{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_37032/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_37032","id":"gutenberg_37032","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/37032","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Health & Medicine","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Health -- Religious aspects"],"text":"</pre>\n\n\n\nProduced by Don Kostuch\n\n\n\n\n[Transcriber's Notes]\n  Page numbers in this book are indicated by numbers enclosed in curly\n  braces, e.g. {99}. They have been located where page breaks occurred\n  in the original book.\n\n  This book is derived from a copy on the Internet Archive:\n    http://www.archive.org/details/religionandheal02walsgoog\n\n  Obvious spelling or typographical errors have been corrected.\n  Inconsistent spelling of names and inventive and alternative\n  spelling is left as printed.\n\n  Extended quotations and citations are indented such as reports,\n  letters and interviews.\n[End Transcriber's Notes]\n\n\nRELIGION AND HEALTH\n\n\nBY\n\nJAMES J. WALSH, M.D., Ph.D., Sc.D. etc.\n\nMEDICAL DIRECTOR OF FORDHAM UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF SOCIOLOGY,\nPROFESSOR OF PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY, CATHEDRAL COLLEGE\nLECTURER ON PSYCHOLOGY AND SOCIOLOGY, MARYWOOD COLLEGE,\nSCRANTON, PA., MT. ST. MARY'S, PLAINFIELD, N.J.\n\n\n\nBOSTON\n\nLITTLE, BROWN, AND COMPANY\n\n1920\n\n\n\n\n_Copyright, 1920_,\nBy Little, Brown, and Company.\n\n\n\n_All rights reserved_\nPublished October, 1920\n\n\n\n_Norwood Press_\n\nSet up and electrotyped by J. S. Cushing Co.,\n\nNorwood, Mass., U.S.A.\n\n\n\nTo\n\nHIS EMINENCE JAMES CARDINAL GIBBONS\n\nAN EXEMPLAR OF RELIGION AND HEALTH\nFOR OUR GENERATION\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\n                      Page\n\n       Introduction                  1\n\nCHAPTER\n\n   I   Can We Still Believe?         8\n\n  II   Prayer                       33\n\n III   Sacrifice                    59\n\n  IV   Charity                      80\n\n   V   Fasting and Abstinence      109\n\n  VI   Holydays and Holidays       120\n\n  VII  Recreation and Dissipation  132\n\n VIII  Mortification               147\n\n   IX  Excesses                    168\n\n    X  Purity                      184\n\n   XI  Insanity                    205\n\n  XII  Nervous Disease             217\n\n XIII  Dreads                      234\n\n  XIV  Suffering                   254\n\n   XV  Pain                        265\n\n  XVI  Suicide and Homicide        277\n\n XVII  Longevity                   294\n\nXVIII  The Bible and Health        306\n\n  XIX  Health and Religion         319\n\n       Index                       333\n\n\n\n{1}\n\nRELIGION AND HEALTH\n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION\n\nPhysicians are agreed that there is no entirely satisfactory\ndefinition for health. We all know quite well what we mean when we use\nthe word, but it does not admit of such exact limitations as would\nmake a scientific formulation of its meaning. Religion is another of\nthe words which, in spite of its common use, is extremely difficult to\ndefine exactly, and it has often been said that we have no definition\nthat will satisfy all those who profess religion and certainly not all\nthose who have made a study of it from the standpoint of the science\nof theology. As is true of health, each of us knows pretty thoroughly\nwhat we mean when we use the word, though our definitely formulated\nsignification for it might not meet with the approval of others,\nespecially of those who are exacting in their requirements. With the\ntwo principal words in the title incapable of exact definition, it\nmight seem that the subject matter of this book would be rather vague\nat best and unpromising in practical significance. But all this\nindefiniteness is in theory. There are no two words in the language\nthat are more used than health and religion, none that are less vague\nin practice and no two subjects have a wider appeal or a more\nparamount interest. The linking them together for discussion in common\nbecause of their mutual influence will serve to {2} throw light on\nboth of them and undoubtedly help toward a better understanding of\neach.\n\nOrdinarily the most satisfactory definition of a word can be obtained\nfrom its etymology. Unfortunately in the matter of religion there is a\nvery old-time division of opinion as to the derivation of the word\nwhich makes etymology of less definite significance than usual. Cicero\nsuggested that _religio_ came from _relegere_, to go through or over\nagain in reading, speech or thought, as prayers and religious\nobservances generally are repeated. On the other hand St. Augustine\nand Lactantius insisted on deriving _religio_ from the Latin verb\n_religare_, which means to bind again, to bind back, to bind fast. The\nword obligation has an analogous origin and illustrates the meaning of\nreligion as if its form from etymology should have been religation.\n\nIt is this latter derivation that has been most commonly accepted in\nthe modern time. A man may recognize the existence of God and yet not\nfeel any particular obligations toward Him, but if he binds himself\nanew to the deity whom he recognizes, by trying to make his life\naccord with the divine will as he views it, then he practices\nreligion. James Martineau said, \"By religion I understand the belief\nand worship of Supreme Mind and Will, directing the universe and\nholding moral relations with human life.\"\n\nWhat will occupy us in this book is the effect of this profound\nfeeling and sense of obligation toward a higher power on health, that\nis, on that wholeness of body and mind which constitutes a normal\ncondition for human beings.\n\nThere are many more relations between the two words than would at\nfirst be suspected or that most people {3} might think possible. The\nold high German word _haelu_ or _haelo_, from which our word health is\nderived, meant also salvation. The original root _hal_ means haleness\nor wholeness and also refers to healing, and curiously enough the word\nholiness is derived from the same root. Holiness has now come to refer\nto perfection, or at least normality of soul, while health refers to\nnormality of body. Our word health is related more directly to whole\nthan it is to heal, in spite of the feeling there might be because of\nthe spelling that the latter word must represent its immediate origin.\nHoliness of soul exactly corresponds in etymology with wholeness of\nbody.\n\nCardinal Newman would, I suppose, be an authority on the subject of\nreligion as satisfying for most people as could be found. In his\n\"Grammar of Assent\", which he wrote in order to define as exactly as\nmight be possible just how men came to admit certain propositions with\nspecial reference to the acceptance of religion, he gave a definition\nof what he meant by the word in as simple words as it is possible to\nuse, perhaps, to express so large a subject. He said: \"By religion I\nmean the knowledge of God, of His Will, and of our duties toward Him.\"\nMatthew Arnold, who represents among English-speaking peoples almost\nthe opposite pole of thought to Cardinal Newman, in what concerns\nreligion, suggested in \"Literature and Dogma\" that \"Religion, if we\nfollow the intention of human thought and human language in the use of\nthe word, is ethics heightened, enkindled, lit up by feeling; the\npassage from morality to religion is made when to morality is applied\nemotion.\" Both of these men, in spite of their distance apart, insist\non duty as the essence of religion. Matthew Arnold calls it ethics and\nsays nothing as to the foundation of it; the great English {4}\nCardinal speaks very simply of our duties toward God. Newman says\nnothing of the emotions but appeals only to the reason, while,\ncuriously enough, the rationalizer in religion emphasizes the\nemotions.\n\nBetween these two definitions there is a world of difference that we\nshall not attempt to bridge, for we want to treat of the relations and\nabove all the interaction of religion and health in the widest sense\nof these terms. The \"Century Dictionary\" definition more nearly\nresembles that of Cardinal Newman than Matthew Arnold's formula, but\nit generalizes in a way that would describe the practice of religion\nfor a greater number of people and especially for those who still\nbelieve that there are more gods than one. It runs: \"Recognition of\nand allegiance in manner of life to a superhuman power or superhuman\npowers, to whom allegiance and service are regarded as justly due.\"\n\nEven this definition is not too broad for the subject matter of this\nbook, for I am one of those who believe that there is a blessing on\nevery sincere effort of worship of the Higher Power, no matter how\ngroping it may be. Above all, every regulation of life with reference\nto a power above us felt to have a Providence over the world in which\nwe live has an almost inevitable reaction on health and will lead to\nbetter things. The sincere pursuit of good conduct as an end in life\nunder a Providence that is recognized will almost necessarily lead to\nbetter knowledge of our relations to the higher powers, and also of\nour relations to ourselves and the world around us.\n\nWith these preliminaries we are ready to consider religion and health\nand their mutual influence, but the inevitable question that suggests\nitself is, \"Is religion a living force in our time? Has not science\ngiven it its {5} death blow? While it walks the earth as yet, is it\nnot only as the ghost of an outworn phase of human interest? Is it any\nmore than merely a superstition in the sense once suggested as the\netymology of this word by James Russell Lowell as if derived from\n_superstes_, a survivor, representing, as all superstitions do, a\nsurvival from a previous state of thinking, the reasons for which have\ndisappeared, though the mental inertia of human beings still keeps\nthem in vogue?\" A good many people in our time, including not a few\nof those who are rather prone to consider themselves above the rest of\nthe world, have not hesitated to express the view that it is only old\nfogies and especially those ignorant of modern science who continue to\nthink that religion can still be taken seriously. Some few of them\nhave the best of good will in the world and appreciate how much of\nbenefit was derived from religious belief, benefit which they confess\ndid good both for the mind and the body of man; and they are even\nready to express sorrow that it has outlived its usefulness, but they\nfeel that they must insist that religion is now only the wraith of its\nformer self, a misty congeries of old-fashioned beliefs which the\nignorant alone reverence, accepting it very much as they do ghost\nstories in general.\n\nPresident Schurman of Cornell in an address before the Liberal Club of\nBuffalo thirty years ago,  [Footnote 1] reminded us that there are a\nnumber of people who are always ready to proclaim the end of religion\nand to weep for it. Religion continues to be as living a force and as\nlively as ever in spite of their proclamations, and this has been true\ngeneration after generation practically since the beginning of\nChristianity. President Schurman said:\n\n{6}\n  \"Every now and then we hear the requiem of religion chanted alike by\n  the spirits who mock and by the pious souls who have 'no language\n  but a cry.' I suppose we shall always have professional mourners.\n  But it is greatly to be desired that their services should not be\n  prematurely given. If there is anything in the world that is alive\n  and active, it is just this religious spirit, for whose demise\n  certain mourners go about the streets. The body of religion changes,\n  the spirit and the life abide forever. To the assertion that\n  religion is defunct, I reply by pointing to the intense interest\n  which men to-day everywhere feel in religion. It was recently stated\n  by a Massachusetts Judge--Burke observed truly that we Americans\n  like to appeal to the law--that there is nothing in the world\n  perennially interesting but religion. The ground of this dictum is\n  to be found in the constitution of humanity; for the human soul\n  which the things of sense fail to satisfy can attain its true home\n  and its complete self-realization only in conscious communion with\n  the Spirit behind the veil.\"\n\n    [Footnote 1: \"Agnosticism,\" Scribners, New York, 1895. ]\n\nThe recent death of Mrs. Humphry Ward recalled the experience with\nregard to her book \"Robert Elsmere.\" In a certain narrow circle of\nintellectuals it was supposed that this novel represented a veritable\ndeath blow to a series of compromises which had permitted people\nfamiliar with modern progress and science, and especially with the\nhigher criticism, to continue to practice their religion in peace in\nspite of the fact that belief had long since departed. How amusing it\nis now and indeed how almost incomprehensible to learn that Mrs.\nHumphry Ward's husband, a well-known English critic, suggested shortly\nafter its publication that her novel had {7} \"shaken the very pillars\nof Christianity.\" It is surprising indeed how often the foundations of\nreligion are supposed to have been completely undermined, and yet the\nedifice itself continues to stand and to be the shelter for the vast\nmajority of mankind from the buffetings of a world that without it\nwould be almost shelterless for them and a place of trial too hard to\nbear.\n\nMen are incurably religious, and just as no tribe has been found,\nhowever low in the scale of savagery, which has not formulated for\nitself some system of worship of a higher power and definite feelings\nof dependence on it, so even those whose minds under the influence of\ncertain phases of intellectual development lead them away from formal\nreligion find deep in their hearts the belief and appreciation of\ntheir relations to a power that makes for good, even though it may be\ndifficult to understand the mystery of it. Long ago the Scriptural\nexpression was formulated that only the fool who thinketh not in his\nheart says there is no God. Due acknowledgment of the thought in\npractice, however imperfect it may be, is religion.\n\nReligion has been with us for all the period that we know anything\nabout man, for the very cave man buried his dead with manifest\nconfidence in a hereafter, and there seems no doubt that it will be\nwith us until this stage of mundane affairs has passed. It affects the\nbody as well as the mind, as indeed do all the great modes of thought,\nand it deserves to be cultivated, not only for its effect on the soul\nbut also on the mind and heart and the bodily powers. There is no\ndoubt at all that it means very much, and there is only the question\nof facing its significance for the whole man candidly and\nstraightforwardly.\n\n\n{8}\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nCAN WE STILL BELIEVE?\n\nThere is no doubt that man's quite instinctive attitude toward the\nmystery which surrounds him, out of which he came and into which he\ngoes, has always so influenced his attitude of mind toward his body\nand its processes as to affect them deeply. The medicine man with his\nappeal to the religious as well as the superstitious feelings of man\nalways had a potent influence over the most primitive of mankind, but\nculture has not obliterated this source of special reaction in men.\nEven now, for the great majority of men it still remains true that no\nmatter how vague their religious instinct may be, it continues to\naffect, to a notable extent, their physiological and psychological\nfunctions. An eclipse of the religious instinct is at the basis of the\nincrease in suicide and also undoubtedly of insanity in our day. The\nlack of an abiding faith in Providence is the source of many dreads\nand worries that affect health. Every physician is sure to know of\nhighly educated patients whose ills reflect their mental relation to\nthe mystery of life and whose symptoms take on or lose significance,\naccording to their religious feelings.\n\nThe question that in our time, however, is coming insistently into a\ngreat many minds is, Can we, as intelligent human beings, reasonably\nin touch with man's recent progress in science, be fair with ourselves\nand still continue {9} to believe in the great religious truths that\naffected our ancestors so deeply? While we may realize all the depth\nof the mystery in the midst of which we are, can we, with our little\nminds, hope to fathom any of it? This is the questioning feeling that\nwill not down for a certain number of those who have had educational\nadvantages. Must we not just confess our inability to, know anything\ndefinite in reality with regard to it, and feel that those who have\nthought that they held the key of the mystery were deluding themselves\nor allowing themselves to be caught by pseudo-knowledge, an\ninheritance from unthinking generations, instead of realities?\n\nHas not the modern advance in science made it very clear to us that\nall we can hope to say of man's origin and man's destiny is that we do\nnot know just what all this mystery that surrounds us is about? Will\nnot this very rational attitude of mind preclude at least the educated\nintelligent people of our generation from having their health affected\nin any way by their religion? Above all, if religion is to influence\nhealth, must there not be some regular practice of it, and have not\nthe scientists of the last generation made it quite clear that this is\nout of the question in any sincere and serious way for any one who\nknows enough of science and appreciates the present position of our\nknowledge of the facts of the relationship of man to the universe?\n\nFor a large and growing number of people, as the result of the\nprevalence of this impression, the practice of religion seems to be an\ninteresting but entirely worn-out relic of an older generation when\nfolk were more easily satisfied with regard to such things than we are\nin our enlightened scientific era. Religion is surely not something\nthat our contemporaries, with their broader {10} outlook on the\nmeaning of life, can be brought to conform to very readily. The\nquestion \"Can We Still Believe?\" would seem then to have for answer in\nour time at best, \"Speculatively, perhaps yes! but practically, no!\"\n\nWe may still feel the religious instinct, but we can scarcely be\nexpected to acknowledge religious obligations in any such strictness\nas would demand in our already overstrenuous daily life with its many\nduties the devotion of time to religious exercises. We surely cannot\nbe expected to assume any additional obligations or rebind ourselves\nto a divinity who seems to be getting farther away from us.\n\nAlmost needless to say, if all this be true, then religion can have,\nin our time, only a very slight and quite negligible influence on\nhealth. Men may be incurably religious in the mass, as yet, but this\ninstinct is manifestly passing, for the educated at least, and for\nsensible people is now without any significance for physical\nprocesses, though it may at times even yet affect psychological\nstates.\n\nThere is only one fair and practical way to reply to this question\n\"Can We Still Believe?\" especially for those who think that modern\nscience has obscured the answer, and that is to turn to the lives of\nthe men who made our modern science and see how they answered it in\ntheir definite relations to religion. The surprise is to find that\nwhile so many people, and not a few of them professors in colleges and\neven universities, are of the very often expressed opinion that\nscience makes men irreligious or at least unreligious, that is not\ntrue at all of our greatest scientists. Most of the men who have done\nthe great work of modern science have been deeply religious, and a\ngreat many of them have practiced their {11} religion very faithfully.\nIt is true that not a few of the lesser lights in science have been\ncarried away by the impression that science was just about to explain\neverything, and there was no longer any need of a creator or creation\nor of Providence, but that is only because of their own limitations.\nFrancis Bacon, himself a distinguished thinker in science, declared\nsome three hundred years ago that his own feeling was that a little\nphilosophy takes men away from God, but a sufficiency of philosophy\nbrings them back. His opinion has often been reached by our deepest\nthinkers in the modern time, and it is just as true for natural\nphilosophy as it was for the metaphysical philosophy of the older\ntime, for Bacon's aphorism had been more than once anticipated in the\nearly days of Christianity, notably by St. Augustine, and it would not\nbe hard to find quotations from Greek thinkers along the same line.\nThe Scriptures said very emphatically, \"Only the fool who thinketh not\nin his heart says there is no God.\"\n\nWhile young scientists then are so prone to feel that science and\nreligion are in opposition, and a certain number of scientific workers\nnever seem to outgrow their youthfulness in this regard, it must not\nbe forgotten that the greatest scientists of the nineteenth and\ntwentieth centuries have practically all been firm believers in\nreligion. Lord Kelvin, at the beginning of the twentieth century, at\nthe moment when he was looked up to by all the world as the greatest\nof living physical scientists, did not hesitate to say that \"science\ndemonstrates the existence of a Creator.\" As president of the British\nAssociation for the Advancement of Science he declared: \"But strong,\noverpowering proofs of intelligent and benevolent design lie all\naround us; and if ever {12} perplexities, whether metaphysical or\nscientific occur, they turn us away with irresistible force, showing\nto us, through nature, the influence of free will, and teaching us\nthat all living beings depend on one ever-acting Creator and Ruler.\"\n\nOnce when particularly disgusted with the materialistic views of those\nwho, while denying the existence of the Creator, attributed the\nwonders of nature, animate and inanimate, to the potency of a\nfortuitous concourse of atoms, Lord Kelvin wrote to Liebig, the great\nchemist, asking him if a leaf or a flower could be formed or even made\nto grow by chemical forces, and received the emphatic reply, \"I would\nmore readily believe that a book on chemistry or on botany could grow\nout of dead matter by chemical processes.\"\n\nExpressions similar to those of Lord Kelvin and Liebig are\ncommonplaces in the history of science. Sir Humphry Davy declared,\n\"The true chemist sees God in all the manifold forms of the external\nworld.\" Linnaeus, to whom the modern world confesses that it owes so\nmuch in the organization of botanical science, once exclaimed in what\nhas well been called a spirit of rapture:\n\n\"I have traced God's footprints in the works of His creation; and in\nall of them, even in the least, and in those that border on\nnothingness, what power, what wisdom, what ineffable perfection!\"\n\nIt would be very easy to make a long list of extremely great\nscientists who were firm believers. Clerk Maxwell once said to a\nfriend, \"I have read up many queer religions; there is nothing like\nthe old one after all; and I have looked into most philosophical\nsystems, and I have seen that none will work without a God.\" Pasteur\ndeclared in his address before the French Academy, when {13} admitted\nas a member, \"Blessed is the man who has an ideal of the virtues of\nthe Gospel and obeys it.\" He had once said, impatient at the\npretensions of pseudo-scientists: \"Posterity will one day laugh at the\nsublime foolishness of the modern materialistic philosophy. The more I\nstudy nature, the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator. I\npray while I am engaged at my work in the laboratory.\"\n\nKepler, the great astronomer to whom we owe so many significant basic\ndiscoveries, once said:\n\n  \"The day is near at hand when one shall know the truth in the book\n  of nature as in the Holy Scriptures, and when one shall rejoice in\n  the harmony of both revelations.\"\n\nSir Isaac Newton, whose modesty was equaled only by the magnitude of\nhis discoveries, was so impressed with his own littleness in the\ncontemplation of the wonderful works of God that he declared, a short\ntime before his death, \"I seem to have been only like a boy playing on\nthe seashore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother\npebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, while the great ocean of\ntruth lay all undiscovered before me.\"\n\nDumas, the great French chemist, for many years the secretary of the\nFrench Academy of Sciences, once suggested the great difference there\nis in the matter of religious belief between the original worker in\nscience and those who know their science only at second-hand. Those\nwho have acquired their knowledge of science easily have no idea of\nthe difficulties which the original investigator had to encounter and\nhow deep are the mysteries which he knows lie all around him. The\nsecond-hand scientist becomes conceited over his {14} knowledge, but\nthe original investigator becomes humble. Dumas said:\n\n  \"People who only exploit the discoveries of others, and who never\n  make any themselves, greatly exaggerate their importance, because\n  they have never run against the mysteries of science which have\n  checked real savants. Hence their irreligion and their infatuation.\n  It is quite different with people who have made discoveries\n  themselves. They know by experience how limited their field is, and\n  they find themselves at every step arrested by the incomprehensible.\n  Hence their religion and their modesty. Faith and respect for\n  mysteries is easy for them. The more progress they make in science,\n  the more they are confounded by the infinite.\"\n\nProfessor P. G. Tait, professor of natural philosophy at Edinburgh\nUniversity for the last forty years of the nineteenth century, and who\nwas the co-author with Lord Kelvin of Thomson's and Tait's \"Natural\nPhilosophy\" (the well-known T+T) summed up the question of the\nsupposed conflict of religion and science rather strikingly and in a\nway that makes it easy to comprehend many modern misunderstandings. He\nsaid:\n\n  \"The assumed incompatibility of Religion and Science has been so\n  often confidently asserted in recent times that it has come to be\n  taken for granted by writers of leading articles, etc., and it is,\n  of course, perpetually thrust by them broadcast before their too\n  trusting readers.\n\n  \"But the whole thing is a mistake, and a mistake so grave that no\n  true scientific man (unless indeed he be literally a\n  specialist--such as a pure mathematician, or a mycologist or\n  entomologist) runs, in Britain at least, the smallest risk of making\n  it.\n\n  \"When we ask of any competent authority who are the {15} 'advanced',\n  the best, and the ablest scientific thinkers of the immediate past\n  (in Britain), we cannot but receive for answer such names as\n  Brewster, Faraday, Forbes, Graham, Rowan Hamilton, Herschel, and\n  Talbot. This must be the case unless we use the word 'science' in a\n  perverted sense. Which of these great men gave up the idea that\n  Nature evidences a Designing Mind?\"\n\nLord Rayleigh, the physicist and mathematician, professor of\nexperimental physics at Cambridge and then Tyndall's successor as\nprofessor of natural philosophy at the Royal Institution, who, after\nhaving been secretary of the Royal Society for some ten years, was\nelected to what has been called the highest official position in the\nscientific world--the presidency of the Royal Society--wrote in\nanswer to a question:  [Footnote 2] \"I am not able to write you at\nlength, but I may say that in my opinion true Science and true\nReligion neither are nor could be opposed.\n\n\"A large number of 'leading scientists' are not irreligious or\nanti-Christian. Witness: Faraday, Maxwell, Stokes, Kelvin, and a large\nnumber of others less distinguished.\"\n\n  [Footnote 2: I owe this and a number of other quotations in this\n  chapter to Tabrum \"Religious Beliefs of Scientists,\" London, 1911.]\n\nPractically all the men whose names are connected with the evolution\nof electricity in the nineteenth century were thorough-going believers\nin revealed religion. Galvani, Volta, Coulomb, Ohm, Ampere, Oersted,\nFaraday, Sir Humphry Davy, and many others are among the believers.\nFaraday once declared when the dark shadow of death was creeping over\nhim, \"I bow before Him who is the Lord of all, and hope to be kept\nwaiting patiently for His time and mode of releasing me, {16}\naccording to His divine word and the great and precious promises\nwhereby His people are made partakers of the divine nature.\"\n\nEarlier in life, in the very maturity of the intellectual powers which\nmade him immortal in science, lest perhaps some one should suggest\nthat he had lost his mental grasp toward the end, he said: \"When I\nconsider the multitude of associate forces which are diffused through\nnature; when I think of that calm and tranquil balancing of their\nenergies which enables elements, most powerful in themselves, most\ndestructive to the world's creatures and economy, to dwell associated\ntogether and be made subservient to the wants of creation, I rise from\nthe contemplation more than ever impressed with the wisdom, the\nbeneficence, and grandeur beyond our language to express, of the Great\nDisposer of all!\"\n\nIt would be easy to multiply quotations such as this from the great\noriginal workers in modern electricity. Hans Christian Oersted, for\ninstance, the great Danish scientist, to whom we owe the discovery of\nthe \"magnetic effect\" of the electric current, the demonstration of\nthe intimate relationship between magnetism and electricity, whose\nname all Europe rang with in the early part of the nineteenth century,\nwas a man of really great genius and scientific penetration and yet of\ndeeply fervent piety. He did not hesitate to say that genuine\nknowledge of science necessarily produced a feeling of religious piety\ntowards the Creator. Lord Kelvin once quoted some words of his in this\nregard on a memorable occasion, which are particularly to our purpose\nhere:\n\n  \"If my purpose here was merely to show that science necessarily\n  engenders piety, I should appeal to the great truth everywhere\n  recognized, that the essence of all {17} religion consists in love\n  toward God. The conclusion would then be easy, that love of Him from\n  whom all truth proceeds must create the desire to acknowledge truth\n  in all her paths; but as we desire here to recognize science herself\n  as a religious duty, it will be requisite for us to penetrate deeper\n  into its nature. It is obvious, therefore, that the searching eye of\n  man, whether he regards his own inward being or the creation\n  surrounding him, is always led to the eternal source of all things.\n  In all inquiry, the ultimate aim is to discover that which really\n  exists and to contemplate it in its pure light apart from all that\n  deceives the careless observer by only a seeming existence. The\n  philosopher will then comprehend what, amidst ceaseless change, is\n  the Constant and Uncreated, which is hidden behind unnumbered\n  creations, the bond of union which keeps things together in spite of\n  their manifold divisions and separations. He must soon acknowledge\n  that the independent can only be the constant and the constant the\n  independent, and that true unity is inseparable from either of\n  these. And thus it is in the nature of thought that it finds no\n  quiet resting place, no pause, except in the invariable, eternal,\n  uncaused, all causing, all comprehensive Omniscience.\n\n  \"But, if this one-sided view does not satisfy him, if he seeks to\n  examine the world with the eye of experience, he perceives that all\n  those things of whose reality the multitude feels most assured never\n  have an enduring existence, but are always on the road between birth\n  and death. If he now properly comprehends the whole array of nature,\n  he perceives that it is not merely an idea of an abstract notion, as\n  it is called; but that reason and the power to which everything is\n  indebted for its essential nature are only the revelation of a\n  self-sustained Being. How can {18} he, when he sees this, be\n  otherwise animated than by the deepest feeling of humility, of\n  devotion and of love? If any one has learned a different lesson from\n  his observation of nature, it could only be because he lost his way\n  amidst the dispersion and variety of creation and had not looked\n  upwards to the eternal unity of truth.\"\n\nThe great contemporary and colleague of Oersted in the demonstration\nof the intimate relations between magnetism and electricity who was\nquite as outspoken as the Danish scientist in his recognition of the\nrelations of science and religion, was the Frenchman Ampere, whose\nname was chosen as a term for one of the units of electrical science,\nbecause of his great original work in extending our knowledge of\nelectricity. This choice of his name was made by an international\ncongress of scientists who felt that he deserved this very great\nhonor. Ozanam, to whose thoroughly practical Christianity while he was\nprofessor of foreign literatures at the University of Paris we owe the\nfoundation of the Conferences of St. Vincent de Paul, which so long\nanticipated the \"settlement work\" of the modern time and have done so\nmuch for the poor in large cities ever since, who was very close to\nAmpere and indeed lived with him for a while, said that, no matter\nwhere conversations with him began, they always led up to God. The\ngreat French scientist and philosopher used to take his broad forehead\nbetween his hands after he had been discussing some specially deep\nquestion of science or philosophy and say: \"How great is God, Ozanam;\nHow great is God and how little is our knowledge.\" Of course this has\nbeen the feeling of most profound thinkers at all times. St.\nAugustine's famous vision of the angel standing by the sea emptying it\nout with a teaspoon, which has been rendered so living {19} for most\nof us by Botticelli's great picture, is but an earlier example of the\nsame thing. One of Ampere's greatest contemporaries, Laplace, reechoed\nthe same sentiment, perhaps in less striking terms, when he declared\nthat \"What we know is but little; while what we do not know is\ninfinite.\"\n\nWriting of Ampere after his death Ozanam, who knew him best, brought\nout this extremely interesting union of intellectual qualities, his\nscience, his faith, his charity to the poor which was proverbial, and\nthe charming geniality of his character, as well as his manifold human\ninterests, in a passage that serves very well to sum up the meaning of\nthe great Frenchman's life.\n\n  \"In addition to his scientific achievements this brilliant genius\n  has other claims upon our admiration and affection.... It was\n  religion which guided the labors of his mind and illuminated his\n  contemplations; he judged all things, science itself, by the exalted\n  standard of religion.... This venerable head which was crowned by\n  achievements and honors, bowed without reserve before the mysteries\n  of faith, down even below the line which the Church has marked for\n  us. He prayed before the same altars before which Descartes and\n  Pascal had knelt; beside the poor widow and the small child who may\n  have been less humble in mind than he was. Nobody observed the\n  regulations of the Church more conscientiously, regulations which\n  are so hard on nature and yet so sweet in the habit. Above all\n  things, however, it is beautiful to see what sublime things\n  Christianity wrought in his great soul; this admirable simplicity,\n  the unassumingness of a mind that recognized everything except its\n  own genius; this high rectitude in matters of science, now so rare,\n  seeking nothing but the truth and never {20} rewards and\n  distinction; the pleasant and ungrudging amiability; and lastly, the\n  kindness with which he met every one, especially young people. I can\n  say that those who know only the intelligence of the man, know only\n  the less perfect part. If he thought much, he loved more.\"\n\nOhm, after whom another of the units of electricity is named, was\nanother of the scientists who realized very clearly the existence of\nProvidence and in one very disappointing circumstance in life, when he\nfound that some of his work at which he had spent much time was\ncompletely anticipated by a Norwegian investigator, he said very\nsimply, \"Man proposes but God disposes\"; and he chronicled the fact\nthat without the bait of this discovery which he vaguely foresaw at\nthe beginning he would not have taken up the work, and yet during the\ntime when he was at it \"A number of things of which I had no hint at\nall at the beginning of my researches have come to take the place of\nmy original purpose and compensate for it.\" When he undertook his next\nwork he foresaw that he might not be able to finish it; he had hoped\nagainst hope that he would, and in the preface to the first volume he\ndeclared that he would devote himself to it at every possible\nopportunity and that he hoped and prayed that \"God would spare him to\ncomplete it.\" This simplicity of confidence in the Almighty is indeed\na striking characteristic of the man of whose discovery of the law of\nelectricity Lord Kelvin declared that it was such an extremely simple\nexpression of a great truth that its significance is probably not\nconfined to that department of physical phenomena, but it is a law of\nnature in some much broader way. Professor George Chrystal of\nEdinburgh in his article on electricity in the \"Encyclopaedia\nBritannica\" (IX Edition) says that {21} Ohm's law must now be allowed\nto rank with the law of gravitation and the elementary laws of\nstatical electricity as a _law of nature_ in the strictest sense.\n\nVolta, whom the international congress of electricity so deservedly\nhonored by giving his name to one of the units of electricity, is the\ngenius who first constructed an instrument which would give a\ncontinuous flow of electricity. The Voltaic pile is a very great\ninvention. Volta was much more, however, than merely an ingenious\ninventor. He was a great scientist who made discoveries not only in\nelectricity but in various other branches of physical science. He was\none of the eight foreign members of the French Institute, Knight\nCommander of the Legion of Honor, one of the first members of the\nItalian Academy and the gold medalist of the French Academy. There was\nnothing he touched in his work that he did not illuminate.\n\nHis was typically the mind of the genius, ever reaching out beyond the\nboundaries of the known,--an abundant source of leading and light for\nothers. Far from being a doubter in matters religious, his scientific\ngreatness seemed only to make him readier to submit to what are\nsometimes spoken of as the shackles of faith, though to him belief\nappealed as a completion of knowledge of things beyond the domain of\nsense or the ordinary powers of intellectual acquisition.\n\nIn Volta's time as in our own some of the less important workers in\nscience had their faith disturbed by their knowledge of science and\nattributed that result to science rather than to the limitations of\ntheir own minds. One of them declared that though Volta continued to\npractice his religion, this was more because he did not want to offend\nfriends and did not care to scandalize his {22} neighbors and\nespecially the poor folk around him in his country home, whom he did\nnot want to be led by his example into giving up what he knew to be\nthe most fruitful source of consolation in the trials of life, rather\nthan because of sincere conviction. Volta, having heard this report,\ndeliberately wrote out his confession of faith, so that all the world\nof his own and the after time might know it. When he wrote it he was\njust approaching his sixtieth year and was in the full maturity of his\npowers. He lived for twelve years afterwards, looked up to as one of\nthe great thinkers of Europe and as one of the most important men of\nItaly in his time.\n\n  \"If some of my faults and negligences may have by chance given\n  occasion to some one to suspect me of infidelity, I am ready, as\n  some reparation for this and for any other good purpose, to declare\n  to such a one and to every other person and on every occasion and\n  under all circumstances that I have always held, and hold now, the\n  Holy Catholic Religion as the only true and infallible one, thanking\n  without end the good God for having gifted me with such a faith, in\n  which I firmly propose to live and die, in the lively hope of\n  attaining eternal life. I recognize my faith as a gift of God, a\n  supernatural faith. I have not, on this account, however, neglected\n  to use all human means that could confirm me more and more in it and\n  that might drive away any doubt which could arise to tempt me in\n  matters of faith. I have studied my faith with attention as to its\n  foundations, reading for this purpose books of apologetics as well\n  as those written with a contrary purpose, and trying to appreciate\n  the arguments pro and contra. I have tried to realize from what\n  sources spring the strongest arguments which render faith most\n  credible to natural reason and such as cannot fail to make {23}\n  every well-balanced mind which has not been perverted by vice or\n  passion embrace it and love it. May this protest of mine, which I\n  have deliberately drawn up and which I leave to posterity,\n  subscribed with my own hand and which shows to all and every one\n  that I do not blush at the Gospel--may it, as I have said, produce\n  some good fruit.\n\n    \"Signed at Milan, January 6, 1815, Alessandro Volta.\"\n\nSilvio Pellico, whose volume, \"My Ten Years' Imprisonment\", is one of\nthe precious little books of literature that seem destined to enduring\ninterest, had doubted in the midst of his trials and hardships the\npresence of Providence in the world and the existence of a hereafter.\nIn the midst of his doubts he turned to Volta.\n\n\"In thy old age, O Volta!\" said Pellico, \"the hand of Providence\nplaced in thy pathway a young man gone astray. 'Oh! thou,' said I to\nthe ancient seer, 'who hast plunged deeper than others into the\nsecrets of the Creator, teach me the road that will lead me to the\nlight.' And the old man made answer: 'I too have doubted, but I have\nsought. The great scandal of my youth was to behold the teachers of\nthose days lay hold of science to combat religion. For me to-day I see\nonly God everywhere.'\"\n\nIn spite of traditions to the contrary great physicians in their\nrelation to faith are like the great discoverers in electricity. As a\nrule the greater they are as original workers in the medical sciences\nthe more emphatic their expressions of their belief in religion and\nits efficacy in the relief of human ills. The opinions of a few of our\ngreatest physicians in the modern era of medicine are quoted here as\nexamples of their attitude of mind.\n\nSir Richard Owen, probably the greatest anatomist of {24} the\nnineteenth century, was a convinced Christian and saw nothing in\nscientific truth inimical to the Christian faith. In an address before\nthe Young Men's Christian Association, he asked his \"fellow\nChristians\":\n\n  \"Has aught that is essentially Christian suffered--have its truths\n  ceased to spread and operate in mankind--since physical doctrines,\n  supposed or 'declared contrary to Holy Writ', have been established?\n\n  \"Allay, then, your fears, and trust in the Author of all truth, who\n  has decreed that it shall never perish; who has given a power to man\n  to acquire that most precious of his possessions with an\n  intellectual nature that will ultimately rest upon due demonstrative\n  evidence.\"\n\nSir James Paget, sometime president of the Royal College of Surgeons\nof England and vice-chancellor of London University, looked upon as\none of the most distinguished of medical scientists in his time, after\nwhom a special disease described by him has been named, in answer to\nthe question as to the attitude of scientists toward religion said:\n\"You will find among scientific men very few who attack either\ntheology or religion. The attacks imputed to them are made, for the\nmost part, by those who, with a very scanty knowledge of science, use,\nnot its facts, but its most distant inferences, as they do whatever\nelse they can get from any source, for the overthrow of religious\nbeliefs.\"\n\nSir Samuel Wilks, another of the presidents of the Royal College of\nPhysicians and distinguished in many other ways among the physicians\nof Great Britain, in his Harveian Oration expressed himself very\ndefinitely in this matter of the relations of science and religion,\nand his quotation from our own Oliver Wendell Holmes adds to the\ninterest of what he has to say.\n\n{25}\n\n  \"Hear what a learned professor of anatomy, Wendell Holmes, can say:\n  'Science represents the thought of God discovered by man; by\n  learning the natural laws he attaches effects to their first cause,\n  the will of the Creator', or in the poetic language of Goethe:\n  'Nature is the living garment of God.'\n\n  \"Science conducts us through infinite paths; it is a fruitful\n  pursuit for the most poetic imagination. We take the world as we\n  find it and endeavor to unravel its mysteries; but the Alpha and\n  Omega we know not. Enough for us to look at what is lying around us;\n  it is a part we see and not the whole, but we can say with the poet,\n  'We doubt not, through the ages one increasing purpose runs.'\"\n\nProfessor Sims Woodhead, well known as one of the distinguished\ncontributors to pathology in the nineteenth century and who was,\nbefore being professor of pathology at Cambridge the director of the\nLaboratories of the Conjoint Board of the Royal College of Physicians\n(London) and Surgeons (England) may very well be taken as a\nrepresentative of the medical scientists of the last generation of the\nnineteenth century. It has been said that where there are three\nphysicians there are two atheists, and perhaps this may be true among\nthe smaller fry of the profession, but it certainly is not among the\nmost distinguished members of it. Such men as Pasteur, Lord Lister,\nRobert Graves, Corrigan, Laennec, Claude Bernard, Johannes Mueller, are\nthe outspoken contradiction of it. Pathology and anatomy, in both of\nwhich subjects Professor Woodhead was a teacher, are often said to be\nrather serious in their inroads on the faith of the men who pursue\nthem closely. Professor Woodhead is on record categorically with\nregard to this subject of {26} the relations of the Bible and\nreligion, and science and religion, and his words are well worth while\nquoting here.\n\n  \"As regards the statement that 'recent scientific research has shown\n  the Bible and Religion to be untrue', nothing is further from the\n  real fact; the more the Bible is tested the more it is found to be\n  made up of historical documents. Moreover, it is recognized that the\n  Bible, as a record of truths, never falls foul of Science in its\n  search after truth, and scientific men are too true to themselves to\n  take the stand that they will not accept truth of any kind.\n\n  \"I agree with you that certain theories put forward in the name of\n  Science may be opposed to certain theological dogmas; but men are\n  certainly coming to see that between the facts of Science and the\n  essential teachings of the Christian religion there is never any\n  real opposition; and by the 'Christian Religion' I mean the religion\n  of Christ, not what some people have wished to read into it; and by\n  'science' I mean a search for truth and knowledge, and by 'men of\n  science' I mean men engaged in that search.\"\n\nProfessor John W. Taylor, one of the distinguished physicians of Great\nBritain and president of the British Gynecological Society, summed up\nthe answer to the question \"Can We Still Believe?\" in words that show\nhow devout a great medical scientist can be:\n\n\"What can we 'hold by' as Christians? We can hold by the Faith of the\nearly Apostles as enunciated in the Apostles' and the Nicene Creeds,\nand plainly foreshadowed in 1 Cor. xv. This was written within thirty\nyears of our Lord's crucifixion and must have been 'received' by St.\nPaul immediately on his conversion.\" Any one who will turn to that\nchapter of First Corinthians will {27} find that it contains all the\nessentials of Christian faith, yet here is a great modern physician\nfinding in it the expression of his own mental attitude toward\nreligion in our time.\n\nBiologists, in spite of popular impressions to the contrary, have\nparalleled physicians in this regard. To cite but one or two:\n\nProfessor George Romanes, who was considered not alone one of the\nleaders of scientific thought in England, but one of the foremost\nnaturalists of modern times, after expressions as a younger man that\nshowed his deep and even devout belief in religion, wrote somewhat\nlater a defense of atheism on scientific grounds. Some years\nafterwards, in the maturity of his powers, he prepared a\nthorough-going recantation of this in the shape of a work designed to\nshow the fallacy of his former atheistic views, in which he said:\n\n  \"It is a general, if not a universal rule that those who reject\n  Christianity with contempt are those who care not for religion of\n  any kind. 'Depart from me' has always been the sentiment of such. On\n  the other hand, those in whom the religious sentiment is intact, but\n  who have rejected Christianity on intellectual grounds, still almost\n  deify Christ. These facts are remarkable.\"\n\n  \"Unbelief,\" Professor Romanes concluded, \"is usually due to\n  indolence, often to prejudice, and never a thing to be proud of.\"\n\nIn every department of science one finds the representatives of the\nvarious branches of scientific study in harmony on this subject of\nreligion and science. Professor George Boulger, whose work has been\nmainly done in botany and who was a fellow of a number of the\nscientific societies of England and vice-president of the Selborne\n{28} Society, has some very direct expressions in the matter that add\nto the significance of what has been said by others.\n\n  \"In philosophy, in physics, and in astronomy I am content to place\n  myself on the side of Bacon, of Newton, of Napoleon. I believe, with\n  Bacon, that 'a little Philosophy inclineth Man's Minde to Atheisme;\n  but depth in Philosophy bringeth Men's Mindes about to Religion.'\n  With Newton I am content to 'seem to have been only like a boy\n  playing on the seashore, and diverting myself in now and then\n  finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst\n  the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.' With\n  Napoleon--not a man of science but a man of the world, a man of\n  action--I would say to our neo-Epicureans as he did to his sceptical\n  officers, pointing to the stars, 'Gentlemen, you may talk all night,\n  but who made all these?'\"\n\nHe recognized how many difficulties there might be for the scientist,\nbut felt, as Cardinal Newman once said, that hundreds of difficulties\nmay not make a single doubt. Professor Boulger has dealt with some of\nthese cruder difficulties with trenchant directness.\n\n  \"I am perfectly aware of the temptation of the physiological\n  laboratory, when one is face to face with the facts of the\n  localisation of brain-functions and the influence of purely physical\n  conditions upon mentality, until one is almost led to Buchner's\n  gross misstatement that 'the brain secretes thought as the liver\n  secretes bile'; but here, as ever, it is at the very base of the\n  problem that the unsolved mystery shows itself insoluble. Force,\n  Matter, Life, Thought, Will,--what are they, whence come they?\n  Science deals with their phenomena, their manifestations. With John\n  Ray I would term the study of nature a pious duty, one suited to a\n  Sabbath day and not {29} improbably one of the main occupations of\n  the endless Sabbaths hereafter.... But true science will never\n  presume to say that it can deal with anything beyond these\n  phenomena. As I am as convinced that the Christian Faith is a Divine\n  revelation as I am that 'Nature' is the creation of the Divine First\n  Cause, it is, of course, to me unthinkable that there could be any\n  conflict between them.\"\n\nNot only the scientists themselves but the philosophic students of the\nwhole range of modern thought who took the information imparted by the\nspecialists and coordinated it for the purpose of finding the\nphilosophic conclusions to be drawn from it all as to man's life and\ndestiny and the meaning of it all have recognized the place of\nreligion in Life and its significance for humanity.\n\nMr. Frederic Harrison, the well-known English apostle of Comte, whose\nPositivism might possibly have been expected to lead him away from\nsuch ideas, did not hesitate in the midst of that wave of skepticism\nwhich spread over Europe shortly after the \"silly seventies\" when so\nmany even of the well-informed thought that natural selection was\ngoing to explain everything for us and solve all the mysteries, to\nutter some very strong words on the subject that well deserve to be\nrecalled. In his book, \"The Creed of a  Layman,\" he said, for\ninstance:\n\n  \"I believe that before all things, needful beyond all else, is true\n  religion. This only can give wisdom, happiness and goodness to men\n  and a nobler life to mankind. Nothing but this can sustain, guide\n  and satisfy all lives, control all characters and unite all men.\n  True religion must rule in every heart, brain and will, over every\n  people of the whole earth; inspire every thought, hallow every\n  emotion and be the guide of every act.\"\n\n{30}\n\nAnd by what he termed the true religion Mr. Harrison did not mean\nmerely some vague deism or some shadowy belief in a vaguer power that\nmade for righteousness, but a very definite personal relationship to a\npersonal God who was not only to be looked up to and reverenced but\nwho was to be loved.\n\n  \"The paramount importance to Man of Religion--at once dominant over\n  brain and heart--a living reality and working power--the necessity\n  for this has not only never left me at any time but year by year has\n  grown deeper as a conviction and more familiar as a rule of life.\n  But as the indispensable need of true religion grew stronger in my\n  mind, I more and more came to feel that religion would end in vague\n  sentimentality unless it has an object of devotion distinctly\n  grasped by the intellect and able to kindle ardent emotions. The\n  nature--if not the name--of the Supreme Being is in truth decisive.\n  Unless the Supreme Power be felt to be in sympathy with the\n  believer, be akin to the believer, be in active touch with his life\n  and heart, such a religion is merely a dogma; it cannot be a guide\n  of life in the spring of action--the object of love.\"\n\nAgnosticism, so fashionable in educational circles at the end of the\nnineteenth century, has practically disappeared, or at least has\nsuffered such an eclipse that its adherents are comparatively few.\nThere was a time in the generation that is still alive when a great\nmany educators who felt that they were the leaders of thought in our\ntime were quite sure that agnosticism would be the only mode of\nintellectual reaction which the educated man could possibly think of\nallowing to take place in him by the time the year of grace 1920 had\ncome. Instead agnosticism, like so many other movements of similar\n{31} kind founded on human thinking, in accord with the fashion of the\nmoment, has dwindled into insignificance. Fortunately there were some\neducators who even twenty-five years ago recognized the real portent\nof it and stated their opinions so emphatically as to keep the\neducational world of their time from being entirely run away with.\nPresident Schurman of Cornell said:\n\n  \"Agnosticism is the apotheosis of skepticism. It is skepticism as a\n  creed, as a system, as an ultimate resting-place. Those who proclaim\n  it strangely misread the processes and the conditions of our\n  spiritual life. _They make the aimless gropings of the youthful\n  intellect an ideal for the thinking of mature men_. Only, instead of\n  the awful earnestness of the inquiring youth, they often affect an\n  indifference to the great problems which oppress him. As though we\n  could be indifferent to the highest interests of the human spirit!\n  So long as life lasts, so long must we strive to grasp the ultimate\n  truth of things. To shut our eyes to problems is an ostrich policy.\n  Man is called by an inner voice to strive, and strive, and strive,\n  and not to yield. Agnosticism would eradicate this noble endeavor.\n  Its only justification, so far as I can see, is that men never\n  attain the absolute truth, but only make successive approximations\n  to it.\"\n\nSuch men seem to forget the great lesson that the differential\ncalculus has taught us. It represents one of the greatest developments\nof modern mathematics. It does not solve problems by absolute\nsolutions but by such approximations as make the answer which cannot\nbe reached very clear. It has been of immense value in adding to the\nknowledge of mankind and in giving science particularly a command over\nprinciples that would otherwise seem impossible. Religion requires\n{32} faith to complete it. Knowledge can never more than approximate\nconclusions with regard to many religious questions. Such\napproximations, however, like the answers in differential calculus,\nrepresent real advances on the road to knowledge that are of great\nvalue in directing men toward what is best in life.\n\nMr. Frederic Harrison has answered this question \"Can We Still\nBelieve?\" by insisting that belief in the hereafter is the most\nprecious heritage that man has, to be fostered above all else. He\nsaid:\n\n  \"The great truth of a life beyond the grave is indeed one of the\n  best possessions of Man, the fondest of all noble, living and\n  working doctrines on earth. When Paul first preached it in that\n  sublime song of triumph over death, which has so often thrilled us\n  to the marrow as we stood round the coffined dead, he gave the human\n  race a new and imperishable hope to last while the planet\n  endures.... Let us cherish and hold fast this glad tiding of good\n  things.\"\n\nAny one who faces the question of religion seriously realizes that not\nonly it is not a thing of the past but that the rationalistic\ntendencies of the later nineteenth century have had their usual\ninevitable reaction emphasized by the Great War, so that men are\nreadier to be swayed by religious influences than ever before. The\nmore one studies the problems of health of mind and of body connected\nwith religion, and the strong factor that it is for the making of\ncharacter, the shaping of destiny and the cultivation of happiness,\nthe more one realizes the truth of Napoleon's expression that if\nreligion were to disappear we should have to reinvent it, because of\nthe immense benefit that it represents for mankind.\n\n\n{33}\n\nCHAPTER II\n\n\nPRAYER\n\n\nIn spite of a very prevalent impression in the matter, the\nall-important element of religion is not attendance at church or the\npublic exercise of religious functions, or even the joining in\nreligious celebrations, for all these may be accomplished by routine\nwithout an element of real devotion to the Creator in them. They may\neven be gone through with hypocritically while all the time one is\nthinking of merely worldly things, or even of the effect that one is\nproducing on others by the show of devotion, though with such slight\nadvertence as to make the devotions of extremely little value or even\na sort of insult to the Almighty if the negligent attitude of mind is\nassumed deliberately. Bodily participation in worship is a necessary\nadjunct of the expression of religious feeling, but it is of course of\njust so much less importance than the mental worship of the Creator as\nthe body is less important than the mind. Mental adoration of the\nDeity is accomplished through prayer, which is the all-important\npersonal element of religion.\n\nPrayer in the words of the old Christian teachers is \"A raising up of\nthe mind to God asking for help, begging for forgiveness for past\nerrors and thanking Him for all that He has done for us.\" Real prayer\nis no mere formula of words, and some very fervent prayers are made\nwithout being formulated into words at all. I remember {34} once\nsuggesting in a medical meeting that prayer was an extremely valuable\nadjunct to the treatment for certain milder forms of disturbed\nmentality and for the dreads and obsessions that haunt men and women,\nthat is, in general for that very important class of diseases which in\nour day are grouped under the term psychoneuroses. A physician friend,\nin discussing the suggestion, said that no words that he knew would\ndispel or be of the slightest help in any of these conditions as they\ncame under his observation. Prayer is not, however, a formula of\nwords, but an act of the mind and the heart and the will, for to be\ngenuine, it should contain acknowledgment, affection and resolve. My\ncolleague's failure to appreciate the true meaning of prayer and his\napparent persuasion that the words were the all-important element in\nprayer are not surprising, for rather frequently it happens that the\npersonal experience of the professional classes as to prayer is not\ncalculated to be really enlightening.\n\nProfessor James confesses that unfortunately comparatively few\neducated people have the real power of prayer; those who have,\nhowever, possess a magnificent source of renewed energy that can be of\nthe greatest possible service to them. He says:\n\n  \"Relatively few medical men and scientific men, I fancy, can pray.\n  Few can carry on any living commerce with 'God.' Yet many of us are\n  well aware of how much freer and abler our lives would be, were such\n  important forms of energizing not sealed up by the critical\n  atmosphere in which we have been reared. There are in every one\n  potential forms of activity that actually are shunted out from use.\n  Part of the imperfect vitality under which we labor can thus be\n  easily explained. One part of our mind dams up--even _damns_\n  up!--the other parts.\"\n\n{35}\n\nManifestly the well-known professor of psychology envied those who\nlived lives of prayer and felt that he was missing something in life\nfrom not possessing the developed faculty to enjoy their privileges.\nLike so many other of the good things of life, prayer, to be really\nefficient for all the good it can produce, must be a habit and must be\npracticed as a rule from very early years. Otherwise it is hard to\nmake it such a factor in living as is significant for the best, and\nprofessional men commonly have not given enough time to the practice\nin their earlier years to make it of potency when it may be needed.\n\nIt is of course not long vocal prayers--though many people find not\nonly consolation, but strength for their work and the added capacity\nto bear their trials in these--but the frequent raising up of the\nheart and mind to the Power above us, striving to put our intentions\nin line with His in the hope to do our work so that it will not be\nunworthy of the best aspirations that He has put in our hearts, that\ncounts. Many of the saints have suggested that all our work should be\na prayer begun with the right intention, pursued, no matter how\ndifficult it may be, with the feeling that this is what we ought to do\nhere and now, and finished with the offering of it to the Creator who\nhas lent us the energy to accomplish it. _Ora et Labora_, pray and\nwork, was the motto which Benedict, who revolutionized the social\nconditions of Europe by bringing back the dignity of labor and lifting\nmen's minds out of the rut of the cult of their bodies, into which\nthey had fallen at the close of the Roman Empire, gave to the members\nof his order. It was really not two things but one that he meant. What\nhis sons accomplished as the result of his great motto we are only\njust beginning to recognize. They saved the old {36} classics for us,\nkept the torch of education burning when barbarism might have quenched\nit, passed it on to the new generation, yet at the same time saved and\ndeveloped agriculture so that, as President Goodell of the\nMassachusetts Agricultural College said, they made some of the best\nagricultural schools, in the best sense of that term, that have ever\nbeen made, and organized health and happiness for the country people\nas they have never been made possible before or since, except in the\nvery modern time.\n\nIn the chapter on longevity there are some statistics which might very\nwell and easily have been increased in numbers with regard to the\neffect of St. Benedict's foundation on the length of life that men\nhave lived. Even now, in the midst of all our improvement in\nsanitation which has so lowered the death rate among mankind, we find\nthat nearly fifteen hundred years after Benedict's work was first\nbegun, his direction to make life a compend of work and prayer is\nhaving its effect in prolonging existence for the followers of his\nrule to-day. He himself would probably have said that it was the\ncombination of these two that proved so effective in this important\nmatter of lengthening life. We find that people outside the\nmonasteries work enough, however, but fail to pray, so it would seem\nthat prayer is a particularly important factor for monastic longevity,\nat least. Length of life comes, however, from a healthy mind in a\nhealthy body, and nothing so conduces to the possession of a healthy\nmind as the habit of prayer, since it enables man to throw off to some\nextent at least--and the deeper the prayer habit the more it will do\nit--the solicitudes and anxieties with regard to the past and the\npresent and the future which disturb so many people. As Ignatius\nLoyola, the {37} wise founder of the Jesuits, said: \"Pray as if\neverything depended on God; work as if everything depended on you; but\nleave everything to the Almighty, for you might as well since His Will\nwill surely be accomplished anyhow.\"\n\nIt would be very easy to think that such habits of prayer in the midst\nof work would only be possible if the work that one was engaged at was\nnot very interesting or was not taken very seriously and was being\naccomplished in more or less of a routine. In particular many\nscientific students, and especially those who are interested in\npsychology, would probably feel quite sure that very great results\ncould not be accomplished in any important work if distractions of\nthis kind were allowed and above all encouraged.\n\nIt is interesting then to take some of the examples of men who are\nknown to have formed and maintained such habits and yet accomplished\nvery great work for mankind. The list might be made a very long one;\nwe shall mention only a few of the most distinguished. Almost in our\nown time Pasteur said, as we have already quoted: \"The more I study\nnature the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator. I pray\nwhile I am engaged at work in the laboratory.\" A distinguished\ncontemporary of his in France in his earlier years was Leverrier.\nThere is no doubt at all about his power of concentration; he is the\nscientist who discovered the planet Neptune by mathematics alone\nwithout the aid of a telescope. He constantly kept a crucifix in his\nobservatory and used to turn his eyes to it frequently for\nrecollection and then go on with his calculations. There is a\nwell-known picture of Vesalius, who so well deserves the title of\nFather of Modern Anatomy, at work in his {38} anatomical rooms with a\ncrucifix before him. The composition is founded on the tradition that\nthe great anatomist was a devout man who prayed as he worked. He made\na pilgrimage to the Holy Land in his older years in expiation for a\nfault committed.\n\nIn spite of traditions to the contrary, a great many of our scientists\nof the last two centuries whose work has meant most for modern\nmedicine have been men to whom prayer meant very much. There are\ntraditions of Morgagni, the distinguished father of modern pathology,\nas Virchow hailed him, which show that never a day passed without his\nraising his heart in prayer. Volta and Galvani, whose names have\nbecome so familiar in modern electricity, were both of them well known\nfor their devotion to the practice of daily religious duties. French\nscientists were not less devout. Laennec, a Breton by birth, lost none\nof the devoutness of his early years so characteristic of the Bretons\neven when he was in the midst of the great work which enabled him to\nwrite the greatest medical book in modern times. Ozanam has told us\nthat when he himself felt thoroughly discouraged and ready to think\nreligion something that any one who wanted to keep up with modern\nthought would have to give up, he wandered into a church, hoping that\nprayer might help him to dispel his doubts and difficulties and found\nthere praying before the altar devoutly his great professor of\nscience, Ampere.\n\nDeep thinkers, whether of scientific temper of mind or not, have\nrecognized the value of prayer. Vesalius' great contemporary,\nMichelangelo, who is perhaps the greatest intellectual and artistic\ngenius that the world has ever known--sculptor, architect, painter,\npoet, and unsurpassed in all these modes of human expression {39} at\ntheir highest--was another for whom his crucifix meant much and who\nfrequently turned to it. One of his greatest sonnets is dedicated to\nthe Crucified One. Of Leonardo da Vinci's private life we we know less, but\non his death bed he left a sum of money to be used to provide candles\nto burn before the altar of the little village church at which he had\nprayed as a boy, so that evidently something of that old fervor of\nspirit was his at the end. Leonardo da Vinci's mind was one of the\nmost acute in the whole history of mankind. He was a great painter,\nsculptor, architect, and also a great engineer, a great scientific\ndiscoverer, an inventor of all sorts of useful appliances and a\nveritable marvel of comprehensive appreciation of the significance of\neven the most obscure things. He is a founder in half a dozen\nsciences, paleontology, biology, anatomy, physics and mechanics, and\nnothing makes one feel the smallness of the ordinary man like reading\na sketch of Leonardo's achievements.