings. Their disapproval would\nnot rest on the ground that these things were 'unwomanly', nor upon any\nquestion of weakness or strength, of inferiority or superiority, but for\nanother and, to the savage, very urgent reason.\n\nOne can very easily exaggerate the extent of the subjection of women\namong uncivilised people. As a matter of fact, it usually is\nexaggerated. Not all travellers are capable of accurate observation, and\nvery many are led astray by what are really superficial aspects of\nsavage life. They are so impressed by the contemplation of a state of\naffairs different from our own that they mistake mere lines of\ndemarcation for a moral valuation. Many travellers, for example,\nobserving that women are strictly forbidden to do this or that, conclude\nthat the woman has no rights as against the man. As in nearly all these\ncases the man is as strictly forbidden to encroach on the woman's\nsphere, one might as reasonably reverse the statement and dwell upon\nmale subjection. As a matter of fact, both furnish examples of the\nall-powerful principle of 'taboo.' Some things are taboo to the man,\nothers to the woman. And the key to the problem lies in the nature and\norigin of these taboos. But taboo does not extinguish rights; it\nconfirms them. Under its operation, far from its being the truth that\nwomen are without status or rights or power, her position and rights are\nclearly marked, generally recognised, and quickly enforced. Some\nexamples of this may be noted.\n\nA Kaffir woman when ill-treated possesses the right of asylum with her\nparents, and remains there until the husband makes atonement. The same\nthing holds of the West African Fulahs. In the Marquesas a woman is\nprohibited the use of canoes; on the other hand, men are prohibited\nfrequenting certain places belonging to the women. In Nicaragua no man\nmay enter the woman's market-place under penalty of a beating. With most\nof the North-American tribes a woman has supreme power inside the lodge.\nThe husband possesses no power of interference. In most cases the\nhusband cannot give away anything belonging to the lodge without first\ngetting the consent of his wife. With the Nootkas, women are consulted\non all matters of business. Livingstone relates his surprise on finding\nthat a native would not accompany him on a journey because he could not\nget his wife's consent. He found this to be one of the customs of the\ntribe to which the man belonged. Among the Kandhs of India nothing\npublic is done without consulting the women. In the Pellew Islands the\nhead of the family can do nothing of importance without consulting the\noldest female relative. Among the Hottentots women have supreme rule in\nthe house. If a man oversteps the line, his female relatives inflict a\nfine, which is paid to the wife. With the Bechuanas the mother of the\nchief is present at all councils, and he can hardly decide anything\nwithout her consent. These are only a few of the cases that might be\ncited, but they are sufficient to show that the common view of women\namong savages as without recognised status, or power, needs very serious\nqualification. Of course, ill-treatment of women does occur with\nuncivilised as with civilised people, and she may suffer from the\nexpression of brutal passion or superior strength, but an examination of\nthe facts justifies Starcke's opinion that \"we are not justified in\nassuming that the savage feels a contempt for women in virtue of her\nsex.\"\n\nIn primitive life, in short, the dominant idea is not that of\nsuperiority in relation to woman, but that of difference. She is\ndifferent from man, and this difference involves consequences of the\ngravest character, and against which due precautions must be taken.\nSuperiority and inferiority are much later conceptions; they belong to a\ncomparatively civilised period, and their development offers an\nadmirable example of the way in which customs based on sheer\nsuperstitions become transformed into a social prejudice, with the\nconsequent creation of numerous excuses for their perpetuation. What\nthat initial prejudice is--a prejudice so powerful that it largely\ndetermines the future status of woman--has already been pointed out. Her\nplace in society is marked out in uncivilised times by the powerful\nsuperstitions connected with sexual functions. Not that she is\nweaker--although that is, of course, plain--nor that she is inferior, a\nthought which scarcely exists with uncivilised peoples, but that she is\ndangerous, particularly so during her functional crises and in\nchildbirth. And being dangerous, because charged with a supernatural\ninfluence inimical to others, she is excluded from certain occupations,\nand contact with her has to be carefully regulated. I agree with Mr.\nAndrew Lang that in the regulations concerning women amongst uncivilised\npeople we have another illustration of the far-reaching principle of\ntaboo (_Social Origins and Primal Law_, p. 239) she suffers because of\nher sex, and because of the superstitious dread to which her sex nature\ngives birth.\n\nOf course, at a later stage other considerations begin to operate.\nWhere, for example, as amongst the Kaffirs, women are not permitted to\ntouch cattle because of this assumed spiritual infection, and where a\nman's wealth is measured by the cattle he possesses, it is easy to see\nthat this would constitute a force preventing the political and social\nequality of the sexes. The pursuits from which women were primarily\nexcluded for purely religious reasons would in course of time come to be\nlooked upon as man's inalienable possessions. And here her physical\nweakness would play its part; for she could not take, as man could\nwithhold, by force. Even when the primitive point of view is discarded,\nthe social prejudices engendered by it long remains. And social\nprejudices, as we all know, are the hardest of all things to destroy.\n\nA final consideration needs to be stated. This is that the customs\ndetermined by the views of woman (above outlined) fall into line, in a\nrough-and-ready fashion, with the biological tendency to consecrate the\nfemale to the function of motherhood and conserve her energies to that\nend, leaving other kinds of work to the male. It would be an obvious\nadvantage to a tribe in which woman, relieved from the necessity of\nphysical struggle for food and defence, was able to attend to children\nand the more peaceful side of family life. Children would not only\nbenefit thereby, but the home with all its civilising, humanising\ninfluences would develop more rapidly. Assuming variations in tribal\nlife in this direction, there is no question as to which tribe that\nwould stand the better chance of survival. The development of life has\nproceeded here as elsewhere by differentiation and specialisation; and\nwhile the tasks demanding the more sustained physical exertions were\nleft to man, and to the performance of which his sexual nature offered\nno impediment, woman became more and more specialised for maternity and\ndomestic occupations. This, I hasten to add, is not at all intended as a\nplea for denying to women the right to participate in the wider social\nlife of the species. I am trying to explain a social phase, and neither\njustifying nor condemning its perpetuation.\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[65] Dr. Iwan Bloch, _The Sexual Life of Our Time_, p. 97.\n\n[66] E. D. Starbuck, _The Psychology of Religion_, p. 401.\n\n[67] _The Psychological Phenomena of Christianity_, p. 419.\n\n[68] _Primitive Paternity_, 2 vols., 1909-10.\n\n[69] _The Mystic Rose_, p. 191.\n\n[70] See Frazer's _Taboo and the Perils of the Soul_, pp. 145-63, and\nCrawley's _Mystic Rose_.\n\n[71] _Man and Woman_, p. 15.\n\n[72] _Taboo_, pp. 163-4.\n\n[73] _Religion of the Semites_, p. 142.\n\n[74] A long list of animals that were sacred to various Semitic tribes\nhas been compiled by Robertson Smith, _Kinship and Marriage in Early\nArabia_, pp. 194-201.\n\n[75] Robertson Smith, _Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia_, pp. 306-7.\n\n[76] _Religion of the Semites_, pp. 427-9. For a fuller discussion of\nthe subject, see _Studies in the Psychology of Sex_, by Havelock Ellis,\n1901.\n\n[77] Westermarck, _Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas_, p. 666.\n\n[78] Westermarck, p. 666.\n\n[79] Frazer, _Taboo_, p. 150.\n\n[80] See the Rev. Principal Donaldson's _Woman: her Position and\nInfluence in Ancient Greece and Rome, and among the Early Christians_,\nbk. iii.\n\n[81] For the general influence of these beliefs about woman in\ndetermining her social position, see note at the end of this chapter.\n\n[82] _The Worship of Priapus_, Pref. p. 9.\n\n[83] _The River Congo_, p. 405.\n\n[84] A description of the Sakti ceremony is given by Major-General\nForlong, _Faiths of Man_, iii. pp. 228-9.\n\n[85] Westropp, _Primitive Symbolism_, p. 30.\n\n[86] _Egyptian Belief and Modern Thought_, p. 256.\n\n[87] Forlong, _Faiths of Man_, iii. p. 66.\n\n[88] _Primitive Symbolism_, p. 36.\n\n[89] _Primitive Paternity_, i. pp. 63-4.\n\n[90] Major-General Forlong agrees with many other authorities in tracing\nour custom of kissing under the mistletoe to this ancient practice. \"The\nmistletoe,\" he says, \"marks in one sense Venus's temple, for any girl\nmay be kissed if caught under its sprays--a practice, though modified,\nwhich recalls to us that horrid one mentioned by Herodotus, where all\nwomen were for once at least the property of the man who sought them in\nMylitta's temple.\"--_Rivers of Life_, i. p. 91.\n\n[91] Those who desire further and more detailed information may consult\nForlong's great work, _The Rivers of Life_, Payne Knight's _Worship of\nPriapus_, Westropp and Wake's _Phallicism in Ancient Religion_, Brown's\n_Dionysiak Myth_, Westropp's _Primitive Symbolism_, R. A. Campbell's\n_Phallic Worship_, Hargrave Jennings's _Worship of Priapus_, etc.\n\n[92] A good discussion of the topic will be found in this author's\n_Social and Ethical Interpretations in Mental Development_.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER FIVE\n\nTHE INFLUENCE OF SEXUAL AND PATHOLOGIC STATES ON RELIGIOUS BELIEF\n\n\nIn the preceding chapter we have been concerned with the various ways in\nwhich the phenomena attendant on the sexual life of man and woman become\nassociated with religious beliefs. As a force that arises in the life of\neach individual, and intrudes, as it were, into consciousness, the\nphenomena of sex fill primitive man with an amazement that is not\nunmixed with terror. In strict accord with primitive psychology sexual\nphenomena are conceived as more or less connected with the supernatural\nworld, and becoming thus entwined with religious convictions are made\nthe nucleus of a number of superstitious ceremonies. The connection is\nclose and obvious so long as we restrict our survey to uncivilised\nhumanity. The only room for doubt or discussion is the exact meaning of\ncertain ceremonies, or the order of certain phases of development. It is\nwhen we take man in a more advanced stage that obscurity gathers and\ndifficulties arise. The sexual life is no longer lived, as it were,\nopenly. Symbolism and mysticism develop; a more complex social life\nprovides disguised outlets for primitive and indestructible feelings.\nSexualism, instead of being something to be glorified, and, so to speak,\nannotated by religious ceremonies, becomes something to be hidden or\ndecried. Ignored it may be. Decried it may be; but it will not be\ndenied. That is a practical impossibility in the case of so powerful and\nso pervasive a fact as sex. We may disguise its expression, but only too\noften the disguise is the equivalent of undesirable and unhealthy\nmanifestations.\n\nThe modern history of religion offers a melancholy illustration of the\ntruth of the last sentence, and it is quite clearly exhibited in the\nhistory of Christianity itself. From the beginning it strove to suppress\nthe power of sexual feeling. It was an enemy against whom one had to be\nalways on guard, one that had to be crushed, or at least kept in\nsubjection in the interests of spiritual development. And yet the very\nintensity of the efforts at suppression defeated the object aimed at.\nWith some of the leaders of early Christianity sex became an obsession.\nLong dwelling upon its power made them unduly and unhealthily conscious\nof its presence. Instead of sex taking its place as one of the facts of\nlife, which like most other facts might be good or bad as circumstances\ndetermined, it was so much dwelt upon as to often dwarf everything else.\nAsceticism is, after all, mainly a reversed sensualism, or at least\nconfesses the existence of a sensualism that must not be allowed\nexpression lest its manifestation becomes overpowering. Mortification\nconfesses the supremacy of sense as surely as gratification. Moreover,\nmortification of sense as preached by the great ascetics does not\nprevent that most dangerous of all forms of gratification, the\nsensualism of the imagination. That remains, and is apt to gain in\nstrength since the fundamentally healthful energies are denied\nlegitimate and natural modes of expression. Thus it is that we find\ndeveloping social life not always providing a healthy outlet for the\nsexual life, and thus it is that the intense striving of religious\nleaders against the power of the sexual impulse has often forced it into\nstrange and harmful forms of expression. So we find throughout the\nhistory of religion, not only that a deal of what has passed for\nsupernatural illumination to have undoubtedly had its origin in\nperverted sexual feeling, but the constant emergence of curious\nreligio-erotic sects whose strange mingling of eroticism and religion\nhas scandalised many, and offered a lesson to all had they but possessed\nthe wit to discern it.\n\nAlthough there is an understandable disinclination, amounting with some\nto positive revulsion, to recognise the sexual origin of much that\npasses for religious fervour, the fact is well known to competent\nmedical observers, as the following citations will show. More than a\ngeneration since a well-known medical authority said:--\n\n\"I know of no fact in pathology more striking and more terrifying than\nthe way in which the phenomena of the ecstatic--which have often been\nseized upon by sentimental theorisers as proofs of spiritual\nexaltation--may be plainly seen to bridge the gulf between the innocent\nfoolery of ordinary hypnotic patients and the degraded and repulsive\nphenomena of nymphomania and satyriasis.\"[93]\n\nDr. C. Norman also observes:--\n\n\"Ecstasy, as we see in cases of acute mental disease, is probably always\nconnected with sexual excitement, if not with sexual depravity. The same\nassociation is seen in less extreme cases, and one of the commonest\nfeatures in the conversation of acutely maniacal women is the\nintermingling of erotic and religious ideas.\"[94]\n\nThis opinion is fully endorsed by Sir Francis Galton:--\n\n\"It has been noticed that among the morbid organic conditions which\naccompany the show of excessive piety and religious rapture in the\ninsane, none are so frequent as disorders of the sexual organisation.\nConversely, the frenzies of religious revivals have not infrequently\nended in gross profligacy. The encouragement of celibacy by the fervent\nleaders of most creeds, utilises in an unconscious way the morbid\nconnection between an over-restraint of the sexual desires and impulses\ntowards extreme devotion.\"[95]\n\nDr. Auguste Forel, the eminent German specialist, points out that--\n\n\"When we study the religious sentiment profoundly, especially in the\nChristian religion, and Catholicism in particular, we find at each step\nits astonishing connection with eroticism. We find it in the exalted\nadoration of holy women, such as Mary Magdalene, Marie de Bethany, for\nJesus, in the holy legends, in the worship of the Virgin Mary in the\nMiddle Ages, and especially in art. The ecstatic Madonnas in our art\ngalleries cast their fervent regards on Jesus or on the heavens. The\nexpression in Murillo's 'Immaculate Conception' may be interpreted by\nthe highest voluptuous exaltation of love as well as by holy\ntransfiguration. The 'saints' of Correggio regard the Virgin with an\namorous ardour which may be celestial, but appears in reality extremely\nterrestrial and human.\"[96]\n\nAnother German authority remarks:--\n\n\"I venture to express my conviction that we should rarely err if, in a\ncase of religious melancholy, we assumed the sexual apparatus to be\nimplicated.\"[97]\n\nDr. Bevan Lewis points out how frequently religious exaltation occurs\nwith women at puberty, and religious melancholia at the period of sexual\ndecline. And Dr. Charles Mercier puts the interchangeability of sexual\nand religious feelings in the following passage:--\n\n\"Religious observances provide an alternative, into which the amatory\ninstinct can be easily and naturally diverted. The emotions and\ninstinctive desires, which finds expression in courtship, is a vast body\nof vague feeling, which is at first undirected.... It is a voluminous\nstate of exaltation that demands enthusiastic action. This is the state\nantecedent to falling in love, and if an object presents himself or\nherself, the torrent of emotion is directed into amatory passion. But if\nno object appears, or if the selected object is denied, then religious\nobservances yield a very passable substitute for the expression of the\nemotion. Religious observances provide the sensuous atmosphere, the call\nfor self-renunciation, the means of expressing powerful and voluminous\nfeeling, that the potential or disappointed lover needs. The madrigal is\ntransformed into the hymn; the adornment of the person that should have\ngone to allure the beloved now takes the shape of ecclesiastical\nvestments; the reverence that should have been paid to the loved one is\ntransformed to a higher object; the enthusiasm that would have expanded\nin courtship is expressed in worship; the gifts that would have been\nmade, the services that would have been rendered to the loved one, are\ntransferred to the Church.\"[98]\n\nDr. Krafft-Ebing, after dwelling upon the substantial identity of sexual\nlove and religious emotion, summarises his conclusions by saying:--\n\n\"Religious and sexual hyper\u00e6sthesia at the acme of development show the\nsame volume of intensity and the same quality of excitement, and may,\ntherefore, under given circumstances interchange. Both will in certain\npathologic states degenerate into cruelty.\"[99]\n\nEven so orthodox a writer as the Rev. S. Baring-Gould points out that--\n\n\"The existence of that evil, which, knowing the constitution of man, we\nshould expect to find prevalent in mysticism, the experience of all ages\nhas shown following, dogging its steps inevitably. So slight is the film\nthat separates religion from sensual passion, that uncontrolled\nspiritual fervour roars readily into a blaze of licentiousness.\"[100]\n\nNo useful purpose would be served by lengthening this list of citations.\nEnough has been said to show that the point of view expressed is one\nendorsed by many sober, competent, and responsible observers. There\nexists among them a general, and one may add a growing, recognition of\nthe important truth that the connection between religious and sexual\nfeeling is of the closest character, and that one is very often mistaken\nfor the other. Asceticism, usually taken as evidence to the reverse, is\non the contrary, confirmative. The ascetic often presents us with a\nflagrant case of eroto-mania, expressing itself in terms of religion.\nIt is highly significant that the biographies of Christian saints should\nfurnish so many cases of men and women of strong sensual passions, and\nwhose ascetic devotion was only the reaction from almost unbridled\nsensualism. No wonder that in the temptations experienced by the monks\nthe figures of nude women so often appeared before their heated\nimaginations. Sexual feeling suppressed in one direction broke out in\nanother. Feelings, in themselves perfectly normal, became, as a\nconsequence of repression and misdirection, pathologic. And one\nconsequence of this was that many of the early Christian writers brought\nto the consideration of the subject of sex a concentration of mind that\nresulted in disquisitions of such a nature that it is impossible to do\nmore than refer to them. The sexual relation instead of being refined\nwas coarsened. Marriage was viewed in its lowest form, more as a\nconcession to the weakness of the flesh than as a desirable state for\nall men and women. Nor can it be said, after many centuries, that these\nideas are quite eradicated from present-day life.\n\nA field of investigation that yields much illuminating information is\nthe biographies of the saints and of other religious characters. In many\nof these cases the acceptance of sexual feeling for religious\nillumination is very clear. Thus of St. Gertrude, a Benedictine nun of\nthe thirteenth century, we read:--\n\n\"One day at chapel she heard supernaturally sung the words, '_Sanctus,\nSanctus, Sanctus_.' The Son of God, leaning towards her like a sweet\nlover, and giving to her soul the softest kiss, said to her at the\nsecond _Sanctus_, 'In the _Sanctus_ addressed to My person, receive with\nthis all the sanctity of My divinity and of My humanity.'... And the\nfollowing Sunday, while she was thanking God for this favour, behold the\nSon of God, more beauteous than thousands of angels, takes her to His\narms as if He were proud of her, and presents her to God the Father, and\nin that perfection of sanctity with which He had endowed her.\"[101]\n\nOf Juliana of Norwich, who was granted a revelation in 1373, we are told\nthat she had for long 'ardently desired' a bodily sight of the Lord upon\nthe cross; and that finally Jesus appeared to her and said, \"I love thee\nand thou lovest Me, and our love shall never be disparted in two.\"[102]\nSo, again, in the case of Sister Jeanne des Anges, Superior of the\nConvent of Ursulines of Loudun, and the principal character in the\nfamous Grandier witchcraft case, we have a detailed account, in her own\nwords, of the lascivious dreams, unclean suggestions, etc.--all\nattributed to Satan--and alternating with impressions of bodily union\nwith Jesus.[103] Marie de L'Incarnation addresses Jesus as follows:--\n\n\"Oh, my love, when shall I embrace you? Have you no pity on the torments\nthat I suffer? Alas! alas! My love! My beauty! My life! Instead of\nhealing my pain, you take pleasure in it. Come, let me embrace you, and\ndie in your sacred arms.\"[104]\n\nVeronica Juliani, beatified by Pope Pius II., took a real lamb to bed\nwith her, kissed it, and suckled it at her breasts. St. Catherine of\nGenoa threw herself on the ground to cool herself, crying out, \"Love,\nlove, I can bear it no longer.\" She also confessed to a peculiar\nlonging towards her confessor.[105]\n\nThe blessed Mary Alacoque, foundress of the Sacred Heart, was subject\nfrom early life to a number of complaints--rheumatism, palsy, pains in\nthe side, ulceration of the legs--and experienced visions early in her\ncareer. As a child she had so vivid a sense of modesty that the mere\nsight of a man offended her. At seventeen she took to wearing a knotted\ncord drawn so tightly that she could neither eat nor breathe without\npain. She compressed her arms so tightly with iron chains that she could\nnot remove them without anguish. \"I made,\" she says, \"a bed of\npotsherds, on which I slept with extreme pleasure.\" She fasted and\ntortured herself in a variety of ways, and the more her physical\ndisorders increased the more numerous became her visions. Before she was\neighteen years of age, in 1671, she entered a nunnery. From the time she\ndonned the habit of a novice she was 'blessed' with visions. \"Our Lord\nshowed me that that day was the day of our spiritual wedding; He\nforthwith gave me to understand that He wished to make me taste all the\nsweetness of the caresses of His love. In reality, those divine caresses\nwere from that moment so excessive, that they often put me out of\nmyself.\" \"Once,\" says one of her biographers, \"having retired into her\nchamber, she threw off the clothes with which she had bedecked herself\nduring the day, when the Son of God showed Himself to her in the state\nin which He was after His cruel flagellation--that is, with His body all\nwounded, torn, gory--and He said to her that it was her vanities that\nhad brought Him into that condition.\" In one of these visions Jesus\ntook the head of Mary, pressed it to His bosom, spoke to her in\npassionate words, opened her side and took out her heart, plunged it\ninto His own, and then replaced it. He then explained His design of\nfounding the Order of the Sacred Heart. Ever after, Mary was conscious\nof a pain in her side and a burning sensation in her chest--two plain\nsymptoms of hysteria.[106]\n\nSanta Teresa, who died at the early age of thirty-three, and in whose\nfamily more than one case of well-developed neurasthenia can be traced,\nwas favoured with 'messages' at a very early age. She believed some of\nthese were temptations from the devil suggesting an 'honourable\nalliance.' A nervous breakdown followed directly after entrance into a\nconvent. She was then twenty years of age, was subject to fainting fits\nand longed for illness as a sign of divine favour. She was subject to\nconvulsions, and soon after taking the veil fell into a cataleptic\ntrance, which lasted three days. She was thought to be dead, but at the\nend of the time sat up and told those around that she had visited both\nheaven and hell, and seen the joys of the blessed and the torments of\nthe damned. It is at least suggestive that, in spite of the longing for\npersonal communion with Jesus, her first experience of the ecstasy of\ndivine love was experienced after discovering a 'very realistic' picture\nof a martyred saint--St. Joseph. The significance of the intense\ncontemplation of a tortured body--possibly made by one whose sexual\nnature was undergoing a process of suppression--is unmistakable.[107]\n\nOn these and similar cases Professor William James makes the following\ncomment:--\n\n\"To the medical mind these ecstasies signify nothing but suggested\nhypnoid states, on an intellectual basis of superstition, and a\ncorporeal one of degeneration and hysteria. Undoubtedly these\npathological conditions have existed in many and possibly in all the\ncases, but that fact tells us nothing about the value for knowledge of\nthe consciousness which they induce. To pass a spiritual judgment upon\nthese states, we must not content ourselves with superficial medical\ntalk, but enquire into their fruits for life.\"[108]\n\nNow the question is really not what these ecstasies suggest to the\n'medical mind,' as though that were a type of mind quite unfitted to\npass judgment. It is a question of what the facts suggest to any mind\njudging the behaviour of a person under the influence of strong\nreligious emotion exactly as it would judge anyone under any other\nstrong emotional pressure. And if it be possible to explain these states\nin terms of known physiological and mental action, what warranty have we\nfor rejecting this and preferring in its stead an explanation that is\nboth unprovable and unnecessary? And one would be excused for thinking\nthat cases which certainly involve some sort of abnormal nervous action\nare precisely those in which the medical mind should be called on to\nexpress an opinion. What is meant by passing 'a spiritual judgment'\nupon these states is not exactly clear, unless it means judging them in\nterms of the historic supernatural interpretation. But that is precisely\nthe interpretation which is challenged by the 'medical mind.'\n\nI do not see how any enquiry \"into their fruits for life\" can affect a\nrational estimate of the nature of these mystical states. Mysticism adds\nnothing to the native disposition of a person. It merely gives their\nenergies a new turn, a new direction. What they were before the\nexperience they remain, substantially, afterwards. That is why we find\nreligious mystics of every variety. Some energetically practical; others\ndreamily unpractical. Professor James admits this in saying that \"the\nother-worldliness encouraged by the mystical consciousness makes this\nover-abstraction from practical life peculiarly liable to befall mystics\nin whom the character is naturally passive and the intellect feeble; but\nin natively strong minds and characters we find quite opposite\nresults.\"[109] And when it is further admitted that \"the mystical\nfeeling of enlargement, union, and emancipation has no specific\nintellectual content whatever of its own,\" but \"is capable of forming\nmatrimonial alliances with material furnished by the most diverse\nphilosophies and theologies, provided only they can find a place in\ntheir framework for its peculiar emotional mood,\" mysticism seems\nreduced to an emotional development on all fours with emotional\ndevelopment in other directions. It is not peculiar to religious minds\nbecause \"it has no specific intellectual content.\" It is amorphous, so\nto speak. And it may form diverse 'matrimonial alliances' precisely\nbecause it does not point to a hidden world of reality, but is merely\nindicative of tense emotional moods. In the face of nature the\nnon-theistic Richard Jeffries experiences all the feelings of mental\nenlargement and emotional transports that Mary Alacoque or Santa Teresa\nexperienced in their visions of the 'Risen Christ.'\n\nIt is idle, then, to sneer at 'medical materialism,' and stigmatise it\nas superficial. Many people are constitutionally afraid of words, and\nthere is nothing that arouses prejudice so quickly as a name. But it is\nreally not a question of materialism, medical or non-medical. It is a\nmere matter of applying knowledge and common sense to the cases before\nus. Are we to take the subject's explanation of his or her mental states\nas authoritative, so far as their nature is concerned; or are we to\ntreat them as symptoms demanding the skilled analysis of the specialist?\nIf the former, how can we differentiate between the mystic and the\nadmittedly hysterical patient? If the latter, what ground is there for\nplacing the mystic in a category of his own? Rational and scientific\nanalysis will certainly take far more notice of the nature of the\nfeelings excited than of the object towards which they are directed.\nHere is the case of a young lady, given by Dr. Moreau, in his _Morbid\nPsychology_:--\n\n\"During my long hours of sleeplessness in the night my beloved Saviour\nbegan to make Himself manifest to me. Pondering over the meditations of\nSt. Fran\u00e7ois de Sales on the _Song of Songs_, I seemed to feel all my\nfaculties suspended, and crossing my arms upon my chest, I awaited in a\nsort of dread what might be revealed to me.... I saw the Redeemer\nveritably in the flesh.... He extended Himself beside me, pressed me so\nclosely that I could feel His crown of thorns, and the nails in His feet\nand hands, while He pressed His lips over mine, giving me the most\nravishing kiss of a divine Spouse, and sending a delicious thrill\nthrough my entire body.\"[110]\n\nGet rid of the narcotising effect of theological associations by\neliminating the name of Jesus and other religious terms from this case,\nand from the others already cited, and no one would have the least doubt\nas to their real nature. Given a condition of physical health in these\ncases, with conditions that favoured social activity, healthy\nintercourse with the opposite sex, culminating in marriage and\nparenthood, can there be any doubt that this species of religious\necstasy would have been non-existent? If, as Tylor says, the refectory\ndoor would many a time have closed the gates of heaven, happy family\nlife would in a vast number of cases have prevented those religio-erotic\ntrances which have played so powerful a part in the history of\nsupernaturalism. Most people will agree with Dr. Maudsley:--\n\n\"The ecstatic trances of such saintly women as Catherine Sienne and St.\nTheresa, in which they believed themselves to be visited by their\nSaviour and to be received as veritable spouses into His bosom, were,\nthough they knew it not, little better than vicarious sexual orgasm; a\ncondition of things which the intense contemplation of the naked male\nfigure, carved or sculptured in all its proportions on a cross, is more\nfitted to produce in young women of susceptible nervous temperament than\npeople are apt to consider. Every experienced physician must have met\nwith instances of single and childless women who have devoted\nthemselves with extraordinary zeal to habitual religious exercises, and\nwho, having gone insane as a culmination of their emotional fervour,\nhave straightway exhibited the saddest mixture of religious and erotic\nsymptoms--a boiling over of lust in voice, face, gestures, under the\npitiful degradation of disease.... The fanatical religious sects, such\nas the Shakers and the like, which spring up from time to time in\ncommunities and disgust them by the offensive way in which they mingle\nlove and religion, are inspired in great measure by sexual feeling; on\nthe one hand, there is probably the cunning of a hypocritical knave, or\nthe self-deception of a half-insane one, using the weaknesses of weak\nwomen to minister to his vanity or his lust under a religious guise; on\nthe other hand, there is an exaggerated self-feeling, often rooted in\nthe sexual passion, which is unwittingly fostered under the cloak of\nreligious emotion, and which is apt to conduct to madness or to sin. In\nsuch cases the holy kiss owes its warmth to the sexual impulse, which\ninspires it, consciously or unconsciously, and the mystical religious\nunion of the sexes is fitted to issue in a less spiritual union.\"[111]\n\nMany manuals of devotion will be found to furnish the same kind of\nevidence as biographical narratives concerning the intimate relations\nthat exists between sexuality and religious feeling. What has just been\nsaid may be repeated here, namely, that if the religious associations\nwere dispelled, there would be no mistaking the nature of feelings that\noriginated much of this class of writing, or the feelings to which they\nappeal. The serious fact is that the appeal is there whether we\nrecognise it or not, and it is a question worthy of serious\nconsideration whether the unwary imagination of the young may be not as\nsurely debauched by certain books of devotion as by a frankly erotic\nproduction. It is not without reason that d'Israeli the elder, in an\nessay omitted from all editions of his book after the first, remarked\nthat \"poets are amorous, lovers are poetical, but saints are both.\"[112]\nTake, for example, the following from a collection of old English\nhomilies, dating from the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries:--\n\n\"Jesus, my holy love, my sure sweetness! Jesus, my heart, my joy, my\nsoul-heal! Jesus, sweet Jesus, my darling, my life, my light, my balm,\nmy honey-drop!... Kindle me with the blaze of Thy enlightening love. Let\nme be Thy leman, and teach me to love Thee.... Oh, that I might behold\nhow Thou stretchedst Thyself for me on the cross. Oh, that I might cast\nmyself between those same arms, so very wide outspread.... Oh, that I\nwere in Thy arms, in Thy arms so stretchedst and outspread on the\ncross.\"\n\nOr this, from the same collection:--\n\n\"Sweet Jesus, my love, my darling, my Lord, my Saviour, my balm, sweeter\nis the remembrance of Thee than honey in the mouth. Who is there that\nmay not love Thy lovely face? Whose heart is so hard that may not melt\nat the remembrance of Thee? Oh! who may not love Thee, lovely Jesus?\nJesus, my precious darling, my love, my life, my beloved, my most worthy\nof love, my heart's balm, Thou art lovesome in countenance, Thou art\naltogether bright. All angels' life is to look upon Thy face, for Thy\ncheer is so marvellously lovesome and pleasant to look upon.... Thou art\nso bright, and so white that the sun would be pale if compared to Thy\nblissful countenance. If I, then, love any man for beauty, I will love\nThee, my dear life, my mother's fairest son.\"[113]\n\nThe language of erotic piety figures much more prominently in Roman\nCatholic medieval writings than in Protestant literature. This is not\nbecause an appeal to the same feelings is absent from the religious\nliterature of Protestantism, it is mainly due to the fact that more\nmodern conditions leads to a less intense religious appeal, while the\nbroadening of social life encourages a more natural outlet for all\naspects of human nature. Still, the following expression of a young lady\nconvert of Wesley's offers a fair parallel to the specimen given above.\nIt is taken from Southey's _Life of Wesley_:--\n\n\"Oh, mighty, powerful, happy change! The love of God was shed abroad in\nmy heart, and a flame kindled there with pains so violent, and yet so\nvery ravishing, that my body was almost torn asunder. I sweated, I\ntrembled, I fainted, I sang. Oh, I thought my head was a fountain of\nwater. I was dissolved in love. My beloved is mine, and I am His. He has\nall charms; He has ravished my heart; He is my comforter, my friend, my\nall. Oh, I am sick of love. He is altogether lovely, the chiefest among\nten thousand. Oh, how Jesus fills, Jesus extends, Jesus overwhelms the\nsoul in which He lives.