\n\nOf course the clergymen scientists have been men of prayer, but few\npeople realize how many of them have made distinguished contributions\nto the domain of science. Poggendorf's \"Biographical Lexicon\" contains\nthe names of nearly a thousand clergymen who have made such\ncontributions to science as deserve that their fame should be thus\nenshrined among the scientists of history. One of the greatest\nastronomers of the nineteenth century was Father Secchi, a Jesuit,\nsome of whose work was done for a time in America. Among the most\ndistinguished names in modern science are Abbe Breuil and Father\nObermaier, who have taught the world so much about the cave man. Both\nof them are well known for their faithful performance of their\nreligious duties in the midst of their scientific work.\n\n{40}\n\nRaising up the heart and mind in the midst of work, instead of\nincreasing distractions, rather helps to control them. Distractions\nwill come and may prove seriously wasteful of time, but are caught in\nthe habit of lifting up the mind occasionally, and then the original\nwork is taken up with renewed energy. Above all, such a habit of\nprayer keeps people from getting into a state of irritable haste about\ntheir work in which they consume a lot of energy without getting much\ndone and wear out their nervous systems by the feeling of nervousness\nthat comes over them. To do anything under a sense of pressure is\nnearly always to disturb the best efforts of the mind and skimp the\nwork. Doing things in this way leads to that bane of modern existence,\nnervous breakdown, which has become ever so much commoner since men\nforgot that it is not labor for ourselves that counts so much as labor\nfor others, and that an over-anxiety to get things done for selfish\nreasons burns up nervous energy faster than anything else. Fussy,\nirritable effort to work gets on the nerves sooner than any amount of\ncalm effort would. Prayer as I have described would be the cure for\nit. St. Theresa's well-known prayer is the antidote.   [Footnote 3]\n\n  [Footnote 3:\n     Let nothing disturb thee,\n     Let nothing affright thee,\n     All things are passing,\n     God never changeth.\n     Who God possesseth\n     In nothing is wanting.\n     Alone God sufficeth.\n           (Longfellow translation.) ]\n\n\nWhen the life of the late Cardinal Vaughan of London appeared, one of\nthe most surprising things in it was the story of the distinguished\nEnglish Cardinal's habit of prayer. Almost needless to say he was an\nextremely busy man. Important problems in the administration {41} of\nhis immense archdiocese and in the relationship of the English\nCatholics to their fellow citizens came before him every day. He had\nto carry the heavy burden of responsibility and make his decisions\npromptly and thoroughly, for a great many details necessarily devolved\non him. Somehow he found time for hours of prayer during the day, and\nthose who knew him best felt sure he would have declared that so far\nfrom distracting him in his work or taking time from it in any real\nsense of the word, it would have been quite impossible for him to\naccomplish all he did without this habit of prayer. It was this which\nenabled him to keep a placid mind and make his decisions easily and\nfirmly in the midst of his work. He himself would undoubtedly have\nadded that he felt he actually derived help from the Infinite through\nprayer, which enabled him to do his work ever so much better than\nwould have been possible by his own unaided effort. There have been\nmany others, and not a few of them who were not churchmen, who have\nfelt this same way even in our strenuous times.\n\nA whole series of the generals in command of important departments of\nthe French army were men who never let a day pass without prayer and\nwho often raised their hearts and minds up to the Power above them for\nhelp in their work and also for resignation that the will of the Most\nHigh might be accomplished. General Pau, for instance, was one of\nthese. When, during the war, he was presented with flowers by the\nchildren of villages through which he passed, he would say, \"These\nmust be for the altar,\" and then he would ask the children to pray for\nthe success of the French army and would insist that for victory \"we\nmust pray very much.\" General de Castelnau was another of these men\nwho {42} found a resource and a real help in prayer. He felt that the\nprayers of others helped him. That is the index of real recognition of\nthe value of prayer. \"I beg you to implore Him especially to give me\nlight and courage; there is no position where one is more completely\nin His hands than that which I hold.\" He wrote to Monsignor Ricard,\nArchbishop of Auch, \"More than ever I find by experience the\nall-importance in war, as elsewhere, of the 'imponderables' and these\n'imponderables' are manifestly in His hands Who knows all and guides\nall.\"\n\nWe might go on with such examples. For instance, Marshal Petain, who\nat the end of the war was in command of the French troops, was another\nof these strong men of prayer. Earlier in the Great War he had been in\ncommand at Verdun, transferred there just as it seemed almost\nimpossible to believe that the Germans could be kept from taking the\nplace. The words of his first order issued the day of his\narrival--\"They shall not pass\"--show the character of the man. He was\nalmost reckless in his bravery when it was necessary to impress his\ntroops with the need to go on, no matter what it cost. Alone and on\nfoot he led his troops under a rain of German shells at Saint Bon;\nafter that he could ask anything of his men. General Gouraud, whose\nmasterly defense of the Allied line when the Germans made their great\nfinal unsuccessful attack stamps him as one of the greatest military\nleaders of the day, had been wounded a number of times before this,\nbut refused to give up, and when, early in the war, one of his arms\nhad to be amputated and the surgeons were afraid that he would object,\nhe said very simply, \"Go on, if you think it necessary; I offer it to\nGod for France.\" His recovery from his several wounds at that time\nseemed almost impossible, so in gratitude for it he {43} hung an\n_ex-voto_ in white marble at the shrine of Our Lady of Victories in\nParis. General Fayolle is another striking example of prayerfulness in\na practical man. He had intended to spend a year of his retirement,\nwhich came just before the war opened, in following the footsteps of\nSt. Paul's missionary voyages. He offered himself for service and\nproved a great leader, yet a simple, kindly man whom his soldiers\ncalled Pere Fayolle. A letter of his directed to the Mayor of Mainz\nshowed very clearly that while he remembered and realized all the\ncruelty of the German occupation of Belgium and France, there was no\nfear of reprisals from the French, just though they might be. He is a\nman of deep knowledge of his religion as well as of firm piety, and he\nis famous for his matter-of-fact common sense. He has all the\nqualities which some people, because they have had so little\nexperience in the matter, assume are not to be found in a man who\nbelieves thoroughly in and practices prayer.\n\nA good deal has been said in recent years about the practice of \"going\ninto the silence\" and finding there renewal of self. Like so many\nother new modes of expression, this is merely a new formula for that\nvery old religious custom, meditation, and some of the old writers on\nspiritual subjects, not only generations ago but actually many\nhundreds of years before modern history began, laid down the rules for\nit rather carefully. Meditation can be a source of some of the most\nvaluable suggestive, helpful consolation as well as profound\nenlightenment in difficult problems that human nature has. Above all\nit generates a calm that makes for peace of mind and, therefore,\nhealth of body. John Boyle O'Reilly recognized its deeper meanings a\ngeneration ago when he wrote:\n\n{44}\n\n  \"The infinite always is silent:\n  It is only the finite that speaks.\n  Our words are the idle wave-caps\n  On the deep that never breaks.\n  We may question with wand of science,\n  Explain, decide, and discuss;\n  But only in meditation\n  The Mystery speaks to us.\"\n\nMost of the religious orders, and it is in them particularly that the\neffect of religion on health and happiness and efficiency and increase\nof the power to achieve, under the influence of profoundly religious\nmotives, can be studied, require by rule that their members shall\nspend at least half an hour in meditation each morning; and with many\nof them, of course, an hour or more is required. They prepare for it\nthe night before by reading some passage in the life of Christ, or by\ntaking some special lesson from His teaching; the next morning they\nreflect how this can be exemplified in their own daily lives and\nproceed to make certain practical applications of it to the everyday\nconcerns with which they are occupied.\n\nIt is surprising how efficient in living up to their very best during\nthe day this makes a great many of the members. There are exceptions,\nof course, who fail to derive the proper benefit from the practice\nbecause they do not devote themselves to it with sufficient\nearnestness to secure its advantages, but most of them, as the result\nof this daily period of morning prayer, are rendered capable of going\nthrough a monotonous round of hard daily work and succeed in getting\nexcellent results and in keeping cheerful and light-hearted in the\nmidst of what might otherwise seem a very trivial mode of life. The\nmotives thus imparted to them often make even the trifles of life of\ngreat interest and significant import.\n\n{45}\n\nAs a result of their life of prayer, members of religious orders have\never so many less complaints than people who live under corresponding\ncircumstances, largely within doors amid a rather monotonous round of\nexistence. It is extremely rare to find religious devotees who \"enjoy\npoor health\" as so many of the laity do. Having less complaints they\nsuffer less from disease, for after all discomfort depends on two\nfactors,--one the irritation and the other the mode of its reception.\nAn irritable person will suffer tortures, though under the same\ncircumstances a placid, composed person will be but very little\ndisturbed. Whenever there is much reaction, there is always an\nincrease of the pain that has to be borne. Whenever much attention is\npaid to discomfort, the concentration of mind on it multiplies by the\nlaw of avalanche the number of cells in the brain affected, and this\nmultiplies the actual discomfort felt. A few thousand cells may be\naffected by a particular focus of irritation, but if all the other\ncells of the brain are concentrated on this sensation, each of them,\nand there are many millions of them, will share something at least of\nthe discomfort. Besides, concentration of attention sends more blood\nor rather opens the blood vessels in the irritated neighborhood\nsomewhat in the way that a blush opens them up on the cheeks, and this\nhyperemia increases the sensitiveness of the part. The individual,\nthen, who by the help of prayer lessens his complaints actually\nlessens his discomfort. To stand a thing patiently for a high motive\nactually makes the pain suffered less than it otherwise would be.\n\nWhen a man can look calmly forward to the future and say\nwholeheartedly, \"Thy Will be done on earth as it is in heaven,\" a\ngreat many things are easier to bear {46} because of the recognition\nof the fact that they are the will of a Providence who oversees\neverything that is being accomplished, and that somehow, somewhere,\nall is to be for the best. When men recall to themselves the words,\n\"Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors,\" or \"Forgive us our\ntrespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us,\" word it as\nyou will, they are reminded of how much they owe to the Father in\nheaven, and, therefore, how much they ought to be willing to pay back,\nnot only for what they have been given but also for all the failures\nthat they have made, to say nothing of serious faults. Suffering then\ncomes to have a real meaning that any one, even the least\nintellectual, can understand, and by that very fact it becomes easier\nto bear. I have often found that I could do a great deal for nervous\npatients by suggesting that they adopt some morning practice of\nprayer. Usually the best thing for my Catholic patients was to advise\nthem to go to Mass. For this they had to get up at a definite hour,\ndress promptly, and usually be some blocks away from home by eight\no'clock. Some such duty as this, requiring promptitude and taking the\nmind off oneself and the little troubles that often loom so large in\nthe morning, is an excellent thing for neurotic patients. The great\ncharacteristic of the neuroses is that they make people feel depressed\nwhen they first awake. They often feel tired and incapable and find it\nhard to begin the day well; and beginning the day well often means\nmore than anything else in dispelling nervous symptoms and dreads and\ninhibitions. Most nervous people realize that when they have to get up\npromptly at about seven o'clock, as for instance after a night on a\ntrain, they have almost none of the feelings of oppression that greet\ntheir arising {47} when they can turn over in bed and drowse a little\nlonger and let the troubles which have awakened ever so much more\npromptly than their incentives to do things soak in and take\npossession of them. To get up and accomplish a duty that gives some\nsatisfaction soon proves to be a wide-open gate of escape from these\nearly morning \"blue devils\" of which so many of the nervous complain\nso bitterly.\n\nThe differential diagnosis between merely nervous symptoms and the\nfeelings of tiredness and incapacity which come from organic disease\ncan often be made from the early morning symptoms. Nervous patients\nfeel their worst in the very early morning. They often wonder how they\nwill be able to get through the day without breaking down. After an\nhour or two they begin to feel somewhat better, though life still\nlooks blue enough. On towards ten o'clock they think that the sun may\nshine for them again. By noon, especially if they have done something\nin the meantime, they feel much better, and after their lunch in the\nearly afternoon they begin to be quite chipper; toward evening they\nusually are persuaded that after all life may be worth living, and by\nthe time they are ready to go to bed--and unfortunately they are\ntempted to put off going to bed until rather late because they do feel\nso well--they are inclined to wonder how it is possible that they felt\nso depressed in the morning. The sufferer from organic disease,\nhowever, always feels best in the early morning and begins to get\ntired toward noon; the evening is his time of least enjoyment, and he\nis quite ready to get to bed rather early. For the neurotic patient\nwaking to a sense of his troubles at once, nothing is better than a\nprompt lifting up of his mind to God to offer Him the new {48} day\nthat He has given, no matter how it may turn out, and a readiness to\ntake things as they come so that His will may be fulfilled.\n\nIn nervous patients one would almost have the feeling that their wills\ndid not wake up nearly so soon as their memories, or even quite so\nsoon as their intellects, such as they have. Their wills need to be\naroused. For men setting-up exercises of various kinds are\nparticularly valuable because the will has got to be used in doing\nthem; many a young soldier who during the war was waked up at the\nunearthly hour of five o'clock and had perforce to get out of bed,\nfound himself full of pains and aches not only of body, but of mind,\nand wondered how he could stand it. After ten minutes of setting-up\nexercises, with the blood coursing through his muscles and deep\nbreaths of outdoor air to oxygenate sluggish tissues, he felt like\nanother man. The days seemed nothing to endure then. For a good many\nnervous women the exercise of getting to church after prompt rising\nand dressing and then the occupation of mind with deep, serious\nthoughts of prayer, will do very much what the setting-up exercises\ndid for the young soldiers during the war. I have tried this so often\non patients that I know whereof I speak, and I can think of nothing\nthat does them more good than to have some such enlivening incident\nthat satisfies their hearts and minds and starts them at once doing\nsomething that will help them throw off the fear thoughts so prone to\ncrowd in.\n\nIt is surprising often to learn what things are accomplished by people\nwho find an unfailing resource for their powers physical and mental in\nprayer. I had the privilege of knowing a frail little woman whose life\nseemed to be one long prayer, so entirely was every {49} action guided\nby what she felt God would like her to do at any particular time; and\nduring very nearly sixty years she directed the destinies of a\ncommunity of women who did more for the charities and education of an\nimportant State than any other single factor that I know. She\norganized hospitals, multiplied schools, built homes for the care of\norphans, established an academy with excellent standards in the days\nwhen educational criteria were low, and put a climax to her work by\nbuilding a college for women in which hundreds of young women are now\nbeing educated in the best sense of that word,--that is, not only\nhaving their minds stuffed with knowledge, but having their thinking\npowers aroused and, in Huxley's expressive phrase, having their\n\"passions trained to come to heel by a vigorous will, the servant of a\ntender conscience.\" I am sure that Huxley's further words might be\nused of the graduates,--that they have \"learned to love all beauty,\nwhether of nature or of art, to hate all vileness and respect others\nas themselves.\" The little woman who did all this, frail little thing\nshe often seemed, would have said, I feel certain, that she derived\nthe energy to do it all from prayer.\n\nSome years ago I wrote a sketch of another one of these women of\nprayer, a little Italian noblewoman who, touched by the condition of\nthe poor Italians in America--only by America she meant both\nAmericas--came over here to help them. She organized Columbus\nhospitals in New York, Chicago, Seattle and Denver. She established\nliterally hundreds of schools. She gathered around her a band of\nseveral thousand young women who devoted themselves to the\naccomplishment of anything and everything that would help the Italians\nin this country. They were not all Italians themselves, but they were\nwon to {50} the work by the ardent enthusiasm and the marvelously\ncharming personality of this little woman. The United States would\nseem to be field large enough for her zeal or for that of any one, but\nshe did not think so, so she went down to South America and organized\nto similar good purpose down there, having herself carried on one\noccasion across the Cordilleras in a hamper on mule-back. It seemed\nalmost impossible that any one could have all the energy that she had\nand the initiative, and yet with it charming tact, winning ways and\nthe prudence that enabled her to find her path in some of the most\ndifficult circumstances. She said over and over again that she owed\nher power to prayer. Many times when she was told that she must rest,\nshe just prayed and went on.\n\nSometimes the stories of these old-fashioned, prayerful women of our\ntime will be told properly. They hid themselves from publicity as\nsedulously as most people seek it. I think it one of the most precious\nprivileges of life to have known a score of such women, East and West.\nSome of them actually seemed to achieve the impossible and even\nventured to get up from sick beds to do what they felt they must do,\nyet they pushed through successfully. Not infrequently they had to\nstand all sorts of hardships. Over and over again I have heard the\nstory of pioneer work in the midst of privations that would surely\nseem must break down health; yet many of these women lived to be well\nbeyond seventy and sometimes even beyond eighty years of age. They\nwere strengthened, consoled, held up in trial by prayer, and it\nenabled them to tap layers of energy in their physical beings which\nthey themselves scarcely knew they possessed and concerning which\nother people were {51} so dubious that they felt sure the workers\nwould die young of exhausted vitality. Many wondered why some of them\ndid not suffer from nervous prostration. Men and women of prayer\nseldom suffer from nervous prostration in the ordinary sense of the\nword, and what is called that in them is very often the manifestation\nof some organic ailment which has not been recognized.\n\nAs to the power of prayer to enable people to stand suffering and\npain, that is discussed in the chapters on these special subjects.\nRaising the mind and heart to God will do more to make even the\nextremity of pain bearable than anything else in the world. I have\nknown a man under an engine, almost literally cooking to death from\nthe steam that was escaping near him, in poignant agony, take on a\nquiet, peaceful look after a priest had crawled under the engine to\ngive him the last rites of the Church; and though his groans would\nstill escape from him involuntarily, it was mainly words of prayer\nthat came and he was evidently in a very different state of mind from\nthat which governed him but a few moments before when only the\nphysical side of his case was occupying his mind. Many a soldier\nduring the war found that when a dread came over him, and he feared\nthat his courage might leave him, especially when men were falling\nthick and fast all around, a little prayer would lift him up and give\nhim new courage; and when he was so tired that it seemed as though he\ncould not go on any farther it would enable him to tap a new level of\nenergy and get his second wind, as it were, and \"carry on.\"\n\nThere are a great many people nowadays, and unfortunately they are\never so much more frequent among the educated classes than among those\nwho have not had the benefit of an education, who seem to think that\nprayer {52} is a confession of weakness. When a man or a woman has\nrecourse to prayer they would be inclined to say that it is because he\nor she has not the strength of character and personality that enables\nthem to stand up under the trials of life and to face difficulties\nvaliantly and hopefully. Impressions like this have been rather\nfostered among the modern intellectual classes who, it must be\nrecalled, are not always intelligent.\n\nWe saw in the first chapter that while there is a very prevalent\nimpression that somehow science is opposed to religion and that\nscientists find it utterly impossible to accept religious beliefs\nseriously and indeed can only pity those who continue to cherish such\noutworn superstitions, practically all the greatest scientists of\nmodern times have been deep believers.\n\nWhat is true with regard to scientists and belief in religion is true\nalso with regard to the strongest characters of the world and prayer.\nThe greatest moral force of the war, the man who stood as Horace long\nago said the perfect man, _totus teres atque rotundus_, should stand,\nunmoved, even though the world is falling in pieces around him, was\nCardinal Mercier. When they asked him at the luncheon given to him in\nNew York by some two thousand of our most prominent commercial\nrepresentatives how he, a bishop, \"brought up in the peace and quiet\nof a university, should stand unmoved in the presence of the greatest\nmilitary power on earth and insist on the rights of his country and\nhis people\", his very simple reply was, \"As a bishop, there was\nnothing else that it occurred to me for the moment to do.\"\n\nSome of Cardinal Mercier's favorite maxims show how deeply he feels\nwhence comes his strength. He said, for instance, that \"the ideal of\nlife is a clear sense of {53} duty.\" His favorite quotation is from\nSt. Theresa, that well-known expression, \"whenever conscience commands\nanything, there is only one thing to fear and that is fear.\" His maxim\nfor daily life was \"The whole duty of man consists in doing God's will\nto-day. I care to have no vain regrets with regard to the past and no\nidle dreams as to the future, but I shall be quite satisfied if God\ngives me His grace to accomplish His Holy Will to-day.\" It is easy to\nsee from these that the Cardinal feels his utter dependence on a\nHigher Power and the necessity for keeping as closely in touch with\nthat Higher Power by prayer as possible. There is no doubt at all\nabout his supreme strength of character and his placid, yet unbending\nresolution to accomplish what he sees as duty. There is no doubt,\nalso, that he feels that he draws his strength to accomplish whatever\nhe can from prayer. His daily recourse to it, far from being a sign of\nweakness in any sense, simply represents the man's own feeling of his\ninadequacy to accomplish what his conscience dictates unless he is\nstrengthened from on High.\n\nPerhaps it is to be expected that a churchman would find his strength\nin prayer, but it must not be forgotten that the greatest military\nleader of this war, who because of the immense armies that he had to\nlead must be considered one of the greatest military geniuses of all\ntime, confesses also that the source of whatever power he had came\nfrom prayer. Over and over again during the time while he was the\ncommander-in-chief of the Allied armies. Marshal Foch was discovered\nat prayer in some quiet chapel, manifestly absorbed in communion with\nGod. When congratulated on what he had accomplished, he said at once,\n\"Do not thank me, but thank the Author of all good to whom the victory\nis due.\" He {54} was often known to ask for prayers and when on the\nmorning of the first battle of the Marne he met the chaplain of one of\nhis regiments, he said to him, \"Pray for us, father; we advance from\nhere or die here to-day.\"\n\nThere is a story that comes from his own headquarters that when\nsometimes he was thought to be asleep he was found at prayer. When his\nfirst decision as commander-in-chief of the Allied armies had to be\nmade, and he had to determine whether Amiens should be surrendered to\nthe enemy and a defense made on lines behind that city, both Haig, in\nimmediate command of the British forces, as well as Petain, the French\ncommander, are said to have advised retirement. Foch listened\npatiently to their reasons and then asked for twenty minutes by\nhimself before making his decision, declaring that he would give it in\nthat time. He spent those minutes walking up and down the garden in\nthe slight rain that was falling, very much in the concentrated manner\nthat he was known to assume when praying. At the end of twenty minutes\nhe declared that Amiens was to be held at all cost,--and it was. This\nwas the first great step in the breaking of the enemy morale. When\nthree months later, on the 18th of July--after the Germans had tried\nfor three days to come through his lines and had practically succeeded\nand then, lacking in men and munitions had to stop--Marshal Foch\nlaunched his counter-offensive which represented the beginning of the\nend of the war, it was easy to understand the strain through which he\nhad just passed and the immensity of the responsibility of the\ndecision that he had to make. After the orders for the\ncounter-offensive had been sent out he said, \"Now I must rest.\" As can\nreadily be imagined he had slept {55} but little on any of the three\npreceding nights. Half an hour after he retired there came a dispatch\nwhich the high staff decided must be communicated to the\ngeneral-in-chief. They hesitated for some time to wake him, but there\nwas nothing else for it. His adjutant found him on his knees.\n\nThe practice of prayer, then, instead of being an index of weakness of\ncharacter, is on the contrary a note that is found exemplified in a\ngreat many men who are distinguished for their strength of character.\nIt is the strong man above all who knows his own weakness and realizes\nhow incapable he is of doing very great things of himself. It is the\nconceited man who is confident that he can accomplish anything that he\nwants out of his own strength and often fails. Great generals almost\nas a rule have been men who turned aside from the immense calls made\nupon them by their military responsibilities to gain consolation and\nstrength from the Most High. It is surprising often to find how\ndevoutly they turn to the Higher Power in their trials. Field Marshal\nLord Wolseley carried a copy of Thomas a Kempis' \"Imitation of Christ\"\nwith him always and read in it every day. When they found Chinese\nGordon dead at Khartum there was a little copy of Newman's \"Dream of\nGerontius\" in which he had been reading and making some annotations\nduring the days before the end. For him, too, the \"Imitation of\nChrist\" was favorite reading, as it was for Stanley the explorer and\nmany another thoroughly practical, intensely brave and strong man whom\nthe world has come to appreciate for his strength of character.\n\nIn our time there has been noted an extreme lack of delicacy and a\ndiminution of that reticence which {56} characterized human beings at\ntheir best. There has been a pouring out of the story of their woes\nand ills by men and women seeking sympathy which not only does them no\ngood but which tends to break down their own character. It was\nNietzsche who said, in one of these striking aphorisms of his,\n\"Sympathy only makes us feel bad and the person for whom we sympathize\nfeel worse than before.\" In an older time when there was more faith\nand the practice of prayer was commoner, the habit of prayer replaced\nthis pouring out of the heart to others. People let God know about it\nand in that way brought themselves into the mental attitude that\nsomehow, somewhere, all was well, for God's in His world and all is\nright with it. This proved an antidote to that sympathy-seeking\nself-pity which is not only so fatal to character development, but\nwhich actually makes the trials and sufferings of life harder to bear\nthan they would otherwise be and will sometimes lift the little\ndiscomforts that are almost inevitably associated with living up to a\nplane of superconsciousness on which they seem to be torments. Prayer\nis often its own reward, though any one who practices it in reality\nknows that there are other and much higher effects than this\npsychological influence which can of itself, however, neutralize many\nof the lesser disturbances of life that may be so readily exaggerated.\n\nTo many people in our time prayer seems a useless exercise except in\nso far as the state of mind which it engenders reacts upon the\nindividual to console and strengthen him in trials and to hearten him\nfor difficulties that lie ahead. Even if it had no other effect than\nthis, prayer would still be a very valuable factor for health in the\nmidst of the difficulties and above all the {57} dreads of humanity\nwhich are so likely to disturb the proper functioning of organic life.\nIf this were all that it meant, however, prayer would not be a\nreligious but a psychotherapeutic exercise. As a matter of belief,\nhowever, prayer is much more than this and, to the mind of the\nbeliever at least, leads to help from on High that may prove of\nimmense consequence in the development of individual life. Many people\nfeel that it would be idle to think that prayer can alter the ordinary\ncourse of natural events and that these are rigidly connected with the\ncausal elements which lead up to them and cannot be modified, once the\nchain of causes has been set to work.\n\nIt is curiously interesting to realize that not a few of those who\nurge this inevitability of causation are just those who refuse to\nacknowledge the principle of causation as necessarily leading to the\ndemonstration that there must be a first cause. As suggested by Sir\nBertram Windle, president of University College, Cork, in his volume\n\"The Church in Science\" which has recently been awarded one of the\nBridgewater prizes in England, it is not difficult to realize \"that\nthe world is by no means so rigidly predetermined as many enthusiastic\nvotaries of science would have us believe\"; he adds:\n\n  \"There is room for free play; chance has a real objective\n  significance, viz., the intercrossing of independent causal chains,\n  and is not a mere cloak for ignorance. Not alone is a large part of\n  natural occurrences within our own control, but there is opportunity\n  for God's special direction of events without any contravention of\n  the laws of science. We cannot see far ahead; for aught we know, a\n  small change of present plans may result in far-reaching future\n  consequences. And many present {58} realities were once frail\n  possibilities hanging on slender causal threads; did not England's\n  present mineral wealth and insular position originate in some\n  chance-formed heterogeneity in a nebula? All these life-histories of\n  countries and individuals stand spread out to God's eternal gaze. At\n  each stage He sees the possibilities foreclosed or initiated; He\n  influences development by the primal distribution in the past and by\n  direction and inspiration in the present.\"\n\n\n{59}\n\nCHAPTER III\n\n\nSACRIFICE\n\n\nThe essence of religion is sacrifice. St. Paul summed it up in his own\ninimitable fashion when he said, \"I beseech you therefore, brethren,\nby the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice,\nholy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.\" The\nsupreme exercise of religious feeling is the readiness to make\nsacrifices because one feels that it is the will of the Deity that\nthey should be made. The \"Century Dictionary's\" definition of\nsacrifice, \"the giving up of some prized or desirable thing in behalf\nof a higher object\", represents the state of mind that one must have\nif one is desirous of practicing religion sincerely. The tendency to\nmake sacrifices seems almost to be ingrained in humanity and to be a\nsort of instinct. It is one of these precious manifestations of nature\nso difficult to understand and yet representing some great basic\nprinciple of humanity. The feeling of satisfaction that comes with it\nrepresents that compensation for the exercise of a natural function\nwhich so often accompanies natural processes and is sometimes supposed\nto be a feature only of the physical yet is so invariably found also\nin the moral order.\n\nFrom the very earliest times men have made sacrifices in the spirit of\nreligion. Now that the story of the cave man is known not by inference\nbut by actual discovery {60} of his remains in the caves of western\nFrance and northern Spain, we find that he was an artist who invented\noil colors, grinding the oxides of manganese and of iron in mortars\nand mixing them with the rendered fat of animals and painting some of\nthe most vivid pictures of animals that have ever been made on the\nwalls of his cave in order to make his home beautiful. Instead of\nbeing just a little better than the beasts, he was an artist, and an\nartist is at all times the flower of our civilization, ahead of and\nnot behind the rest of the race. In the tombs of the cave men finely\nmade tools have been found buried with the bodies, demonstrating the\nbelief in a hereafter and the readiness of those who were left behind\nto make sacrifices for their dead. For these tools had been produced\nat the cost of no little labor, and in the values of the time were\nprecious. In order that their dead friend might be happy in another\nworld they were quite willing to make these sacrifices and to devote\nother efforts to securing happiness for him. They devoted a good deal\nof care to the disposal of the body and even buried red coloring\nmatter with the remains so that their dead friend might not look too\npale in the next world and perhaps be the subject of remark, because\nof that. We rouge our corpses in our time again, but with the idea of\nmaking them presentable for this world.\n\nThis state of mind which prompts man to make a sacrifice is, almost\nneedless to say, extremely valuable for health and for happiness,\nbecause it makes people ready to offer up their feelings in case of\ndisappointment and even to be ready to accept trials that may come to\nthem--and life is sure to have them--as representing opportunities for\nthe making of sacrifices. If one has set one's heart on something and\nhas devoted great efforts to getting it {61} and then finds that owing\nto circumstances it cannot be secured, nothing is so effective as the\ndeep religious feeling of sacrifice to aid in keeping the\ndisappointment from affecting health and strength.\n\nWe need it at the present time sadly, and its eclipse through\ndecadence of religion has been a great misfortune. Modern life has\nbeen very much disturbed by the fact that insanity and suicides are\nboth on the increase to an almost alarming extent and that, sad to\nsay, the average age at which they occur is steadily becoming earlier.\nSuicide happens at ever younger years just in proportion, it would\nseem, to the spread of popular education and the lessening of the\ninfluence of religion, while at the same time the necessity for\nrestraint for insanity and of internments in asylums is also coming at\na younger age. People used to go through with some of the very hard\nthings of life before they were ready to give up struggling or broke\ndown in mind, but now some of the minor trials of early life--a petty\nsetback in school examinations or disappointment in a youthful love\naffair--may bring about a very serious breakdown in physical or\nmental health and may even lead to suicide.\n\nWe need ever so much more training in the discipline of sacrifice even\nfrom very earliest youth, but almost needless to say this can come\npractically only from religion, and religious influences are waning\nfor a great many people. All young folks must be trained to give\nthings up voluntarily so that when disappointment comes they are ready\nfor it. They must be taught to stand some of the disagreeable things\nin life so that they may have the will power to endure even the\nhardest ones, if they should be called upon to do so. Such discipline,\ninstead of being cruel, is really kind, for constituted as life is and\nwith {62} hardships and trials inevitable to the great majority of\npeople, it is all-important that we should be prepared for them. It is\nthe role of religion particularly to do this. It can accomplish it\nwithout producing unfortunate reactions, but on the contrary with\npersonal satisfaction to the individual who has to be trained in\nendurance because of the feeling that the sacrifices have a worth\nbeyond that of the merely material.\n\nWhole-hearted sacrifice will lift a character up to heights of heroism\nthat are supremely admirable and make life exemplary, though the\nfailure to take the opportunities for sacrifice may lead to crushing\nof the spirit entirely. Almost inevitably this brings about\ndisturbance of health as well as deterioration of character. The loss\nof children by death, particularly when there are but one or two\nchildren in a family, as is so frequent in modern times, often brings\non a state of mental perturbation in which the health of mind and\nbody, especially of women, may suffer severely. Religion, with its\ndevelopment of the spirit of sacrifice, whenever it is taken\nseriously, is the best possible sheet anchor in such cases, and the\ngradual diminution of religious feelings and abandonment of religious\npractice during the present generation have greatly multiplied the\ntendency to such severe breakdowns.\n\nA distinguished scientist. Professor Whittaker, the Royal Astronomer\nof Ireland, dwelt on the scientific aspect of sacrifice for high\npurpose in a way that is illuminating and serves to make our\ngeneration understand better the enduring nature of sacrifice in\ncreation and the place that it has in the up-building of what is best\nin life.\n\n  \"Surrender to the will of God generally means the giving up of some\n  of the delights of the world. Like the {63} coral island built up on\n  the accumulations of its own past life, the perfected kingdom is to\n  be reached only by the sacrifice of countless generations of its own\n  up-builders. But--and this is the greatest of all evidence of the\n  divine life within humanity--in all ages men have left the pleasures\n  of their former life to obey the inward call. The long procession\n  that leads to the distant goal is reunited afresh in every\n  generation: and to-day millions have found the joy of a life\n  centered round the words of the Master, 'Repent', 'Follow Me.'\"\n\nA distinguished mathematician who is at the same time a very\nwell-known physical scientist declared not long since that the formula\nfor happiness may be expressed as follows:\n\n  h = g/w\n\nIn this, h stands for the amount of individual happiness and is equal\nto what the individual has got, g, divided by w, what he wants. If a\nman has a great deal but wants ever so much more, his fraction of\nhappiness may be comparatively small. If he has got even a little but\ndoes not want much more, his fraction of happiness may approach an\ninteger. If he has got anything in the world and does not want\nanything more, according to the terms of the formula, he is infinitely\nhappy, for one divided by zero equals infinity\n(1/0=infinity). What is important for men for their happiness\nthen is not so much to try to increase the numerator by adding to or\neven multiplying their possessions, but to decrease the denominator by\nlessening their wants and by decreasing the number of things without\nwhich they feel that they cannot be happy.\n\n{64}\n\nAlmost needless to say the one element above all in life which enables\nmen to reduce their wants and to live in satisfaction with few things\nis religion. A great many men in the history of the race have for\nreligious motives assumed the obligations of voluntary poverty and\nhave greatly increased satisfaction in life and have found happiness\nthereby. The multiplication of material wants which after a time\nbecome needs that actually cannot be dispensed with without a feeling\nof serious deprivation leads to such preoccupation with mere bodily\nconcerns that no time is left to live the life of the spirit and\nreally to enjoy the things of the mind and the heart and the soul with\nthe supreme satisfaction which their experience gives to us. The old\npagan poet, Horace, suggested long ago that he hated the apparatus of\nluxury because it took away so much of the simple enjoyment of life\nand consumed so much time in idle concerns. Nothing is so helpful in\nenabling men to simplify life as religious motives. They learn to make\nthe sacrifice of certain inclinations and feelings that would tempt\nthem to rival other men and to be satisfied with a little for the sake\nof the lessened allurements to luxury that are thus secured for\nthemselves and their children. Health comes as a by-product of this\nsimplification of life as it is not likely to come under any other\ncircumstances.\n\nTo all men there comes, sooner or later in life, the realization that\nthe getting of things cannot bring happiness. Oscar Wilde said in one\nof his well-known caustic epigrams, \"There are two tragedies in life;\nthe one is not getting what you want and the other is getting it; and\nof the two the latter is the worse.\" Quite apart from the pessimism\nand the exaggeration of the apothegm which constitutes only part of\nthe humor, there is a great deal of {65} truth in the expression, as\nall men learn eventually. What Faust said to Mephistopheles was that\n\"if ever a time shall come when I shall be willing to say to the\npassing moment 'stay you with me, for I shall be satisfied with you\nforever' then you may have my soul.\" All that the devil had to do was\nto make him happy, but that is impossible, for \"man never is, but to\nbe blessed.\" There is no lasting satisfaction in getting, for men\nincrease their desires with everything they get.\n\nMen come to realize, if they gather wisdom with the years, that the\nfruit of striving and the quest after anything in the world, be it\nriches or knowledge or honor or power, is of itself but dust and ashes\nin the mouth once the goal has been reached, for it is the quest and\nnot the attainment, the hunt and not the capture that counts in life,\nand the only thing that can possibly give any genuine satisfaction to\nman is the cultivation of the spirit of sacrifice. Sacrifices made for\na higher power give life a meaning that it would otherwise have lost.\nFor those who have reached the years beyond middle life, the\nblessedness of giving rather than receiving, of making sacrifices\nrather than seeking satisfaction, means the renewal of life's hopes\nand aspirations.\n\nIt is making a virtue of necessity to cultivate the spirit of\nsacrifice, but then it was a great philosopher who said that \"the only\nvirtue worth while talking about is the virtue that is made out of\nnecessity.\" Most of the things in life that are really worth while we\nhave to do whether we want to or not, and it is the spirit in which\nthey are done that lifts them out of the rut of common-place, sordid,\neveryday actions into the realm of spiritual significance, because\nthey are done for a great purpose. Each act of sacrifice may thus be\nmade an act of worship {66} of the Deity and have almost an infinite\nvalue. This makes even the minor acts of life produce a satisfaction\nnot otherwise possible and gives a new significance to life when the\nnovelty of living has worn off and when the _taedium vitae_, the\ntiredness with life that comes to every one after a while, if mere\nhuman motives prevail, steals over us.\n\nThere is a passage in the Scriptures, the truth of which a good many\npeople seem to doubt in the modern time, though the experience of\ncenturies has confirmed it. \"It is more blessed to give than to\nreceive.\" Those who have experienced the delightful satisfaction of\ngiving whole-heartedly, even when they did not have much to give,\nrealize the truth of this. By comparison, the poor are the great\ngivers among men, giving ever so much more in proportion to their\nmeans than do the rich, almost without exception, and it is to them\nparticularly that these divine words have come home. They are ready to\nmake all sorts of personal sacrifices to help those around them,\nalmost as a rule, and they know the blessedness of giving. If the rich\ngave to others in anything like the proportion to what the poor so\ncommonly do, there would be no suffering from poverty.\n\nThe sacrifices which they make bring with them a satisfaction that is\neminently conducive to health. There is nothing like the sleep that\ncomes with the consciousness of good accomplished for others, and the\npoor enjoy that just in proportion to the sacrifice that their doing\nof good has entailed. Giving up has often meant much for others, but\nit usually means more for oneself. The consciousness of having\nrelieved the necessities of others is probably the best appetizer and\nsomnifacient that we have. We talk of \"sleeping the sleep of the\njust\", and {67} the just man is above all the one who thinks of\nothers. Feelings of depression and melancholy, when not actually the\nconsequence of organic disease or hereditary impairment of mentality,\nare probably better relieved by the consciousness of doing good to\nothers than in any other way. This is particularly true when the doing\nof good entails some special sacrifice on the doer of it. Nervousness,\nin the broad general sense of that word, is at bottom very often a\nmanifestation of selfishness, that is, oversolicitude about oneself\nand one's affairs, and nothing so serves to neutralize it as personal\nsacrifices made for others.\n\nSacrifice, moreover, is the fundamental element in most of the\npractices of religion. It represents the underlying factor of charity\nand fasting and mortification, for personal sacrifices have to be made\nof time and money and often of inclination and immediate personal\nsatisfaction in order to accomplish these. As they are treated in\nseparate chapters, they need only be mentioned here as representing\ncomponent elements in that readiness to make sacrifices for the sake\nof others and oneself which Providence seems to demand.\n\nNothing requires so much sacrifice from men and women, even to the\ngiving up of life itself, as war, and yet when whole-heartedly entered\ninto, it becomes a magnificent discipline of humanity, affording\nsatisfactions that are supreme and leaving memories that are the most\nprecious for the race. Above all, men learn in time of war that there\nare things in life that are worth more than life itself, and there is\nno knowledge in the world that is so precious for mankind as this.\n\nHow much war's sacrifices may mean for the development of character\nProfessor William James has {68} emphasized in his essay on the \"Moral\nEquivalent of War.\" He confesses the paradox, but he says:\n\n  \"Ask all our millions, north and south, whether they would vote now\n  (were such a thing possible) to have our war for the Union expunged\n  from history, and the record of a peaceful transition to the present\n  time substituted for that of its marches and battles, and probably\n  hardly a handful of eccentrics would say yes. Those ancestors, those\n  efforts, those memories and legends, are the most ideal part of what\n  we now own together, a sacred spiritual possession worth more than\n  all the blood poured out. Yet ask those same people whether they\n  would be willing in cold blood to start another civil war now to\n  gain another similar possession, and not one man or woman would vote\n  for the proposition.\"\n\nIt must not be forgotten that strengthening of character, war's\ninvariable effect on the man of moral aims, always diminishes the\ndreads of life. They mean ever so much not only for the development of\nthe psychoneuroses and the whole domain of neurotic symptoms so common\nin our time, but also for the exaggeration of the symptoms of real\nphysical disease which makes patients so uncomfortable, or full of\ncomplaints, and has led to so many useless operations in our\ngeneration.\n\nProfessor James even ventured to suggest that \"the dread hammer (of\nwar) is the welder of men into cohesive states, and nowhere but in\nsuch states can human nature adequately develop its capacity. The only\nalternative is degeneration.\" He adds that \"the martial type of\ncharacter can be bred without war\", but only under very special\ncircumstances and where men have been willing to give themselves up to\na great cause. \"Priests and medical men are in a fashion educated to\nit, {69} and we should all feel some degree of it imperative if we\nwere conscious of our work as an obligatory service to the State. We\nshould be owned, as soldiers are by the army, and our pride would\narise accordingly. We could be poor then without humiliation, as army\nofficers now are.\"\n\nMr. H. G. Wells, in one of his paradoxical moods, has dwelt on how far\nthe sacrifices needed for military life have lifted the life of the\nsoldier above that of the civilian, in so far as its social value is\nconcerned. \"When the contemporary man steps from the street of\nclamorous insincere advertisement, push, adulteration, underselling\nand intermittent employment into the barrack-year, he steps on to a\nhigher social plane, into an atmosphere of service and cooperation and\nof infinitely more honorable emulations. Here at least men are not\nflung out of employment to degenerate because there is no immediate\nwork for them to do. They are fed and drilled and trained for better\nservices. Here at least a man is supposed to win promotion by\nself-forgetfulness and not by self-seeking.\"\n\nThe war spirit with its necessary sacrifices serves to lift men above\nthe dreads that wear away other lives and makes it very clear what the\nspirit of whole-hearted sacrifice can accomplish in keeping life from\nbeing disturbed by fear thoughts of many kinds. It might possibly be\nthought that the supreme call made upon nature's power to overcome\nsuch dreads, when combined with the extreme physical efforts that war\noften calls for and the draft upon nature's resources that the healing\nof wounds demands, would surely shorten the lives of military men, and\nthat soldiers and officers, but above all these latter, would have on\nthe average much less expectancy of life than the rest of mankind.\nApart from actual fatal {70} wounds, this is not true, however, but on\nthe contrary men who have suffered severely from wounds, who have been\nplaced under heavy burdens of responsibility and have gone through\ntrials that would seem calculated to exhaust nature's powers, have\nlived far beyond the average length of life and even long beyond the\nvast majority of men. Lord Roberts, wounded over and over again, once\nshot almost to pieces, getting his Victoria Cross for bravery of the\nhighest type, lived, still active, well past eighty and died from\npneumonia behind the lines in the Great War quite as any man of the\ngeneration after his might have done. Sir Evelyn Wood is another\ntypical instance of this living well beyond eighty in the enjoyment of\nhealth and strength and power to be of use to his country.\n\nThe spirit of sacrifice for a great patriotic purpose is like the\nspirit of sacrifice from religious motives which blesses while it\nfurnishes the highest satisfactions that can come to a man. If men and\nwomen could be brought to exercise from religious motives in time of\npeace as much of the spirit of sacrifice as they do for war and\npatriotism, the world would be a very wonderful place in which to\nlive. As it is, there are a great many who do so and whose lives have\nbecome veritable blessings for others and yet sources of supreme\nsatisfaction to themselves. Their thoroughgoing faith and trust are\nexamples to others that make life not only ever so much easier in the\nmidst of hardships, but that give a new depth to the belief in\nimmortality, because these others whose lives are so admirable have\nsuch a supreme faith in it that they direct all their actions to its\nreflection. As Professor Osler said in delivering the Ingersoll\nlecture on immortality at Harvard, a great many of us believe {71}\nbecause there are around us persons, often those whom we love dearly,\nwhose lives and faith mean so much to us that their confidence in\nimmortality is imparted to us.\n\nReligion is above all the motive of sacrifice that makes life more\nefficient and is productive of the healthy mind in the healthy body.\nIt has quite equaled war in this regard, and the lives of\nmissionaries, when lived under the most difficult circumstances, have\noften lasted long beyond even the Psalmist's limit of three-score\nyears and ten. I have in mind as I write a dear old missionary who is\nstill with us who spent twenty years with the Nez Perces Indians in\nthe distant West, sharing all the hardships of the tribe and yet\naccomplishing very little in the matter of winning them to\nChristianity until at the end of that long time his leg was broken by\na fall. The manly, uncomplaining courage with which he bore the\naccident won the hearts of the warriors, and they were ready to become\nChristians and to follow whole-heartedly the principles of religion\nwhich could make a white man so completely a man in every sense of the\nword as they had found their missionary. His health in the midst of\nall this had been excellent, and he is now in Alaska, past eighty,\nstanding the climate and the trials of that country.\n\nIt is surprising how weak women, in the spirit of religious sacrifice,\naccomplish what seems almost the impossible and actually live\nhealthier lives after they have given up everything and there is\nnothing more for them to dread. We have all heard of the story of\nFather Damien who so bravely went to Molokai in order to care for the\nlepers, but how many know that religious women have offered themselves\nfor similar purposes, and not only at Molokai but at Tracadie in\nCanada and in {72} Louisiana have given themselves up for life to the\ncare of lepers? I know from records that some of these women, after\nhaving made the supreme sacrifice, were actually better in health\nliving among the lepers than they had been when apparently living\nunder much more favorable circumstances in their city homes. Some of\nthem have lived to be very old, and none of them have contracted the\ndisease. The story of such a striking personal sacrifice as that of\nFather Damien among the lepers at Molokai, crowned by years of\nsuffering and death, attracts sensational attention, but it must not\nbe forgotten that he is only one of many who have given up all in\nsimilar spirit. There were many like him, though utterly unknown to\nthe world, who in China, in distant India, in Central Africa, or among\nthe Indians in our own country, have sacrificed everything that the\nworld deems most satisfying just to give themselves to the care of\ntheir savage brothers. I shall never forget dropping off years ago one\nday in the West at the then little station of Missoula in Montana to\nmeet an old teacher of mine who had been famous for his knowledge of\nGreek and of the Aristotelian philosophy and who was then engaged in\ntaking care of Indians, where none of these special intellectual\nacquirements were of any service, but where his hearty good cheer made\nhim the best of missionaries. He had made his sacrifice; he said there\nwere plenty of others who could do the teaching of Greek and\nphilosophy, and he felt the call to do something for others who needed\nhis personal services. He was in better health than he had been in\nyears and in better spirits, and there was a look about him which\nindicated that some of the hundred-fold promised to those who give to\nthe Lord was already coming back to him.\n\n{73}\n\nMany a man and woman in this country and in England has been lifted\nout of the depths, even out of the very \"slough of despond\" where\ndreads abound and a healthy mind in a healthy body is almost\nimpossible of attainment, by reading about the work of Doctor Wilfred\nGrenfell, who has so nobly given himself and his professional services\nto the care of the poor fishermen on the Labrador coast. Their\nsufferings are often so severe as to be almost unbearable, especially\nduring the winter time, and yet they cling to their little homes on\nthe rugged coast, ready to bear through successive winters the\nvicissitudes of a climate and the bitter struggle for existence which\nseem almost beyond the endurance of human nature and where they need\nso much the sympathy and kindliness which have been extended to them\nby Doctor Grenfell. Any one who has come in contact with him\npersonally learns that this spirit of sacrifice so finely exemplified\nand exercised to high achievement has made him a charmingly\nsympathetic man whom everybody who comes to know is sure to like, and\nwho exhibits the best traits of the race in some of their highest\nforms of expression. Withal he is a very practical, common-sense\nindividual grafted on the lofty idealist. His sacrifices have done him\ngood, and the example of them has stimulated and helped an immense\nnumber of other people besides the special objects of his devotion on\nthe Labrador coast.\n\nWhat marvelous examples men can give in this way, examples which\nfairly quicken life in other and weaker brethren and set them at their\ntasks whole-heartedly to accomplish whatever they can when otherwise\nthey would have been discouraged and downcast and apt to find excuses\nin poor health or weakness, is well illustrated {74} by Doctor\nGrenfell's life and also by that of many others in our own day. I\ncount it as one of the privileges of life to have been a close friend\nfor some precious years of the man of whom one of those who came in\ncontact with him has told the story which I shall quote. His example\nwas all the more striking because it had for background that flagrant\nexhibition of the selfishness of men which a rush to new gold fields\nalways presents. He was engaged in quite a different quest that for\nhim seemed much more important, and he went on with his work in the\nmidst of the excitement as calmly as if men all around him were not\nexhausting all their natural powers to the limit for a fancied prize\nwhich they were sure would make them happy.\n\n  \"All of us can remember the mad rush for gold to the Klondyke, out\n  on the northern edge of the world. Nature has pushed her ice\n  barriers far to the south of it and fringed them for leagues with\n  impenetrable forest and towering mountain and treacherous river, as\n  though to guard her treasure. Men, lured by the golden gleams,\n  essayed to break through. In tens of thousands they plunged into the\n  unknown wilderness, pushing in frenzied haste through forest and\n  canyon and river.\n\n  \"By thousands they fell and died, and but a remnant crept out on the\n  deadly Yukon plain, every step on which was a fight for life.\n\n  \"Some of the first of these hardy adventurers were making their way\n  across the frozen Alaskan waste when they saw ahead something moving\n  that stood out black against the blinding white of the snow.\n  Stumbling through snowdrifts, waist-deep in ice hollows, jumping\n  treacherous crevasses, they pushed on, and the dark spot gradually\n  took shape. It was a loaded dog-sledge, and {75} in front, hauling\n  laboriously, were a man and a dog. He was alone, and they stared in\n  wonder at him, as if to ask what manner of man was this, so\n  contentedly traveling in this land of dreadful silence,--a land that\n  seemed to be the tomb of all living things that ventured into it. He\n  gave them cheery greeting as they passed by, stopping not, for here\n  the race was to the swift and strong, and wished them good fortune.\n  Their guide knew him, and they learned with astonishment that it was\n  not love of gold that had made him risk his life on that frozen\n  tundra. That gray-haired man with the kindly face, buffeted by the\n  icy wind that cut like a whiplash, and bent low under the sledge\n  rope, was the best-known man in the Klondyke. His sledge was loaded\n  with medicine and food for poor sick miners, 'his boys', as he\n  called them, whom he kindly cared for in a hospital that with his\n  own hands he had helped to build in the town in the valley of gold.\n  They saw him next day, as he came down the street, still harnessed\n  to the sledge; they saw the crowds that rushed from the canvas\n  buildings on either side and pressed forward to shake his hand, and\n  laughingly take the sledge from him, and swing along the street,\n  filling it from side to side, to where at the far end stood his\n  hospital; they saw him enter, and when they heard the shout of joy\n  that burst forth from the inmates, at the sight of the only man that\n  stood between them and death, tears sprang to their eyes, and they\n  too pressed forward to exchange a word with and press the hand of a\n  hero. Too soon there came a day when the axe and the sledge rope\n  fell from the once strong hands, and he lay, dead, among the boys\n  whom he loved. They buried him In the frozen earth between his\n  hospital and his church.\"\n\nThe making of sacrifices for religious motives, that is, {76} from a\nreligious sense of duty, is often followed by some of the most\nsatisfying rewards of life. Physicians frequently have this brought\nhome to them when they encounter people who, because of unwillingness\nto make what seemed to be sacrifices in their earlier years, have to\ngo through some rather serious conditions later on in life. The woman\nwho, having had opportunities to marry, has refused them because she\nfears the cares of family life and dreads the dangers of maternity,\nwill very often suffer ever so much more during the years of\ninvolution and obsolescence in the second half of life as the result\nof the loneliness that will come to her and the lack of any heart\ninterest in life which will leave her without the resources and\nsatisfaction which come to the woman whose children are around her and\nwhose grandchildren bless her. The man who has remained a bachelor\nwill very often, unless, perhaps, some of his brothers and sisters\nhave married and taken the trouble and had the joy of raising\nchildren, be even more pitiable in his solitary old age. This may not\nseem to mean much for health and happiness, and there may appear more\nsentimentality than reality in it, but the statistics of suicide and\ninsanity among the unmarried, which are ever so much higher than among\nthe married, demonstrate how much of hopeless discouragement and\nmental discomfort comes to those who have given no hostages to fortune\nand no pledges for the future, by the sacrifice of some of the passing\npleasures and selfish satisfactions of youth.\n\nNearly the same thing is true of the married folk who have only a\nchild or two in the family. The children are almost inevitably\nspoiled. A careful study of the single child in the family has shown\nvery clearly how nervous and selfish the solitary child is likely to\nbe and how {77} much unhappiness the mother prepares for her child by\nrefusing to give it the normal companionship of brothers and sisters.\nThe real kindergarten of life should be the family of five   [Footnote\n4] or six children raised together and learning to bear with each\nother and yield to each other and take care of each other as the\nhighest kind of training in unselfishness. Even when there are two\nchildren in the family, especially if these are of opposite sexes, the\nboy and girl are likely to grow up with entirely wrong notions as\nregards their importance in life. The whole household is centered\naround them, and they learn how to impose on father and mother. Nearly\nalways the parents prepare unhappiness for themselves as well as their\nchildren, though there is usually the excuse that they will be better\nable to provide for fewer children, afford them a better education,\nand bring them up so as to secure for them more opportunities in life.\n\n  [Footnote 4:  Dr. Karl Pearson, of London, the well-known authority\n  on eugenics, has investigated rather carefully the health of\n  children in large and small families, and has demonstrated that\n  children are healthiest when there are five to eight children in the\n  family. On the average, first and second children are not as healthy\n  as those who come later in the family, and those who are in the best\n  condition physically and mentally for life come after the fourth.\n  The early children in the family are more liable to epilepsy and\n  certain serious nervous diseases, and are often of unstable nervous\n  equilibrium, while the later children are more gifted and are likely\n  to live longer.]\n\n\nThe sacrifices of social pleasures and of passing ease and comfort in\norder to bear and raise four or more children in the family are, as a\nrule of nature, amply rewarded in the health and strength of both the\nchildren and the mother. In my book on \"Health through Will Power\", in\nthe chapter on Feminine Ills and the Will, I have pointed out that in\nspite of the tradition which assumes that a woman's health is hurt if\nshe has more than {78} two or three children, the women of the older\ntime, when families were larger, were healthier on the average than\nthey are now, in spite of all the progress that medicine and surgery\nhave since made in relieving serious ills. Above all, it was typically\nthe mother of numerous children who lived long and in good health to\nbe a blessing to those around her, and not the old maids or the\nchildless wives, for longevity is not a special trait of these latter\nclasses of women. The modern dread of deterioration of vitality as the\nresult of frequent child-bearing is quite without foundation in the\nrealities of human experience. Some rather carefully made statistics\ndemonstrate that the old tradition in the matter is not merely an\nimpression but a veritable truth as to human nature's reaction to a\ngreat natural call. While the mothers of large families born in the\nslums, with all the handicaps of poverty as well as hard work against\nthem, die on the average much younger than the generality of women in\nthe population, careful study of the admirable vital statistics of New\nSouth Wales shows that the mothers who lived longest were those who\nunder reasonably good conditions bore from five to seven children.\nHere in America, a study of more favored families shows that the\nhealthiest children come from the large families, and it is in the\nsmall families particularly that the delicate, neurotic and generally\nweakly children are found. Alexander Graham Bell, in his investigation\nof the Hyde family here in America, discovered that the greatest\nlongevity occurred in the families of ten or more children. So far\nfrom mothers being exhausted by the number of children that were born,\nand thus endowing their children with less vitality than if they had\nfewer children, it was to the numerous offspring that the highest\nvitality {79} and physical fitness were given. One special consequence\nof these is longevity.\n\nThe spirit of sacrifice brings its own reward. The realization from a\nreligious standpoint that it is better to give than to receive is one\nof the greatest blessings that a man can have. Nothing is so\ndisturbing to health and happiness--and real happiness always reacts\non health--as selfishness, the contradiction of the spirit of\nsacrifice. All the great writers on the spiritual life have emphasized\nthe fact that nervousness is at bottom selfishness. Conceit is the\nroot of a great deal of unhappiness and consequent disturbance of the\nhealth of mind and body.\n\n\n{80}\n\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nCHARITY\n\n\nCharity is usually looked upon as a cure for social, not personal\nills. Its activities, while recognized as supremely effective in\nfostering the health of people who have to live on inadequate means,\nare not ordinarily considered as reacting to benefit the health of the\nindividual who practices the virtue. Any such outlook is, however,\nvery partial. Religion has always taught that the benefiting of others\ninvariably served to bring down blessings on those who took up the\nprecious duty of helpfulness, blessings which are not reserved merely\nfor the hereafter, but are felt also in this world, which affect not\nonly the spirit but the mind of man. \"Blessed are the merciful, for\nthey shall obtain mercy\" are the words of the Sermon on the Mount, and\nit must not be forgotten that that dear old-fashioned word, mercy,\nwhich is so often limited to forgiveness in our day, meant in the old\ntime acts of benevolence--\"works of mercy\", as they were called--and\nin Luke it is stated that the \"neighbor unto him that fell among\nthieves\" was \"he that showed mercy on him.\"\n\nThe personal satisfaction which comes from the performance of these\nworks of mercy represents one of the most active factors that we have\nfor good health and especially for the creation of that background of\ncontentment with life on which good health is commonly {81} developed.\nThe merciful garner some of their reward here in the shape of a less\ntroubled life, so far at least as their own worries might be sources\nof trouble, and a fuller, heartier existence in the consciousness of\nhelpfulness for others. The words encouragement, discouragement, in\nSaxon English heartening and disheartening, putting heart into or\ntaking heart out of people, have a literal physical as well as\nmetaphysical significance that all physicians have come to appreciate\nrather thoroughly.\n\nCharity is a cure not only for the ills of the social body, but it is\nalso an extremely valuable remedy for the personal ills of those who\ndevote themselves to doing their duty towards others. Vincent de Paul,\nthat great organizer of charity, or as we would call his work in our\ntime, social service--for during and after the great wars in France in\nthe early seventeenth century he organized relief for literally\nthousands of people in the war zone and afterwards continued his great\nsocial work, which was quite as much needed then as our post-war work\nis now, in the large cities and towns of France--once used an\nexpression in this regard that deserves to be repeated here because it\nemphasizes this reactionary effect of charity which means so much for\nhealth. Vincent said that \"Unless the charity we do does as much good\nfor the doer as it does for the one for whom it is done, there is\nsomething wrong with the charity.\" Here is a phase of charity that has\nbeen forgotten only too often in the modern time. It emphasizes the\nfact that the most important remedy for that very serious affection\n_taedium vitae_, that sense of the unsatisfactoriness of life which\ncomes to everybody at some time or other, is the doing of things for\nother people with a whole-hearted feeling of helpfulness.\n\n{82}\n\nIt has been suggested that the doing of good for others, with all the\ngood effects which flow from it for the active participants, may very\nwell be accomplished without any appeal to religion, and that sympathy\nalone suffices as a foundation. Sir W. Thistleton-Dyer, in reviewing\nHuxley's position in this matter in a critique of Clodd's \"Life of\nHuxley\", suggests that the mystery would still remain as to how the\nsympathy is to be infused. He adds: \"My experience of human nature\ninclines me to think that it requires a more powerful appeal to the\nimagination than is afforded by a mere academic council of perfection\nof this sort.\" As a matter of fact Altruism, as it has been called, is\na very different thing from charity in its effect upon the doer. The\ndeep feeling of the brotherhood of man and the fatherhood of God with\nwhich true charity is associated makes a profoundly impressive\nsuggestion, with a favorable emotional tendency which serves to give\nalmost as a rule and quite naturally a sense of well-being. The\npractice of charity from religious motives becomes, then, a very\ndifferent thing from any mere feeling of sympathy with others founded,\nas it is so likely to be, on the selfish feeling of how painful it\nwould be for us to be in like case, or tinged at least with the\nconsciousness of condescension toward those below us which vitiates\nmost of the good motives of doing for others on any human grounds.\n\nFor those who feel that the new Altruism may fully replace the old\ncharity, and that people can derive just as much good from the\nstirring of their sympathies from merely humanitarian motives as they\ncan from religious love of their neighbor, President Schurman of\nCornell said some things that are very interesting:\n\n  \"It is a blessed characteristic of our own age that {83} religion\n  has come to express itself so nobly in practical well-doing. But\n  beneficence is not piety. To make the love of man the essence of\n  religion is to misread the latter and to divest the former of its\n  supreme spiritual dynamic. If the religious man is a benediction to\n  earth, it is because his soul is bathed in the dews of heaven.\"\n\nThe relief of the serious physical sufferings of those around us,\ntogether with the glimpse so often afforded while engaged in that work\nof the patience with which real ills are borne by others, is the best\npossible dispeller of the dreads which are the source of so many\npsycho-neuroses and the neurotic symptoms which complicate other\ndiseases of modern times. These represent a much larger proportion of\nthe ills of mankind than we were inclined to think. The Great War\nproved a revelation in this regard, for one third of all the\ndismissions from the English army, apart from the wounded, were made\nbecause of neurotic affections. Manifestly they must occupy an\nimportant place also in civil life. Those who practice charity, that\nis, those who not merely supply material aid to be distributed through\nagents or almoners, but give their personal service for those in need,\nhave the chance to be impressed with the thought of how much worse\nthings might be with themselves than they actually are, and how\nthankful they should be for their own conditions. The best practical\ndefinition of contentment still continues to be the conviction that\nthings might be worse than they actually are. Indeed, it is this very\nsatisfaction that comes from doing good that tempts people, humanly\nspeaking, to do more and more of it, and the personal service habit,\nonce formed, is as hard to break as almost any other habit that a man\ncan contract.\n\n{84}\n\nThe word charity has come to have in many minds a very unfortunate\ninnuendo. It is associated with the thought of doling out alms, of\npauperizing people and of making them dependent on others instead of\narousing their power to help themselves. There are a good many people\nwho seem to think that never until our time did the question of\norganizing charity, or social service as it is called, come into men's\nminds in such a way as to prevent these unfortunate abuses of charity\nwhich do so much more harm than good. The history of social service\ndoes not begin in our time, however, but goes back over all the\ncenturies in the history of Christianity. Religion has always\nfurnished the incentive to do good, but the Church and common sense\nhave helped people to regulate their charity in such a way as to make\nit really useful to men. During the Middle Ages there were many legal\nregulations against \"sturdy vagrants\" who imposed on people and took\nthe charity out of the mouths of those who deserved it and who abused\nthe opportunities for treatment in hospitals or for lodging in places\nprovided for the poor. Human nature has not changed much, and the\ntramp and the wanderer have always been with us, as well as the man\nwho is willing to \"give up\", and let others take care of him.\n\nCharity, as its Latin etymology suggests, means the dearness of others\nto us. It is our personal interest in them that constitutes its\nessence and not at all the mere giving of something or even the doing\nof something in order to be relieved from the necessity of thinking\nabout them. Dear old Sir Thomas Browne, in his \"Religio Medici\", put\nthe whole question of charity very succinctly when he said, \"this I\nthink charity, to love God for Himself and our neighbor for God.\"\nMilton summed {85} up the complete quintessence of religion in the\nsingle word charity quite as Doctor Browne did, though with less\naphoristic effectiveness. \"Our whole practical dutie in religion is\ncontained in charitie, or the love of God and our neighbor.\" Charity\nin this sense is a development of Christianity, and the personal\nservice idea is almost unknown in ancient times. Lecky, in his history\nof European morals, says that \"the active, habitual and detailed\ncharity of private persons, which is so conspicuous a feature in all\nChristian societies, was scarcely known in antiquity, and there are\nnot more than two or three moralists who have noticed it.\"\n\nIt is the love or affection that goes with whatever is done that is\nthe real essence of charity. It is this quality especially which makes\nthe charity of benefit to the doer. This helps him and above all her\nto eliminate that super-conscious preoccupation with self which has\nbecome the bane of existence in modern times. It is at the root of\nmore serious physical and mental symptoms than any other single factor\nthat we have in pathology. Anything that will take people out of\nthemselves, that will interest them in others and keep them from\nthinking about themselves, will do an immense amount of good in\nhelping to maintain their good health, but above all will keep people\nfrom exaggerating feelings of all kinds, some of them scarcely more\nthan normal, a great many of them merely physiological, into symptoms\nwhich seem to indicate serious disease and sometimes to portend\nextremely serious consequences. Charity that really touches the heart\nis a panacea for more ills than any remedy we have. It will make even\nthose who are sufferers from genuine disease often of severe or almost\nfatal character ever so much more comfortable, and it has {86}\nfurnished some invalids with such occupation of mind and heart as has\nenabled them to do a great deal of good in the world. A great many of\nus know of one bedridden lady, utterly unable to sit up, who has\nsucceeded in organizing throughout the country branches of an\nextremely valuable organization which helps the poor to provide proper\nclothing for their infants and has saved many lives and made many\nhomes happier.\n\nThere are a great many people who are afraid lest they should do harm\nby their charity and who apparently fail to realize that it is their\nown selfishness which takes refuge in the excuse that doing things for\nothers may possibly pauperize the objects of their beneficence. As\nJohn Ruskin reminded us in \"Sesame and Lilies\", it is extremely\nimportant not to let ourselves be deceived by any of the very common\ntalk of \"indiscriminate charity.\" He adds, in one of those passages of\nhis that only he could write and that are so full of the meat of\nthought for those who care to think about such subjects:\n\n  \"The order to us is not to feed the deserving hungry, nor the\n  industrious hungry, nor the amiable and well-intentioned hungry, but\n  simply to feed the hungry. It is quite true, infallibly true, that\n  if any man will not work, neither should he eat--think of that, and\n  every time you sit down to your dinner, ladies and gentlemen, say\n  solemnly, before you ask a blessing, 'How much work have I done\n  to-day for my dinner?' But the proper way to enforce that order on\n  those below you, as well as on yourselves, is not to leave vagabonds\n  and honest people to starve together, but very distinctly to discern\n  and seize your vagabond; and shut your vagabond up out of honest\n  people's way, and very sternly then see that, until he has worked,\n  he does not eat.\"\n\n{87}\n\nWorks of charity under religious impulses have always constituted an\nexcellent resource for people inclined to be overoccupied with\nthemselves and who need the stimulus of contact with those in\nsuffering to make them realize that their own troubles are largely the\nresult of too much preoccupation with trifling discomforts of various\nkinds or even with symptoms of various affections which must be borne\nand which will cause much less suffering and general disturbance of\nhealth if there is the distraction of sincere and deep interest in\nothers. Anything that will act as a brake on the working of the Law of\nAvalanche which is discussed in the chapter on Pain and which serves\nto increase all suffering through subjective influences will do human\nbeings a great deal of good. As a rule nothing is so effective in this\ndirection as preoccupation with the much severer ills of other people.\n\nThe seven corporal works of mercy, as they were called, that is, the\nseven modes of succoring those in need which St. Paul suggested every\nChristian should practice, are particularly valuable for the neurotic\nindividuals whom, like the poor and needy, we have always with us, but\nwho have multiplied so much more in this generation because a great\nmany people have not enough to occupy their time properly, but above\nall have not enough exercise of their heart impulses and their\naffections to satisfy this imperative need of humanity. Women\nparticularly must be afforded, as a rule, the opportunity to mother\nsomebody who requires their care. If they have no children of their\nown, and with the loosening of the bonds of religion more and more of\nthem have not, then they will seldom be happy unless the chance is\nprovided for them to devote the emotional side of their {88} natures\nto other human beings who need them and whose needs constitute the\nbest possible opportunity for the exercise of the spiritual side of\nthis precious function.\n\nThe seven corporal works of mercy are:\n  (1) To feed the hungry;\n  (2) To give drink to the thirsty;\n  (3) To clothe the naked;\n  (4) To harbor the harborless;\n  (5) To visit and ransom the captive;\n  (6) To visit the sick; and\n  (7) To bury the dead.\nThese represented a list of very definite duties which children were\ntaught to repeat from memory when they were young; and they were told\nvery simply that if they did not take the opportunity to perform them\nthey were really not doing their Christian duty. To visit the sick,\nfor instance, meant not only to spend an hour or two with a sick\nrelative, but to seek out those who were sick and poor and had no one\nto care for them and make some provision for them. Some of the old\nhospital visiting customs in this regard are extremely interesting,\ninasmuch as they reveal the resource that this must have been to\npeople who are usually thought of as being occupied solely with social\nduties in the much narrower sense of the term. Martin Luther tells in\none of his letters that during his visit to Italy about four hundred\nyears ago, one of the things that proved a great source of edification\nto him was the fact that the ladies of the nobility in the Italian\ncities made it a custom to visit the hospitals regularly and to spend\nhours at a time there and do things for the patients with their own\nhands. Some of them wore veils while they were performing this\nbeautiful service in order that they might not be recognized, lest\nwhat they did should come to be talked about, and they did not want to\npractice their charity for the sake of publicity. The people of the\nold time were often as intent on avoiding publicity as our generation,\nas a rule, {89} seems to be intent on securing it. Almost needless to\nsay ostentatious philanthropy is not charity and has none of the\nreactionary good effects for the doer to be found in real charity.\n\nIt must not be forgotten that whenever hospitals are visited regularly\nthus by the better-to-do classes there is very little likelihood of\nserious abuses creeping into them. The care of even the very poor\npatients is kept at a high standard because these visitors see the\nbeginnings of abuses and either bring about their correction at once,\nor else devote themselves to some modification of hospital routine\nthat will prevent the recurrence of such unfortunate conditions.\nReligion thus proved a stimulus to the better care of the ailing poor\nthat was a distinct benefit to the health of the community. It was\nwhen hospitals ceased to be the object of such attention on the part\nof the better-to-do people that they ran down into the awful condition\nwhich prevailed so generally in them even less than a century ago.\n\nBurdett in his \"History of Hospitals\" has not hesitated to say that\nhospitals placed in the midst of cities and visited regularly by the\nwell-to-do represent a great social instrument for the betterment of\nall sorts of social conditions. The wealthy are kept from being\nselfish, the poor from being envious, the classes of the community are\nnot so separated that they fail to understand each other, and both of\nthem are greatly benefited by the experiences which bring them\ntogether.\n\nBurdett has gone even further and insisted that the support of\nhospitals, by the State, because it removes opportunities for charity,\nis an unfortunate development in modern times. Those who are well able\nto help the poor and the ailing get the feeling that due provision is\n{90} made for them out of the taxes, and that, therefore, no further\nobligation rests upon them and the needs and requirements of the poor\nare no concern of theirs. As a consequence, he says, \"an increasing\nnumber of people are being brought up on a wrong principle and are\nthus led to forget the privilege and to ignore the duty of giving\ntoward the support of those who are unable to help themselves.\"\n\nBesides pointing out how much is lost of social value and social\nstimulus when private charitable institutions are replaced by State\ninstitutions, Burdett emphasizes not only how much of social good is\naccomplished by voluntary charity, but also how much of personal\nrelief is afforded to some of the trials of life that often prove the\nsource of unfortunate pathological conditions. He said: \"Apart from\nthe evils we have briefly referred to, there is a loss to the whole\ncommunity in the lessened moral sense which State institutions create.\nThe voluntary charities afford an opening for the encouragement and\nexpression of the best of all human feelings,--sympathy between man\nand man. They give to the rich an opening for the display of\nconsideration toward the poor which is fruitful in results. They\ncreate a feeling of widespread sympathy with those who suffer and\nimpress on the population the duty of almsgiving to an extent which no\nother charity can do. They constitute a neutral platform whereon all\nclasses and sects can meet with unanimity and good feeling. They\nprovide a field of labor wherein some of the most devoted and best\nmembers of society can cultivate the higher feelings of humanity and\nlearn to bear their own sufferings and afflictions with resignation\nand patience.\"\n\nI have made it a practice for years, now, when women {91} who were\nwithout children and without any special outlet for their affections\nsuffered from neurotic symptoms, to prescribe that they get in touch\nwith the ailing poor in some way. Especially for those trying patients\nwho complain of inability to sleep well, a feeling of depression when\nthey awake, a lack of appetite, but also a lack of incentive to do\nanything and a tendency to stay much in the house and by themselves, a\ncondition which not infrequently develops in childless women shortly\nbefore and after what is called \"the change of life\", no prescription\nis so valuable as hospital visiting, or where that is impossible for\nsome reason, at least to make it a rule to visit sick friends\nregularly. I have seen women suffering severely from neurotic symptoms\nthat made life miserable for them become not only quite reconciled to\nexistence, sleep better and eat better, but actually find some of\ntheir first real satisfaction in life as the result of discovering\nthat they could visit the orthopedic ward of a hospital regularly,\ntell stories to the crippled children and bring them little toys, help\nto make Easter and the Fourth of July and Thanksgiving Day and\nChristmas and New Year's happier for them. I have known women who\nthought after some serious domestic affliction that they could never\nbe happy again, to find, if not happiness, at least satisfaction in\nlife after they had visited a cancer home regularly for some time and\nhad seen with what cheerfulness patients could face the inevitably\nfatal affection which they knew was gradually sapping life and\ncarrying them day by day into the shadow of death. No therapeusis that\nI know is so valuable for the stony grief without tears that some\nwomen exhibit after a great loss as the ward for crippled children or\nsome regular visiting of incurable patients.\n\n{92}\n\nTo visit and ransom the captives, that is, to visit prisoners and help\nthem in any way possible, is a work of mercy that comparatively few\npeople in our day seem to think they are under any obligations to do\nmerely because they are Christians. They took this duty very seriously\nin the older time, however, and the result was excellent for the\nprisoners as well as for those who visited them. When condemned to\nserve a sentence and then left to wear out prison existence for years\nas best he can, seeing only his fellow prisoners and his keepers, a\nprisoner is very likely to grow bitter. In not a few of the prisoners,\nhealth of body and even of mind gives way under these hard conditions.\nIf the prisoners were visited at definite intervals by some one\nwilling to listen a little patiently to their story, for there is\nalways another side to every story--even though the other side may not\nbe very true--and who would occasionally bring them little things like\ntobacco as a solace or reading matter to occupy idle hours, and who\nwould promise to interest himself in securing any favors that were\npossible and to see that they were given advantage of every benefit\nallowed them by the law, they would have less of the feeling that they\nwere outcasts of society. It is because the corporal works of mercy as\nrepresenting serious Christian duties somehow have come to be\nneglected that we have had this rather disturbing social problem of\nthe bitter-minded prisoner so likely to get into prison again thrust\nupon us. But it is also because of the lack of such a fine human\ninterest as is afforded by contact with prisoners who show some hope\nof reform that many an overoccupied business man suffers from such\nprofound weariness of life that rest cures and special vacations have\nto be prescribed for him.\n\n{93}\n\nI once had a bachelor friend whom I had known for many years come to\nme as a patient, and though he had been a model of common sense, whom\nI had been accustomed to think of as utterly without nerves, I was\nsurprised to find how many neurotic symptoms were gradually developing\nin him. He had lost his sister who had made a home life and a heart\ninterest for him, and he had no near relatives; he had nothing but his\nbusiness to occupy him; he had no hobby and no interest in that\ndirection that seemed likely to develop, and I wondered what I should\nadvise him to occupy himself with to keep him from getting further on\nhis own nerves. He had an extremely important and correspondingly\ndifficult position involving the carrying of a heavy burden of\nresponsibility for a great many rather complex details of a huge\nbusiness. A chance remark of his own in pity for a young fellow whom\nhis corporation had found cheating and had felt itself compelled to\nprosecute--for example's sake--led me to suggest the visiting of\nprisoners. For years that man spent several hours on two or three\nSundays of every month visiting the prisoners of a large city. He\ngathered around him a group of men who found a good deal of\nsatisfaction in that work. He himself began to sleep better and wiped\noff the slate of life a series of dreads and obsessions that he was\nbeginning to foster. Men often talk of \"the blue devils\" getting hold\nof them, but it is often just a case of the devil finding work not for\nidle hands but for idle hearts. Especially at Christmas and Easter he\nused to have as good a time, in the best sense of that expression,\nwith his \"little brothers\" of the prison as any father and mother ever\nhad with a house full of children. He once told me some of his\nexperiences in a way that revealed his tactfulness in the {94}\nhandling of these sensitive fellow mortals that was one of the most\ninteresting revelations of the Christian gentleman I think I have ever\nhad given me.\n\nTo harbor the harborless as a work of mercy, when stated in this form,\nseemed to me as a child, when I learned it in the catechism, some\nwonderful exhibition of charity for shipwrecked mariners. I could not\nhelp but think that it must be harborless sailors who needed to be\nharbored. Stories of even two or three generations ago here in America\nshow how seriously this Christian duty of the old-fashioned words was\ntaken. There are still many country places, in the mountains of\nKentucky and Tennessee particularly, where a family will take in a\nstranger for the night if he happens to be in their neighborhood. They\nwill give him his supper and breakfast too--or they would a few years\nago--and likely would be insulted if he offered to pay for them. They\nhave performed a simple duty of hospitality which comes down to them\nby tradition from the older time. A man who is still alive told me\nthat when he was young, and two or three of his brothers slept in the\nbed with him, occasionally they would find, when they woke in the\nmorning, that father had taken in a stranger during the night, and\nsince there was no other place for him than the children's big bed on\nthe floor, the children had been crowded over and room had been made\nfor him with them. This happened not in the south, but in\nPennsylvania. I know that my old grandmother long ago, living in a\none-roomed house with an attic, used to take in the \"greenhorns\" from\nIreland in this manner and give the men shelter and food until they\ncould get a job; and give the girls who came a lodging and a chance to\nlearn something about plain American cooking and the care {95} of a\nhouse until they would be ready to take a place in service.\n\nAlmost needless to say, this exercise of hospitality proved a very\ninteresting diversion for people whose lives were rather monotonous. I\nfeel sure that it must have meant much for the relief of that\ndissatisfaction with life because it lacks variety which is so often\nthe first symptom of a neurosis. The stranger brought the news from a\ndistance; the \"greenhorns\" brought news from Ireland, and many things\nwere talked over while they ate their meals or sat around the fire in\nthe evening, and it proved real entertainment. This was not the motive\nfor which the charity was offered, for that was, as a rule, as\nChristian as it could be, but it represented that reward which is so\noften--it cannot but be divinely--attached to a good deed and which\nbrings so much satisfaction with it.\n\nOur entertainment of guests, as a rule, is very different. Above all\nit entails no personal effort. Even when people are invited to dinner\nnowadays, hostesses seem to consider it necessary to ask somebody to\nentertain them, for if they should be permitted to entertain\nthemselves or be asked to make an effort to make their own\nconversation entertaining, they would probably be almost bored to\ndeath. Is it any wonder that our fulfilment of so-called social duties\noften proves nerve-racking and a season of it must be followed by a\nrest cure while old-fashioned hospitality did good to the doer and the\nrecipient? Ours is the selfish striving of social aspirations; theirs\nwas an exercise of real charity, an external expression of the\ndearness of fellow mortals.\n\nAbove all, the presence in a household of an occasional guest who is\nnot a relative is good for family life. It {96} relieves the monotony,\noften relaxes domestic tension, gives a new zest to living and cements\npersonal friendships.\n\nTo feed the hungry, to give drink to the thirsty and to clothe the\nnaked were, in the Christian ritual of corporal works of mercy, not\nobligations to be accomplished by writing one's name on a piece of\nbank paper and passing it over to a social service society of some\nkind, nor by handing a few bills to some almoner who distributes\ncondescendingly your dole to the poor. Some one has very well said\nthat the only action calling for any reward in such activities is the\neffort required to write one's signature or reach into the pocket for\nthe money. The rest of the transaction is only a matter of debit and\ncredit on a bank balance and makes practically no difference in most\ncases to the individual who gives it. The most compelling motive for\ncharity in our time is that you might as well give up to fifteen per\ncent of your income, for if you do not the government will take it\nanyhow. So have the satisfaction of getting ahead of Uncle Sam.\n\nCharity in the older time was thought to be actual, personal work for\nothers. It is this personal service which carries its reward with it,\noften by provision of needed physical exercise, always by happy\noccupation of mind, affording the opportunity for the satisfaction of\nheart impulses with the many other personal reactions which enter into\ntrue charity.\n\nReligious teaching furnishes an abundance of examples of even kings\nand queens and the higher nobility and of wealthy merchants and their\nwives who devoted themselves to personal service in the performance of\nthese works of mercy. St. Louis of France, St. Ferdinand of Castille,\nSt. Catherine of Siena, though she was only a dyer's daughter in this\ngroup of notabilities, {97} St. Elizabeth of Hungary, St. Margaret of\nScotland and the good Queen Maud her daughter, Dick Whittington (of\nthe cat), Lord Mayor of London and many others,--all these were held\nup as symbols of what people ought to do in the matter of personal\nservice.\n\nThere is often the feeling at the present time that when people give\nto charity it is not infrequently because they have heard some recent\nharrowing reports of the condition of the poor or have been brought in\ncontact with some particularly pitiable case, and that the memory of\nthese is likely to recur to them and intrude on their social\nsatisfactions unless they can do something to make them feel that they\nhave at least tried to fulfill their duty in the way of affording\nrelief. A merchant on the way home from business who meets a beggar on\nthe streets knows that as a rule, if he gives money, it will do harm\nrather than good, but he knows too that when he is comfortably seated\nafter dinner before the fire, with his coffee and his cigar before\nhim, if the thought of the beggar that he refused comes to him, it\nwill make him uncomfortable. To give with the idea of avoiding such\ndiscomforts is, of course, not charity, but refined selfishness, and\nit is no wonder that it lacks the surpassing sense of satisfaction\nwhich helps so much in making life more full of the feeling of\nusefulness. This is not the charity that does as much good for the\ndoer as for the receiver of it.\n\nIn our time settlement work, neighborhood houses and the like have\nrepresented this personal service which religion in the older time\nlisted under the various titles of the corporal works of mercy. Many\nphysicians have learned that young women particularly who had not very\nmuch to do, indeed perhaps no definite duties and yet {98} had an\nabundance of vital energy which had to be expended in some way, found\nvery interesting and satisfying occupation of mind in connection with\nsettlement work. Above all they secured an opportunity for the\nexercise of the heart impulses, so natural to women, and which must\nalmost as necessarily be expended on something as the physical\nenergies which they develop every day must be employed in some sort of\nlabor if they are not to be short-circuited and make them miserable.\nIt is perfectly possible and even easy to pervert heart impulses which\nmight be the source of good for self and others, into sexuality of\nvarious kinds, whether that be exhibited in philanderings with the\nmale dancers employed by the hotels to make _thes dansants_\ninteresting for feminine youth--and also idle middle age--or in love\naffairs with the family chauffeur. They will find an issue some way\nalmost inevitably. It may be that writing notes to the latest matinee\nidol or even letting one's feelings be properly harrowed up at\nperformances of sex-problem plays may prove sufficient for a time, but\nsomething more will be demanded before long, and there must be\nsomething real to satisfy natural cravings.\n\nThere is probably no better safeguard against the tendency of the\nyoung heart to overflow on unworthy objects than to give it the\nopportunity to exercise itself on unselfish aims which lead up to the\nfine satisfactions to be derived from helpfulness for others.\nSettlement work and cognate personal activities have so organized the\nopportunity for this that young women do not have to travel in\nperilous neighborhoods except under such circumstances as reasonably\nassure their safety from insult or aggression of any kind. The charity\nthat prompts occupation with such activities often leads to {99} a\ndevelopment of character, while at the same time affording such\nexercise of body and mind as greatly promotes that eminently desirable\nend,--the possession of a healthy mind in a healthy body. There is\nmuch discussion at the present time over sex dangers for young people,\nbut it must not be forgotten that these are mainly due to the sexual\nincitements which we are fostering in the dance hall and the theater\nand the cabaret supper room, while the best possible corrective for\nsexual erethism is to be found in contact with some of the misery of\nthe world. The remedy is at hand, but unfortunately it is not made use\nof as a rule, and we wonder why evils increase as selfishness becomes\nmore rampant.\n\nJohn Ruskin summed up the situation with regard to the young women of\nour time in his address on The Mystery of Life and its Arts (\"Sesame\nand Lilies\"), in words that deserve to be in the notebook of every one\nwho hopes to be able to help the young over some of the difficult\nparts of their path through life in our time.\n\n  \"You may see continually girls who have never been taught to do a\n  single useful thing thoroughly; who cannot sew, who cannot cook, who\n  cannot cast an account, nor prepare a medicine, whose whole life has\n  been passed either in play or in pride; you will find girls like\n  these, when they are earnest-hearted, cast all their innate passion\n  of religious spirit, which was meant by God to support them through\n  the irksomeness of daily toil, into grievous and vain meditation\n  over the meaning of the great Book, of which no syllable was ever\n  yet to be understood but through a deed; all the instinctive wisdom\n  and mercy of their womanhood made vain, and the glory of their pure\n  consciences warped into fruitless agony concerning questions which\n  the laws of common, serviceable life {100} would have either solved\n  for them in an instant, or kept out of their way. Give such a girl\n  any true work that will make her active in the dawn and weary at\n  night, with the consciousness that her fellow creatures have indeed\n  been the better for her day, and the powerless sorrow of her\n  enthusiasm will transform itself into a majesty of radiant and\n  beneficent peace.\"\n\nThe friendly visiting of the poor is an old-fashioned Christian\npractice which had lapsed, unfortunately, until it was restored to\nsome extent at least by the great work of Frederick Ozanam of Paris.\nThe conferences of St. Vincent de Paul organized by him in Paris while\nhe was professor of the university there about one hundred years ago\nhad for their principal object the visitation of the poor, not so much\nfor the purpose of giving them alms as of helping them with advice,\nmaking them feel that there are people interested in them, and giving\nthem a new sense of human dignity; though also providing them with\nsuch necessaries as they might be in immediate want of and, above all,\nsecuring them occupations whenever they were needed. I have known many\nmen who have developed a new and vigorous sense of life as a\nconsequence of learning that they could be so useful to others as the\nOzanam organization permitted them to be.\n\nFor a great many men some such escape from the sordid routine of daily\nbusiness life is needed. This is particularly true when they have\npassed a little beyond middle age, which for me is not beyond fifty,\nas so many people seem to think, but thirty-five, the period indicated\nby Dante in the first line of his \"Divine Comedy\" as marking the\nmid-point of existence. After forty, particularly, most men who take\nlife seriously and do not merely try {101} to make money and kill the\nintervening time that hangs heavily on their hands in any way that\nthey can, as a rule lose their interest in reading novels and do not\ncare for the trivial plays of our time. They need diversion. They are\nnot likely to get it at the opera unless they are very musically\ninclined. Card-playing may prove an excellent diversion and one that\npersonally I think ever so much better than the reading of trivial\nnovels, but there are a great many men to whom it has no appeal. If\nthey stay at home they are likely to fall asleep in their chairs over\nthe evening paper or a current magazine, and nothing in the world\nmakes one feel so uncomfortable or so spoils an evening as to go to\nsleep in that way.\n\nIf they are particularly occupied with business affairs these may\nintrude themselves on their evening hours, but they very soon learn\nthe lesson that it is dangerous to take business home with them. They\nneed some serious occupation of mind quite different from what\noccupies them during the day. Professional men find something of this\nin the meetings of professional societies, but they too need a heart\ninterest, a sympathy interest for their fellow man quite as well as\nthe women. Many of them find it with their children as these grow up\naround them, and family life will help very much. But as the children\ngrow older and have their own interests in the evenings, father is\nmore and more likely to be left by himself, and then he needs\nsomething that will occupy him in some broad, human way. A good hobby\nof any kind would be a saving grace, but hobbies, to be effective,\nshould be cultivated from early in life. One cannot be created easily\nat need after forty.\n\nFor such men friendly visiting of the poor, for it is only in the\nevenings that the man of the house can be {102} seen, since he is\nalways at work during the day, will often prove a most valuable\nresource. In a number of instances I have suggested to men who were\nbeginning to get on their own nerves that they interest themselves in\nthis way and have been rather well satisfied with the results when\nthey took the advice seriously. In a few cases I have seen really\nwonderful results when it seemed almost inevitable that men were\ndrifting into dangerous neurotic conditions because they were living\nlives too narrow in their interests and above all so self-centered\nthat they were dwelling on slight discomforts and exaggerating them\ninto symptoms of disease. Contact with the suffering that one sees\namong the city poor is a wonderful remedy for neurotic tendencies to\nmake too much of one's own feelings, for the poor almost as a rule\nface the real ills of life with a simplicity and a courage that\ninevitably causes any one who is brought close to them to admire them\nand to feel that his own trials are trifles compared to what these\npeople undergo with very little whimpering.\n\nThere is another phase of charity, probably unintentional in its\nactivity and almost unconscious, that is extremely interesting and has\na very definite place in a discussion of health and religion. Some men\nwho have made a success in life far beyond their neighbors have\npreferred to continue dwelling in their old home rather than move into\nthe quarter of the city to which their changed circumstances would\nhave permitted them to go. Such families represent the very best\npossible kind of settlements in the poorer quarters of the city and\nhelp more than anything else to keep a neighborhood from running down\nin such a way as to make life harder for the poor who dwell there. The\nold walled cities are often {103} said to have been almost intolerably\nunhealthy because of the inevitable crowding of the population which\nthey compelled, and undoubtedly they were a fruitful source of disease\nand ills of many kinds for the population; and yet it is doubtful\nwhether any old-time city was ever so insanitary as the slums of our\nmodern crowded cities were a generation ago or are even in many places\nat the present time.\n\nThere was one feature of the old cities whose obliteration one cannot\nhelp but regret. The better-to-do families often lived on the front\npart of a city lot while the less well-to-do, often indeed the men who\nworked for the proprietor of the house in front, lived on the back of\nit. This was true particularly in many foreign cities and continued\nuntil a few generations ago.\n\nThis arrangement kept the conditions of living, so far as regards the\nmiddle class of the poor, from being so markedly indifferent as they\nare at the present time. Those who lived in the rear knew all the\nhappenings, the births and deaths among their employers, while the\nfamily in the front took an interest in the events, the births and\ndeaths and illnesses in the families in the rear. This proved to be\nvaluable for social reasons, and it kept conditions of health among\nthe poor from degenerating in anything like the way that has happened\nin modern times. The mutual personal interests did a great deal more\nto make life more satisfactory and more full of good feeling than the\nrelationships of classes to each other do in our time, and this\nreacted to make a state of mind much more conducive to health than\nwould otherwise have been the case.\n\nSuch associations would seem to be almost impossible in modern days,\nand yet the late Mr. Thomas Mulry, {104} president of the Immigrants\nSavings Bank, at a time when, I believe, it was the largest savings\nbank in the world, continued to live down among the poorer folk to\nwhom so much of his life was devoted for years after families of his\nstanding in the financial world had long moved out. Our present\ngovernor of New York has declared his intention of continuing his\nresidence among his friends in the old Seventh Ward, and undoubtedly\nhis presence there will mean much not only for the health of those\naround him, but also for the health of his family because of the\nsimple life which is so likely to be perpetuated in these\nsurroundings.\n\nFor such social work as this, religious motives are probably the most\nefficient impulses. Nothing is quite so direct a denial of the\nbrotherhood of man that religion teaches as the tendency for people to\nmove away from old neighbors into the better quarters of the cities\njust as soon as they are any way able. Such reasoning may seem\nidealistic and impractical, but then religion is the typically ideal\nand impractical thing in life which teaches that self-advantage is not\nso important as advantage for all those around one, and that man's\nprincipal duty in life is to love his neighbor as himself.\n\nHow often has it happened that the building of the new house in a new\nneighborhood proves the last straw which serves to make an end of the\ngood health and heartiness of life which the head of the family had\nenjoyed up to this time. The new habits that are necessitated, the\ninterference with the active life which had been customary up to this\ntime and above all the more luxurious living, very often with less\nexercise, which come under the new conditions bring about\ndeterioration of health. The move is made for the sake of the {105}\nyoung people, but it takes the old folks out of the precious, simple\nhabits of a life-time which meant much for the preservation of health,\nso that it is no wonder that many a physician has had a patient whose\nbreakdown in health followed not long after the move to a new and\nhandsome house that carried people away from their old associations\nand their old neighbors and left them without those heart resources\nwhich are so important for the preservation of a healthy mind in a\nhealthy body. It is men, not things, that count in life, though that\nlesson is hard for many to learn.\n\nFor a while, toward the end of the nineteenth century, owing to a\nmisunderstanding of the significance of the struggle for existence,\nthere came to be the feeling that sympathy and helpfulness for others\nwas somehow contrary to modern scientific principles and that it\nrepresented at best a sentimentality that could scarcely hope to be\neffective and was indeed sure to fail in the long run because it was\nin opposition, though to but a very slight degree, to nature's\ninevitable elimination of the weak. Further investigations in biology,\nhowever, have revealed the fact that while the struggle for existence\nis an important factor in whatever evolution takes place, mutual aid\nis another factor of scarcely less importance in general and of\nsupreme significance within the species. While one species preys on\nanother, the members of the same species usually possess certain\ndeep-seated instincts of helpfulness. Only at times when there is\nfamine or when a mother is seeking food for her young do members of\nthe same species seriously interfere with each other's activities, or\ninjure each other, while a great many of them have mutually helpful\ninstincts that are extremely precious for personal as well as generic\ndevelopments.\n\n{106}\n\nThe smaller living things, as the insects, dwell together in\ncommunities and perform their duties constantly with the community\nbenefit rather than personal satisfaction in view. It might be said\nperhaps that these small creatures would have to be gifted in some\nsuch way to secure their preservation in the struggle for existence\nand their defense against their enemies. The larger animals, however,\nhave the same helpful instincts. Wild horses run in droves and when\nattacked by a pack of wolves--the wolves hunting in packs because they\ncan thus secure their prey better--the horses gather in a circle with\ntheir heads facing in and the young foals and the mares in the center,\nand only a battery of heels is presented to the attackers. Even such\nlarge animals as elephants travel in herds, with the huge bull\nelephants on the outskirts of the herd ready to hurl back any of the\nbig cats, the lions or tigers who might spring to get one of those\ntoothsome morsels, a baby elephant, traveling with its mother near the\ncenter of the herd. Smaller animals live in villages and groups of\nvarious kinds, and those of the same species are often helpful to each\nother in many ways.\n\nManifestly the great law of charity in a certain basic way at least\npervades all nature. Nature may be \"red in tooth and claw\", but\nbrother animals very often have by instinct a fellow feeling that is a\nfactor in the preservation of the race. The idea that the discovery of\nthe struggle for existence and the preservation of favorite races in\nthat way has in any fashion neutralized the law of charity is entirely\na mistake. Men in their selfishness have occasionally asserted this,\nand above all those who felt uncomfortable because their own selfish\nsuccesses were, as they could plainly see, causing a great deal of\ndiscomfort and sometimes the ruin of others. It was {107} once\nsuggested that when the nurseryman wants to grow specially beautiful\nAmerican Beauty roses he is careful to eliminate all except a few\nbuds, so that these may have an opportunity to grow to the greatest\npossible perfection, and that this same policy pursued in human\naffairs led to the production of such great institutions as the\nStandard Oil Company. This was a particularly odorous comparison; it\nwas made some twenty years ago. Almost needless to say every one sees\nthe absurdity of it now, though at that time there were not a few who\nthought that the biological principle of the struggle for existence\njustified even the hurting of rivals in order to secure success. The\nGreat War completed the elimination of such ideas. It was undertaken\nwith the thought that any nation or people who could dominate the\nworld was bound to do so, because that was manifest destiny for the\nbenefit of the race. Just as it took our Civil War to end the defense\nof slavery in the United States, so it has taken the Great War to end\nsuch pretensions and bring out the fact that mutual aid, and above all\ncharity undertaken out of real love for others through a divine motive\nmust be the rule for men, while its symbol, mutual aid among the\nmembers of the various species, constitutes an important element for\nthe preservation of the various races and the working out of the great\nlaws that underlie all nature.\n\nWe in our generation were the inheritors of a philosophy of life\nwhich, for a time in what has now come to be called the \"silly\nseventies\", people thought could do away entirely with the necessity\nfor a Creator and with the idea of a Providence because it seemed to\nthem as though the suffering in the world around them contravened\n_their_ notion of an all-wise Power capable of {108} relieving suffering\nand yet not doing so. The doctrine of the survival of the fittest\nseemed to many a demonstration that victory was to the strongest or to\nthe swiftest, and that the rest must simply go to the wall or lag\nbehind in the race of life. The doctrine of the superman seemed to be\nthe very latest discovery of science, but now, after having fought a\ngreat war to overthrow that doctrine, the world is much readier to go\nback and take up the thread of the philosophy of the race before the\ntheory of the struggle for existence came to figure so largely in it.\nWe have come to realize that everywhere in nature there is a great law\nof mutual aid within its species impressed upon all living things, and\nthis is even more applicable to the human species than to those of the\nlower orders.\n\n\n\n{109}\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nFASTING AND ABSTINENCE\n\n\nPractically all religions have enjoined fasting as a part of their\npractice, either as a sacrifice made to higher powers or a recognition\nof the fact that occasional voluntary abstinence from food gave man a\npower of control over himself which represented a real religious gain\nin his relations with the deity. We have heard not a little in modern\ntimes of the evils to health consequent upon the abuse of fasting and\nof the limitation of food generally. Appetite must rule the quantity\nto be eaten, and this must not be interfered with by religious motives\nor health will suffer. Undoubtedly imprudent fasting, like the abuse\nof anything else, no matter how good in itself, has done no little\nharm. So much has been said, however, of the hysterical and neurotic\nconditions which resulted in women particularly, who out of an\nexaggerated sense of piety ate less than was necessary to support\ntheir bodies properly, that a rather violent prejudice has been\ncreated in many minds with regard to fasting as if it were an\nold-fashioned superstitious practice which our progress in knowledge\nand in the proper understanding of man, and his relations to the\nhigher powers had enabled us to see the foolishness of and do away\nwith for good and all.\n\nCareful observations made in the course of the advance of modern\nscientific medicine have, however, made it {110} very clear that\nperiodical abstinences from food, or at least certain foods,\nespecially among people who are accustomed to eat rather heartily,\ninstead of being in any way a detriment to health, are practically\nalways a distinct hygienic advantage. Physicians are not likely to\ntake seriously such expressions as that most people dig their graves\nwith their teeth or that eating too much is the bane of the race, but\nthey appreciate very well that there are a great many people,\nespecially among the better-to-do classes, who eat more than is good\nfor them. It is just the people who have least exercise and need the\nleast food who are tempted by the variety and tastiness of modern food\nto eat too much. Any practice that would limit this would undoubtedly\nbe good. Fasting and abstinence, because periodic, would be especially\nvaluable, for they are likely to do less harm than any continued\nlimitation of food. The one phase of modern sanitation and hygiene, as\nmade clear from the mortality records of the departments of health of\nour cities, that has been seriously disturbing in recent years, has\nbeen the increase in mortality among people above the age of fifty. We\nhave been very properly proud of the fact that we have reduced\nmunicipal death rates and made the average length of life much longer\nthan it used to be. We have done this, however, by saving more young\nchildren and by greatly lessening the infectious diseases among young\nadults, but the deaths from apoplexy, Bright's disease and heart\ndisease, just when life is at its most valuable stage, have increased\nand not diminished. The tendencies to these serious degenerative\ndiseases are due, it is well understood, ever so much more to\novereating than to undereating. This is particularly true as regards\nthe overeating of meat and other foods {111} rich in proteid materials\nwhich have been the special subject of religious fasting regulation.\n\nReligion then, by inculcating the practice of fasting and abstinence\nfrom flesh meat at certain times, has conferred a great benefit on the\nrace. One fish day in the week, for instance, all the year round, has\nin the minds of a great many physicians given nearly as much rest to\nthe digestive tract and certain of the more delicate metabolic\nprocesses of the body as Sunday freedom from labor has given to the\nmind and the body generally. The fact that a large part of our\npopulation will eat no meat on Friday and must have fish leads to a\ncommercial provision of fresh fish on that day in the week, of which\npractically all the community, including those who feel no religious\nobligation in the matter, takes advantage.\n\nAbstinence from meat, however, is quite a different thing from\nfasting, and Friday is a day of abstinence and not of fast. The fast\ndays come at certain periods of the year, as in Advent and Lent, and\ncertain days which are specially designated. The keeping of Lent,\nduring which for forty days people are expected to eat one third less\nthan they have been accustomed to, is a very valuable institution. I\nam not one of those who think, that everybody eats too much and who\nlike to be constantly insisting that people are destroying their lives\nby overeating, but I know very well that considerably more than half\nof humanity eat more than is good for them. I know, too, that about\none fourth of humanity does not eat enough for its own good, and that\nunfortunately a good many of these are taking the warnings with regard\nto eating to heart, though those who need them most are neglecting\nthem. Practically everybody who is overweight is eating too much and\nexercising too little. A {112} good many people who are underweight\nare eating too little. Considerably more than one half of adult\nmankind, however, would be benefited by keeping rather strictly the\nregulations for the Lenten season. The fact that the Sundays are not\nin Lent and that good, hearty meals can be eaten on that day gives\nassurance that people are not likely to be hurt by the fast. I think\nthat most of the physicians of the world would agree that the great\nmajority of men and women would be benefited by the rest and change\nwhich their metabolic processes receive as a result of limitation of\neating, and the observance of ecclesiastical regulations as to the\nmodification of food.\n\nThe reduction in meat eating and the production to some extent of a\ntaste for the white rather than the dark foods generally, for butter\nand eggs and creamed vegetables rather than the meat soups and meat\nsauces and the dark, heavy meats, so rich in the irritative\nextractives, is undoubtedly of distinct hygienic advantage. Of late\nyears particularly, probably much more meat than is good for people\nhas been eaten. The better-to-do classes have gradually come to the\nfashion of removing the fat, cutting off all the connective tissue\nportions of their meat and serving it or eating it in solid muscular\nmasses, which is neither conducive to good digestion and elimination\nnor to the proper building up of the body. Too many irritant materials\nare thus consumed, and it is no wonder that that properly dreaded\ndisease, arterio-sclerosis, the hardening of the arteries,\nrepresenting premature lessening of the elasticity of the tubes which\nconvey the blood on which vital processes depend to so great a degree,\nhas begun to be much more frequent than it used to be. There is\nagreement among physicians that {113} a rich meat diet has much to do\nwith this and that excessive meat eating is a growing evil in our\ntime.\n\nOnly religion could accomplish a change in this tendency, for there is\nan allurement about meat which grows as more of it is taken. This can\nbe noticed in children very readily, and human habits in civilized\ncountries have unfortunately followed a direction in this matter that\nrequires some profound influence to modify them. Not that meat is of\nitself a deleterious substance, nor one that should not be eaten, for\nthere is no reason in nature for vegetarianism; but excess in eating\nit, like excess in anything else, may do serious harm. Nature, and\nwhen we use the word we mean nature's God, set an index that is\ninfallible as to the variety of our diet when we were given cutting\nand tearing as well as grinding teeth. The presence of both these\nvarieties of teeth, though the meat-eating animals have only the\nincisors and canines, while the plant-eating animals have only the\nmolars or grinders, makes it clear beyond all doubt that human beings\nwere meant to eat meat, but in this, as in everything else, excess\nmust be avoided, and if it is not serious consequences follow.\n\nA great many are inclined to think of abstinence as representing\nabstinence from food alone, but it must not be forgotten that as\nunderstood in connection with religion it represents abstinence from\nall the harmful things. For instance, it represents abstinence from\nsleep when that is being taken to excess, and as a rule any healthy\nhuman being above the age of twenty and under sixty who sleeps more\nthan eight hours in the day needs to practice such abstinence. There\nis literally such a thing as oversleeping and thus accumulating more\nenergy than one has use for. The surplus energy is then used up {114}\nwithin the individual to the disturbance of functions of various\nkinds. Many a woman who has no children and who lives in an apartment\nhotel and has no duties that she has to get up for eats breakfast in\nbed, and does not rise until after eleven o'clock, after having gone\nto bed the night before sometime around midnight, and then wonders why\nshe feels so miserable. Nothing would do her more good than to be out\na little after eight in the morning briskly walking somewhere with the\nidea of helping some one else. She needs to practice abstinence of a\nvery definite kind.\n\nThen there are others who abstain too much from exercise. Whenever\nthey go out they ride either in a trolley car or in a machine; the\nidea of walking a mile is disturbing to them and walking three or four\nmiles seems utterly out of the question. Some of them are gaining in\nweight and are already overweight; they are wondering why they cannot\nbring themselves down and perhaps they are practicing abstinence of\nall kinds for that purpose. The famous English statesman. Lord\nPalmerston, who lived in good health to be a very old man and was for\nsixty years very prominent in English politics, was well known for the\namount of exercise that he took. His maxim with regard to it should be\nvery well known. He said, \"Every other abstinence will not make up for\nabstinence from exercise.\" There are a great many people who are\nabstaining too much from exercise and need to abstain from rest. If\nthey would do so for religious motives, and there are a number of\npeople who keep themselves going when they are tired by these motives,\nthey would not only accomplish a very great deal for their health, but\nthey would at the same time make their religion mean ever so much more\nin a practical way in life.\n\n{115}\n\nThe religious custom of setting a day of fasting before a feast day\nand of introducing three Ember Days before some of the larger feasts\nand at certain seasons of the year when, owing to the abundance of\nfood provided for the day of rejoicing, people are likely to overeat,\nhas been extremely beneficial as a simple matter of health\nconservation and prophylaxis against the effects of overeating. It has\nalways been the custom to provide better and ampler meals on the feast\ndays and if these are prepared for by a day of fasting, when one third\nless at least than usual is eaten, the stomach and digestive tract\ngenerally come to the full table much more ready for the feast. An old\nmedical friend once suggested that the only things in the world worth\nwhile considering in matters of health are contrast and microbes. From\nthe fast to the feast one gets the contrast and the variety in life\ndistinctly makes for better resistance against microbic invasion. The\nChurch believes in the satisfaction of reasonable appetites and\nencourages the feast days and their celebration by a larger provision\nof good things, but conserves health and disciplines the moral\ncharacter at the same time by inserting the fast days before them. The\noccurrence of feast days at regular intervals so that a special\ngratification of the appetite is looked forward to has been declared\nby most physicians who have considered the subject to be an excellent\nthing for health. Monotony of diet begets sluggish digestion.\n\nIn some very serious diseases, as for instance occasionally in\nBright's disease and rather more frequently in diabetes, fasting\nperiods of short duration have been found particularly valuable as\ntherapeutic measures. In certain forms of digestive disease fasting is\nalso a valuable adjuvant, though it needs to be used under the {116}\ndirection of a physician, for people who prescribe their own fasting\noften fail to realize that they may weaken their digestive organs\nrather seriously by the process. The stomach has a very good habit of\npassing on to the other organs the nutritious materials that come to\nit and will sometimes drain itself of necessary nutrition in following\nout this good habit in this matter. People who are overweight\nparticularly are often benefited by a fasting period, though here too\ncare must be exercised.\n\nEcclesiastical regulations which have introduced fasting at intervals,\nbut with proper interruptions on Sundays, even when there is a\nprolonged period of fasting, have certainly been beneficial to\nmankind. The loosening of the bonds of religion in modern times and\nthe very general persuasion that somehow we are not capable of\nstanding such abstinence from food as was insisted upon for the people\nof long ago are almost surely mistakes. All the nations of the world\nfound during the war that their men could stand a great deal more than\neither they themselves or any one else thought they could. The\nsoldiers taken out of the comforts of our cities lived in uncovered\nditches in the open fields winter and summer, spring and fall, rain or\nshine, hail or snow, often with wet feet and clothes frozen upon them,\nwith coarse food and not too much of it, taken at irregular intervals\noften in cold and unappetizing form, with interrupted sleep amid war's\nalarms and yet they actually came out of it in better health than they\nwere before. We hear much of hurting human nature by deprivations, but\nit seems very probable that the old-fashioned habits of religious\ndiscipline with even fasting rigorously enforced, for all who are in\nnormal health, would do good rather than harm. Not only could men\nstand them, though so {117} many fear they could not, but they would\nbe actually benefited by them. Nothing is so relaxing to the physical\nfiber of mankind as overindulgence, especially if continued\npersistently.\n\nUndoubtedly the old-fashioned ecclesiastical regulations would do good\nto the moral as well as the physical side of man and also to his\nmental power. An over-abundance of food sets up irritations of many\nkinds which make people restive in mind and body and adds fuel to\npassion. The expression in the Scripture is \"My beloved waxed fat and\nkicked.\" The people who kick over the traces of the ordinary rules of\nconduct in life are much oftener well fed than underfed. I refer, of\ncourse, to the sins against self and others rather than to the sins\nagainst property. Fasting was always recognized as an extremely\nvaluable adjunct in helping in the control of the passions. The\npractice of it made a man much more capable of controlling himself.\nThe passions are all serious for health when permitted to get beyond\nbounds. Many a case of indigestion is dependent on that irritability\nof temper which so often develops in good feeders and then proceeds to\nform a vicious circle of influence, perpetuating itself. Irritability\nof tissues is often in direct ratio to irritability of temper, and not\na few men owe both conditions to overindulgence in the pleasures of\nthe table and failure to acquire, to some extent at least, such habits\nof self-control as the practice of fasting at intervals would help\nthem to secure.\n\nThe bodily passions, especially those related to sex, are particularly\nlikely to be influenced by overeating and to be brought under\nsubjection by fasting, while at the same time the practice of this\ngives strength to the will in overcoming appetites which is a very\nvaluable auxiliary {118} for self-denial and self-control. All the\nauthorities in the spiritual life, that is to say, to use a modern way\nof putting it, all the students of psychology in the olden time who\ndevoted themselves to finding out how man could best regulate his\ninstincts and train his will to self-control are agreed in declaring\nfasting particularly valuable for the proper regulation of certain\nvery natural physical tendencies that may readily prove the source of\nserious temptations involving danger to health as well as to morals.\n\nIf fasting had done nothing else in the olden time but help men to\ncontrol tendencies to sexual excess, religion, by its encouragement of\nthe practice, would be a great creditor to health. One of the reasons\nwhy young folks, particularly nowadays, find it so hard and indeed\nsome of them seem to think almost impossible--to control their sexual\nimpulses, is that they have had no practice in building up habits of\ncontrol of bodily appetites and no exercise of their will power to\nhelp them to suppress the natural tendencies, whenever these threaten\ntheir own good or that of those around them.\n\nPerhaps modern hygiene may in the course of time find it advisable to\nreintroduce days of abstinence from certain foods and definite periods\nof fasting into the year for the sake of their mere physical benefit,\njust as holidays have been reintroduced in the last generation or so\nto replace the lost holydays of the older time. There are undoubtedly\ncorresponding benefits for humanity in both movements. Some of these\nhave been indicated more in detail in the chapters on Purity,\nMortification and Suffering, so that the specific benefits of the\npractice of self-denial with regard to food and drink which religion\nhas always encouraged may be seen in them. Religion {119} has always\ncounseled plain food for growing young folks, pointing out the dangers\nparticularly of overeating, feeding the sex impulses, or at least\nmaking them extremely difficult to repress. This is particularly true\nas regards the richer foods specially prepared with condiments that\ntempt the appetite and lead to the accumulation of heat-forming\nmaterials for which there is no natural outlet except hard physical\nexercise. Sugar and the sweets generally are particularly undesirable\nin this respect, hence the benefit of the pious practice which makes\nmany young folks abstain from candy during Lent.\n\n{120}\n\n\nCHAPTER VI\n\nHOLYDAYS AND HOLIDAYS\n\n\nIf religion had done nothing else for mankind than insert holydays\ninto the year, which came to be holidays in the best sense of the\nword, the health of mankind would have a great deal for which to thank\nit. Humanity is deeply indebted for the breaks in the routine of labor\nwhich came as the result of the institution of Church holydays of\nvarious kinds and especially for the Sundays. That every seventh day\nman should be free from labor was indeed a blessing. How few there are\nwho realize that the Sundays, taken together, fifty-two of them, make\nseven weeks and a half of vacation in the year. Seven weeks of\ncontinuous vacation are usually too much for most people to enjoy\nproperly; so long an interval palls on them. Coming once a week,\nhowever, the Sundays are probably the most wonderful aid to health and\nthe conservation of strength and the keeping of people in good\ncondition that we have.