\"\n\nThe _Imitation of Christ_ has been described by more than one writer as\na manual of eroticism, and certainly the chapters \"The Wonderful Effects\nof Divine Love,\" and \"Of the Proof of a True Lover,\" might well be cited\nin defence of this view. In the following canticle of St. Francis of\nAssisi it does not seem possible to distinguish a substantial difference\nbetween it and a frankly avowed love poem:--\n\n    \"Into love's furnace I am cast,\n     Into love's furnace I am cast,\n     I burn, I languish, pine, and waste.\n     Oh, love divine, how sharp thy dart!\n     How deep the wound that galls my heart!\n     As wax in heat, so, from above,\n     My smitten soul dissolves in love.\n     I live, yet languishing I die,\n     While in thy furnace bound I lie.\"[114]\n\nIt would certainly be possible to furnish exact parallels from volumes\nof secular verse that would be strictly 'taboo' among those who fail to\nsee anything objectionable in verses like the above when written in\nconnection with religion. Such people fail to recognise that their\nattractiveness lies in the hidden appeal to amatory feeling, and owe\ntheir origin to the suppressed or perverted sexual passion of their\nauthor. We must not allow ourselves to be blinded by the consideration\nas to whether the object of adoration be an earthly or a heavenly one.\nMen and women have not distinct feelings that are aroused as their\nobjective differs, but the same feelings directed now in one direction,\nnow in another. The direction of these feelings, their exciting cause,\nare sheer environmental accidents. How can one resist the implications\nof the following, from a devotional work widely circulated amongst the\nwomen of France:--\n\n    \"Praise to Jesus, praise His power,\n     Praise His sweet allurements.\n     Praise to Jesus, when His goodness\n     Reduces me to nakedness;\n     Praise to Jesus when He says to me,\n     My sister, my dove, my beautiful one!\n     Praise to Jesus in all my steps,\n     Praise to His amorous charms.\n     Praise to Jesus when His loving mouth\n     Touches mine in a loving kiss.\n     Praise to Jesus when His gentle caresses\n     Overwhelm me with chaste joys.\n     Praise to Jesus when at His leisure\n     He allows me to kiss Him.\"[115]\n\nAgainst this we may place the following hymn, sung at an American camp\nmeeting of some thousands of persons between the ages of fourteen and\ntwenty-five:--\n\n    \"Blessed Lily of the Valley, oh, how fair is He;\n            He is mine, I am His.\n     Sweeter than the angels' music is His voice to me;\n            He is mine, I am His.\n     Where the lilies fair are blooming by the waters calm\n     There He leads me and upholds me by His strong right arm.\n\n     All the air is love around me--I can feel no harm;\n            He is mine, I am His.\"[116]\n\nSpecial significance is given to this reference by the age of those who\ncomposed the gathering. This period embraces the years during which\nsexual maturity is attained, and the organism experiences important\nphysiological and psychological changes. The consequence is that the\natmosphere is, so to say, charged with unsuspected sex feeling, and it\nis not surprising that many complaints have been made of immorality\nfollowing such gatherings. The organism is then peculiarly liable to\nsuggestion in all forms. Along with the imitativeness of early years\nthere is something of the decisive initiative of maturity. These\nqualities wisely guided might be turned to the great advantage of both\nthe individual and of the community. Mere incitement by religious\nrevivalism can result in little else than misdirection and injury. It\nshould be the most obvious of truths that the attractiveness of hymns\nsuch as the one given, with the keen delight in the suggested pictures,\nlies in their yielding--all unknown, perhaps, to those participating--\nsatisfaction to feelings that are very frequently imperious in their\ndemands, and are at all times astonishingly pervasive in their\ninfluence.\n\nMuch valuable light is thrown upon this aspect of the subject by a\nstudy of human behaviour under the influence of actual disease. Of late\nyears much useful work has been done in this direction, and our\nknowledge of normal psychology greatly helped by a study of abnormal\nmental states.[117] This is mainly because in disease we are able to\nobserve the operation of tendencies that are unobscured by the\nrestraints and inhibitions created by education and social convention.\nAnd one of the most striking, and to many startling, things observed is\nthe close relation existing between erotic mania and religious delusion.\nThe person who at one time feels himself under direct religious\ninspiration, or who imagines himself to be the incarnation of a divine\npersonage, will at another time exhibit the most shocking obscenity in\naction and language. Sir T. S. Clouston furnishes a very striking case\nof this character, which he cites in order to show \"the common mixture\nof religious and sexual emotion.\"[118] I do not reproduce it here\nbecause of its grossly obscene character; but, save for coarseness of\nlanguage, it does not differ materially from illustrations already\ngiven. Almost any of the text-books will supply cases illustrating the\nconnection between sexualism and religion, a connection generally\nrecognised as the opinions cited already clearly show.\n\nDr. Mercier, in dealing with the connection between sexualism and\nreligion, which he says \"has long been recognised, but never accounted\nfor,\" traces it to a feeling of, or desire for self-sacrifice common to\nboth. Certainly sacrifice in some form--of food, weapons, land, money,\nor bodily inconvenience--is a feature present in every religion more or\nless. And it is quite certain that not merely the fact, but the desire\nfor some amount of sacrifice, forms \"an integral, fundamental, and\npreponderating element\" in the sexual emotion. Dr. Mercier further\nbelieves that the benevolence founded on religious emotion has its\norigin in sexual emotion, which is, again, extremely likely. This\ncommunity of origin would allow for the transformation of one into the\nother, and supplies a key to the language of lover-like devotion and\nself-abnegation which is so prominent in religious devotional\nliterature. The importance attached to dress is also very suggestive;\nfor here, again, the element of sacrifice expresses itself in the\ncultivation of a studied repulsiveness to the normal attractiveness of\ncostume. \"Thus,\" says Dr. Mercier, \"we find that the self-sacrificial\nvagaries of the rejected lover and of the religious devotee own a common\norigin and nature. The hook and spiny kennel of the fakir, the pillar of\nSt. Simeon Stylites, the flagellum of the monk, the sombre garments of\nthe nun, the silence of the Trappists, the defiantly hideous costume of\nthe hallelujah lass, and the mortified sobriety of the district visitor,\nhave at bottom the same origin as the rags of Cardenio, the cage of Don\nQuixote de la Mancha, and the yellow stockings and crossed garters of\nMalvolio.\"[119]\n\nProfessor Granger, who at times comes very near the truth, says:--\n\n\"There is something profoundly philosophical in the use of _The Song of\nSongs_ to typify the communion of the soul with its ideal. The passion\nwhich is expressed by the Shulamite for her earthly lover in such\nglowing phrases becomes the type of the love of the soul towards\nGod.\"[120]\n\nOne fails to see the profoundly philosophic nature of the selection. The\n_Song of Songs_ is a frankly erotic love poem, written with no other aim\nthan is common to such poetry, and its spiritualisation is due to the\nsame process of reinterpretation that is applied to other parts of the\nBible in order to make them agreeable to modern thought. Had it not been\nin the Bible, Christians would have found it neither profoundly\nphilosophical nor spiritually illuminating; and, as a matter of fact,\nsimilar effusions are selected by Christians from non-Christian writings\nas proofs of their sensual character. The real significance of its use\nin religious worship is that it gives a marked expression to feelings\nthat crave an outlet. And the lesson is that sexual feeling cannot be\neliminated from life; it can only be diverted or disguised. Some\nexpression it will find--here in open perversion resulting in positive\nvice, there in obsession that leads to a half-insane asceticism, and\nelsewhere the creation of the unconsciously salacious with an unhealthy\nfondness for dabbling in questions that refer to the illicit relations\nof the sexes.\n\n\"One of the reasons why popular religion in England,\" says Professor\nGranger, \"seems to be coming to the limits of its power, is that it has\ncontented itself so largely with the commonplace motives which, after\nall, find sufficient exercise in the ordinary duties of life.\" Here,\nagain, is a curious obtuseness to a plain but important truth. With\nwhat else should a healthy religion associate itself but the ordinary\nmotives or feelings of human life? With what else has religion always\nassociated itself? Far from that being the source of the weakness of\nmodern religion, it is its only genuine source of strength. If religion\ncan so associate itself with the ordinary facts and feelings of life\nthat these are unintelligible or poorer without religion, then religious\npeople have nothing to fear. But if it be true, as Professor Granger\nimplies, that life in its normal moods can receive complete\ngratification apart from religion, then the outlook is very different.\nFrom a merely historic point of view it is true that as men have found\nexplanations of phenomena, and gratifications of feelings apart from\nreligion, the latter has lost a deal of its power. This is seen in the\ngrowth of the physical sciences, and also, although in a smaller\nmeasure, in sociology and morals.\n\nThis, however, opens up the enquiry, previously indicated, as to how far\nthe whole range of human life may be satisfactorily explained in the\ncomplete absence of religion or supernaturalism. And with this we are\nnot now directly concerned. What we are concerned with is to show that\nfrom one direction at least supernaturalism has derived strength from a\nmisinterpretation of the facts. These facts, once interpreted as clear\nevidence for supernaturalism, are now seen to be susceptible to a\ndifferent explanation. But they have nevertheless played their part in\ncreating as part of the social heritage a diffused sense of the reality\nof supernatural intercourse. It is not, then, a question of religion\nlosing power because it has contented itself with commonplace motives,\nand because these have now found satisfaction in ordinary life. It is\nrather a question of the adequacy of science to deal with facts that\nhave been taken to lie outside the scientific order. Has science the\nknowledge or the ability to deal with the extraordinary as well as with\nthe ordinary facts of life? I believe it has. The facts we have passed\nin review _are_ amenable to scientific treatment, for the reason that\nthey belong to a class with which the physician of to-day finds himself\nin constant contact. And it is too often overlooked that the belief in\nthe existence and influence of a supersensible world is itself only a\ntheory put forward in explanation of certain classes of facts, and like\nall theories it becomes superfluous once a simpler theory is made\npossible.\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[93] Article in _The Lancet_, Jan. 11, 1873.\n\n[94] Article in Tuke's _Dictionary of Psychological Medicine_.\n\n[95] _Inquiries into Human Faculty_, pp. 66-7.\n\n[96] _The Sexual Question_, pp. 354-5.\n\n[97] Cited by Havelock Ellis, _Psychology of Sex_, pp. 233-4.\n\n[98] _Conduct and its Disorders_, pp. 368-9.\n\n[99] _Psychopathia-Sexualis_, pp. 9-11.\n\n[100] _Lost and Hostile Gospels_, Preface.\n\n[101] Cited by James, _Varieties_, pp. 345-6.\n\n[102] Inge, _Christian Mysticism_, pp. 201-9.\n\n[103] See Ellis, _Psychology of Sex_, pp. 240-2.\n\n[104] Parkman's _Jesuits in North America_, p. 175.\n\n[105] Krafft-Ebing, _Psychopathia-Sexualis_, p. 8.\n\n[106] See L. Asseline's _Mary Alacoque and the Worship of the Sacred\nHeart of Jesus_.\n\n[107] See _St. Teresa of Spain_, by H. H. Colvill, and _Saint Teresa_,\nby H. Joly.\n\n[108] _Varieties_, p. 413.\n\n[109] _Varieties_, p. 413.\n\n[110] Cited by J. F. Nisbet, _The Insanity of Genius_, p. 248.\n\n[111] _Pathology of Mind_, p. 144. Also Mercier, _Sanity and Insanity_,\npp. 223, 281.\n\n[112] _Miscellanies_, 1796, p. 365. From the same essay I take the\nfollowing: \"Even the ceremonies of religion, both in ancient and in\nmodern times, have exhibited the grossest indecencies. Priests in all\nages have been the successful panders of the human heart, and have\nintroduced in the solemn worship of the divinity, incitements,\ngratifications, and representations, which the pen of the historian must\nrefuse to describe. Often has the sensible Catholic blushed amidst his\ndevotions, and I have seen chapels surrounded by pictures of lascivious\nattitudes, and the obsolete amours of saints revived by the pencil of\nsome Aretine.... Their homilies were manuals of love, and the more\nreligious they became, the more depraved were their imaginations. In the\nnunnery the love of Jesus was the most abandoned of passions, and the\nideal espousal was indulged at the cost of the feeble heart of many a\nsolitary beauty\" (pp. 369-70).\n\n[113] From a collection published by the Early English Text Society,\n1868, pp. 182-4, 268.\n\n[114] G. A. Coe, _The Spiritual Life_, p. 210.\n\n[115] _Les Perles de Saint Fran\u00e7ois de Sales_, 1871. Cited by Bloch, p.\n111.\n\n[116] Davenport's _Primitive Traits in Religious Revivals_, p. 29.\n\n[117] See, for example, _Conduct and its Disorders_, by Dr. C. Mercier;\n_Psycho-Pathological Researches_, by Dr. Boris Sidis; and _Abnormal\nPsychology_, by I. H. Coriat.\n\n[118] _Clinical Lectures on Mental Diseases_, p. 584.\n\n[119] _Sanity and Insanity_, chap. viii.\n\n[120] _The Soul of a Christian_, p. 178.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER SIX\n\nTHE STREAM OF TENDENCY\n\n\nIt should hardly need pointing out that the facts presented in the last\nchapter are not offered as an attempt at the--to use Professor William\nJames's expression--\"reinterpretation of religion as perverted\nsexuality.\" Nor, so far as the present writer is aware, has anyone ever\nso presented them. The expression, indeed, seems almost a deliberate\nmis-statement of a position in order to make its rebuttal easier.\nObviously the idea of religion must be already in existence before it\ncould be utilised for the purpose of explaining any group of phenomena.\nBut if the biographic and other facts described have any value whatever,\nthey are at least strong presumptive evidence in favour of the position\nthat in very many cases a perverted or unsatisfied sexuality has been at\nthe root of a great deal of the world's emotional piety. Of course, the\nstrong religious belief must be in existence before-hand. But given\nthis, and add thereto a sexual nature imperious in its demands and yet\ndenied legitimate outlet, and we have the conditions present for its\npromptings being interpreted as the fruits of supernatural influence. It\nis not a reinterpretation of _religion_ that is attempted, but a\nreinterpretation of phenomena that have been erroneously called\nreligious. And on all sides the need for this reinterpretation is\nbecoming clear. Over sixty years ago Renan wrote, \"A rigorous\npsychological analysis would class the innate religious instinct of\nwomen in the same category with the sexual instinct,\"[121] and since\nthen a very much more detailed knowledge of both physiology and\npsychology has furnished a multitude of data for an exhaustive study of\nthe whole question.\n\nIn the present chapter our interest is mainly historical. And for\nvarious reasons, chief amongst which is that interested readers may the\nmore easily follow up the study should they feel so inclined, the survey\nhas been restricted to the history of that religion with which we are\nbest acquainted--Christianity. Moreover, if we are to form a correct\njudgment of the part played in the history of religions by the\nmisinterpretations already noted, it is necessary to trace the extent to\nwhich they have influenced men and women in a collective capacity. For\nthe striking fact is that, in spite of the purification of the sexual\nrelations being one of the avowed objects of Christianity, in spite,\ntoo, of the attempts of the official churches to suppress them, the\nhistory of Christianity has been dogged by outbreaks of sexual\nextravagance, by the continuous emergence of erotico-religious sects,\nclaiming Christian teachings as the authority for their actions. We need\nnot discuss the legitimacy of their inferences. We are concerned solely\nwith a chronicle of historic facts so far as they can be ascertained;\nand these have a certain significance of their own, as events, quite\napart from their reasonableness or desirability.\n\nA part cause of the movements we are about to describe may have been a\nviolent reaction against an extravagant asceticism. Something may also\nbe due to the fact that over-concentration of mind upon a particular\nevil is apt to defeat its end by the mere force of unconscious\nsuggestion in the contrary direction. But in all probability much was\ndue to the presence of certain elements inherited by Christianity from\nthe older religions. At any rate, those whose minds are filled with the\nidea that sexual extravagance on a collective scale and under the cloak\nof religion is either a modern phenomenon, or was unknown to the early\nhistory of Christianity, would do well to revise their opinions in the\nlight of ascertainable facts. No less a person than the Rev. S.\nBaring-Gould has reminded us that criticism discloses \"on the shining\nface of primitive Christianity rents and craters undreamt of in our old\nsimplicity,\" and also asserts \"that there was in the breast of the\nnewborn Church an element of antinomianism, not latent, but in virulent\nactivity, is a fact as capable of demonstration as any conclusion in a\nscience which is not exact.\"[122]\n\nThere would be little value in a study of these erotico-religious\nmovements if they involved only a detection of individual lust\nconsciously using religion as a cloak for its gratification. Such a\nconclusion is a fatally easy one, but it does little justice to the\nchief people concerned, and it is quite lacking in historical\nperspective. In most cases the initiators of these strange sects have\nput forward a philosophy of religion as a justification of their\nteaching, and only a slight knowledge of this is enough to prove that we\nare face to face with a phenomenon of much greater significance than\nmere immorality. This may be recognised even in the pages of the New\nTestament itself. It is not a practice that is there denounced; it is a\nteaching that is repudiated. And one sees the same thing at later\nperiods. The conviction on the one side that certain actions are\nunlawful, is met on the other side with the conviction that they are\nperfectly legitimate. Conviction is met with conviction. Each side\nexpresses itself in terms of religion; the ethical aspect is incidental\nor subordinate. It is a contest of opposing religious beliefs and\npractices.\n\nThe real nature of the conflict is often obscured by the fact of social\nopinion and the social forces generally being on the side of the more\nnormal expression of sexual life. This, however, is no more than a\nnecessity of the situation. The continuance of a healthful social life\nis dependent upon the maintenance of a certain balance in the relations\nof the sexes, and anything that strikes at this strikes at social life\nas a whole. In such cases we have, therefore, to allow for the operation\nof social selection, which is always on the side of the more normal\ntype. From this it follows that although a small body of people may\nexemplify a variation that is in itself socially disastrous, the main\nforces of social life will prevent its ever assuming large dimensions.\nMoreover, a large body of people, such as is represented by a church\nholding a commanding position in society, will be forced to come to\nterms with the permanent tendencies of social life, and will either\nsuppress undesirable variations or expel them. It thus happens that\nwhile the larger and more dominant churches have been on the side of\nnormal, regularised expressions of the sexual life, abnormal variations\nhave constantly arisen and have been denounced by them. But the\nsignificant feature is that they have arisen within the churches, and\nmost commonly during periods of great religious stress or excitement.\n\nThese tendencies, as the Rev. S. Baring-Gould has pointed out, existed\nin the very earliest days of Christianity. It is quite apparent from\nPaul's writings that as early as the date of the First Epistle to the\nCorinthians some of the more objectionable features of the older Pagan\nworship had shown themselves in the Church. The doctrine of 'spiritual\nwifehood' appeared at a very early date in the Church, and its teachers\ncited even St. Paul himself as their authority. Their claim was based\nupon Paul's declaration (1 Cor. ix. 5) that he had power to lead about\n\"a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the\nLord and Cephas.\" Curiously enough, commentators have never agreed as to\nwhat Paul meant by this expression. The word translated may mean either\nwife, or sister, or woman. Had it been wife in the ordinary sense, it\ndoes not appear that at that date there would have been any room for\nscandal. The clear fact is, however, that others claimed a like\nprivilege; the privilege was not always restricted to one woman, and the\npractice, if not general, became not uncommon, and furnished the ground\nfor scandal for a long period. Two epistles, wrongly attributed to St.\nClement of Rome, and dating from some time in the second century,\ncondemn the practice of young people living together under the cloak of\nreligion, and specially warns virgins against cohabiting with the clergy\nand so giving offence. That the practice was difficult to suppress is\nshown by its being condemned by several church councils--Antioch in 210,\nNicea in 325, and Elvira in 350.[123] At a later date a much more\nelaborate theory has been built on Paul's claim. The Pauline Church has\nfound several expressions both in England and America within recent\ntimes.[124] These sects have claimed that both St. Paul and the woman\nwith whom he travelled were in a state of grace, and, therefore, above\nall law. We do not mean the maintenance of an ascetic relationship, but\nthe normal relation of husband and wife. It is really the doctrine of\n'Free Love' with a spiritual warranty instead of a secular one.\n\nThis doctrine of religious 'Free Love' rests upon a twofold basis.\nFirst, it was held that, apart from a wife after the flesh, one might\nalso have a wife after the spirit, and this spiritual union might exist\nside by side with the fleshly one, and with different persons. A great\nimpetus appears to have been given to this theory from Germany, many of\nthe originators of the American sects of Free Lovers being Germans.\nSecondly, it was held that a Christian in a state of grace was absolved\nfrom laws that were binding upon other people. His actions were no\nlonger subject to the categories of right and wrong; as it was said, to\none in a state of grace all things were lawful, even though all things\nmight not be expedient. Some went the length of teaching that not only\nwere all things lawful, but all things were desirable. Separating by a\nsharp division things that influenced the soul from things that\ninfluenced the body, it was openly taught by some of the early sects\nthat nothing done by the body could injure the soul, and so could not\naffect its salvation. Reversing the practice of asceticism, which sought\nto crush bodily passions by a course of deprivation, it was taught that\nall kinds of forbidden conduct might be practised in order to\ndemonstrate the soul's superiority. There is no question whatever that\nthis tendency was very prominent in the early Christian Church. It was\nnot there as something hidden, something of which men ought to be\nashamed; it was an avowed teaching, claiming full religious sanction.\n\"The Church,\" says Baring-Gould, \"trembled on the verge of becoming an\nimmoral sect.\" The same writer also says:--\n\n\"This _teaching_ of immorality in the Church is a startling feature, and\nit seems to have been pursued by some who called themselves apostles as\nwell as by those who assumed to be prophets. In the Corinthian Church\neven the elders encouraged incest. Now, it is not possible to explain\nthis phenomenon except on the ground that Paul's argument as to the Law\nbeing overridden had been laid hold of and elevated into a principle.\nThese teachers did not wink at lapses into immorality, but defiantly\nurged on the converts to the Gospel to commit adultery, fornication, and\nall uncleanness ... as a protest against those who contended that the\nmoral law as given on the tables was still binding upon the\nChurch.\"[125]\n\nA certain detachment from modern conditions, and from modern frames of\nmind, is essential to an adequate appreciation of what has been said.\nLooking at these events through the distorting medium of an altogether\ndifferent social atmosphere, one is apt to attribute them to the\noperation of lawless desire, and so have done with it. This, however, is\nto overlook the fact that we are dealing with a society in which sexual\nsymbols were common in religious worship, and in which theories of the\nreligious life were propounded and accepted which to-day would be\nregarded as little less than maniacal. Unquestionably even then, once\nthe situation had established itself it would be utilised by those of a\ncoarser nature for mere sensual gratification. But practices such as we\nknow existed, on the scale we have every reason for believing they were,\ncould never have been had they not taken the form of an intense\nconviction. To assume otherwise is equal to arguing that because men\nhave entered the Church from mere love of power or lust for wealth, the\nChurch owed its establishment to the play of these motives. It is true\nthat those who opposed these religio-erotic sects accused them of\nimmorality, but it is the form these teachings assumed to the members of\nthe impeached sects, not how they appeared to their enemies, that is\nimportant. Eroticism taught and practised as a religious\nconviction--that is the essential and significant feature of the\nsituation. Not to grasp this is to fail to realise the vital fact\nembodied in the phenomena under consideration. We are not dealing with\nmere sensualists, even though we may be dealing with what is largely an\nexpression of sensualism. It is sensualism expressed as, and sanctioned\nby, religious conviction that is the vital fact of the situation.\n\nOne of the earliest Christian institutions around which scandals\ngathered was that of the Agap\u00e6, or love-feasts. From the outset the\nPagan writers asserted that these love-feasts were new versions of\nvarious old orgiastic practices, some of which were still current,\nothers of which had been suppressed by the Roman government. There is no\ndoubt that they were the grounds of very serious accusations against the\nChristians. On the other hand, it must be remembered that, at the outset\nat least, these charges were indignantly rejected by the Christians. The\nAgap\u00e6 were called indiscriminately Feasts of Love and Feasts of\nCharity. Each member, male and female, greeted each other with a holy\nkiss, and the institution was described by Tertullian as \"a support of\nlove, a solace of purity, a check on riches, a discipline of weakness.\"\nThese love-feasts were held on important occasions, such as a marriage,\na death, or the anniversary of a martyrdom. Some churches celebrated\nthem weekly. From the Acts of the Apostles we learn that the feasts\nbegan about nightfall, and continued till after midnight, or even till\ndaybreak. It was only natural that mixed assemblies of men and women\nthat gathered in this manner, and where there was eating and drinking,\nshould create scandal. It is absolutely certain that some of this\nscandal had a basis in fact. The Rev. S. Baring-Gould confesses that \"at\nCorinth, and certainly elsewhere, among excitable people, the wine, the\nheat, the exaltation of emotion, led to orgiastic ravings, the jabbering\nof disconnected, unintelligible words, to fits, convulsions, pious\nexclamations, and incoherent ravings.\" And unless St. Paul was\ndeliberately slandering his fellow-believers worse things than these\noccurred.\n\nGenerally, even by non-Christian writers, it has been assumed that the\nAgap\u00e6 commenced as a perfectly harmless, even admirable institution, and\nafterwards degenerated, and so gave genuine cause for scandal. It is not\neasy to see that this opinion rests on anything better than a mere\nprejudice. It is true that there is no unmistakable evidence to the\ncontrary, but no clear evidence is to be found in its behalf. The Agap\u00e6\nwas not, after all, an essentially Christian institution. Similar\ngatherings existed among the Pagans, more or less orgiastic in\ncharacter. And even though at first some of the more extreme forms were\navoided amongst the Christians, it is not improbable, on the face of it,\nthat some kind of sexual extravagance or symbolism was present from the\noutset. At any rate, as I have said, the charges were made, first by\nPagans, afterwards by Christians against other Christians. The charges\nwere persistent, and were made in districts far removed from each other.\nSays Lecky: \"When the Pagans accused the Christians of indulging in\norgies of gross licentiousness, the first apologist, while repudiating\nthe charge, was careful to add, of the heretics, 'Whether or not these\npeople commit those shameful acts ... I know not.' In a few years the\nlanguage of doubt and insinuation was exchanged for that of direct\nassertion; and if we may believe St. Iren\u00e6us and St. Clement of\nAlexandria, the followers of Carpocrates, the Marcionites, and some\nother gnostic sects habitually indulged, in their secret meetings, in\nacts of impurity and licentiousness as hideous and as monstrous as can\nbe conceived, and their conduct was one of the causes of the persecution\nof the orthodox.\"[126] Tertullian accused some of the sects of\npractising incestuous intercourse at the Agap\u00e6. Ambrose compared the\ninstitution to the Pagan Parentalia. Clement says, probably referring to\nthe Agap\u00e6, \"the shameless use of the rite occasions foul suspicion and\nevil reports.\" The first epistle on Virginity by the Pseudo-Clement\n(probably written in the second century) admits the existence of\nimmorality by saying, \"Others eat and drink with them (_i.e._ the\nvirgins) at feasts, and indulge in loose behaviour and much uncleanness,\nsuch as ought not to be among those who have elected holiness for\nthemselves.\" Justin Martyr, referring to certain sects, says more\ncautiously: \"Whether or not these people commit these shameful acts (the\nputting out of lights, and indulging in promiscuous intercourse) I know\nnot.\" Others are more precise in their charges. That the Agap\u00e6 became\nthe legitimate cause of complaint is admitted by all. The only question\nis whether it was the institution itself or the public mind in relation\nto it that underwent a change. Eventually, on the avowed ground of evil\nconduct, the Agap\u00e6 were forbidden by the Council of Carthage, 391, of\nOrleans, 541, and of Constantinople, 680.\n\nThe whole subject is obscure, but the one certain and significant thing\nis that charges of licentiousness were connected with the Agap\u00e6 from the\noutset. These may at first have been unfounded or exaggerated. On the\nother hand, it is quite probable that just as Christianity continued\nPagan ceremonies in other directions, so there was also a carrying over\ninto the Church of some of the sexual rites and ceremonies connected\nwith earlier forms of worship. And we know that the principle of\nAntinomianism, a prolific cause of evil at all times, was active amongst\nthe Christians from the outset.\n\nIt is almost impossible to say at this distance how many sects\nexhibiting marked erotic tendencies appeared in the early Christian\ncenturies. Many must have disappeared and left no trace of their\nexistence. But there can be no question that they were fairly numerous.\nThe extensive sect, or sects, of the gnostics contained in its teachings\nelements that at least paved the way for the conduct with which other\nChristians charged them, although the charges made may not have been\ntrue of all. To some of the gnostic sects belongs the teaching--quite in\naccord with the doctrine of the evil nature of the world, that\nliberation from the 'Law' was one of the first conditions of spiritual\nfreedom. From this came the teaching, subsequently held by numerous\nother sects, that those born of the Spirit could not be defiled by any\nacts of the flesh, and that so-called vicious actions were rather to be\nencouraged as providing experience useful to spiritual welfare. Some\nbranches of the gnostics had 'spiritual marriages,' similar to what\nexisted in India in the Sakti rites already described. Thus the\nAdamites, a rather obscure gnostic sect of the second century, attempted\nto imitate the Edenic state by condemning marriage and abandoning\nclothing. Their assemblies were held underground, and on entering the\nplace of worship both sexes stripped themselves naked, and in that state\nperformed their ceremonies. They called their church Paradise, from\nwhich all dissentients were promptly expelled. The Adamites themselves\nclaimed that their object was to extirpate desire by familiarising the\nsenses to strict control. Their religious opponents gave a very\ndifferent account of the practice, and it is not difficult to realise,\nwhatever may have been the motive of the founders, the consequences of\nsuch a practice. It is curious, by the way, to observe how strong\nreligious excitement seems to lead people to discard clothing. Thus,\nduring the Crusade of 1203-42 the women crusaders rushed about the\nstreets in a state of nudity.[127] During the wars of the League in\nFrance, men and women walked naked in procession headed by the\nclergy.[128] Other examples of this curious practice might be given.\n\nThe Nicolaitanes, a second-century sect referred to in the New Testament\n(Rev. ii. 14), were accused of practising religious prostitution. So\nalso were the Manich\u00e6ans, a very numerous sect, against whom the charges\nwere of a much more detailed character. With them the ceremonial\nviolation of a virgin is said to have formed a part of their regular\nritual, and that their meetings frequently ended in an orgy of\npromiscuous intercourse.[129] As both these acts are found in connection\nwith other religious ceremonies, and, as will be seen later, have\npersisted until recent times, the story does not sound so incredible as\notherwise it might. The difficulty of deciding definitely is intensified\nby the fact of the Manich\u00e6ans being split into a number of sects, and\nstatements true of some might be untrue of others. So we find St.\nAugustine, who had been a Manich\u00e6an, declaring that if all did not\npractise licentious rites, one sect (the Catharists) did, believing that\nthey could only mortify the flesh by the exercise of bad instincts,\nsince the flesh proceeded from demons. St. Augustine himself confesses\nto have taken part in various phallic ceremonies before his conversion.\n\"I myself,\" he says, \"when a young man used to go sometimes to the\nsacrilegious entertainments and spectacles; I saw the priests raving in\nreligious excitement, and heard the choristers; I took pleasure in the\nshameful games which were celebrated in honour of gods and goddesses, of\nthe Virgin Coelestia, and of Berecynthia, the mother of all gods. And\non the day consecrated to her purification, there were sung before her\ncouch productions so obscene and filthy to the ear--I do not say of the\nmother of the gods, but of the mother of any senator or honest man--nay,\nso impure that not even the mother of the foul-mouthed players\nthemselves could have formed one of the audience.\"[130]\n\nThe Carpocratians, who claimed to be a branch of the Gnostics, taught\nthat faith and charity were alone necessary virtues: all others were\nuseless. There is nothing evil in itself, and life only becomes complete\nwhen all so-called blemishes are fully displayed in conduct. Their\nleader \"not only allowed his disciples a full liberty to sin, but\nrecommended a vicious course of life as a matter of obligation and\nnecessity; asserting that eternal salvation was only attainable by those\nwho had committed all sorts of crimes.... It was the will of God that\nall things should be possessed in common, the female sex not\nexcepted.