\n\nOne of the things for which we find it hardest to forgive the French\nRevolution is that when men tried to rule themselves by what they\nthought was pure reason, they changed the observance of Sunday every\nseventh day into a day of rest every tenth day. There seems to have\nbeen no other reason for that except that the French were introducing\nthe decimal system, and ten seemed to be {121} the number that\nappealed to them. Perhaps there was the feeling that seven was a sort\nof mystical number often mentioned in the Scriptures and deeply\nconnected with religion. Their thoroughgoing reaction against the\nmystical made them reject it. Seven is, however, a much better number\non which to regulate the day of rest than ten, and the seventh day has\nbeen extremely valuable for mankind.\n\nPractically every one who has thought about the subject has recognized\nthis, and yet it usually needs to be called particularly to their\nattention to have people generally appreciate it properly. Mr.\nGladstone once emphasized the great benefits which he himself had\nderived from it and which he felt ought to be accorded to every\nworkingman.\n\n  \"Believing in the authority of the Lord's day as a religious\n  institution, I must, as a matter of course, desire the recognition\n  of that authority by others. But, over and above this, I have\n  myself, in the course of a laborious life, signally experienced both\n  its mental and its physical benefits. I can hardly overstate its\n  value in this view; and for the interest of the working-men of this\n  country, alike in these and other yet higher respects, there is\n  nothing I more anxiously desire than that they should more and more\n  highly appreciate the Christian Day of Rest.\"\n\nMacaulay, the well-known English historian and essayist, emphasized\nparticularly the fact that the rest of Sunday, instead of proving a\ndetriment to mankind, was actually an advantage. During the war the\nBritish had to learn that lesson over again. Men and women in munition\nfactories were at the beginning, owing to the high wages, but with the\nfull approval of the government {122} authorities, encouraged to labor\nin the factories on Sunday as well as on other days in the week. It\nwas very soon found, however, that continuous labor, instead of\nenabling the operatives to keep up a greater production than before,\nwas soon followed by a diminution in the power of production which\nsadly reduced the output. The restoration of the Sunday rest was\npromptly followed by an increased output, for nature seems to need\nsuch a rest, or after a while there comes a lassitude and relaxation\nof muscular power which actually prevents men and women from\naccomplishing their tasks with anything like the energy that they have\nunder a regime of six working days followed by a day of rest. Only the\nmost menial of routine labor, requiring no thought for its\naccomplishment, can be kept up without definite days of rest for\nrelief and recuperation of forces.\n\nMacaulay declared: \"We are not poorer but richer because we have,\nthrough many ages, rested from our labour one day in seven. That day\nis not lost. While industry is suspended, while the plough lies in the\nfurrow, while the exchange is silent, while no smoke ascends from the\nfactory, a process is going on quite as important to the wealth of the\nnation as any process which is performed on more busy days. Man, the\nmachine of machines--the machine compared with which all the\ncontrivances of the Watts and Arkwrights are worthless--is repairing\nand winding-up, so that he returns to his labours on the Monday with\nclearer intellect, with livelier spirits, with renewed corporeal\nvigour.\"\n\nDuring the ages when organized religion had the power to regulate\nhuman life much more than it has at the present time, there were many\nmore days of rest than the Sundays. It is surprising now to find how\nmany days {123} in the year there were on which the Church forbade\nservile labor. All the Holydays of Obligation, so-called, were days of\nrest. From the very earliest time in Christianity there were at least\ntwo dozen of these in the year. The feast days of the Twelve Apostles,\nfor instance, were twelve holydays of obligation with no work, and\nthen there were of course nearly another dozen important celebrations\nin honor of the Lord. Christmas, and New Year, the Annunciation on\nMarch 25, Holy Thursday, Good Friday and usually two or three days in\nEaster week, Whitmonday and, as time went on, certain feast days in\nhonor of the Mother of the Lord were added and then certain local\nsaints' days in particular regions, as for instance the patron saint\nof the church of the place and often of the country. All together\nthere were some thirty of these Holydays of Obligation, that is one\nextra day every two weeks and a little more than that was a holiday,\non which no work was done. As the vigils of all first-class feasts\nwere free from labor after the vesper hour, two in the afternoon, and\nas no work was done on Saturday afternoons after the same hour, there\nwere actually well above one hundred days in the year free from labor.\n\nOne of the awful things that happened in the social order in modern\nhistory was the obliteration of these holydays shortly after the\nReformation. We are engaged, now that we have waked up to the\nnecessity of working people having days of recreation, in putting the\nholidays back into the year. We in this country have Lincoln's Day,\nWashington's Birthday, Decoration Day, Independence Day, Labor Day,\nand in most of the States Columbus Day, Election Day, and Thanksgiving\nDay as well as Christmas and New Year. In England, in {124} order to\nmake up for some of the holidays that have been lost, or rather so\nunwarrantably taken away from the working classes, they put in the\nbank holidays four times in the year, having them occur on Monday\nalways, so that from Saturday afternoon until Tuesday morning people\nare free from the obligation of laboring. We know now how wise, from a\nhuman and merely natural as well as the divine and spiritual aspect\nwas the insertion of holydays in the year. We must have more holidays;\nthere should be at least one every month, and the old custom of having\nat least one every two weeks would be much better.\n\nThere are not a few people, especially in our strenuous time, deeply\nintent on human productiveness rather than on human life and\nhappiness, who seem inclined to think that so many holidays in the\nyear sadly hamper the power of humanity to get things done and,\ntherefore, represent a very serious waste of time. Those who think\nthat, however, are usually in quest of some personal advantage of some\nvery sordid kind and are not interested in the real achievements of\nhumanity. After all, human accomplishment, like personal advance,\ndepends not on how much we get done but how well it is done. It is not\nfrom extremely tired, overwrought mortals, whose physical forces are\nalways in tension because of the almost continuous strain to which\nthey are subjected that we can ever expect to get any products that\nare really worth while. Slave labor may be exploited thus, and it is\npossible to build barracks and railroads and even pyramids in this\nway, but to erect structures of any noble kind which comprise in\nmaterial form beautiful expressions of the artistic feelings of\nmankind, there can be no rush of tired human beings, but time must be\ntaken.\n\n{125}\n\nThe late Mr. Standish O'Grady of Dublin, to whom probably more than to\nany one else is due the modern revival in Irish literature which has\nbeen such an incentive for better poetry throughout the\nEnglish-speaking world, once discussed this question of the\nachievement of mankind when men are released from the obligation of\ncontinuous labor and are free to think and have the opportunity to\ninvite their souls and be inspired to higher things. It was at a\ndinner here in America, and he was remarking the fact that every one\nwhom he met over here in this country was busy, _busy_, BUSY! They did\nnot apologize for the fact, as a rule, but on the contrary seemed to\nbe proud of it and to think that it must be the normal state of man to\nbe so occupied with what he was about that he was ever deeply intent\non it. He reminded his American audience that leisure was the\nfoster-mother of nearly everything that mankind had ever done that was\nworth while, for the worth-while things must have thought in them, and\nthought requires time and leisure for its fulfillment.\n\nMr. O'Grady recalled the fact that twice in the world's history when\nmen accomplished results so great that the world will never willingly\nlet die the monuments then created, the most important feature of life\nwas its leisure. Actually one third of the time of the men of Greece\nin the Periclean period, that Golden Age of achievement, was spent in\nthe preparation for and the celebration of religious mysteries. Their\ngreatest architectural monuments were their temples; their finest\nsculptures were the figures of the gods and goddesses, but what is not\nusually realized is that their literature was the product of the\nleisure afforded for competitions in their great religious festivals,\nand their painting had a similar origin. The {126} Greeks, like the\nmedieval Christians, had a great many feast days during the year, and\non these they held games and contests of various kinds, not only\nathletic but poetic, dramatic and literary of all kinds, for Herodotus\nread his great history before the assembled multitude in the\ncelebration of a religious festival at Athens and was awarded a prize\nequivalent very probably to ten thousand dollars in our time.\n\nWhat was true of the Greeks was true also, as has been said, of the\nMiddle Ages. The generations which made the great Gothic cathedrals\nwhich we have come to look upon as such triumphs of construction,\nwhich built the magnificent abbeys and town halls and hospitals of the\nlater Middle Ages, enduring monuments of their genius in construction,\nspent one third of their time in the celebration of and the\npreparation for religious festivals. Twice in the history of the\nworld, once in the later Middle Ages and in the older days in Greece,\ndramatic literature originated anew in religious mystery and morality\nplays. The men who gave us Magna Charta and all the great charters of\nliberties that lie at the basis of modern rights and privileges in\npractically every country in Europe had the time to think out the\nsolutions of their problems in the leisure afforded by the fifty-two\nSundays and thirty Holydays of Obligation which they were accustomed\nto celebrate. The undying literature of the thirteenth century, the\nCid in Spain, the Arthurian legends in England, the Nibelungen in\nGermany and Dante all came at a time when men set apart days for\nreligious meditation and a contemplation of higher things than the\nsordid concerns of everyday life.\n\nSo far from one day of leisure in three interfering with human\nproductivity in the best sense of that word, the {127} custom actually\nadded to it. Men who work continuously from day to day without\nintermission can make a quantity of trivial things, but they cannot\nmake anything that would be enduringly interesting, for they have not\nthe time. I have often said that I thought that the greatest\nexpression in American literature is those famous words of Thoreau as\nto the relation of time and money. The Sage of Walden found that by\nworking about one half a day in the week he could support himself, and\nhe used the rest of the time for the study of nature around him and\nfor inviting his soul in the woods and along the streams. He feared\nthat the business of making a living might keep him from really\nliving. It is easy to understand that his thrifty Yankee neighbors\nfailed utterly to comprehend any such attitude toward what they\nconceived to be a workaday world. Especially at harvest time when they\nneeded help it seemed a shame to see Thoreau wandering apparently\nlazily and aimlessly while they were working so hard and looking for\nworkers whom they were willing to pay what they thought was very good\nwages. They stopped Thoreau and offered him better pay than they were\nusually accustomed to offer, but Thoreau replied very simply, \"I have\nno time to make money.\" There seem to be a great many people in our\nday who apparently are of the opinion that the only reason for which\ntime is given is to make money. The Sundays and holydays, as arranged\nby the religious authorities, made excellent recreation days. After\ntheir morning spent in church, listening to a sermon by some favorite\npreacher, but having the eye and the ear and even the nose appealed to\nby the rest of the celebration, the people were then free for\nrecreation. The old Church had no Puritanic scruples about people\nplaying on the {128} Sabbath; there were sports of various kinds on\nthe green in front of the church and their parish priest might be the\nreferee; neighboring parishes held contests in archery or at bowls or\nin what the Irish call hurling and the English call shinney. At\ncertain seasons the guilds offered prizes for these contests; the\nyoung were encouraged to go into training for them for weeks\nbeforehand, and the prizes were conferred rather gloriously before all\nthose whom the young folks most loved and respected.\n\nThese Church holidays were associated with various celebrations, such\nas May Day, the Feast of the Innocents or Fools; the beating of the\nbounds when in procession the parishioners on the Rogation Days walked\nround the various properties of the parish and asked the blessing of\nheaven on the crops; the carnival time when, before abuses crept in,\nthe Church encouraged the celebration that would mark the beginning of\nLent and make everybody ready to bid good-by to the pleasures of life\nfor a while. Then the various fairs and markets were usually so timed\nthat they immediately followed some important festival day in the year\nand afforded people an opportunity for a little vacation and an outing\nin connection with the feast, while at the same time they were able to\nbuy what they needed.\n\nAbove all, religion insisted that some part of these days of\nrecreation, the holydays of the years, should be spent not merely for\none's own selfish pleasure, but in bringing pleasure to others. It was\nsuggested, for instance, that there could be no better occupation for\na portion of Christmas and Easter or of some Sunday afternoons than\nvisiting the sick or prisoners or bringing consolation to those in\nneed. Kings and queens washed the feet of the poor on Holy Thursday,\nand there were {129} similar practices at other times in the\necclesiastical year. The people were encouraged to bury the dead\nreverently and then to keep their graves green and to visit them\noccasionally on the holydays as a sign that their memory had not\nfaded, though also as a reminder of the fact that sometime they hoped\nto be with their dear friends in another world. This may seem a rather\nsolemn occupation for recreation, but taken in the open air, while the\nchildren played around the graves and the old folks sat and tallied,\nit was ever so much better than that unconquerable tendency to crowd\ntogether in hot, dusty places which afflicts people on our holidays.\nThe old graveyards represented the parks in even the smallest towns,\nand the inhabitants had a pride in keeping them in order and found a\npleasure in visiting them occasionally. In the unfortunately crowded\nconditions in which they often lived, the only lungs for some of their\nvillages were to be found in the churchyard. There was scarcely a town\nin this country two generations ago that had anything approaching a\npublic park, except its cemetery.\n\nThere is a constant tendency to encroach on the Sunday rest for\ncommercial and industrial reasons of one kind or another, and only\nreligious influences have saved the Sabbath for mankind. Even as it\nis, the decadence of religion in many countries has led more and more\nto neglect of the Sabbath-day rest, and in certain of the European\ncountries particularly, Sunday, instead of being a day of rest for the\nsmall tradesman, is sometimes his busiest day. Here in this country\nreligious influences were the only factors that kept the saloons more\nor less closed on Sunday and kept the rest day from being an orgy of\ndissipation for many people. Selfishness continues to encroach on the\nprecious day of rest and various {130} forms of trade try to present\nsome necessity for their being open on the Sabbath. This has always\nbeen the way, and the religious sanction in the matter has been the\nmost precious safeguard.\n\nAt the present time, there are a good many stores open for a while or\nfor the whole day on Sunday for which it is hard to find any\nnecessity. Some of the fresh food and milk stores have a certain\njustification, but why tobacco stores should be open, seeing that\ntheir product will keep perfectly and that any man can rather easily\nlay in a store to carry him over a day at least, is indeed hard to\nunderstand.    [Footnote 5]\n\n  [Footnote 5:  There are probably several hundred thousand men in\n  this country who have to work on Sunday because the tobacco stores\n  are open. This is an abuse corresponding to that with regard to the\n  saloon, which will almost surely bring about a reaction in the\n  public mind against the traffic in tobacco generally.]\n\nAnother abuse of the public confidence is the opening of all drug\nstores on Sunday. As a consequence hundreds of thousands of men are\ndeprived of this day of rest in the week. Drugs are extremely\nimportant and should of course be available at all hours, but there is\nno more reason for all the drug stores to be open every Sunday than\nthere is for all the drug stores to be open all night. Certain drug\nstores should be open, but as St. Antonius suggested five hundred\nyears ago, there is no good reason why there should not be an\narrangement by which the drug stores should be open in rotation on\nSundays, so that drugs would be always available and only the\nabsolutely necessary articles needed for emergencies should be sold on\nthat day. There is no reason at all why the modern department store\nannex of the large drug corporations which happens to have a small\ncorner of its store space set off for the filling of prescriptions\nshould {131} do business on Sunday than for an immense department\nstore to put in a prescription department and then sell goods all over\nthe house because they have to keep their drug department open on\nSundays. Only the religious element in life will save us from this\ncommercial invasion, with the harm which it does in depriving so many\npeople of their day of rest.\n\nThe future of the Sunday as a needed day of rest is dependent more on\nreligion than on any other factor. The insidious selfish quest for\nmoney will find excuses for the violation of the day in one way or\nanother. The institution and maintenance down the ages of the Sabbath\nday of rest is a wonderful example of what religion can accomplish for\nman in the face of the corroding power of selfishness and is the best\ndemonstration of its living influence for the bodily as well as the\nspiritual and mental health of mankind.\n\n\n{132}\n\nCHAPTER VII\n\nRECREATION AND DISSIPATION\n\n\nAs has been suggested in the last chapter on Holydays and Holidays,\nreligious institutions have been the most effective organizers of\nrecreations sane and safe for the mind as well as for the body of man,\nand recreation is one of the most important factors for the\npreservation of human health. The man who does not take the time for\nrecreation and above all who does not know how to recreate is almost\ninevitably drifting toward a premature aging of tissues, or often is\nlaying the foundation for an acute breakdown in health. Recreation is\nan absolute need of humanity, adding to health, strength, efficiency,\nlength of life, and power of accomplishment. Instead of being a waste\nof time, it is a time saver and above all a saver of suffering, mental\nand physical, as the years roll on.\n\nDissipation is, however, the very opposite of recreation. What\ncorresponds to these two words in human conduct is confounded in the\nminds of a great many people probably as often as the activities which\nrespond to those other much abused words, liberty and license.\nRecreation, as the etymology indicates so clearly, means the building\nup of energy, while dissipation signifies the scattering of it,\nusually to no purpose. It is extremely easy for what is meant to be\nrecreation to become {133} dissipation, and religion has been the most\nimportant factor in life in controlling the tendency to dissipation\nwhich exists among men, not only from the moral but also from the\nintellectual aspect of life. Religious motives have succeeded better\nthan any other factors in lessening this tendency and securing such\ngenuine recreation as would serve to rebuild men's minds and bodies\nafter they had been more or less worn out from work, and at the same\ntime tend to keep them from immorality and afford such relief from the\nstrain of serious occupation as would provide real reconstruction for\nthem.\n\nUnfortunately in our time, just in proportion as religion has lost its\nhold on men, recreation has become largely a matter of dissipation of\nmind when not also dissipation of body. More and more barbaric or\nmerely bodily modes of recreation are preoccupying the leisure time\nthat men have outside of their regular occupations in life. It must\nnot be forgotten that the way a man or a generation spends its leisure\nis the best possible index of the character of the man or the\ngeneration. It is the way that a man spends the time that he is free\nto use any way that he wishes which reveals what he is. It was a great\nphilosopher who said, \"Tell me what a man does with his leisure, and I\nshall tell you what sort of a man he is.\" We all have to work a\ncertain portion of our time, and often what we work at is not a matter\nof choice but necessity. What we do during our leisure, however, is\ndependent on ourselves and represents our tastes.\n\nThe recreation of our time reveals that people are ever so much more\ninterested in their bodies than they are in their minds and hearts and\nsouls. Very often the recreation of the older time consisted of hours\nspent with all the advantages of outdoor air, exercise, and fine {134}\nsatisfaction of mind, perhaps in visiting the poor or the prisons or\nthe hospitals, or in encouraging the sports of children, or in\narranging for outings of various kinds in which the pleasantest of\nsocial intercourse between friends and neighbors was associated with\nsuch recreation of body as gave a good healthy weariness after a day's\nouting. More and more these old-fashioned modes of recreation are\npassing, and sophistication has brought in occupation of mind with a\nlot of unworthy things.\n\nInstead of taking an active part in what is supposed to recreate them\npeople must now be amused. Whenever this happens and participants pay\nfor the amusement, the character of the amusement degenerates because\nit must appeal to as great a number as possible. As a consequence, in\nour day recreation, especially for young folks who ought of course to\nbe actively engaged in sport and not merely onlookers, consists in\nattendance at \"shows\" and games. The \"shows\" have an appeal merely to\nthe senses, they have not an idea lost in them anywhere; the music is\na caricature of real music founded on the fact--which the most\nprimitive of savages have always discovered for themselves--that a\nrhythm appeals to men and gives them a certain bodily satisfaction,\nprobably because of some ill-understood interaction with the heart\nbeat. The main feature of appeal is really the sex element that enters\ninto the show and produces feelings. The lyrics are, if that term for\nthem were to be taken seriously, a crying shame, for the words of the\nsongs usually mean absolutely nothing. The rule is to take certain\nwords that rhyme, like kiss and bliss, and love and glove, and for the\nrest to talk about the moon and some sentimental twaddle. There is not\na glimpse of poetry about them in any sense of the word.\n\n{135}\n\nThe attendance at games of various kinds in which people watch other\npeople exercise is a favorite occupation in our time, but it is only\nthe shadow of recreation. It is usually associated with feelings\naroused by the desire for one side to win, either because of betting\nor some other sentiment often entirely artificial. Whenever anything\noccurs to disappoint the desire, there is likely to be an exhibition\nof some of the ugliest feelings of mankind. Men invade the field, take\nup quarrels, and sometimes not only threaten but actually attempt\nbodily injury of the players and particularly of the umpire. Probably\nnothing could be more unworthy as recreation for human beings than\nthis passive interest in the exercise that other people take, and the\nelevation of the contests of paid professionals into something to\noccupy men's minds seriously and even arouse their feelings deeply.\n\nMore and more bodily interests are drowning out higher interests, and\nprize fighting and wrestling command ever larger audiences, while the\nsums of money that are paid for such exhibitions grow in size, showing\nthe importance of bodily interests to the general public. There is an\nold story of Cimabue's Madonna causing the stoppage of business in\nFlorence in the old days, but the transport of no mere picture along\nthe street, no matter how beautiful it might be, would have any such\neffect nowadays, though the arrival of a prize fighter who had just\nwon a heavyweight contest, if his coming were announced beforehand,\nwould almost surely interfere seriously with business for some time in\nthe neighborhood of the station.\n\nJust as in the days of Rome when the amphitheater was the center of\nattraction, recreation is becoming mere barbaric dissipation for a\ngreat many people. {136} The cultured, intelligent Romans--at least\nmany of them were educated--went to see gladiators fight with wild\nbeasts or with each other unto the death, or to get a special thrill\nby seeing the Christians thrown to the lions. The other shows they\nattended were mainly the dancing of slave girls scantily dressed,\nwhose actions were meant to excite sex feelings. At Rome the women had\nno virtue and the men no courage; they were interested in their bodies\nand degeneracy had come. No wonder the real barbarians came to replace\ntheir counterfeit presentments in the pseudo-refined Romans.\n\nEven our mental occupations are very largely taken up with bodily\ninterests. Reading is supposed to be an intellectual diversion, but it\nhas become a matter of attention to sex and other bodily emotions. My\nfriend. Doctor Austin O'Malley, suggests that one of the most\nimportant criteria of intelligence is contained in the rule \"the book\nthat you like is like you,\" to which may be added, of course, that the\nplay that you like is like you and the magazine that you like is like\nyou. If our generation is to be judged by its occupation of its\nleisure, the estimation will not be very high. Most of the leisure\ntime of men is spent in reading the newspapers. Indeed, it may be said\nwithout exaggeration that the greater part of civilized mankind now\nspends the major portion of its hours of relaxation over the\nnewspaper. News was defined by an old-fashioned editor succinctly as\nsin. The definition has enough of truth in it to give us pause when we\nconsider that every one is occupied with the newspaper for an hour or\nmore each day. We want to know the last details of the ugly sex crimes\nand the misfortunes of various kinds that have happened to people,\nperhaps with a feeling that things might be worse for us {137} than\nthey are, but the suggestive effect is almost the worst that could\nwell be imagined, and the recreation of mind becomes a sad dissipation\nof mental energy.\n\nReligion brought the holydays, which were in our modern sense\nholidays, into the year, but did ever so much more than this by\nsuggesting, organizing and encouraging such occupation of them as\nafforded recreation for men and women in definite contradistinction\nfrom dissipation. On all the Sundays and holydays men rose to attend\nservices and usually spent some hours in this occupation. Attendance\nat religious services in our time has become very largely a matter of\nduty, requiring considerable self-denial and control for its\naccomplishment. The religious ceremonials of the older time were,\nhowever, extremely interesting, and people looked forward to them.\nThey had to attend them as a matter of duty, but the great majority of\nthem found a pleasure in the duty because of the appeal that the\nChurch ceremonial made.\n\nVarious societies associated with religion in one way or another\norganized the recreations for the afternoon of the holydays or for the\nvigils or eves of the great festivals, on which there was no work done\nafter the vesper hour. The guilds, for instance, most of which\nreceived saints' names, and many of which built chapels of their own\nand were closely affiliated with the ecclesiastical authorities,\noffered prizes for athletic exercises among the young folks, both boys\nand girls, and arranged contests in archery, in the pitching of\nquoits, in the old-fashioned form of hockey and the like, between the\ninhabitants of neighboring villages, and then there were also\nindividual athletic contests of various kinds. Banquets were held four\ntimes a year on the special feast days, to which a man was expected to\nbring either his wife or his {138} sweetheart. They did not believe\nthat it was good for men to be alone in their feasting, and realized\nthat there was likely to be much less of excess and ever so much less\nof a tendency to quarrel if the women were present. The banquets were\nheld in the afternoon, and there was dancing on the green afterward\nfor the young folks and games of various kinds, all of which were\nmeant to give the young particularly innocent enjoyment and bring them\ntogether for proper matchmaking.\n\nReligious authorities have always recognized the necessity for\nrecreation. Besides, they have always tried to keep recreation on that\nhigher plane where it may do good and not harm. Dancing, for instance,\nhas very often had a place in religious ceremonials. Rhythmic\nmovements of the body can add to the significance of even the deepest\nthought. They may, of course, be reduced merely to the expression of\nsensuality or constitute an invitation to it. David danced before the\nArk, and dancing has always had a place in the expression of religious\nfeelings. The old Greeks employed dancing to great effect, even in\ntheir higher religious ceremonials. The great Greek dramatists wrote\nchoric odes which are among the most beautiful lyric poems ever\nwritten. They were on such subjects as life and death and man and fate\nand all the other great mysteries with which man is confronted. The\nchorus, in singing them, danced, and the reason for the dance was that\nit added to the significance of the beautiful words that had been\nwritten. The Greek plays were staged as a part of the religious\nceremonial in celebration of the festivals of Dionysus; his name has\nbeen translated by the supposed Latin equivalent Bacchus, but the\nGreeks meant the god of inspiration and not the god of intoxication.\n\n{139}\n\nReligion then proved a source of a great deal of genuine recreation.\nIt emphasized the joys of existence rather than merely the pleasures\nof life. It encouraged family participation in everything and found a\nplace for the children. There is a great distinction between joy and\npleasure that is often missed when religion is in decay. Joy is a\nprofound feeling usually associated with the performance of simple\nduties and rather easily attainable by every one. Pleasures are often\nexpensive, frequently are followed by remorse, and more often than not\ndo harm rather than good to those who indulge in them, especially to\nany excess. Joy, however, inspires human beings to the further\naccomplishment of duty, gives a supreme sense of well-being, brings\nlight-hearted sleep and is very precious in the memory. Joys are\nusually associated with domestic duties and religious observances and\nthe celebration in family groups of the great festivals. What religion\ndid in bringing joy into life is one of the most precious factors for\nreal recreation that we have.\n\nThe main feature of religion's work for recreation, however,\nconsisted of the development of dramatics. Twice in the world's\nhistory, as I have noted in the chapter on Holydays and Holidays,\ndramatic literature has developed out of religious ceremonials. These\nceremonials very naturally take on the dramatic form, and the\nevolution of this in the course of time led to additions to religious\nservices which soon came to occupy so much attention as to deserve a\nplace and time for themselves, and then they were transferred to the\ntemple porch in the older time, or to the open space at the foot of\nthe steps, or in the Middle Ages to the churchyard or the green in\nfront of the church.\n\nThis encouragement of recreation with a deep appeal {140} to the\nemotions and the higher feelings which at the same time brought\nsatisfaction for the intellect, proved of the greatest possible\nservice for health. Men need to have thoroughgoing diversion of mind\nfrom their ordinary occupations. Such diversion of mind is, in my\nopinion, even more important than exercise of body. The effort in our\ntime is concentrated on doing nothing with the mind, as a rest for it,\nor doing something that is so trivial that it is supposed to provide\nopportunity for mental recreation. Almost needless to say it is\nimpossible to do nothing with the mind. The mind will keep right on\nthinking about something or other, and unless thought is diverted it\nis very inclined to recur to the last worries and troubles which the\nindividual has experienced. The attempt to occupy the mind with\ntrivial matters does not divert it. To read the newspaper or some\npopular magazine or a light novel will enable the person to kill time,\nbut up through the print will always come obtruding itself the worry\nor anxiety that occupied it before. What is needed for true recreation\nis that the mind shall be interested in something very different from\nits ordinary occupation. This interest must be deep and abiding and\nholding, or it will not prove so successful as would otherwise be the\ncase.\n\nSome form of intellectual hobby makes the very best recreation, but\nnot every one has either the time or the money and above all the\nintelligence to cultivate a hobby that will be absorbing in its\nappeal. Religion, then, with its universal appeal, its deep touching\nof the feelings, its sense of supreme satisfaction when people\nbelieved, its presentation of ceremonies that have even a sensory\nattraction, formed in the past a fine avenue of escape from the sordid\nconsiderations of life for a great many {141} people and can still be\nan invaluable resource for those who take it seriously. In the midst\nof trials and hardships the folk of the older time learned to turn to\nreligion as a consolation that occupied their minds and promised them\ndivine help in their difficulties. Religion as organized in the later\nMiddle Ages, with its great celebrations on the festival days in the\nbeautiful Gothic churches, on the background of great art, served this\npurpose of diversion of mind extremely well. If that had been its only\npurpose it would have been quite unworthy of the great intellectual\nand artistic accomplishments which religion aroused. But as a\nsecondary consideration this must not be forgotten, and the absence of\nan appeal of this kind makes for that tendency to dissipation of mind\nwhich is so unfortunate because [it is] so unworthy of human nature and\nat the same time proves so ineffective as providing any real recreation\nof mind.\n\nIn the old days when the Puritans went to a sermon two hours long,\nthey listened with rapt attention to the preacher, and in so doing\ntheir minds were occupied with an entirely other subject from that\nwhich ordinarily attracted their attention. Such a diversion, even\nthough it may seem to be pretty hard work, represents a real mental\nrest because the part of the brain that is usually occupied gets its\nrest, the blood being diverted to other parts of the brain. This may\nseem a paradox to some people until they are reminded that men who\nhave lived very long lives have usually been men who turned from one\nform of mental work to another for diversion and rest. Gladstone, for\ninstance, who was Prime Minister of Great Britain when past eighty\nyears of age, was an intensely hard intellectual worker all his life,\nbut found recreation from his political cares in the study and {142}\ndiscussion of the problems of Greek literature. Leo XIII, who lived to\nbe ninety-three, concerned to the very end with the administration of\nthe Church--an immense task--found his recreation in the writing of\nLatin poetry, though that might seem to some people too hard work of\nitself to be classed as rest. For a great many of these hard-working,\nlong-lived people, as was true of both Leo XIII and Gladstone, prayer\nwas a recourse in time of trial that made anxiety less and took the\nedge off solicitude and occupied the mind with the profound thought of\nthe Providence that overrules and somehow cares for us.\n\nI have often said before medical societies, and in articles for\nmedical journals, because the expression represents a definite medical\nconclusion in my mind, that the reason why nervous and mental diseases\nwere growing commoner in our time was that men and women had no real\nmental recreation. They go to trivial shows of various kinds,\nvaudeville, musical comedy and the movies, and they laugh a little and\nfeel a great deal, but think almost not at all. They try to forget\ntheir ordinary occupations and worries, and indeed plays and novels\nare now advertised as \"the kind that make you forget\", but they do not\nsucceed very well in this effort and their minds are not really\ndiverted. For diversion the mind should become occupied rather deeply\nwith some other subject, so that the blood which has been going to a\nparticular part of the brain in order to call up the memory of things\nassociated with the special interests of the individual may be\ndiverted to another part. This will give the portion of the brain\npreviously occupied a rest as almost nothing else will. Doing nothing\nwith the mind is impossible, though some people apparently come very\n{143} near it. Doing very trivial things will not divert the current\nof attention so as to allow of real rest. Attention is probably a\nmatter of increased blood circulation to a particular set of brain\ncells. These will go on working in spite of the wish to stop, unless\nthe blood is actually diverted elsewhere in the cerebral tissues or\nthe individual sleeps, with its accompanying brain anemia.\n\nFor believers religion has this deep appeal and strong interest which\nrepresents very definite diversion of mind. Of itself, then, it may\nafford genuine recreation, though so little associated with recreation\nin the modern sense of the term. It is the most cogent reliever of\nworries. It affords the best neutralization of such intense\npreoccupation with merely sordid concerns as may prove dangerous for\nhealth.\n\nReligion has always insisted that idle dissipation of mental and\nphysical energy was an extremely dangerous thing. The devil finds work\nfor idle hands is an expression that has come from very early\nChristian times. While the Church has appreciated thoroughly the\nnecessity for occupation of mind and enjoyment and amusement and has\nput the holydays into the year in large numbers and made true holidays\nof them, it has also recognized clearly the dangers there might be in\nrecreations of various kinds. Fashion has often been strong enough to\noverride religious counsels in the matter, but at least they have\nserved to restrain to some extent, and they have always pointed out\nthe dangers so that young folks have not gone into them unseeing and\nunthinking; thus a good many have been saved from grave risks and\nabsolute moral and physical injuries which might have proved serious\nas the result of religious regulations and advice.\n\n{144}\n\nDancing has always been one of the modes of recreation with regard to\nwhich religion has felt the need to exercise surveillance and\ninculcate the necessity for proper supervision. There has been no\nunthinking opposition to it and no mere bigoted intolerance. The dance\nhas always been recognized as an excellent exercise of the body and a\nvery definite mode of expressing beautiful thoughts in graceful\npostures and movements; the dance has actually been used in Church\nceremonies, and its symbolism made to lend significance to the body's\nshare in worship or in the expression of beautiful thoughts. When\ngraceful dancing was to a great extent discarded and the essence of\nthe dance came to be the intimate contact of two persons of opposite\nsex in the lively movements of modern dancing measures which were\nalmost sure to arouse passion, no wonder that religion counseled\nprudence in order to prevent harmful developments which are often the\nsource of so much danger for health of body as well as for holiness,\nthat is wholeness of spirit. The restraint exercised in this way over\nthe control of occasions that might lead to serious consequences makes\nreligion an important factor for health.\n\nIt is quite true that religion does not often succeed in her\nwell-meant efforts in controlling such tendencies to dissipation and\nsometimes seems utterly to fail, but that is largely because in recent\nyears there has been an unfortunate decadence of religious influence,\nand people do not live up even to the principles of religion which\nthey themselves hold. Among those who still maintain the religious\nlife, the restraint exercised as regards many of these unfortunate\ndissipations means a very great deal for health of body and mind.\nCertainly social evils would be much worse only for the presence of a\ngreat {145} conservative institution exercising restraint and calling\non people to practice self-control and self-denial in these matters,\nno matter how alluring they might be nor how much they may have met\nwith the approval of what is called society.\n\nProbably the most important element for health in the modern time is\nthe conservation of the distinction between recreation and\ndissipation. Almost inevitably recreation becomes dissipation; that\nis, the relaxation of mind and body so necessary for health becomes a\ndissolution of physical and mental forces to the serious detriment of\nthe individual, unless there are strong, impelling motives to prevent\nthe degeneration. Such motives may be drawn from human respect or from\nthe desire to maintain the body in healthful vigor, but these lower\nmotives very often fail of their purpose and at best apply only to a\ncomparatively few among mankind. For the great majority of men,\nmotives with a deeper appeal than mere self-respect or the respect of\nothers or even the preservation of the body from impending disease are\nnecessary. In youth particularly bodily degeneration seems a distant\npossibility, almost surely to be escaped without much difficulty,\nespecially if one has any luck, and even if serious disease be\nincurred it will surely be cured rather easily by the means that\nscience now has at her command. The general appeal that is necessary\nto give men a fixed point of support in maintaining recreation on a\nhigh level and not letting it slip down into dissipation is to be\nfound in religion.\n\nThe reason why recreation and dissipation have so often come to be\nconfounded in our time, or at least that recreation has sunk to a much\nlower level than it used to occupy, is the diminution of religious\ninfluence over a {146} great many people. The old religious family\nlife made it much easier to maintain such discipline in the lives of\ngrowing young folks as kept them from the tendencies to dissipation\nalmost sure to develop unless there are strong safeguards in the\nhousehold. Where the young folk themselves are firm believers in the\ngreat truths of religion, their control is much easier and is\nexercised much more by themselves than by any external measures. It is\nthe having a fount of incentive to what is good and deterrents for\nwhat is evil within oneself that is the best possible auxiliary for\nthe neutralization of tendencies to evil that are as natural as they\ncan be and that represent one inexplicable phase of that mystery of\nevil by which we are surrounded in the world.\n\nThe only satisfactory explanation of that is to be found in faith, and\nit is from this that strength can be derived to prevent the lower\nnature of man which shares so many animal proclivities from governing\nthe individual to the detriment of both sides of his being.\n\n\n\n{147}\n\nCHAPTER VIII\n\nMORTIFICATION\n\n\nMortification is a word with an interesting etymology. It means\nliterally the dying or more properly the putting to death of one part\nof an animal body while the rest is alive. From this it has come to\nmean, to quote the Century Dictionary, \"The act of subduing the\npassions and appetites by penance, abstinence or painful severities\ninflicted on the body.\" It has had this signification from the very\nearliest times of Christianity, for the early Fathers spoke of dying\nto self to have a higher and a nobler life. It is used exactly in this\nsense in the old medieval Latin as well as by that first great prose\nwriter in modern English, Sir Thomas More, for he spoke of \"the\nmortification of the fleshly woorkes\" in just this signification.\nAfter all our recent Poet Laureate, when in \"In Memoriam\" he summed up\nso much of the current thought of our time, expressed the same ideas\nas the earlier religious authorities when he said that \"we rise on\nstepping stones of our dead selves to higher things.\"\n\nIt was a favorite idea of the Greeks of the classical period that the\nway to get most out of life was to repress the body and give the mind\nand soul a chance. Aristotle said, \"The vanities of the world are a\nhindrance to the soul,\" and he paraphrased by anticipation that\nexpression which came to mean so much during the war that our {148}\nrising generation learned the precious lesson \"that there are things\nin life worth more than life itself\" when he said, \"'T is better for\nthe soul's sake to suffer death than to lose the soul for the love of\nthis life.\" Socrates had said before him, \"A wise man ought to look as\ncarefully to his soul as to his body\", and Plato, going straight to\nthe point, declared, \"Whoso desireth the life of his soul ought to\nmortify the body and give it trouble in this world.\" No one knew\nbetter than Plato that the desire of having things did more than aught\nelse to make the higher life impossible. He did not hesitate to say,\nand the expression constitutes one of the most striking commentaries\non our time that we could have, \"the soul is lost that delighteth in\ncovetousness.\" Pythagoras long before the group of the classical\nperiod had said, \"Order thyself so that thy soul may always be in good\nestate; whatsoever become of thy body.\"\n\nIt would be easy to find almost as many expressions commending\nmortification among the old Greek philosophers as among the Fathers of\nthe Church. Plato said, \"He obeyeth many that obeyeth his body.\" And\nAristotle said, \"He that hath bound himself to follow his fleshly\ndelights is more bound than any caitiff\", which after all, is only\nanother way of wording Plato's expression, \"the worst bondage is to be\nsubject to vices.\" Seneca, five centuries afterwards in Rome,\ndeclared, \"Too much liberty turneth into bondage\", doubtless\nimitating, as he did so often, Euripides, who declared, \"Better is it\nto be free in heart and bond in name than to be free in name and bond\nin heart.\"\n\nIn spite of this very respectable ancient lineage which would indicate\nan agreement for many centuries among thoughtful people that\nmortification has a definite place {149} in life, many in our time\nseem inclined to think that the idea underlying the word is a mistake,\nand that the virtue attributed to it does not actually work out in\npractice. Hence mortification is at present considered by a good many\nto be only one of the good old ways of life evolved in an earlier day\nwhen men were less capable of judging of the significance of things\nthan they are now, but which humanity ought to set definitely back in\nthe lumber room of discarded notions, now that an era of really\nrational development of humanity has come. The old-fashioned idea that\nin this way the passions can be controlled is looked upon as a sort of\nworn-out superstition, good enough for people who did not know as much\nas we do and who did not understand as we have come to understand the\nprofounder psychology of humanity. We are apparently quite sure in our\ntime that sweet reasonableness must be the only rule for mankind and\nthat anything so crude as self-inflicted suffering is not needed by\ngenerations which have not sounded the depth of human nature as we\nhave done.\n\nNothing is commoner than to read tirades of various kinds against the\npractices of mortification that were in vogue in the older times. A\ngreat many writers who think themselves well informed feel assured\nthat the people of the olden time performed the most difficult acts of\npenance and inflicted intense self-suffering on themselves with no\nother purpose in view than to curry favor with the Almighty quite as\nif they felt that the Creator delighted in the suffering of His\ncreatures. They do not seem to realize at all that the real reason why\nthe older peoples thought such self-inflicted suffering might be\nlooked upon with favor from on High was that the efforts required to\nperform these acts strengthened their wills {150} so as to enable them\nto repress their passions and inordinate desires and to control the\ntendencies to do wrong which are in every nature and which require\nconstant watching and subjection, or they prove extremely difficult to\nmaster.\n\nBefore the war, when the world generally was rather inclined to take a\ngood deal of its psychology from Germany, the scoffing tone with\nregard to mortification was particularly rife in academic circles.\nWhile other nations as a rule did not adopt the German idea of the\nsuperman, they were usually much more tinctured with that teaching\nthan they suspected. Nietzsche's great teaching was that a man must\nfollow his instincts and develop his personality to the highest,\nregardless of the consequences to others. One of his famous parables\nis that of the soft coal and the diamond. The soft coal is heard\ncomplaining to the diamond, \"We are brothers, why then do you scratch\nme?\" and the diamond replies, \"Since we are brothers how is it that I\ncan scratch you; why are you not as hard as I am, and then all would\nbe well between us?\" and Nietzsche's conclusion was, \"For I preach to\nyou a new doctrine; be ye hard.\" As Germany had more professors of\npsychology than any other nation, it is easy to understand what\nfar-reaching influence her teaching had. A very few were conservative,\nbut most were radical, and the only consolation that we have now is to\nrealize that the nation which had the most professors of psychology\nleast understood the minds of men, as was demonstrated very clearly by\nthe egregious blunders which the German government made with regard to\nthe neutral nations during the course of the war.\n\nThe modern psychologists who have thought most deeply about human\nnature do not share at all the {151} supercilious contempt for\nmortification and even the habit of performing frequent acts of\nself-repression, though they may cost effort and suffering, which so\nmany thoughtless people are ready to express. Professor William James,\nwho was surely not at all a medievally minded individual and who is\nrecognized as one of the leaders of thought in modern psychology, did\nnot hesitate to express his conclusions on this matter in a paragraph\nthat should be very well known:\n\n  \"As a fine practical maxim, relative to these habits of the will, we\n  may, then, offer something like this: Keep the faculty of effort\n  alive in you by a little gratuitous exercise every day. That is, be\n  systematically ascetic or heroic in little unnecessary points; do\n  every day or two something for no other reason than that you would\n  rather not do it, so that when the hour of dire need draws nigh, it\n  may find you not unnerved and untrained to stand the test.\n  Asceticism of this sort is like the insurance which a man pays on\n  his house and goods. The tax does him no good at the time and\n  possibly may never bring him a return. But if the fire does come,\n  his having paid it will be his salvation from ruin. So with the man\n  who has daily inured himself to habits of concentrated attention,\n  energetic volition, and self-denial in unnecessary things. He will\n  stand like a tower when everything rocks around him, and when his\n  softer fellow mortals are winnowed like chaff in the blast.\"\n\nAbove all in youth there is need of enduring hard things in order to\nform character and enable people to control themselves and deny\nthemselves. This is sometimes supposed to be a medieval idea, but\nGoethe, with all his leaning toward the ways of the old Greeks and his\nliking even for the Olympian religion, did not hesitate to say {152}\nthat the most important thing in the world for a man was self-denial.\n_Entbehren sollst du, sollst entbehren_. \"You must deny yourself, must\ndeny yourself.\" There is only one way to do this, and that is to\npractice it by a succession of acts until it becomes habitual. The\ngreat world teacher of this practice is and has always been religion.\nSacrifice has been preached as the very essence of Christianity.\n\nTo many people it may seem as though mortification, that is, the\npractice of doing a series of things that are hard to do and even\npainful to accomplish, in order to increase one's power over oneself\nmay be beneficial and even necessary for weak characters; but that\nsurely strong men and women can dispense with any such artificial\nsupport of their personalities. Such an expression must probably be\nconsidered an excuse that enables people to escape the difficulties\nand self-denial of practices of mortification, but not at all as a\nreal reason. Some of the strongest men who have ever lived have\nrecognized the necessity for the insurance policies of little acts of\nsupererogation that require real will power to accomplish in order to\nkeep their strength of character at its top notch of efficiency.\nProbably few men in history have ever had a stronger character than\nSir Thomas More. All his life he was noted for the absolute purity of\nhis motives and the thoroughgoing righteousness of his life. He is the\nonly man in the history of England who ever cleared the docket of the\nCourt of Chancery. He was the first lay Lord Chancellor that England\never had. The opportunities for using his high office for his own\nbenefit are well illustrated by the expression of Lord Campbell, who\ndeclared of More in his lives of the Lord Chancellors: \"I am indeed\nreluctant to take leave of Sir Thomas More, {153} not only from his\nagreeable qualities and extraordinary merits, but from my abhorrence\nof the mean, sordid, unprincipled chancellors who succeeded him and\nmade the latter half of the reign of Henry VIII the most disgraceful\nperiod in our annals.\"\n\nNearly a hundred years after More's death when Lord Bacon was\nimpeached by the English Parliament, he made as the excuse for having\ntaken bribes that he was the best Lord Chancellor that England had had\nfor fifty years. Very probably he was; no one knew that better than\nhe. Yet Sir Thomas More had gone unscathed through the fire of\ntemptations such as these to which every Lord Chancellor for a hundred\nyears afterward yielded; but More went farther, and when it was a\nquestion of conscience he died for what he felt was the right. It did\nnot matter to him that others had been able to compound with their\nconsciences; he even told the jury that condemned him that he hoped to\nmeet them in heaven, but right was right and even death was not too\nhigh a price to pay for its fulfillment. One of More's practices at\ntimes during his life had been the wearing of a hair shirt; even when\nin prison--and God knows the Tower of London, with the shadow of the\nscaffold hanging over it, would seem to be mortification enough--he\nwore his hair shirt, and it was found among his possessions after his\ndeath.\n\nI suppose to-day, after a generation of contemptuous scoffing at\nmortification, it may be necessary to explain to many people what a\nhair shirt is. It is a very coarse undergarment woven of hair to be\nworn next the skin, and the discomfort of the skin surface is so great\nthat until one gets a little used to it one can scarcely think of\nanything else except the constant irritation. It was {154} a very\ncommon practice to wear it in the Middle Ages, and we have the story\nof one mother who felt that perhaps nothing would do her boys more\ngood than to learn to stand something like this in order that they\nmight be able to withstand youth's temptations. She was Mabel Rich,\nthe mother of Edmund of Canterbury, who has come to be looked upon as\none of the great characters of English history. For years he suffered\nin exile rather than give up to the king the rights of his people and\nthe Church; this great scholar, professor of Oxford that he was and\nleader among men, who might have had all sorts of favors from the king\nhad he yielded, spent fifteen years in poverty and hardships rather\nthan yield a point of conscience. He tells that when he and his elder\nbrother went off to the university, where they were to be gone for\nfour or five years, their mother packed with their clothes a hair\nshirt for each of them. She asked them to wear them occasionally for\nher sake and to remember that they had to stand many things in life in\norder to keep on the right path. This London tradesman's wife of the\nearly thirteenth century knew as well as any city mother in modern\ntimes the dangers her boys were going to encounter and which they\nwould have to go through successfully or lose health of soul and body.\nThere is apt to be a feeling in many minds that these problems have\nonly come to be realized in our day, but that is due only to failure\nto project our knowledge of human nature into the past. Mabel Rich,\nlike a good sensible mother, did not make an hysterical appeal that\nmight cause her boys to feel her fear that they could not keep right,\nbut she asked them, partly for her sake but mainly for religious\nmotives, to submit to voluntary sufferings sometimes so that they\nmight have the strength {155} to bear any temptation that came to\nthem. Edmund of Canterbury declared, toward the end of his life, that\nhe owed more to his mother and her example and training for whatever\nhis character had enabled him to accomplish in life than to any other\nsingle factor.\n\nIn the chapter on Purity I have quoted distinguished authorities in\npsychology who insist that the one way to strengthen the young man and\nthe young woman against the allurements of impurity and thus help them\nto avoid the extremely serious dangers to health involved in yielding\nto such temptations is to have them practice self-denial in little\nthings. Mortifications of one kind or another are to be undertaken,\nand the young folks build up self-control by the doing of things which\nare hard, though not obligatory, with the one idea of enabling them to\nperform even harder things in self-control whenever it may be\nnecessary. There are some who seem to think that such practices may\nweaken men's powers of accomplishment, as if personality might be\nimpaired by self-control, but there is no reason to think that.\n\nFoerster, the well-known German writer on ethics, knowing well how\nmuch contempt has been thrown on asceticism in recent years, did not\nhesitate to say that the fear of weakness is all due to a\nmisunderstanding. The ascetic is not a stunted human being who has\nmutilated himself, or prevented his development lest by any chance he\nmight wander so far away from the path to his heavenly home that he\nmight not get back. Asceticism has for its derivation the Greek verb\n[Greek text] which means to exercise,--that is, not to decrease but to\nincrease power. The ascetic exercises his will power so that he will\nbe able to follow the straight path that he wants to tread, no matter\nhow many difficulties present themselves to him. {156} No matter how\nsteep the hills, he will not turn aside to the pleasanter paths that\nlead so gently downward because he wants to \"carry on.\" Professor\nFoerster said: \"Asceticism should be regarded, not as a negation of\nnature nor as an attempt to extirpate natural forces, but as practice\nin the art of self-discipline. Its object should be to show humanity\nwhat the human will is capable of performing, to serve as an\nencouraging example of the conquest of the spirit over the animal\nself. The contempt which has been poured upon the idea of asceticism\nin recent times has contributed more than anything else towards\neffeminacy. Nothing could be more effective in bringing humanity back\nto the best traditions of manhood than a respect for the spiritual\nstrength and conquest which is symbolised in ascetic lives.\"\n\nWith regard to that anxiety of mothers to help their boys and girls in\nthe very serious matter of sex temptation which has become so\nprominent a social feature in recent years, Foerster has a passage\nthat is well worth putting before every mother:\n\n  \"There are plenty of modern mothers who are aware of the necessity\n  for instruction in matters relating to sex, and who are perhaps\n  anxiously awaiting the suitable moment: it is a great deal more\n  important, however, that they should make their children acquainted\n  with what Sailer called 'the strategy of the Holy War', that they\n  should train them every now and then to deny themselves some\n  favourite article of food, or to accomplish some heroic conquest of\n  indolence, or to practise themselves in ignoring pain.\n\n  \"The outstanding feature of sexual education should not be an\n  explanation of the sex functions, but an introduction to the\n  inexhaustible power of the human spirit {157} and its capacity for\n  dominating the animal nature and controlling its demands.\"\n\nJoseph de Maistre once said: \"Everything that hinders a man\nstrengthens him. Many a man of thirty years of age is capable of\nsuccessfully resisting the allurements of a beautiful woman because at\nthe age of five or six he was taught voluntarily to give up a toy or a\nsweet!\"\n\nMortification in little things seems to many people too trivial in its\neffects to be of any real significance. If there is anything in the\nworld that has been brought home to us in medicine in the modern era\nit is that little things count immensely. Microbes so small that we\nnot only cannot see them, but never hope to be able to increase the\npowers of the microscope in such a way as to be able to get a sight of\nthem, may cause the most serious epidemics. One of these\nultramicroscopic microbes is probably the cause of infantile\nparalysis, which we know to have been in existence over five thousand\nyears, because the mummy of a princeling of one of the early dynasties\nin Egypt shows that its possessor suffered from it as a child. Another\nof the ultramicroscopic microbes is perhaps the cause of influenza\nwhich carried off in a few months more victims among young people than\nthe greatest war in human history did in over four years. No wonder\nthat little things count in the moral order then, since they may mean\nso much in the physical order. Whenever anything affects living\nbeings, then it cannot be counted small.\n\nFour hundred years ago Michelangelo declared that \"trifles make\nperfection, but perfection is no trifle.\" No one had a better right to\nan opinion in the matter than he, for he was the greatest sculptor\nsince the time of {158} the Greeks, one of the greatest architects who\never lived, perhaps the greatest decorative artist in all history, as\nthe Sistine Chapel demonstrates, and he wrote sonnets of the highest\nquality. If in the mind of so supreme an artist soul little things\ncount so much in making a great work of art, surely they must count\nfor a very great deal in making a moral masterpiece, or anything that\napproaches it.\n\nMichelangelo himself recognized over and over again in life what\nbearing the trials and troubles of existence might have on building up\ncharacter for him and bringing him other than an earthly reward. He\nonce said to one of the popes, \"If these fatigues which I endure do\nnot benefit my soul I lose both time and labor.\" There is a famous\nsonnet of his in which he begs pardon of his Crucified God if he had\never attributed to himself any of the glory which he ought to have\ngiven to his Maker. If ever a man lived who had the right to have some\nconceit of himself it was Michelangelo. When we look around and see\nthe little whippets who have monumental conceit and then think of\nMichelangelo's deprecation of himself, it is easy to understand how he\nmust have suppressed--or, as they said in the older time,\nmortified--his pride in order to keep his humility and not let any\nself-exultation run away with him.\n\nMortification in its true sense is indeed much more a question of the\nmind and the heart than of the body. Cultivating detachment from the\nthings around us means more than anything else. This mortification of\nthe spirit of man so that material possessions are not allowed to\ncrowd out the genuine good things of life is particularly important.\nNowadays people are so afraid to be poor, or indeed to lack anything\nthat their neighbors have, that {159} the principal efforts of life\nare expended in \"keeping up with the Smiths\", or with some other\nutterly insignificant people who happen to be making a display. I\nsuppose that every physician in a large city has known people who\nactually denied themselves some of the necessaries of life in order to\nwear a little better clothes, and of course every physician everywhere\nsees people who deform their feet and disturb their organic health in\nother ways trying to keep up with the fashions. The fear of being\nthought to have less than other people and of having to deny oneself\nsomething that happens to be fashionable is particularly rife in our\ntime and plays sad havoc with mental equanimity and with such\nsatisfaction with life as is the best safeguard of continued health.\n\nThere was a time centuries ago, under the Roman Empire, when money had\ncome to be as much thought of as in our own time, when the wealthy\nwent down to Naples in the winter, up to Como in the summer, had a\nhouse at Ostia as well as a palace in Rome. It is easy to understand\nthat the people then as now failed to comprehend how any one could\npossibly choose to be poor, even though thus he succeeded in putting\noff the cares of wealth and gave himself an opportunity to live his\nlife for the sake of higher things.\n\nReligion raised up men who went into voluntary poverty and restored\nthe dignity of labor, when manual work had become almost a disgrace,\nby deliberately electing to occupy themselves with it for a certain\nnumber of hours a day. Their example proved very precious, and as it\nwas mainly the young men who did it, they influenced deeply a series\nof generations. The sons of the nobility as well as of professional\nclasses were represented among {160} these reformers who believed\nfirst in reforming themselves, but along with them were young men of\nall classes, and the barriers between the classes were thus lowered.\nThe cultivation of religious poverty proved the greatest kind of\nblessing in the social order and has always meant much for the\namelioration of social conditions which it brings with it.\n\nI suppose that the greatest possible benefit for health that could be\nconferred on mankind at the present time would come from the\neradication of the mad strife for the possession of money which has\ntaken possession of so many men's minds. Our recent Great War was\nprecipitated by the struggle for markets and favored nations among\nwhom to distribute surplus industrial products so that certain nations\nmight go on piling up money. This is so badly distributed that serious\nsocial disorders are impending. Men spend their lives getting money\nand then leave it to their children, to hurt them physically and\nmorally. They take away incentive, and they provide the greatest\npossible facilities for temptations. Justice Hughes said some years\nago, when governor of New York, \"The main occupation of men in our\ntime seems to be the raising of a corruption fund for their children.\"\n\nWe need some of that poverty of spirit which Christianity brought in\nwith it when it was so sadly needed and which was cultivated with so\nmuch success during the later Middle Ages, when the great scholars and\nsaintly characters who most deeply influenced the times were mainly\nmembers of the mendicant orders, that is, of associations of men who\nrefused to own any possessions in order that they might have the time\nto devote themselves to higher things and who depended on the {161}\nwork of their hands and the beneficence of the public to enable them\nto continue their work. Their motto was plain living and high\nthinking, and it is surprising how much they accomplished. The spirit\nwhich made St. Francis of Assisi choose the Lady Poverty for his bride\nand delight to call himself _Il poverello di Dio_, \"the little poor\nman of God\", would seem to be entirely too impracticable and utterly\nidealistic to have any interest for our time, and yet literally more\nthan a score of important lives of St. Francis have been written\nduring our generation. We are beginning to wake up to the realization\nof the fact that \"things are in the saddle and ride mankind\", and that\nthings seem ever so much more important than thoughts, though it\nrequires no special intelligence to understand what an utter\ncontradiction of real values any such state of mind represents.