\"[131]\n\nA little later we have the sect of the Agapet\u00e6. They rejected marriage\nas an institution, and permitted unrestrained intercourse between the\nsexes. St. Jerome, alluding to this sect, says: \"It is a shame even to\nallude to the true facts. Whence did the pest of the Agapet\u00e6 creep into\nthe Church? Whence is this new title of wives without marriage rites?\nWhence this new class of concubines? I will infer more. Whence these\nharlots cleaving to one man? They occupy the same house, a single\nchamber, often a single bed, and call us suspicious if we think anything\nof it. The brother deserts his virgin sister, the virgin despises her\nunmarried brother, and seeks a stranger, and since they pretend to be\naiming at the same object, they ask for the spiritual consolation of\neach other that they may enjoy the pleasures of the flesh.\"[132]\n\nThis form of extravagance does not appear to have been limited to a\nsingle sect. It was more or less general during the ascendancy of\nasceticism. Tertullian says that the desire to enjoy the reputation of\nvirginity led to much immorality, the effects of which were concealed by\ninfanticide. The Council of Antioch lamented the practice of unmarried\nmen and women sharing the same room. In 450, the Anchorites of Palestine\nare described as herding together without distinction of sex, and with\nno garments but a breech-clout.[133] The practice of priests travelling\nabout with women, mothers and wives, and the scandals created thereby,\nis referred to in regulation after regulation. Although legislated\nagainst, it never entirely disappeared, and eventually led to a\nrecognised priestly concubinage--recognised, that is, by public opinion,\nalthough condemned by the Church.\n\nThere is no need to go over even the names of all the numerous sects\nthat appeared during the early centuries manifesting curious features\nconcerning sexual relations. When suppressed in one form they reappeared\nin another, and were unusually prominent during seasons of religious\nunrest. Many of the teachings already noted made their appearance again\nwith the \"Brethren of the Free Spirit\" in the thirteenth, fourteenth,\nand fifteenth centuries. Some of these sects took their stand on the\nPauline teaching, \"The law of the spirit of life in Jesus Christ hath\nmade me free from the law of sin and death,\" and claimed freedom from\nsin, no matter what their actions. The \"Brethren of the Free Spirit\"\ncarried women about with them, held midnight assemblies, and, according\nto Mosheim, attended these meetings in a state of nudity. The Ranters,\nthe Spirituels of Geneva, the Berghards, the Flagellants, the Molinists,\nwere all accused of sexual misconduct in their assemblies. One of the\nspecific teachings of the last-named body, as condemned by the\nInquisition, ran as follows: \"God, to humble us, permits in certain\nperfect souls that the devil should make them commit certain acts. In\nthis case, and in others, which without the permission of God, would be\nguilty, there is no sin because there is no consent. It may happen, that\nthis violent movement, which excites to carnal acts, may take place in\ntwo persons, a man and a woman, at the same instant.\"[134]\n\nIt has been pointed out that the dominant Church made continuous efforts\nto suppress these sects, but the remarkable thing is that they should so\noften reappear, and always with strong claims to existence on the basis\nof religious conviction. That a number of men and women should seek\ngratification of their sensual feelings in ways not countenanced by the\nlaws of normal life need not excite surprise. There always have been and\nalways will be such. But to do this in the name of religion, and with a\npersistency as great as that of the religious idea itself, is a\nphenomenon that surely deserves more attention than it ordinarily\nreceives. Nor can it be said with justice that these sects began in mere\nconscious lust. They ended there, true; more or less disguised, it may\nalways have been present, but those who initiated them believed that\nthey were justified in doing so by religious principles, and appealed to\nthose principles to justify their conduct. Why should this have been the\ncase? Why should conduct of which men and women are ashamed in the\nsocial sphere, and which their social sense promptly condemns, in the\nreligious sphere be crowned with the dignity of lofty principles and\nfought for with the fervour of intense conviction? So long as\ntheologians leave that question unanswered, their arguments are simply\nwide of the real issue.\n\nNaturally, the closer we get to our own day, and to times when religious\nfeeling is more vigorously controlled by purely social forces, these\nmanifestations of sexuality become less frequent, less widely spread,\nand more transient in character. Still they do occur. For reasons that\ndo not concern us here, America has in recent years been a favourable\nground for these religio-sexual developments. A sympathetic account of\nmany of these American sects will be found in Hepworth Dixon's\n_Spiritual Wives_, with accounts of similar sects in Germany and\nEngland. In some cases many of the features of the early Christian sects\nwere reproduced, even to the length of young women sharing the bedrooms\nof their spiritual guides. All took Paul as their principal authority.\nJ. H. Noyes, one of the best known and most representative of these\nteachers, laid down the main principles of his teachings thus:--\n\n\"When the will of God is done on earth as it is in heaven, there will be\nno marriage. The marriage supper of the Lamb is a feast at which every\ndish is free to every guest. Exclusiveness, jealousy, quarrelling, have\nno place there, for the same reason as that which forbids the guests at\na thanksgiving dinner to claim each his separate dish, and quarrel with\nthe rest for his rights. In a holy community there is no more reason why\nsexual intercourse should be restrained by law, than why eating and\ndrinking should be; and there is as little occasion for shame in the one\ncase as in the other.... The guests of the marriage supper may have each\nhis favourite dish, each a dish of his own procuring, and that without\nthe jealousy of exclusiveness. I call a certain woman my wife; she is\nyours; she is Christ's; and in Him she is the bride of all saints. She\nis dear in the hands of a stranger, and according to my promise to her I\nrejoice.\"[135]\n\nIn a letter to Mr. Hepworth Dixon, J. H. Noyes claims the \"right of\nreligious inspiration to shape society and dictate the form of family\nlife,\" and with probable accuracy says that the origin of these American\nsects is to be found in revivals:--\n\n\"The philosophy of the matter seems to be this: Revivals are theocratic\nin their very nature; they introduce God into human affairs.... In the\nconservative theory of revivals, this power is restricted to the\nconversion of souls; but in actual experience it goes, or tends to go,\ninto all the affairs of life.... Religious love is very near neighbour\nto sexual love, and they always get mixed in the intimacies and social\nexcitements of revivals. The next thing a man wants, after he has found\nthe salvation of his soul, is to find his Eve and his Paradise.... The\ncourse of things may be restated thus: Revivals lead to religious love;\nreligious love excites the passions; the converts, finding themselves\nin theocratic liberty, begin to look about for their mates and their\nliberty.\"[136]\n\nWith regard to the beginnings of these modern movements of \"Spiritual\nWifehood,\" all involving the abrogation of the normal relations of the\nsexes, Hepworth Dixon writes:--\n\n\"It has not, I think, been noticed by any writer that three of the most\nsingular movements in the churches of our generation seem to have been\nconnected, more or less closely, with the state of mind produced by\nrevivals; one in Germany, one in England, and one in the United States;\nmovements which resulted, among other things, in the establishment of\nthree singular societies--the congregation of Pietists, vulgarly called\nthe Mucker, at K\u00f6nigsberg; the brotherhood of Princeites at Spaxton; and\nthe Bible Communists at Oneida Creek.... They had these chief things in\ncommon: they began in colleges, they affected the form of family life,\nand they were carried on by clergymen; each movement in a place of\nlearning and of theological study: that in Germany at the Luther-Kirch\nof K\u00f6nigsberg, that in England at St. David's College, that in the\nUnited States at Yale College.... These three divines, one Lutheran, one\nAnglican, one Congregational, began their work in perfect ignorance of\neach other.... Each movement was regarded by its votaries as the most\nperfect fruit of the revival spirit. In truth, the change which came\nupon the saints from their close experience of revival passion, was\nregarded by themselves as in some degree miraculous, equal in divine\nsignificance to a new creation of the world.\"[137]\n\nFor an almost exact replica of the erotic extravagances of some of the\nearly Christian sects, one may turn to Russia. The difficulties and\ndangers of political life in Russia are doubtless responsible for having\nmade religion such a power among the mass of the people, and this will\nalso explain the diversion into religious channels of energy that under\nmore favourable conditions is expended in social agitation and activity.\nMany of these sects are, of course, of a harmless character, mostly\noriginating in an even greater love for the past and a more slavish\nadherence to ancient formulas than is displayed by the orthodox Church.\nSome, however, present the wildest excesses of sexual theory and\npractice. Nothing seems too wild or too extravagant to become the\noriginating point of a new sect. Theories of marriage and sexual\nrelations generally are developed with a logical fearlessness peculiarly\nRussian. Among the Bezpopovtsi, a numerous sect split up into several\nbranches, opinions on marriage vary between regarding it as a mere\nconventional affair, and denouncing it as a hindrance to spiritual\ndevelopment. \"Between these two extremes,\" says Mr. Heard, \"there is\nroom for the wildest and most repulsive theories. Carnal sensuality is\nallied in monstrous union with religious mysticism. Free love,\nindependence of the sexes, possession of women in common, have been\npreached and practised. Debauchery, as an incidental weakness of human\nnature, has been advocated as the lesser evil; libertinism as preferable\nto concubinage, and the latter as better than marriage. One of their\nmost austere teachers cynically declares that 'it is wiser to live with\nbeasts than to be joined to a wife; to frequent many women in secret,\nrather than to live with one openly.'\"[138]\n\nAnother sect called 'Eunuchs' take their stand on Matt. xix. 12: \"There\nare some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there\nare some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs,\nwhich have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He\nthat is able to receive it, let him receive it.\" This sect believes in\nand practises emasculation as the surest way of attaining perfection.\nMan, they say, should be like the angels, without sex and without\ndesire. This practice reminds one of an early Christian sect, the\nValesians, which not only emasculated members of their own sect, but\nperformed the same operation forcibly on those who fell into their\nhands.[139] The Khlysti, a sect which derives its name from the practice\nof flagellation, denounce marriage as unclean, and part of their\nreligious ritual is, according to some writers, the worship of a naked\nwoman. Baron Von Haxthausen, writing in 1856, gives the following\ndescription of their ceremonies on Easter night:--\n\n\"On this night the Khlysti all assemble for a great solemnity, the\nworship of the mother of God. A virgin, fifteen years of age, whom they\nhave induced to act the part by tempting promises, is bound and placed\nin a tub of warm water; some old women come, and first make a large\nincision in the left breast, then cut it off, and staunch the blood in a\nwonderfully short time. During the operation a mystical picture of the\nHoly Spirit is put into the victim's hand, in order that she may be\nabsorbed in regarding it. The breast which has been removed is laid upon\na plate and cut into small pieces, which are eaten by all the members of\nthe sect present; the girl in the tub is then raised upon an altar which\nstands near, and the whole congregation dance wildly round it, singing\nat the same time. The jumping then grows madder and wilder, till the\nlights are suddenly extinguished and horrible orgies commence.\"[140]\n\nThe 'Jumpers,' an offshoot of the Khlysti, are much more pronounced in\ntheir sexual extravagances. They openly profess debauchery, for the\nusual reason, that of conquering the flesh by exhaustion and satiety.\nThey meet usually by night, and after prayers are chanted and hymns\nsung, the leader commences a slow jumping movement, keeping time with a\nsong. Then:--\n\n\"The audience, arranged in couples, engaged to each other in advance,\nimitate his example and join the strain; the bounds and the singing grow\nfaster and louder as it spreads, until, at its height, the elder shouts\nthat he hears the voices of angels; the lights are extinguished, the\njumping ceases, and the scene that follows in the darkness defies\ndescription. Each one yields to his desires, born of inspiration, and\ntherefore righteous, and to be gratified; all are brethren in Christ,\nall promptings of the inner spirit are holy; incest, even, is no sin.\nThey repudiate marriage, and justify their abominations by the Biblical\nlegends of Lot's daughters, Solomon's harem, and the like.\"[141]\n\nThere are many other curious sects in Russia, many of which bring us\nback to the religious atmosphere of the European dark ages. But without\npursuing a description of these to any greater extent, enough has been\nsaid to show the persistence of the stream of sexualism in the history\nof Christianity. Of course, this feature did not enter religion with\nChristianity. On the contrary, I have shown that it was present from the\nearliest times. The association of religion with sexual phenomena does\nnot commence as a sexual aberration; it only assumes that form at a\ncomparatively late stage in religious history. The origin of the\nconnection has to be found in that atmosphere of the supernatural which\nenvelops primitive life, moulds primitive conceptions, and more or less\nfashions all primitive institutions. The sexual side of religious belief\nand religious symbolism only becomes abnormal, and even morbid, when the\ndevelopment of social life makes possible a truer view of sexuality. In\nthis the great churches have, perhaps, unconsciously assisted. Their\nposition of social control has compelled them to set their faces against\nthe sexual symbolism which is so closely associated with early religious\nhistory, while at the same time countenancing religious fervour in\ngeneral. The consequence has been that small bodies of men and women,\nfreed from the restraining influence of social responsibility, have\ndeveloped to extravagant length certain phases of religious belief that\nhave been generally discountenanced elsewhere. Their so doing certainly\nhelps the present-day student to make a more complete survey of all the\nfactors that have played their part in religious history than would\notherwise have been possible. Repulsive as some of these features now\nare, they have helped in their time to nourish the general belief in a\nsupernatural order, and so to strengthen the general idea to which they\nwere affiliated.\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[121] _The Future of Science_, p. 465.\n\n[122] _Lost and Hostile Gospels_, Preface, p. 7.\n\n[123] See Baring-Gould's _Study of St. Paul_, pp. 450-1.\n\n[124] See Hepworth Dixon's curious work, _Spiritual Wives_, 1888, 2\nvols.\n\n[125] _Study of St. Paul_, p. 458.\n\n[126] _History of European Morals_, i. p. 417.\n\n[127] Cutten, _Psychological Christianity_, p. 157.\n\n[128] Sanger, _History of Prostitution_, p. 116.\n\n[129] See Blunt's _Dictionary of Sects_, art. \"Manich\u00e6ans.\"\n\n[130] _De Civitate Dei_, ii. 4.\n\n[131] Mosheim, _Cent. 2_, chap. v. sec. 4.\n\n[132] _Dictionary of Sects_, p. 13.\n\n[133] Lea, _Hist. of Sacerdotal Celibacy_, 1884, p. 42.\n\n[134] Cited by Michelet, _Priests, Women, and Families_, p. 130.\n\n[135] _Spiritual Wives_, ii. pp. 55-6.\n\n[136] _Spiritual Wives_, pp. 176-7, 181.\n\n[137] _Ibid._, pp. 84-6.\n\n[138] _The Russian Church and Russian Dissent_, p. 201.\n\n[139] Lea, _Hist. of Sacerdotal Celibacy_, p. 40.\n\n[140] _Visit to the Russian Empire_, i. p. 254. Merejkowski, in his\nhistorical novel, _Peter and Alexis_, gives a more detailed account of\nthe sexual ceremonies of this sect. See also Heard's description,\n_Russian Church_, p. 258.\n\n[141] _Russian Church and Russian Dissent_, p. 262.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER SEVEN\n\nCONVERSION\n\n\nFrom what has been already said, it should be clear that a complete\nunderstanding of religious phenomena--whether legitimately or wrongly so\ncalled--involves acquaintance with a number of factors that are not\nusually called religious. Man's religious beliefs are usually a very\ncomposite product; they are built up from a number of states of feeling\nand mental convictions, some of which have only an accidental connection\nwith the religious idea itself. Unfortunately, the training given to\nprofessional religious teachers rarely equips them for dealing with\nreligion from the scientific point of view. Their training gives them a\nknowledge of several ancient languages, makes them acquainted with the\nrise and fall of certain doctrines, the nature of Church ritual and the\nlike, all of which, while interesting enough in themselves, give little\nmore genuine enlightenment than a knowledge of the dates of English\nmonarchs provides of the character of genuine historic processes. One\nwriter pertinently asks:--\n\n\"What does the ordinary seminary graduate know of the histology,\nanatomy, and physiology of the soul? Absolutely nothing. He must stumble\nalong through years of trying experience and look back over countless\nmistakes before he understands these things even in a general way. What\ndoes the ordinary graduate understand about doubt? It is all classed\ntogether, whether in adolescents or in hardened sinners, and one dose is\napplied. What does the graduate know about sexuality, so closely allied\nwith certain forms of religious manifestations? What about ecstasy, in\nits various forms, the numerous methods of faith cure thrust upon an\nilliterate but credulous people, or the significance or insignificance\nof visions and dreams?\"[142]\n\nIt is, indeed, not too much to say that a theological training tends to\nprevent a rational comprehension of religion in both its normal and\nabnormal manifestations. Religious phenomena are not affiliated to\nphenomena as a whole; they are treated as quite distinct from the rest\nof life, possessing both an independent origin and justification. The\nconsequence is that what are usually called studies of religion move\nround and round the same circle of ideas, and a revolution is mistaken\nfor progress. Genuine enlightenment has come to us from men who have\nattacked the subject from a quite different point of view. They\nrecognised that whether the religious idea was accepted as true or\nrejected as false, it could not be separated from that host of ideas and\nbeliefs which make up the psychological side of the social structure. It\nwas to be studied as a piece of natural history first of all. Whether it\ninvolved more than this they left to be settled later. It cannot be said\nthat they belittled the _power_ of religion; on the contrary, the\ninvestigations showed it to be one of the most potent of the forces that\nshape social institutions. But they demonstrated the absurdity of\nplacing religion in a category of its own. As an objective fact, they\nshowed that religion was subject to the same forces that determine the\nform of other objective facts. As a culture fact, they traced its\nconnection with corresponding phases of social development; and as a\npsychological fact, they demonstrated its workings to be in harmony with\nworkings of normal psychological laws. Five thousand years of\ntheological study had left the world as ignorant of the nature of\nreligious phenomena as it was in the days of ancient Chaldea. Fifty\nyears of scientific study has served to make at least a broad path\nthrough what was hitherto an impenetrable jungle.\n\nWhat has been said holds with peculiar force of the subject of\nconversion. This is not a phenomenon peculiar to Christianity, for\ninitiation and conversion accompanies religion in all its phases. I do\nnot think that it is peculiar to religion even as a whole. A sudden\ndischarge of feeling in a special direction leading to a changed\nattitude, more or less permanent towards life, may be seen in connection\nwith the non-religious life, although it fails to receive the attention\nbestowed on changes that are connected with religion. But if conversion\nis not a peculiarly Christian phenomenon, one school of theologians, at\nleast, has raised it to a position of peculiar eminence in connection\nwith Christianity. They have taken it to be the mark of a person who has\nattained spiritual manhood, and have laid down elaborate rules for its\nachievement. Many theologians will agree that this has been almost\nwholly disastrous. On the one side, conversion has been dwelt upon as a\ncataclysmal epoch in a person's life, produced, negatively, by an act of\nself-surrender, and, positively, by a supernatural act of grace. This\nhas had the effect of blinding people to the real nature of the process,\nand has led to certain evil consequences that must always accompany\nattempts at wholesale conversion. On the other hand, it has given rise\nto a class of professional evangelists who count their trophies in\n'souls' as a Red Indian might count scalps, and who are ignorant of\nnearly everything except the art of working upon the emotions of a crowd\nof more or less uncultured people. Here, for instance, is an account of\nan American evangelist and ex-prize fighter, and evidently a great\nfavourite with certain sections of the religious public in America. The\naccount is cited by Dr. Cutten from a local paper, Illinois:--\n\n\"5843 converts, 683 in a day. Total gift to Mr. Sunday, $10,431.\nGreatest revival in history. Will attract the attention of the religious\nworld. Sermon on 'Booze,' the great effort of the revival! These are all\nheadlines to the report of the meeting, which covers six\ncolumns--evidently a response to the interest shown in 'Billy' Sunday's\nmeetings. The sermon on 'Booze' is given in full, and the physical\nexertions of the preacher described in detail. He began with his coat,\nvest, tie, and collar off. In a few moments his shirt and undershirt\nwere gaping open to the waist, and the muscles of his neck and chest\nwere seen working like those in the arm of a blacksmith, while\nperspiration poured from every pore. His clothing was soaked, as if a\nhose had been turned on him. He strained, and twisted, and reached up\nand down. Once he was on the floor for just a second, in the attitude of\ncrawling, to show that all crime crawled out of the saloon; then he was\non his feet as quickly as a cat could jump. At the end of forty-five\nminutes he mounted a chair, reached high, as he shouted, then again was\non the floor, and dropped prostrate to illustrate a story of a drunken\nman, bounded to his feet again as if steel springs filled that lithe,\nslender, lightning-like body. He generally breaks a common kitchen chair\nin this sermon, and this came after a terrible effort, with eyes\nflashing, face scowling, the picture of hate. He whirled the chair over\nhis head, smashed the chair to the platform floor, whirled the shattered\nwreck in the air again, and threw it to the ground in front of the\npulpit. In two minutes men from the front row were tearing the wreck to\npieces and dividing it up--a round here, a leg there, a piece of the\nback to another, and so on. Later, men carried away in cheering could be\nseen in the audience waving those chair fragments in the air.\"\n\nThis is, of course, an extreme case, although it is but an exaggeration\nof methods in common use among these professional revivalists. The whole\naim and purpose of these men is to arouse in the audience a high\nemotional tension, and any means is acceptable that succeeds in doing\nthis. On the part of the congregation a large portion go for the express\npurpose of indulging in an emotional debauch. Many attend revival after\nrevival, living over again the debauch of the last, and treasuring\nlively expectations of the next. Between these and the victim of alcohol\ntasting again his last 'burst,' and seeking opportunities for another,\nthere is really little moral or psychological distinction. The social\nconsequences of these engineered revivals have never been fully worked\nout, but when it is done by some competent person, the conclusions will\nbe a revelation to many. One thing is certain: to expect really useful\nsocial results from such methods is verily to look to gather grapes from\nthistles.\n\nDuring recent years the phenomena of religious conversion have been\nstudied in a more scientific spirit.[143] Statistics have been compiled\nand analysed, the frames of mind attendant on conversion arranged and\nstudied, with the result that the salient features are to be discerned\nby all who approach the study of the subject with a little detachment of\nmind. One outstanding feature of this more scientific enquiry into the\nnature of conversion has been to demonstrate that it is almost\nexclusively a phenomenon of puberty and adolescence. Mr. Hall has\ncompiled a lengthy list of the ages at which noted religious characters\nexperienced what is known as conversion.[144] From this I take the\nfollowing examples. Religious conviction came to St. Thekla at the age\nof 18, to St. Agnes at 13, St. Antony at 18, Martin of Tours at 18,\nEuphrasia at 12, Benedict at 14, Cuthbert at 15, St. Bernard at 12, St.\nDominic at 15, St. Collette at 20, St. Catherine at 7, St. Teresa at 12,\nSt. Francis of Sales at 11. In his _Life of Jesus_, Keim also remarks\nthat although some of the disciples may have been married, most of them\nwere probably about twenty years of age.[145]\n\nProfessor Starbuck, placing on one side both historical and\nanthropological aspects, set himself the task of examining cases of the\npresent day. A paper was sent out asking various questions as to age,\nstate of health, frame of mind, before, during, and following\nconversion. The questions were sent to male and female members of\ndifferent religious denominations. In reply, 1265 papers were filled up\nand returned. One result of a scrutiny of these returns was to show that\nthe age at which religious conversion was experienced began as early as\n7 or 8 years, it increased gradually till 10 or 11, then a more rapid\nincrease till 18 or 20, a decline increasing in rapidity to the age of\n25, and its practical disappearance beyond the age of 30. In girls, the\nperiod of conversion antedates that of boys by about two years.[146]\nStarbuck's conclusion is the perfectly valid one that conversion\n\"belongs almost exclusively to the years between 10 and 25,\" and is\ndistinctly a phenomenon of adolescence.\n\nThis conclusion would be borne out by a study of almost any revival\ncrusade. Thus a few years ago--1904--England received a visit from the\nAmerican evangelist, Dr. Torrey. At the conclusion of his visit, Sir\nRobertson Nicol invited opinions from ministers in the towns visited by\nTorrey, and published the replies in his paper, _The British Weekly_, on\nOctober 27. There was no attempt whatever to elicit the ages of the\nreported converts; the enquiry was directed to the point of ascertaining\nwhether these engineered missions had a beneficial effect on church\nlife, or the reverse. But incidentally the ages of the converts were\ngiven in some cases, and one may safely assume that in the reports where\nno age was mentioned the facts, if disclosed, would not run counter to\nthe generalisation above given. The Rev. T. Towers, Birmingham, noted\nthat 16 out of 25 reported converts were children. Rev. A. Le Gros,\nRugby, reported: \"A number of our youngest members, especially amongst\nthe young girls, were amongst those who professed conversion.\" Rev. H.\nSingleton, Smethwick, says: \"The bulk of the names sent to me were those\nof children under thirteen years of age.\" Rev. W. G. Percival, Lozells\nCongregational Church, says of the 'inquiry' meeting held after the\npreaching: \"The dear little things followed one another for inquiry\nuntil the place was a scene of utter confusion.\" Reports of a similar\nnature came from other places. The ages were pointed out quite\nincidentally; conversions of youths of 17 or 18 would not excite comment\nwith these. Were the ages of all given, we should, without doubt, find\nthem fall into line with Starbuck's and Hall's figures.\n\nProfessor James quite accepts this view of conversion. The conclusion,\nhe says, \"would seem to be the only sound one: conversion is in its\nessence a normal adolescent phenomenon, incidental to the passage from\nthe child's small universe to the wider intellectual and spiritual life\nof maturity.\"[147] Conversion, in the sense of a change from \"the\nchild's small universe\" to the large world of human society, may be a\nnormal fact in life, but the really essential fact in the enquiry is not\nthe fact of growth, but growth in a specific direction. Why should this\nnormal change from childhood to maturity be the period during which\n_religious_ conversion is experienced? This question is not only ignored\nby Professor James, it is made more confused by his method of stating\nit. Of course, if all people experienced this religious conviction, as\nall people undergo other changes at adolescence, the question would be\nsimplified. But this is obviously not the case. A large number of people\nnever experience it so long as they are only brought into contact with\nordinary social forces. Special circumstances seem usually to be\nrequired to rouse this sense of religious conviction. Nearly every story\nof conversion turns upon something unusual, unexpected, or dramatic\noccurring as the exciting cause. The question is, therefore, why should\nthe line of growth, general with all at adolescence, be, in the case of\nsome, diverted into religious channels? A study of the subject from this\npoint of view will, I think, show that conversion is only normal in the\nsense that in an environment where religious influences are powerful\neach person is normally exposed to it. Those on whom the religious\ninfluence fails to operate experience the change from childhood to\nadolescence, on to complete maturity, without their nature evincing any\nlack of completeness. This is the vital truth of which Professor James\nloses sight, and it is ignored by the vast majority of writers who treat\nof the subject.\n\nLeaving, for a while, the statistical view of conversion, we may turn to\nits other aspects. By the more advanced of religious teachers to-day the\ndevelopments attendant on adolescence are taken as supplying no more\nthan a favourable occasion for directing mind and emotion to definite\nreligious conviction. Here the connection is admittedly more or less\naccidental. But by the great majority of theologians there is assumed a\ndirect supernatural influence in the states of mind developed during\nadolescence. In more primitive times the connection is of a yet closer\ncharacter. Puberty does not at this stage represent what a modern would\ncall an awakening of the religious consciousness, but a direct\nimpingement of supernatural influence. From one point of view this\nconception still remains part of all religious systems, however overlaid\nit may be with modern ideas concerning sexual maturity. And we have, as\na mere matter of historic fact, a whole series of customs commencing\nwith the initiatory customs of savages and running right on to the\nmodern practice of confirmation.\n\nIn a previous chapter it was pointed out what is the savage state of\nmind in relation to the beginnings of sex life as it is manifested in\nboth boys and girls. Adolescence does not, to the primitive mind, serve\nas an occasion for the creation of an interest in the religious life, it\nis the sign of direct supernatural influence. One consequence of this is\nthe rise of more or less elaborate ceremonials marking the initiation of\nyouth into direct communion with the spiritual forces that govern tribal\nlife.[148] Among the Polynesians tattooing forms part of the religious\nceremony, and during the time the marks are healing the boy is taboo to\nthe rest of the tribe, owing to his having been touched by the gods.\nWith the North American Indians the following ceremony seems\ncharacteristic:--\n\n\"When a boy has attained the age of fourteen or fifteen years he absents\nhimself from his father's lodge, lying on the ground in some remote or\nsecluded spot, crying to the Great Spirit, and fasting the whole time.\nDuring this period of peril and abstinence, when he falls asleep, the\nfirst animal, bird, or reptile, of which he dreams, he considers the\nGreat Spirit has designated for his mysterious protector through\nlife.\"[149] Similar ceremonies are described by Livingstone as existing\namong the South African tribes. These customs are too widespread, and\nbear too great a similarity to be described with reference to many\nraces. The variations are unimportant, and such as they are they may be\nstudied in the pages of Hall, Frazer, and numerous other writers. With\ngirls the measures adopted are of a more elaborate character than is the\ncase with boys, because, for reasons already stated, the occurrence of\npuberty in girls gives the supernatural act a more startling and\nsignificant character. Hence the strict seclusion of girls almost\nuniversally practised among uncivilised peoples. The precautions taken\nindicate, as Hartland points out, that they are at this period not\nmerely charged with a malign influence, but are peculiarly susceptible\nto the onset of powers other than human. And with a modification of\nlanguage the same idea has persisted down to our time, even amongst\nthose who would reject with indignation the statement that savage ideas\nconcerning the nature of puberty form the real basis of their own mental\nattitude.\n\nThis truth cannot be too strongly emphasised. To ignore it is to miss\nthe whole significance of continuity in human institutions and ideas.\nThe ceremonies described do, of course, gather round the fact of sexual\ndevelopment, but they are not concerned with the sexual life, as such.\nIt is sex as a supernatural manifestation that is the vital feature of\nthe situation. The governing idea is that puberty marks the direct\nassociation of the individual with a spiritual world to the influence of\nwhich the functional changes are due. As more accurate conceptions are\nformed, the older and inaccurate one is not altogether discarded. It has\nbecome incarnate in ceremonies, it is part of the traditional psychic\nlife of the people, and the change is one of transformation rather than\nof eradication. In later cultural stages the physiological nature of the\nchanges are seen, but they are expressed in terms of religion. Such\nexpressions as \"the soul's awareness of God,\" \"the dawning consciousness\nof religion,\" etc., take the place of the earlier and more direct\nanimistic interpretation. But the essential misinterpretation is\nretained, disguised from careless or uninformed people by the use of a\nmodified terminology. But in substance the use made of puberty by\norganised religious forces remains the same throughout. We have the same\nabsence of a rational explanation in both instances. In the one because\nthe state of knowledge makes any other impossible; in the other because\ntradition, self-interest, and prejudice prevent its use. It is not only\nin his physical structure that man carries reminiscences of a lower form\nof life; such reminders are quite as plentiful in his mental life, and\nin social institutions.\n\nEven with many who perceive the mechanism of conversion its real\nsignificance is often missed. For the important thing is, not that some\npeople express the changes incident to adolescence in terms of religion,\nbut that many do not, and also that these find complete satisfaction\nalong lines of \u00e6sthetic, intellectual, or social interest. Yet one often\nfinds it assumed that the difference between the two classes is\nexplained by assuming a certain lack of 'spiritual' development in the\nnon-religious class. As stated, this is often perilously near to\nimpertinence, and in any case is little better than the language of a\ncharlatan. In the same way, the use of amatory phraseology is often\ntreated as the intrusion of the sex element in a sphere in which it has\nno proper place. Enough has already been said to furnish good grounds\nfor believing that there is much more than this in the phenomenon, and\nthat one is justified in treating it as symptomatic of the operation of\nforces of the nature of which the subject is quite unaware. The only\nexplanation of the facts already cited is that a misinterpretation of\nsexual states lies at the heart of the question. No other hypothesis\ncovers the facts; no other hypothesis will explain why the larger number\nof people should find complete development in activities that lie\noutside the field of religion.\n\nHow easy it is to see the truth and distort it in the stating may be\nseen in the following passage:--\n\n\"Passing over the fact that the period of adolescence is noticeably a\nperiod of 'susceptibility,' we may take as an example of the intrusion\nor the persistence of the sexual elements in conditions of a non-sexual\nkind the frequent association of sexual with religious excitement. The\nappeal made during a religious revival to an unconverted person has\npsychologically some resemblance to the attempt of the male to overcome\nthe hesitancy of the female. In each case the will has to be set aside,\nand strong suggestive means are used; and in both cases the appeal is\nnot of the conflict type, but of an intimate, sympathetic, and pleading\nkind. In the effort to make a moral adjustment, it consequently turns\nout that a technique is used which was derived originally from sexual\nlife, and the use, so to speak, of the sexual machinery for a moral\nadjustment involves, in some cases, the carrying over into the general\nprocess of some sexual manifestations.\"[150]\n\nThe important questions, why religion should so powerfully appeal to\npeople at adolescence, why its strength should reside so largely in the\nappeal to feelings associated with sexual development, and why\nconversion should be so rarely experienced when the period of sexual\ncrisis is past, are quite ignored by Mr. Thomas. Yet it is precisely\nthese questions that call most loudly for answers, and which, I believe,\ncontain the key of the situation.\n\nFrom many points of view adolescence is perhaps the most important epoch\nin the life of every individual. It is a time of great and significant\norganic growth, with the development of new organs and functions, and a\ncorresponding transformation of both the emotional and intellectual\noutput. So far as the brain, the most important organ of all, is\nconcerned, one may safely say that before puberty its main function has\nbeen acquisition. After puberty vast tracts of brain tissue become\nactive, and an era of rapid development sets in. There is a rapid growth\nof new nerve connections which occasions both physiological and\npsychological unrest.[151] An important point to bear in mind, also, is\nthat all periods of rapid development involve conditions of relative\ninstability--one is, in fact, only the obverse side of the other. Dr.\nMercier says that with girls \"more or less decided manifestations of\nhysteria are the rule,\" and with both sexes this instability involves a\npeculiar susceptibility to suggestions and impressions. Accompanying the\npurely physical changes the mental and emotional nature undergoes what\nis little less than a transformation. There is less direct concern with\nself, and a more conscious concern with others. There is a craving for\nsympathy, for fellowship, a tendency to look at oneself from the\noutside, so to speak, a susceptibility to sights and sounds and\nimpressions that formerly had little influence. Each one is conscious of\nnew desires, new attractions, expressed often only in a vague feeling of\nunrest, with a desire, half shy because half conscious, for the company\nof the opposite sex. The childish desire for protection weakens; the\nmore mature desire to protect others begins to express itself.\n\nNow, the whole significance of these changes, physical and mental, is\nfundamentally sexual and social. Human life, it may be said, has a\ntwofold aspect. As a mere animal organism, there is the perpetuation of\nthe species, which nature secures by the mere force of the sex impulse.\nAs a human being, he is part of a social structure, cell in the social\ntissue, to use Leslie Stephen's expressive phrase. And in this direction\nnature secures what is necessary by the presence of impulses and\ncravings as imperious as, and even more permanent than, those of mere\nsex. Of course, in practice these two things operate together. By a\nprocess of selection, the anti-social character is weeded out, and the\ntwo sets of feelings work together in harmony for the furtherance and\nthe development of the life of the species. The species is perpetuated\nin the interests of society; society is perpetuated in the interests of\nthe species. Further, it is part of the natural 'plan' that there shall\nbe developed impulses and capacities suitable to each phase of life as\nit emerges. Thus it has been shown that the lengthening of infancy--that\nis, the prolongation of the time during which the young human being is\ndependent upon its parents for support and protection--is nature's\nmethod of developing to a greater degree the capacity of the human\nanimal for more complex adjustment. Instead of being launched on the\nworld with a number of instincts practically fully developed, and so\ncapable of attending to its own needs almost as soon as born, man is\nborn with few instincts, and a great capacity for education enabling him\nto adjust his conduct to the demands of an environment constantly\nincreasing in complexity. In the same way it has been shown that the\ninstinct for play, practically universal throughout the whole of the\nanimal world, is nature's method of preparing the young for the more\nserious business of nature.[152] It is, therefore, only in line with\nwhat is found to be true elsewhere that the changes incident to puberty\nshould receive their rational interpretation in the necessities of\nsocial life. That these necessities should be met largely by the play of\nunreasoning impulse is, again, quite in line with what occurs in other\ndirections. The insistent pressure of social life for thousands of\ngenerations secures the emergence of needs of the true nature of which\nthe individual may be ignorant. In no other way, in fact, could the\npersistence of the species and of human society be secured.\n\nThe whole significance, then, of puberty and adolescence is the entry of\nthe individual into the larger life of the race. It is, too, a statement\nbeyond reasonable dispute that if we eliminate religion altogether from\nthe environment there is not a single feeling experienced at\nadolescence, not a single intellectual craving, that would not undergo\nfull development and receive complete satisfaction. The proof of the\ntruth of this is that it occurs in a large number of cases. Sacrifice,\nthe craving for the ideal, with every other feeling associated by many\nwith religion, exist in connection with non-religious phases of life. It\nis idle to argue that some people have a craving for religion, and\nnothing but religion will satisfy them. Where an individual is in\ncomplete ignorance of the nature and significance of his own\ndevelopment, and those around him no better informed; where, moreover,\nthere are others in a position of authority ready with a special\ninterpretation, it is not surprising if the religious explanation is\naccepted as the genuine and only one. But in reality a sound judgment is\nformed, not on the basis of what some declare they cannot do without,\nbut on the basis of what others actually do without, and suffer no\nobservable loss in consequence. We do not estimate the value of alcohol\non the basis of those who declare they cannot do without it. The true\ntest is found in those who abstain from its use. So, also, in the case\nof religion. That some, even the majority, declare that religious belief\nis essential to their welfare, proves little or nothing. Human nature\nbeing what it is, and the history of society being what it is, it would\nbe surprising were it otherwise. There is much greater significance in\nso large a number of people finding complete satisfaction in purely\nsecular activities.\n\nAfter what has been said of the misinterpretation of mental and\nemotional states in terms of religious belief, it is not surprising to\nfind a writer, a clergyman, and one with experience of growing boys,\nexpress himself as follows:--\n\n\"My experience confirms the opinion of the psychologists that most boys\nof the public school age have a strongly mystical tendency. This is to\nbe expected, on account of the great emotional development of that\nperiod of life. But it is obscured by the fact that the boy is both\nunwilling and unable to give any verbal expression to this tendency. He\nis unwilling because it is something very new and curious in his\nexperience; he is often a little frightened of it, and he is exceedingly\nfrightened of other people's contempt for it. And he is unable, because\nthe words he is accustomed to use are valueless in this connection, and\nhe feels priggish if he tries to use others.... But, though unexplained,\nthe mystical tendency is there, and should be appealed to and\ndeveloped.\"[153]\n\nNow, clearly, all that can be reasonably meant by saying that a boy of,\napparently, from 12 to 16 has a mystical tendency, is that the\nphysiological changes incident to puberty are accompanied by a mass of\nfeeling of a vague and formless character. Naturally, his boyish\nexperience is unable to furnish him with the means of giving adequate\nexpression to his feelings. That can only come with the experience of\nmaturity. And with equal inevitability he is at the mercy of the\nexplanation furnished him by those whom he regards as his teachers and\nguides. When he is told that this element of 'mysticism' is the\nawakening of religion in his soul, he accepts the explanation precisely\nas he accepts explanations of other things. That this 'mystical\ntendency' should be appealed to and developed is a statement open to\nvery great doubt. It should rather be explained, not perhaps in a\nbrutally frank manner, but in a way that would lead the boy to see\nhimself as an organic part of society, with definite duties and\nobligations. If this were done, adolescence might provide us with the\nraw material for a much greater number of useful and intelligent\ncitizens than it does at present. The true nature of the process, so\nelaborately misunderstood by Dr. Temple, is clearly outlined by Dr.\nMercier:--\n\n\"In connection with normal development, a large body of vague and\nformless feeling arises, and, until experience gives it shape, the\npossessor remains ignorant of the source and nature of the feeling. If\nthe circumstances are appropriate for the natural outlet and expression\nof the activities, they are expressed in affection, and are a source of\nhealth and strength to the possessor. But if no such outlet exists, the\nvague, voluminous, formless feelings are referred to an occasion that is\nvague, voluminous, and wanting in definite form, they are ascribed to\nthe direct influence of the Deity, and assume a place in religious\nemotion.\"[154]\n\nLeaving this aspect of the subject for a time, let us look more closely\nat the process of conversion. It has already been pointed out that one\ngreat feature of adolescence is susceptibility to impressions and\nsuggestions. One is not surprised to find, therefore, that in\nStarbuck's collection of cases 34 per cent. of the females and 29 per\ncent. of the males described their conversion as being directly due to\nimitation, social pressure, and example. If we were to add to these the\ncases where unconscious imitation and suggestion is at work, the\nproportion would be much greater. Religion, like dress, has its modes,\nand imitation will occur in the one direction as readily as in the\nother. Nothing is more striking in the records of conversion than the\nmonotony of the language used to describe the feelings experienced. It\nis exactly as though the converts had been learning a regular catechism,\nas in a way they have been. Young boys and girls will confess their\nsinful state in language identical with that used by one who has\nactually lived a career of vice and crime. Others of an aggressively\ncommonplace character will use the language of exalted mysticism\nsuitable to an Augustine or a Jacob Boehme. In these cases we have not\nidentity of feeling finding expression in identity of language; it is\npure imitation and suggestion without the least regard to the fitness of\nthe language employed.\n\nThe full power of suggestion would be more fitly considered in\nconnection with waves of religious feeling that have assumed an epidemic\nform; but it will not be out of place here to call attention to this\nfactor in such a recent case as the outbreaks in Wales under the\nleadership of persons such as Evan Roberts. Quite apart from the\nsuggestion and imitation operating in the gatherings themselves, it is\nplain that many went to the meetings quite prepared to act in accordance\nwith what had gone before. Newspapers had published elaborate reports\nof the 'scenes,' certain manifestations were recognised as signs of the\n\"workings of the Spirit,\" with the result that all these operated as\npowerful suggestions, particularly with those of a hysterical\ndisposition. And behind this particular revival there were the\ntraditions of other revivals, all of which had created a heritage as\ncoercive as any purely social tradition. A crowd of people in a state of\neager expectancy, exposed to the assaults of a preacher skilled in\nrousing their emotion to fever pitch, is naturally ready to see and hear\nthings that none would see and hear in their normal moments. No better\nfield for the study of crowd psychology, particularly at the point at\nwhich it merges into the abnormal, could be imagined than the ordinary\nrevival.\n\nIn America these revival out breaks seem to assume a much more\nextravagant form than with us. Mr. Stanley Hall, for example, thus\ndescribes a Kentucky camp meeting in which the prevailing term of\nspiritual manifestation was that of 'jerking.' Quoting from an\neye-witness, he says:--\n\n\"The crowd swarmed all night round the preacher, singing, shouting,\nlaughing, some plunging wildly over stumps and benches into the forest,\nshouting 'Lost, lost!' others leaping and bounding about like live fish\nout of water; others rolling over and over on the ground for hours;\nothers lying on the ground and talking when they could not move; and yet\nothers beating the ground with their heels. As the excitement increased,\nit grew more morbid and took the form of 'jerkings,' or in others the\nholy laugh. The jerks began with the head, which was thrown violently\nfrom side to side so rapidly that the features were blurred and the\nhair almost seemed to snap, and when the sufferer struck an obstacle and\nfell he would bounce about like a ball. Saplings were sometimes cut\nbreast high for the people to jerk by. In one place the earth about the\nroots of one of them was kicked about as though by the feet of a horse\nstamping flies. One sufferer mounted his horse to ride away when the\njerks threw him to the earth, whence he rose a Christian. A lad, who\nfeigned illness to stay away, was dragged there by the spirit and his\nhead dashed against the wall till he had to pray. A sceptic who cursed\nand swore was crushed by a falling tree. Men fancied themselves dogs,\nand gathered round a tree barking and 'treeing the devil.' They saw\nvisions and dreamed dreams, and as the revival waned, it left a crop of\nnervous and hysterical disorders in its wake.\"[155]\n\nWe have nothing quite so extreme as this in British revivals, but the\nhome phenomena are not substantially different in nature. A medical\nobserver of some of the earliest Methodist revivals thus describes the\nsymptoms of those who were subject to 'divine' seizures under the\ninfluence of Wesley and his immediate followers:--\n\n\"There came on first a feeling of faintness, with rigor and a sense of\nweight at the pit of the stomach; soon after which the patient cried out\nas though in the agonies of labour. The convulsions then began, first\nshowing themselves in the muscles of the eyelids, though the eyes\nthemselves were fixed and staring. The most frightful contortions of the\ncountenance followed, and the convulsions now took their course\ndownwards, so that the muscles of the trunk and neck were affected,\ncausing a sobbing respiration, which was performed with great effort.\nTremors and agitations ensued, and the patients screamed out violently,\nand tossed their heads from side to side. As the complaint increased, it\nseized the arms, and its victims beat their breasts, clasped their\nhands, and made all sorts of strange noises.\"\n\nTo the non-medical religious observer the scenes produced a different\nimpression, thus:--\n\n\"When the power of religion began to be spoken of, the presence of God\nreally filled the place.... The greatest number of them who cried or\nfell were men; but some women and several children felt the power of the\nsame Almighty Spirit, and seemed just sinking into hell. This occasioned\na mixture of sounds, some shrieking, some roaring aloud. The most\ngeneral was a loud breathing, like that of people half strangled and\ngasping for life; and, indeed, almost all the cries were like those of\nhuman creatures dying in bitter anguish.... I stood on a pew seat, as\ndid a young man in the opposite pew, an able-bodied, fresh, healthy\ncountryman; but in a moment, while he seemed to think of nothing less,\ndown he dropt with a violence inconceivable. The adjoining pews seemed\nshook with his fall. I heard afterwards the stamping of his feet ready\nto break the boards as he lay in strong convulsions at the bottom of the\npew.... Among the children who felt the arrows of the Almighty, I saw a\nsturdy boy, about eight years old, who roared above his fellows, and\nseemed, in his agony, to struggle with the strength of a grown man. His\nface was red as scarlet; and almost all on whom God laid His hand turned\neither very red or almost black.\"[156]\n\nIn other instances connected with the same movement, a girl is described\nas \"lying on the floor as one dead.\" One woman \"tore up the ground with\nher hands, filling them with dust and with the hard-trodden grass\";\nanother \"roared and screamed in dreadful agony.\" A child, seven years\nold, \"saw visions, and astonished the neighbours with her awful manner\nof relating them.\" John Wesley personally interviewed a number of the\npeople seized in this manner, and was quite convinced of the\nsupernatural nature of the attacks. He said that he had \"generally\nobserved more or less of these outward symptoms to attend the beginning\nof a general work of God,\" although he admitted that in some cases\n\"Satan mimicked God's work in order to discredit the whole work.\" But\nwhether of God or Satan there was no question of their supernatural\ncharacter. Moreover, whatever may be one's opinion of these outbreaks,\nthere is one fact that stands out clear and indisputable. This is that\nthe Methodist revival owed a great deal of its vitality--as is also the\ncase with other religious movements--to phenomena of a distinctly\npathologic nature. Subtract from these movements all phenomena of the\nclass indicated, and such phrases as 'the revival fire' become\nmeaningless. Right through history religious conviction has been gained\nin innumerable cases by the operation of factors that a more accurate\nknowledge finds can be explained without any reference whatever to\nsupernatural forces.\n\nLest the above examples be dismissed as belonging to an old order of\nthings, I subjoin the following account--from a missionary--of a recent\nrevival scene in India:--\n\n\"There were people ... on the floor fairly writhing over the realisation\nof sin as it came over them.... Saturday we were favoured with a\nwonderful manifestation of the Spirit. One of the older girls who had\nhad a remarkable experience, went into a trance, with her head thrown\nback, her arms folded, and motionless, except for a slight movement of\nher foot. She seemed to be seeing something wonderful, for she would\nmarvel at it, and then laugh excitedly.... One girl rushed to the back\nof the vestibule and, lying across a bench, with her head and hands\nagainst the wall, she fairly writhed in agony for two hours before peace\ncame to her.\"[157]\n\nI do not know on what grounds we are justified in calling civilised\npeople who chronicle these outbreaks as \"a wonderful manifestation of\nthe Spirit.\" Civilised in other respects, in relation to other matters,\nthey may be. Civilised in relation to this particular matter they\ncertainly are not. Their viewpoint is precisely that of the lowest tribe\nof savages. Savages, indeed, could not do more; our 'civilised'\nmissionaries do no less. Tylor well says that \"such descriptions carry\nus far back in the history of the human mind, showing modern men still\nin ignorant sincerity producing the very fits and swoons to which for\nuntold ages savage tribes have given religious import. These\nmanifestations in modern Europe indeed form part of a revival of\nreligion, the religion of mental disease.\"[158]\n\nThe truth is that the appeals usually made to induce conversion, and the\nmethods adopted, tend to develop a morbid state of mind, which very\neasily passes into the pathological. A too insistent habit of\nintrospection is always dangerous, and the danger is heightened when it\ntakes the form of religious brooding. In Dr. Starbuck's collection of\ncases, seventy-five per cent. of the males and sixty per cent. of the\nfemales confessed to feelings of depression, anxiety, and sadness before\nconversion. This may be attributed partly to the harping upon a\nconviction of sinfulness, which in itself is wholly of an unhealthy\ncharacter. It does not indicate moral health, and it is very far from\nindicating physiological health. The following confessions are\npertinent, and will illustrate both points. I give in brackets the ages\nof the subjects where stated:--\n\n\"I felt the wrath of God resting on me. I called on Him for aid, and\nfelt my sins forgiven\" (13).\n\n\"I couldn't eat, and would lie awake all night.\"\n\n\"Often, very often, I cried myself to sleep\" (19).\n\n\"Hymns would sound in my ears as if sung\" (10).\n\n\"I had visions of Christ saying to me, Come to Me, My child\" (15).\n\n\"Just before conversion I was walking along a pathway, thinking of\nreligious matters, when suddenly the word H-e-l-l was spelled out five\nyards ahead of me\" (17).\n\n\"I felt a touch of the Divine One, and a voice said 'Thy sins are\nforgiven thee; arise and go in peace'\" (12).\n\n\"The thoughts of my condition were terrible\" (13).\n\n\"For three months it seemed as if God's Spirit had withdrawn from me.\nFear took hold of me. For a week I was on the border of despair\" (16).\n\n\"A sense of sinfulness and estrangement from God grew daily\" (15).\n\n\"Everything went wrong with me; it felt like Sunday all the time\" (12).\n\n\"I felt that something terrible was going to happen\" (14).\n\n\"I fell on my face by a bench and tried to pray. Every time I would call\non God something like a man's hand would strangle me by choking. I\nthought I would surely die if I could not get help. I made one final\neffort to call on God for mercy if I did strangle and die, and the last\nI remember at that time was falling back on the ground with that unseen\nhand on my throat. When I came to myself there was a crowd around\npraising God.\"\n\nA crowd around praising God! For all substantial purposes this last\nmight be the description of a state of affairs in Central Africa instead\nof an occurrence in a country that claims to be civilised. It is not\nsurprising that so great an authority as Sir T. S. Clouston gives an\nemphatic warning against revival services and unusual religious\nmeetings, which should \"on no account be attended by persons with weak\nheads, excitable dispositions, and neurotic constitutions.\"[159]\nUnfortunately it is precisely these classes for whom they possess the\ngreatest attractions, and from whom the larger number of chronicled\ncases are drawn. The excitement of the revival meeting is as fatal an\nattraction to them as the dram is to the confirmed alcoholist; and if\nthe ill-consequences are neither so immediately discernible nor as\nrepulsive in character, they are none the less present in a large number\nof cases. The emotional strain to which the organism is subjected\noccurs, as the ages of the converts show, precisely at the time when it\nis least able to bear it safely. The main characteristic of adolescence\nis instability, physical, emotional, and intellectual. It is a time of\nstress and strain, of the formation of new feelings and associations and\ndesires that crave for expression and gratification. The instability of\nthe organic conditions is evidenced by the large proportion of nervous\ndisorders that occur during adolescence. Adolescent insanity is a\nwell-known form of mania, although it is usually of brief duration. Sir\nT. S. Clouston, in his _Neuroses of Development_, gives a long list of\ncomplaints attendant on adolescence, and Sir W. R. Gowers, dealing with\n1450 cases of epilepsy, points out that \"three-quarters of the cases of\nepilepsy begin under twenty years, and nearly half (46 per cent.)\nbetween ten and twenty, the maximum being at fourteen, fifteen, and\nsixteen.\" Of hysteria, the same writer points out that of the total\ncases 50 per cent. occurs from ten to twenty years of age, 20 per cent.\nfrom twenty to thirty, and only 10 per cent. from thirty to forty.[160]\n\nThe peculiar danger, then, of the modern appeal for conversion is that\nit is couched in a form likely to do the minimum of good and the maximum\nof harm. Where religion exists as a normally operative factor of the\nenvironment--as in lower stages of culture--the danger is avoided,\nbecause no special machinery is required to bring about religious\nconviction. The general social life secures this. But at a later stage,\nwhen the religious and secular aspects of life become separated, with a\ngrowing preponderance of the latter, religion must be, as it were,\nspecially and forcibly introduced. Whether for good or ill, it is a\ndisturbing force. It strives to divert the developing organic energies\ninto a new channel. To effect this, it plays upon the emotions to an\naltogether dangerous extent, in complete ignorance of the nature of the\npassions excited. In the older form of the religious appeal, that in\nwhich fear was the chief emotion aroused, it is now generally conceded\nthat the consequences were wholly bad. But under any form the emotional\nappeal is fraught with danger, since the tendency is for it to bring out\nunsuspected weaknesses in other directions. Sir W. R. Gowers wisely\npoints out that \"mental emotion--fright, excitement, anxiety--is the\nmost potent cause of epilepsy,\" which is accounted for by bearing in\nmind \"the profoundly disturbing effect of alarm on the nervous system,\nderanging as it does almost every function of the nervous system.\"\nPersons with predispositions to nervous disorders may pass with safety\nthrough the period of adolescence so long as their circumstances provide\nopportunities for healthy occupation with no undue emotional strain. But\nlet the former be lacking, and the latter danger is always present. The\nhidden weakness develops, and injury more or less permanent follows.\nThere is hardly a qualified medical authority in the country who would\ndeny the truth of what has been said, although many do not care to speak\nout in relation to religious matters. But all would doubtless agree with\nDr. Mercier that \"every revival is attended by its crop of cases of\ninsanity, which are the more numerous as the revival is more fervent and\nlong continued.\"[161]\n\nSomething must be said on the moral character of conversions in\ngeneral. This is, naturally, greatly exaggerated, often deliberately so.\nIn the first place, confessions of 'sinfulness' in a pre-conversion\nstate, when made by youths of both sexes, may be dismissed as quite\nworthless. They are merely using the language placed in their mouths by\nprofessional evangelists, and the similarity of the confessions carry\ntheir own condemnation. Leading a sinful, or even a vicious life,\nusually means no more than visiting a theatre, or a music hall, or\nplaying cards, or non-attendance at church, or not troubling about\nreligious doctrines. Very often the vague feeling of restlessness\nincident to adolescence is interpreted as due to sin or estrangement\nfrom God, and after conversion the convert is, for purposes of\nself-glorification, given to magnify the benefits and comforts derived\nfrom his religious convictions. The magnitude of the change increases\nthe value of the convert, and with well-known characters there has been\nas great an exaggeration of vices before conversion as of virtues\nsubsequently. The way in which evangelical Christianity has created a\nlife of the wildest dissipation for the earlier years of John Bunyan is\nan instructive instance of this procedure.\n\nSo far as older converts are concerned, everyone of balanced judgment\nwill regard stories of conversion from extreme vice to extreme virtue\nwith the greatest suspicion. Character does not change suddenly,\nalthough there may be cases of 'sports' in the moral world as elsewhere.\nWhere some modification of conduct, but hardly of character, results,\nthe machinery is very obvious, and does not in the least necessitate an\nappeal to the intrusion of a supernatural influence for an explanation.\nThe religious gathering opens--as any non-religious meeting may open--a\nnew circle of associates with different ideals and standards of value.\nSo long as the newcomer is desirous of retaining the respect of his\nfresh associates, so long he will try to act as they act and think as\nthey think. There will be a change of conduct, but not, as I have said,\nof character. Those who look closely will find the same character still\nactive. The mean character remains mean, the untruthful one remains\nuntruthful. The only difference is that these qualities will be\nexpressed in a different form. Moreover, the same thing may be seen\noccurring quite apart from religion. Every association of men and women\nexerts precisely the same influence. In the army, a regiment that has a\nreputation for steadiness and sobriety develops these qualities in all\nwho enter it. Regiments with a reputation for opposite qualities do not\nfail to convert newcomers. A workshop, a club, a profession, exerts a\nprecisely similar influence. One man finds inspiration in the Bible and\nanother in the Newgate Calendar. A man will usually be guided by the\nideals of his associates, whether these ideals be those of a thieves'\nkitchen or of a philanthropic institution. This only means that each\nindividual is subject to the influence of the group spirit. For good and\nevil this is one of the deepest and most pregnant facts of human nature.\nThe utilisation and distortion of this fact in the interests of\nreligious organisations has served to prevent its general recognition\nand the wise use of it by the community at large.\n\nFinally, it has to be borne in mind, in view of the data given above,\nthat conversion is experienced by the individual at that period of life\nwhen the more social side of human nature is beginning to find\nexpression. In this way the natural growth from the small world of\nchildhood to the larger world of adult humanity is taken advantage of by\nreligion, and the process of inevitable growth is attributed to the\ninfluence of religious belief. In itself the phenomenon is in no degree\nreligious, but wholly social. The process is well enough described by\nStarbuck in the following passage--although there are certain quite\nunnecessary theological implications:--\n\n\"Conversion is the surrender of the personal will to be guided by the\nlarger forces of which it is a part. These two aspects are often\nmingled. In both there is much in common. There is a sudden revelation\nand recognition of a higher order than that of the personal will. The\nsympathies follow the direction of the new insight, and the convert\ntransfers the centre of life and activity from the part to the whole.\nWith new insight comes new beauty. Beauty and worth awaken love--love\nfor parents, kindred, kind, society, cosmic order, truth, and spiritual\nlife. The individual learns to transfer himself from a centre of\nself-activity into an organ of revelation of universal being, and to\nlive a life of affection for and oneness with the larger life outside.\nAs a necessary condition of the spiritual awakening is the birth of\nfresh activity and of a larger self-consciousness, which often assert\nthemselves as the dominant element in consciousness.\"[162]\n\nAdolescence is the golden period of life, because it is the age in which\nthe formative influences effect their strongest and most permanent\nimpressions. But this susceptibility, while pregnant with promise, is\nbecause of this susceptibility likewise fraught with the possibilities\nof danger. The developing qualities of mind need to be wisely and\ncarefully guided; and it is little short of criminal that at this\ncritical juncture so many young people should be handed over to the\nignorant ministrations of professional evangelism. The true sociological\nsignificance of the development is ignored, and it is small wonder that,\nhaving wasted this impressionable period, so many people should go\nthrough life with a quite rudimentary sense of social responsibility and\nduty. An American author, speaking of the connection between certain\nbrutal manifestations in social life in the United States and religious\nteaching, says:--\n\n\"It is well known that lynching in the South is carried on largely by\nthe ignorant and baser elements of the white population. It is also well\nknown that the chief method of religious influence and training of the\nblack man and the ignorant white man is impulsive and emotional\nrevivalism. It is a highly dangerous situation, and deserves the earnest\nconsideration of the ecclesiastical statesmen of all denominations which\nwork in the South. It will be impossible to protect that part of the\nnation, or any other, from the epidemic madness of the lynching mob if\nthe seeds of it are sown in the sacred soil of religion.... Their\npreachers are great 'soul-savers,' but they lack the practical sense to\nbuild up their emotionalised converts into anything that approaches a\nhigher life.\"[163]\n\nThe truth of this passage has a very wide implication. It is not alone\ntrue that so long as the lower kind of revivalism is encouraged, we are\nunconsciously perpetuating certain very ugly manifestations of social\nlife; it is also true that while we give a supernaturalistic\ninterpretation of phenomena that are wholly physiological and\nsociological in character, we can never make the most of the human\nmaterial we possess. On the one side we have a deplorable encouragement\nof unhealthy emotionalism, and on the other a sheer misdirection and\nmisuse of human faculty. The increase of self-consciousness, the craving\nfor sympathy and communion with one's fellows, the impulse to service in\nthe common life of the State, have no genuine connection with religion,\nalthough all these qualities are classified as religious, and are\nutilised by religious organisations. Actually and fundamentally they\nbelong to the social side of human nature. As our hands are developed\nfor grasping, and the various organs of the body for their respective\nfunctions, so mental and emotional qualities are developed in their due\ncourse for a rational social life. Biologically and psychologically,\nmale and female are at adolescence entering into a deeper and more\nenduring relationship with the life of the race. There is no other\nmeaning to the process.\n\nNaturally enough, the vast majority of people express their developing\nnature in accordance with the fashion of their environment. If this\nenvironmental influence were rationally non-religious, the language\nwould be that of a non-religious philosophy. As, however,\nsupernaturalism, in some form or other, is still a potent force we have\na contrary result. It is only here and there that one is found with the\ninclination or the wit to analyse his or her impulses, and few possess\nenough knowledge to make the analysis profitable. There is no wonder\nthat concerning many of the most important phenomena of human life we\nare still little above the level of the fetish worshipper. We may have a\nmore elaborate phraseology, but the old ideas are still operative. The\nconsequence is that each newcomer finds certain ideas and forms of\nspeech ready for his acceptance, and is handed over, bound hand and\nfoot, to influences that are the least capable of sane direction. We do\nnot merely sacrifice our first-born; we immolate the whole of our\nprogeny. The ignorant past plays into the hands of the designing\npresent; the present conspires with the past to rob the future of the\ngood that might result from the growth of a wiser and a better race.