\n\nWhat is now needed above all is such detachment from the things around\nus that we shall be poor in spirit. This is the element above all that\nreligion supplies. In the Sermon on the Mount, that greatest sermon\never preached, the Master said, \"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for\ntheirs is the kingdom of heaven.\" Certainly there is no straighter\nroad to heavenly peace than that, for a man may have great possessions\nand yet be poor in spirit because he is detached from them and has\nmortified his feelings with regard to them so that they do not puff\nhim up and make him vain (what striking old Saxon words those are), so\nthat he is able to use them not for himself alone but for the benefit\nof the community.\n\nThe expression \"poor in spirit\" is not popular in our time and has\noften been spoken of contemptuously. There are some who think that\nactual poverty, as well as poverty of spirit, has a paralyzing effect\non human {162} incentive, but it is well to realize that there are a\ngood many serious thinkers in our generation who do not agree with\nthis impression but on the contrary feel that detachment from temporal\ngoods may well prove a source of the highest and best stimulation to\nthe accomplishment of what is really worth while in life. Some of them\nexpress themselves rather strongly on the subject, and perhaps no one\nhas stated his mind more emphatically with regard to it than Professor\nWilliam James, who did not hesitate to declare just when money had\ncome to be apparently the most important thing in modern life: \"Among\nus English-speaking peoples especially do the praises of poverty need\nonce more to be boldly sung. We have grown literally afraid to be\npoor. We despise any one who elects to be poor in order to simplify\nand save his inner life. If he does not join the general scramble and\npant with the money-making street, we deem him spiritless and lacking\nin ambition. We have lost the power even of imagining what the ancient\nidealization of poverty could have meant: the liberation from material\nattachments; the unbribed soul, the manlier indifference; the paying\nour way by what we are or do and not by what we have; the right to\nfling away our life at any moment irresponsibly--the more athletic\ntrim, in short, the moral fighting shape. When we of the so-called\nbetter classes are scared as men were never scared in history at\nmaterial ugliness and hardship; when we put off marriage until our\nhouse can be artistic, and quake at the thought of having a child\nwithout a bank account, it is time for thinking men to protest against\nso unmanly and irreligious a state of opinion.... I recommend this\nmatter to your serious pondering, for it is certain that the prevalent\nfear of poverty among the {163} educated classes is the worst moral\ndisease from which our civilization suffers.\"\n\nAll the great religions have preached mortification. Some of them have\nmade it apparently of value in itself as working merit, but this was\npractically always an abuse of the original idea that a man learned to\ncontrol himself by practicing hard things. Our generation resents even\nthe term \"hard things\" and does not like to hear \"hard sayings\",\nthough even that gentlest of human beings, the Divine Master, felt\nthat He had to use them. There can be no doubt at all, however, about\nthe benefit to be derived from enduring hard things. Every trainer who\nhopes to have a winning team in any department of athletics knows that\nhe has to put them through hard things in order to enable them to\nacquire power and make their energies available when they are needed.\nSomehow people do not seem to realize that exactly the same thing is\nnecessary with regard to training of the will as for training of the\nmuscles, and that indeed training of the muscles is of itself\neffective largely because of the training of the will connected with\nit which makes the nervous system capable of reacting according to the\ndesires of the individual.\n\nWhile we are so intent on making things easy for the young, let us not\nforget that the best authorities on the subject of man's development\nof his powers so as to make them available for life's purposes are\npractically all agreed that the most important element in the\nformation of character--and on character depends destiny--is the\nhaving to go through hard things when one is young. In the chapter on\nSuffering I have quoted Thucydides in this matter and its approval by\nGladstone and John Morley in our own time. We hear much of a favorable\n{164} environment for young folks but most of what is so called\nrepresents the worst possible set of influences for the development of\ncharacter.\n\nProfessor Conklin of Princeton, in his volume on \"Heredity and\nEnvironment,\" which consists of lectures delivered on the Harris\nFoundation of the Northwestern University and afterwards at Princeton,\nand which therefore must be taken to represent the scientific thought\nof our time, does not hesitate to say:\n\n  \"How often is it said that the worthless sons of worthy parents are\n  mysteries; with the best of heredity and environment they amount to\n  nothing, whereas the sons of poor and ignorant farmers, blacksmiths,\n  tanners and backwoodsmen, with few opportunities and with many\n  hardships and disadvantages, become world figures. Probably the\n  inheritance in these last-named cases was no better than in the\n  former, but the environment was better. 'Good environment' usually\n  means easy, pleasant, refined surroundings, 'all the opportunities\n  that money can buy', but little responsibility and none of that\n  self-discipline which reveals the hidden powers and which alone\n  should be counted good environment. Many schools and colleges are\n  making the same mistake as the fond parents; luxury, soft living,\n  irresponsibility are not only allowed, but are encouraged and\n  endowed--and by such means it is hoped to bring out that in men\n  which can only be born in travail.\"\n\nAbove all, mortification, that is, the suppressing of the natural\ninclinations, must be practiced for health's sake as regards the\nbearing of ills that have to be suffered anyhow, and in the\nforbearance from passion when that would certainly prove physically\ndisturbing. \"Bear and forbear\" has been sometimes set down as the most\n{165} important formula for life, and it is certainly as valuable for\nthe physical as for the moral side of humanity. The repression of the\nnatural tendencies is an extremely valuable practice for the\nprevention of the many excesses which have so much to do with the\nundermining of health. The man who controls himself and compels his\ninstincts to submit to correction and modification, even when that is\nunnecessary, so far as any serious consideration is concerned, will\nsurely find himself in a position to resist natural proclivities to\nevil which may easily be serious from the standpoint of health,\nwhenever they assert themselves.\n\nAusterity is supposed to be old-fashioned and out of date, but all\nthose who want to get anything really worth while done in the world\nknow that they must deny themselves and their inclinations and work\nout their ideas in lonely vigil and by hard work. Nothing that is easy\ncounts. When men do things that will be remembered they have devoted\nthemselves whole-heartedly to them to the exclusion of more attractive\noccupations.\n\nMatthew Arnold, in his splendid sonnet on Austerity as the poet must\npractice it, has brought this out very forcibly. He tells the story of\nJacopone da Todi, the author of the Stabat Mater, who, on his wedding\nday, saw his bride of the morning killed by the fall of a stand at a\nspectacle and found beneath her bridal robes a penitential garment. He\nwas so deeply impressed that he became a Franciscan and subsequently\nthe author of the famous hymn. Certainly pathos was never more\nwondrously expressed than by this man whose own austerities, initiated\nby the example of his beloved bride, made him ready to strip himself\nof every trivial interest in the cult of the eternal verities.\n\n{166}\n\n  \"That son of Italy who tried to blow,\n  Ere Dante came, the trump of sacred song,\n  In his light youth amid a festal throng\n  Sate with his bride to see a public show.\n  Fair was the bride, and on her front did glow\n  Youth like a star; and what to youth belong--\n  Gay raiment, sparkling gauds, elation strong.\n  A prop gave way! crash fell a platform! lo,\n  'Mid struggling sufferers, hurt to death, she lay!\n  Shuddering, they drew her garments off--and found\n  A robe of sackcloth next the smooth, white skin.\n  Such, poets, is your bride, the Muse! young, gay,\n  Radiant, adorn'd, outside; a hidden ground\n  Of thought and of austerity within.\"\n\nSo far from mortification being in any sense of the word an\nold-fashioned, worn-out practice, good enough for the foolish people\nof the dark ages who had nothing better to think of, it is, in so far\nas it brings about training of the will and exercise in self-denial\nand self-control, the most important element in education at all\ntimes. We have unfortunately been neglecting it, but that neglect is\nthe real trouble with our modern education. Nearly every one who talks\nabout education has some mental panacea for it; but the trouble lies\ndeeper than that. It is the education of the will that has\nunfortunately been neglected and that requires, to cite once more the\nCentury definition, the subduing of appetites, even though painful\nseverities should have to be inflicted on the body.\n\nHuxley, in his address on \"A Liberal Education; and Where to Find It\",\ndelivered before the South London Workingmen's College, has a passage\nin which he brings this out very well. Almost needless to say Huxley\nwas the farthest possible from being medievally minded, and {167} yet\nhe placed the essence of a liberal education in will power over self\nrather than in intellectual development, or above all the accumulation\nof information. He said:\n\n  \"That man, I think, has had a liberal education who has been so\n  trained in youth that his body is the ready servant of his will, and\n  does with ease and pleasure all the work that, as a mechanism, it is\n  capable of; whose intellect is a clear, cold, logic engine, with all\n  its parts of equal strength and in smooth working order; ready, like\n  a steam engine, to be turned to any kind of work and spin the\n  gossamers as well as forge the anchors of the mind; whose mind is\n  stored with a knowledge of the great and fundamental truths of\n  nature and of the laws of her operations; one who, no stunted\n  ascetic, is full of life and fire, but whose passions are trained to\n  come to heel by a vigorous will, the servant of a tender conscience;\n  who has learned to love all beauty, whether of nature or of art, to\n  hate all vileness, and to respect others as himself.\n\n  \"Such an one and no other, I conceive, has had a liberal education;\n  for he is, as completely as a man can be, in harmony with nature.\"\n\n\n{168}\n\nCHAPTER IX\n\nEXCESSES\n\n\nThe most important rule of conduct for health is the avoidance of\nexcesses of any and every kind. Men have recognized this fact for as\nlong as the memory of the race runs. The instruction of Ptah Hotep,\nthe letter of advice from a father to his son, written by the vizier\nof King Itosi in the fifth dynasty in Egypt, something over five\nthousand years ago, which is often called the oldest book in the\nworld, emphasizes particularly the necessity for the avoidance of\nexcess in all things. Self-control and self-denial are held up as the\nhighest attributes of man. One of the seven wise men of Greece adopted\nas his contribution to the wisdom of mankind \"avoid excess.\" A\nfavorite maxim of the Romans was _ne quid nimis_, \"let there be\nnothing too much\"; and another favorite expression of theirs was _in\nmedio tutissimus ibis_, \"you will go most safely if you follow the\nmean\" (and not either extreme).\n\nThe most powerful factor for securing the avoidance of excess among\nmen has always been religion. The four cardinal virtues are prudence,\njustice, fortitude and temperance, and the last is considered by no\nmeans the least. Almost needless to say, by temperance was meant not\nonly abstinence from excessive drinking and eating, but that\nmoderation and self-control in all things which the ancients\nrecognized as the most important factor in human life, and which\nreligion, trying to perfect {169} nature by grace, set forth as one of\nthe cardinal or \"hinge\" qualities on which the whole of a good life\nswings. When reason and not impulse, when virtue and not passion, when\nstrength of character and not weakness rule a man's life, the motives\nwhich impel him or, as we would rather say in our modern knowledge of\npsychology, stimulate him to action and enable him to accomplish what\nhe desires in so important a matter are drawn much oftener from\nreligion than from any other source.\n\nReligion has done more than anything else to make people rational in\ntheir lives and not merely the sport of their impulses and instincts.\nMen are animals, but possessed of reason, though reason can be\nobscured to a great extent or even almost completely eclipsed by the\nimpulses that arise from the lower nature of man. Religion has above\nall helped to make men think of others who are so often hurt by their\nunreason rather than themselves, and has helped to keep them from\nself-indulgence.\n\nAbernethy, the distinguished surgeon who impressed himself so deeply\non the history of medicine in London at the beginning of the\nnineteenth century, was accustomed to say that the two great killing\npowers in the world are stuff and fret,--in a word, eating too much\nand worrying about things, most of which will never happen. Satisfying\nthe desires of mankind and fostering their dreads will do more to wear\nout life before its time than anything else. Religion represents the\never present signpost pointing away from travel in either of these\ndirections. Men do not heed her warnings very often until they have\ngone so far on the road of life that some of their powers have been\nlost because of their neglect, but at least they can recognize then\nthat the signposts are {170} always in place, and that they saw them,\nand that it was their own fault if they did not follow them.\n\nHomer, three thousand years ago, told the poetic story of the men who\nhad been turned into swine by Circe and who, though swine, knew that\nthey were men, but could not get back to the use of their reason. The\nsimilitude lies so close that it is perfectly clear that the idea\nbehind the old myth of the goddess who invited men to share swinish\npleasures and secured such control over them that they could not get\nback their reason again was the goddess of lubricity. Ulysses himself\nhad to abstain from the indulgence that had captivated his men, and\nthen he had to come to their assistance with the herb _moly_ which,\nrevealed to him by one of the gods, enabled him to turn Circe's\nvictims back to men again. The old Fathers of the Church used to\nemphasize the fact that this herb _moly_ represented grace, for\nwithout divine assistance it is almost impossible for men who have\ngiven themselves over to the pleasures of the body to win back\nself-control again. Men may recognize their unfortunate state yet be\nunable to set themselves right. No wonder the Church Fathers\nproclaimed the story as told by Homer to be one of the prefigurements\nof Christian symbol which showed that the old poet was, in a certain\nway at least, a messenger from celestial powers carrying on the\ntradition of Providence in the world.\n\nIt is a commonplace among physicians that the so-called pleasures of\nlife indulged in to excess are much more prone to be followed by ill\nhealth than is the hard work of existence, no matter how apparently\ntrying the work may be. We hear much of hard work shortening life and\nof bringing on states of exhaustion in which health is at a low ebb,\nbut physicians find it very difficult to collect {171} cases that\nillustrate any such effects of hard work. Some of our hardest workers,\nmen who have devoted themselves to half a dozen different difficult\ntasks with an ardor that made other men wonder how they could possibly\nstand it, have lived to even advanced old age. I have personally known\nabout a dozen physicians who lived to eighty-five or beyond, and all\nof them without exception had been very hard workers when they were\nyoung. Distinguished generals often live to a good old age; though not\ninfrequently they have been shot to pieces when they were young,\nwounded a number of times during life, yet, like Lord Roberts, Sir\nEvelyn Wood and Von Moltke, they have lived well beyond eighty years\nof age, active and capable until the very end.\n\nThe ill effect of hard work is a fetish created by people who are\nthemselves afraid of hard work. Hard play has killed many more men\nthan hard work. Concentrated efforts to compress into life all the\npossible pleasure that one can secure will break a man down sooner\nthan anything else in the world. Such a breakdown is usually thorough\nand seldom is followed by complete and enduring recovery. Hard\nphysical work, on the contrary, performed under any reasonably\nfavorable circumstances, is a factor conducive to health and strength\nand long life, and this is particularly true if it is accomplished in\nthe open. The devotee of pleasure is notably shortlived. Work,\naccording to the Scriptural expression, was imposed as a curse on man,\nbut it has been very well said, \"if when the Lord curses they turn to\nblessings this way, what must it not be when He blesses?\" No wonder\nthat we say, \"Blessed is the man who has found his work.\" The more\nexperience a man has had, the more he recognizes this truth. Work is\none of the most precious {172} resources for men in the world, while\npleasure, unless carefully guarded from excess, can be the worst of\ncurses. Though so costly, so much sought after and so often even\nlooked forward to as the reward for work, pleasure is but seldom\nsatisfying and is often followed by remorse which proves disturbing to\nboth mind and body. The deterioration of constitution brought about by\nthe physical consequences of pleasures indulged in to excess must be\ncounted among the most serious factors for ill health to which\nhumanity is subject.\n\nDoctor Carroll, in his \"Mastery of Nervousness\", says very well, \"the\ndanger of overwork is far less common than that of underwork.... Close\nobservation brings the conviction that the great majority claiming\noverwork as the reason for their nervous deficiency are the victims\nnot of earnest productive work itself but of defective methods of work\ndiscounted by haste, stress and strain, by impatience, worry and\nfear.\" In a word nervous breakdown, when it comes to a busy man or\nwoman, is due ever so much more to the irritable state of mind into\nwhich they get in the midst of their press of work than to the work\nitself. The feeling of haste is ever so much more dangerous than the\nactual hurry. The mistakes that are made under these circumstances are\ngreat wasters of time and of energy and disturbers of morale, until a\nfeeling of impotence grows on one and then becomes inveterate. As a\nmatter of fact a great many people who break down do so not during the\nstress of work but afterwards, when they have the leisure to look back\non it and think about it and wonder why they did not break down, and\nwhile their friends keep sympathizing with them and they have the\nchance to let their self-pity cause the crumpling of their character.\n\n{173}\n\nPremature old age, that is, the precocious hardening of the arteries,\nfor \"a man is as old as his arteries\", came particularly, the older\nphysicians used to say, to the devotees of the three pagan deities,\nVenus, Bacchus and Vulcan. That is, senility came before it was due in\nthe order of nature to those who indulged in venery or in wine and its\nalmost inevitable accompaniment, overeating, and then to the man who\ndid such hard physical work as the blacksmith does, for Vulcan, it may\nbe recalled, was the blacksmith among the gods. In this enumeration\ntwo out of three of the factors unfavorable for health come from the\npleasures of life; but I think there is no doubt in the minds of\nphysicians that if a comparison in the number of patients whose\nailments were the consequences of the worship of the deities named\nwere to be made, there would be found ten times as many men who became\nprematurely old or suffered from the development of organic affections\nbecause of wine and venereal disease as from hard physical labor.\n\nAneurysm is the one form of arterial degeneration to which the hard\nworker is particularly liable, and the more we have learned of that\nthe more we have come to realize very clearly that while the hard work\nwas the immediate occasion, the real underlying cause of the\ndegeneration of arteries that led to the development of the aneurysm\nwas to be found in some overindulgence. The French physicians\nsometimes said satirically that overwork of the heart much more than\nof the head or the hands laid the foundation on which aneurysm\ndeveloped, for it occurs oftenest on a luetic basis.\n\nPractically all the degenerative diseases affecting heart, arteries,\nkidneys and brain are due to excesses. The excesses of life are\ncounted by religion among the deadly {174} sins. Pride, anger,\ncovetousness, lust, gluttony, envy and sloth,--all these represent\nindulgence in evil passions that very readily affect the body.\nReligion has constantly used all its influence to overcome them and\nhas succeeded better than any other single factor in life. It is\nperfectly possible to have a veneer of religion and be a miser or a\nglutton or a very devil of pride, but real religion of the heart,\nwhile it does not eradicate the tendency that exists in human nature\ntoward these unfortunate qualities, helps the possessor of them\nmaterially to control them and to keep his passions in subjection.\n\nIn this control of excesses religion has been an extremely important\nfactor for health. It is true that many other factors, human respect,\nworldly consideration, preservation of one's own dignity and similar\nnon-religious factors have had a like influence. Occasionally indeed\nit would seem as though mere respectability had more to do with\npreventing men and women from making exhibitions of themselves by the\npublic commission of sin than even religion itself. This would appear\nto be surely true if different strata of society were compared with\neach other. If, for instance, the working classes who practice their\nreligion and the better-to-do classes who perhaps neglect it were to\nbe compared in these regards, the contrast would favor the latter as a\nrule, but any such comparison would be eminently odious. There is no\ndoubt that mere human motives can be effective, but the value of\nreligion should be gauged from its effect on people who are living in\nthe same circumstance. The vast majority of the very poor have found\nreligion a sheet anchor of veritable salvation under circumstances\nwhere sin would have been not only not a disadvantage but actually\nhave proved of material benefit to them. While, on the other hand,\nmany {175} a well-to-do person lacking religion has fallen into sin in\nspite of the fact that every human motive spoke emphatically against\ntheir commission of it.\n\nReligion has been particularly helpful in the neutralization of\ntemptations to excess in the matter of alcoholic liquor. Father\nMatthew's great crusade in Ireland, England and this country enlisted\nmillions of people under the banner of temperance and helped\nmarvelously in enabling the world to understand that the serious evils\nconnected with the liquor traffic were by no means inevitable, but\ncould be repressed to a great extent by simple personal appeals which\ncalled to the manhood of men and made them understand their own power\nto throw off the shackles of what to them seemed an unconquerable\nhabit by a serious act of the will. The immense amount of suffering\nthat was thus saved to the women and children of men who had been\naccustomed to drink a considerable portion or sometimes practically\nall of their wages and leave their families to get on as best they\nmight is almost incalculable.\n\nA still more important result of Father Matthew's work was the\ndemonstration that men who are the victims of even such a habit and\ncraving as that which is produced by indulgence in liquor may break it\ncompletely by a single powerful act of the will, when to that is added\nthe strong suggestion that they will surely be helped by divine favor\nto accomplish what they have purposed. Literally hundreds of thousands\nof men under Father Matthew's inspiration, and touched by the example\nof others around them, broke off once and for all from liquor habits\nto which they had been enslaved sometimes for years.\n\nProfessor William James in his essay on the \"Energies of Men\" first\npublished in the _American Magazine_ under {176} the title of \"Powers\nof Men\" (October, 1907)--it was originally the presidential address\ndelivered before the American Philosophical Association and therefore\nwritten not for popular reading, but as a serious contribution to\nscience--has on this, as on many other subjects, a paragraph that is\nvaluable in this regard. It is not only interesting but is eminently\nsuggestive with regard to the effect that can be produced on a man by\ndeep emotion, and when that emotion is based on profound religious\nfeeling it can be not only immediate but extremely enduring in its\neffect. This is what proved to be the case for the vast majority of\nthose who took the pledge from Father Matthew.\n\nProfessor James said: \"The normal opener of deeper and deeper levels\nof energy is the will. The difficulty is to use it, to make the effort\nwhich the word volition implies. But if we do make it (or if a god,\nthough he were only the god Chance, makes it through us), it will act\ndynamogenically on us for a month. It is notorious that a single\nsuccessful effort of moral volition, such as saying 'no' to some\nhabitual temptation, or performing some courageous act will launch a\nman on a higher level of energy for days and weeks, will give him a\nnew range of power. 'In the act of uncorking the whiskey bottle which\nI had brought home to get drunk upon,' said a man to me, 'I suddenly\nfound myself running out into the garden, where I smashed it on the\nground. I felt so happy and uplifted after this act, that for two\nmonths I wasn't tempted to touch a drop.'\"\n\nNothing is so capable of giving a fillip to a sluggish will, arousing\nit to efforts that even its possessor never dreamt it capable of, as\nreligion. The change of life known as conversion has not infrequently\nrevolutionized an existence that seemed hopelessly and helplessly\ncommitted {177} to the baser aims of living. Instances are in every\none's experience, and the veriest self-missioned exhorter has many of\nthem to his credit.\n\nReligion has listed temperance among the four cardinal virtues, and\nthough it is usually named the last--prudence, justice, fortitude and\ntemperance--it is considered by no means the least in importance, and\nthe cardinal virtues, as the etymology of their descriptive epithet\nsignifies, are literally the \"hinge virtues\" on which the religious\nlife depends. Religion has not, however, ever favored that complete\nprohibition of the use of the milder alcoholic beverages which have\nsuch a definite place in life. Life is, as a rule, too hard a thing\nfor most people without the opportunity for escape from the tension of\nexistence represented by mild alcoholic stimulation. At the very\nbeginning of Christianity Paul advised his disciple Timothy to take a\nlittle wine for the stomach's sake, and in this religion is only\nhelping nature, provided there is no abuse, for natural digestion is\naccompanied by the production of a certain amount of dilute alcohol.\nAbsolute prohibition of very natural indulgences that are not in\nthemselves wrong is so likely to be followed by a reaction in the\nopposite direction that abuses are almost sure to occur. Temperance\nand not prohibition represents the true religious aspect of this\nquestion.\n\nUnfortunately very serious abuses had followed the interesting\ndevelopments of modern human ingenuity in the making of strong\nliquors. Natural processes only make liquors of various kinds that do\nno harm unless taken in great excess and that have a very special\nplace in the human economy. From the abuses no argument holds against\nthe use, but it was the very reaction produced in religious minds\nagainst the serious associations of {178} the drink traffic that led\nto the enactment of laws against it. In themselves they represent a\ngreat benefit for humanity, for it is perfectly sure that we shall\nnever want the saloon back again, nor the free consumption of strong\nalcoholic liquors which are not stimulants but narcotics and have done\nnot so much physical harm as moral harm. They have caused the workman\nto neglect his family and bring them very often to the point of\nstarvation; they have filled our jails, have made the need for charity\ngreater than it would otherwise be; have fomented passion and only too\noften encouraged vice, and we must never have them back. Even the\nexaggerated religious reaction has done great positive good, and when\nit settles down to moderation in prohibitive laws we will set a\nmagnificent example for the rest of the world, the first hints of\nwhich are already manifest.\n\nWhat is true for the alcoholic craving can be just as true for\naddictions of all kinds and particularly for drug addictions. In our\nday a great crusade is needed for the relief of this evil, for in\nspite of efforts at repression, drug addictions are growing in\nfrequency rather than decreasing. We have tried to use material\nrepressive measures and have failed. It is time for us to realize that\nthere remain moral and religious motives, appeal to which can produce\nalmost incredibly strong effects. These can prove effective against\nmany of the most unfortunate habits of mankind which are likely to\nturn out extremely deleterious to health if persisted in. Religion can\nthus be a source of power--virtue is the word the Romans used for this\nand its full form is not translated by our English word virtue any\nmore--to help in the neutralization of human tendencies more prone\nthan any others to shorten life or be the origin of serious disease.\n\n{179}\n\nIt would be too bad to reduce religion to the role of merely a\nscavenger of bad habits, a sweeper up of the unconsidered trifles\nwhich if allowed to act tend to the deterioration of physical\nexistence, but what happens when religion does bring about improvement\nin the victims of these unfortunate habits is that a great new\nincentive is given to life, and men, realizing what they have been\nrescued from, may now turn the new energies they have found to great\npurposes. Some of these at least have learned to devote themselves\nunstintedly to work for others which proves a source of the greatest\npossible good. How many a rescued drunkard has, after reform, given\nhimself whole-heartedly to helping others out of various unfortunate\nconditions in which both body and soul were being pulled down to the\nvery lowest that was in them. Some of these \"rescued\" ones for twenty\nor more years devoted themselves, in the midst of what might have\nseemed almost inevitably compelling temptations to their former\nhabits, to the care for others until their names became household\nwords in the great cities of their time because of the good they were\naccomplishing. Jerry Macaulay was an example of this that New York\nwill not soon forget, but we have had many humbler fellow workers of\nhis.\n\nThe human will, stimulated by religious motives, can change the whole\ncourse of man's life when his character would seem to have made it\ninevitable that this could not be changed for the better. How true the\nmaxim of conduct in life is: \"plant an act and reap a habit; plant a\nhabit and reap a character; plant a character and reap a destiny.\"\nWhat seemed the almost unescapable destiny of many men has been\nchanged by the influence of religion over habits, so that a natural\ndisposition which by habit {180} had become a personality fraught with\nevil for self and others has been changed into an individual that\nproves an asset instead of a liability to the community.\n\nNot only in the matter of substances harmful in themselves, but in\nthose which though good and even necessary when taken in moderation,\nyet are greatly harmful when consumed in excess, the regulations of\nreligion have been particularly helpful to mankind. Fasting has been\nencouraged and indeed set down as an absolute obligation for all those\nwho are in health. Mortification, that is, self-denial with regard to\nthings that people like very much, was counseled and the counsels so\noften repeated that people were almost sure to practice some of them\nand many were taken quite seriously to heart. Moderation in eating was\nadvised at all times, and any serious excess set down as gluttony, one\nof the seven deadly sins. How much the religious counsels against\nexcess may be needed nowadays even with regard to things quite\nharmless or even valuable for mankind will perhaps be best appreciated\nfrom the present status of sugar consumption in the world. One hundred\nand twenty-five years ago a few thousand tons of sugar supplied all\nthe needs of mankind. Now nearly twenty-five million of tons are\nscarcely sufficient to maintain prices for the commodity at a level\nlow enough so that people may continue to buy it in the quantities\nthey desire.\n\nSugar is an artificial product made from starchy substances, not\nunlike alcohol in certain ways and capable of doing at least as much\nphysical harm as alcohol. There are at the present time half a million\npeople in this country who either have now or will have before they\ndie, diabetes. This is a serious disease; when it occurs under thirty\nit is practically always fatal. Under forty it may shorten life {181}\nseriously. It always greatly weakens the individual and makes him\nsubject to certain other serious diseases. We need self-control in the\nuse of sugar; the habit of taking it grows on one.\n\nThe use of sugar and milk in tea and coffee is an occidental abuse\nthat the orientals who originally began the drinking of these\nsubstances find it extremely difficult to understand. Tea with milk\nand sugar in it a Chinaman would be likely to think of as sweetened\nmilk soup. The reason for adding milk and sugar was to cover up the\ndefective qualities in poor tea or coffee, or mistakes in their making\nby which certain bitter astringent principles not meant to be in\nsolution had their taste covered up by the sweet milkiness. The habit\nof using tea without sugar often formed by the practice of a little\nmortification would probably result in more good than merely the\nabsence of the sugar.\n\nEvery one of the seven deadly sins represents excesses in bodily or\nmental propensities against which religion set up the attitude of\nutter disapproval and pointed out their inevitable tendency to part a\nman from what was best in him. Teaching children from their early\nyears that pride, covetousness, lust, anger, gluttony, envy and sloth\nwere serious offenses made for an early realization of the necessity\nfor guarding against them. All of them represent extremely unfavorable\nfactors for health. Pride goes before a fall, and the disappointments\nwhich it almost inevitably brings with it represent more occasions for\ndepression and melancholic tendencies than almost anything else. The\ninordinate desire for money has brought down on many a man serious\nnervous prostration. With regard to lust and its awful consequences to\nhealth nothing need be said here, and not much needs to be said {182}\neven in the chapter on Purity. We have had its baneful effects dinned\ninto our ears particularly in recent years. Anger is not so serious,\nand yet many an older man especially has shortened his life quite\nmaterially by giving away to ungovernable bursts of temper. Nervous\npeople who do not control their tempers often suffer from serious lack\nof nerve control as a consequence of their lapses of temper. Gluttony\nhas already been touched on and needs no illustration as to its\nextremely bad effect on health. Envy often makes most of the functions\nof the body perform their work incompletely because nothing so\ndisturbs even such apparently purely physical functions as digestion\nand nutritional metabolism generally as the wearing of a grouch. The\ngrouchy man almost never digests well and quite inevitably his state\nof mind interferes with other functions. Little need be said about\nsloth and its effect upon health but the fact that from the very\nearliest times religion has pointed out that the mere doing of nothing\ncould of itself become a serious, even capital offense, for a healthy\nperson represented an excellent stimulus to that activity of mind and\nbody which is so important for health. It is only lately that we have\ncome to realize how dangerous a remedy rest may be, to be prescribed\nwith great care, for it is a habit-producing remedy nearly as risky as\nopium and never to be prescribed on any general principles. There has\nbeen ten times as much harm done to health by rest as by vigorous\nexercise or even hard work. The hard workers are nearly all long\nlived, but the sons and daughters of rest pass away from the scene,\nnot of their labors, but of their languors, rather early, as a rule.\n\nReligion then has been an extremely valuable factor for the control of\nexcesses, or at least for their limitation, {183} and thus has been of\ngreat significance for health. Religious counsels and prohibitions\nhave not entirely prevented excesses even in those who were adherents\nof religion, for man is so constituted that it is not quite possible\nto have all men follow the wiser course. Even the best of men have to\nconfess, like St. Paul, that sometimes, though they know the better\npath, they follow the worse. If to do good were as easy as it is to\nknow what it is good to do, life would be a much simpler matter. Not\nknowledge, but will power is needed, and religious practice builds\nthis up and strengthens the will so that it is able to resist many\ntemptations that would otherwise prove difficult to surmount. The\ncontest between good and evil has gone on in spite of religion, and\nwill go on, but there is no doubt at all that evil would have\naccomplished much more of harm only for the help that religion has\nbeen to mankind, and this has been particularly manifest in the\nlimitation of the excesses which so often prove detrimental to health.\n\nThe old saw of English tradition which in some form or other is many\ncenturies old is well worth recalling in this regard.\n\n  \"Virtue, temperance and repose\n  Slam the door on the doctor's nose.\"\n\nWe hear much of the vicious circles that are formed by which things go\nfrom worse to worse, one unfavorable factor helping on another, but we\nforget apparently that there are virtuous circles according to which\n\"all things work together for good.\" This means good not only for the\nsoul and the mind, but also for the body and for health. Religion\nmakes for health and health promotes religion, and the virtuous circle\nis completed.\n\n\n{184}\n\nCHAPTER X\n\nPURITY\n\nNothing has worked so much detriment to the health of mankind for many\ncenturies as the habits that may be generalized under the term\nimpurity. Until recent years it has been the custom to suppress the\nknowledge of the immense physical evil that was being worked to\nhumanity by the venereal diseases. A generation ago it was only\nimperfectly known, but now we recognize that no set of diseases are\nmore important for the race and its health than those which usually\noccur as the direct result of violations of the moral code. Their\nravages have increased just in proportion to the gradual diminution of\nthe influence of religion during the past few generations. They have\nprobably worked greater havoc on the better classes than on the poorer\nclasses. There are nations like the Irish, over whom religion has a\nstrong hold, in which the injury worked by these diseases has been\nalmost negligible. There have been classes of men like the clergymen,\ndeeply under the influence of religion, who have escaped almost\nentirely the awful, destructive effects of these affections. We have\nonly just waked up to the realization of how much this element of\nconduct, so profoundly influenced by religion, has meant for suffering\nand death among men.\n\nIn spite of the fact that there was a conspiracy of silence with\nregard to the venereal diseases, something of their {185} fearful\neffectiveness in adding to mortality lists came to be known, at least\nby those who were interested in the subject, a generation ago. Though\nevery possible excuse was taken not to list death as due to these\ndiseases during the twenty-five years before nineteen hundred, when,\njust after the smug mid-Victorian period, the conspiracy of silence\nwas at its highest and was particularly hide-bound in England, no less\nthan sixty thousand deaths from venereal disease were registered by\nthe English registrar general. Nearly twenty-five thousand of these\nwere females. Over two thousand deaths a year is a pretty heavy toll,\nbut such statistics give only the very faintest hint of the awful\nravages of these diseases. It is not alone death that occurs as a\nconsequence of them but long years of suffering and crippling of\nvarious kinds, the blinding of children and the birth of dead or\nidiotic children, or of other poor little ones who grow up to be\nepileptic or to become insane in early adult life, or to exhibit other\nsad marks of the diseases of their parents.\n\nCivil statistics of these diseases mean very little, especially in\nEnglish-speaking countries, because of our prudery with regard to\nthem. Army medical statistics, however, have had to be rigorously kept\nbecause of the amount of military inefficiency due to these\naffections. The statistics of the last generation in England show that\nit was not an unusual thing for nearly one in four of the soldiers in\na regiment to be admitted to the hospital each year because of\nvenereal disease. Actually nearly one in five of the effective\nstrength of regiments was constantly in a hospital because of these\ndiseases. It is improbable that soldiers are notably more immoral than\ncivilians of the same class, except that perhaps there has been in the\narmy a tradition of greater contempt for these affections. So {186}\nfar as large cities are concerned, many good medical authorities are\nconvinced that the average young men of the population suffer to about\nthe same extent as soldiers. Actually something more than three out of\nfive in the English army suffered at some time from these diseases,\nand as they are extremely difficult to cure and often continue to have\nserious effects for years, as well as being contagious for others, we\nget some idea of what an immense amount of harm has been worked by\nthem.\n\nIt might possibly be thought that conditions in America were better\nthan in Europe in this regard, but our experience during the war did\nnot justify any such optimism. Nearly six per cent of the men\nmobilized for the army in the United States actually showed signs of\nthese diseases when they were admitted for examination on arrival in\ncamp. This percentage does not include those who had been cured prior\nto their examination. From some of the cities of this country the\nproportion of young men actually suffering at the time of their\nenlistment from these diseases was more than one in ten, and from\ncertain of the southern cities it actually approached very close to\none in five. According to the statement of the Surgeon General of the\nWar Department, diseases due to impurity constituted the greatest\ncause of disability in the army. When the physicians were given the\nopportunity to make a more careful examination of the second million\nof the draft than had been possible for the first, the percentage of\ndiseased men ran up notably, in spite of the fact that warnings in the\nmatter led a great many of those who were drafted to seek proper\ntreatment before presenting themselves at the camps.\n\nWe have waked up at last to something like the full significance of\nthese diseases in the destruction of the race. {187} The American\nSocial Hygiene Association in its Publication No. 250, \"Conquering an\nOld Enemy\", dared to tell the story of these affections very\nstraightforwardly. There are many physicians connected with this\nassociation and its opinions are thoroughly conservative and not at\nall hysterical. We get a striking idea of the destructiveness of these\ndiseases from an early paragraph of the publication:\n\n  \"In these United States and in this year of peace 1920, more lives\n  than the whole empire of Great Britain lost during any year of the\n  Great War will be flicked out by two diseases which are curable and\n  preventable diseases. Nor will the year 1920 stand alone. In the\n  four and a half years of intensive warfare between 1914 and 1918,\n  the fifteen civilized nations which fought at Armageddon gave to\n  these twin scourges a heavier toll than they did to bullets, shells,\n  gas, air-bombs, all the ghastly, wholesale killers of modern\n  battle.\"\n\nThe more important of these diseases is estimated by authorities to\nkill annually in the United States more than 300,000 people. It is far\nmore deadly than tuberculosis and carries off every year nearly, if\nnot quite, as many lives as influenza at the height of its\nepidemicity. France lost during the four years and four months of\nArmageddon 1,350,000 lives in battle. We lost almost as many during\nthe same time from this affection which a few years ago we were\nostrich-like hiding from ourselves by refusing to look at it. The\nother of these affections is probably responsible for more serious\nsuffering in women and female complaints that require operation as\nwell as blindness in children than any other single factor that we\nhave in modern life. There is no element that has so seriously\ninterfered with the simple joys of existence, the {188} raising of\nchildren and family life in peace and happiness, as this affection.\n\nWhen it is realized how many complications and sequelae may develop\nfrom these diseases, but above all how much harm may be done to\ninnocent wives and children, some notion of the suffering that has\nthus been inflicted on mankind will be obtained. The one significant\nfactor in the control of this source of ill health has been religion.\nJust in proportion as religion has lost its hold over the rising\ngeneration, there has been a marked increase in this particular mode\nof ill health. The only effective brake on human passion has been\nreligious feeling, but above all religious training. If religion had\ndone nothing else than limit to a noteworthy extent the irregular\nliving consequent upon yielding to passion, that would be sufficient\nof itself to make not only personal but community health greatly\nindebted to religion. Other motives have at times been appealed to and\nsometimes with apparently good results for the time being, but never\nwith any enduring effectiveness against the flood tide of feeling\nwhich comes over those who have had no practice in self-repression and\nwho have not learned to appeal to the higher motives to help them in\nthis matter.\n\nFor a great many young men, \"sowing their wild oats\" has been sowing a\ncrop of seeds whose products have meant the ruination of their own\nlives, but unfortunately also only too often of the lives of their\nfuture wives and their unborn children. We know now that the great\nmajority of all the blind children in our blind asylums owe their\nblindness to one of these venereal affections. Three out of five at\nleast of the imbeciles and epileptics in our institutions derive their\nmental trouble from the other {189} of these diseases. We hear a good\ndeal about young folks \"seeing life\", but for many the process which\nhas been thus lightly glossed over should be described literally as\n\"seeing death.\"\n\nSince the unfortunate breakdown of religion to a considerable extent\nin the last few generations and its tendency to change into a mere\nsocial influence at most, there has been a great increase in the\nprevalence of these diseases. Some of this is undoubtedly due to our\nmodern city life and its temptations, but the individual attitude\ntoward life means more. St. Theresa said, \"When the individual is well\ngrounded in faith, the temptation means little.\" An attempt has been\nmade to control the power of temptations and repress the passions of\nmen by other means. Above all, knowledge of the awful sex disease\ndangers which they were running has been turned to as a hopeful remedy\nin this matter. It was thought that young folks could be terrified by\nthe knowledge of the hideous possible consequences of their acts into\navoiding the lapses which occasion them.\n\nIn spite of the fact that practically all of our prominent\npsychologists have opposed any such method as this, a great many\npeople who have very little right to an opinion have insisted that\nthis policy must be followed in our schools. There is probably nothing\nthat could do more harm than this. The diffusion of the knowledge of\nthe immense amount of serious, even fatal, disease consequent upon sex\nirregularities suddenly thrust upon the world has made a great many\npeople a little hysterical and has tempted them to turn to remedies\nwhich are not only not likely to be helpful but are almost sure to be\nvicious in their consequences. It is like finding {190} that a child\nhas swallowed some poison and in the excitement administering another\nwith the vague hope that one may neutralize the other.\n\nProfessor Foerster of the department of psychology and ethics at the\nUniversity of Munich does not hesitate to say that such teaching is\nsure to do harm and not good. He has suggested that \"in making use of\nthe intellect to restrain sex instincts there is every danger of the\nintellect itself, through excessive familiarization with details of\nsuch knowledge, being captured and employed in the service of the\nenemy.\" He praises the older teachers, \"The great educators of the\npast who have all been instinctively aware of this truth and have\nhence strongly insisted on the importance of cultivating a sense of\nshame; for they have realized that the chief task of sexual education\nis not to attract the attention of the young to sex matters, but as\nfar as possible to distract them from it.\"\n\nProfessor Muensterberg of Harvard University took very strong ground\nagainst the teaching of sex hygiene in public schools and stated his\nopinion quite as emphatically as Professor Foerster that such\nteaching, even though it be given with the best of intentions, is sure\nto do much more harm than good. He said: \"The cleanest boy and girl\ncannot give theoretical attention to the thoughts concerning sexuality\nwithout the whole mechanism for reinforcement automatically entering\ninto action. We may instruct with the best intention to suppress, and\nyet our instruction itself must become a source of stimulation which\nunnecessarily creates a desire for improper conduct. The policy of\nsilence showed an instinctive understanding of this fundamental\nsituation. Even if that traditional policy had had no {191} positive\npurpose, its negative function, its leaving at rest the explosive\nsexual system of the youth, must be acknowledged as one of those\nwonderful instinctive procedures by which society protects itself....\n\n\"A nation which tries to lift its sexual morality by dragging the\nsexual problems to the street for the inspection of the crowd without\nshyness and without shame, and which wilfully makes them objects of\ngossip and stage entertainment is doing worse than Munchausen when he\ntried to lift himself by his scalp.\"\n\nIt would be perfectly easy to give many other quotations from\nprominent psychologists who agree with Foerster and Muensterberg in\nthis matter. What is forgotten is how large a role suggestion plays in\nall matters relating to conduct, but particularly sex conduct. The\nexhibition of such ordinary crimes as \"second-story work\", climbing\nporches in order to steal while the family are at meals, the picking\nof pockets and the like, on the reels of moving pictures has been\nfound to be followed over and over again by the occurrence of such\ncrimes among the boys and even the girls in the neighborhood where the\nexhibition was given. Girls see a woman's reticule cleverly rifled in\na street car or on a crowded corner and, tempted by the cleverness of\nit, they are led to imitate the action. In many cities the police\nrefuse to allow such reels to be exhibited unless the punishment for\nthe crime completes the picture. Even with this, however, it has been\nfound that such exhibitions prove criminally suggestive, for the young\nfolks remember the cleverness and think of the fun that one can have\nwith the money, while the punishment is, if not forgotten, at least so\npushed into the background of memory as to have comparatively little\ndeterrent effect.\n\n{192}\n\nIf this is true with regard to indifferent actions of this kind, the\ntemptations to which are more or less artificial or but of\ncomparatively slight allurement, it is easy to understand how serious\nand profound can be the suggestive power of sex knowledge for which\nthere is likely to be so prurient a curiosity and with regard to which\nthere are in the best-regulated healthy individuals, bodily stirrings\nalmost as soon as the mind begins to be occupied with them. For that\nis the danger,--that even in the best of men the physical sex impulse\nmay be awakened. In those who for professional reasons are quite\nfamiliar with sex matters, as for instance the physician, the dwelling\non sex subjects even in matters of disease may arouse physical\nelements in the system, and these may react to deepen the attention\nuntil other considerations may be quite pushed into the background of\nconsciousness. If this is true for older people, how much more so for\nthe young, who have not yet been disillusioned on sex subjects and\nwhose inhibitions are likely to be so much weaker. A great many of the\npeople who are so intent on sex education apparently do not realize\nthat their very tendency to occupy themselves with this subject so\nmuch is due to unconscious physical stirrings within themselves,\nconsequent upon the preoccupation of mind with these subjects to the\nexclusion of healthier considerations.\n\nThe imparting of knowledge often serves only to awaken sleeping\npassions unsuspected before in the organism. Everyday experience shows\nhow little knowledge helps. The people whose sex divagations get most\nfrequently into our courts are those between thirty-five and fifty\nyears of age. There is no question at all that they know enough to\nkeep them right if knowledge made {193} for righteousness. I have said\nelsewhere, and I know it to be true, that medical students, in spite\nof their knowledge of the consequences of venery, are not better, but\non the average a little worse in these matters than other students in\nthe universities. Their knowledge, like all knowledge, acts as a\nsuggestion to evil much more than as a protection against vice. When\ntemptation comes they are likely to think of the possibility of\navoiding the worst evils and of the powers of medicine, and anyhow\nyouth always feels in the expressive French phrase. _On meurt! les\nautres!_ People die! Oh, yes, other people.\n\nThe one factor in life that will give the most precious aid in the\nprotection of humanity against sexual temptations is religion. All the\nhigher religions have emphasized the virtue of purity, that is, of\nfreedom from sex vice, as of the greatest importance. For Christianity\nthis has been a corner stone of the spiritual life without which\nrighteousness, to use the good old-fashioned word which indicated that\na man went \"right\" in life, was impossible. We are a little afraid of\nthese old-fashioned religious words in our time, and we use such\nexpressions as \"go straight\", somewhat as during the war the soldiers\nused the expression \"go west\" in order not to have to mention the\nsolemn word death, but the old-fashioned words express exactly the\nmeaning that we want, and they often carry valuable suggestion with\nthem. In the Sermon on the Mount, Christ held out His highest rewards\nin heaven for those who practiced purity. He insisted, however, not on\npurity of body alone, but on purity of mind and heart when He said,\n\"Blessed are the clean of heart, for they shall see God.\"\n\nThe head master of Harrow, the great public school {194} in England,\nproclaimed a very great truth that we all know, but need to be\nreminded of, when he said to his young men at Harrow that \"The Bible\ndoes not so much speak as thunder against impurity, and it is no\ninjustice to a secularistic morality to say that purity received from\nthe lips of Jesus Christ a dignity, nay, a paramount authority which\nit cannot receive from human lips. Nor is personal chastity the same\nthing if it be taken to be a sanitary, or conventional, or moral\npractice, as if it be a duty resulting from the sanctity of the body\nas the temple of the indwelling Spirit of God.\"\n\nDoctor Norman Porritt, in his book on \"Religion and Health\", does not\nhesitate to say that religion is the only factor that can be helpful\nin this extremely important matter of the prophylaxis of sex disease.\nHe goes so far as to say that \"Give to the tempted the reinforcement\nof religion, and you place him in a position well-nigh impregnable.\"\nIt has been well said that if the man who first wrote \"honesty is the\nbest policy\" meant that people should be honest because that was sure\nto rebound to their own benefit in the end, he was a rascal at heart.\nIn something the same way Doctor Porritt suggests that to teach that\npurity is the best policy is to take an extremely low motive for the\npurpose of combating one of the most alluring temptations that man\nhas. He says very emphatically and yet surely with a great deal of\ncommon sense: \"And what is to be the remedy for the scourge which is\nincapacitating and crippling a fifth part of the nation's manhood,\nchecking the natural expansion of population and sweeping unknown\nthousands to untimely graves? There are many remedies. We may look to\nthe creation of a public sentiment which shall regard immorality as a\ndisgraceful thing, to be {195} ashamed of rather than proud of; we may\nlearn to point the finger of scorn at the tempter as readily as we\nspurn his victim; we may prove, both by precept and our own example,\nthat chastity is compatible with health, and that impurity--even when\nno gross disease follows--tends to deterioration and disorder; that\nthe reasoning which gives a sanatory sanction to immorality and vice\nis a subtle sophistry. We may cultivate the manly exercises and stamp\nout impurity by wholesome books, elevating amusements, and noble\nambitions; we may endeavour to check the spread of these diseases by\nlegislative restrictions; we may inculcate teetotalism and banish\nenervating habits and too stimulating foods. Each of these measures\nmay do something. Some of them may do much. But all of them have one\nfatal defect. They are all tarred with the brush of expediency.\nExpediency, and not wrong-doing, is the danger signal they show. And\nwhen the hot blood surges through young veins in the struggle with an\nimminent temptation, what becomes of expediency?\"\n\nMany people are ready to declare that the conspiracy of silence which\nhas characterized the old-fashioned attitude of mind with regard to\nsex matters generally is due to the Church more than to any other\nagency. I think that from what we have said the Church's insistence on\nreticence with regard to sex subjects as the policy most likely to do\ngood in the long run is now recognized by psychologists as being\nfounded on motives that are the basis of natural defense by human\nnature in an extremely thorny matter. Ignorance is not innocence, but\na saving lack of knowledge may spare a great many evil suggestions\nthat would otherwise work harm. You cannot neutralize sex temptations\nby the {196} provision of knowledge, you cannot even minimize them,\nand you may tactlessly add not a little to their danger.\n\nThere is a prudery which is not proper reticence that is cultivated by\nsome people who happen incidentally to be religiously inclined. They\nwould not call a spade a spade for the world. They would not hint at\nthe fact that conjugation is always the origin of life for worlds.\nThey would not use certain plain words that must be used in order to\nexpress very definite ideas without the feeling that they had smirched\nthemselves by saying such things. If they had gone through Europe in\nthe old days and seen the public comfort arrangements, they would have\ncollapsed then and there. All this is sheer prudery and when applied\nto sex matters represents really a neurosis of excessive precaution\nand inhibition with regard to some of the most natural things in the\nworld.\n\nAny one who understands even a little of the religious attitude toward\nmarriage will appreciate readily that such a state of mind is as far\nas possible from being that of the Church. Marriage is termed holy and\nblessed, and the ministers of the sacrament are the married persons\nthemselves. Only those who fail to comprehend religious teaching in\nthese matters have suggested that religious reticence with its\nconservation of that supreme reverence which even the great pagan\nteacher Quintilian recognized as due to youth represented an\nunfortunate cultivation of harmful ignorance. On the contrary, it is a\npart of that great tradition of age-long reticence which represents\nthe highest wisdom of humanity. Hence the reversion to that mode of\ndealing with the question which has characterized the teaching of\nconservative psychologists in the last few years.\n\n{197}\n\nThe greatest safeguard of purity with all that it means for the\npreservation of health and strength is the practice of self-denial\nwith regard to the luxuries of life. No element in life has emphasized\nthat and encouraged its practice so much or so constantly, and so\npersistently tried to train her children in it from youth as religion.\nIt is almost impossible, for young people particularly, to keep right\nin this matter if they constantly indulge in luxuries. The very word\nluxury has come to be defined as \"lust and lasciviousness and\nindulgence in lust\", because there is such an almost inevitable\nconnection between the exuberance of animal spirits which develops in\nconnection with indulgence in luxuries of various kinds that the two\nwords have almost necessarily come to have an intimate association.\nThe word is applied to the friskiness or wantonness of animals, and it\nis very easy to understand its application. Men as well as animals who\ntake more food than their occupations in life enable them to dispose\nof properly become similarly wanton or out of control. In Scriptural\nwords they \"wax fat and kick.\"\n\nReligion has encouraged innocent enjoyment of every worthy sort as a\ndistraction of mind and an outlet for youthful energy, but has\ndiscouraged in every way possible that complete gratification of the\nsenses or of bodily desires which is so likely to be fatal to such\nstrength of will as will enable people to control themselves. Clarke\nsays, \"Luxury does not consist in the innocent enjoyment of any of the\ngood things which God has created to be received with thankfulness,\nbut in the wasteful abuse of them to vicious purposes in ways\ninconsistent with sobriety, justice or charity.\"\n\nProfessor Foerster, whose books on the subject of the {198} training\nof youth and especially on sex matters in youth attracted so much\nattention shortly before the war, faced frankly this problem of the\nnecessity for the practice of mortification, or as he did not hesitate\nto call it, genuine asceticism, the exercise of the virtues of\nself-control and self-denial as the most important factor for the\nprotection of youth. He said: \"All solutions of the sex problem which\ntend to emancipate sex feeling from the control of moral and spiritual\nlaw (instead of making it the chief aim to place the spirit in a\nposition of mastery over the sex nature) are essentially hostile, not\nonly to our whole social evolution and to the development of\nindividual character, but to actual physical health in the sphere of\nsex. To secure the mastery of man's higher self over the whole world\nof animal desire is a task, however, which demands a more systematic\ndevelopment of will-power and the cultivation of a deeper faith in the\nspiritual destiny of humanity than are to be found in the superficial\nintellectualistic civilization of to-day. To achieve such a result it\nwill be necessary not only to have recourse to new methods and new\nideals, but to make sure that we do not allow what is valuable and in\nany way worthy of imitation, in the old, to be forgotten. The ascetic\nprinciple in particular is to-day in danger of being undervalued.\"\n\nThe cult of the body which has become so much the occupation of the\npresent generation, which refuses to make the necessary effort of mind\nto secure intellectual pleasures, has always been the special\ndeprecation of the Church. A great many of the words in the language\nshow the effect of that religious attitude very clearly. Sensuousness,\nwhile its original meaning is only anything connected with the senses,\nhas come to mean the quality {199} of being particularly alive to the\npleasure that is received through the senses and therefore by\nimplication, at least, not particularly intellectual. The _Edinburgh\nQuarterly_ reviewer long ago, in the famous article which Byron\nsuggested as having snuffed out the \"fiery particle\" of Keats' soul,\nhurt him most by suggesting his lack of intellectuality and declaring\nthat he was \"too soft and sensuous by nature to be exhilarated by the\nconflict of modern opinions\", hence \"he found an opiate for his\ndespondency in the old tales of Greek mythology.\" Sensuality even more\nthan sensuousness has come to mean under the sway of the senses and\nthe bodily desires rather than of the mind. Pope spoke of men\n\"sensualized by pleasure\" like those who were \"changed into brutes by\nCirce.\"\n\nThere is probably no epithet that a man of intelligence resents more\nthan to be called a sensualist. Goldsmith summed it up when he spoke\nof \"the vulgar satisfaction of soliciting happiness from sensual\nenjoyment alone.\" Religion has particularly emphasized the danger and\nthe actual degradation of human nature which this brought about.\nBishop Atterbury declared that \"No small part of virtue consists in\nabstaining from that in which sensual men place their felicity.\"\nLonger ago Shakespeare summed up the degeneration of the sensualist\nwhen he said\n\n           \"Those pampered animals\n  That rage in savage sensuality.\"\n\nThis is quite literal degeneracy, for as man is both animal and\nrational, overindulgence in the pleasures of the senses drags him down\ntoward his animal nature, that is, toward the _genus_ below the _genus\nhomo_ to which man belongs. No wonder men resent the epithet\n\"degenerate.\"\n\n{200}\n\nAs the result of the influence of religion other words such as carnal,\nworldly, have come to be stamped with a meaning which makes people\nunderstand much better than would otherwise be the case the real\nsignificance of indulgence in bodily or mere earthly pleasure. The\nwords are no longer fashionable, but that is because the deeds which\nthey represent have become quite fashionable, and those who affect\nthem do not want to have the innuendo of decadence and wrongful\nindulgence which necessarily goes with them applied to their acts.\nReligion has thus created a state of the public mind that has been\nextremely helpful against sensual pleasures and their power to ruin\nhealth, so long of course as religion held its place of influence over\nmen.\n\nAbove all religion has insisted, and it is almost the only agency\nwhich continues to do so, that there can be no purity with its power\nfor good for the health of both mind and body if the excitants of\nsensuality are indulged in. There must not only be no doing of evil,\nbut there must be, as far as possible, no thinking about it, and\nespecially there must be no dwelling on sensual pleasure, for bodily\ncravings will almost surely be aroused that make temptation almost\ninsuperable. To think of delicate viands when one is hungry causes a\nflow of saliva, making the mouth water, but we know now that it causes\na flow of what are called the appetite juices in the stomach which\nadds materially to the feeling of hunger and would make it very hard\nto resist taking food if it were placed before one, even though there\nmight be some rather serious dangers connected with its taking. The\nthirsty soldier finds it extremely difficult to obey military laws\nwith regard to not drinking any water that has not been examined and\ndeclared wholesome by the medical regime {201} of the army, and if he\nshould dwell much on his thirst it would make it ever so much harder\nto restrain if water from outside military sources should be offered\nto him.\n\nOther pleasures of sense are even more likely to become the subject of\nalmost insuperable temptations if the objects of them are dwelt on.