\n\nWere society really enlightened and genuinely civilised, the truth of\nwhat has been said would be recognised as soon as stated. It would,\nindeed, be unnecessary to labour what would then be a generally\nrecognised truth. But the mass of the people are not genuinely\nenlightened, our civilisation is largely a veneer, and numerous agencies\nprevent our reaping the full benefit of our available knowledge. Thus it\nhappens that in place of an explanation of human qualities in terms of\nbiologic and social evolution, we find current an explanation that is\nbased upon pre-scientific ideas. Because our less instructed ancestors\naccounted for various manifestations of human qualities as due to a\nsupernatural influence, we continue to perpetuate the delusion. We teach\nyouth to express itself in terms of supernaturalism, and then treat the\nlanguage and the fact as inseparable. In this respect, sociology is\npassing through a phase from which some of the sciences have finally\nemerged. In physics and astronomy, for instance, the fact has been\nseparated from the supernatural explanation, and shown to be\nindependent of it. An exploitation of social life in the interests of\nsupernaturalism is still in active operation. It is this that is really\nthe central truth of the situation. And in ignoring this truth we expose\na growing generation to the worst possible of educative influences, at a\ntime when a wiser control would be preparing it for an intelligent\nparticipation in the serious and enduring work of social organisation.\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[142] Dr. G. B. Cutten, _The Psychological Phenomena of Christianity_,\npp. 7-8.\n\n[143] The most elaborate study of this character known to the present\nwriter is Mr. G. Stanley Hall's _Adolescence_, in two volumes. The bulk\nof the work is, however, terrifying to some, and the cost prohibitive to\nmany. For the general reader of limited leisure and means, Professor\nStarbuck's smaller volume, _The Psychology of Religion_, presents the\nsalient facts in a brief and satisfactory manner. It is lacking,\nhowever, on the anthropological side, a view that is well presented by\nDr. Stanley Hall.\n\n[144] See _Adolescence_, i. p. 528.\n\n[145] Vol. iii. p. 279.\n\n[146] _Psychology of Religion_, chap. iii. Hall's figures are given in\nthe second volume of his work, pp. 288-92.\n\n[147] _Varieties_, p. 199.\n\n[148] An elaborate list of these ceremonies in both the savage and\ncivilised worlds has been compiled by Mr. Hall, ii. chap. xiii.\n\n[149] Catlin, _North American Indians_, i. p. 36; see also ii. p. 347.\n\n[150] W. I. Thomas, _Sex and Society_, pp. 115-6.\n\n[151] For a good summary, see Donaldson's _Growth of the Brain_, pp.\n241-48.\n\n[152] See on this subject the two fine works by Karl Groos, _The Play of\nAnimals_, _The Play of Man_.\n\n[153] W. Temple, _Repton School Sermons_.\n\n[154] _Sanity and Insanity_, p. 281.\n\n[155] _Adolescence_, ii. pp. 286-7.\n\n[156] Southey's _Life of Wesley_, chap. xxiv.\n\n[157] From _The Examiner_ of September 6, 1906, cited by Cutten, p. 185.\n\n[158] _Primitive Culture_, ii. p. 422.\n\n[159] _Clinical Lectures_, p. 39.\n\n[160] _Manual of Diseases of the Nervous System_, 1893, pp. 732 and 785.\n\n[161] _Sanity and Insanity_, p. 282.\n\n[162] _Psychology of Religion_, pp. 146-7.\n\n[163] _Primitive Traits in Religious Revivals._\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER EIGHT\n\nRELIGIOUS EPIDEMICS\n\n\nUnder pressure of scientific analysis the old distinction between the\nindividual and society bids fair to break down, or to maintain itself as\nno more than a convenience of classification. It is now being recognised\nthat a society is something more than a mere aggregate of self-contained\nunits, and that the individual is quite inexplicable apart from the\nsocial group. It is the latter which gives the former his individuality.\nHis earliest impressions are derived from the life of the group, and as\nhe grows so he comes more and more under the influence of social forces.\nThe consequence is that the key to a very large part of the phenomena of\nhuman nature is to be found in a study of group life. We may abstract\nthe individual for purposes of examination, much as a physiologist may\nstudy the heart or the liver apart from the body from which it has been\ntaken. But ultimately it is in relation to the whole that the true\nsignificance and value of the part is to be discerned.\n\nIn this corporate life imitation and suggestion play a powerful part.\nWith children, by far the larger part of their education consists of\nsheer imitation, nor do adults ever develop beyond its influence.\nSuggestion is a factor that is more operative in youth and maturity than\nin early childhood, and is exhibited in a thousand and one subtle and\nunexpected ways. Both these forces are essential to an orderly, and to a\nprogressive, social life; but they may just as easily become the cause\nof movements that are retrogressive, and even anti-social in character.\nAn epidemic of suicide or of murder is as easily initiated as an\nepidemic of philanthropy. Let a person commit suicide in a striking and\nunusual manner, and there will soon be others following his example.\nGiven a favourable environment, there is no idea, however unreal, that\nwill not find advocates; no example, however strange or disgusting, that\nwill not find imitators. The more uniform the society, the more powerful\nthe suggestion, the easier the imitation. That is why a crowd, acting as\na crowd, is nearly always made up of people drawn from the same social\nstratum, each unit already familiar with certain ideals and belief.\nUnder such conditions a crowd will assume all the characteristics of a\npsychological entity. As Gustave Le Bon has pointed out, a crowd will do\ncollectively what none of its constituent units would ever dream of\ndoing singly.[164] It becomes capable of deeds of heroism or of savage\ncruelty. It will sacrifice itself or others with indifference. Above\nall, the mere fact of moving in a mass gives the individual a sense of\npower, a certainty of being in the right that he can--save under\nexceptional circumstances--never acquire while alone. The intellect is\nsubdued, inhibition is inoperative, the instincts are given free play,\nand their movement is determined in turn by suggestions not unlike those\nwith which a trained hypnotist influences his subject.\n\nIn the phenomena of contagion words and symbols play a powerful part.\nThey are both a rallying-point and an outlet for the emotions of a\ncrowd. These words or symbols may be wholly incongruous with the real\nneeds of a people, but provided they are sufficiently familiar they will\nserve their purpose. And the more primitive the type of mind represented\nby the mass of the people the more powerfully these symbols operate.\nShakespeare's portrayal of the crowd in _Julius C\u00e6sar_ remains eternally\ntrue. The skilled orator, playing on old feelings, using familiar terms,\nand invoking familiar ideas, finds a crowd quite plastic to his hands.\nIt is for these reasons that there is so keen a struggle with political\nand social parties for a monopoly of good rallying cries, and a\nreadiness to fix objectionable titles on their opponents. Patriotism,\nLittle Englander, Jingo, The Church in Danger, Godless Education, etc.\netc. Causes are materially helped or injured by these means. There is\nlittle or no consideration given to their justice or reasonableness; it\nis the image aroused that does the work.\n\nPsychological epidemics may in some cases be justly called normal in\ncharacter. That is, they depend upon factors that are always in\noperation and which form a part of every social structure. A war fever\nor a commercial panic falls under this head. In other instances they\ndepend upon abnormal conditions, upon the workings, perhaps, of some\nobscure nervous disease, and are of a pathological description. In yet\nother cases they represent a mixture of both. In such cases, for\nexample, as that of the Medieval Flagellants or of the Dancing Mania,\nthe presence of pathological elements is unmistakable. But neither of\nthese epidemics could have occurred without a certain social\npreparation, and unless they had called into operation those principles\nof crowd psychology to which science has within recent years turned its\nattention, and which are normal factors in every society. These three\nclasses of epidemics may be found in connection with subjects other than\nreligious, but I am at present concerned with them only in that\nrelation, and to point out that, in spite of their undesirable or\nadmittedly pathologic character, they have yet served to keep\nsupernaturalism alive and active.\n\nDuring the Christian period of European history by far the most\nimportant of all epidemics, as it was indeed the earliest, was\nmonasticism. This takes front rank because of its extent, the degree to\nwhich it prepared the ground for subsequent outbreaks, and because of\nits indirect, and, I think, too little noticed, social consequences. It\nmay safely be said that no other movement has so powerfully affected\nEuropean society as has the monasticism of the early Christian\ncenturies. It cannot, of course, be urged that Christianity originated\nmonasticism. India and Egypt had its ascetic practices and celibate\npriesthood long before the birth of Christianity, and indeed gave\nChristianity the pattern from which to work. But the main stream of\nsocial life remained unaffected to any considerable extent by this\nasceticism. The social and domestic virtues received full recognition\nfrom the upholders of the monastic life, and there is no evidence that\nasceticism ever assumed an epidemic form. It has often been the lot of\nthe Christian Church to give a more intense expression to religious\ntendencies already existing, and this was so in the case before us. At\nany rate, it was left for the Christian Church to give to monasticism\nthe character of an epidemic, to treat the purely social and domestic\nvirtues as a positive hindrance to the religious life, seriously to\ndisturb national well-being, and to come perilously near destroying\ncivilisation.\n\nThe origin of ascetic practices has already been indicated in a previous\nchapter. It has there been pointed out that the deliberate torture of\nmind and body arose from the belief that the induced states brought man\ninto direct communion with supernatural powers, and that this element\nhas continued in almost every religion in the world. Says\nBaring-Gould:--\n\n\"The ascetic instinct is intimately united with the religious instinct.\nThere is scarcely a religion of ancient and modern times, certain forms\nof Protestantism excepted, that does not recognise asceticism as an\nelement in its system.... Brahmanism has its order of ascetics....\nMohammedanism has its fakirs, subduing the flesh by their austerities,\nand developing the spirit by their contemplation and prayers. Fasting\nand self-denial were observances required of the Greeks, who desired\ninitiation into the mysteries.... The scourge was used before the altars\nof Artemis and over the tomb of Pelops. The Egyptian priests passed\ntheir novitiate in the deserts, and when not engaged in their religious\nfunctions were supposed to spend their time in caves. They renounced all\ncommerce with the world, and lived in contemplation, temperance, and\nfrugality, and in absolute poverty.... The Peruvians were required to\nfast before sacrificing to the gods, and to bind themselves by vows of\nchastity and abstinence from nourishing food.... There were ascetic\norders for old men and nunneries for widows among the Totomacs, monastic\norders among Toltecs dedicated to the service of Quetzalcoatl, and\nothers among the Aztecs consecrated to Tezcatlipoca.\"[165]\n\nIt was argued by Bingham, a learned eighteenth-century ecclesiastical\nhistorian, that although asceticism was known and practised in\nindividual cases from the earliest period of Christian history, it did\nnot establish itself within the Church until the fourth century. It is\nnot a matter of great consequence to the subject under discussion\nwhether this be so or not. It is at least certain that Christian\nteaching contained within itself all the elements for such a\ndevelopment, which was bound, sooner or later, to transpire. The\nantithesis between the flesh and the spirit, the conception of the world\nas given over to Satan, the ascetic teaching of Paul, with the value\nplaced upon suffering and privation as spiritually disciplinary forces,\ncould not but create in a society permeated with a special type of\nsupernaturalism, that asceticism which became so marked a feature of\nmedieval Christianity. And it is certain also that in no other instance\nhas asceticism proved itself so grave a danger to social order and\nsecurity. Allowing for what Lecky calls the 'glaring mendacity' of the\nlives of the saints, a description that applies more or less to all the\necclesiastical writings of the early centuries, it is evident that the\nnumber of monks, their ferocity, and general practices, were enough to\nconstitute a grave social danger. It is said that St. Pachomius had 7000\nmonks under his direct rule; that in the time of Jerome 50,000 monks\ngathered together at the Easter festival; that one Egyptian city\nmustered 20,000 nuns and 10,000 monks, and that the monastic population\nof Egypt at one time equalled in number the rest of the inhabitants. At\na later date, within fifty years of its institution, the Franciscan\nOrder possessed 8000 houses, with 200,000 members. In the twelfth\ncentury the Cluniacs had 2000 monasteries in France. In England, as late\nas 1546, Hooper, afterwards Bishop of Gloucester, declared that there\nwere no less than 10,000 nuns in England. Every country in Europe\npossessed a larger or smaller army of men and women whose ideals were in\ndirect conflict with nearly all that makes for a sane and progressive\ncivilisation.\n\nThe general character of the monk during the full swing of the ascetic\nepidemic has been well sketched by Lecky. His summary here will save a\nmore extended exposition:--\n\n\"There is perhaps no phase in the moral history of mankind of a deeper\nand more painful interest than this ascetic epidemic. A hideous, sordid,\nand emaciated maniac, without knowledge, without patriotism, without\nnatural affection, passing his life in a long routine of useless and\natrocious self-torture, and quailing before the ghastly phantoms of his\ndelirious brain, had become the ideal of the nations which had known the\nwritings of Plato and Cicero, and the lives of Socrates and Cato. For\nabout two centuries, the hideous maceration of the body was regarded as\nthe highest proof of excellence. St. Jerome declares, with a thrill of\nadmiration, how he had seen a monk, who for thirty years had lived\nexclusively on a small portion of barley bread and of mouldy water;\nanother who lived in a hole and never ate more than five figs for his\ndaily repast; a third who cut his hair only on Easter Sunday, who never\nwashed his clothes, who never changed his tunic till it fell to pieces,\nwho starved himself till his eyes grew dim, and his skin like a pumice\nstone.... For six months, it is said, St. Macarius of Alexandria slept\nin a marsh, and exposed his naked body to the stings of venomous\nflies.... His disciple, St. Eusebius, carried one hundred and fifty\npounds of iron, and lived for three years in a dried-up well.... St.\nBesarion spent forty days and nights in the middle of thorn bushes, and\nfor forty days and nights never lay down when he slept.... Some saints,\nlike St. Marcian, restricted themselves to one meal a day, so small that\nthey continually suffered the pangs of hunger.... Some of the hermits\nlived in deserted dens of wild beasts, others in dried-up wells, while\nothers found a congenial resting-place among the tombs. Some disdained\nall clothes, and crawled abroad like the wild beasts, covered only by\ntheir matted hair. The cleanliness of the body was regarded as a\npollution of the soul, and the saints who were most admired had become\none hideous mass of clotted filth. St. Athanasius relates with\nenthusiasm how St. Antony, the patriarch of monachism, had never, to\nextreme old age, been guilty of washing his feet.... St. Abraham, the\nhermit, however, who lived for fifty years after his conversion, rigidly\nrefused from that date to wash either his face or his feet.... St. Ammon\nhad never seen himself naked. A famous virgin, named Sylvia, though she\nwas sixty years old, and though bodily sickness was a consequence of her\nhabits, resolutely refused, on religious principles, to wash any part of\nher body except her fingers. St. Euphraxia joined a convent of one\nhundred and thirty nuns, who never washed their feet, and who shuddered\nat the mention of a bath.\"[166]\n\nIt is difficult to realise what it is exactly that some writers have in\ntheir minds when they praise the purity of the ascetic ideal, and lament\nits degradation as though society lost something of great value thereby.\nThe examples cited realised that ideal as well as it could be realised,\nand its anti-social character is unmistakable. If it is intended to\nimply that an element of self-denial or self-discipline is essential to\nhealthy development, that is admitted, but this is not the ascetic\nideal; it is that of temperance as taught by the best of the ancient\nphilosophers. What the ascetic aimed at was not self-development, but\nself-suppression. The discipline of the monk was only another name for\nthe cultivation of a frame of mind unhealthy and anti-social.\nEventually, the rapidity with which this mania spread, the fact that for\nseveral centuries it raged as a veritable epidemic, carried with it the\ngerms of a corrective. The more numerous monks and nuns became, the more\ncertain it became that many of them would develop passions and\npropensities they professed to despise. The love of ease and wealth, the\nlust of power and pride of place, was sure to find expression, and if by\nthe degradation of the ascetic ideal is meant the fact that the\npreachers of poverty, and humility, and meekness, became the wealthiest,\nthe most powerful, the most corrupt, and the most tyrannical order in\nChristendom, the reason is that not even monasticism could prevent\nordinary human passions from finding expression. They might be\nsuppressed in the case of a few; it became impossible with a multitude.\nThat they found expression in so disastrous a form was due to the fact\nthat the disciplinary agent of these passions, a developed social\nconsciousness, played so small a part in the life of the monk.\n\nIt is no part of my present purpose to trace the full consequences of\nthe ascetic epidemic. Some of these consequences, however, have a more\nor less direct bearing upon this enquiry, and it is necessary to say\nsomething upon them. One enduring and inevitable consequence of\nmonasticism has not, I think, been adequately noted by many writers.\nThis is its influence on the ideal of marriage, on the family, and on\nthe domestic virtues. In India and Egypt celibacy had been closely\nassociated with the religious life, but the ascetic was regarded as a\nman peculiarly apart from his fellows, and the family continued to be\nheld in great honour, even by religious writers. Christianity provided\nfor the first time a body of writers who made a direct attack upon\nmarriage as obstructing the supreme duty of spiritual development. The\nRev. Principal Donaldson, in his generally excellent book on _Woman_,\nprofesses to find some difficulty in accounting for the growth among the\nearly Christians of the feeling in favour of celibacy. He remarks that\n\"no one with the New Testament as his guide could venture to assert that\nmarriage was wrong.\" Not wrong, certainly; but anyone with the New\nTestament before him would be justified in asserting marriage to be\ninferior to celibacy. It is at most taken for granted; it is neither\ncommended nor recommended, and of its social value there is never a\nglimpse. And there is much on the other side. Paul's teaching is\nstrongly in favour of celibacy, and marriage is only advised to avoid a\ngreater evil. In the Book of _Revelation_ there is a reference to the\n144,000 saints who wait on \"the Lamb,\" and who \"were not defiled with\nwomen, but were virgins.\" Certainly the New Testament does not condemn\nmarriage, but it is idle to pretend that those who preached the celibate\nideal failed to find therein a warranty for their teaching.\n\nThe historic fact is, however, that the early Christian leaders were, in\nthe main, ardent advocates of celibacy. The social importance of\nmarriage being ignored, its functions became those of ministering to\nsexual passion and the perpetuation of the race. In view of the supposed\napproaching end of the world, the desirability of this last was\nquestioned, and in the name of purity the former was strongly denounced.\nIt is from these points of view that Tertullian describes children as\n\"burdens which are to most of us perilous as being unsuitable to faith,\"\nand wives as women of the second degree of modesty who had fallen into\nwedlock. Jerome said that marriage was at best a sin, and all that could\nbe done was to excuse and purify it. Epiphanius said that the Church was\nbased upon virginity as upon a corner-stone. Augustine was of opinion\nthat celibates would shine in heaven like dazzling stars. Married people\nwere declared, by another authority, to be incapable of salvation. The\nmost powerful and most influential of writers concurred that the sexual\nrelation was an almost fatal obstacle to religious salvation.\n\nHardly any movement ever struck so hard against social well-being as\ndid this teaching of celibacy. Wives were encouraged to desert their\nhusbands, husbands to forsake their wives, children their parents.\nParents, in turn, were exhorted to devote their children to the monastic\nlife; and although at first children who had been so condemned were\nallowed to return to the world, should they desire it, on reaching\nmaturity, this liberty was taken from them by the fourth Council of\nToledo in 633.[167] Some few of the Christian writers protested against\nchildren being taught to forsake their parents in this manner, but the\ngeneral spirit of the time was in its favour.\n\n\"Children were nursed and trained to expect at every instant more than\nhuman interferences; their young energies had ever before them examples\nof asceticism, to which it was the glory, the true felicity of life, to\naspire. The thoughtful child had all his mind thus preoccupied ...\nwherever there was gentleness, modesty, the timidity of young passion,\nrepugnance to vice, an imaginative temperament, a consciousness of\nunfitness to wrestle with the rough realities of life, the way lay\ninvitingly open.... It lay through perils, but was made attractive by\nperpetual wonders. It was awful, but in its awfulness lay its power over\nthe young mind. It learned to trample down that last bond which united\nthe child to common humanity, filial reverence; the fond and mysterious\nattachment of the child and the mother, the inborn reverence of the son\nto the father. It is the highest praise of St. Fulgentius that he\novercame his mother's tenderness by religious cruelty.\"[168]\n\nThe full warranty for Dean Milman's stricture is seen in the following\npassage from St. Jerome:--\n\n\"Though your little nephew twine his arms around your neck; though your\nmother, with dishevelled hair, and tearing her robe asunder, point to\nthe breast with which she suckled you; though your father fall down on\nthe threshold before you, pass on over your father's body. Fly with\ntearless eyes to the banner of the cross. In this matter cruelty is the\nonly piety.... Your widowed sister may throw her gentle arms around\nyou.... Your father may implore you to wait but a short time to bury\nthose near to you, who will soon be no more; your weeping mother may\nrecall your childish days, and may point to her shrunken breast and to\nher wrinkled brow. Those around you may tell you that all the household\nrests upon you. Such chains as these the love of God and the fear of\nhell can easily break. You say that Scripture orders you to obey your\nparents, but he who loves them more than Christ loses his soul. The\nenemy brandishes a sword to slay me. Shall I think of a mother's\ntears?\"[169]\n\nGibbon said of the ascetic movement that the Pagan world regarded with\nastonishment a society that perpetuated itself without marriage.\nUnfortunately this perpetuation was secured by the sacrifice of some of\nthe dearest interests of the race. For, in general, one may say that\nidealistic teaching of any kind appeals most powerfully to those who are\nleast in need of it. The world would at any time lose little, and might\npossibly gain much, were it possible to restrain a certain class from\nparentage. But there is no evidence that monasticism ever had its effect\non that kind of people; the presumption is indeed in the contrary\ndirection. The careless and brutal hear and are unaffected. The more\nthoughtful and desirable alone are influenced. And there can be little\ndoubt that the Church in appealing to certain aspects of human nature\ndissuaded from parentage those who were most fitted for the task. There\nwas a practical survival of the unfittest. Nothing is more striking, in\nfact, in the early history of Christianity than the comparative absence\nof home life and of the domestic ideals. Dean Milman remarked that in\nall the discussion concerning celibacy he could not recall a single\ninstance where the social aspects appear to have occurred to the\ndisputants. The Dean's remark applies to some extent to a much later\nperiod of Christian history than the one to which he refers. That\nmuch-admired evangelical classic, Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_, for\nexample, shows a curious obliviousness to the value of family and social\nlife. But neglect of the socialising and refining influence of family\nlife leads inevitably to a hardening of character and a brutalising of\nlife in general. The ferocious nature of the theological disputes of the\nearly Christian period never fail to arouse the comments of historians.\nBut there was really nothing to soften or restrain them. Everything was\ndominated by the theological interest. And we owe it in no small measure\nto the vogue of the monk that the tolerance of Pagan times, with its\nwidespread respect for truth-seeking, was replaced by the narrow\nintolerance of the medieval period, an intolerance which has never\nreally been eradicated from any part of Christian Europe.\n\nIn counting this as one of the consequences of the Christian preaching\nof celibacy, I am supported by no less an authority than the late Sir\nFrancis Galton. In his epoch-marking work, _Hereditary Genius_, this\nwriter says:--\n\n\"The long period of the Dark Ages under which Europe has lain is due, I\nbelieve, in a very considerable degree, to the celibacy enjoined by the\nreligious orders on their votaries. Whenever a man or woman was\npossessed of a gentle nature that fitted him or her to deeds of charity,\nto meditation, to literature, or to art, the social condition of the\ntime was such that they had no refuge elsewhere than in the bosom of the\nChurch. But she chose to preach and exact celibacy. The consequence was\nthat these gentle natures had no continuance, and thus by a policy so\nsingularly unwise and suicidal that I am hardly able to speak of it\nwithout impatience, the Church brutalised the breed of our forefathers.\nShe acted precisely as if she had aimed at selecting the rudest portion\nof the community to be alone the parents of future generations. She\npractised the arts that breeders would use, who aimed at creating\nferocious, currish, and stupid nature. No wonder that club law prevailed\nfor centuries over Europe; the wonder rather is that enough good\nremained in the veins of Europeans to enable their race to rise to its\nvery moderate level of natural morality.\"[170]\n\nThe consequences of asceticism on morals were almost wholly disastrous.\nThere is no intention of endorsing the vulgar Protestant prejudice of\nevery convent being a brothel, and all monks and nuns as given over to a\nvicious life, but there is no question that a very widespread\ndemoralisation existed amongst the religious orders, that this existed\nfrom the very earliest times, and that it was an inevitable consequence\nof so large a number of people professing the ascetic life. This is not\na history of morals, and it is needless to enter into a detailed account\nof the state of morality during the prevalence of asceticism. But the\nabsence of any favourable influence exerted by asceticism on conduct is\nwell illustrated in the description of Salvianus, Bishop of Marseilles\nat the close of the fifth century, of the condition of society in his\nday. Gaul, Spain, Italy, and Africa are depicted as sunk in an\novermastering sensuality. Rome is represented as the sewer of the\nnations, and in the African Church, he says, the most diligent search\ncan scarce discover one chaste among thousands. And this, it must be\nborne in mind, was the African Church, which under the care of Augustine\nhad been specially nurtured in the most rigid asceticism. Four hundred\nyears later the state of monastic morals is sufficiently indicated by a\nregulation of St. Theodore Studita prohibiting the entrance of female\nanimals into monasteries.[171] A regulation passed in Paris at a Council\nheld in 1212 enforces the same lesson by forbidding monks or nuns\nsleeping two in a bed. The avowed object of this was to repress offences\nof the most disgusting description.[172] In 1208 an order was issued\nprohibiting mothers or other female relatives residing with priests, on\naccount of the frequent scandals arising. Offences became so numerous\nand so open that it was with relief that laymen saw priests openly\nselect concubines. That at least gave a promise of some protection to\ndomestic life. In some of the Swiss cantons it actually became the\npractice to compel a new pastor, on taking up his charge, to select a\nconcubine as a necessary protection to the females under his care. The\nsame practice existed in Spain.[173]\n\nThere is, as Lea rightly says, no injustice in holding the Church mainly\nresponsible for the laxity of morals which is characteristic of medieval\nsociety. It had unbounded and unquestioned power, and this with its\nwealth and privileges might have made medieval society the purest in the\nworld. As it was, \"the period of its unquestioned domination over the\nconscience of Europe was the very period in which licence among the\nTeutonic races was most unchecked. A church which, though founded on the\nGospel, and wielding the illimitable power of the Roman hierarchy, could\nyet allow the feudal principle to extend to the _jus prim\u00e6 noctis_ or\n_droit de marquette_, and whose ministers in their character of temporal\nseigneurs could even occasionally claim the disgusting right, was\nevidently exercising its influence, not for good, but for evil.\"\n\nOn civic life and the civic virtues the influence of asceticism was\nequally disastrous. \"A candid examination,\" says Lecky, \"will show that\nthe Christian civilisation has been as inferior to the Pagan ones in\ncivic and intellectual virtues as it has been superior to them in the\nvirtues of humanity and chastity.\" One may reasonably question the\nlatter part of this statement, bearing in mind the facts just pointed\nout, but the first part admits of overwhelming proof. Celibacy is not\nchastity, and it is difficult to see how the coarsening of character\ndescribed by Lecky himself can be consistent with a heightened\nhumanity. But there can be small doubt that the growth of the Christian\nChurch spelt disaster to the civic life and institutions of the Empire.\nNothing the Romans did was more admirable than their organisation of\nmunicipal life. They avoided the common blunder of imposing on all a\nuniform organisation, and so gave free play to local feeling and custom\nso far as was consistent with imperial order and peace. Civic life\nbecame, as a consequence, well ordered and persistent. It was far less\ncorrupt than administration in the capital, and freedom persisted in the\nprovincial towns for long after its practical disappearance in Rome\nitself. Indeed, but for the antagonism of Christianity, it is probable\nthat the urban municipalities might have provided the impetus for the\nrejuvenation of the Empire.[174]\n\nFrom the outset, the early Christian movement stood as a whole apart\nfrom the civic life of the Empire, while the ascetic waged a constant\nwarfare against it. \"According to monastic view of Christianity,\" says\nMilman, \"the total abandonment of the world, with all its ties and\nduties, as well as its treasures, its enjoyments, and objects of\nambition, advanced rather than diminished the hopes of salvation.\" The\nobject was individual salvation, not social regeneration. When people\nwere praised for breaking the closest of family ties in their desire for\nsalvation, it would be absurd to suppose that social duties and\nobligations would remain exempt. The Christian ascetic was ready enough\nto risk his own life, or to take the life of others, on account of\nminute points of doctrinal difference, but he was deaf to the call of\npatriotism or the demands of civic life. Theology became the one\nabsorbing topic; and as monasticism assumed more menacing proportions,\nthe monk became the dominating figure, paralysing by his presence the\nhealthful activities of masses of the people. Speaking of the Eastern\nEmpire, although his words apply with almost equal truth wherever the\nChurch was supreme, Milman says:--\n\n\"That which is the characteristic sign of the times as a social and\npolitical, as well as a religious, phenomenon, is the complete dominion\nassumed by the monks in the East over the public mind.... The monks, in\nfact, exercise the most complete tyranny, not merely over the laity, but\nover bishops and patriarchs, whose rule, though nominally subject to it,\nthey throw off whenever it suits their purposes.... Monks in Alexandria,\nmonks in Antioch, monks in Constantinople, decide peremptorily on\northodoxy and heterodoxy.... Persecution is universal; persecution by\nevery means of violence and cruelty; the only question is in whose hands\nis the power to persecute.... Bloodshed, murder, treachery,\nassassination, even during the public worship of God--these are the\nfrightful means by which each party strives to maintain its opinions and\nto defeat its adversary. Ecclesiastical and civil authority are alike\nparalysed by combinations of fanatics ready to suffer or to inflict\ndeath, utterly unapproachable by reason.\"[175]\n\nAgainst such combinations of ignorance, fanaticism, and ferocity, the\nfew remaining lovers of secular progress were powerless. Patriotism\nbecame a mere name, and organised civic life an almost forgotten\naspiration. What the Pagan world had understood by a 'good man' was one\nwho spent himself in the service of his country. The Christian\nunderstood by it one who succeeded in saving his own soul, even at the\nsacrifice of family and friends. Vampire-like, monasticism fed upon the\nlife-blood of the Empire. The civic life and patriotism of old Rome\nbecame a mere tradition, to inspire long after the men of the\nRenaissance and of the French Revolution.\n\nFinally, asceticism exerted a powerful influence on religion itself.\nThat it served to strengthen and perpetuate the life of religion there\ncan be little doubt. However strongly some people may have resented the\nmonastic ideal, it nevertheless gave increased strength and vitality to\nthe religious idea. To begin with, it offered for centuries a very\npowerful obstacle to the development of those progressive and scientific\nideas that have made such advances in all centres of civilisation during\nthe past two or three centuries. To the common mind it brought home the\nsupremacy of religion in a way that nothing else could. The mere sight\nof monarch and noble yielding homage to the monk, acknowledging his\nsupremacy in what was declared to be the chief interest in life, the\ninterference of the monk in every department of life, saturated society\nwith supernaturalism. And although at a later period the rapacity,\ndissoluteness, and tyranny of the monkish orders led to revolt, by that\ntime the imagination of all had been thoroughly impressed with the value\nof religion. Even to-day current theology is permeated with the monkish\nnotions of self-denial, self-sacrifice, and contempt of the world's\ncomfort and beauty as belonging to the essence of pure religion. The\nlives of the saints still remain the storehouse of ideals for the\nreligious preacher. In spite of their absurd practices and disgusting\npenances, later generations have not failed to hold them up as examples.\nThey have been used to impress the imagination of their successors, as\nthey were used to impress the minds of their contemporaries. The fact of\nThomas \u00e0 Beckett wearing a hair shirt running with vermin has not\nprevented his being held up as an example of the power of religion.\nPeople fear ghosts long after they cease to believe in them; they pay\nunreasoning homage to a crown long after intellectual development has\nrobbed the kingly office of its primitive significance; all the recent\ndevelopments of democracy have not abolished the Englishman's\nconstitutional crick in the neck at the sight of a nobleman. Nor is\nsupernaturalism expunged from a society because the conditions that gave\nit birth have passed away. A religious epidemic is not analogous to\nthose physical disorders which deposit an antitoxin and so protect\nagainst future attacks. It resembles rather those disorders that\npermanently weaken, and so invite repeated assaults. The ascetic\nepidemic passed away; but, before doing so, it thoroughly saturated with\nsupernaturalism the social atmosphere and impressed its power upon the\npublic mind. It gave supernaturalism a new and longer lease of life, and\npaved the way for other outbreaks, of a less general, but still of a\nthoroughly epidemic character.\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[164] See _The Psychology of Peoples_ and _The Crowd_.\n\n[165] _Origin and Development of Religious Belief_, i. pp. 343-8.\n\n[166] _History of European Morals_, ii. pp. 107-10. For a careful\ndescription of the monastic discipline in its more normal aspects, see\nBingham's Works, vol. ii. bk. vi. Gibbon gives his usual brilliant\nsummary of the movement in chapter xxxvii. of the _Decline and Fall_. A\nhost of facts similar to those cited by Lecky will be found in _The Book\nof Paradise_, 2 vols., trans. by Wallis Budge. Lea's _History of\nSacerdotal Celibacy_ gives the classical and authoritative account of\nthe moral consequences of the practice of celibacy. For a vivid picture\nof the psychology of the ascetic, see Flaubert's great romance, _St.\nAntony_.\n\n[167] Cited by Lecky, ii. p. 131.\n\n[168] Dean Milman, _Hist. of Latin Christianity_, ii. pp. 81-2.\n\n[169] Lecky, ii. pp. 134-5.\n\n[170] _Hereditary Genius_, 1869, p. 357.\n\n[171] Lea, p. 109.\n\n[172] Lea, p. 332.\n\n[173] See Lea, pp. 353-4.\n\n[174] For a fine sketch of Roman municipal life, see Dill's _Roman\nSociety from Nero to Marcus Aurelius_, chap. ii.\n\n[175] _Hist. of Latin Christianity_, i. pp. 317-8.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER NINE\n\nRELIGIOUS EPIDEMICS--(_CONCLUDED_)\n\n\nIt is not easy to overestimate the influence of monasticism on\nsubsequent religious history. The lives of its votaries provided\nexamples of almost every conceivable kind of self-torture or\nsemi-maniacal behaviour. It had made the world thoroughly familiar with\nextravagance of action as the symptom of intense religious conviction.\nAnd its influence on social development had been such that the\nsusceptibility of the public mind to suggestions was as a raw wound in\nthe presence of a powerful irritant. Such an institution as the\nInquisition could only have maintained itself among a people thoroughly\nfamiliar with supernaturalism, and to whom its preservation was the\nfirst and most sacred of duties.\n\nA society habituated to the commanding presence of the monk, fed upon\nstories of their miraculous encounters with celestial and diabolic\nvisitants, and so accustomed to regard the priesthood as in a very\npeculiar sense the mouthpiece of divinity, was well prepared for such a\nseries of events as the crusades for the recovery of the Holy Land.\nPilgrimages to the burial-places of saints, and to spots connected, by\nlegend or otherwise, with Christian history, had long been in vogue, and\nformed a source of both revenue to the Church and of inspiration to the\nfaithful. As early as 833 a guide-book had been prepared called the\n_Itinerary from Bordeaux to Jerusalem_, and along the route marked\nconvents and shelters for the pilgrims were established. A lucrative\ntraffic in relics of every description had also been established, and\nany interference with this touched the Church in its tenderest point.\nAdded to which the expected end of the world in the year 1000 had the\neffect of still further increasing the crowd of pilgrims to the Holy\nLand, where it was firmly believed the second advent would take place.\n\nIn the eleventh century a tax was imposed on all Christians visiting\nJerusalem. There were also reports of Christian pilgrims being\nill-treated. Recent events in Europe have shown with what ease Christian\nfeeling may be roused against a Mohammedan power, and it was\nconsiderably easier to do this in the eleventh century. Between them,\nPope Urban II. and Peter the Hermit--the former acting mainly from\npolitical motives; the latter from a spirit of sheer fanaticism--\nsucceeded in rousing Europe to a maniacal desire for the recovery\nof the Holy Land. And for nearly two hundred years the world saw\na series of crusades on as absurd an errand as ever engaged the\nenergies of mankind. Every class of society participated, and it is\ncalculated that no less than two millions of lives were sacrificed.\n\nOrdinary histories lean to representing the crusades as a series of\narmed expeditions, led by princes, nobles, and kings. But this gives a\nquite inaccurate conception of the movement, during its early stages, at\nall events. In reality it was a true psychological epidemic. No custom,\nhowever ancient, no duty, no law, was allowed to stand before the\ncrusading mania. In every village the clergy fed the mania, promising\neternal rewards to all who took up the burden of the cross. Old and\nyoung, the strong and the sick, the rich and the poor were enrolled.\nUrban had told them that \"under their General, Jesus Christ,\" they would\nmarch to certain victory. Absolution for all sins was promised to all\nwho joined; and, as Gibbon says, \"at the voice of their pastor, the\nrobber, the incendiary, the homicide, arose by thousands to redeem their\nsouls by repeating on the infidels the same deeds which they had\nexercised against their Christian brethren.\" Until experience had taught\nthem better, little precautions were taken to provide food or arms. Huge\nconcourses of people,[176] some led by a goose and a goat, into which it\nwas believed the Holy Ghost had entered, set out for the Holy Land, so\nignorant that at every large town or city they enquired, \"Is this Zion?\"\nAlthough a religious expedition, small regard was paid to decency or\nhumanity. Defenceless cities _en route_ were sacked. Women were\noutraged, men and children killed. The Jews were murdered wholesale.\nAlmost universally the slaughter of Jews at home were preparatory to\ncrusading abroad. Germany, Hungary, and Bulgaria, although providing\ncontingents for the crusading army, suffered heavily by the passage of\nthese undisciplined, lawless crowds. As one writer says:--\n\n\"If they had devoted themselves to the service of God, they convinced\nthe inhabitants on their line of march that they had ceased to regard\nthe laws of man. They considered themselves privileged to gratify every\nwish and every lust as it arose. They recognised no rights of property,\nthey felt no gratitude for hospitality, and they possessed no sense of\nhonour. They violated the wives and daughters of their hosts when they\nwere kindly treated, they devastated the lands of friends whom they had\nconverted into enemies, they resorted to wanton robbery and destruction\nin revenge for calamities which they had brought upon themselves. They\nbelieved that they proved their superiority to the Mohammedans by\ntorturing the defenceless Jews; and this was the only exploit in which\nthe first divisions of the crusaders could boast of success.... To the\nleaders, who could not write their own names, deception and treachery\nwere as familiar as force; to their followers rapine and murder were so\ncongenial that, in the absence of Saracens, Jews, or townsfolk, it\nseemed but a professional pastime to kill or to rob a companion in\narms.\"[177]\n\nAnd of the behaviour of the crusaders on the first capture of Jerusalem,\n1099, Dean Milman writes:--\n\n\"No barbarian, no infidel, no Saracen, ever perpetrated such wanton and\ncold-blooded atrocities of cruelty as the wearers of the Cross of Christ\n(who, it is said, had fallen on their knees and burst into a pious hymn\nat the first view of the Holy City) on the capture of that city. Murder\nwas mercy, rape tenderness, simple plunder the mere assertion of the\nconqueror's right. Children were seized by their legs, some of them\nplucked from their mother's breasts, and dashed against the walls, or\nwhirled from the battlements. Others were obliged to leap from the\nwalls; some tortured, roasted by slow fires. They ripped up prisoners to\nsee if they had swallowed gold. Of 70,000 Saracens there were not left\nenough to bury the dead; poor Christians were hired to perform the\noffice. Everyone surprised in the Temple was slaughtered, till the reek\nfrom the dead drove away the slayers. The Jews were burned alive in\ntheir synagogue.\"[178]\n\nThe most remarkable of all the crusades, and the one that best shows\nthe character of the epidemic, was the children's crusade of 1212. It\nwas said that the sins of the crusaders had caused their failure, and\npriests went about France and Germany calling upon the children to do\nwhat the sins of their fathers had prevented them accomplishing. The\nchildren were told that the sea would dry up to give them passage, and\nthe infidels be stricken by the Lord on their approach. A peasant lad,\nStephen of Cloyes, received the usual vision, and was ordered to lead\nthe crusade. Commencing with the children around Paris, he collected\nsome 30,000 followers, and without money or food commenced the march. At\nthe same time an army of children, 40,000 strong, was gathered together\nat Cologne. The result of the crusade may be told in a few words. About\n6000 of the French contingent, having reached Marseilles, were offered a\npassage by some shipowners. Several of the ships foundered, others\nreached shore, and the boys were sold into slavery. The girls were\nreserved for a more sinister fate. Thousands of the children died in\nattempting a march over the Alps. A mere remnant succeeded in reaching\nhome, ruined in both mind and body. Well might Fuller say: \"This crusade\nwas done by the instinct of the devil, who, as it were, desired a\ncordial of children's blood, to comfort his weak stomach, long cloyed\nwith murdering of men.\"[179]\n\nOn both the social and the religious side the consequences were\nimportant. For the first time large bodies of men, taught to regard all\nthose who were outside Christendom as beneath consideration, came into\ncontact with a people possessing an art, an industry, a culture far\nsuperior to their own. As Draper says: \"Even down to the meanest camp\nfollower, everyone must have recognised the difference between what they\nhad anticipated and what they had found. They had seen undaunted\ncourage, chivalrous bearing, intellectual culture far higher than their\nown. They had been in lands filled with prodigies of human skill. They\ndid not melt down into the populations to whom they returned without\nimparting to them a profound impression destined to make itself felt in\nthe course of time.\"[180] Hitherto Mohammedan culture had only\ninfluenced Christendom through the medium of the Spanish schools and\nuniversities. Now the influence became more general. A taste for greater\ncomfort developed. Commerce grew; literature improved. We approach the\nperiod of the Renaissance, and to that new birth the crusades, despite\ntheir intolerance and brutality, offered a contribution of no small\nvalue.\n\nOn the other hand, and for a time, the power of the Church grew greater.\nThe impetus given to superstitious hopes and fears made on all hands for\nthe wealth of the Church. Much was made over to the Church as a free\ngift. Much was pawned to it. Much also was entrusted by those who went\nto the Holy Land, never to return, in which case the Church became the\ndesignated or undesignated heir. \"In every way the all-absorbing Church\nwas still gathering in wealth, encircling new land within her hallowed\npale, the one steady merchant who in this vast traffic and sale of\npersonal and of landed property never made a losing venture, but went on\naccumulating and still accumulating, and for the most part withdrawing\nthe largest portion of the land in every kingdom into a separate\nestate, which claimed exemption from all burthens of the realm, until\nthe realm was compelled into measures, violent often and iniquitous in\ntheir mode, but still inevitable.\"[181]\n\nNext, the crusades set their seal upon the justice of religious wars,\nand established an enduring alliance between militarism and religion.\nThe military profession became surrounded with all the ceremonies and\nparaphernalia of religion, without being in the least humanised by the\nalliance. The knight received his arms blessed by the Church, he was\nsworn to defend the Church, and he was as ready to turn his weapons\nagainst heretics in Europe as against infidels in Syria. Military\npersecutions of heretics assumed the form of a mania. There were\ncrusades against the Moors in Spain, against the Albigenses, and against\nother heretics. As Bryce remarks: \"The religious feeling which the\ncrusades evoked--a feeling which became the origin of the great orders\nof chivalry, and somewhat later of the two great orders of mendicant\nfriars--turned wholly against the opponents of ecclesiastical claims,\nand was made to work the will of the Holy See, which had blessed and\norganised the project.\"[182] The expedition against King John by Philip\nof France was undertaken at the behest of the Pope, and was called a\ncrusade. The attempt of Spain to crush the Netherlands was called a\ncrusade. So was the Armada that was fitted out against England.\n\nMore than all, a stamp of permanency was given to popular superstition.\nFor two centuries people had seen expedition after expedition fitted out\nto accomplish an avowedly religious purpose. They had been taught that\nto die in defence of religion, or in the attempt to achieve a religious\nobject, was the noblest of deaths. They had seen the greatest in Europe\nsetting forth at the command of the Church. Signs and wonders had\nabounded to prove the heaven-blessed character of the crusades. They had\nseen the Church growing steadily in power, and every possible means had\nbeen utilised to increase the flame of religious fanaticism. Expeditions\nmight fail, but failure did not cure fanaticism. It fed it; the\ncrusaders returned, chastened in some respects, but still sufficiently\nfull of religious zeal to be ready to battle against the unbeliever and\nthe heretic at the behest of the Church. And it was not the policy of\nthe Church to allow this fanaticism to remain unemployed. Even though it\nmight ultimately lose, the Church and superstition profited enormously\nby the crusading spirit. It strengthened the general sense of the\nsupernatural, even while creating tendencies that were destined to limit\nits sway. Above all, it prepared the way for other religious epidemics.\nThese were more circumscribed in area, and less lengthy in their\nduration; but their existence was made possible and easy by the\ncenturies during which, first monasticism, and later the crusading\nmania, had dominated the public mind.\n\nThe crusades had hardly been brought to a close before continental\nEurope witnessed an outbreak, in epidemic form, of a practice that had\nbeen long associated with monastic discipline. The use of the whip as a\nform of religious discipline had always played a part in conventual and\nmonastic life. On the one hand, it formed part of that insensate desire\nto torture the body which went to make up the ascetic ideal; on the\nother hand, the fondness for whipping bare flesh and for being whipped\nhas a distinctly pathologic character. The subject is rather too\nunsavoury to dwell upon, but it has long been established that there is\na close connection between the whipping of certain parts of the body and\nthe production of intense sexual pleasure.[183] And it is also clear\nthat the life led by monks and nuns was such as to encourage sexual\naberrations of various forms. Moreover, when once the practice of\nwhipping became a public spectacle, and assumed an epidemic form,\nimitation, combined with intense religious faith, would operate very\npowerfully.\n\nIn the fourteenth century Europe was visited by the Black Plague. In\ncountries utterly devoid of sanitation, where baths were practically\nunknown and personal habits of the filthiest, the plague found a\nfruitful soil. Nearly a quarter of the population died, and corpses were\nso numerous that huge pits were dug and hundreds buried together. It was\namid the general terror and demoralisation caused by this visitation\nthat the sect of the Flagellants arose. Calling themselves the\nBrotherhood of the Flagellants, or the Brethren of the Cross, wearing\ndark garments with red crosses front and back, they traversed the cities\nof the Continent carrying whips to which small pieces of iron were\nfixed. England appears to have been the only country in which they\nfailed to establish themselves. Elsewhere their numbers grew with\nformidable rapidity. At Spires two hundred boys, under twelve years of\nage, influenced probably by the example of the children's crusade,\nformed themselves into a brotherhood and marched through some of the\nGerman cities. In Italy over 20,000 people marched from Florence in one\nof these processions; from Modena, over 25,000. Some of them professed\nto work miracles. Everywhere, while the mania lasted, they were warmly\nwelcomed, the inhabitants of towns and cities ringing the bells and\nflocking in crowds to hear the preaching and witness the whippings.\n\nThe proceedings of the Flagellants in all countries were very similar.\nThey marched from town to town, men and women and children stripped to\nthe waist--sometimes entirely naked--praying incessantly and whipping\neach other. \"Not only during the day, but even by night, and in the\nseverest winter, they traversed the cities with torches and banners, in\nthousands and tens of thousands, headed by their priests, and prostrated\nthemselves before the altars.\" At other times they proceeded to the\nmarket-place, arranged themselves on the ground in circles, assuming\nattitudes in accordance with their real or supposed crimes. After each\nhad been whipped, \"one of them, in conclusion, stood up to read a\nletter, which it was pretended an angel had brought from heaven to St.\nPeter's Church, at Jerusalem, stating that Christ, who was sore\ndispleased at the sins of man, had granted, at the intercession of the\nHoly Virgin and of the angels, that all who should wander about for\nthirty-four days and scourge themselves should be partakers of the\nDivine grace.\" In the end the movement became so obnoxious to the\nChurch, and so troublesome to the civil authorities, that both combined\nto secure its suppression.\n\nEqually significant in the history of religion is the dancing mania,\nwhich broke out as the mania for flagellation was subsiding. The\nfunction of dancing in primitive religious ceremonial has been pointed\nout in a previous chapter. It is there a common and obvious method of\nboth creating and expressing a high state of nervous excitability. In\nlater times religious dancing becomes more purely hypnotic in character,\nand suggestion plays a powerful part. During the medieval period the\nconditions were peculiarly favourable to the prevalence of psychological\nepidemics. Plagues, more or less severe, were of frequent occurrence.\nBetween 1119 and 1340, Italy alone had no less than sixteen such\nvisitations. Smallpox and leprosy were also common. The public mind was\nmorbidly sensitive to signs and portents and saturated to an almost\nincredible degree with superstition. The public processions of the\nChurch, its penances, and practices were all calculated to fire the\nimagination, and produce a mixed and dangerous condition of fear and\nexpectancy. Moreover, dancing mania, on a small scale, had made its\nappearance on several previous occasions, and the public mind was thus\nin a way prepared for a more serious outbreak.\n\nThe great dancing mania of 1374 occurred immediately after the revels\nconnected with the semi-Pagan festival of St. John. Bacchanalian dances\nformed one of the accompaniments of the festival of St. John, and made,\nso to speak, a natural starting-point for the epidemic. Hecker, who\ngives a very elaborate account of the dancing mania as it appeared in\nvarious countries, thus describes the behaviour of those afflicted:--\n\n\"They formed circles, hand in hand, and, appearing to have lost control\nover their senses, continued dancing, regardless of all bystanders, for\nhours together, in wild delirium, until at length they fell to the\nground in a state of exhaustion.... While dancing, they neither saw nor\nheard, being insensible to external impressions, but were haunted by\nvisions, their fancies conjuring up spirits whose names they shrieked\nout; and some of them afterwards asserted that they felt as if they had\nbeen immersed in a stream of blood, which obliged them to leap so high.\nOthers, during the paroxysm, saw the heavens open and the Saviour\nenthroned with the Virgin Mary.\"[184]\n\nAt Aix-la-Chapelle, Cologne, and Metz, says the same writer:--\n\n\"Peasants left their ploughs, mechanics their workshops, housewives\ntheir domestic duties, to join the wild revels. Secret desires were\nexcited, and but too often found opportunities for wild enjoyment; and\nnumerous beggars, stimulated by vice and misery, availed themselves of\nthis new complaint to gain a temporary livelihood. Girls and boys\nquitted their parents, and servants their masters, to amuse themselves\nat the dances of those possessed, and greedily imbibed the poison of\nmental infection. Above a hundred unmarried women were seen raving about\nin consecrated and unconsecrated places, and the consequences were soon\nperceived.\"[185]\n\nOnce attacked, the hypnotic character of the complaint was shown by its\nannual recurrence. Again to quote Hecker:--\n\n\"Most of those affected were only annually visited by attacks; and the\noccasion of them was so manifestly referable to the prevailing notions\nof that period that, if the unqualified belief in the agency of saints\ncould have been abolished, they would not have had any return of the\ncomplaint. Throughout the whole of June, prior to the festival of St.\nJohn, patients felt a disquietude and restlessness which they were\nunable to overcome. They were dejected, timid, and anxious; wandered\nabout in an unsettled state, being tormented with twitching pains, which\nseized them suddenly in different parts, and eagerly expected the eve of\nSt. John's Day, in the confident hope that by dancing at the altars of\nthis saint they would be freed from all their sufferings. This hope was\nnot disappointed; and they remained, for the rest of the year, exempt\nfrom any further attack.\"[186]\n\nIn addition to John the Baptist, the dancing disease was also connected\nwith another saint--St. Vitus. He is said to have been martyred about\n303, and a body, reputed to be his, was transported to France in the\nninth century. It is said that just before he was killed he prayed that\nall who would commemorate the day of his death should be protected from\nthe dancing mania. Whereupon a voice from heaven was heard to say,\n\"Vitus, thy prayer is accepted.\" The fact that the prayer was offered a\nthousand years before the dancing mania appeared is a circumstance that\nto the eye of faith merely heightened its value.\n\nWithin recent times epidemics of dancing have been more local, less\npersistent, and of necessity not so public in their display, but nearly\nalways their appearance has been in connection with displays of\nreligious fervour. In most cases the dancing has tended more to a\nspecies of 'jumping,' and--although this may be due to more careful\nobservation--has been accompanied by actions of a clearly epileptoid\nnature. One of the most famous of these outbreaks was that of the French\nConvulsionnaires, which lasted from 1727 to the Revolution. In 1727, a\npopular, but half-crazy priest, Fran\u00e7ois de Paris, died. During his life\nParis had fasted and scourged himself, lived in a hut that was seldom or\nnever cleansed, showed the same lack of cleanliness in his person, and\noften went about half naked. Very shortly after his death, it was said\nthat miracles began to take place at his grave in the cemetery of St.\nM\u00e9dard. People gathered round the tomb day after day, and one young girl\nwas seized with convulsions. (She is called a girl in the narrative, but\nshe was a mature virgin of forty-two years of age.) Afterwards other\nmiracles followed in rapid succession. Some fell in fits, others\nswallowed pieces of coal or flint, some were cured of diseases. From the\ndescription of the behaviour of some of these devotees there seems to\nhave been a considerable amount of sexual feeling mixed up with the\ndisplay. Sometimes, we are told, those seized \"bounded from the ground\nlike fish out of water; this was so frequently imitated at a later\nperiod that the women and girls, when they expected such violent\ncontortions, not wishing to appear indecent, put on gowns made like\nsacks, closed at the feet. If they received any bruises by falling down,\nthey were healed with earth taken from the grave of the uncanonised\nsaint. They usually, however, showed great agility in this respect; and\nit is scarcely necessary to remark that the female sex especially was\ndistinguished by all kinds of leaping, and almost inconceivable\ncontortions of body. Some spun round on their feet with incredible\nrapidity, as is related of the dervishes. Others ran with their heads\nagainst walls, or curved their bodies like rope dancers, so that their\nheels touched their shoulders.\"\n\nWomen figured very prominently among the Convulsionnaires, particularly\nwhen the epidemic passed from convulsive dancing to prophecy, and thence\nto various forms of self-torture. Women stretched themselves on the\nfloor, while other women, and even men, jumped upon their bodies. Others\nwere beaten with clubs and bars of iron. Some actually underwent\ncrucifixion on repeated occasions. They were stretched on wooden\ncrosses, and nails three inches long driven through hands and feet. Some\nof the occurrences remind one of what is now seen to take place under\nhypnotic influence. People labouring under strong excitement, it is\nknown, become insensible to pain.\n\nOutbreaks of jumping and dancing followed the introduction of Methodist\npreachers into country districts in the eighteenth century. In Wales, a\nsect of 'Jumpers' originated from this cause, and many of the American\n'Jumpers' and 'Dancers' seem to have had their origin from this Welsh\noutbreak. In all such cases the spread of the mania was helped, if not\nmade possible, by the preachers. They themselves looked upon these\nexhibitions as manifestations of the power of God, and so encouraged\ntheir hearers in their behaviour. Not every minister has the common\nsense of the Shetland preacher cited by Hecker. An epileptic woman had a\nfit in church, which a number of others hailed as a manifestation of\nthe power of God. Sunday after Sunday the same thing occurred with other\nwomen, the number of the sufferers steadily increasing. The thing\nthreatened to assume such proportions, and to become so great a\nnuisance, he announced that attendants would be at hand who would dip\nwomen in the lake who happened to be seized. This threat proved a most\npowerful form of exorcism. Not one woman was affected. Similar conduct\nmight have been quite as efficacious in preventing many religious\nmanifestations that have assumed epidemic proportions.\n\nUnfortunately, the influence of preachers and religious teachers was\nmost usually cast in the other direction. Very often, of course, they\nwere no better informed than their congregations; at other times they\nundoubtedly encouraged the delusion for interested reasons. The most\nstriking recent illustration of this latter behaviour was seen in the\nWelsh revival led by Evan Roberts. Of this man's mental condition there\ncould be little doubt. Just as little doubt could there be that the\nbehaviour of the congregations was wholly due to the power of\nsuggestions upon weak and excitable natures. Yet scarcely a preacher in\nBritain said a word in disapproval. Hundreds of them used the outbreak\nto illustrate the power of religion. Many prominent preachers travelled\ndown to Wales and returned telling of the great manifestations of\n'spiritual power' they had witnessed. How little removed such behaviour\nis from that of the savage watching with awe the actions of one\nsuffering from epilepsy or insanity, readers of the foregoing pages will\nbe in a position to judge.\n\nFrom the middle of the third century onward, Europe had been subject to\nwave after wave of religious fanaticism. All along, religious belief had\nbeen verified and strengthened by the occurrence of phenomena that now\nadmittedly fall within the purview of the pathologist. And from one\npoint of view the secularisation of life served but to emphasise the\ndependence of religion upon the occurrence of these abnormal conditions.\nFor the more surely the phenomena of nature and of social life were\nbrought within the scope of a scientific generalisation, the more people\nbegan to look for the life of religion in conditions that were removed\nfrom the normal. But, above all, this long succession of waves of\nfanaticism served to permeate the general mind with supernaturalism.\nEach one cleared the way for a successor. And in the next chapter we\nhave to deal with one that, in some respects, is the most remarkable of\nall, viz., that of the belief in witchcraft.\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[176] It is estimated that 275,000 people formed the van of the first\ncrusade.\n\n[177] L. O. Pike, _History of Crime in England_, i. pp. 164-9.\n\n[178] _History of Latin Christianity_, iv. p. 188.\n\n[179] _History of the Holy War_, bk. iii.\n\n[180] _Intellectual Development of Europe_, 1872, p. 425.\n\n[181] Milman, iv. p. 199.\n\n[182] _Holy Roman Empire_, p. 164.\n\n[183] See Bloch, _Sexual Life of our Time_, pp. 568-74.\n\n[184] _Epidemics of the Middle Ages_, pp. 87-8.\n\n[185] Hecker, p. 91.\n\n[186] _Epidemics_, p. 105.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER TEN\n\nTHE WITCH MANIA\n\n\nIn all stages of religious history the witch and the wizard are familiar\nfigures. It is of no importance to our present enquiry whether magic\nprecedes religion or not. It is at all events certain that they are very\nclosely connected, and that conditions which foster the belief in magic\nlikewise serve to strengthen religious belief. Witchcraft, as Tylor\nsays, is part and parcel of savage life. Death is very frequently\nattributed to the magical action of wizards, and the savage lives in\nperpetual fear lest some of his belongings, or some part of his person,\nshould be bewitched by malevolent sorcerers. Sir Richard Burton says\nthat in East Africa his experience taught him that among the negroes,\nwhat with slavery and what with black magic, no one, especially in old\nage, is safe from being burnt at a day's notice. When from savage life\nwe mount to societies enjoying a higher culture, we still find the witch\nand the wizard in evidence. Both in Greece and Rome the belief in\nwitchcraft existed. There were made direct laws against its practice,\nalthough neither the Greeks nor the Romans stained their civilisation\nwith the judicial murder of thousands of victims such as occurred later\nin Christian Europe.\n\nBut the belief in witchcraft is continuous. So also are the methods\npractised, and the modes of detection. The proofs offered in support of\nsorcery in the seventeenth century are precisely similar to those\ncredited by savages in the lowest stage of human culture. The power of\ntransformation possessed by the accused, the ability to bewitch through\nthe possession of hairs belonging to the afflicted person, the making of\nlittle effigies and driving sharp instruments into them, and so\naffecting the corresponding parts of people, transportation through the\nair, etc., all belong to the belief in and practice of witchcraft\nwherever found. Had a Fijian been transported to a seat on the judicial\nbench by the side of Sir Matthew Hale, when that judge condemned two old\nwomen to death for witchcraft, he would have found himself in a quite\ncongenial atmosphere. Allowing for difference in language, he would have\nfound the evidence similar to that with which he was familiar, and he\nwould have been able to endorse the judge's remarks with tales of his\nown experience. On this point, the level of culture attained by savages,\nand that of the inhabitants of the overwhelming majority of European\ncountries little more than two hundred years ago, were substantially the\nsame. Even to-day cases are continually occurring which prove that\nadvances in knowledge and civilisation have not left this ancient\nsuperstition without supporters.\n\nIn subscribing to the belief in witchcraft, the Christian Church thus\nfell into line with earlier forms of religious belief. The peculiar\nfeature it represents is that it came into existence when the belief in\nwitchcraft was losing its hold on the more cultured classes. Had it not\nallied itself with this tendency, no such thing as the witch mania of\nthe medieval period could have existed. In sober truth, it brought about\na veritable renaissance of the cruder theories of demonism, while its\nintolerance of opposition succeeded in stifling the voice of criticism\nfor centuries. The primitive theory which holds that man is surrounded\nby hosts of spiritual agencies, mostly of a malevolent nature, was\nrevived and fully endorsed by all Christian teachers. In the commonest,\nas well as in the rarest events of life, this supernatural activity was\nmanifest. In both the Old and New Testament the belief in demoniacal\nagency was endorsed. Moreover, the fact that Christianity was not a\ncreed seeking to live as one of many others, but a religion struggling\nfor complete mastery, gave further impetus to the belief. An easy\nexplanation for the miracles and marvels that occurred in connection\nwith non-Christian beliefs was that they were the work of demons. The\nChristian felt himself to be fighting not so much human antagonists as\nso many embodiments of satanic power. And after the establishment of\nChristianity it is probable that much that went on under cover of witch\nassemblies, a more detailed knowledge than we possess would prove to be\nreally the clandestine exercise of prescribed forms of faith. The old\nsaying, \"The sin of witchcraft is as the sin of rebellion,\" has more in\nit than meets the eye. There is little real difference between the magic\nthat appears as piety and the magic that is denounced as sorcery, except\nthat one is permitted and the other is not. And it is almost a law of\nreligious development that the gods of one religion become the demons of\nits successor.\n\nBut while witchcraft has existed in all ages, it existed in a much\nmilder form than that which we find in the sixteenth and seventeenth\ncenturies. First of all, there is the fact to which attention has\nalready been directed, namely, the concentration of the public mind upon\nvarious forms of supernaturalism. Every aspect of life was more or less\nunder the direct influence of the Church, and no teaching was tolerated\nthat conflicted with her doctrines. And it was to the interest of the\nChurch perpetually to emphasise the reality of either angelic or\ndiabolic activity. Even in the case of those who showed a tendency to\nrevolt against Church rule there was no exception to this. If anything,\nthe belief was more pronounced. Next, the fifteenth and sixteenth\ncenturies saw a rising tide of heresy against which the Church was\ncompelled to battle; and to ascribe this alleged perversion of Christian\ndoctrines to the malevolence of Satan offered the line of least\nresistance--just as the heretics attributed the power of the Church\nitself to the same source. Whatever diminution ensued in the general\nflood of superstition, as a consequence of the quarrel between\nProtestant and Catholic, was, so far as the disputants were concerned,\nincidental and even undesired. On the one point of demonism there\nexisted complete unanimity, and the sceptic fared equally hard with both\nparties. In such an environment the wildest tales of sorcery became\ncredible; and nothing illustrates this more forcibly than the fact that\nmany of those tortured and condemned for sorcery actually believed\nthemselves capable of performing the marvels laid to their charge. Added\nto these factors, we have to note that social conditions were also\nextremely favourable. Moral ties were as loose as they could reasonably\nbe; and the attitude of the Church towards the sexual relation had\nforced both the religious and the non-religious mind into wholly\nunhealthy channels. This last aspect of the subject has been little\ndealt with, but it is unquestionably a very real one. A German writer\nsays:--\n\n\"Whilst in the fifteenth and the beginning of the sixteenth centuries,\nas those well acquainted with the state of morals during this period can\nall confirm, a most unbounded freedom was dominant in sexual relations,\nthe State and the Church were desirous of compelling the people to keep\nbetter order by the use of actual force, and by religious compulsion. So\nforced a transformation in so vital a matter necessarily resulted in a\nreaction of the worst kind, and forced into secret channels the impulse\nwhich it had attempted to suppress. This reaction occurred, moreover,\nwith an elemental force. There resulted widespread sexual violence and\nseduction, hesitating at nothing, often insanely daring, in which\neverywhere the devil was supposed to help; everyone's head was turned in\nthis way; the uncontrolled lust of debauchees found vent in secret\nbacchanalian associations and orgies, wherein many, with or without\nmasquerade, played the part of Satan; shameful deeds were perpetrated by\nexcited women and by procuresses and prostitutes ready for any kind of\nimmoral abomination; add to these sexual orgies the most widely diffused\nweb of a completely developed theory of witchcraft, and the systematic\nstrengthening of the widely prevalent belief in the devil--all these\nthings, woven in a labyrinthine connection, made it possible for\nthousands upon thousands to be murdered by a disordered justice and to\nbe sacrificed to delusion.