\nReligion therefore has insisted, and is still insisting, on the\nnecessity of avoiding attendance at such theaters as quite inevitably\nset up sensual excitation.\n\nFashion, which is another word for the world--and religion has always\npointed out that the three great enemies of the development of the\nspirit of man are the world, the flesh, and the devil--has always set\nitself in opposition to religion in the approval of sensual\ngratification. That conflict is unending. A great many people declare\nthat they would rather be out of the world than out of fashion, and it\nis surprising what insensate things fashion leads people to. The\npresent fashion for the slow dance with the partners closely wrapped\nin one another's arms, for that is of course the essence of all the\nmodern dances, no matter what their varying names may be, is only\nanother development of the unending opposition between fashion and\nreligion. Here once more, as with regard to the theater, religion\npresents the only serious protest. Dame Fashion insists that she sees\nno harm in it, but that is of course only a fashion of speech. It is\nquite impossible for a physician to watch the dancing without becoming\nconvinced that human passions must be aroused by such close contact of\nhuman bodies of opposite sexes.\n\nIn this, however, as in so many other phases of life, only religion\ncan interfere or protest with any hope of success. Her protest remains\noften unheard; fashion {202} may be almost all powerful even against\nthe higher calls of duty as well as against common sense. Certainly\nreligious influence has had more to do with keeping a great many women\nfrom following the dictates of fashion in emphasizing their sex and\ntherefore exciting the men with whom they come in contact than any\nother single factor. It has not been entirely successful, it never\nwill be; the conflict will go on and worldliness will constantly come\nto the surface in some form or other, often to the detriment of\nhealth; and religion when properly vital will continue to be the most\nimportant factor in keeping evil from gaining such ascendancy as would\nbe seriously detrimental to the healthy mind in a healthy body.\n\nReligion is the only agency in the modern time that tries to regulate\nthe reading of young folks and indeed of others in this dangerous\nmatter of sex excitation. A great many books seem to be written at the\npresent time for no other purpose than to excite sex feeling,--and\nthereby to make money. They depend for their sale entirely on the fact\nthat for a great many people there is a distinct physical pleasure in\nreading about sex subjects. This is particularly true of women. A\ngreat many of them, and especially those who have not very much else\nto do and who therefore have no proper outlet for animal spirits and\nfor the energies that tend to accumulate in them because they feed\nwell and sleep long, are prone to indulge in this sort of luxury. Most\nof them would resent the suggestion that it was wrong for them to\nindulge their feelings in this way, but religion has always taken a\ndecided stand and insisted that the fomenting of desire and the toying\nwith alluring thoughts and the inviting of temptation are of\nthemselves actually sinful. As John Boyle O'Reilly said,\n\n{203}\n\n  \"Temptation waits for all, and ills will come;\n  But some go out and ask the devil home.\"\n\nPhysicians have always insisted that the sexual erethism which is\nexcited by the reading of books on sex subjects, the attending of sex\nproblem plays and of shows of various kinds is the worst possible\nbackground for healthy living. Such frequent titillation of delicate\nnervous mechanisms plays sad havoc with general nervous control.\nUnfortunately just those who are indoors a great deal, who take very\nlittle exercise, and who live on dainties are most likely to indulge\nin these habits of life with regard to reading and the theater and\ndancing and the like which are most harmful for them. They are\nirritable in the nervous sense and excitable, and this erethism\nincreases their nervous instability which responds by craving further\nexcitement. A vicious circle is formed which very often leads to\nnervous breakdown. Just now we are hearing much about sexual\nrepression as the cause of nervous disorders, but sexual repression is\nas almost nothing in its tendency to produce neurotic or\npsycho-neurotic affections compared to the partial tantalizing, sexual\nindulgence which comes from sensual reading or lascivious shows. The\nplays that are seen, the jokes that are heard, the sex problems that\nare dwelt on, the stories that are read must get more and more spicy\nand contain more and more sex \"pep\" to afford any satisfaction, and\nthe consequence is a disturbance of delicate parts of the nervous\nsystem which react more or less seriously to lessen the control over\nthe whole nervous mechanism of the body.\n\nWhen Doctor S. Weir Mitchell pointed out two generations ago that not\nonly headache, but rather serious nervous disturbance involving often\nthe gastro-intestinal {204} tract and sometimes other large organs\nlike the brain itself, as well as even mental operations, might come\nfrom so small a cause as disturbance of accommodation in the eye, most\nphysicians refused to believe that such far-reaching symptoms could\ncome from what was apparently so trivial a factor. The accommodation\nmechanism of the eye is extremely delicate, however, and requires such\nnice adjustment that any interference with it causes a waste of\nnervous energy that is likely to make itself felt at almost any part\nof the nervous system. In our day disturbances of the eye are\nconfessed by all to be extremely important. In something of the same\nway disturbances of the sexual system of the body are reflected\nthroughout the whole nervous system.\n\nReligion has counseled, commanded and thundered against any practices,\nhowever simple they might seem in themselves, that would serve as\nexcitants for the sex feelings. Without her influence even more harm\nwould have been done than has been. It is the waning of religious\npower over public morality and public opinion that has led to the orgy\nof indulgence in sexual excitation, which has had such bad effects and\nwhich unfortunately so often leads to sexual acts which are fraught\nwith the hideous dangers of venereal disease, because passion excited\nwill find its satisfaction. Society heedlessly arouses passion but\napparently cares not what happens afterwards.\n\n\n{205}\n\nCHAPTER XI\n\nINSANITY\n\n\nThere is a very prevalent impression that religion is a common, even\nrather frequent cause of insanity. This is founded on popular\nexperience. It has often been noted that not a few of the people who\ngo insane have delusions on religious subjects. It is also a very\ncommon observation that those who are on the road to insanity and have\nfinally to be placed in an asylum have for some time been making\nthemselves conspicuous by their excessive practice of religious\nobservances of one kind or another. It is not surprising then that the\nfamiliar fallacy _post hoc ergo propter hoc_, \"after this therefore\nthe result of this\", should have come to be applied in these cases,\nand that religion should be set down as a prominent factor of mental\ndisease and perhaps one of the commonest causes of the condition.\n\nThose who have given most study to the subject, however, know very\nwell that this conclusion is quite as unjustified by the facts of the\ncase as the corresponding one with regard to religion being a frequent\nsource of nervous diseases. We will discuss that in the chapter on\nNervous Diseases, and almost necessarily the closely related subject\nof mental disturbances is touched on somewhat there. Of course it is\nwell understood that a great many of those who are on the road to such\nmental alienation {206} as will eventually require their internment in\nan asylum will give many external manifestations of religious\nfeelings, some of them exaggerated beyond reason, as perhaps the very\nearliest striking symptom of their mental alienation. Religion, as we\nsaid in the Introduction, is one of the most universal interests of\nmen. When people go insane, some interest will receive exaggerated\nattention. The delusions of their insanity are dependent on what the\ndeepest interest of the individual was. If he was interested in money,\nhe will believe himself the richest or perhaps the poorest of men. If\nhe is interested in science, his delusions will be associated with\nthat subject. Delusions concerning some phase of science are probably\neven more common in our day than those based on religion. Electricity\nis the source of more delusions than anything else, though hypnotism\nand telepathy and other sensationally exploited modes of so-called\npsychology are a close second in this respect. If the patient has\nrecently suffered a severe loss by the death of a friend, sorrow will\nbe the central idea of his mental disturbance; if there has been a\ndisappointment in love, that will be the focus of his mental troubles;\nif there has been a money loss, that disappointment will be the core\nof the depression. Almost any human interest may thus become the root\nof excitement or discouragement leading to mania or melancholia.\n\nThe Great War gave us some very interesting material as to mental as\nwell as nervous disease. In nothing was that more interesting than as\nto the causes from which insanity develops. It might very well have\nbeen expected that a great many people would break down under the\nawful conditions in which they were placed during the war. For\ninstance Poland was fought over some six times, {207} and portions of\nAustria overrun three times, and Servia was, between war and the\nravages of famine and disease, a veritable shambles of its people for\nthree or four years. It is easy to understand the awful states of\nanxiety and solicitude and almost continuous terror to which the\ninhabitants of Belgium, occupied by the Germans, were subjected,\nparticularly in the smaller places where they were utterly at the\nmercy of the German officials whose one idea, fostered by their\nmilitary teaching, was that the end of the war would be brought about\nor at least greatly hastened by a policy of frightfulness.\n\nLiterally many millions of people were subjected to conditions which\nwould seem to be impossible for human nature to stand for any length\nof time, and yet they had to bear them continuously for four years or\nmore.\n\nThe records of the development of insanity among these people have\nbeen rather carefully gathered, and they reveal the astounding fact\nthat the insanity rate was very little higher among all these intense\nsufferers from the war than it would have been under the ordinary\nconditions of civil life. Manifestly a certain number of persons had\nthe insanities which would have developed in them in later years\nanticipated by the trials and the hardships of wartime conditions, but\nonly those suffered from insanity as a rule who might have been\nexpected to do so because their family or personal history revealed\ntendencies in that direction which would almost surely have made\nthemselves manifest sooner or later even under the inevitable\nvicissitudes of peace time.\n\nWhat modern medicine has revealed to us is that apart from certain\ninfectious diseases which produce degeneration of the physical basis\nof mind and the absorption of certain poisons--alcohol is a typical\nexample--which {208} cause a corresponding degeneration to the\ninfections, the supreme factor in insanity is the inheritance of a\npredisposition to the affection. Two things have become perfectly\nclear in the course of modern medical investigation, that insanity and\nlongevity run in families, and that there is almost no other basis on\nwhich the two conditions may develop. Infections or intoxications in\nthe broad sense of the word may produce conditions to foster or impair\nrespectively either of them, but even they are of minor significance\ncompared to the original inheritance in either case.\n\nClouston, the well-known English authority on mental diseases, whose\nopinion is founded on many years of personal observation, in his book\non \"Unsoundness of Mind\"   [Footnote 6] has put the relationship\nbetween religion and mental disease very clearly. He said: \"It is true\nthat religion, touching as it does, in the most intense way the\nemotional nature and the spiritual instincts of mankind, sometimes\nappears to cause and is often mixed up with insanity. But in nearly\nall such cases the brain of the individual was originally unstable,\nspecially emotional, oversensitive, hyperconscientious and often\nsomewhat weak in the intellectual and inhibitory faculties and, if\nlooked for, other causes will usually be found.\" He had said just\nbefore, \"To talk of 'religious insanity' as if it were a definite and\ndefinable form is in my judgment a mistake.\"\n\n  [Footnote 6:   Methuen, London, 1911. ]\n\nSo far from prayer--the principal exercise of religion, that is the\nraising up of the mind to God, either in petition or in\nresignation--unsettling people's minds, it has exactly the opposite\neffect. Professor William James, whom most people are not inclined to\nthink of as likely to be an overstrenuous advocate of religion, in his\n{209} well-known essay on \"The Energies of Men\" has a paragraph in\nwhich he quotes from a physician who had had long experience in the\ncare of a great many insane and who did not hesitate to say that\nprayer was a benefit and not in any sense of the word a detriment to\nhis patients.\n\n\"Doctor Thomas Hyslop, of the great West Riding Asylum in England,\nsaid last year to the British Medical Association that the best\nsleep-producing agent which his practice had revealed to him was\nprayer. I say this, he added (I am sorry here that I must quote from\nmemory) purely as a medical man. The exercise of prayer, in those who\nhabitually exert it, must be regarded by us doctors as the most\nadequate and normal of all the pacifiers of the mind and calmers of\nthe nerves.\"\n\nIt is recognized as a general rule in asylum practice that when\npatients begin really to pray, a turn for the better has come in their\ncondition, and they are on the high road to recovery. This does not\nmean, of course, noisy, wordy praying, but quiet raising of the mind\nto God and acts of resignation to their condition so long as they may\nbe affected.\n\nThere is a very general impression among those who have had most to do\nwith the insane as well as among psychologists in general that\nreligion, instead of favoring the development of insanity, rather\ninhibits it. Professor Muensterberg, in his \"Psychotherapy\" dwells\nparticularly on this. Almost needless to say Professor Muensterberg did\nnot wear the special favor of religion in the lists and was in no\nsense her champion. He is proclaiming simply what he knows and feels\nto be true.\n\nA very curious reflection on the relations of religion and insanity is\nto be found in the fact that the marked increase in the insane among\nthe population of all the {210} great modern civilized countries and\nmost striking among our own has come since the decay of religion and\nthe decrease of religious belief. The statistics of that increase in\nthe number of the insane are very startling to those who are not\nfamiliar with the subject. During a single generation the number of\nthe insane in our institutions has increased to five times what it was\nbefore in proportion to the population. There is no doubt that this is\ndue to some extent to the fact that people are much less ready to care\nfor their insane relatives outside of institutions than they were a\ngeneration and especially two or three generations ago. We are much\nless ready to make the personal sacrifices needed to keep our friends\nat home, which is probably also due to the lowering of our religious\nsense of obligation in the matter. Fortunately our insane asylums are\nmuch better conducted than they were, and this has made people more\nwilling to confide their relatives to them. Giving all due allowance\nfor this, however, there has been an enormous increase in the number\nof the insane. Such commonwealths as California and Massachusetts, in\nwhich there are very large proportions of educated people, present the\nhighest increase in the number of the insane. There are certain\ncritical spirits who would say that it is our education without God\nand without religion that has fostered this state of affairs, and that\nit is particularly people of a certain limited intelligence who, when\novereducated, lose their faith, who are most prone to lose their\nminds.\n\nThe most important single factor in insanity, not dependent on\nconstitution or heredity but on conduct, is that degeneration of the\nbrain which brings on paresis or general paralysis of the insane.\nTaken by and large throughout the world generally, nearly one in five\nof all {211} those who die in insane asylums die from this affection.\nIt is the result of an infection usually consequent upon sexual\nimmorality. The disease is inevitably fatal and once it begins it is\nsteadily progressive from the delusions of grandeur so common at the\nbeginning through various delusional states up to absolute dementia\nand death, which usually takes place in a little more than three years\nfrom the beginning of the disease; five years is a long time for a\npatient to survive. Nothing has done so much to limit the occurrence\nof this disease as religious influences, and it has increased to\nbecome the modern scourge that it is just in proportion as religion\nhas lost its hold upon the mind of the rising generation. The disease\nis particularly infrequent among clergymen, and while _lues_ from\nwhich the disease develops may be contracted innocently, it is very\nevident that a regular moral life such as is led under the sway of\nreligious principles is the best possible safeguard against the spread\nof the disease.\n\nAfter paresis the most serious form of acquired insanity in modern\nlife is that known as alcoholic insanity, due to excess in the taking\nof spirituous liquors. It is not necessarily inevitable that a man who\nfrequently indulges to excess in alcoholic liquors will become insane\nany more than that he will suffer from alcoholic neuritis, but a large\nnumber of individuals prove susceptible to the toxic effects of\nalcohol in these ways. There is an inherent liability in their brain\nand nervous system to degenerate under the influence of alcohol acting\nas a poison. This is an extremely common form of insanity, but almost\nneedless to say it occurs much less frequently in those who have any\nreligious principles than in those who are without them, because\nreligion protects from the excesses that predispose to these\nconditions. Clergymen {212} very rarely suffer from them and though\noccasionally clerical patients have developed alcoholic insanity or\nalcoholic neuritis, these cases on careful investigation oftener\nproved to be due to certain patent medicines which contained alcohol\nin large percentage than to any direct consumption of spirituous\nliquor.\n\nReligion by its calming influence keeps a good many people who have\nhereditary tendencies to insanity from developing outspoken symptoms\nof the disease. Religious conviction has a definite efficacy in making\npeople humble instead of conceited, and this is an excellent factor\nfor preventing the tendency to insanity. Nearly always the preliminary\nsign of insanity is an exaggeration of the _ego_ and a hint at least\nof delusions of grandeur. People who overrate their importance are\noften on the road to the asylum. Religion, by inculcating humility, at\nleast lessens this tendency and puts off developments that are\ninevitable so that many more years of reasonable sanity are enjoyed\nthan would otherwise be the case.\n\nProbably the worst thing in the world for those who have any inherited\ntendency to disequilibration of mind is to have an occupation in life\nwhich involves strains and stresses of emotion. The gambler, the\nspeculator, the man who risks his all on some attempt to make a great\ndeal of money, are much more prone to develop insanity than those who\nhave occupations in life at which they work from day to day for a\nmoderate wage, and who get their joy in life out of the fulfillment of\ndomestic duties. Almost needless to say religion has always\ndiscouraged gambling and such speculation as resembles it very\nclosely, and the whole tendency of religious influence is to make\npeople so satisfied with their lot in life that they will not take the\nrisks which involve the {213} vehement mental emotions so likely to\ndisturb those with inherited predispositions toward irrationality.\nUndoubtedly religion has in this way saved a great many men from\nserious developments in mental alienation which might have come had\nthey felt themselves free to take up the riskier avocations in life\nfrom which they were deterred by the feeling of religious disapproval.\n\nAfter the tendency to exaggeration of the ego and delusions of\ngrandeur, the most common symptom of incipient insanity is delusion of\npersecution. As regards this, once more, the religious feeling of\ntrust in Providence and the conviction that God will somehow take care\nof them keeps many people from allowing their delusions of persecution\nto manifest themselves so soon or so violently as would otherwise be\nthe case. Only comparatively rarely do religious minded people in the\nmidst of their delusions of persecution commit crimes, being deterred\ntherefrom by the underlying consciousness of the wrongness of their\nacts in taking judgment on their persecutors into their own hands,\neven though they may have yielded to a belief in their delusions. It\nis true that a certain number of religious-minded people do commit\ncrime under the influence of delusions, but these are rarer than the\ncases which occur in people who have never had any sense of religious\nmorality.\n\nIn a word religion has meant a very great deal for the limitation of\ninsanity and the tendency to it, for putting off its development and\ngiving patients years of sanity they might not otherwise have enjoyed,\nand it has had a very definite effect in limiting the crimes\nconsequent upon insanity. It has a very marked tendency to create the\natmosphere of placid trust and confidence which means so much for the\npreservation of sanity. Far from being {214} a provocative of\nirrational tendencies it soothes patients' minds, prevents them from\nrunning into such excesses of emotion as are dangerous for mental\nbalance, and it predisposes those who allow themselves to be deeply\ninfluenced by it to live such quiet satisfied lives without inordinate\nambition and disordered desires as make for health of mind and body\nduring prolonged life.\n\nIt has often been said that religion unfortunately proved harmful to\ninsanity and the insane in the old medieval days, because\necclesiastics, sometimes for the sake of the fees that they might\nsecure for exorcisms, taught very generally the doctrine that the\ninsane were possessed of the devil, and that the one thing to do for\nthem, besides exorcising the evil spirit, was to chain them up and\nkeep them in manacles in dungeons until there was assurance that they\nhad been released from the devil that had gained possession of them.\n\nIn spite of the fact that this is a rather common teaching in medical\nbooks and is frequently asserted even by physicians and sometimes\nindeed by specialists in nervous and mental diseases who are supposed\nto know the subject on which they discourse, there is very little\nfoundation for this prevalent impression. Undoubtedly there was the\nbelief in the possibility of possession by the devil and some such\nmodern scientific minds as Alfred Russel Wallace and Professor Barrett\nof Trinity College, Dublin, have reverted to that belief because of\ntheir studies in spiritism and some of the curious results that follow\nfrom overdevotion to the cult of spirits. There was, however, a very\ndefinite recognition of the fact during the later Middle Ages that the\ninsane were just ailing persons who had to be taken care of, properly\ntreated, kept from hurting themselves or others, just as delirious\nindividuals {215} would have to be guarded, but who must be looked\nupon as sick in mind, just as a number of people were sick in body and\nwith more than a hint that the bodily condition had more to do with\nthe insanity than anything else. I have discussed the subject at some\nlength in my volume on \"Medieval Medicine\" recently published in\nLondon.   [Footnote 7] Paul of Aegina wrote in the seventh century of\nmelancholy as a primary affection of the brain to be treated with\nfrequent baths and a wholesome and humid diet, together with suitable\nexhilaration of mind and without any other remedy unless when from its\nlong continuance the offending humor is difficult to evacuate, in\nwhich case we must have recourse to more complicated and powerful\nplans of treatment. Paul was a very popular author much read in the\nMiddle Ages.\n\n  [Footnote 7: Black. 1920.]\n\nThe Church's view of the subject of insanity is very well expressed in\nBartholomew's Encyclopedia. This was a work written particularly for\nthe information of the clergymen of the time, in order to explain to\nthem all references in Scripture and to give them such details of\nknowledge as were necessary for preaching and for the teaching of\ntheir flocks. Bartholomew was very widely read and went through many\neditions before printing, was put into print very early, and some of\nthe editions are among the greatest of bibliophilic treasures.\nBartholomew, usually called the Englishman--his Latin name of\n_Bartholomaeus Anglicus_ is well known--boiled down all the knowledge\nof insanity into a single paragraph. He has nothing at all to say of\npossession by the devil, and his discussion of the whole subject of\nmadness is as modern as can be.\n\nThe causes of insanity which this clergyman writer {216} of the middle\nof the thirteenth century enumerates are those which psychiatrists of\nthe present day are insisting on. The symptoms of infection,\nconsidering the brevity of the passage, are very well and clearly\ndescribed, and the treatment suggested is the very latest in modern\npractice and consists of improvement of nutrition and the diversion of\nthe insane. With all our supposed advance in knowledge no physician,\neven of the twentieth century, could have expressed the whole subject\nof insanity any better than Bartholomew did. This paragraph is a\ncomplete refutation of the objections that the Church by its\ninsistence on diabolical possession as the principal cause of insanity\ndid a great deal of harm. Bartholomew said:\n\n  \"Madness cometh sometime of passions of the soul, as of business and\n  of great thoughts, of sorrow and of too great study, and of dread:\n  sometimes of the biting of a wood (mad) hound, or some other\n  venomous beast; sometimes of melancholy meats, and sometimes of\n  drink of strong wine. And as the causes be diverse, the tokens and\n  signs be diverse. For some cry and leap and hurt and wound\n  themselves and other men, and darken and hide themselves in privy\n  and secret places. The medicine of them is, that they be bound, that\n  they hurt not themselves and other men. And namely, such shall be\n  refreshed, and comforted, and withdrawn from cause and matter of\n  dread and busy thoughts. And they must be gladded with instruments\n  of music, and some deal be occupied.\"\n\n\n{217}\n\nCHAPTER XII\n\nNERVOUS DISEASE\n\n\nJust as with regard to insanity, there is a very common impression\nthat religion increases the amount of nervous disease in the world and\nis responsible for a great deal of what has been called hysteria. Not\na few who think they have a right to an opinion in this matter, and\nsome of them are physicians--though usually they are rather young--are\nquite ready to assert that religion is a fruitful source of nervous\nsymptoms and very often of rather serious nervous conditions. We saw\nin the chapter on Insanity how false is the prevalent impression as to\nreligion producing tendencies to insanity, though of course a great\nmany insane people have religious delusions. It is very much the same\nwith nervous diseases. Many nervous people pay a certain amount of\nattention to religion, and not a few of them cling to straws of hope\nthat they may be able to overcome their neurotic tendencies by\nsuperficial attention to prayer or to some practices of religion which\nthey seem to look upon about in the same light as patent medicines\nrecommended for the cure of nervous diseases. People who are deeply\nreligious, however, very seldom suffer from nervous affections, and\nthey have in their religion the most beneficent of helpful resources,\nif by nature, that is, by heredity or unfortunate development, they\nhave neurotic tendencies.\n\n{218}\n\nSo far from religion increasing nervous disease, then, it has exactly\nthe opposite effect. We have a number of testimonies to this purport\nfrom prominent neurologists, many of whom were themselves not\nbelievers in religion but who recognized its influence for good over\nothers. Such expressions are to be found in the writings of men of\nevery nationality. Not infrequently, in spite of their own religious\naffiliations, they acknowledge what a profound influence certain forms\nof religion have over certain people. These testimonies have been\nmultiplying in our medical literature in recent years, because\napparently physicians have come to appreciate by contrast the\ninfluence for good of religion over some of their patients, since they\nsee so many sufferers from nervous diseases who have not this source\nof consolation to which to recur.\n\nIn America we have a number of such testimonies. In his \"Self Help for\nNervous Women\", Doctor John K. Mitchell of Philadelphia, who may be\ntaken to represent in this matter the Philadelphia School of\nNeurologists, to which his father lent such distinction, said:\n\n  \"It is certainly true that considering as examples two such\n  separated forms of religious belief as the Orthodox Jews and the\n  strict Roman Catholics, one does not see as many patients from them\n  as might be expected from their numbers, especially when it is\n  remembered that Jews as a whole are very nervous people and that the\n  Roman Catholic includes in this country among its members numbers of\n  the most emotional race in the world.\n\n  \"Of only one sect can I recall no example. It is not in my memory\n  that a professing Quaker ever came into my hands to be treated for\n  nervousness. If the opinion I have already stated so often is\n  correct, namely that {219} want of control of the emotions and the\n  overexpression of the feelings are prime causes of nervousness, then\n  the fact that discipline of the emotions is a lesson early and\n  constantly taught by the Friends would help to account for the\n  infrequency of this disorder among them and adds emphasis to the\n  belief in such a causation.\"\n\nIn writing a \"Textbook of Psychotherapy\"   [Footnote 8] eight years\nago one of the appendices was devoted to the relations between\nreligion and psychotherapy. One of the paragraphs, written for\nphysicians, and I may say that it has been read by many thousands of\nthem, puts my own opinion on the dual subject of the nexus between\nreligion, insanity and nervous disease, as succinctly as I can hope to\nput it. There is no doubt that an abiding sense of religion does much\nfor people in the midst of their ailments and, above all, keeps them\nfrom developing those symptoms due to nervous worry and solicitude\nwhich so often are more annoying to the patient than the actual\nsufferings he or she may have to bear. While religion is often said to\npredispose to certain mental troubles, it is now well appreciated by\npsychiatrists that it is not religion that has the tendency to disturb\nthe mind, but a disequilibrated mind has the tendency to exaggerate\nout of all reason its interest in anything that it takes up seriously.\nWhether the object of the attention be business, or pleasure, or\nsexuality, or religion, the unbalanced mind pays too much attention to\nit, becomes too exclusively occupied with it, and this overindulgence\nhelps to form a vicious circle of unfavorable influence.\n\n  [Footnote 8: Appleton.]\n\nWhile many people in their insanity, then, show exaggerated interest\nin religion, this is only like other {220} exaggerated interests of\nthe disequilibrated, and religion itself is not the cause but only a\ncoincidence in the matter.\n\nSome who are interested particularly in this subject, on reading this\nwill at once revert to the fact that scruples are extremely common\namong the religiously inclined and that these are, after all, as a\nrule, only nervous symptoms which are surely fostered by religion. To\nsay this, however, is to misapprehend the real meaning of scruples.\nThe word is a very old one and means a little sharp stone, as if in\ntrying to make progress the scrupulous found themselves hindered by\nhaving to walk over little sharp stones which so disturbed them that\nthey were hampered in getting on. Above all, scruples put them into a\nstate of mind where they hesitate as to whether they can go on at all\nor not.\n\nThe subject of scruples was very thoroughly worked out and carefully\ndescribed by the older spiritual writers centuries ago. They wrote\nelaborate treatises on it, while it was not until our own time that\nphysicians by their careful study of corresponding conditions entirely\napart from religion came to appreciate that these conditions of the\nspiritual life were only expressions of a rather common set of\ntendencies altogether independent of religion. They are prone to\ndevelop in people with certain physical and mental characteristics who\nare possessed of dispositions and nervous systems particularly likely\nto be the subject of these hesitancies and doubts and difficulties for\nwhich there is very little basis in actuality.\n\nThe whole chapter of phobias and the other chapter on obsessions and\nthe third on what the French call _la folie du doute_, the doubting\nmania in our modern textbooks of neurology, are really so many\nchapters in the {221} literature of scruples of the old time, now\ntransferred to the textbooks on functional nervous diseases. Some\nnervous people who are religiously inclined get into a very disturbed\nstate of mind from the fear that they may commit sin almost unknown to\nthemselves or that they may be in sin unawaredly and cut off from\ntheir Creator, and they become extremely miserable as a consequence.\nThis is, after all, a very familiar picture to the neurologist\naccustomed to see patients suffering from functional nervous diseases.\nI have patients who suffer quite as much from the dread of dirt as\nthese scrupulous people do from the dread of sin. Women often suffer\nfrom this dread of dirt--misophobia is the scientific name derived\nfrom the Greek--to an exaggerated degree. A woman patient of mine\nmakes it extremely uncomfortable for the conductors on the street cars\nbecause, for fear of contaminating her hands, she dreads to touch the\nhandle bars by which she could mount or descend easily. This adds\ngreatly to the risks she takes every time she boards a car. She is\nconstantly washing her hands to get the dirt off, so that in cold\nweather she sets up severe skin irritations and makes herself very\nuncomfortable. I have a male patient who would not touch the handle of\nmy door for the world, and whom successive maids have come to know\nvery well because he stands outside the outer door and has to have\nthat as well as the inner door opened for him. He has said to me over\nand over again, \"Doctor, don't ask me to shake hands with you, because\nyou shake hands with so many people.\" I have seen him standing outside\nof a large department store with the temperature around zero, waiting\nfor some one to open the door so that he might slip in without\ntouching it. Nor are such states {222} of mind confined to the\nuneducated; on the contrary, they are commonest among those who have a\ngood education and are quite sensible in other things.\n\nObsessions were originally described as super-religious states of mind\nin which some idea assumed a terrorizing character. The victims of\nthem dread that they might commit some awful crime and as a\nconsequence were profoundly miserable. Instead of being confined to\nreligion, such mental states are quite common in conditions altogether\napart from religious feelings. Women read of a mother killing her\nchild in some awful way or perhaps accidentally poisoning it or\nburning it badly with some escharotic external application. They\nbecome obsessed with the idea that they may do something of this kind\nand fear that they may not be able to resist the suggestion. Medical\nliterature is full of such cases. A typical case is described by Tangi\nin his textbook on insanity:\n\n  \"A young married woman suffered from nervous exhaustion after her\n  first childbirth. She watched day by day her husband cutting up meat\n  for his parrots with a pair of scissors, and the action filled her\n  with disgust which later increased to positive horror. Thus a\n  repulsive obsession was produced and this in turn engendered the\n  morbid suggestion to cut the tongue of her dearly loved child in the\n  same way. The fear that she would not be able to resist this\n  suggestion made the suggestion more vivid and the idea more\n  imperative, causing an agonizing struggle each time.\"\n\nThen there are accounts, some of them most poignant, from Catholic\npatients of my own, who were sure that sometime while in the midst of\ntheir devotions or even at the very reception of the sacraments they\nwould {223} blaspheme. They are people who fear that every pious act\nof theirs may just expose them to the risk of committing some awful\nsacrilege.\n\nAlmost needless to say such states have nothing at all to do with\nreligion, and when similar conditions occur among the religious\nminded, they must be attributed to the general neurotic condition and\nnot to the incidental religious tendencies. The doubting mania occurs\namong the religious minded when they keep on fearing that they have\nnot done something that they should do. Some of these individuals get\ninto a profoundly miserable and disturbed state of mind, but that must\nnot be blamed on religion.\n\nThis sad state of mind in people who have no religion at all is\nextremely familiar to the neurologist, and it has no necessary\nconnection with religious practice or religious belief. I have a\npatient who has been coming to me for many years now from a city in\nthe Middle West; he is a broker, and every time there is a panic in\nthe money market I am almost sure to see him. Whenever he gets very\nmuch disturbed over business matters, as is likely to happen in panic\ntimes, he develops a very striking _folie du doute_, or doubting\nmania. He will take a letter to a post box and go back three or four\ntimes, first to see if by chance he did not drop it on the way,\nsecondly to be sure that it did not get caught in the slot; then, if\nthe letter is important, he will go back to see if perchance there may\nnot be some bolts or other obstructions at the top of the box that may\ncatch it and delay its collection. I have even known him to wait for\nsome time at the post box to see if the postman might not possibly\ndrop it when he came to collect the mail. But then he does other\nthings just as foolish. Occasionally he will {224} get home from his\noffice and suddenly have the feeling that he forgot to lock his safe.\nHe will go back and then get part way up town when he is overcome by\nthe fear that he may not have locked the door after him as he came\nout. At times when his _folie du doute_ is at its worst, he has been\nknown to go back three or four times to close windows or for some\nother trivial reason. When he is in reasonably good condition there is\nvery little of this state of mind manifest, but he can make himself\nsupremely miserable when the obsession is on him.\n\nIt is often said that the declaration by the Church of the idea of\npossession by the devil rather encouraged the development of certain\nmental and nervous states and thus fostered neurotic manifestations of\nmany kinds. This whole question of the possibility of direct diabolic\ninfluence over mankind, that is, of some evil spirit deeply\ninfluencing certain human beings, is yet a matter that is not nearly\nso settled as a great many physicians who have not been following\nscientific work in allied lines seem to think. So distinguished a\nscientist as Alfred Russel Wallace, the co-discoverer with Darwin of\nthe theory of natural selection, had the feeling that spirits\ninterfered much more in human affairs than a great many people were\nwilling to admit, and that the evil spirits probably could, under\ncertain circumstances, deeply affect individuals. Professor Barrett of\nTrinity College, Dublin, is even more outspoken in what he has to say\nin this regard, and now there is a very general feeling among those\nwho have investigated spiritistic phenomena most carefully that if\nspirits do actually communicate directly with men, it is commonly not\nthe spirits who claim to do the communicating who are actually\npresent. Almost needless to say any such conclusion as this would,\n{225} if maintained, throw even scientists back to the old idea of\ndiabolism, which the Church, on the strength of many centuries of\nexperience, still teaches.\n\nOne thing is perfectly sure: that if overzeal on the part of certain\necclesiastics rather encouraged neurotic manifestations because of the\nalluringly suggestive quality of the thought of diabolic possession,\nthey did no more than physicians did in more modern times by their\nsuggestive methods in the study of hysteria. A great French\nneurologist of to-day has pointed out that major hysteria as studied\nby French neurologists of a generation ago has practically\ndisappeared, or occurs very rarely in our day because it is no longer\nunconsciously suggested to patients by physicians that these major\nsymptoms are being looked for. Overzeal in medicine raised up a whole\nseries of symptoms that had no existence except in the heated\nimagination of their patients under the influence of strong\nsuggestion.\n\nAnother extremely interesting phase of this subject is that in the old\ndays many of the sensible ecclesiastics and some of the civil\nauthorities came to recognize that people supposed to be possessed of\nevil spirits could be cured of their condition not infrequently by\nroundly whipping them. Sir Thomas More particularly called attention\nto how much good could be effected in this way. In writing an article\non \"Psychoneurosis and the War\" (International Clinics, Volume II,\nSeries 29) I called attention to this in a paragraph that may be\nhelpful in the understanding of the discussion of diabolic influence.\n\nIt has been the custom for many years now, indeed for more than a\ngeneration, to think that the old-fashioned methods of treating many\nof the psychoneuroses by {226} punishment and the infliction of pain\nwere founded on an entirely wrong principle. Sir Thomas More, for\ninstance, tells the story of a number of folk in his time who suffered\nfrom rather serious complaints; some of them were dumb and some deaf,\nand some thought they could not see, and others could not walk. He\nsays that some people considered them possessed of the devil, and that\nit was the presence of this very undesirable spirit that hampered\ntheir activities in various ways and made it impossible for them to\nuse their powers properly. The description of the cases makes it very\nclear that he is referring to hysterical conditions of various kinds\nand the sequel as to the successful treatment which he says was\nfrequently employed on them more than confirms the inference of\nhysteria and demonstrates the very definite hysterical character of\nthe affection. Many a physician down through the ages has been\ninclined to think that these people were possessed of a bad spirit of\nsome kind, even though he might not be quite ready to think that a\npersonal devil had taken hold of them and was seriously hampering\ntheir functions. We recognize that the real trouble is with their own\nspirit, to which may be applied whatever epithets come to mind, and no\none will think them exaggerations; this spirit has lost its control of\ntheir activities, rendering them incapable of exercising their\nfunctions properly.\n\nThere is a very widespread tradition, which has found its way into\nmedical literature especially, that the fervent practice of religion\nin women has a very definite tendency to make them neurotic.\nParticularly when religious devotion is associated with mortification\nand fasting, it is supposed to be serious in its effects. It is the\ncustom to make references to such pious women as St. Catherine {227}\nof Siena and St. Theresa of Spain as typically exemplifying this\nneuroticizing tendency.\n\nAny one who really knows the lives of either of these women will not\nbe likely to think that they were neurotic in any proper sense of that\nword at all. Both of them were not weak but had immensely strong\ncharacters, veritable towers of strength in supremely difficult times,\nsupporting not only their own heavy burdens but helping others around\nthem to bear theirs. Of Catherine of Siena, Swinburne, the English\npoet, surely not a sanctimonious person, whose sentimentality might\nlead to admiration for the hysterical bizarre, but who had studied her\ncareer because so many incidents in her life have been the subject of\ngreat paintings by a number of the greatest painters of Italy, said:\n\n  \"Then in her sacred saving hands\n  She took the sorrows of the lands,\n  With maiden palms she lifted up\n  The sick time's blood-embittered cup,\n  And in her virgin garment furled\n  The faint limbs of a wounded world.\n  Clothed with calm love and clear desire.\n  She went forth in her soul's attire,\n  A missive fire.\"\n\nThe great hospital at Siena was rebuilt in honor of Catherine shortly\nafter her death because of the fact that she had spent many years of\nher comparatively brief life there; she died at thirty-two in personal\nservice of all kinds to the patients suffering from every manner of\ndisease, even leprosy, who were in the institution. (The lepers were\nhoused apart from the others.) She placated so many feuds among the\nnoble families of Siena, feuds that were the cause of as many murders\nas the worst {228} of our own in Kentucky, that she was asked to be\nthe envoy of peace when cities were at war, and it was she who\neventually by her influence brought the Popes back from Avignon to\nRome and thus put an end to the great disorders in the Italian\npeninsula.\n\nSt. Theresa, the great Spanish mystic of the sixteenth century, the\nother \"horrible example,\" held up even by some neurologists, of\nhysterical tendencies due to religion and mortification, proves, when\nstudied in real life, to have been at least as great and strong a\ncharacter as Catherine of Siena. She well deserves the name of saint\nas a leader in unselfishness, but besides she had a fine sense of\nhumor. That is what neurotic people lack above all--a sense of humor.\nAll sorts of distinguished men in the Spain of her time--and in the\nsixteenth century Spain was by far the greatest country in Europe, her\nsovereigns ruling most of Europe and the greater part of America, and\nthe nation gave birth to great art, literature, architecture and\nphilosophy--turned to consult St. Theresa in their difficulties. She\nwrote a series of books that have been republished in every cultured\nlanguage in Europe at least once a century ever since, and our own\ngeneration has been sedulous in the study of Theresa's writings. No\nless than a dozen lives of her have been written in English in the\ntwentieth century. This Spanish lady who died three hundred and fifty\nyears ago is still a very living force in the world.\n\nOwing to the special conditions under which much of my work is\naccomplished, I am brought in contact with a great many religious\nwomen every year. For some twenty years I have spent some days each\nsummer with groups of religious communities where large numbers were\nassembled for special intellectual and spiritual work. The {229}\nmother superior has often consulted me with regard to some of her\ndaughters who had special nervous manifestations, but it is a\nnever-ending source of surprise to find how few of them suffer from\nthe nervous symptoms so common in our time. Considering the fact that\nthey spend their lives very largely indoors, that they live on very\nsimple food--and sometimes I have been inclined to think with scarcely\nenough nor sufficient variety to make them capable of the amount and\ndemanding nature of work they have to do--fewer of them suffer from\nnervous symptoms or affections than women of the same class who are\nliving at home and on whom the demands are not nearly so strenuous.\nTheir religious duties, instead of being in any way a drain on their\nnerve force, though I have often heard it said that teachers ought not\nto be required to give quite so much time to their religious duties,\nrepresent a reservoir of energy from which they draw strength and\nabove all placidity of mind and consequent power to accomplish more\nthan would otherwise be the case.\n\nMy duties often bring me into contact with numbers of sisters during\ntheir hours of recreation, so-called, and I do not think that I have\never seen a happier, heartier group of people than they make during\nthese periods of relaxation. I have always considered it a privilege\nto share recreation after dinner or supper with a dozen sisters when I\nam lecturing in one of the smaller towns, and we have often laughed so\nheartily together that I have sometimes wondered what the neighbors\nwould think of us. People with a sense of humor like this are not\nlikely to have hysterical tendencies. Nervousness is at bottom\nselfishness, and there is always a great deal of conceit in it.\nReligious women are likely to be humble, and that means much in\nkeeping them from various magnifications {230} of their ego which so\noften result in nervous and mental symptoms.\n\nI have often ventured to say that I was quite sure that a religious\nhouse, especially where there were many young people, in which\nlaughter came easily and was heard frequently during the times\nappropriate for it, was sure to be a place of real spirituality and\nhappiness. I have often dared to remind them that the one place where\none hears no real laughter, though sometimes sounds are made\nresembling it, is an insane asylum. People who are ready to laugh are\nusually eminently sane. Above all, they do not take themselves too\nseriously. It is taking one's self and one's feelings too seriously\nthat is the root of a great deal of nervous and mental disturbance in\nthis little world of ours. Certainly the discipline of heart and mind\nand body and the feeling of satisfaction from duty well done that\ncomes in connection with that complete sacrifice of themselves in a\ngreat religious cause which members of religious orders make, so far\nfrom predisposing them to nervous disease has just exactly the\nopposite effect.\n\nNervous diseases, instead of being fostered or fomented by religion,\nare on the contrary repressed rather effectually and equilibrium given\neven to those in whom some hereditary elements might have proved\ndisturbing. This does not mean that all the religious minded are free\nfrom nervous symptoms, and it must not be forgotten that not every one\nwho says \"Lord, Lord,\" gets into the kingdom of heaven, either on\nearth or hereafter, but religion must be counted as an asset and not a\nliability in this matter. It will not overcome strong hereditary\ntendencies, and it will not help efficaciously those who do not submit\nto the discipline that true religious feeling entails, and of {231}\ncourse religion is not a panacea for the ills of mankind, though it\nmust be counted a therapeutic adjuvant and not a nervous irritant.\n\nProfessor Foerster, whom one is tempted to quote because of the\nthoroughgoing thoughtfulness of his treatment of many of these\nsubjects and his wise conservatism founded on that deep consideration,\nhas discussed the question of repression of self in matters of purity\nas a possible source of nervous troubles of various kinds.\nFreudianism, as it is called, which has attracted so much attention in\nrecent years, would seem to suggest the conclusion that a great many\nof the nervous symptoms of humanity are due to the repression of sex\nimpulses. Foerster has pointed out that just the opposite is true, and\nthat there never was a time when there was so little real\nself-repression and also never a time when there was so much\nfunctional nervous disease. He said:\n\n  \"From this point of view there can be no doubt that the modern\n  theory of 'living one's nature out' is largely responsible for the\n  nervous degeneration of to-day, and that the widespread hysteria in\n  modern life does not spring from those remnants of discipline and\n  idealism which are still operative amongst us. One is compelled to\n  ask indeed with astonishment, with what right Freud finds the\n  dangers of repression so alarming in an age which is conspicuous for\n  self-indulgence. In reality there has never been an age which was\n  less influenced by the spirit of abnegation and repression than is\n  our own. The present age is one of disintegration, in which natural\n  instincts have largely broken away from their controlling higher\n  ideals; if, therefore, it suffers to a peculiar degree from\n  nervousness, one can hardly look for the cause in the fact that it\n  constitutes a high-water mark of control and {232} discipline. The\n  precisely opposite conclusion would be nearer the mark.\"\n\nProfessor Foerster admits, however, that it is perfectly possible that\npeople who have no good motive for self-repression and who suppress\ninstincts only out of the merest human respect and cowardice as to\nresults, may very well suffer some of the consequences that Freud has\npointed out. He says:\n\n  \"There is one point, however, in which one can entirely agree with\n  Freud, or at any rate allow oneself, through him, to be led to the\n  recognition of an important psychological and pedagogical truth.\n  There are to-day certain circles who cling to the old ethical\n  tradition only through considerations of an outward description, as\n  the result of a species of timidity which keeps them from breaking\n  with respectable customs; and yet these people are, at the bottom of\n  their hearts, believers in a view of life of a totally different\n  description--one which attaches no value or meaning to self-mastery\n  and self-denial.\"\n\nAlmost needless to say this obscuration of religious motives with the\nresult of leaving the individual too much at the mercy of the merely\nphysical without adequate principles for self-control is not the fault\nof religion but of its very opposite--irreligion. Foerster's words are\nall-important for the understanding of an important phase of the\ndiscussion of the cause and cure of nervous and psychic symptoms of\nvarious kinds which has attracted much more attention outside of\nmedical circles than it deserves.\n\nThe danger of the absence of religious motives in the world, because\nof the persuasion that new discoveries are doing away with the\nnecessity for faith, has also been emphasized by Professor Foerster,\nwho said:\n\n{233}\n\n  \"Along with the disappearance of belief in a spiritual world arises\n  the danger that even earnest and noble men and women will be\n  influenced in their consideration of the deeper things of life by\n  the newest and most tangible facts alone, and will be inaccessible\n  to all arguments going beyond the scope of mere practical sense and\n  expediency. It would appear as if the preponderance of an intellect\n  directed towards external things destroyed not only belief in the\n  invisible world in a religious sense, but also undermined the power\n  of grasping the full value and reality of certain _imponderabilia_\n  in earthly life, and of understanding the deep-growing spiritual\n  injuries which may proceed from apparently harmless and even\n  outwardly beneficial things.\"\n\n\n{234}\n\nCHAPTER XIII\n\nDREADS\n\n\nThe most fruitful source of neurotic affections and especially of what\nhave come to be termed in recent years the psychoneuroses, those\ndisturbances of nerve function due to an unfortunate state of mind,\nare the dreads or, as they have been called, the fear thoughts of\nmankind. Men as well as women develop, in the sense of fostering,\noften almost unconsciously to themselves, a dread of the ulterior\nsignificance of some symptom, or feeling, or disturbance of function,\nwhich serves to make them extremely uncomfortable. The physical\nsensation which they experience and which is the basis and the source\nof the dread may be only a quite normal physiological feeling common\nto all humanity, heightened by overattention to it, but the fearsome\nstate of mind will cause it to assume the significance of a definite\nsymptom of some serious disease or, what may be worse, an indefinite\nsymptom of some impending affection which, in the opinion of the\nsufferer, may be as yet too inchoate for the physician to recognize\nits real significance.\n\nIt is not a question of an imaginary ill, as a rule, and there is but\nseldom a real hallucination or creation by the fantasy out of nothing,\nof the ailment from which these people suffer, but there is an\nexaggeration of some slight or at least comparatively insignificant\nfeeling to {235} an extent that makes it assume a serious aspect. This\ninhibits normal function, lessens appetite and exercise, at times even\ndisturbs sleep, and so brings about some at least of the ailments that\nare dreaded.\n\nNot infrequently these dreads are very vague. People wake in the\nmorning with a sense of depression and the feeling that something is\nhanging over them. As a result they feel out of sorts, their appetite\nfor breakfast is blunted and they begin the day very badly just\nbecause of this incubus of vague disturbance of mind. Almost anything\nthat happens during the day will emphasize their depression; as a\nconsequence lunch may be skimped, they do not get out as they should,\nand a vicious circle of influences is begun. Perhaps they eat rather\nheartily for dinner and then fall asleep in their chair afterwards\nover the evening paper, and then find that when they go to bed they do\nnot sleep promptly as they expected to. They worry over it, feeling\nthere must be something the matter with them, since they cannot sleep\nlying down though they could sleep so well in the chair, and if there\nshould be a repetition of these feelings the next day, it is easy to\nunderstand how a psychoneurosis would be started which might easily,\nif eating and outing and exercise were to continue to be neglected,\ndevelop into a serious condition. Many a case of nervous breakdown has\na beginning as simple as this, and people of nervous temperament must\nbe constantly on guard against it.\n\nSuch patients--and they are much more common than might be thought and\nthey have been with us for thousands of years, for Plato describes\nsome of them and the oldest prescription in the world is a fumigation\nthat was directed to curing just such a neurotic condition--need to\nhave faith in themselves and faith in their Maker and to stop {236}\nhesitating and doubting and thinking and dreading. I have known men,\nbut particularly women, who had been suffering in this way, become\nconverted so that they took up the practice of religion which they had\nneglected before and proceeded to get immensely better. Of course,\nthere are any number of hypochondriacs among people who profess\nreligion, but they are the exceptions which prove the rule that fewer\npeople who have a real sense of religion and who take it seriously as\na guide of life suffer from dreads and the symptoms which result from\nthem than are to be found among the people who have given up the\nbelief and practice of their religion. This is particularly true of\nthose who belong to the old orthodox forms of religion which require\nself-denial and self-control as part of the practice of religious\nduties. As we have shown in the chapter on Nervous Diseases the\nQuakers, the strict Methodists, the Roman Catholics, the Orthodox\nJews, get their reward for their submission to their religion even in\nthis world by lessened solicitude about themselves. Indeed there is\nnothing that is more likely to dispel dreads than an abiding sense of\nreligion. If a man or a woman is convinced that there is a Providence\nthat oversees human life as well as the universe, in Whom \"we live and\nmove and have our being\" and of Whose infinite knowledge and power we\ncan have no doubt, the unreasonableness of dreads comes home to him.\nThe man who prays every morning, \"Thy will be done on earth as it is\nin heaven\", must have the feeling that His will _will_ be\naccomplished, and that is all that any of us can ask for. Somehow that\nis for the best, though we may not be able to see just how. \"If not a\nsparrow falls to the ground but your Heavenly Father knoweth\", and if,\nas the Master said, \"Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings and\n{237} not one of them is forgotten before God? But even the very hairs\nof your head are all numbered. Fear not therefore: you are of more\nvalue than many sparrows\", surely the believer will keep himself at\nleast from being overworried by dreads. His disposition may be such\nthat he cannot dispose of them entirely, but at least the best source\nof consolation and strength is to be found in that strong faith for\nwhich there are so many strengthening expressions against the fears\nand dreads of life to be found in the sacred writings.\n\nHow many striking sentences there are in the Scriptures to help\nagainst these solicitudes: \"And which of you with taking thought can\nadd to his stature one cubit? If ye then be not able to do that thing\nwhich is least, why take ye thought for the rest?\" How one is tempted\nto quote others of the expressions in that same wonderful chapter of\nLuke (XII). \"The life is more than the meat and the body is more than\nraiment. Consider the ravens; for they neither sow nor reap; which\nneither have storehouse nor barn; and God feedeth them; how much more\nare ye better than the fowls. But rather seek ye the kingdom of God;\nand all these things shall be added unto you. Fear not, little flock;\nfor it is your Father's good pleasure to give you a kingdom.\" All over\nthe Scriptures are passages that are meant to be fear-dispelling and\nthat have been for many men and women in many generations. For fear is\noften the state of man unless he has something to cling to. \"Fear not,\nI am with thee.\"... \"Fear ye not, nor be afraid, have I not told\nthee.\"... \"Fear not, I am the first and the last, for I the Lord thy\nGod will hold thy right hand, saying to thee fear not, I will help\nthee.\"\n\nScientists have recognized that religion and science {238} were\ncoordinate factors for the neutralization of the dreads that disturb\nhumanity. Professor H. D. Seeley, who was for many years professor of\ngeography, geology and mineralogy at Kings College, London, and who\nwas a distinguished Fellow of most of the important English scientific\nsocieties, the Royal, Linnean, Geological, Zoological and\nGeographical, stated in his little work, \"Factors in Life\", his views\nas regards the place of religion in dissipating the fear thoughts of\nlife, and places it side by side with science itself in this respect.\nHe said:\n\n  \"To the religious neither life nor death has terrors, and in freeing\n  existence from its greater anxieties the influence of Religion works\n  on the same foundation of moral efforts as Science. The sciences are\n  the sisters of Religion in that they unfold something of the laws by\n  which the universe is governed, and by which man's life is directed.\n  They are thus far the stepping-stones of faith. And those who have\n  learned that health is the reward which man may gain by moral\n  discipline, that mental vigour may be augmented by the wise (or\n  moral) use of food, and that education is the systematic exercise of\n  moral responsibility in any or all the affairs of life, may find\n  that in the practice and pursuit of the truths of Science they are\n  conscious of a religious education which is a light to the feet.\n  Such matters are factors in life, which may educate us in a reverent\n  appreciation of religious truth and divine government of the world.\"\n\nMany physicians of large experience have recognized the value of an\nabiding religious faith as a remedy for many of these dreads and\ndoubts which so pester mankind and make so many people suffer even\nfrom physical symptoms that seem surely to have only material causes\nas their basis because they so hamper the will to live. {239} Sir Dyce\nDuckworth, the distinguished English physician, once wrote to a\nfriend:\n\n  \"What is always needed is a reverent study and a full acknowledgment\n  of God as a Father and as the great 'All in All.' In my experience\n  the only solution of all our difficulties is to maintain a humble,\n  child-like faith and a confident trust in the perfect love of God,\n  who 'knows whereof we are made, and remembers that we are but dust.'\n\n  \"With that and perfect love, there need be no fear, and all will\n  come right in His own time. That is the faith to live by and to die\n  with, and the happiest people (and the happiest of the dying) are\n  those who hold firm by that faith.\n\n  \"This is my experience after much thought, much knowledge of human\n  nature, and not a little study of all the difficulties you relate to\n  me.\"\n\nBut it must not be thought that these dreads cause only the trivial\ninstances of nervous breakdown in which people never very capable give\nway before the strenuous call of commercial life in the large cities\nof our time. Nor must it be thought that education is dispelling them.\nSome idea of the important role that dreads may play in the production\nof human ills that seem to be very serious and that often prove quite\nincapacitating for mental and physical work, even in men of fine\nabilities and proven powers, may be gathered from what happened during\nthe recent Great War. The Allied nations had to maintain some fifty\nthousand beds behind the lines for the accommodation of patients\nsuffering from functional nervous affections really founded on dreads.\nAt the beginning these cases were misunderstood, and they were\nunfortunately called \"shell shock\" because they seemed so serious that\nit was thought that they were {240} due to some concussion of the\nnervous system, that is, some shaking up of its elements that made it\nimpossible for it to function normally, even though there were no\nexternal signs of injury. After a time, however, it came to be\nappreciated that the great majority of these patients were suffering\nfrom major hysteria due to loss of control over the nervous system as\na consequence of the almost inevitable dreads which developed in the\nawful conditions of warfare in the trenches, with its terrifying\nsights and sounds, and with the intense strain put upon the nervous\nsystem because of the demands made upon physical energy almost to the\npoint of exhaustion.\n\nAfter loss of sleep and irregular eating, wet feet for days at a time,\nexposure to the inclemencies of the weather and then having to\nwithstand an enemy attack, often at dawn after a fearsome barrage had\nbeen laid down on them for hours, it is no wonder that in many cases\nmen's nervous control did give way. They were not cowards, they were\nnot malingerers; on the contrary they were often brave men who had\nvolunteered for the service, giving up important positions at home to\ntake up the defense of their country; and yet after a time their\ndreads dominated them and they suffered from all sorts of symptoms.\nSome of them could not see, a number could not hear; some could not\nuse their legs, and some could not employ their arms properly; some\nwalked with a limp, some had tremor that made their usefulness as\nsoldiers absolutely at an end. Nearly all of them had a series of\ncomplaints which they wanted to detail in all their minuteness to\nevery physician who came near. Their stories of what had happened were\nmainly untrue or utter exaggerations of the actual events, and yet\nthese men were not liars and they were not the doddering idiots that\nthey sometimes {241} seemed to be; they were just fellow mortals who\nmeant to do their best, and who had been affected in this way because\nthey were asked to stand what was beyond their strength of soul to\nwithstand.\n\nThe educated suffered more than the uneducated. There were four times\nas many \"shell shock\" cases among the officers of the British army in\nproportion to their number as there were among the privates. Neither\nambition nor nobility nor any artificial distinction of any kind\nseemed to make any difference, for all classes and conditions of men\ncame down with it. Its frequence can be very well judged from the fact\nthat one third of all the dismissions from the British army, not\ncounting the wounded, was for \"shell shock\", which of course should be\ncalled by its proper name of major hysteria. One seventh of all the\ndismissions, if the wounded were included, was for this reason. It had\nbeen the custom to think before the war that only a comparatively few\nmen, mostly those of a certain feministic appearance and delicacy of\nconstitution, were likely to suffer from hysteria. It was found,\nhowever, that college graduates who stood at the head of their\nclasses, athletes who held records, broad-shouldered, healthy men who\nhad been considered to be the very acme of common sense, men who were\nsupposed to be without a nerve in their make-up, all these proved to\nhave \"nerves\"; and when the war \"got on their nerves\", they suffered\nfrom the complaints which we have mentioned and many others, including\npains and discomforts of all kinds, and inabilities and incapacities,\nmotor and sensory as well as of the memory, of the mind or the will.\n\nThis recent significant experience will give some idea of how potent\ndreads may be in the production of {242} symptoms which seem surely to\nbe due to physical rather than merely mental conditions. Most people\nwould probably be inclined to think that in so far as dreads produced\ndiseases by the exaggeration of minor symptoms, at most scarcely more\nthan mental conditions of discomfort would result from them. What are\ncalled the psychoneuroses, that is, the neurotic affections dependent\non the state of mind, may simulate almost any of the organic\nconditions and may seem to be serious diseases. Through the creation\nof unfortunate habits, they may give rise to a great many rather\nsevere physical symptoms. The war neuroses emphasized this for us.\nInability to use limbs, either legs or arms, is quite common in\nconnection with them; disturbances of sensation, such as defective\nhearing and eyesight, or even what seems to be complete blindness and\ndeafness, may develop. Tremors are quite common, and pains and aches\nin connection with the disabilities of the limbs are extremely\nfrequent.\n\nA very usual experience is to find that a patient has as a preliminary\nsuffered some injury. This may not be very severe, but it is enough to\ncause the sufferer to spare the limb that is affected; and\nunfortunately physicians sometimes put a limb with a minor affection\nin plaster of Paris or in a splint for a time. The patient's own\nsolicitude with regard to the hurt may cause almost as effective\nsplinting of it as a plaster cast or wooden slat and a bandage.\nWhenever this happens, the unused muscles lose some of their\nnutrition. This is due partly to the fact that the circulation is\ninterfered with because the active contraction of muscles, especially\nof the legs, is depended on by nature to help the venous or return\ncirculation by bringing about compression of the veins. The valves in\nthe veins are so arranged that when the {243} veins are compressed and\nthe blood thus pressed out of them, it cannot move away from the heart\nbut is impelled onward toward the heart. Besides, the sending down of\nnervous impulses for the active use of muscles increases the size of\nthe arteries to the part by direct action on their walls, and whenever\nthere is failure to send impulses down, the arteries do not carry as\nmuch blood as usual, and the nutrition of the part suffers as a\nresult.\n\nIf this inactive state of the muscles continues for a few days, they\nwill become somewhat flaccid, and after a week or more will actually\nbegin to decrease in size. As a consequence of this, they cannot be\nused to as good advantage as before, and use of them sets up an achy\ncondition as soon as the limb is set free for use, whether it has been\nsplinted by the physician or by the patient's mind. If the patient is\nstill solicitous, he notices this condition of pain and concludes that\nit means that the muscles are not yet in the condition of health where\nthey should be used, and he puts on the splints, metaphorical or\nliteral, once more. The muscles grow more flaccid and eventually\natrophic as a consequence, until sometimes there will be a difference\nof more than an inch in the girth of two limbs at the same point, and\nthis atrophy may proceed much farther. It seems almost impossible to\nbelieve that men and women could thus make a limb useless, but this is\nactually what happens rather frequently. The effects of the original\ninjury will pass off in a few days, but the effects of the disuse of\nthe limb may remain for months or even years because of the\ndisturbance of circulation and of nerve impulse. It is probable that\nthe nerves themselves have a trophic or nutritional--that is,\nvitalizing--influence upon muscles. Some physiologists actually talk\nof there being {244} trophic fibers in the nerves, though it would\nseem more reasonable to think that the nerve trophic effect comes from\nthe modification of the circulation to the part.\n\nWhenever muscles have to be increased in size or won back from an\natrophic condition, the individual to whom they belong must go through\na period of soreness and tenderness in those muscles which often is\nvery hard to bear. The young fellow who, after a rather relaxed\nsummer, begins training for the football team in the fall, knows how\nsore and tender his muscles have become. After the first day or two of\ntraining, each time he wakes up at night he turns over in bed with the\nfeeling that every bit of him is full of tenderness. Any number of\npeople under similar circumstances are inclined to think that they\nmust have caught cold. They usually reason thus: \"I got into a\nperspiration and sat down for a while and then took cold, and that is\nthe reason for all this painful condition that has developed.\"\n\nThat word \"cold\" is as unfortunate as \"shell shock.\" There is no such\nthing as taking cold. We catch infections, but much more frequently in\nfall and spring than in winter. The young man who is in training\nusually pays no attention to such unfavorable suggestions or dreads,\nsince he knows that he must take his medicine of further hard exercise\nuntil he has hardened and developed his muscles and then, instead of\ntheir causing discomfort, nothing in the world gives him so much\nsatisfaction as their active exercise.\n\nOlder people, however, and especially those who have what may be\ncalled a \"dready\" disposition, do not call their muscle discomfort\nsoreness and tenderness; they speak of pains and aches. The very words\ncarry a suggestion of evil with them, and above all they carry with\n{245} them an inhibitory suggestion which keeps muscles from being\nused normally. If, then, certain older people get an injury, even\nthough it may not be very serious, so long as it causes them to give\nup the use of a limb for a while, or sets them to using the muscles of\nit a little differently from before, a psychoneurosis on the basis of\na dread, but with the physical basis of somewhat atrophied muscles to\nkeep it up, may develop and persist for weeks and months and even\nyears. As a consequence of this state--much more of the mind than the\nbody--men may walk lame or be very awkward in the use of one arm, or\nthey may have a little stoop, or they may dread very much the using of\nsome group of muscles. Such conditions occasionally occur in the neck\nor in various parts of the back, and especially in the lumbar region,\nwith strikingly visible effects.\n\nIt might seem impossible that such conditions should develop and\npersist for any length of time in sensible and above all intelligent\npeople, and yet I suppose that every physician's case book contains a\nnumber of examples. After he has been in practice for ten years or\nmore this will surely be true, if he has had much to do with nervous\npatients. One of the most distinguished scientists that we had in this\ncountry, possessed of one of the finest intellects of our generation,\nthoroughly sensible and noted for his executive ability, suffered from\na slight attack of sciatica, to which he had been predisposed by some\nunusual work in connection with a heavy fall of snow when he had to go\nout and do the shoveling himself, since labor was not available. He\nnever quite got over it. For some time he carried two crutches because\nhe had so little confidence in putting down the foot on that side,\nafter having spared it for a {246} while. Then for several years he\ncarried a single crutch. In the meantime he was examined by half a\ndozen of the best physicians in the country, who could find nothing\nthe matter with him except that disuse had rendered the muscles of\nthat leg slightly atrophic, and he would have to push through a period\nof soreness and tenderness while exercising them. He carried a cane\never afterwards, walked a little lame and favored that leg.\n\nPersistent sciaticas of this kind and lumbagoes are much more common\nthan they are thought. It was a case of this kind, undoubtedly, that\nbrought about Bernheim's interest in hypnotism at Nancy and initiated\nthat wave of attention to hypnotism at the end of the nineteenth\ncentury which did so much harm. A patient who had suffered from\nsciatica for some years and walked a little lame as a consequence came\nunder Bernheim's care, and he tried without success every therapeutic\nresource at his command to make him better. Finally his patient gave\nup calling on him, completely discouraged. He had gone to a great many\nphysicians before Bernheim, and all of them had failed to do him any\neffectual good. They could relieve his discomfort for a while, but\nwhen he stopped taking drugs, that returned and his limb could be used\nno better than before.\n\nSome months after Bernheim missed the patient from his clinic he met\nhim on the street one day, walking perfectly straight without his cane\nand evidently entirely well. He was so much interested that he stopped\nto ask what had cured him. The patient told him he had gone around to\nLiebault, who, almost alone in Europe, was still practicing hypnotism,\nfor the practice had been greatly discredited by certain exposures in\nEngland shortly after the middle of the century. Bernheim, who had\nignored {247} Liebault's work before, now took an interest in it and\nfound of course that hypnotism--or indeed, though Bernheim did not\nknow that, anything else that would give these patients the confidence\nto push through a period of tenderness and soreness in regaining the\nuse of their muscles--would cure them. The incident began that period\nof reawakened interest in hypnotism which now constitutes such a\nludicrous series of events in the medicine of the end of the\nnineteenth century.\n\nSuch cases are by no means so uncommon as they might be thought. I\nhave known the teacher of a high school to slip while coming out of\nschool, fall on his knee, bruise it rather badly, and then have this\nbruised condition heal very well, only to develop in the course of a\nfew weeks a distinct inability to use the muscles of that leg\nproperly, until he had to walk with a marked limp. The circumference\nof the limb above the knee reduced distinctly in size, it suffered\nmore from cold than did the other one; it perspired more freely; it\nwas distinctly more sensitive to the touch, and it would seem as\nthough there must be some serious underlying nervous condition. He\npassed through the hands of several specialists, including one who\nwanted to remove a cartilage in the knee joint which he said had been\ndislocated, and another who insisted that he was suffering from a\nneuritis of a branch of the sciatic nerve, and who wanted to inject\nwater within the sheath of it or at least lay it bare and stretch it.\nFortunately we persuaded him to join an athletic club and take more\nexercise than usual and above all exercise that limb. He had had\nmassage and passive movements for it, but these are of very little\nservice in these cases, because the nervous impulses must come down\nfrom above. It would almost seem as though the {248} will sent down\nsome of its own creative energy through the nerves which lead to the\npart. He is now entirely well, though he suffered for several years,\nand absolutely nothing was done for him except to make him eat better\nand make him push through a period of soreness and tenderness--he used\nto call them pains and aches before we explained the condition to\nhim--until he had properly recovered the use of his limb.\n\nOn the other hand, I have known a good clergyman with a rather similar\ncondition to this, who had bumped his shin bone not far below the knee\nand after recovery from that had developed a marked psychoneurosis in\nthe muscles above the knee, refuse to be cured by any such simple\nprocedure as merely exercising himself back to health. He could not\nbring himself to think that it was only his own lack of will power\nthat had caused the condition to develop. Above all he needed\nsomething external to cure him. He finally went to a bone-setter, one\nof these old fellows who claim to be the seventh son of a seventh son,\nor something of that kind, possessed of marvelous hereditary power and\ninstinctive intuition in the matter of setting bones right, and who\ncure nearly everything under the sun and a few other things besides by\ntheir supposed bone-setting processes. My clerical friend was sure\nthat he had been cured by the bone-setter, but any physician would\nhave told him that what had happened was that his faith in his healer\nhad released his inhibition of his muscles and given him the\nconfidence to go on and use them as they should be used,--that is, of\ncourse, as far as he possibly could at first. Then they were gradually\nrestored to their former condition of health and strength. That is\nwhat happened, and he has had no recurrence. He is quite {249} sure,\nhowever, that the trouble was a subluxation of his hip joint, which\nthe bone-setter set right, thus allowing nervous impulses and the\nblood to flow properly through the part once more. His own will was\nthe only obstacle and it was that alone that had to be overcome and\nused as a therapeutic agent.\n\nThese patients are the stock in trade of all sorts of irregular\npractitioners. Whenever they think anything is the matter with them\nthey must be \"cured\"; they never get better of themselves. They need\nsomething or somebody to which to pin their faith. It is the hardest\nthing in the world to find out what is the matter with a man who has\nnothing the matter with him except a state of mind and its\nconsequences in his physical condition. He must have his state of mind\nchanged first of all, and usually he requires some rather strong\nsuggestion for that purpose. What is likely to affect him most\nfavorably is some novel or unusual method of treatment, or some new\ndiscovery in science recently applied to medicine, or some new method\nof healing, or some supposedly new invention or discovery in\ntherapeutics. These patients are a veritable nuisance in medicine. It\nis the cures of them, made by all sorts of new-fangled remedies, which\nmake it so difficult for physicians to judge whether a new remedy has\na positive favorable physical effect or only a mental influence.\n\nVery probably the best appreciation of the place of dreads in life and\nhow much of good is accomplished by their neutralization can be\nobtained from the number of sufferers of all kinds who are cured by\nall sorts of new remedies which prove after a time to have no physical\neffect at all. We have discussed this subject of the {250} remedies\nthat have come and gone in medicine in the volume \"Psychotherapy.\" It\nhas been very well said that the most important chapter in the history\nof medicine is that of the cures that have failed. It illustrates very\nthoroughly how much influence the mind has over the body, and\nparticularly how much dreads have meant for the production of symptoms\nwhich have been relieved whenever the patient had his dreads lifted,\nno matter what might be the agent to accomplish this purpose. Instead\nof decreasing, dreads have increased just in proportion as popular\neducation has spread and more people have been able to read and\nreceive unfavorable suggestions of all kinds. This has been\nparticularly true with the diminution of the influence of religion\nover people's minds.\n\nAll sorts of religious substitutes which would give people enough\nconfidence in themselves to enable them to throw off their dreads have\ngained vogue and have come to be very popular institutions in recent\nyears. Dowie, who claimed he was Elijah returned to earth, and\nSchlatter, who said that he was divinely inspired to cure people, were\nas successful in the twentieth century as Greatrakes \"the stroker,\"\nwho said that the Holy Ghost appeared to him in a dream and told him\nto heal people, in the seventeenth. Metaphysical healing of all kinds\nhas been successful, and spiritualistic healing and new thought and\nmagnetic healing, with as little magnetism about it as Mesmer's famous\nbattery which had no electricity,--all these have cured people. All\nsorts of healers are successful just because they lift the dreads and\nmake people forget the inhibitions that they have been exercising over\ntheir functions. Indeed this state of fear thought is one of the most\nprolific sources of {251} symptoms, or rather let us say of\ncomplaints, that medicine has to do with at all times, hence the\nimportance of the chapter of the cures that have failed. Almost any\nreligious feeling will be helpful in the matter, but an abiding sense\nof rational religion will save many people from being imposed on by\nall sorts of upstart theories and religious systems which base their\nclaim to recognition on these cures of human beings.\n\nThese patients furnish a great many of the cures made at shrines. That\nis why at every shrine there are so many crutches and canes and braces\nand belts and splints and supports of various kinds to be seen. They\nhave been left there by grateful patients who were able to drop them\nas the result of the change of mind that came over them during their\ndevotions. Many cures besides these occur at shrines, and I have taken\na good deal of pains to assure myself that most of the affections that\nare healed at them are quite different from these psychoneuroses. Over\nsixty per cent of the cures made at Lourdes, for instance, are of\ntuberculosis processes. Many of these are of external visible lesions.\nSome of them, after years of progress in spite of all sorts of\ntreatment, heal over in the course of twenty-four hours. I have seen\nthis happen to a lupus, at Lourdes, during my stay there, and I do not\nknow how to explain that incident by any natural process. To me it\nseemed surely supernatural. I know that there are some physicians who\nsuggest that we do not know all the possibilities of the therapeutic\neffect of the mind on the body, and somehow there may be included in\nthe psychotherapeutic armamentarium the power to heal tissues rapidly,\neven when they have been the subject of a chronic granulomatous\nprocess for years, but I cannot but think that is {252} merely an\neffort to retain what seems to me plainly miraculous within the domain\nof the natural.\n\nI know too that Doctor Boissarie's experience, so carefully noted and\nwritten out in his clinic at Lourdes, shows that there are cases of\nreal joint trouble which have been cured with similar rapidity, but\nthese are very rare. Most of the halt and crippled who are cured at\nshrines have simply been the victims of an attitude of mind which has\naffected their muscles and their use of certain joints unfavorably, so\nthat they had to carry crutches or canes or wear braces. The deep\ninfluence of religion will cure them very often, but it is not a\nmiracle in any supernatural sense of the word, though it is a\nwonderful event, and that is all that miracle means by etymology.\nIndeed, professors of neurology have occasionally foretold that\ncertain of these patients would perhaps be cured at shrines, and their\nprophecies in specific instances have been fulfilled. The cures are\nexamples of what faith can do in lifting a dread, but that faith may\nbe exercised with regard to much less worthy objects than are\npresented at shrines and yet work successfully. When George Cohan, in\nthe \"Miracle Man\", had the cure that attracted attention to the \"new\nprophet\" occur with regard to a lame boy, he was eminently wise in the\nselection of just the type of case that could very readily be cured\nthat way, and yet the fact that the boy had been lame for years and\nnow walked perfectly made the healer seem a veritable wonder worker.\n\nDreads have always been with mankind, and their effects upon human\nbodies have been the stock in trade of the medicine man in primitive\ntribes and among savages and of his successors in suggestive medicine\namong educated and even cultivated people down to our own {253} time.\nThey can be conjured away by almost any impression that is deep enough\nto produce a favorable suggestion. Religion of all kinds has been\nappealed to successfully to neutralize them. The one rational cure for\nthem is a deep sense of confidence in the Almighty and in an\noverruling Providence which serves to dissipate the phobic state of\nmind with its inevitable inhibitions on bodily functions. It may be\nnecessary for its successful working that the correction of many minor\nphysical ills should be secured, but the all-important basis of\nsuccessful treatment for the psychoneurosis and the many ailments of\nmankind which are complicated by psychic states is a thoroughgoing\nbelief that God is in His heaven and all is well with the world, even\nthough there may be difficulties to be overcome, hardships to be\nborne, and many things that are far from easy to understand.\n\n\n{254}\n\nCHAPTER XIV\n\nSUFFERING\n\n\nThe problem of the meaning of suffering and evil in the world is the\ngreatest natural mystery that man has to face. It has raised the\nquestion as to whether life is worth living or not in some minds. It\ncauses a great many people to be disturbed about the meaning of life\nand has led some sensitive people to conclude that there cannot be an\noverseeing, all-wise Providence since otherwise He would surely\nprevent all the needless suffering there is in the world. Biologists,\nowing to their occupation with the thought of the struggle for\nexistence in current theories of evolution, have been particularly\ninclined to say that they could not think that there was a Providence\nbecause there was so much of carnage in nature, so much ruthless\ndestruction of life amid suffering for which it would be hard to find\nany satisfactory reason. There has been no little exaggeration in this\nview, for a calm review of conditions as they obtain in nature shows\nnot so much of active contest as a healthy competition for the means\nof existence, in the midst of which death comes to the weakling\nwithout anything like the suffering so much emphasized.\n\nIt must not be forgotten that the supersensitiveness of the sedentary\nstudent must be taken into account in the appreciation of the\nsignificance of such a declaration, {255} for the recluse scientist\noften shrinks from trials that the active outdoors man finds only a\nstimulus to action, which serve to develop powers and give\nsatisfaction rather than any real suffering. The incentive to have\nlife and to have it more abundantly which this affords to heartier\nnatures makes the poet's expression, _forsan et haec olim meminisse\njuvabit_, \"perhaps we shall be glad to recall these hardships in the\ntime to come\", easy to appreciate. Life without suffering would lack\nthat contrast which saves it from the dull monotony that might tempt\nto waste of energy in dissipation.\n\nPerhaps the best illustration of the actual benefit to man which\naccrues from suffering is to be found in the fact that one of the\nsurprising results of the presence of the mystery of suffering in the\nworld is that meditation over it has given rise to the five greatest\ndramatic poems that were ever written. Men contemplating it have been\nled to the expression of the deepest thoughts that have ever stirred\nminds. These great poems have come at longer and shorter intervals\nduring four thousand years, from Job, the essential ideas for which\nprobably date from about 1800 B.C., though its literary form is much\nlater, through AEschylus' \"Prometheus\", Shakespeare's \"Hamlet\",\nCalderon's \"The Wonder-working Magician\", down to Goethe's \"Faust.\" Of\nthese five dramatizations of the mystery of human suffering, recurring\npoetic impersonations of Hamlet's\n\n  \"The time is out of joint: O cursed spite,\n  That ever I was born to set it right!\"\n\nthe greatest, as conceded by all the critics, is not--as might be\nexpected from the very prevalent impression that man makes wonderful\nprogress down the ages--the {256} last one, Goethe's \"Faust\", but is\nthe first one, Job. No one has ever expressed so well the only\nreasonable attitude of mind that man must take in the presence of evil\nand suffering as this \"man of the land of Hus whose name was Job and\nwho was simple and upright and fearing God and avoiding evil\", yet who\nhad to bear some of the severest trials that man has ever been called\nupon to undergo.\n\nMr. H. G. Wells has recently, in one of his thought-stimulating\nnovels, shown us that verisimilitude of the most modern type could be\nwoven into a story which followed the outlines of the book of Job very\nclosely, so that far from being dead, even the novelty-seeking fiction\nreaders of our generation have brought home to them the fact that Job\nis still a very living piece of literature. Job's answer to the\nmystery of evil is that man must confess his inability to understand\nit, but he can trust the God who \"thunders wonderfully with His voice\"\nand \"doth great and unsearchable things\", \"who commandeth the snow to\ngo down on the earth and the winter rain\", \"who knoweth what ways the\nlight spreads and heat divideth on the earth\", \"who joins together the\nshining stars, the pleiads, and can stop the turning about of\nArcturus\" and \"who created behemoth and leviathan and can bind the\nrhinoceros and has fashioned the ostrich.\" All that Job can say is, \"I\nknow that Thou canst do everything and that no thought can be\nwithholden from Thee\", therefore for any impatience that he may have\ndisplayed over his suffering he reprehends himself and promises to do\npenance in dust and ashes,--\"and after this Job lived one hundred and\nforty years and saw his sons and his sons' sons, even four\ngenerations. So Job died, being old and full of days.\"\n\n{257}\n\nIn any consideration of suffering, above all in connection with the\nrelated subjects of health and religion, we must not forget that\nsuffering has always been a badge of the race, the common lot of men,\nso that this very community of it greatly reduces human reaction\ntoward it, since the sufferer cannot help but note that every one else\nmust submit to it as well as himself. At times among those who fail to\nthink deeply enough this may be doubted. The poor may even envy the\nrich because they suppose that they must by their riches escape\nsuffering, but most physicians soon learn to appreciate very well that\nthe mental discomforts of the wealthy, their disappointed social\nambitions, their thwarted aspirations after greater wealth, their envy\nof their more successful neighbors, but above all their frequent\ndisappointment in their children, though it is almost invariably their\nvery wealth that has spoiled the children and brought their greatest\ngriefs on them, are really the source of much more genuine suffering\nthan the poor have to bear. The worries of life increase with\npossessions, not decrease, as is fondly hoped, and as the author of\nthe \"Romance of the Rose\" said some seven centuries ago:\n\n  \"And he who what he holds esteems\n  Enough, is rich beyond the dreams\n  Of many a dreary usurer.\n  And lives his life-days happier far;\n  For nought it signifies what gains\n  The wretched usurer makes, the pains\n  Of poverty afflict him yet\n  Who having, struggleth still to get.\"\n\nSuffering must ever remain a mystery, especially when we take into\naccount the fact that all of us are profoundly possessed by the desire\nfor happiness. We can never {258} probe to the bottom of the mystery\nand know all its meaning, but at least we can readily understand that\nin the vast majority of cases, instead of being an evil, it is a good.\nNothing so deepens and develops character as suffering. Take the case\nof our young men who went to the war--so many of them scarcely more\nthan boys, feeling but little of the responsibilities of life--and see\nhow they have come back to us matured by the hardships and sufferings\nthrough which they had to go. Thucydides said nearly twenty-five\nhundred years ago, \"There is very little difference among men, only a\nfew of them rise above the great mass because they have gone through\nhard things when they were young.\"\n\nIt would seem as though we had changed all that, for we are deeply\nintent on making things just as easy as possible for the young, but a\ngeneration ago Gladstone repeated Thucydides' expression with\nheartiest approval, and twenty years ago John Morley, writing the life\nof Gladstone, agreed with both of them. I wonder if there are two men\nin our time who have known men better than Gladstone and Morley.\n\nIn that sense suffering is no mystery, and it is easy to see how it is\nquite literally true that \"Whom the Lord loves He chastises.\" It is\nthe chastisement of suffering that brings out the powers of men. Any\none who has not had to suffer in life is nearly always a self-centered\negoist without sympathy, but above all without that fellow feeling\nthat comes only from having gone through similar experience. He who\nhas not suffered has not really lived below the surface of his being\nat all, and he does not know himself. To \"know thyself\" is the most\nimportant thing in the world and the only way to know others. The men\nwho have done great thinking for us {259} have nearly always been men\nwho had to suffer much. It was a blind Milton who wrote \"Paradise\nLost.\" When Camoens wrote what German and French critics think--and\nwhen Germans and French agree about anything there is probably a deep\nunderlying truth in it--the greatest epic in modern time, he was\nstarving in a garret, and his old Indian servant was begging for him\non the streets to secure enough to keep body and soul together until\nthe great work was finished. Cervantes wrote what Lord Macaulay called\n\"incomparably the greatest novel ever written\" in a debtor's prison,\nout of which it seemed he might never be able to secure his release.\nDante wrote what many think the greatest poem ever written during a\nlong exile in which he learned \"how bitter it is to eat the bread of\nother's tables.\" _Poeta laudatur et alget,_ \"the poet is praised and\nstarves\", is as true in our time as when Horace said it three\nthousand years ago.\n\nGoldwin Smith has brought out very clearly the fact that suffering and\nevil are really a necessity in the world if this is to be a place of\ntrial, as every one believes, for of course such a belief represents\nthe only satisfactory explanation of life as we have it. Man must have\nsomething to strive for and against if there are to be stepping stones\nof our dead selves to higher things, and so it is not surprising that\nDoctor Goldwin Smith should have said:\n\n  \"At the same time, so far as we can discern, character can be formed\n  only by an effort which implies something against which to strive;\n  so that without evil or what appears to us evil, character could not\n  be formed. The existence of evil in fact, so far as we can see, is\n  the necessary condition of active life.\"\n\nSuffering has been with us from the beginning and it will always be\nwith us; instead of an evil it is one of God's {260} great gifts to\nman, and yet it sometimes makes little souls bitter and swamps the\nefforts of those who cannot rise above its trials. Religion is the one\nelement that is supremely helpful in this. Above all in the terminal\nsufferings of mankind, when there is no longer any question of pain\nthat has to be borne in developing character for this life, the only\nconsolation is that to be derived from religion and a firm belief in a\nhereafter and an acknowledgment of the fact that somehow God knows\nbest and all is for the best. Without this the awful suffering from\ncancer which is increasing rather than diminishing, and which seems to\nbe so rooted in human nature that we shall probably never solve its\nmystery or at least be able to secure human nature against it, as well\nas ever so many other chronic sources of pain that will never cease\nentirely until the end of life comes, become hideous specters for\nhumanity, and suffering has very little meaning.\n\nNo matter what our attitude of mind may be with regard to suffering,\nthere is no question but that we have to stand it under present\nconditions in this little world of ours. During the next twelve months\nscarcely less than one hundred thousand persons will die of cancer in\nthis country and a million and a half victims of the disease will\nbreathe their last throughout the world. When we add up all the\naccidents in industry and transportation, all the wounds in war and\ncivil life, and then add the affections which in one way or another\ncause mechanical stoppages of processes in the body, for these are the\nexquisitely painful conditions, it is easy to understand that we need\nconsolation for suffering. An old medical axiom is that \"the doctor\ncan seldom cure but he can often relieve and can always console.\"\nThere are a good many physicians, however, who feel their ability to\nconsole sadly {261} hampered by the fact that so many men and women in\nour time do not believe in a hereafter for which their sufferings in\nthis world can be a preparation, and that therefore the terminal\nsuffering of existence, of which there is and manifestly always will\nbe such an amount, can mean nothing for them except just so much pain\nthat has to be borne without any good reason that they can see, except\nthat somehow or other things were so arranged in this world that there\nis ever so much more of pain and suffering than of joy in it.\n\nTwo thousand years ago Cicero said in his own oratorical way that it\nwas better for all of us to believe in immortality, for if there was\nno immortality we should never live after death to know it--which\ncomes very near being an Irish bull by anticipation--while if there\nwas, and we had not believed in it, there would come a very rude\nawakening to the truth of things. Something of the same problem has\nbeen put in much more flippant and yet very expressive way in modern\nslang. \"If there is no other world than this, then some one handed us\nan awful lemon when we were sent into existence.\" That is, I suppose,\none answer to the mystery of suffering so sure to come to all men in\nsome way or other, and it is one that counsels us to seek the only\nreal consolation for suffering,--that which is to be found in the\nreligious feeling that somehow or other, somewhere, there is some one\nwho knows and understands, and suffering has its meaning. \"God's in\nHis heaven and all's well with the world\" in spite of the fact that\n\"nature red in tooth and claw\" works such sad havoc with her\ncreatures.\n\nWhat the belief in immortality and the feeling that this life is\nmerely its portico can accomplish in giving a man equanimity in the\nface of disappointments and patient {262} fortitude under even\natrocious pain is very well illustrated by what Professor William\nJames has to say of Thomas Davidson in his essay on him.   [Footnote\n9] Davidson died of cancer at a comparatively early age, considering\nthe length of life that many scholars enjoy, and for many years he\nhad prepared a large amount of material for that history of the\ninteraction of Greek, Christian Hebrew and Arabic thought on one\nanother before the revival of learning which was to be his Magnum\nOpus. Davidson was destined never to finish the work. Professor James,\nwho had been an intimate friend and was so close to him in the\norganization of the Glenmore School of the Culture Sciences on\nHurricane Mountain at the head of Keene Valley in the Adirondacks, had\nfelt the possibility of this accident of destiny and had inquired of\nDavidson with regard to his great prospective work.\n\n  [Footnote 9: \"Memories and Studies\", New York, 1911. ]\n\n  \"Knowing how short his life might be, I once asked him whether he\n  felt no concern lest the work already done by him should be\n  frustrate, from the lack of its necessary complement, in case he\n  were suddenly cut off. His answer surprised me by its indifference.\n  He would work as long as he lived, he said, but not allow himself to\n  worry, and would look serenely at whatever might be the outcome.\n  This seemed to me uncommonly high-minded. I think that Davidson's\n  conviction of immortality had much to do with such a superiority to\n  accidents. On the surface and toward small things, he was irritable\n  enough, but the undertone of his character was remarkable for\n  equanimity. He showed it in his final illness, of which the misery\n  was really atrocious. There were no general complaints or\n  lamentations about the personal situation or the arrest to his\n  career. It was the human lot, and {263} he must even bear it; so he\n  kept his mind upon objective matter.\"\n\nOnly a profound conviction of personal immortality will enable a man\nwho feels that he is cut off in the midst of his work to bear with\npatience the final ailment which by its very progress is precluding\nthe possibility of accomplishing the task that he had set himself. Yet\nthis interruption of their chosen labor inevitably comes to a great\nmany men; for death, no matter how late it may seem to onlookers to\noccur, happens untimely to most of humanity, even though they may\ncount up years far beyond the threescore and ten of the Psalmist.\n\nThe greatest resource in the midst of the suffering caused by the war\nfor soldiers and civilians has been religion. It was sadly needed, but\nit was magnificently employed. Any one who saw how much their religion\nmeant to the soldiers who really had faith will appreciate very well\nhow valuable it was for them. Many a man who had given up his faith,\nand this was particularly true of the French, found a new power to\ndare and to do, and also to bear and to \"carry on\" in the religion\nthat it had seemed they could so readily dispense with before.\n\nColton, writing a series of aphorisms in \"Lacon\", a century ago,\ndeclared that there are three arguments for atheism more effective\nthan any others,--health and wealth and friends. When we have our\nhealth and an abundance of money at command, besides many and powerful\nfriends who seem willing to do everything that they can for us, we\nfeel but little need of God and then many men refuse to believe in\nhim. Necessity is a very precious thing, the mother not only of\ninvention, but of reverence and many other good qualities. But when\nsuffering comes, especially if wealth, and in that case of course,\n{264} friends, have disappeared, God is a very firm support to lean\non. Many a man has found his faith again under such circumstances and\nhas realized how flimsy were the veils which he had allowed to come\nbetween him and his recognition of his obligations to his Creator.\n\nThe presence of suffering and evil in the world has provided us with\none of the most striking arguments for the existence of God and of a\nhereafter that we have. As Goldwin Smith said:\n\n  \"This at all events is certain: if death is to end all alike for the\n  righteous and for the unrighteous, for those who have been blessings\n  and for those who have been curses to their kind, the Power which\n  rules the universe cannot be just in any sense of the word which we\n  can understand.\"\n\nDoctor Carroll, in \"The Mastery of Nervousness\"   [Footnote 10] has\nsummed up the value of suffering as a revealer of power and a bracer\nof strength in words that are worth remembering. \"None knows his real\nstrength till he has faced failure and tasted the bitterness of\ndefeat. Physical and mental suffering and soul pain come to all that\nendurance may be developed, for without this the strength which\nconquers can never be. The master man laughs in the face of personal\nhurts; offenses fail to offend, insults fail to embitter; he turns\nwith shame from the so-called depths of suffering; for him honor and\nmajesty of soul are found upon the heights of suffering.\" In a word\nthe really brave man does not let himself sink under the burden of\nsuffering but maintains his place and stands up firmly under it. Under\nthese circumstances suffering, instead of being an evil, is a good.\nAfter the showing of mercy, man is likest to God when he stands\nsuffering bravely and brings good out of evil even as Providence does.\n\n  [Footnote 10: Macmillan, New York, 1918.]\n\n\n{265}\n\nCHAPTER XV\n\nPAIN\n\n\nPain is one of the very hard things of life which most people find it\nextremely difficult to bear with equanimity. I suppose that the\nmajority of human beings, especially when they are young, do not feel\nnearly so much dread of death as they do of the possibility of years\nof discomfort preceding it or even a short period of very acute pain\nwhen nature is preparing for dissolution. Older folks learn to bear\nphysical pain better and come to appreciate how much harder to stand\nis mental anguish. Modern life, with its cultivation of comforts and\nconveniences and the elimination of discomforts of all kinds, has\ngreatly fostered the dread of pain. We hear much of the progress of\nhumanity founded on the increase of comfort, but that way lies\ndegeneracy and failure to take life seriously. Human character\ndevelops under the stress of pain and even the body acquires\nself-control through it and is trained under the discipline of pain\nnot to react so disturbingly as is the case when there has been no\nexperience with it or but very little.\n\nWe find it almost impossible to understand, now that we have\ncultivated the comforts of life so sedulously, how men and women stood\nthe discomforts to which they were subjected in the ordinary run of\nlife practically every day two generations ago. A great many of them\nslept {266} in little stuffy attics with scarcely any chance for the\nfree movement of air on the hot days of summer, often immediately\nunderneath a roof which had been exposed to the direct rays of the sun\nall day long. In the winter not infrequently they broke the ice in\ntheir pitchers to secure water for washing. Their heating arrangements\nwere so imperfect that in the colder months at least there was very\nlittle possibility of comfort. A grate fire makes a very charming\nornamental addition to a room which is heated by steam or some other\nmodern heating arrangement, but when it is the only means of heating\nit is not very efficacious except in milder weather. On very cold days\nan open fire will heat one side of the individual, but not the whole\nperson, and at best the feet are likely to be cold because the open\nfire must be fed with an abundance of air and the draft runs along the\nfloor in order to get to it. The story is told of an English public\nschool in the old days where the head master met one of the smaller\nboys crying because of the cold; on being told what was the matter,\nthe head master simply remarked that \"this was no young ladies'\nseminary, and young gentlemen are expected to stand things without\ntears.\" Twenty years later in India, during the Mutiny, just before\nthat boy who had cried from the cold led a forlorn hope of a charge\nwith the idea of saving the lives of women and children, he remarked\nto his commanding officer who was himself also from that same public\nschool, \"This is what old... \"--naming the head master--\"would have\nsaid is no young ladies' seminary.\" And then he went out without more\nado to accept death in a great cause.\n\nIt is extremely difficult for us to understand how the people of the\nolder time, young and old, endured all these {267} trials and\nhardships, though it is not difficult to comprehend that if one were\nexercised daily in standing things of this kind it would be much\neasier to bear pain and even serious discomfort than it is at the\npresent time, when many people can bear only the touch of silk on the\nskin and the sybarite's complaint of his utter inability to sleep\nbecause there was a crushed rose leaf underneath him has become almost\na literal reality. More and more we are eliminating discomforts from\nlife and making things as comfortable and easy as possible. From the\ncarefully tempered water of the morning bath to the warm foot bath\njust before sleep, in a bedroom where the temperature makes it\npossible to undress for bed without a shiver, all is arranged for the\navoidance of the slightest discomfort.\n\nPain has become a veritable nightmare to most people as a consequence\nof the lack of the necessity to stand things in life, and it is\ntherefore all the more interesting to see what an effect religion can\nhave in enabling people to stand pain. In my volume \"Health through\nWill Power\" I have told the story of the second last General of the\nJesuits and the very serious and intensely painful operation which he\ninsisted on standing without an anaesthetic. The story is worth\nrepeating here as showing what a habit of prayer and practice of\nself-control can do for a man in the face of some of the severest pain\na human being is asked to stand. Generals of the Jesuits have usually\nfound their way into literature for very different reasons from this.\n\nHe had developed a sarcoma of his upper arm and was advised to submit\nto an amputation at the shoulder joint. As he was well on in the\nsixties the operation presented an extremely serious problem. The\nsurgeons suggested {268} that he should be ready for the anaesthetic\nat a given hour the next morning and then they would proceed to\noperate. He replied that he would be ready for the operation at the\ntime appointed, but that he would not take an anaesthetic. They argued\nwith him that it would be quite impossible for him to stand\nunanaesthetized the elaborate cutting and dissection necessary to\ncomplete an operation of this kind in a most important part of the\nbody, where large nerves and arteries would have to be cut through and\nwhere the slightest disturbance on the part of the patient might\neasily lead to serious or even fatal results. Above all, he could not\nhope to stand the exaggerated pain that would surely be produced in\nthe tissues rendered more sensitive than normal by the increased\ncirculation to the part, due to the growth of the tumor.\n\nHe insisted, however, that he would not take an anaesthetic, for\nsurely here seemed a chance to welcome suffering voluntarily as his\nLord and Master had done. I believe that the head surgeon said at\nfirst that he would not operate. He felt sure that the operation would\nhave to be interrupted after it had been begun, because the patient\nwould not be able to stand the pain, and there would then be the\ndanger from bleeding as well as from infection which might occur as\nthe result of the delay. The General of the Jesuits, however, was so\ncalm and firm that at last it was determined to permit him at least to\ntry to stand it.\n\nThe event was most interesting. The patient not only underwent the\noperation without a murmur, but absolutely without wincing. The\nsurgeon who performed the operation said afterwards, \"It was like\ncutting wax and not human flesh, so far as any reaction was concerned,\nthough of course it bled very freely.\"\n\n{269}\n\nProfessor William James has noted this same power with regard to that\nmost painful of all diseases in which pain seems so much harder to\nstand because it is hopeless, and there is no possibility that the\nendurance of it can lead eventually to any improvement. The patient\nmust just stand being racked to pieces until the end comes. No wonder\nthen that the professor of psychology should note with commendation\nthe effect of religion in bringing about a sense of well-being in\nspite of the constantly progressive physical condition which was so\npainfully eating life away. He said:\n\n  \"The most genuinely saintly person I have ever known is a friend of\n  mine now suffering from cancer of the breast--I hope that she may\n  pardon my citing her here as an example of what ideas can do. Her\n  ideas have kept her a practically well woman for months after she\n  should have given up and gone to bed. They have annulled all pain\n  and weakness and given her a cheerful active life, unusually\n  beneficent to others to whom she has afforded help. Her doctors,\n  acquiescing in results they could not understand, have had the good\n  sense to let her go her own way.\"\n\nMany physicians, I am sure, have had the opportunity to witness\ninstances very like that which is thus recorded with whole-hearted\nsympathy by Professor James. I count it as one of the precious\nprivileges of life to have known rather well a distinguished professor\nof anatomy at Professor James' own university. He suffered from\nincurable cancer and two years before the end knew that nothing could\nbe done for him and that it was just a question of time and pain and\nthe most poignant discomfort until the end would come. He continued\nhis lessons at the university; he finished up a book that he {270} had\nlong wished to write and had begun several times; he maintained his\nsimple, social relations with friends in such a gracious spirit that\nnone of them suspected his condition and continued until the very end\nbravely to go on with his work quite as if there were nothing the\nmatter.\n\nI shall never forget how shocked I was when I once presumed to invite\nan addition to his labors by asking him to make a public address, and\nhe told me, as a brother physician, just how much he had to be in the\ntrained nurse's hands every day so as to keep himself from being\noffensive to others. I had met him at lunch in the bosom of his family\nand spent several pleasant hours with him afterward without ever a\nthought of the possibility of the hideous malignant neoplasm which was\nconstantly at work making a wreck of his tissues and which no one knew\nbetter than he would never be appeased with less than his death.\n\nHe himself would have said that whatever there was of courage in his\nconduct was due to the strength that came to him from prayer. It was\nhis consolation and the sources of the energy which enabled him to\nstand not only the pain he had to suffer but to suppress any\nmanifestations with regard to it and keep on with his work.\n\nThere is an impression in many minds that as time goes on and medicine\nand surgery advance and science scores further triumphs, pain and ill\nhealth generally will decrease, and there will not be nearly so much\nnecessity for standing pain as there is even at the present time.\nBesides, it is thought that the discovery of new modes of stilling\npain will still further eliminate the necessity for patience. As a\nmatter of fact, all our advance in hygiene and sanitation and\nscientific medicine has served {271} rather to increase than lessen\nthe amount of pain. People now live longer than they used to. They\nlive on to die of the degenerative diseases which are slow running and\noften involve a great deal of pain over a prolonged period. One\nreason, probably the most important one, for the great increase of the\nnumber of deaths from cancer in recent years is the fact that ever so\nmany more people now live on to the cancer age than before. Every year\nbeyond forty which a human being lives increases the liability of\ndeath from cancer in that individual. There are some enthusiasts in\nthe field of medicine who are inclined to think that we may discover\nthe cause of cancer and eliminate the disease, but after a generation\nof special effort in that direction with absolutely no hopeful\noutlook, this is at least a dubious prospect. Indeed, there are many\ngood authorities on the subject, who are inclined to feel that cancer\nmore often represents an embryologic or developmental defect than\nalmost anything else and that in so far as it does we can scarcely\nhope ever to eliminate it.\n\nWhile the death rate from other acute diseases has been decreasing in\nrecent years and especially from the infectious diseases, the\nmortality from affections of the kidneys, heart and brain has been\nincreasing. Almost needless to say, these affections are practically\nalways chronic, involve definite discomfort when not positively acute\nsuffering, and not infrequently produce bodily states in which people\nmust bear patiently a great deal of discomfort, sometimes for years.\nWhen people live beyond middle life they become more and more liable\nto be affected by these diseases, so that instead of needing less\nconsolation for pain, our generation and the immediately succeeding\ngenerations at least are going to {272} need more. It is particularly\nthe people who are stricken with chronic disease who need the\nconsolation afforded by religion, above all when they know that their\naffection is essentially incurable and that the only absolute relief\nthey can have will come from death.\n\nIt is with this as with regard to hospitals and charity. The greater\nthe advance in medicine and the longer people are kept in life, the\nmore need there will be for hospital care and consequently for the\nexercise of charity in the best sense of that word and also for\npatience in pain and suffering. In these matters, as with regard to\nknowledge, science, instead of lessening the need of religion and its\ninfluence, is multiplying it. There is not the slightest reason for\nthinking that a man will ever make here on earth a heaven in which he\nmay be perfectly happy, and even those enthusiastic advocates of\nmodern progress who are inclined to think of the possibility of this\nset the date of it so far forward in the future, especially since the\ndisillusionizing process of the Great War, that even the fulfillment\nof their prophecy is not likely to do very much good for our\ngeneration or for many subsequent generations. We are going to need\nthe consolations afforded by religion even more than our forefathers\ndid in the past, now that physicians are able to prolong life and yet\ncannot entirely do away with suffering.\n\nAbove all it must not be forgotten that the cult of comfort and\nconvenience and what may well be called the habit of luxury in the\nmodern time has greatly increased sensitiveness to pain. There are two\nelements that enter into suffering, as we have said in the chapter on\nthat subject. The one is the irritation of a sensitive nerve and the\nother is the reaction to it in the mind of the sufferer. If, for any\nreason, the nerve has been rendered {273} insensitive, or the mind put\nin a condition where it cannot receive the irritation, the subject\nwill not feel the pain. If anything has happened to increase the\nirritability of a nerve, as happens, for instance, when continued\nirritation has brought more blood to the part than usual and the\naffected area is hyperemic and swollen, the pain will be greater\nbecause the nerve is more sensitive. If anything happens to make the\nmind more receptive of pain, and especially if the pain message that\ncomes up along a nerve is diffused over a large part of the brain\nbecause there is a concentration of attention on it, then too the pain\nwill be ever so much worse. We are, in various ways, adding to this\nsubjective element of pain and therefore increasing it. We are going\nto need then all the possible consolation that can be afforded by\nreligious motives.\n\nIn an article written for the _International Clinics_,  [Footnote 11]\non \"Neurotic Discomfort and the Law of Avalanche\", I called attention\nto how much even comparatively mild pains can be increased by\nconcentration of attention.\n\n  [Footnote 11: Series 23, Vol. IV.]\n\nThe law of avalanche is a term employed by Ramon y Cajal to indicate\nthe mode by which very simple sensations at the periphery of the body\nmay be multiplied into an avalanche of sensations within the brain. In\na lecture of his for _International Clinics_   [Footnote 12] Professor\nRamon y Cajal said: \"Impressions are made upon single cells at the\nperiphery. As the result of the disturbance of the single cell, an\never-increasing number of cells are affected as the nervous impulse\ntravels toward the nerve-center. Finally the nervous impulses reach\nthe brain and are spread over a considerable group of pyramidal cells\nin the cortex.\"\n\n  [Footnote 12: Series 11, Vol. II.]\n\nIn his paragraphs on attention he says that if conscious {274}\nattention is paid to the sensation a great many other cells throughout\nthe brain become affected by it. It may be that every cell which\nsubtends consciousness will at a given moment of intense attention be\ntingling from a single sensation. If it is unpleasant, the\nunpleasantness is multiplied to a very serious degree. The \"law of\navalanche\" has a very large place in disturbing the lives of those\npeople who have much time on their hands to think about themselves and\nwho are always solicitous lest some serious condition should be\ndeveloping.\n\nOur self-conscious generation, as religious impressions have been\ndiminished in recent years, is making its pains ever so much more\ndifficult to bear than they were before. Paying attention to slight\ndiscomfort will quite literally turn it into a veritable torment.\nPrayer of itself, by distracting the attention, will act in an actual\nphysical manner to reduce the pain, and the habit of prayer could\naccomplish very much in that direction. The feeling that somehow the\npain that is being borne is not merely a useless torment but has a\ndual beneficial effect in strengthening character and storing up merit\nfor the hereafter, as the religious minded believe, will do a very\ngreat deal to make the pain more bearable. As we are not going to have\nless pain for humanity, and suffering and death are to be always with\nus, not even the most roseate dreams of medical scientists\ncontemplating their elimination, it is easy to understand how valuable\nreligious motives will continue to be. Meantime physicians have\nabundance of experience of how much religion can do to make life, even\nunder the most trying circumstances, not only useful for self and\nothers, but even satisfying for those who would otherwise find it an\nalmost intolerable burden.\n\n{275}\n\nProbably the most fruitful source of consolation to be found in life\nis contained in the profound conviction that the Lord and Master said\nto those who would come after Him that if they would be His disciples\nthey must take up their cross and follow Him. One of the very great\nbooks of world literature is \"The Imitation of Christ\", the keynote of\nwhich is contained in its title.\n\nThis little book, which has chapters bearing such titles as \"That a\nMan Must not be over Eager about his Affairs\" and \"That a Man has\nNothing Good of Himself\" and which suggests \"That True Comfort must be\nSought in God Alone\" and \"That All care Should be Cast upon God\" and\n\"That Worldly Honor must be Held in Contempt\" and \"That All Things,\nhowever Grievous, are to be Borne for the Sake of Eternal Life\" and\n\"That a Man ought to Consider Himself more Worthy of Chastisement than\nof Consolation\", has been the favorite reading of more of the men and\nwomen whose opinions are worth while in the world's history than\nprobably any other, with the exception of the Bible itself. It has\nbeen placed next to Homer and Dante and Shakespeare among the books\nwhich scholars would preserve if, by a cataclysm, all the other books\nin the world were to be destroyed. When, some years ago, there was a\nspirited discussion in the English newspapers and magazines as to the\nten books which should be selected if one were to be on a desert\nisland for the rest of life with only these ten books for company, the\n\"Imitation of Christ\" almost invariably found its way into the list\nand usually among the first five.\n\nIf the little book which emphasizes the pain and suffering of life has\ncome to be looked upon as one of the greatest books of the world, by\nthe very fact of its {276} profound treatment of this subject in lofty\npoetry, then it is easy to understand the place that pain bears in\nlife. It is at the very heart of it. Nothing so reveals its meaning\nand makes it so bearable as religion. Just as it is true with regard\nto suffering, as stated in the chapter on that subject, that the five\npoets who at long-separated intervals in the world's history dared to\ntake the mystery of suffering in the world for the subject of their\npoems, made by that very fact the greatest dramatic poetry that has\never been made, so this humble member of the Brethren of the Common\nLife, Thomas a Kempis, working just as the Renaissance was beginning,\nand writing the spiritual conferences for \"those humble-minded patient\nteachers and thinkers\" as Hamilton Mabie said, \"whose devotion and\nfire of soul for a century and a half made the choice treasures of\nItalian palaces and convents and universities a common possession\nalong the low-lying shores of the Netherlands\", composed what his\ncontemporaries called \"ecclesiastical music\", and what all subsequent\ngenerations have agreed in thinking the most wonderful expression of\nthe significance of life in terms of Christianity that has ever been\nwritten.\n\n\n{277}\n\nCHAPTER XVI\n\nSUICIDE AND HOMICIDE\n\n\nNo book on religion and health would be complete without a discussion\nof the effect of religious influence on these two very important\nfactors in modern mortality statistics, especially in our own\ncountry,--suicide and homicide. One of the most disturbing features of\npublic health work is the occurrence of such a large number of deaths\nevery year in our great city life from murder and self-murder. It is\ndiscouraging to have the death rate from nearly every form of disease\ncoming down while these are going up. Any factor which promises,\nhowever modestly, to remove even to a slight degree this stigma from\nour modern civilization is worthy of consideration. The moral factors\nin life are most important in this regard and over these religion has\nthe most direct and potent influence.\n\nOne of the most disturbing features of our modern life is the fact\nthat in spite of the notable progressive increase of comfort in life\nfar beyond what people enjoyed in the past, there has been a steadily\nmounting growth in the number of suicides every year in civilized\ncountries. Comforts and conveniences have become widely diffused, so\nthat the luxuries of the rich in the older time have become the\neveryday commonplaces of the poor or the simple necessities of the\nmiddle class, and life would {278} seem to be ever so much more easy\nthan it used to be. Yet more and more people find it so hard that they\nare willing to go out of life by their own hands to meet untimely the\ndark mystery of the future. It has become quite manifest that comfort\nof body and peace of mind are by no means in such direct ratio to one\nanother as is usually thought, but rather the contrary. Our suicides\ntake place more frequently among the better-to-do classes than among\nthe poor who might possibly be expected to find life so hard that they\ncould not stand it any longer. Even chronic suffering does not cause\nso many suicides as the various disappointments of life, most of which\nare only transitory in their effect.\n\nPerhaps the most disturbing feature of the suicide situation lies in\nthe fact that the average age of those who commit suicide every year\nis constantly becoming younger. Suicide used to be the resort\nparticularly of the discouraged beyond middle life, but now it is\nbecoming ever more and more the mode of escape from an immediate\nfuture of unhappiness which ever younger and younger folk foresee for\nthemselves. Disappointments in love have always been occasions for\nsuicide, but other causes have multiplied in recent years to an\nalarming degree, and now high-school children with the suggestion of\nsensational newspaper accounts of suicide in their minds turn to\nself-murder over failures in examination or setbacks in school work or\nover a scolding at home. Even below the age of fifteen suicides are\nreported rather frequently, because children have been punished or\nhave been refused something that they had set their hearts on. The\ngeneration is engaged in producing many oversensitive young folk who\ncannot stand being disturbed in their hopes and aspirations.\n\n{279}\n\nSuicides have increased just in proportion to the decrease of\nattention to religion and the absence of religious teaching and above\nall of religious training, that is, of such practice of self-denial\nand of mortification for religious motives as leads to formation of\ncharacter. When children and young folks are always given their own\nway and are not taught that denying themselves is of itself a virtue\nbecause it leads to strength of will power and enables one to stand\nthe inevitable hardships of later life, no wonder that their first\nserious disappointments come to them as such disturbing misfortunes\nthat they can scarcely picture to themselves a time when they shall be\nhappy again. Above all a great many of them have no real belief in\nimmortality and therefore face the future life with no feeling as to\nits mystery and no proper sense of their obligation toward a Creator\nwho gave them life to use to the best advantage possible and who wants\nthem to play the game of life fair, taking the ill with the good and\n\"carrying on.\" The lack of religious feeling has left them with\nnothing to cling to in the midst of their trials, and though they may\nhave friends, all human beings are eminently alone, and we must go\nthrough what is hard in life by ourselves. We never feel our\nloneliness more than when some severe trial comes. We almost resent\nthe pity of others, and Emerson's phrase that we are \"infinitely\nrepellent particles\" becomes a very grave reality.\n\nIt is the easy custom of our time to blame nearly all the social ills\non what is called our present-day strenuous existence. There are a\ngreat many people who seem to think that men never worked so hard as\nthey do now, though as a matter of fact in what concerns the\naccomplishment of things worth while our generation is {280} sadly\nbackward. He unfortunately grows preoccupied with trivial narrow\nconcerns and keeps on working at them so continuously that we have\nbecome very fussy folk because we have no variety of occupation to\nrelieve the strain of daily life. It must not be forgotten in this\nregard that some of the men who have lived the longest have been\nextremely hard workers, accomplishing so much in a number of lines of\nthought and endeavor that it has seemed almost impossible to\nunderstand how they did it, yet they have been healthy and hearty in\nmind and body until fourscore years, and sometimes, like Ranke, the\ngreat German historian, and Pope Leo XIII and Chevreul, the\ndistinguished French chemist, even beyond ninety years of age and\nmore. The strenuous existence is a good excuse, however, and a great\nmany people are sure that it is the overtiredness and the disturbance\nof health and the depression which comes in connection with this that\ncauses suicide or at least contributes greatly to the increase of it\nin our time.\n\nOnly a little analysis of suicide statistics, however, is necessary to\nmake it very clear that it is not physical factors which contribute\nmost to the increase of suicide, but that it is the state of mind of\nthe individual. If the physical counted for much then it would be\nconfidently expected that suicides would be commonest in the winter\nand least frequent in the summer, particularly in the pleasanter\nmonths of the summer time. The statistics show, however, that the\nmonth which has the most suicides is June. June is probably the\npleasantest month of the year in most ways in our climate. July is\nlikely to be very hot. May often has cold and rainy days at the\nbeginning, but June has often a succession of almost perfect days.\nJames Russell {281} Lowell sang, and it has been reechoed many times,\n\"What is so rare as a day in June\", yet this is the month which more\npeople take to put themselves out of existence than any other. Brides\nhave chosen it as the favorite month for marriage because all nature\nlooks so lovely and in sympathy with their own joy and because there\nare fewer rainy days in it than any other. Happy hearts are beginning\na new existence with the brightest possible prospects just when so\nmany others are voluntarily getting out of what seems a hopeless life.\n\nDecember, which has so many gloomy days and which naturally is likely\nto be so much more depressing than the succeeding months of the\nwinter, for the clear, cold days of January and February are bracing,\nmight on physical grounds be expected to be the month with most\nsuicides in it. Christmas with its celebrations and the announcement\nof peace and joy to men of good will might be expected to lower the\nnumber of suicides for the latter third of the month, but even the joy\nof that occasion could scarcely be hoped to neutralize completely the\ndepressing effect of the weather. Just exactly the contradiction of\nthese anticipations is what happens. Suicides are least frequent in\nDecember of any month in the year, and the last ten days of the month\nhave the most of them because it is not so much the individual's own\nsense of hopelessness in life, complicated by physical suffering and\nmaterial trials of various kinds, that tempts to suicide, as the\ncontrast of the joy of those around him with his own feelings which\nemphasize his depressed state of mind until he feels that he can stand\nit no longer. June's gayety with its happy brides adds to the number\nof suicides and the Christmas festivities have a like unfortunate\ntendency. Gloomy weather has exactly the {282} opposite effect from\nwhat would surely have been expected on the general principle that the\nphysical plays the most important role in the production of suicides.\n\nThis is brought out still more clearly by the careful review of the\neffect of the weather on suicide which was made some years ago by\nProfessor Edmund T. Dexter   [Footnote 13] of the University of\nIllinois.\n\n  [Footnote 13: _Popular Science Monthly_, April, 1901.]\n\nHe followed out the records of nearly two thousand cases of suicides\nreported to the police in the City of New York and placed beside them\nthe records of the weather bureau of the same city for the days on\nwhich these suicides occurred. According to this, which represents not\nany preconceived notions but the realities of the relationship of the\nweather to self-murder, the tendency to suicide is highest in spring\nand summer, and the deed is accomplished in the great majority of\ncases on the sunniest days of these seasons. It is not at all a case\nof heat disturbance of mind or tendency to heat stroke, for as has\nbeen seen June is the month of most suicides and while it often has\nsome hot days it does not compare in this regard with July and August\nor even September as a rule.