\"[187]\n\nTo those who look closely into the subject of medieval witchcraft the\npresence of a strong sexual element is undeniable. When we examine\ncontemporary accounts of the 'Sabbath,' some of which are so gross as to\nbe unprintable, we find a portion of the proceedings to be of a marked\nerotic character. The figure of Satan often enough reminds one of the\npagan Priapus, and the ceremonies bear a strong resemblance to the\nancient ones, with the mixture of Christian language and symbolism\ninevitable under such circumstances. Promiscuous intercourse between the\nsexes was said to occur at the witches' gatherings; and, indeed, unless\nsome sort of sexual extravagance occurred, it is hard to account for\nboth the persistency of the gatherings and of the reports concerning\nthem. The most probable theory is, as I have just said, that these\ngatherings were covers for a continuance of the older sex worship. Many\ncustoms connected therewith lingered on in the Church itself, and it is\nnot a wild assumption that they existed in a less adulterated and more\nextravagant form outside.\n\nUniversal as the belief in witchcraft has been, it was not until the\nclose of the fifteenth century that it assumed what may be justly called\nan epidemic form. The famous Bull of Pope Innocent VIII. was not\nunconnected in its origin with the growth of heresy. This precious\ndocument, issued in 1484, declares:--\n\n\"It has come to our ears that very many persons of both sexes, deviating\nfrom the Catholic Faith, abuse themselves with demons, Incubus and\nSuccubus; and by incantations, charms, and conjurations, and other\nwicked superstitions, by criminal acts and offences, have caused the\noffspring of women and of the lower animals, the fruits of the earth,\nthe grape, and the products of various plants, men, women, and other\nanimals of different kinds, vineyards, meadows, pasture land, corn and\nother vegetables of the earth, to perish, be oppressed, and utterly\ndestroyed; that they torture men and women with cruel pains and\ntorments, internal as well as external; that they hinder the proper\nintercourse of the sexes, and the propagation of the human species.\nMoreover, they are in the habit of denying the very faith itself. We,\ntherefore, willing to provide by opportune remedies, according as it\nfalls to our office, by our apostolical authority, by the tenor of these\npresents, do appoint and decree that they be convicted, imprisoned,\npunished, and mulcted according to their offences.\"\n\nIt was this Pope who commissioned the inquisitor, Sprenger, to root out\nwitches. Sprenger, with two others, acting on the authority of the\nPopes, drew up the famous work, _The Witch Hammer_, which provided the\nbasis for all subsequent works on the detection and punishment of\nwitches.[188] The folly and iniquity of the book is almost unbelievable,\nalthough it is quite matched by subsequent productions. It even provides\nfor the silence of people under torture. If they confess when tortured,\nthe case is complete. But if they do not confess, this diabolic\nproduction lays it down that this is because witches who have given\nthemselves up to the devil are insensible to pain. Even the evidence of\nchildren was admitted. And although in ordinary trials the evidence of\ncriminals was barred, it was to be freely allowed in trials for sorcery.\nEverything that ingenuity could suggest or brutality execute was\nprovided for.\n\nFrom the issue of _The Witch Hammer_ until the middle of the seventeenth\ncentury, a period of about one hundred and fifty years, an epidemic of\nwitchcraft raged. People of all ages and of all classes of society\nbecame implicated, and for some time, at least, accusation meant\nconviction. An almost unbelievably large number were executed. Says\nLecky:--\n\n\"In almost every province of Germany, but especially in those where\nclerical influence predominated, the persecution raged with a fearful\nintensity. Seven thousand witches are said to have been burned at\nTr\u00e8ves, six hundred by a single bishop in Bamberg, and nine hundred in a\nsingle year in the bishopric of W\u00fcrzburg.... At Toulouse, the seat of\nthe Inquisition, four hundred persons perished for sorcery at a single\nexecution, and fifty at Douay in a single year. Remy, a judge of Nancy,\nboasted that he put to death eight hundred witches in sixteen years....\nIn Italy, a thousand persons were executed in a single year in the\nprovince of Como; and in other parts of the country the severity of the\ninquisitors at last created an absolute rebellion.... In Geneva, which\nwas then ruled by a bishop, five hundred alleged witches were executed\nin three months; forty-eight were burned at Constance or Ravensburg, and\neighty in the little town of Valery in Saxony. In 1670, seventy persons\nwere condemned in Sweden, and a large proportion of them burnt.\"[189]\n\nIn England, from 1603 to 1680, it is estimated that seventy thousand\npersons were put to death for sorcery.[190] Grey, the editor of\n_Hudibras_, says that he had himself seen a list of three thousand who\nwere put to death during the Long Parliament. The celebrated\nwitch-finder, Mathew Hopkins, hung sixty in one year in the county of\nSuffolk. In Scotland, for thirty-nine years, the number killed annually\naveraged about two hundred. This, of course, does not take into account\nthe number who were hounded to death by persecution of a popular kind,\nor whose lives were made so wearisome that death must have come as a\nrelease. But the most remarkable, and the most horrible, of witchcraft\nexecutions occurred in W\u00fcrzburg in February 1629. No less than one\nhundred and sixty-two witches were burned in a succession of\n_autos-da-f\u00e9_. Among these, the reports disclose that there were\nactually thirty-four children. The following details give the actual\nages of some of them:--\n\n  +----------+---------+---------------------------------+\n  | Burning. | Number. |      Children.                  |\n  +----------+---------+---------------------------------+\n  |   7th    |   7     |  1 Girl, aged 12.               |\n  |  13th    |   4     |  1 Girl of 10 and another.      |\n  |  15th    |   2     |  1 Boy of 12.                   |\n  |  18th    |   6     |  2 Boys of 10, girl of 14.      |\n  |  19th    |   6     |  2 Boys, 10 and 12.             |\n  |  20th    |   6     |  2 Boys.                        |\n  |  23rd    |   9     |  3 Boys, 9, 10, and 14.         |\n  |  24th    |   7     |  2 Boys, brought from hospital. |\n  |  26th    |   8     |  Little boy and girl.           |\n  |  27th    |   7     |  2 Boys, 8 and 9.               |\n  |  28th    |   6     |  Blind girl and infant.[191]    |\n  +----------+---------+---------------------------------+\n\nThe vast majority of those executed for sorcery were women. At all times\nwitches have been more numerous than wizards, owing to their assumed\ncloser connection with the world of supernatural beings. It was said,\n\"For one sorcerer, ten thousand sorceresses,\" and Christian writers were\nready to explain why. Woman had a greater affinity with the devil from\nthe outset. It was through woman that Satan had seduced Adam, and it\nwas only to be expected that he would employ the same instrument on\nsubsequent occasions. _The Witch Hammer_ has a special chapter devoted\nto the consideration of why women are more given to sorcery than men,\nand quotes freely from the Fathers to prove that this follows from her\nnature. James I. in his _Demonologia_ follows Sprenger in accounting for\nthe number of witches. \"The reason is easy. For as that sex is frailer\nthan man is, so it is easier to be entrapped in the gross snares of the\ndevil, as was over-well proved to be true by the serpent's deceiving of\nEve at the beginning, which makes him the homelier with the sex\nsensine.\" To be old, or ugly, or unpopular, to have any peculiar\ndeformity or mark, was to invite persecution, and, in an overwhelming\nmajority of instances, conviction followed accusation.\n\nIt is a significant comment upon the popular belief that Protestantism,\nas a form of religious belief, was the product of an enlightened\nrational life, that it was only with the advance of Protestantism that\nthe belief in witchcraft assumed an epidemic form. This may be partly\ndue to the greater direct dependence upon the Bible, in which satanic\ninfluence--particularly in the New Testament--plays so large a part. In\nthe Roman Church, exorcism remained a regular part of the functions of\nthe priest; the Church was filled with accounts of satanic conflicts,\nbut diabolic intercourse seems to have been mainly limited to saintly\ncharacters and priests. Protestantism which, theoretically, made every\nman his own priest, raised the belief in satanic agency to an obsession.\nAnd wherever Protestantism established itself there was an immediate\nand marked increase in the number of cases of witchcraft. In England, if\nwe omit a doubtful law of the tenth century, there existed no regular\nlaw against witchcraft until 1541. It remained a purely ecclesiastical\noffence. Seventeen years later, the year of Elizabeth's accession,\nBishop Jewell, preaching before the Queen, drew attention to the\nincrease of sorcery. \"It may please Your Grace,\" he said, \"to understand\nthat witches and sorcerers, within these last few years, are\nmarvellously increased within Your Grace's realm. Your Grace's subjects\npine away even to the death, their colour fadeth, their flesh rotteth,\ntheir senses are bereft. I pray God they never practise further than\nupon the subject.\" And he added, \"These eyes have seen most evident and\nmanifest marks of their wickedness.\" A measure was passed through\nParliament the same year, making enchantments and witchcraft felony. The\nfirst year of James I. saw the passing of the 'Witch Act,' under which\nsubsequent executions took place, and which remained in force until\nnearly the middle of the eighteenth century.\n\nWith scarce an exception, the leaders of Protestantism encouraged the\nbelief in witches and urged their extermination as a religious and civil\nduty. With Luther, in spite of the sturdy common sense he manifested in\nsome directions, belief in the activity of Satan amounted to an\nobsession. He saw Satan everywhere in everything. The devil appeared to\nhim while writing, disturbed his rest by the rattling of pans, and\nprevented his pursuing his studies by hammering on his skull. When a\nstorm arose, Luther declared, \"'Tis the devil who has done this; the\nwinds are nothing else but good or bad spirits.\" Suicides, he said, were\noften those strangled by the devil. Moreover, \"The devil can so\ncompletely assume the human form when he wants to deceive us, that we\nmay very well lie with what seems to be a woman of real flesh and blood,\nand yet all the while 'tis only the devil in the shape of a woman.\" The\ndevil could also become the father of children. Luther says that he knew\nof one such case, and added, \"I would have that child thrown into the\nMoldau at the risk of being held its murderer.\"[192]\n\nIn America, Protestantism manifested the same influence. Of course, the\nsettlers took the superstition of witchcraft with them, but it underwent\nno diminution in a new land. Increase Mather and his celebrated son,\nCotton Mather, were the principal agents in stirring up the belief to\nfrenzy point, and a commission was appointed to rout out witches and\nsuppress their practices. There was soon a plentiful supply of victims.\nOne woman was charged with \"giving a look towards the great\nmeeting-house of Salem, and immediately a demon entered the house and\ntore down part of it.\" It seems that a bit of the wooden wainscotting\nhad fallen down. In the case of Giles Corey, who refused to plead\nguilty, torture was used. He was pressed to death, and when his tongue\nprotruded from his mouth the sheriff thrust it back with his\nwalking-stick. Many people were executed, and the ministers of Boston\nand Charlestown drew up an address warmly thanking the commission for\nits zeal, and expressing the hope that it would never be relaxed.\n\nCertainly the commission did what it could to earn the thanks given. A\nshipmaster making for Maryland with emigrants encountered unusually\nrough weather. An old woman, one Mary Lee, was accused of raising the\nstorm, and drowned as a witch. A woman walked a long distance over muddy\nroads without soiling her dress. \"I scorn to be drabbled,\" she said, and\nwas hanged as a reward. George Burroughs could lift a barrel by\ninserting his finger in the bunghole. He was hanged for a wizard.\nBridget Bishop was charged with appearing before John Louder at midnight\nand grievously oppressing him. Louder's evidence against the woman also\nincluded the fact that he saw a black pig approach his door, and when he\nwent to kick it the pig vanished. He was also tempted by a black thing\nwith the body of a monkey, the feet of a cock, and the face of a man. On\ngoing out of his back door he saw the said Bridget Bishop going towards\nher house. The evidence was deemed quite conclusive. Another witness\nsaid that being in bed on the Lord's Day, he saw a woman, Susanna\nMartin, come in at the window and jump down on the floor. She took hold\nof the witness's foot, and drawing his body into a heap, lay upon him\nfor nearly two hours, so that he could neither move nor hear. In most of\nthese cases torture was applied, and confessions were obtained. These\nconfessions often implicated others, but when the witches took to\naccusing those in high places, and even ministers of religion, the need\nfor discrimination was realised. Once a critical judgment was aroused,\nthe mania began to subside--Cotton Mather fighting manfully for the\nbelief to the end.\n\nThe impetus given by Protestantism to witch-hunting in Scotland was most\nmarked. Scotch witchcraft, says Lecky, was the offspring of Scotch\nPuritanism, and faithfully reflected the character of its parent. The\nclergy nowhere possessed greater power, and nowhere used it more\nassiduously to fan the flame against witchcraft. Buckle says:--\n\n\"Of all the means of intimidation employed by the Scotch clergy, none\nwas more efficacious than the doctrines they propounded respecting evil\nspirits and future punishments. On these subjects they constantly\nuttered the most appalling threats. The language which they used was\ncalculated to madden men with fear, and to drive them to the depths of\ndespair.... It was generally believed that the world was overrun by evil\nspirits, who not only went up and down the earth, but also lived in the\nair, and whose business it was to tempt mankind. Their number was\ninfinite, and they were to be found in all places, and in all seasons.\nAt their head was Satan himself, whose delight it was to appear in\nperson, ensnaring or terrifying everyone he met. With this object he\nassumed various forms. One day he would visit the earth as a black dog;\nanother day, as a raven; on another, he would be heard in the distance\nroaring like a bull. He appeared sometimes as a white man in black\nclothes, and sometimes he appeared as a black man in black clothes, when\nit was remarked that his voice was ghostly, and that one of his feet was\ncloven. His stratagems were endless. For, in the opinion of divines, his\ncunning increased with his age, and, having been studying for more than\n5000 years, he had now attained to unexampled dexterity.\"[193]\n\nWitchcraft was declared by the Scotch Parliament in 1563 to be\npunishable by death. And, naturally, the more zealous and active the\nsearch for witches, the more numerous they became. In the search the\nclergy and the kirk-sessions led the way. In 1587 the General Assembly,\nhaving before them a case of witchcraft in which the evidence was\ninsufficient, deputed James Melville to travel on the coast side and\ncollect evidence in favour of the prosecution. It also ordered that the\npresbyteries should proceed in all severity against such magistrates as\nliberated convicted witches. As in England so here, a body of men came\ninto existence whose business it was to travel the country and detect\nwitches. Anonymous accusations were invited, the clergy \"placing an\nempty box in church, to receive a billet with the sorcerer's name, and\nthe date and description of his deeds.\"[194] In 1603 \"at the College of\nAuld Abirdene\" every minister was ordered to make \"subtill and privie\ninquisition,\" concerning the number of witches in his parish, and report\nthe same forthwith. Nothing that could whet the appetite for the hunt\nwas neglected. William Johnston, baron, bailie \"of the regalitie and\nbarronie of Broughton,\" was awarded the goods of all who should be\n\"lawfullie convict be assyses of notorious and common witches, haunting\nand resorting devilles and witches.\"[195] The lives of thousands of\npeople were rendered unbearable, and the complaint of one, Margaret\nMiall, that \"she desyres not to live, because nobody will converse with\nher, seeing she is under the reputation of a witch,\" must have\nrepresented the feelings of many.\n\nIt was not only for working ill that people were accused of witchcraft\nand executed; ill or well made little difference. In Edinburgh in 1623\nit was charged against Thomas Grieve that he had relieved many\nsicknesses and grievous diseases by sorcery and witchcraft. \"He took\nsickness off a woman in Fife, and put it upon a cow, which thereafter\nran mad and died.\" He also cured a child of a disease \"by straiking back\nthe hair of his head, and wrapping him in an anointed cloth, and by that\nmeans putting him asleep,\" and thus through his devilry and witchcraft,\ncured the child. Other charges of a similar kind were brought against\nGrieve, who was found guilty and hanged on the Castle Hill.[196] At the\nsame place, a year previous, Margaret Wallace was also sentenced to be\nhanged and burned, on the same kind of charge, and for \"practising\ndevilry, incantation, and witchcraft, especially forbidden by the laws\nof Almighty God, and the municipal laws of this realm.\"\n\nThe following bill of costs for burning two women, Jane Wischert and\nIsabel Cocker, in Aberdeen, has a certain melancholy interest:--\n\n                                              \u00a3  _s._ _d._\n\n  Item for 20 loads of Peatts to burn them    2    0   0\n    \"  for ane boll of colles                 1    4   0\n    \"  for four tar barrells                  0    6   8\n    \"  for fir and win barrells               0   16   8\n    \"  for a staick and the dressing of it    0   16   0\n    \"  for four fathoms of towis              4    0   0\n    \"  to Jon Justice for their execution     0   13   4\n\nIn England, no less than in Scotland, America, and on the Continent,\nmuch learned testimony might be cited in defence of witchcraft. The\ngreat Sir Thomas Browne said in the most famous of his writings: \"For my\npart I have ever believed, and do now know, that there are witches. They\nthat doubt of these do not only deny them, but spirits; and are\nobliquely and upon consequence, a sort, not of infidels, but\natheists.\"[197] Henry More, the great Platonist, asserted that they who\ndeny the agency of witches are \"puffed up with nothing but ignorance,\nvanity, and stupid infidelity.\" Ralph Cudworth, one of the greatest\nscholars of the latter part of the seventeenth century, said that they\nwho denied the possibility of satanic intercourse \"can hardly escape the\nsuspicion of some hankering towards atheism.\"[198] Writing nearly a\ncentury later, when the English law merely prosecuted as rogues and\nvagabonds those who pretended to witchcraft, Blackstone thought it\nnecessary to point out that this alteration did not deny the possibility\nof the offence, and added:--\n\n\"To deny this would be to contradict the revealed word of God in various\npassages both of the Old and New Testaments; and the thing itself is a\ntruth in which every nation in the world hath in its turn borne\ntestimony; either by examples seemingly well attested, or by prohibitory\nlaws which at least suppose the possibility of a commerce with evil\nspirits.\"[199]\n\nAbout the same time Wesley gave the world his famous declaration on the\nsubject:--\n\n\"It is true likewise that the English in general, and indeed most of the\nmen of learning in Europe, have given up all accounts of witches and\napparitions as mere old wives' fables. I am sorry for it, and I\nwillingly take this opportunity of entering my solemn protest against\nthis violent compliment which so many who believe the Bible pay to those\nwho do not believe it. I owe them no such service. I take knowledge\nthat these are at the bottom of the outcry which has been raised and\nwith such insolence spread through the land in direct opposition, not\nonly to the Bible, but to the suffrage of the wisest and best of men in\nall ages and nations. They well know (whether Christians know it or not)\nthat the giving up of witchcraft is in effect giving up the Bible.\"[200]\n\nThe evidence upon which the convictions for witchcraft rested were\nalmost incredibly stupid, as the punishments were almost unbelievably\nbrutal. If the crops failed, or the milk turned sour; if the head of a\nlocal magnate ached, or a minister of the gospel fell sick; if a woman\nwas childless, or a child taken with a fit; if a cow sickened, or sheep\ndied suddenly, some poor woman was pretty certain to be seized, and\ntortured until she confessed her alleged crime. A mole or wart on any\npart of the body was a sure sign of commerce with the devil. It was\nbelieved that on the body of every witch was a spot insensible to pain.\nTo discover this she was stripped, pins were run into the body, and when\nexcess of pain had produced numbness, some such spot was pretty certain\nto be found. Men regularly took up with this work in both England and\nScotland, and their fame as 'prickers' depended upon the number of\nwitches they unearthed. If a suspected witch kept a black cat, did not\nshed tears, or could not repeat the Lord's Prayer correctly, these were\npretty sure signs of guilt. A more serious test was the ordeal by water.\nThis was a favourite and general test, and was highly recommended by\nthat learned fool, James the First. In this the right hand was tied to\nthe left foot, the left hand to the right foot. She was then thrown\ninto a pond. If she floated she was a witch, and was either hanged or\nburned. If she sank, she was innocent--and was drowned. Another test was\nto tie a woman's legs across, and she was so seated on them that they\nbore the entire weight of her body. In this position she was kept for\nhours, and on the first sign of pain condemned as a witch.\n\nIf none of these tests were adopted, torture was used. There was the\nboot--a frame of iron or wood in which the leg was placed and wedges\ndriven in until the limb was smashed. A variation of this was to place\nthe leg in an iron boot and slowly heat it over a fire. There was the\nthumbscrew, an instrument which smashed the thumb to pulp by the turning\nof a screw. More barbarous still was the bridle. This was an iron hoop\npassing over the head, with four prongs, two pointing to the tongue and\npalate, and one to either cheek. The suspected witch was then chained to\nthe wall, and watchers appointed to prevent her sleeping. The slightest\nmovement caused the greatest torture, and in the vast majority of cases\na confession was secured. In obstinate cases pressing between heavy\nstones was adopted.\n\nOne of the most famous of these witch-finders was the celebrated Mathew\nHopkins before referred to. He was appointed to the work by Parliament\nduring the time of the Commonwealth, and styled himself 'witch-finder\ngeneral.' Hopkins travelled round the country, much like an assize\njudge, putting up at the principal inns, and at the expense of the local\nauthorities. His charge was twenty shillings a visit, whether he found\nwitches or not. If he discovered any, there was a further charge of\ntwenty shillings for every witch brought to execution. His favourite\nmethod of detection was that of floating. But another of Hopkins's tests\nwas the following: The suspected witch was placed cross-legged on a\nstool in the centre of the room. She was closely watched and kept\nwithout food for four-and-twenty hours. Doors and windows remained open\nto watch for the entrance of some of the devil's imps. These might come\nin the form of a fly, a wasp, a moth, or some other insect. The work of\nthe watchers was to kill every insect that came into the room. But if\none escaped, it was clear proof that this was one of the witch's\nfamiliars.\n\nWherever Hopkins travelled numerous convictions followed. These were so\nnumerous that suspicion was aroused, not of the genuineness of the\nconvictions, but of Hopkins's knowledge concerning the locality of the\nwitches. In defence he published in 1647 a tract entitled \"The Discovery\nof Witches; in answer to several Queries lately delivered to the Judge\nof Assize for the County of Norfolk; and now published by Mathew\nHopkins, Witchfinder, for the benefit of the whole Kingdom.\" The charge\nagainst Hopkins was that he had been supplied by the devil with a\nmemorandum of all the witches, and so was able to find them where others\nfailed. Absurd as the charge was, it found credence, and although his\nend is wrapped in obscurity, it is said that he was finally seized\nhimself on a charge of sorcery, tried by his own favourite water\ntest--and floated. One cannot but hope that tradition is in this case\ntrustworthy.\n\nIt is difficult, nowadays, to realise the gravity with which these\ntrials were undertaken. An outline of a very famous witch trial, before\nan eminent judge in the latter part of the seventeenth century, will\nbest serve as an illustration. Before me there lies a little tract of\nsome sixty pages, printed \"for William Shrewsbury at the Bible in Duck\nLane,\" and bearing on the title page the following description:--\n\n\"At the Assizes and general gaol delivery, held at Bury St. Edmunds for\nthe County of Suffolk, the Tenth day of March, in the Sixteenth Year of\nthe Reign of our Sovereign, Lord King Charles II., before Mathew Hale,\nKnight, Lord Chief Baron of His Majesties Court of Exchequer; Rose\nCallender and Amy Duny, Widows, both of Leystoff, in the county\naforesaid, were severally indicted for bewitching Elizabeth and Anne\nDurent, Jane Bocking, Susan Chandler, William Durent, Elizabeth and\nDeborah Pacy and the said Callender and Duny, being arrainged upon the\nsame indictments, pleaded not guilty; and afterwards upon a long\nevidence, were found guilty, and thereupon had judgment to dye for the\nsame.\"\n\nBoth the women charged were old. The charges were as follows: The mother\nof the infant, William Durent, sworn and examined in open court, deposed\nthat about the 10th of March, having special occasion to go from home,\nleft her child in the care of Amy Duny, giving her special occasion not\nto give her child the breast. Nevertheless, Amy Duny did acquaint her\nmother on her return that she had given the child the breast, and on\nbeing reprimanded \"used many high expressions and threatening speeches\ntowards her; telling her that she had as good have done otherwise than\nto have found fault with her ... and that very night her son fell into\nstrange fits of swounding ... and so continued for several weeks.\" Much\ntroubled, the mother consulted a Dr. Jacob, of Yarmouth, who advised\nher to hang up the child's blanket, at night to wrap the child in it,\nand if she found anything therein to throw it in the fire. A very large\ntoad was found, which on being put in the fire \"made a great and\nhorrible noise, and after a space there was a flashing in the fire like\ngunpowder ... and thereupon the toad was no more seen or heard.\" More\nwonderful still, \"the next day there came a young woman and told this\ndeponnent that her aunt (meaning the said Amy) was in a most lamentable\ncondition, having her face all scorched with fire.\" And on the mother\nenquiring of Amy Duny how this had happened, Amy replied, \"she might\nthank her for it, for that she was the cause thereof, but that she\nshould live to see some of her children dead, or else upon crutches.\" It\nwas further alleged \"that not long after this deponnent was taken with\nlameness in both her legges, from the knees downwards, and that she was\nfain to go upon crutches ... and so continued till the time of the\nAssizes, that the witch came to be tried.\"\n\nConcerning the bewitching of Elizabeth and Deborah Pacy, aged eleven and\nnine, their father declared that Deborah was suddenly taken with\nlameness. One day while the girl was resting outside the house, \"Amy\nDuny came to the deponnent's house to buy some herrings; but, being\ndenied, she went away discontented.... But at the very same instant of\ntime, the said child was taken with most violent fits, feeling extreme\npain in her stomach, like the pricking of pins, and shrieking out in a\ndreadful manner like unto a whelp.\" As the result of this and other\nailments from which the child suffered, the father accused Amy Duny of\nbeing a witch, and she was placed in the stocks. Being placed in the\nstocks, further threats were uttered, and both children were afflicted\nwith fits. Upon recovery they \"would cough extremely, and bring up much\nphlegm and crooked pins, and one time a twopenny nail with a very broad\nhead; which pins (amounting to forty or more), together with the\ntwopenny nail, were produced in court, with the affirmation of the said\ndeponnent that he was present when the said nail was vomited up, and\nalso most of the pins.... In this manner the said children continued for\nthe space of two months, during which time, in their intervals, this\ndeponnent would cause them to read some chapters from the New Testament.\nWhereupon he observed that they would read till they came to the name of\nLord or Jesus or Christ, and then, before they could pronounce either of\nthe said words, they would suddenly fall into their fits. But when they\ncame to the name of Satan or Devil, they would clap their fingers upon\nthe book, crying out, 'This bites, but makes me speak right well!'\"\n\nMuch more evidence of a similar kind was offered during the course of\nthe trial, with details of a too indelicate character for reproduction\nconcerning the search made on the women's bodies for devil's marks.\nDuring the whole of the trial there were present in court a number of\ndistinguished people, amongst them Sir Thomas Browne. The latter, being\n\"desired to give his opinion, what he did conceive of him; was clearly\nof opinion that the persons were bewitched, and said that in Denmark\nthere had lately been a great discovery of witches, who used the very\nsame way of afflicting persons, by conveying pins into them, and crooked\nas these pins were, with needles and nails. And his opinion was that\nthe devil in such cases did work upon the bodies of men and women as on\na natural foundation, to stir up and excite such humours superabounding\nin their bodies to a great excess, whereby he did in an extraordinary\nmanner afflict them with such distempers as their bodies were most\nsubject to, as particularly appeared in these children.\"\n\nSir Mathew Hale, one of the greatest lawyers of his day, in directing\nthe jury, told them \"he would not repeat the evidence unto them, lest by\nso doing he should wrong the evidence one way or the other. Only this\nacquainted them. First, whether or no these children were bewitched?\nSecondly, whether the prisoners at the bar were guilty of it? That there\nwere such creatures he made no doubt at all. For, first, the Scriptures\nhad affirmed as much. Secondly, the wisdom of all nations had provided\nlaws against such persons, which is an argument of their confidence of\nsuch a crime. And such had been the judgment of this kingdom, as appears\nby that Act of Parliament which had provided punishments proportionable\nto the quality of the offence. And desired them strictly to observe\ntheir evidence, and desired the great God of Heaven to direct their\nhearts in this weighty thing they had in hand; for to condemn the\ninnocent and let the guilty go free were both an abomination before the\nLord.\" The jury took no more than half an hour to consider their\nverdict, and brought in both women guilty upon all counts. The judge\nexpressed his complete satisfaction with the verdict, and sentenced them\nto be hanged--a sentence duly carried out a fortnight later.\n\nThis is the last notable trial in English history. A witch was burned\nlater than the date of this trial, and the last one actually condemned\nwas in 1712. But in this case, on the representation of the judge who\ntried the issue, the verdict was formally set aside. By that time people\nwere beginning to realise the wisdom of Montaigne's counsel, written at\nthe commencement of the witch epidemic:--\n\n\"How much more natural and more likely do I find it that two men should\nlie than one in twelve hours should pass with the winds from east to\nwest? How much more natural that our understanding may, by the\nvolubility of our loose, capering mind, be transported from its place\nthan one of us should, flesh and bones as we are, by a strange spirit be\ncarried upon a broom through a tunnel or a chimney.\"\n\nIn England the Witch Act of 1604 was not formally repealed until 1736.\nIn Scotland the last witch legally executed was in 1722. Captain Ross,\nSheriff of Sutherland, has the doubtful honour of having condemned her\nto the stake. But fifty years later than this--1773--the Associated\nPresbytery passed a resolution deploring the fact that witchcraft was\nfalling into disrepute. In Germany the last witch was executed in 1749,\nby decapitation. The last trial for witchcraft in Massachusetts was as\nlate as 1793. These dates refer, of course, to legal proceedings.\nExamples of the existence of this belief are continually being recorded\nin newspapers, although they now only rank as solitary reminiscences of\none of the most degrading and brutalising beliefs that European history\nrecords.\n\nI have not aimed at giving a history of the witch mania--indeed, a\nscientific history of witchcraft, one that will make plain the nature of\nthe various factors involved, has yet to be written. I have only dwelt\nupon it for the purpose of enforcing the lesson of how materially such\nan epidemic must have contributed to give permanence to religious belief\nin general. It is certain that such an epidemic could not occur save in\na society saturated with supernaturalism. It is equally certain that\nonce such an epidemic occurs it must in turn strengthen the tendency\ntowards supernaturalistic beliefs. Thanks to the long reign of the\nreligious idea, and to the overwhelming influence of the Church, the\npeople of Europe were prepared for such an outbreak. And it should be\nclear that the prevalence of such beliefs, even though they may be\nafterwards discarded, favours the perpetuation of religious belief as a\nwhole. The particular form of a belief that is prevalent for a time may\ndisappear, but the temper of mind induced by its reign remains. And\nabsurd as the belief in witches capering through the air on broomsticks,\nchanging themselves into black cats, raising storms, and causing\nsickness--absurd though all this may be, it yet serves to keep alive the\ntemper of mind on which supernaturalism lives.\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[187] Cited by Bloch, _Sexual Life of our Time_, p. 120. Michelet has\nalso dealt with this matter in his vivid and picturesque work, _The\nSorceress_.\n\n[188] A lengthy account of this work is given by Ennemoser in his\n_History of Magic_, vol. ii.\n\n[189] _Rise and Influence of Rationalism_, i. pp. 3-6.\n\n[190] H. Williams, _The Superstitions of Witchcraft_, p. 214.\n\n[191] T. Wright, _Narratives of Sorcery and Magic_.\n\n[192] Michelet, _Life of Luther_, chap. vi.\n\n[193] _History of Civilisation_, chap. xix.\n\n[194] Dalyell, _Darker Superstitions of Scotland_, p. 623.\n\n[195] Dalyell, p. 628.\n\n[196] Pitcairn's _Criminal Trials_, vol. iii.\n\n[197] _Religio Medici_, pt. i. sec. 30.\n\n[198] _True Intellectual System_, ii. p. 650.\n\n[199] _Commentaries_, Stephen's Edition, i. p. 238.\n\n[200] _Journal_, 1768.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER ELEVEN\n\nSUMMARY & CONCLUSION\n\n\nThe study of religion falls naturally and easily into two parts. The\nfirst is a question of origin. Under what conditions did the hypothesis\nthat supernatural beings control the life of man come into existence? We\nknow that in civilised times religious beliefs are in the nature of an\ninheritance. A member of any civilised society finds them here when he\nis born, he grows up with them, generally accepting them without\nquestion, or effecting certain modifications in the form in which he\ncontinues to hold them. If we treat religion as a hypothesis, advanced\nas other hypotheses are advanced, to account for a certain class of\nfacts, then we can safely say that religion is one of the earliest in\nthe history of human thought. And its antiquity and universality\npreclude us from seeking an explanation of its origin in the mental life\nof civilised humanity. Whether the religious hypothesis can or cannot be\njustified by an appeal to civilised intelligence, it is plain it did not\nbegin there. Its beginnings are earlier than any existing civilisation;\nand in its most general form may be said to be as old as mankind itself.\nConsequently, if any satisfactory explanation of the origin of the\nreligious idea is to be found, it must be sought amid the very earliest\nconditions of human society.\n\nNow whatever the differences of opinion concerning matters of detail,\nthere is substantial agreement amongst European anthropologists upon one\nimportant point. They all agree that the conception of supernatural, or\n'spiritual,' beings owes its beginning to the ignorance of primitive man\nconcerning both his own nature and the nature of the world around him.\nThe beginnings of human experience suggest questions that can only be\nsatisfactorily answered by the accumulated experience of many\ngenerations. These questions do not materially differ from those that\nface men to-day. The why and wherefore of things are always with us;\nlife propounds the same problem to all; it is the replies alone that\nvary, and the nature of these replies is determined by the knowledge at\nour disposal. The difference is not in nature but in man. The answers\ngiven by primitive man to these eternal questions are a complete\ninversion of those of his better informed descendants. The conception of\nnatural force, of mechanical necessity, is as yet unborn, and the\nprimitive thinker everywhere assumes the operation of personal beings as\nresponsible for all that occurs. This is not so much the product of\ncareful and elaborate philosophising, it is closer akin to the _naive_\nthinking of a child concerning a thunderstorm. Primitive thought accepts\nthe universal operation of living and intelligent forces as an\nunquestionable fact. Modern thought tends more and more surely in the\ndirection of regarding the universe as a complex of self-adjusting,\nnon-conscious forces. Primitive thought assumes a supernatural agency as\nthe cause of disease, and seeks, logically, to placate it by prayer or\ncoerce it by magic. Modern thought turns to test-tube and microscope,\nsearches for the malignant germ, and manufactures an antitoxin. The\nhistory of human thought is, as Huxley said, a record of the\nsubstitution of mechanical for vitalistic processes. The beginning of\nreligion is found in connection with the latter. A genuine science\ncommences with the emergence of the former.\n\nWith this aspect of the matter I have not, however, been specially\nconcerned. It has been left on one side in order to concentrate\nattention upon another and a more neglected aspect of the subject--that\nof the conditions that have served to perpetuate the religious idea.\nGrant, what cannot be well denied in the face of modern investigation,\nthat ideas of the supernatural began in primitive delusion. How comes it\nthat this idea has not by now disappeared from civilised society? What\nare the causes that have given it such a lengthy lease of life?\nExperience has shown that all really verifiable knowledge counts as an\nasset of naturalism, and is so far opposed to supernaturalism. Moreover,\nthe history of science has been such that one feels justified in the\nassumption that, given time and industry, there are no phenomena that\nare not susceptible to a naturalistic explanation. Why, then, has not\nsupernaturalism died out? Even the religious idea cannot persist without\nevidence of some kind being offered in its behalf. This evidence may be\nto a better instructed mind inconclusive or irrelevant, but evidence of\nsome sort there must have been all along, and must still be. Granted\nthat the religious idea began with primitive mankind, granted also that\nit was based on a mistaken interpretation of natural phenomena, these\nreasons are quite insufficient to explain why thousands of generations\nlater that idea is still with us. \"Our fathers have told us\" offers to\nthe average mind a strong appeal, but surely the children will require\nsome further proof than this. What kind of evidence is it that\nthroughout the ages religious people have accepted as conclusive? A\nstudy of primitive psychology shows clearly enough how the religious\nidea vitalised the facts. What we next have to discern is the class of\nfacts that have kept the religious idea alive.\n\nThe foregoing pages constitute an attempt to answer this question. The\nneed for some such investigation was clearly shown by the publication of\nthe late Professor William James's _Varieties of Religious Experience_\nand its reception by the religious press of the country as an\nepoch-marking work. As a mere collection of documents, the work is\ninteresting enough. But its critical value is extremely small. How\nreligious visionaries have felt, or what has been their experiences, can\nonly furnish the mere data of an enquiry, and _their explanation of the\ncause of their experiences is a part of the data_. This, apparently,\nProfessor James overlooked; and it will be noted by critical readers of\nhis book that it proceeds on the assumption that the statements of\nreligious visionaries are to be taken, not only as true concerning their\nsubjective experiences at a given time, but also as approximately true\nas to the causes of their mental states. This, of course, by no means\nfollows. A scientific enquiry cannot separate mental conditions from the\nsubject's interpretation of their causation. Whether this interpretation\nis genuine or not must be decided finally by an appeal to what is known\nof the laws of mental life, under both normal and abnormal conditions.\nIf these are adequate to explain the \"Varieties of Religious\nExperience,\" there is no need whatever to assume the operation of a\nsupernatural agency. Nor does calling this agency 'transcendent' or\n'supermundane' make any substantial difference. For, in this connection,\nthese are only names that serve to disguise a visitant of a highly\nundesirable character.\n\nThe evidence on behalf of a naturalistic explanation of religious\nphenomena has been purposely stated in a suggestive rather than in an\nexhaustive manner. The main lines of evidence are threefold. First,\nthere is the indisputable fact that in the lower stages of culture all\nmental and bodily diseases are universally attributed to spiritual\nagency. This explanation holds the field; it is the only one possible at\nthe time, and it is not replaced until a comparatively late stage of\nhuman history. But of special importance is the fact that a belief does\nnot die out suddenly. It is only destroyed very slowly, and even after\nthe facts upon which the belief was originally based have been otherwise\ninterpreted, the attitude of mind engendered by the long reign of a\nbelief remains. It has by that time become part of the intellectual\nenvironment. Theories of a quasi-philosophic or quasi-scientific\ncharacter are elaborated, and give to the original belief something of a\nrational air. Even to-day the extent to which superstitious practices\nstill gather round the subject of disease is known only to the curious\nin such matters. Not that the original reason is given for the practice.\nIn nearly every case a different one is invented. To take only a single\nexample. We still find saffron tea largely used in cases of measles. All\nmedical men are aware that it possesses not the slightest curative\nvalue. Students of folklore are aware that it has its origin in the\ntheory of sympathetic cures. Its redeeming feature is that it is\nharmless; so we find it still in common use, and the recovery of a child\nfrom measles is often enough attributed to the potency of the\nconcoction. So with the relation of disease to the persistence of the\nbelief in the supernatural. The conclusion that disease--whether bodily\nor mental--is due to the agency of spirits is one that follows from the\nexistence of the religious idea; but in turn the observed facts react\nand strengthen the religious belief. Every case of disease becomes to\nthe primitive mind an unanswerable proof in favour of the original\nhypothesis. The disease is there, and the only explanation possible is\nin terms of the animistic idea. And all the time the religious idea is\nbecoming more deeply embedded in the social consciousness, more firmly\nestablished as a social fact.\n\nThe next line of evidence is that furnished by what I have called the\nculture of the supernatural. By some means or other--probably by\naccident in the first instance--it is discovered that certain herbs and\nvegetable drugs have a peculiar effect on one's mental state. Those who\nuse them see or hear things other people do not normally hear or see.\nAbstention from food and other bodily privations produce similar\nresults. What is the inevitable conclusion? The only one possible under\nthe existing conditions is that communication has been set up with an\ninvisible world from which one is shut off under normal conditions. From\nthis to the next step is obvious and easy. If a drug, or a fast, brings\none into communication with the supernatural world, one has only to\nrepeat the conditions in order to repeat the experience. And repeated\nthey are in all religions, with, at most, those modifications induced by\nchanged times and circumstances. This is why fasting and other forms of\n'fleshly mortification' play so large a part in the history of religion.\nThe savage medicine man, the Hindu fakir, the medieval saint, all create\ntheir ecstasies by the simple plan of disturbing the normal operations\nof the nervous system. It is not, of course, implied that this is done\nwith a full consciousness of all that is involved in the practice. The\nderangement is to them the condition of the supernatural manifestation,\nnot the physiological and psychological cause of the experience.\n\nThe third main line of evidence is connected with the phenomena of\nsexuality. It has been shown that in early stages of culture man\neverywhere connects the phenomena of the sexual life with the activity\nof supernatural forces. Following the lines of investigation indicated\nby Mr. Sidney Hartland, we saw reason to believe that the primitive\nconception of procreation is not that afterwards prevalent, but that of\nassuming the birth of a child to be due to the direct action of\nspiritual beings on the mother. Proofs of this are found in existing\nbeliefs among primitive peoples, in the magical practices so widely\ncurrent to obtain children, and in numerous other customs connected with\nchildbirth. The phenomenon of puberty in the male and of menstruation in\nthe female gives a terrifying reality to this belief. But still more\nimportant is the fact that a great deal of assumed religious feeling is\nfound on analysis to be little more than masked sexuality. The\nconnection between eroticism and piety has been noted over and over\nagain by medical observers in the cases that have been brought\nprofessionally under their notice. And it is hardly less marked in a\nlarge number of instances that are usually classed as normal. Thus great\nreligious teachers have often emphasised the value of a celibate life as\na means of furthering religious devotion, and nearly all have treated it\nwith marked respect. The reason given for this is that marriage involves\na greater absorption in material or worldly cares, while celibacy\nleaves one free to full devotion to the spiritual. But the bottom reason\nfor it is that sexual and domestic feelings, lacking their proper outlet\nin marriage and family life, run with greater force in the outlet\nprovided by religion. So it happens that we find unmarried men and\nwomen, devoted to the religious life, expressing themselves towards\nJesus or the Virgin in language which, separated from its religious\nassociations, leaves no doubt as to its origin in unsatisfied sexual\nfeeling. In these cases we are dealing with a perversion of one of the\ndeepest of human instincts. And it is one of the commonest of\nobservations in psychology that when a feeling is denied outlet through\nits proper channel it finds vent in some other direction, and is to that\nextent masked or disguised.\n\nAllied to the fact of perversion is that of misinterpretation. In the\nchapter on _Conversion_ we have seen how largely this occurs at the\nperiod of adolescence. The significant features of adolescence are a\ndevelopment of the sexual nature and an awakening of a consciousness of\nrace kinship. Connected with these, and flowing from them, is a more or\nless rapid development of what are called the altruistic feelings, the\nindividual becoming less self-centred and more concerned for the\nwell-being of others. From an evolutionary point it is easy to read the\nfundamental meaning of these transformations, although in the course of\nsocial development they have become overlaid with a number of secondary\ncharacteristics. Still, in a completely rationalised social life, with\nadequate knowledge concerning the nature of adolescence, every care\nwould be taken to direct these developing energies into purely social\nchannels. Adolescence is the great formative period; it is then that\nimitation and suggestion play their most important parts, and it is then\nthat the foundations may be laid of a really good and useful\ncitizenship. If we fail then, we fail completely.\n\nIn a society where supernaturalism still exerts considerable power\nanother, and a more disastrous, policy is pursued. Every endeavour is\nmade by religious organisations to exploit adolescence in their own\ninterest. Thousands of priests, often, no doubt, with the best of\nmotives, are engaged in impressing upon the youthful mind an entirely\nerroneous notion of the character and the direction of the feelings\nexperienced. The sense of restlessness, consequent upon a period of\ngreat physiological disturbance, is utilised to create an unhealthy\n'conviction of sin,' or the need of 'getting right with God.' Social\nduties and obligations are made incidental rather than fundamental.\nActivities that should be consciously directed to a social end are\ndiverted into religious channels, and one consequence of this, as we\nhave seen, is a large crop of nervous disorders that might be avoided\nwere a healthier outlet provided. In this the modern priest is acting\nprecisely as his savage forerunner acted. As the savage medicine man\nassociates sexual phenomena with the activity of the tribal ghosts, so\nthe modern priest often associates the psychological conditions that\naccompany adolescence with a supernatural influence. The distinction\nbetween the two is a purely verbal one. In neither case is there a\nrecognition of the nature of the processes actually at work; in both\ncases the phenomena are used to emphasise the reality and activity of\nthe supernatural. In both cases the social feelings are disguised by\nthe religious interpretation given, with the result that instead of\nadolescence being, as it should be, the period of a conscious entry into\nthe larger social life, it only too often marks the beginning of a\nlifelong servitude to retrogressive forces.\n\nThese are the main lines along which, I conceive, the study of the\npathologic elements that enter into the history of religion must be\nstudied. And so long as we restrict our study to the lower culture\nstages the evidence is clear and unmistakable. It is when we reach the\nhigher stages of civilisation that the problem becomes more difficult.\nFor although it is possible to detect the same factors at work they are\nexpressed in a different way, and affiliated to current philosophic and\neven scientific ideas. Thus, it would be readily admitted by most people\nnowadays that visions seen by a fasting man, or by a taker of drugs, or\nby one suffering from some nervous disorder, were wholly inadmissible as\nevidence. So far we have advanced beyond the point of view of primitive\nraces. But the testimony of one who by constantly dwelling upon a single\nidea, and by excluding rational and corrective influences, has brought\nabout a quite abnormal state of mind, is still counted of value by\ntheologians. Much of the current cant concerning 'mysticism' may be\ncited in illustration of this. Exactly what mysticism is no one appears\nto know. Definitions are numerous and varied. So far as most mystics are\nconcerned the definition of Harnack--\"Mysticism is rationalism applied\nto a sphere beyond reason\"--appears to hit the mark, although how reason\ncan be used in a sphere to which it does not apply is precisely one of\nthose unintelligible statements that so delights those with yearnings\nafter the ineffable. The normal mind will probably find more\nsatisfaction in John Stuart Mill's description of mysticism as being\n\"neither more nor less than ascribing objective existence to the\nsubjective creations of the mind, and believing that by watching and\ncontemplating these ideas of its own making, it can read what takes\nplace in the world without.\"\n\nBut the general claim of 'mystics,' and, indeed, of supernaturalists\ngenerally, is that they are, in virtue of the exercise of certain\nqualities or 'faculties,' either inoperative at certain times, or absent\nin the case of normal folk, able to perceive a truth not perceptible to\npeople less fortunately endowed. And these claims, I have no hesitation\nin saying, are wholly false. There are all degrees of development of\nhuman faculty, but it is substantially the same with all. There is no\nroyal road to truth in this direction more than in others. Truth is\nreached in the same way by all, and although an induction may in the\ncase of certain well-dowered individuals be so rapid as to rank as an\n'intuition,' a careful analysis destroys the illusion.\n\nWhen we clear away from the claims of the 'mystic' all the superfluities\nof language that are there, and so reduce these claims to their lowest\nand plainest terms, we find ourselves face to face with the claim of the\nsupernaturalist as it has existed from savage times onward. The method\nremains true to itself. In the first instance, we have the claim to\nillumination based upon direct interference with the normal workings of\nthe mind. In the next stage, we find this interference still marked, but\nless direct. Finally, we have the unhealthy operation of fixed ideas,\nand the exclusion of all conditions that would prevent the operation of\nhallucination or illusion. But the method remains the same throughout,\nand it is equally sterile throughout. In all history these mystical\nstates of illumination have discovered no verifiable truth; they have\nnever at any time advanced human knowledge in the smallest degree. And\nthe reason for this is plain: The brain of the mystic, like that of the\nnon-mystic, can only work on the basis of its acquired knowledge or\nexperience. It can create nothing new; it can declare no truth that is\nnot in the nature of an induction from existing knowledge. All that the\nreligious mystic can accomplish after brooding upon inherited religious\nbeliefs is to create new combinations, or effect certain modifications\nor developments of them, and by continued contemplation endow his\nsubjective creations with an objective existence. That is why the\nChristian mystic remains a Christian. The Mohammedan mystic remains a\nMohammedan. The 'supersensible reality' is always of the kind consonant\nwith their inherited beliefs and their social environment. That is also\nwhy mysticism has its fashions like all other forms of religious\nextravagance. And as he is \"applying rationalism to a sphere above\nreason,\" the mystic may give full vent to his imaginative powers. That\nwhich is above reason may defy reasonable disproof. To some, however, it\nhas the disadvantage of not admitting of reasonable verification. There\nis nothing here but the primitive delusion operating under changed\nconditions.\n\nIn addition, to the lines of investigation followed in the foregoing\npages, a great deal might be said as to how far the religious idea has\nbeen perpetuated by an exploitation of purely social qualities. It must\nbe obvious to even the cursory student that a great deal of what is now\nbeing put forward as religious is really no more than a sociology with a\nreligious label. The feeling for truth, beauty, justice, the desire for\nsocial intercourse, are all treated as expressions of religious\nconviction. All sorts of social reforms are urged in the name of\nreligion, and the degree of success achieved dwelt upon as fruits of the\nreligious spirit. But in no legitimate sense of the word can these\nthings be called religious. They may or may not be consonant with the\nexisting religion, but in themselves they are very clearly the outcome\nof man's social nature, and would exist even though religion disappeared\nentirely. The appeals made to man's moral sense, to his sense of\njustice, to his sympathies, are thus fundamentally appeals made to his\nsocial nature, and so far as the religious appeal is placed upon this\nbasis it becomes an exploitation of the social consciousness.\nUnfortunately, the long association of religious forms with social life\nand institutions, due ultimately to the immense power of supernaturalism\nin early society, this, combined with early education, makes it a matter\nof no small difficulty for the average man or woman to separate the two\nthings.\n\nFinally, let us imagine for a moment that the course of human history\nhad been different to what it actually has been. Suppose that by some\nmiracle humanity had started its career in full possession of that\nknowledge of nature which has been so laboriously accumulated. In that\ncase, would the belief in the supernatural have ever existed? Would the\nthousand and one 'spiritual beings' of primitive society have ever had\nbeing? And if not called into being then, from what other source could\nthey have been derived? Is there anything in later scientific knowledge\nthat would ever have suggested the supernatural? We know there is not;\nwe know that the whole of modern science is an emphatic protest against\nits existence. Unfortunately the scientist does not come first, but\nlast; and by the time he appears, the supernatural has made good its\nfoothold; it has permeated human institutions, and has bitten so deeply\ninto habits of thought as to make its eradication the most difficult of\nall tasks.\n\nLet us carry our imagining yet a step further. Imagine that even after\nprimitive ignorance had created the supernatural, it had come to an\nabrupt stop when man had emerged from the purely savage stage. Suppose a\ngeneration born, not without knowledge of what their progenitors\nbelieved, but with a sufficient knowledge of their own to correct their\nancestor's errors. Suppose that generation in a position to recognise\ndisease, insanity, delusion, hysteria, hallucination for what they are.\nAssume them to be under no delusion concerning the nature of man,\nphysically or mentally. Would the religious idea have persisted in the\nway that it has done? Granted religion would still have continued to\nexist as an ultimate philosophy of nature that appealed to some minds,\nas other systems of philosophy number their disciples, would it have\nbeen the dominating power it has been? What under such conditions would\nhave become of that evidence for the supernatural, accepted generation\nafter generation, but which is now rejected by all educated minds? Where\nwould have been that long array of seers, prophets, illuminants, whose\ncredentials have been found in states of mind that are now seen to have\nbeen pathological in character? For remember it was not always--very\nseldom, in fact--the justice, or the reasonableness of the teachings set\nforth, that won support, but generally the 'signs and wonders' that were\npointed to as evidence of the divine commission of the teachers. Assume,\nthen, that these 'signs and wonders' had been wanting, and that for\nthousands of years people had looked at natural phenomena from the point\nof view of the educated mind of to-day, what would have been the present\nposition of the religious idea? Would it not have been like a tree\ndivorced from the soil?\n\nWell, we know that the course of history has been far different from\nwhat I have assumed to be the case. We know that the savage dies out\nvery slowly, and that even in civilised States to-day he is honoured in\nthe existence of a whole army of representatives. Each generation moves\nalong the road marked out by its predecessors, and broadens or lengthens\nit to but a small extent. For many, many generations people went on\nadopting the conclusions of the savage concerning man and the universe,\nand finding proofs of the soundness of those conclusions in exactly the\nsame kind of experiences. The beliefs thus engendered were wild and\nabsurd--admittedly so, and many of such a nature that educated people\nare now ashamed of them. But such as they were, they served the purpose\nof perpetuating the belief in the supernatural, and so served to\nstrengthen the general religious idea. Of that there can be no\nreasonable doubt. For the influence of beliefs that have been long held\ndoes not end with the intellectual perception of their falsity. A belief\nsuch as witchcraft dies out, but by that time it has done its work in\nfamiliarising the general mind with the reality of the supernatural, and\nso prepares the ground for other harvests. These long centuries of\nsuperstitious beliefs have left behind in society a psychological\nresiduum that is at all times an obstacle and is sometimes fatal to\nscientific thinking. We are like men who have obtained freedom after\nalmost a lifetime of slavery. We may be no longer in any real danger of\nthe lash, but fear of the whip has become part of our nature, and we\nshrink without cause. So with all those now admitted delusions that have\nbeen described in the foregoing pages, and which for generations were\nasserted without question. They bit deeply in to social institutions;\nthe temper of mind they induced became part of our social heritage. They\nperpetuated the long reign of supernaturalism, and still interpose a\nserious obstacle to sane and helpful conceptions of man and the\nuniverse.\n\n\n\n\nINDEX\n\n\nAdolescence and Religion, 177-8, 181, 276-7.\n\nAdolescence and Primitive Customs, 178.\n\nAdolescence and Nervous Disorders, 196-7.\n\nAdolescence, Social Significance of, 183-5.\n\nAgap\u00e6, 152.\n\nAsceticism, 121, 125, 146, 208-13.\n\nAsceticism and Purity, 213.\n\nAsceticism, Influence on Religion, 224-5.\n\nAugustine, 157.\n\nAuthority, Conflict with Science, viii.\n\n\nBaring-Gould, S., 147, 153, 209.\n\nBaring-Gould, S., on Mysticism and Sexualism, 125, 151.\n\nBrinton, D. G., on Origin of Religion, 14.\n\nBryce, J., 232.\n\nBuckle, T. H., 256.\n\n\nCatherine of Sienna, 85, 129.\n\nCelibacy, 214-5.\n\nCelibacy, Results on Morals, 220-3.\n\nCelibacy, Social Consequences of, 216-9, 220-3.\n\nClouston, Sir T. S., on Revivals, 195.\n\nClouston, Sir T. S., on the Connection between Sexualism and Religion,\n140.\n\nConversion, Pathological Nature of, 194.\n\nConversion and Adolescence, 32, 176-7, 276.\n\nConversion, Theological Notions of, 169-71.\n\nConversion, Ages of Converts, 174-5, 194-5.\n\nConversion, Statistics of, 173-5.\n\nConversion and Imitation, 188.\n\nConversion, Social Aspects of, 200.\n\nConvulsionnaires (The), 239.\n\nCrowd Psychology, 206.\n\nCrusades, Character of, 227-9.\n\nCrusades, Children's, 230.\n\nCrusades, Consequences of, 232-3.\n\nCudworth, R., 259.\n\n\nDalyell, J. G., 257.\n\nDancing and Religious Ecstasy, 60-1.\n\nDancing Epidemics, 236-40.\n\nDeath, Savage Ideas of, 44.\n\nDemoniacs, 77.\n\nDisease, Theory of, amongst Primitive Peoples, 46.\n\nDisease, Theory of, amongst the Early Christians, 47.\n\nD'Israeli, I., on Sexualism and Religion, 17, 135.\n\nDraper, J. W., 231.\n\nDrugs, their use in the history of Religion, 57.\n\n\nEnvironment, 36, 38.\n\nEnvironment, Nature of Primitive, 39.\n\nEpilepsy, Influence of, in fostering Supernaturalism, 74-9.\n\nEpilepsy, Opinion of Dr. Hollander, 75.\n\nEpilepsy, Opinion of Sir T. S. Clouston, 75.\n\nEpilepsy, Opinion of Dr. C. Norman, 76.\n\nEpilepsy, Opinion of Emanuel Deutsch, 77, 79.\n\nEpilepsy in New Testament, 77.\n\nErotic Sects, 155-60, 165.\n\nEroticism and Supernaturalism, 126-8, 132, 136-9.\n\nEvidence for the Supernatural, 2, 271.\n\n\nFasting, 61-5.\n\nFlagellation, 234-5.\n\nForlong, Maj.-Gen., 109 _n._\n\nFox, George, Account of Visions, 82.\n\nFrazer, J. G., 39, 46, 97, 99, 111.\n\nFree Love--Religious, 150, 161-4.\n\n\nGalton, Francis, on Religious and Morbid States, 86.\n\nGalton, Francis, 219.\n\nGibbon, E., 227.\n\nGowers, Sir W. R., 197.\n\nGranger, Prof., 84, 141-3.\n\n\nHallucinations, 23-4-5, 62, 84.\n\nHecker, J. F. C., 236-7.\n\nHopkins, Mathew, 261-2.\n\nHuman Qualities, Identity of, 6.\n\n\nInterpretation, Growth of Scientific, xiii.\n\nIreland, Dr. W. W., on Hallucinations, 23-4.\n\n\nJames, W., 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 21, 81, 83, 130, 131, 145, 175-6,\n272.\n\n\nKingsley, Mary, on Primitive Thought, 42.\n\n\nLea, H. C., 220-1.\n\nLe Bon, Gustave, on Crowd Psychology, 206.\n\nLecky, W. E. H., 154, 212, 221.\n\nLuther and Demonism, 25, 58, 82, 253.\n\n\nMaudsley, H., on the Relation between Nervous States and Ecstasy, 66,\n76, 133.\n\nMedicine and the Church, 70-1.\n\nMenstruation, 95-6-7-8.\n\nMental States, Reality of, xi, 7, 22.\n\nMercier, C., Connection between Sexualism and Religion, 124, 140-1, 187,\n197.\n\nMilman, H. H., 219, 222-3, 225-6, 229, 232.\n\nMind, Theories of, x.\n\nMistletoe, Origin of Kissing under, 109 _n._\n\nMohammed, his Account of Inspiration, 78, 81.\n\nMonasticism, 225.\n\nMonasticism and the Family, 216-7, 219, 222-3.\n\nMonasticism and Morals, 220.\n\nMysticism, 131, 279-80.\n\nMysticism and the Abnormal, 55.\n\nMysticism and Puberty, 186.\n\nMysticism, Definitions of, 278-9.\n\nMystics, Claims of, xi.\n\n\nOpium, Effects of, 58.\n\n\nPathological States and Religious Belief, 5, 49.\n\nPathological Aspects of Revivals, 190-1-2-3, 201.\n\nPathology of Religion, Need of, 3.\n\nPhallicism, 104-5-6-7-8-9.\n\nPike, L. O., on Character of Crusaders, 229.\n\nProcreation, Primitive Beliefs concerning, 93-4.\n\nPsychological Epidemics, 207.\n\nPsychology, Normal and Abnormal, 3.\n\nPsychology as a Social Force, 37-8.\n\nPuberty, 180-6.\n\nPuberty Customs, 62, 95, 96.\n\n\nReligion, Definition of, 1.\n  Association of, with Non-religious Forces, 4.\n  and Intuition, 51.\n  and Puberty, 180.\n  and Dancing, 60-1-2.\n  and Fasting, 63-4-5.\n  and Environment, 199, 202.\n  in Primitive Life, 40, 44-5-6, 53.\n  its Connection with Pathological Conditions, 8, 14, 68-9, 70-1-2-3-4.\n\nReligious Faculty, Fallacy of, 7, 19, 20.\n\nReligious Idea and Modern Thought, vii.\n\nRenan, E., 145.\n\nRevivalistic Religion, 163, 172, 189, 190, 193, 201.\n\nRussian Sects, 164-7.\n\n\nSaints, Medical Uses of, 70.\n\nSanta Teresa, 85.\n\nScience, Function of, xi-xii.\n\nSexualism and Religious Belief, 9, 11-2, 89-90, 120, 121, 125-9, 145,\n275.\n\nSexualism and Religious Belief, Opinion of Dr. Norman, 122;\n  of Dr. Forel, 123;\n  of Dr. Mercier, 124;\n  of Dr. Krafft-Ebing, 125;\n  of Dr. Maudsley, 133-4.\n\nSmith, W. R., on the Meaning of 'Unclean,' 101.\n\nSociability, Significance of, 35.\n\nSocial Life and Religious Theories, 13, 281.\n\nSpencer, H., 37, 46.\n\nSpiritual Wifehood, 148-9.\n\nSpiritualism, 53-4.\n\nStarbuck, E. D., on Conversion, 174, 200.\n\nSully, J., 20.\n\nSupernaturalism, Causes of Persistence of, 271, 273, 277, 282.\n\nSupernaturalism, Consequences of, 283-4.\n\nSupernaturalism, Persistence of, 2.\n\nSuso, Austerities of, 85.\n\nSwedenborg, E., 80.\n\nSymonds, J. A., Experience under Chloroform, 29.\n\n\nTheologians, Attitude towards Science, ix.\n\nThomas, W. I., 182.\n\nTylor, E. B., 1, 49, 54, 55, 71, 182, 193.\n\n\nUnclean, Religious Significance of, 100-1.\n\n\nWhittaker, T., on the Effects of Opium, 58.\n\nWilliams, A., 250.\n\nWitchcraft, 27, 243.\n  Pathology of, 246-7.\n  and Christian Church, 244.\n  Bull of Innocent VIII., 248.\n  Extent of Epidemic, 250.\n  and Sir Thomas Browne, 265.\n  and Montaigne, 267.\n  and Sir M. Hale, 266.\n  and John Wesley, 259.\n  and Luther, 253.\n  and Protestantism, 252-3.\n  Scottish, 255-6-7-8, 267.\n  American, 254-5.\n  Children burned for, 251.\n  Description of Trial, 263-6.\n  Legislation in England, 253, 267.\n\nWitches, Methods of Detection, 260-1.\n\nWitches, Number killed, 250-1.\n\nWoman, Christian Church and, 102.\n\nWoman, why considered religiously unclean, 103.\n\nWoman, a Source of Spiritual Infection, 99.\n\nWoman, Influence of Religious Beliefs in determining her Social\nPosition, 102-3, 110-9.\n\nWoman, Position among Primitive Peoples, 115.\n\nWright, T., 251.\n\n\n[Transcriber's Note:\n\nThe following corrections were made:\n\np. 21: extra open quote removed (In what sense)\n\np. 24: Dr. W. H. Ireland to Dr. W. W. Ireland (as given by Dr. W. W.\nIreland)\n\np. 25: Nuremburg to Nuremberg (came from Nuremberg), to match cited text\n\np. 46: Crook to Crooke (says Mr. W. Crooke)\n\np. 46: Ahmadnager to Ahmadnagar (Mahadeo Kolis of Ahmadnagar)\n\np. 57: DeCandolle to De Candolle (says De Candolle)\n\np. 58 (Footnote 26): Pharm\u00e6cology to Pharmacology (Text-Book of\nPharmacology)\n\np. 70: Persel to Pernel (St. Pernel for agues), to match cited text\n\np. 75: everyone to every one (every one of the senses)\n\np. 76: Connolly to Conolly (Dr. Conolly Norman)\n\npp. 86 (Footnote 63), and 130 (Footnote 107): Joli to Joly (H. Joly)\n\np. 101 (Footnote 76): on to in (Studies in the Psychology of Sex)\n\np. 114: is to are (Nor are the substantial facts)\n\np. 123 (Footnote 96): Problem to Question (The Sexual Question)\n\npp. 125, 128 (Footnote 105), and 287 (Index): Kraft-Ebing to\nKrafft-Ebing\n\np. 127: Loudon to Loudun (Convent of Ursulines of Loudun)\n\np. 127 (Footnote 104): of America to in North America (Jesuits in North\nAmerica)\n\np. 128: Alacocque to Alacoque (The blessed Mary Alacoque)\n\np. 149 (Footnote 123): Life of St. Paul to Study of St. Paul\n\np. 166 (Footnote 140): Churches to Church (Heard's description, Russian\nChurch)\n\np. 178: tatooing to tattooing (tattooing forms part of the religious\nceremony)\n\np. 182 (Footnote 151): missing 4 added in 241 (pp. 241-48)\n\np. 209: Brahminism to Brahmanism (Brahmanism has its order of ascetics),\nto match cited text\n\np. 209: missing close quote added (consecrated to Tezcatlipoca.\")\n\np. 249 (Footnote 188): Enenmoser to Ennemoser (is given by Ennemoser)\n\np. 250 (Footnote 190): A. Williams, The Superstition of Witchcraft to H.\nWilliams, The Superstitions of Witchcraft\n\np. 251 (Footnote 191): History to Narratives (Narratives of Sorcery and\nMagic)\n\np. 255: Burroughes to Burroughs (George Burroughs)\n\npp. 263, 264: Tacy to Pacy (Elizabeth and Deborah Pacy)\n\np. 286 (Index): Ireland, Dr. W. H. to Ireland, Dr. W. W.\n\np. 286 (Index): Millman, H. H. to Milman, H. H.\n\nIrregularities in hyphenation (e.g. supernormal vs. super-normal) and\nmisquotations have not been corrected. Unless it was found that the\nerror also occurred in the cited text, misspellings have been corrected.\n\nAlthough Footnote 81 (originally on p. 104) refers to a \"note at the end\nof this chapter,\" the \"NOTE TO PAGE 104\" begins on p. 110, several pages\nbefore the chapter ends. This has not been changed.\n\nFootnotes markers have been changed from symbols (in the original) to\nnumerals.\n\nFor the plain text versions, an oe-ligature has been changed to oe\n(Coelestia).]","title":"Religion & Sex: Studies in the Pathology of Religious Development","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":83039}