\n\nHis conclusions are carefully drawn, and there is no doubt that they\nmust be accepted as representing the actual facts. All the world feels\ndepressed on rainy days and in dark, cloudy weather, but suicides\nreact well, as a rule, against this physical depression, yet allow\ntheir mental depression to get the better of them on the finest days\nof the year. Professor Dexter said:\n\n  \"The clear, dry days show the greatest number of suicides, and the\n  wet, partly cloudy days the least; and {283} with differences too\n  great to be attributed to accident or chance. In fact there are\n  nearly one in three (31%) more suicides on dry than on wet days and\n  more than one in five (21%) more on clear days than on days that are\n  partly cloudy.\"\n\nIn reviewing the subject of suicide in my book on \"Psychotherapy\"\n[Footnote 14] I suggested that this subject of depressed weather\nconditions as the contributing cause of suicide might be carried still\nfurther and the lack of the dispiriting influence of dark, damp\nweather, as a suicide factor, could be seen very strikingly from the\nsuicide statistics of various climates.\n\n  [Footnote 14: D. Appleton & Co., New York, 1912.]\n\nThe suicide rate is not highest in the torrid or in the frigid zones,\nbut in the temperate zones. In the north temperate zone it is much\nmore marked than in the south temperate zone. Civilization and\nculture, diffused to a much greater extent in the north temperate zone\nthan in the south, seem to be the main reason for this difference. We\nmake people capable of feeling pain more poignantly, but do not add to\ntheir power to stand trials or train character by self-control to make\nthe best of life under reasonably severe conditions.\n\nSevere physical suffering of any kind, provided it is shared by a\nwhole people, reduces the suicide rate. Famine, for instance, though\nit might be expected that people facing starvation would surely take\nthe easier way, rather reduces the tendency to suicide. Earthquakes\nfollowed by loss of life and intense suffering have the same effect.\nIt might possibly be thought that this would be true only among less\nwell educated people, the orientals or perhaps certain of the South\nAmericans where lack of education made them less poignantly sensitive\nto physical {284} suffering than among the more refined people in our\nwestern civilization, but the earthquake at San Francisco demonstrated\nvery clearly the effect upon average Californians who, I suppose, must\nbe considered to have been rather a little above than below the\ngeneral run of Americans in what we are accustomed to call\ncivilization and education. Before the catastrophe, suicides were\noccurring in that city on an average of twelve a week. After the\nearthquake, when, if physical sufferings had anything to do with\nsuicide, it might be expected that the self-murder rate would go up,\nthere was so great a reduction that only three suicides were reported\nin two months. Some of this reduction was due to inadequate records,\nbut there can be no doubt that literally a hundred lives were saved\nfrom suicide by the awful catastrophe that leveled the city. Men and\nwomen were homeless, destitute and exposed to every kind of hardship,\nyet because all those around them were suffering in the same way,\nevery one seemed to be reasonably satisfied. Evidently a comparison\nwith the conditions in which others are has much to do with deciding\nthe would-be suicide not to make away with himself, for by dwelling\ntoo much on his own state he is prone to think that he is ever so much\nworse off than others.\n\nIf life were always vividly interesting, as it was in San Francisco\nafter the earthquake, and if all men worked and suffered as the San\nFranciscans did for a few weeks, suicide would not end more than ten\nthousand American lives every year, as it does now. The one hope for\nthe man who is contemplating suicide is to get him interested in\nothers, to arouse him to the realization of the fact that there are\nothers suffering even more than himself, but above all to get him to\nfeel that he can relieve the {285} suffering of others. Selfishness is\nthe root of suicide, usually pathological in its utter preoccupation\nwith self as the most important thing in the universe, but often only\nthe result of a fostering of self-interest and a failure to train the\nmind to think of other people, which is of the very essence of\nreligion.\n\nIt is not when things are made easy for mankind, but on the contrary\nwhen they are passing through times of difficulty and severe stress\nthat the suicide rate goes down. War always brings a striking\nreduction in the number of suicides. Our Spanish-American War reduced\nthe death rate from suicide in this country over forty per cent\nthroughout the country and over fifty per cent in Washington itself,\nwhere there was most excitement with regard to the war. This was true\nalso during the Civil War. Our minimum annual death rate from suicide\nfrom 1805 (when statistics on this subject began to be kept) to the\npresent time was one suicide to about twenty-four thousand people,\nwhich occurred in 1864, when our Civil War was in its severest phase.\nThere had been constant increase in our suicide rate every year until\nthe Civil War began, then there was a drop at once and this continued\nuntil the end of the war. In New York City the average rate of suicide\nfor the five years of the Civil War was nearly forty-five per cent\nlower than the average for the five following years. In Massachusetts,\nwhere the statistics were gathered very carefully, the number of\nsuicides for the five-year period before 1860 was nearly twenty per\ncent greater than for the five-year period immediately following,\nwhich represents the preliminary excitement over the war and the\nactual year of the war. This experience in America is only in\naccordance with what happens everywhere. Mr. George Kennan in his\narticle on {286} \"The Problems of Suicide\" [Footnote 15] has a\nparagraph which brings this out very well. He says:\n\n  [Footnote 15: _McClure's Magazine_, June, 1908.]\n\n  \"In Europe the restraining influence of war upon the suicidal\n  impulse is equally marked. The war between Austria and Italy in 1866\n  decreased the suicide rate for each country about fourteen per cent.\n  The Franco-German War of 1870-1871 lowered the suicide rate of\n  Saxony eight per cent, that of Prussia 11.4 per cent, and that of\n  France 18.7 per cent. The reduction was greatest in France, because\n  the German invasion of that country made the war excitement there\n  much more general and intense than it was in Saxony or Prussia.\"\n\nAbove all the sense of patriotic duty, the recognition of the fact\nthat there are things in life worth more than life itself, lifts men\nout of the depression into which they have permitted themselves to be\nplunged as a consequence of their utter absorption in themselves and\ntheir own narrow interests.\n\nOld-fashioned religion has a distinct effect in the reduction of the\nsuicide rate, and all over the world the orthodox Jews who cling to\ntheir old-time belief and above all to their orthodox practices and\nmode of life have undoubtedly the lowest suicide rate of any people in\nthe world. This is true, though almost needless to say a great many\nJews, not only in the foreign countries but here in our own great\ncities, have to live under circumstances that are the most trying that\nit is possible to imagine. A great many of them live in slums, doing\nintensely hard work in sweat shops--though, thank God, these are fewer\nnow than they used to be--and yet the Jews cling to life in the midst\nof trials that would seem almost impossible for human nature to bear.\nThe Jewish {287} suicide rate is the lowest everywhere in spite of\nracial differences, for after all there are German Jews and Portuguese\nJews and Russian Jews who have lived among the respective peoples\nafter whom they are called for centuries and who might therefore be\nexpected to take on the characteristics which their environments have\nbrought. There is a very great difference in the suicide rate between\nthe orthodox and unorthodox Jews, that is, those who have given up the\nbeliefs and religious practices of their forefathers. It is in favor\nof the orthodox Jews, though of course the record is complicated by\nthe prosperity of those who have given up their religion. Wealth and\nspeculation greatly favor the occurrence of suicide.\n\nIt is well known that Roman Catholics the world over have much less\ntendency to suicide than their Protestant neighbors living in the same\ncommunities. It is true that where the national suicide rate is high,\nmany Catholics also commit suicide, but there is a distinct\ndisproportion between them and their neighbors. The suicide rate of\nProtestants in the northern part of Ireland, as pointed out by Mr.\nGeorge Kennan, is twice that of Roman Catholics in the southern part.\nHe discusses certain factors that would seem to modify the breadth of\nthe conclusion that might be drawn from this, but in the end he\nconfesses that their faith probably has most to do with it and that,\nabove all, the practice of sacramental confession must be considered\nas tending to lessen the suicide rate materially. It is the readiness\nto give their confidence to some one on the part of these patients,\nfor that is what they really are, that seems to the physician the best\nhope of helping them to combat their impulse, and Mr. Kennan's opinion\nis worth recalling for therapeutic purposes:\n\n  \"In view of the fact that the suicide rate of the {288} Protestant\n  canton in Switzerland is nearly four times that of Catholic cantons,\n  it seems probable that Catholicism, as a form of religious belief,\n  does restrain the suicidal impulse. The efficient cause may be the\n  Catholic practice of confessing to priests, which probably gives\n  much encouragement and consolation to unhappy but devout believers\n  and thus induces many of them to struggle on in spite of misfortune\n  and depression.\"\n\nIt is not surprising that in countries where attendance at church and\nadhesion to religious organizations has dropped very seriously, the\nsuicide rate should be higher than in countries where the great mass\nof the people are still faithful churchgoers, take their religious\nduties very seriously and therefore are subjected to the deepest\ninfluence of religion over the heart and mind at regularly recurring\nintervals. They find consolation in their suffering, advice in their\ntrials, strength for their difficulties and a fount of hope almost for\ntheir despair. Above all they are deterred by the thought of another\nworld than this and the possibility of punishment in it, if they have\nnot had the courage and the manly strength of soul to face their\ndifficulties in this.\n\nIt has come to be the custom rather to minimize the effect of\ndeterrent motives on human beings and to say that men cannot be scared\ninto doing good or avoiding evil, and it is quite true that a policy\nof frightfulness pursued out of mere malice to effect a human purpose\nwill have exactly the opposite effect over the great majority of\nmankind, but when men realize that they are bringing punishment on\nthemselves by their own acts, and that those acts are unjustifiable on\nany rational grounds, they have a very different feeling as a rule\nwith regard to punishments that may be impending over them for their\nconduct. It {289} is quite one thing to be unjustly punished and\nresent it and quite another to feel that the punishment we are\nincurring has justice in it, though we may not be quite able to\nunderstand all the significance of it or plumb its mystery entirely.\n\nShakespeare has Hamlet discuss that whole question in his soliloquy so\nwell that it deserves to be quoted here:\n\n  \"... And by a sleep, to say we end\n  The heart-ache, and the thousand natural shocks\n  That flesh is heir to,--'t is a consummation\n  Devoutly to be wished. To die,--to sleep:--\n  To sleep, perchance to dream:--ay, there's the rub;\n  For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,\n  When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,\n  Must give us pause. _There's_ the respect,\n  That makes calamity of so long life:\n  For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,\n  The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,\n  The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,\n  The insolence of office, and the spurns\n  That patient merit of the unworthy takes,\n  When he himself might his quietus make\n  With a bare bodkin? Who would fardels bear,\n  To grunt and sweat under a weary life,\n  _But that the dread of something after death,--\n  The undiscovered country, from whose bourn\n  No traveller returns,--puzzles the will\n  And makes us rather bear those ills we have\n  Than fly to others that we know not of?_\n  Thus conscience does make cowards of us all.\"\n\nWe have come to resent somewhat the suggestion of deterrent motives as\nhelpful for the doing of good, and the dread of punishment as unworthy\nof men, but the religious beliefs of a hereafter of suffering for the\ncoward who dares not face the trials of life are still and have always\nbeen {290} valuable in keeping people up to their duty. The war\nrestored some of the sadly needed old-fashioned attitude toward\npunishment as a help to discipline, and we are now more in sympathy\nwith old-fashioned religious ideas in the matter.\n\nThere has been an even greater increase of homicide than of suicide\nand for very similar reasons. Our homicide rate here in America is a\ndisgrace to a civilized country. Ambassador Andrew D. White, whose\nlong experience in European countries made his opinion of great value,\ndeclared that for homicide we were the worst country in the world,\nwith more killings of human beings to our credit than even\nvendetta-ridden Corsica. This is not due to any persistence of \"wild\nwest\" conditions but obtains in the east as well as in the west.\nIndeed our large cities are by far the worst in this regard. New York\nand Chicago have many times as many murders annually as London has,\nthough there is no very great difference in the composition of the\npopulation of these cities, for all of them house large numbers of\nforeigners of all kinds and they have about the same sort of slums and\nvery nearly the same social conditions. Poverty is worse in London and\nif anything that ought to add to the homicide rate. Reverence for\nhuman life has very largely broken down, and the taking of it is not\nconsidered to be anything like the serious crime that it was even a\nfew years ago.\n\nThis increase in homicide in civilized countries, like the increase in\nsuicide, has come after the serious breakdown of religion. That the\nrise in the homicide rate is not a question of the familiar fallacy\n_post hoc ergo propter hoc_, \"after this therefore because of this\",\nis the opinion of a number of men who have a right to have opinions\n{291} on this subject, and who insist that it is the obliteration of\nreligious feeling with its emphatic insistence on the awfulness of the\ncrime of murder that has largely served to make homicide the very\ncommon event that it is.\n\nOne powerful factor in this matter is undoubtedly the failure to\npunish murder properly, and as far as may be adequately, that has\ndeveloped in recent years in this country. Very few murderers are\nexecuted. Less than five per cent altogether of those who have\ncommitted deliberate murder are ever executed, and in some States it\nis actually only two per cent. When but two out of every hundred men\nwho take life deliberately lose theirs, it is easy to understand that\nmen, in times of intense anger, will not have the restraint which\nwould otherwise be exerted over them by the fear of prompt loss of\nlife under disgraceful circumstances for themselves. Many a man will\ntake his chances of having a long prison term for murder shortened by\nexecutive clemency or a pardon board who would hesitate very much over\nthe thought of having to die himself by prompt legal measure. I have\nheard a distinguished jurist say that they execute nine out of ten of\ntheir murderers in England, while we execute a little more than two\nout of every hundred on the average of ours, so that there is little\nreason for wonder why we have ten times as many murders.\n\nThe real reason for this decrease in the number of executions and the\ngrowth of the opposition on principle to capital punishment in this\ncountry is the increasing obscuration of the belief in immortality.\nPeople have become afraid to do the irretrievable act of sending a man\nout of life because, thinking only in terms of this life, they feel he\nshould have a chance for reform here and above all because they\nhesitate to think that men ever {292} have the right to deprive\nanother of existence, for if there is no other world than this, the\nend of physical life means annihilation. If life is but the portal to\neternity, however, at longest a brief period of trial before entering\nupon another and much more important stage of existence, then the\nexecution of a criminal done with all the dignity of the law, exacting\na compensation as adequate as possible for a wrong that has been done,\ninstead of being a dreadful thing has a very definite nobility about\nit. Of course, if there is no other world, the question of execution\nbecomes a very different consideration,--the obliteration of a fellow\nhuman being. This feeling is often not consciously reflected upon, yet\nit is effective in suggesting conclusions and ruling the mental\nattitude.\n\nThe old religious orders had a tradition that certain men, because of\nthe circumstances in which they died and above all the fact that they\nhad sufficient warning as to the end of life and the chance to prepare\nthemselves for eternity, were predestined to heaven, though they might\nhave to go through a great deal of suffering, quite as Dante foresaw,\nbefore getting there. Among these the most prominent classes were men\nand women afflicted with an incurable disease which it was recognized\nwould surely bring on a fatal conclusion with but a few months' or\nyears' delay, and then those who were condemned to death had their\nweeks and months of preparation in prison for that event. This intense\nbelief in a hereafter made the outlook on both murder and execution a\nvery different thing from what it is without it.\n\nSentimentality reigns now where the sentiment of justice formerly\nruled. A man who has committed an ugly sex crime capped with murder or\nwho has often, after making her life miserable for months or years,\n{293} murdered a poor wife in cold-blooded deliberateness, will be the\nsubject of sentimental compassion during his trial from a crowd of\nsilly women who will send flowers to his cell to lighten his solitude\nand who, if they can obtain permission, will visit him in the death\nhouse. They forget all that his victim suffered and the necessity for\nproducing a definite effect upon the minds of others who might have\nthe temptation to follow in his path, and whose minds are of a caliber\nthat they can only be deterred by holding up adequate punishment\nbefore them.\n\nThe gradual diminution of the place of religion in life has given rise\nto an unfortunate phase of popular psychology with regard to the\neffect of punishment in general on human beings. The wisest writings\nthat we have, the Holy Scriptures, which even those who might deny\ntheir direct divine inspiration would confess readily to contain the\nmost marvelous knowledge of man and his ways to be found in\nliterature, have insisted particularly on the deterrent effect of\npunishment held up before men and the reforming value of it when\nproperly inflicted.\n\nProbably nowhere in modern social life is a revival of religion more\nneeded to save men from unfortunate tendencies in their natures than\nin what concerns the estimation of the value of human life and the\nprevention of a further increase in our awful statistics of suicide\nand homicide. Religion is almost more needed for this than for the\nso-called social diseases.\n\n\n{294}\n\nCHAPTER XVII\n\nLONGEVITY\n\n\nIn spite of the Psalmist's warning that threescore years and ten are\nthe years of man and that life beyond that is likely to be filled with\nall sorts of discomforts, practically all men are anxious to live long\nlives. They are satisfied to take the diseases of advanced years\nprovided only there are surceases from pain at intervals and they are\nable to occupy themselves for some part of the time with their usual\ninterests. It is true that a certain sadly increasing number in our\ntime shorten existence by their own hand, and at an ever younger age\non the average and that some at least of those who do so are not\ninsane in any justifiable legal sense of the word, but they are felt\nby all to be unfortunate exceptions who prove that the rule of love of\nlife and desire to cling to it through sad and evil case is\npractically universal among men. Life may be, in the words of the\ncynic, a chronic disease, whose termination is always death, but most\nmen prefer that the disease should last as long as possible.\n\nThe most important factor for long life is of course heredity. The man\nwho wants to live long should have been careful to be born of\nlong-lived parents and grandparents. Doctor Oliver Wendell Holmes once\nsaid that the physician would often like to be in the position to\ntreat in the persons of his patient's grandparents a {295} number of\nthe diseases that he sees in his consulting room. Whatever truth there\nmay be in that, there is no doubt at all that there is very little\nhope of a man living long if his parents and grandparents have been\nshort-lived, unless of course their taking off has been due to\naccident. After family heredity, however, undoubtedly the most\nimportant factor for longevity is an abiding sense of religion. A\ngreat many religious people live beyond the average age, and a great\nmany clergymen live to be very old men and yet retain their faculties\nand physical powers very well. They are not longer lived than other\nprofessional men on the average, because many of those who become\nclergymen are delicate by nature and only rarely so robust as other\ncollege men.\n\nIn recent years the insurance companies have come to recognize very\nclearly what is called the moral hazard in life. A man who lives a\nquiet, simple life without excesses in eating or drinking, getting his\nfull quota of sleep and his meals regularly without temptations to\nhigh living of various kinds is much more likely to outlive his\nmathematical average of expectancy in life than the man who does not\nfollow that sort of existence.\n\nAlmost needless to say it is seriously religious men--all clergymen do\nnot necessarily come under this head--who live these very regular\nlives and do not allow themselves the occasional divagations in life\nwhich may not in themselves prove serious but which often lead to\nconditions and developments that impair health and shorten existence.\nThere are undoubtedly a good many men who have sowed their wild oats\nvery freely when they were young and who have continued all their\nlives to be rather free livers, and who yet have lived on to good\nround old age. What we speak of here, however, is the average {296}\nlength of life which in men who live without excesses and without\nover-solicitude about the future or the present is sure to be longer\nthan in others.\n\nThe old proverb says that \"worry and not work kills men.\" Undoubtedly\nworry rather than work ages men before their time and breaks down\ntheir vital resistance and makes them much more susceptible to the\nmany diseases that may shorten existence as the years go on than they\nwould have been liable to had they lived regular lives. Religion is\nthe great salve for worries. When genuine it lessens the irritations\nof life, makes them more bearable, renders the disposition more\nequable and more capable of standing the stresses and strains of\nsudden trials or serious misfortunes than it would otherwise be.\nReligion does not change nature essentially, but it lifts it up and\nmodifies it to a noteworthy degree. Even Christ did not come to change\nhuman nature; He assumed it and showed men how to live. Religion does\nnot make a passionate disposition mild, but it confers upon the\npassionate man the power to control his passions to no small extent\nand often so thoroughly that even those who know him best have no idea\nof the storms which start to brew within him but are suppressed.\n\nAlmost needless to say the moderation in all things which religion\ncounsels and which its training fosters is extremely conducive to long\nlife, if there is any underlying basis for that in the nature of the\nindividual. Religion is like oil for machinery. It lessens the\nfriction, prevents the development of heat which would only be\ndestructive and serve no useful purpose, soothes the temper against\nreactions and smooths out life's ways. Some one once suggested that it\nrepresented the rubber tires of the modern automobile, but that is not\na good figure, for the inflation {297} on which a man is smoothly\ncarried may blow out at any moment and leave him to run on the rim.\nThat is much better represented by sentimentality and the motives\ndrawn from it rather than from religion.\n\nThe direct influence of religion on health can very probably be\nestimated best by the comparative death rate of occupations.\nClergymen, according to English statistics which are gathered rather\ncarefully, have the lowest death rate, even below that of gardeners\nand nurserymen whose constant outdoors life gives them such an\nadvantage and whose simple laborious occupation without excitement is\nso favorable for long life. After these come the farmers and then the\nagricultural laborers, and then a long distance afterwards the\nschoolmasters and grocers and mechanics generally. The highest death\nrates in occupations occur not among the laboring classes occupied at\nthe particularly unhealthy trades--plumbers and painters who are\nsubjected to lead; file makers and knife grinders whose lungs are\nseriously hurt by dust; and earthenware manufacturers who are\nsubjected to the influence of both dust and lead--but among the\ninn-keepers, spirit, wine and beer dealers and above all the inn and\nhotel servants among whom the moral hazards of life are greatly\nincreased and over whom religion fails to have the influence that\nwould be beneficial.\n\nPerhaps the best way to demonstrate the effect of religion in\nlessening the wear and tear of life, thus proving conducive to its\nprolongation, is to take the statistics of the lives of those who\ndevote themselves so thoroughly to their religious duties that they\nare called by the name _religious_. They give themselves not alone to\nthe daily but almost to the hourly practice of religion, and its\ninfluence has a thoroughgoing opportunity to exert {298} itself over\ntheir lives. Most of them live very simply and abstemiously, and\nindeed many people would be inclined to say that they did not take\nquite sufficient food to nourish them properly and that they allowed\ntheir sleep to be interrupted by religious duties in such ways as not\nto afford themselves quite rest enough. They are all very early\nrisers, at five o'clock in the winter at the latest and in summer at\nfour, while not a few of them get up at some hour during the night to\nsing some portion of the office, the full round of which has to be\ncompleted every day. Their beds are usually rather hard; there is no\ncarpet on the floor in their cells, their lives to most people would\nseem rather narrow and without adequate diversion, and yet they are\nnoted for living beyond the average age, except in cases where work in\nhospitals or the like subjects them to the danger of infection.\n\nThe tradition with regard to this prolongation of life among the\nreligious has existed since a very early time in Christianity and\nindeed was noted before the Christian era among the men and women who,\nas among the Buddhists, lived in monastic seclusion lives of great\nabstinence and occupation with the contemplation of the hereafter. In\nthe very early days of Christianity a number of the men who withdrew\nto live the lives of solitaries in the desert regions of Egypt and of\nSyria exceeded the Psalmist's limit of life, though the account of\ntheir neglect of food would seem to make that almost impossible. A\nnumber of them lived to be beyond seventy and not a few beyond eighty\nand some of them over ninety. St. Anthony, who is often spoken of as\nthe first hermit, lived to be beyond one hundred.\n\nIt is a matter of never-ending surprise to find how many {299} people\nwho dwell in monasteries, where their occupation is mainly some simple\nwork of the hands varied by long hours of reading and prayer during\nevery day in the year, live to be very old. It might be surmised that\ntheir opportunities for introspection and thought about themselves\nwould be so frequent and extensive that they would get on their own\nminds and probably be the victims of various nervous symptoms that\nwould shorten existence through worries over trifles. So far is this\nfrom being the case, however, that some of the most striking examples\nof group longevity among people who are unrelated are to be found in\nwhat are known as contemplative monasteries, that is, institutions\nwhere there is only enough active life every day necessary to maintain\nhealth and supplies for the simple physical needs of a monastery, and\nthe rest of the time is spent in reading, prayer, meditation and the\nsaying of the Divine Office.\n\nThe modern religious orders, which imitate some at least of the\nausterities of the old solitaries and those who in the early days of\nChristianity lived in communities, have a record of longevity quite\nequal to that of their forbears. What an absolutely regular life under\ndeep religious influences, where practically every hour of the day has\nits allotted task, where no meat is eaten and two Lents a year are\nkept--that is one third less is eaten for about one fourth of the\nyear--will do to prolong human life, can be seen very well from the\nvital statistics of the well-known Trappist Monastery at Gethsemane in\nKentucky, which are before me as I write. The average age at death of\nthe members of this community for the last twenty-five years is nearly\nseventy-three. A number of them lived to be beyond eighty, and as the\nAbbot has written to tell me, the most satisfactory thing for the\n{300} community lies in the fact that the old members, even at\nfourscore years and more, can practically always join in the common\nlife of the community and do not need to be specially waited on or\ntaken care of. Their death is likely to be quiet and rather easy, the\nflickering out of the spark of life rather than its extinction.\n\nOne of the Benedictines has furnished me statistics for that order\nhere in America, for there might be the feeling that in other\ncountries life would be different and that longevity would occur for\ndifferent reasons than those which occasion it in this country. A\ngreat many among the Benedictines live to celebrate their golden\njubilee, and life among them has been calculated to be at least ten\nyears more than that of their brothers and sisters who remained in the\nworld.\n\nOf course it might be said that only the people of very placid\ndisposition who take things very quietly and are not inclined to worry\nwould enter such institutions as these, and there is some truth in the\nstatement. It is not nearly so true, however, as most people would\nimagine, for a great many of those who enter convents and monasteries\nwere rather lively and gay when they were younger; indeed it has often\nbeen said that it was the liveliest, happiest and most charming girls\nat the convent schools who were destined to enter the convents\nafterwards.\n\nAs regards the monasteries for men, the same rule of longevity holds,\nand yet a great many of these men were not only lively and gay, but\nsome of them had rather stormy careers before they settled down to the\ncontemplative life after something of remorse over the foolishness\nwhich had led them astray in their younger years.\n\nThe men and women who enter religious orders are of course the more\nserious characters who take life rather {301} placidly, and this adds\nto their expectancy of life, for it is worry rather than work or\nsuffering that shortens existence, but it must not be forgotten that\nnot a little of their placidity is not natural to their dispositions,\nbut is rather acquired as the result of their deep religious feelings\nand their recognition of the fact that God's Will will be accomplished\nanyhow and there is no use worrying about things.\n\nUndoubtedly one of the principal reasons why the death rate among\nwomen at all ages is so much more favorable than might be expected, in\nspite of their apparent tendency to worry more, their nervousness\nabout many things, and the dangers of maternity as well as their\nweaker physical constitution, is to be found in the fact that\nreligious influences are much more profound over them and have a more\ncalming effect than over men. A very old expression calls women the\ndevout female sex, and the influence of their devotion to religion is\nreflected in their mortality statistics. Doctor Woods Hutchinson, in\nhis \"Civilization and Health\",  [Footnote 16] has a chapter on \"The\nHardy Nerves of Women\" in which he brings out the fact that women\nresist the corroding effect of the strenuous life of modern\ncivilization better than men and are not subject to the factors which\nhave made modern health statistics so disturbing. For while we have\nbeen lengthening the average term of life and reducing the death rate\nin general, we have been shocked to find that the mortality above\nforty-five has been increasing rather than decreasing, so that men are\nbeing taken off just at the prime of life and at the height of their\nusefulness more than ever before, in spite of all our hygiene and the\ndevelopment of sanitary science.\n\n  [Footnote 16: Boston, 1914.]\n\n{302}\n\nThe difference in mortality between men and women after the age of\nforty-five, that is, just at the time when religious feelings are\nlikely to represent so much of a resource for the devout female sex,\nis so striking as to deserve to be noted particularly, and the\ncontrast continues more and more to be emphasized as the years go on.\n\nThe average age at death has risen during the past generation from\nabout thirty-three to slightly above fifty, but this improvement has\nbeen chiefly effected by saving the babies and children from death\nfrom unclean milk and the acute infectious diseases, and young adults\nfrom the great plagues of past generations, typhoid and tuberculosis.\nDoctor Hutchinson goes on to say:\n\n  \"Naturally this preserves a much larger number of individuals to\n  live to, say, the age of forty-five. And, as we must all die\n  sometime, we begin to drop off somewhat more rapidly after this\n  point has been reached--that is to say, the stupid and helpless\n  creature, man, does. Woman, however, is far too shrewd for that.\n  While man's mortality, after falling off markedly up to forty-five\n  years, begins after that period to increase distinctly, woman's\n  death rate, on the other hand, continues to decrease until\n  fifty-five years of age, beating man ten years; then yields to the\n  force of circumstances only to the extent of about one tenth of the\n  increase man shows between fifty-five and sixty-five; and after\n  seventy proceeds to decrease again.\"\n\nIncidentally, it may be remarked that the total increase of mortality\nafter forty-five in man is only about six per cent; besides which, the\nrace need not worry much about what happens to the individual after\nfifty-five or sixty, provided he has done his share of the world's\nwork. But {303} women pass men three laps to the mile, for their\nincrease of death rate after the age of fifty-five is barely one per\ncent, or one sixth of man's.\n\nThe lessened death rates among women at all ages are notable,\nparticularly among those who have taken life seriously and\nreligiously. Typical examples of similar longevity which they\nthemselves would surely have declared to have been influenced more by\ntheir religious attitude of mind than by any other single factor are\nnoteworthy in the lives of the two English cardinals of the nineteenth\ncentury, Newman and Manning. Both of them were men who accomplished a\nvery great deal of work in their younger years and who then went\nthrough the serious mental strain of giving up friends and ways that\nhad been very near and dear to them and making a great revolution in\ntheir lives. Both of them lived to be well past eighty, and indeed\nNewman lived to be past ninety in the full possession of vigorous\npower of mind until the very end of life. He himself had not looked\nfor long life, but on the contrary had felt that he was one of those\nfated to die rather young; indeed, in the sixties, he had begun to\nthink that he would give up work, and his friends had settled down to\nthe idea that he would not be long with them, when an attack on his\nsincerity aroused him to a magnificent response that is one of the\nprecious treasures of nineteenth-century literature and then for\nnearly thirty years longer he was a great intellectual force.\n\nThis same thing is very well illustrated in the lives of the Popes of\nthe nineteenth century, that is, during the period when modern hygiene\nand sanitation have developed to such an extent as to make the\nconservative influence of religion on health felt to the best possible\neffect. The {304} Popes all down the centuries have lived far beyond\nthe average of humanity, in spite of the burdens of responsibility\nplaced on them, and even the shortening of life by martyrdom of so\nmany of them at the beginning. Our nineteenth and twentieth-century\nPopes have proved wonderful examples of what placidity of mind can do\nunder the most difficult circumstances in keeping worries from wearing\nout life energies, in spite of the fact that the life stream in some\nof the cases did not appear to be very strong at its source and long\nlife seemed almost out of the question.\n\nThese long lives might very well be matched from the lists of old\npastors from all the denominations and the sects who have outlived the\nyears of the Psalmist without incurring the physical evils which he\nprophesied. Old clergymen are particularly likely to retain the full\npossession of their senses and to live on to a quiet, peaceful old\nage. I once heard one of them say--I believe that it was a\nquotation--that he used to think that all the pleasure of life was\ncontained in the first eighty years, but now at the age of eighty-five\nhe knew that there was a great deal of life's satisfaction to be found\nin the second eighty years.\n\nThere are exceptions to the rule, of course, and most of us would\nthink that they are the sort of exceptions that prove the rule. There\nis an old saw in many languages which says that the good die young,\nbut physicians are likely to think that this old-fashioned expression\nis founded on nothing more than the fact that a good many of the\nweaklings born without very much vitality develop into harmless\nnonentities who have no strong impulses to either good or ill, and who\nhave but very little resistive vitality and die of the infectious\ndiseases in early youth {305} or are carried off by tuberculosis a\nlittle later. It must not be forgotten, however, that it is as much of\nan accident to run into a bacillus as into a trolley car, and indeed\noften more serious, and though all that too is in the hands of the\nLord, in the order of Providence secondary causes work out their\ndestined effects. Quite contrary to the tradition that the good die\nyoung is the world experience that a great many of the good, that is,\nmen of sterling character and worth who have proved thoroughly capable\nof doing what is best in life for the benefit of others rather than\nfor themselves, live on to be a source of inspiration to those around\nthem for many, many years of a long and physically active life, even\nthough sometimes they may run into the rule that whom the Lord loves\nhe chastens, and they may have had many trials.\n\nThe Scriptural promises made over and over again were that the years\nof those who should keep His word should be long in the land. That\npromise has been fulfilled so often as to make it a commonplace. Three\nhundred years ago Shakespeare summed up at least the physical effects\nof keeping the law when he had old Adam say in \"As You Like It\":\n\n  \"Though I look old, yet I am strong and lusty;\n  For in my youth I never did apply\n  Hot and rebellious liquors in my blood;\n  Nor did not with unbashful forehead woo\n  The means of weakness and debility;\n  Therefore my age is as a lusty winter.\n  Frosty, but kindly. Let me go with you:\n  I'll do the service of a younger man\n  In all your business and necessities.\"\n\n\n{306}\n\nCHAPTER XVIII\n\nTHE BIBLE AND HEALTH\n\n\nFrom the very earliest times religious legislation has proved an\nextremely important factor for health. The book of Leviticus, one of\nthe very oldest religious documents that we have, contains a sanitary\ncode which is a marvel of completeness in its prescriptions for the\nmaintenance of health and the prevention of disease. It anticipates\nmost of the modern discoveries in this matter and the faithful keeping\nof its regulations has made the Jew the powerful personal factor that\nhe has been so often in history, notwithstanding the fact that he\nbelonged to a despised subject race. The orthodox Jew has kept his\nhealth in spite of the unfavorable conditions in which he was placed\nmuch better on the average than the Gentiles around him, and it is for\nthat reason that his nation has been preserved. It would have seemed\nalmost impossible for a people treated so badly as they were, crowded\ninto unhealthy ghettos, often in the lowest and most insanitary parts\nof the towns, with no municipal care exercised for their\nhealth--except when it was feared that epidemics might spread from\nthem to the Gentiles---to have maintained themselves for all these\ncenturies; but they have not only survived but have been the most\nvigorous of people, at all times full of initiative and readiness to\nwork far beyond the average of humanity.\n\n{307}\n\nThe sanitary code of the Jewish people which is contained in the Old\nTestament is one of the greatest triumphs of sanitary legislation that\nthe world has ever known. Doctor Alexander Rattray, in his volumes on\n\"Divine Hygiene, Sanitary Science and Sanitarians of the Sacred\nScriptures and Mosaic Code\",  [Footnote 17] has brought this out very\nclearly. The Scriptural motto of his work, \"That Thy way might be\nknown upon earth; Thy saving health among all nations\", is an\nexcellent text for what he has to say. With regard to the sanitary\ncode of the Hebrews, as compared with other ancient documents in\nsanitation. Doctor Rattray says:\n\n  [Footnote 17: London, 1903.]\n\n  \"Indeed, contrasted with the teachings of modern times, the\n  comprehensiveness and sufficiency of the rules and cardinal points\n  comprised in the Hebrew Sanitary Code, primitive in time but not in\n  practice; ancient, but not antiquated and obsolete; comprising a\n  treasure of infallible truth, which is the admiration of all\n  experts; and altogether so remarkable as to be comparable to, if\n  indeed they do not surpass both in literary style and professional\n  excellence, extracts from the best modern works on hygiene. So that\n  savants, notwithstanding their increased anatomical and\n  physiological knowledge, the accumulation of ages and the result of\n  modern enlightenment and civilization, bringing with them vastly\n  improved facilities for medical study, professional experience in\n  hospitals and communities, may still quote his model work with\n  approval; sit with advantage at the feet of the Jewish sage; and\n  learn in language as concise and forcible as that of the best modern\n  thinkers, not only the great base facts, but even many of the less\n  important minutiae of the art and science which they {308} study; if\n  they would not continue to despise this authority because he is a\n  Hebrew; ignore his work because it is Asiatic; slight the book in\n  which it is found because it is not a rare, costly and abstruse\n  volume; spurn instruction on a scientific subject because it comes\n  from a Biblical source; and neglect the ready-made and divinely\n  inspired code because it is ancient and a non-professional\n  publication.\"\n\nThe question of the place that this health legislation of the Bible\nhas in medical history is worth noting, for it makes very clear that\nit was no mere human development but something divine. Doctor Rattray\nsaid:\n\n  \"Moses was no doubt learned in the medicine and surgery of that era,\n  and could at least have taught his old Egyptian teachers, both\n  theoretically and practically, especially in sanitary matters, a\n  science of which they knew little, as the germ thought of preventive\n  medicine had not then been begotten. But it was not to be his role\n  to indoctrinate the Jews and Mankind in the least important sanatory\n  or healing branch of medicine, but rather to initiate its higher and\n  most philosophical department, the sanitary or disease preventing.\n  And to shew both by precept and practice that this is the most\n  philosophic and wisest policy to pursue regarding physical health,\n  as it also is in moral, social and spiritual matters. Part of his\n  beneficent and Divinely inspired mission was to inculcate in those\n  early days the lesson popularly taught in modern times by the trite\n  yet true proverb, 'prevention is better than cure': and to\n  illustrate it on the Israelites; to shew that its scope is not only\n  of private but of national, nay racial, import; and applicable not\n  only to his day, but all-time: although grievously neglected in past\n  ages even by medical men. From its {309} Biblical study does not\n  medical science thereby appear in a new light, and come in the garb\n  of one of the most incontrovertible aids to human faith in the\n  veracity of Holy Writ; the truth of Scripture as the inspired word\n  of the Almighty; God's medical message to Man, sent in His own\n  method, at His own time, and by servants of His own choosing?\n\n  \"The Sinaitic or so-called 'Mosaic' code and its hygienic sub-code,\n  more ancient by five or six hundred years than Esculapius and the\n  earliest human medical records, was not written and interpolated by\n  any modern or medieval medical sage, but is as Moses says, an\n  emanation of his era. And yet, as he himself affirms, it was not his\n  conception, but strictly and entirely Divine in elaboration,\n  codification, and delivery to humanity. Its true Author and Deviser\n  was Jehovah, and Moses merely its earthly recipient, editor and\n  human expounder and applier. For this most important educational\n  information we are indebted to God's Holy Bible, and to that alone.\n  What was the supernal object of the Code? It was humanitarian and\n  tuitional.\"\n\nThe English physician discusses the origin of this code\nof laws and traces it to divine interposition:\n\n  \"Viewed apart from its source, the Hebrew Health Code is an\n  anachronism. And it must be evident that Moses was not a\n  semi-barbarous Jew, but either a secularly scientific or an inspired\n  man. And if we cannot accept the former hypothesis, and think it\n  unlikely that imparted information and unaided intellect could have\n  originated this consummate production; then we must avow the latter\n  conviction, that he was truly 'a man of God.' But was the sanitary\n  code that goes by his name, or styled the 'Sinaitic', his conception\n  or not? This {310} question Moses himself answers indirectly and\n  often; and takes no credit for but disclaims it. Assuredly Moses was\n  not only a man of science and the foremost sanitarian of his own or\n  any other age; but also a man gifted by his Maker with the faculty\n  to discover and appreciate not only the great fundamental facts and\n  elements, but also many of the more important minutiae of private,\n  public, and national sanitation. Still he takes no credit for the\n  sanitary utterances of the Pentateuch or even says or hints at their\n  being partly, chiefly or wholly self-generated; and his own unaided\n  creation; or that we are purely indebted for them to the genius of\n  their practical expounder. Over and over again he insists and\n  reiterates that they are solely heaven-sent and of Divine origin.\n  Nay, more, what he says appears to suggest that his sanitary code\n  was a premeditated and authoritative emanation, which in its\n  elaboration probably occupied more years than any work that has\n  since been handed down to posterity. In early times medical\n  treatises were more slowly elaborated than now; and swayed only by\n  the double patriotism of zeal for his Master and loyalty to his\n  people, Moses had no need to give hasty and incomplete work to the\n  world. In the desert he would have ample time to write his book of\n  the law and the early story of Man and the Earth leisurely. From the\n  Holy Bible alone we glean the great base facts about the Mosaic Law\n  and its Hygienic portion. Here we learn, and by Moses' own\n  handwriting, that he was not their author, but Jehovah Himself; that\n  Moses only gave or wrote the law as averred by the Saviour (John,\n  vii. 19); therefore, that it is Divine and inspired. Moses was\n  merely its earthly recipient and transcriber and applicant. This\n  great fact practically {311} attested by over two millions of\n  Hebrews, who heard the Voice of God delivering the Decalogue at\n  Sinai, materially enhances the value of the bequest, as its supernal\n  nature and origin attests its truth and infallibility. This great\n  honour reserved for Moses, and the culminating fact in his earth\n  history, stamps his character and place in history. Taught by the\n  Divinity as no other man has yet been, Moses thus became Earth's\n  greatest sanitarian and the Deity's ambassador and mouthpiece to Man\n  in sanitary as in many other matters. What Moses wrote was revealed.\n  He penned as he was inspired and wrote what Jehovah dictated in the\n  Holy of Holies. Moses himself attests this, and thus wholly\n  disclaims the authorship. Chapter after chapter begins thus, 'And\n  the Lord said' (Leviticus, xvii). And thus the Hebrew leader and\n  sage, as has been recorded by his successor Joshua, himself 'full of\n  the spirit of wisdom' (Deuteronomy, xxxiv. 9), fully deserves this\n  record, 'there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses\n  whom the Lord knew face to face' (Deuteronomy, xxxiv. 10-11).\"\n\nThe distinction between the meats allowed to the Hebrews and those not\nallowed remains down to the present day an extremely valuable canon of\npreventive medicine. The carnivorous animals were not to be eaten and\nwere declared unclean. They are, as modern science has abundantly\nshown, much more likely to be the subject of parasites of various\nkinds than are the herbivorous animals. Any animal that died of itself\nor had been torn by beasts was not to be eaten, and this was an\nextremely wise provision, for those that had died were very likely to\nbe the subject of serious disease, while those torn by wild animals,\nif they did not perish at once were likely to have pyemia or\nsepticemia set in in their wounds, {312} while if they had been killed\nat once and their bodies had been exposed for any length of time in\nthe open air, they were likely to become the subject of serious\nputrefactive changes from the growth of bacteria in them. Any of these\nprocesses were likely to make the meat toxic, and the one safeguard\nwas prohibition of their consumption. The Hebrews were not allowed to\ntake the blood of animals, hence the necessity for having cattle\nbutchered in their own way so that it might be _kosher_, and it is\ninteresting to realize that this prohibition probably meant much for\nthe prevention of disease. Meat that is well drained of blood keeps\nlonger than that which contains the tissue fluids, and it has come to\nbe felt that the protection of the Hebrews to a considerable extent\nagainst tuberculosis, so that their death rate from this disease is\nmuch lower than that of other races living under similar\ncircumstances, is perhaps due to their abstinence from blood according\nto their law. They were forbidden to eat many of the fats, and this\nwas hygienic in general, for the fat is a sluggish tissue and may\ncontain parasites; but above all this was important for preventing the\nHebrews from eating such an amount of fat as would make them obese and\nsluggish. The orthodox Jews of the present time who fail to keep this\nprohibition as to fat are weighted down with a load of surplus fatty\ntissue that takes away from their activity and shortens their lives.\nObesity has certain relations directly with diabetes which also makes\nthis fat prohibition of significance, and as the Jew is probably more\nsubject to diabetes than most of those living in similar circumstances\nthere is here another index of the value of this Mosaic law which\nprevented pathological tendencies of several kinds that now make\nthemselves manifest.\n\n{313}\n\nThe greatest weight was placed upon keeping food materials covered\nfrom the air, and the use of liquids kept in vessels that were\nuncovered is forbidden, as is likewise the eating of fruit with open\nmoist cracks. It has often been said in modern times that the paring\nof fruits, when unbroken, constitutes the best possible safeguard\nagainst spoiling, and many have the feeling that this fact was\ndiscovered or its significance properly recognized only since we have\nbeen studying fermentation and putrefaction. It was known long ago,\nhowever. It was recognized also that food materials should not be\nhandled except with the greatest precautions and that those who\nprepared them should practice careful cleansing. These regulations\nundoubtedly had much to do with the prevention of the spread of the\ninfectious diseases. We have learned in recent years that cooks have\nhad much to do with the spread of the intestinal infections, and we\nnow recognize the need of the meticulous precautions on which Moses\ninsisted. The place of the hands in conveying disease was emphasized\nvery much, as for instance by Jewish writers who insisted on the rule\nthat coins should never be placed in the mouth because they had been\nhandled by so many people.\n\nWe have now come to appreciate this thoroughly, after having suspected\nfor some time that the hands have more to do with the conveyance of\ncontagion in many diseases than almost any other factor. A series of\nexperiments made upon young sailors in the United States service after\nthe Armistice was signed and when the \"flu\" was at its height\ndemonstrated almost beyond doubt that influenza cannot be conveyed by\nbreathing or coughing into the faces of others, nor in any way through\nthe air. Most army surgeons came to the {314} conclusion, therefore,\nthat the mode of conveyance of the disease was by the hands, which in\nhandling food and in touching the mouth and nose transmitted\ninfectious material which had been gathered in various ways. It is\ninteresting then to realize that the Jewish law insisted on careful\ncleansing of the hands before eating and on not touching the mouth or\nnose before the hands were washed in the morning, and that the\nTalmudic writings emphasized these regulations as regards the\ncleansing of the hands. They required that the finger nails, when\npared, should be burnt. Some of the Talmudists suggested that if water\ncould not be obtained gloves should be worn while eating, which would\nrecall the use of surgical gloves in modern times, for the surgeons\nlearned long since that the hands were by far the most dangerous media\nfor the transmission of infection.\n\nSome years ago Sir Benjamin Ward Richardson, one of the most\ndistinguished of the English physicians of the latter half of the\nnineteenth century, pointed out that the records showed a very marked\ndifference in the health and death rate of the Jews living in various\ncities of Great Britain as compared to their Gentile neighbors, and\nalways in favor of the Jews. Other statistics gathered later in the\nnineteenth century and at the beginning of the twentieth emphasize the\nfact that there is manifestly something which enables the Jew to\nresist disease and maintain health under circumstances where the\npeople around him suffer much more severely than he does. For\ninstance, in Manchester the average annual death rate for three years\nin the two Jewish districts was over eight in one and over nine in the\nother below the death rate per thousand of the whole city. The two\nJewish districts are among the worst slums of Manchester, yet {315}\nnot only do they exhibit a much lower death rate, but the morbidity\nstatistics show that there is less sickness among the Jews from all\nthe serious infectious diseases than among the Gentiles. They had a\nhigher morbidity rate than all the other parts of the city for\nerysipelas, pyemia, and puerperal fever, showing that they were\nsubjected to the influence of dirt and septic contagion, but in\neverything else they were much lower in the sickness rate than their\nneighbors. They had only about one half as many premature births,\ntheir children suffered from only half as many convulsions and\nscarcely more than half as much from diarrhea and dysentery.\n\nThe children in the Jewish districts proved to be particularly capable\nof resisting disease and their death rate is distinctly lower. The\ndiarrheic diseases of childhood are practically all due to improper\nfeeding, and the saving of children's lives in the unsanitary Jewish\ndistricts where poverty stalks abroad so openly is due to the more\nhealthy feeding of the infants, but above all to the mother's very\ncareful care of them. The Jewish mother is, by age-long tradition, an\nabsolutely unselfish caretaker of her children. When they are ailing\nher devotion is constant, and nothing is too much for her to do. No\nwonder that she saves more of her children than the Gentile mothers\naround her. It is because of the presence of the Jewish mothers in New\nYork and Boston that our Boards of Health have come upon the startling\ndiscovery that the foreign-born mother in this country raises one in\nseven more of her children than does the native-born mother. The\nreason, of course, for this is maternal devotion and readiness to\nsacrifice herself in any and every way for the sake of her children.\nAt least twice as many of these foreign mothers--and among {316} these\nof course every orthodox Jewish mother who can possibly do it--nurse\ntheir children, and that is by far the most important factor in\nsecuring the survival of children beyond the first year.\n\nThe Jews have been particularly careful for the lives of their infant\nchildren both before and after birth. It is considered a disgrace for\na Jewish mother to have a premature birth, for it is felt that some\nblame attaches to the mother. As for the prevalent practice of\nabortion, there is almost none of it among the poor Jewish\npopulations, and none at all until their orthodox Jewry begins to\nbreak down under the influence of contact with their Gentile\nneighbors. Human life is a very sacred thing to the orthodox Jew, and\nno matter how small or insignificant that life may be it has all the\nqualities of humanity for him and appeals to his protection. The\nsolicitude of the Jewish mother for her children has been the subject\nof poet and painter all down the ages and is to be found as well\ndeveloped and as strikingly manifest in the slums of the large cities\nof the west where it is so extremely difficult of exercise as it was\nin the Jewish towns of the olden time.\n\nIn Leeds, toward the end of the nineteenth century, there were some\nfifteen thousand Jews, the great majority of them belonging to the\nvery poorest class. Most of them lived in the central ward of the\ncity. As pointed out by Doctor Porritt in \"Religion and Health\", \"that\nward, one of the most squalid in Leeds, had a death rate lower than\nthat of the whole city, the statistical records for which show all the\nadvantages derived from the healthier or better class districts.\"\n\nIn London itself, in Whitechapel and Mile End, which were principally\noccupied by Jews, the death rates were only 18.5 and 19.3 per thousand\nof population, while in {317} the neighboring districts of Limehouse\nand St. George, where there were many fewer Jews--Limehouse being\npractically without them--the death rates were respectively 23 and\n24.6 per thousand. There was distinctly less morbidity from the\ninfectious diseases in the Jewish districts, there being actually more\nthan one fourth more in Limehouse than in Mile End on the average, and\nthe infantile death rates were much lower among the Jews in spite of\nthe fact that most of them were immigrants who had led very hard and\nanxious lives before settling in London and since coming had to work\nunder unwonted, exceedingly unsanitary conditions, in a climate to\nwhich they were not as yet accustomed.\n\nIn other countries besides England the mortality and morbidity\nstatistics favor the Jew even more strikingly than in England. In\nFrankfurt (on Main), as pointed out by Sir Benjamin Ward Richardson,\nwhere the influence of the Jewish ghetto still made itself felt about\nthe middle of the nineteenth century and Jews were herded together\nunder restricted regulations that would seem inevitably prone to hurt\ntheir health, they had as a matter of fact ever so much better health\nthan the Gentiles around them. The average duration of life among the\nJews was forty-eight years and nine months. Among all other classes it\nwas thirty-six years and eleven months. More than half of the Jews\nreached fifty years of age, while scarcely more than one third of the\nother classes lived up to that. During the first five years of life\nJewish children died at the rate of about thirteen per cent while\nGentile children died at the rate of a little more than twenty-four\nper cent. One fourth of the Jewish population attained the age of\nseventy; one fourth of the rest of the inhabitants lived to be less\nthan sixty.\n\n{318}\n\nIn Furth the tenacity of life among the Jews could be noted at all\nages. Of the Jewish children from one to five years ten per cent died,\nbut among the rest of the population the infant mortality of the same\nage was fourteen per cent. At every stage of life Jewish mortality was\nlower until past the age of sixty, when, owing to the greater number\nof Jews who reached advanced age, the ratio was inverted. The number\nof Jews who lived to be above eighty and even ninety is strikingly\nlarger than among the Gentiles. In Prussia, Legoit found that the\naverage life of the Jew is greater than that of the Gentile by at\nleast five years. The mortality among the population of the whole\nkingdom was a little over two and one half per hundred, while among\nthe Jews it was only one and one half per hundred. The population in\nPrussia is increasing annually at the rate of one and one third per\nhundred among non-Jews, but at the rate of nearly one and three\nfourths among the Jews. The ordinary population requires fifty-one\nyears to double itself, but the Jews require only forty-one and a half\nyears for the same progression.\n\nSir Benjamin Ward Richardson, by a comparison of the ages of two\nthousand five hundred Jews buried in London in three years with the\nmortality of the whole population of London at different ages, found\nthat under five years of age forty-four Jews died to forty-five\nnon-Jews; from thirty-five to forty-five years of age, five Jews died\nto every eight non-Jews; and it was not until the age of eighty-five\nwas reached that the ratio was reversed and two Jews were buried to\nevery one non-Jew, there being considerably more than twice as many\nnon-Jews alive at that age to supply the bodies for the burial.\n\n\n{319}\n\nCHAPTER XIX\n\nHEALTH AND RELIGION    [Footnote 18]\n\n  [Footnote 18: The suggestion for this chapter came from Reverend\n  William J. Lockington's little book on \"Bodily Health and Spiritual\n  Vigour\", Longmans, Green and Co., London, New York, Bombay and\n  Calcutta, 1914.]\n\n\nReligion, as we have seen in the course of this book, does very much\nfor health, but according to the great principle of nature, reaction\nis equal to action in compensation and health undoubtedly also\naccomplishes very much for religion. Indeed there are a great many\ntroubles commonly presumed to be of the spirit and a great many\nsupposed disturbances of the spiritual life that are really only\nmanifestations of ill health of one kind or another, or at least of\nsome hampering of bodily function reflected in the mind. This has\nalways been recognized by all the great authorities in the spiritual\nlife, and none have insisted more than the writers even of the highest\nmystical theology on the necessity for taking proper care of the body\nif the spirit is to be free for religious life.\n\nDesolation, that is that feeling of utter dissatisfaction with\nreligious exercises and difficulty in continuing them of which so much\nis said in spiritual literature, is very often nothing more than\ndyspepsia. What is familiarly called the \"blues\" or the \"blue devils\",\nthat is the state of depression in which nothing seems hopeful and the\nfuture seems very blank indeed, is a common experience among mankind\ngenerally and is very often dependent on {320} some disturbance of the\ndigestive tract. There is a well-known expression in English according\nto which the answer to the question \"Is life worth living?\" is \"That\ndepends on the liver\", meaning not only the person that does the\nliving, but also that large organ in the right upper abdominal\nquadrant, the largest, heaviest organ in the body, disturbances of\nwhich it is no wonder cause serious interference with a number of the\nfunctions of both mind and body. Many a long-faced person indeed who\nthinks himself pious is only bilious, and many a sad-eyed visionary\nwho is quite ready to proclaim himself religious is only what the\nancients called atrabilious and needs some liver regulator as badly as\never Horace thought he needed hellebore in the spring.\n\nThere are a good many traits of disposition or habits of life often\nsupposed to be dependent on the state of the spirit that are really\nonly symptoms of bodily indisposition. Many a fit of temper is\nconsequent upon the condition of the digestive organs rather than the\nstate of the soul. Suspicion and jealousy are not infrequently not so\nmuch vices as unfortunate feelings exaggerated out of all reason by\nsome disturbance of health. There are certain times in women's lives\nparticularly when almost any feeling that comes to them is magnified\nand takes on a significance quite beyond the reality. Physicians\nconstantly have to remind their women patients to wait a few days and\nnot let their inhibited feelings run away with them as they are so\nprone to do at certain periods.\n\nNot a little of the irritability of life and especially the\nexaggerated response to minor irritations is due to insufficient\noxygenation of tissues because the individual concerned is not getting\nout into the air sufficiently. At the end of a number of hours of\nmental work indoors, {321} especially in a stuffy atmosphere, most\npeople are inclined to be irritable. If instead of going out into the\nfresh air and staying out for some time when they get the chance, they\nthink that they feel too tired for the effort which that involves, and\nprefer to rest in a comfortable chair or perhaps lying down, their\nirritability will often not be lessened but sometimes will even be\nheightened. On the other hand, if they get out into the brisk, bracing\ncold air of the winter time particularly, they come back with their\nirritability thoroughly dissipated as a rule and ready to go on with\nother work almost without a sense of weariness. Probably nothing makes\na man say his night prayers more unsatisfactorily and with less\ndevotion than to sit down in a nice comfortable chair after a rather\nheavy evening meal and smoke and read the paper or perhaps a magazine\nuntil he goes to sleep. He wakes up feeling all out of sorts, while if\nhe played a game of cards with friends he would feel fine at the end\nof the evening and be ready to thank the Lord for another day and for\nthe prospect of a good night's rest for the work ahead.\n\nAbove all, people who are living healthy, outdoor lives are much more\nprone to take a happy view of life, to see the bright side of things\nand to radiate good will and sunshine than those who are overmuch in\nthe house. The cheerful givers whom the Lord loves come especially\nfrom among these. A great many of the people who want to pour out\ntheir ills perennially, because they like to indulge their self-pity\nby rolling the delectable morsels of their sufferings under their\ntongues, and who go around seeking consolation and sympathy whenever\nthey are in even slight trouble are indoor people. They occur\nespecially among those who spend a good deal of {322} time sitting\ndown and not exercising their bodies enough. The good old rule _ora et\nlabora_ is an extremely valuable precept, not only for the next world\nbut also for this. Pray and labor, but be sure that labor gets a fair\nshare of the time and be sure that the body has enough exercise to\nkeep it going and to keep its functions in good condition, otherwise\nthe prayer will be disturbed and life will be far from happy.\nHappiness comes to those who are healthily tired every day. Long ago\nDooley said in one of those wise sayings of his which made even the\n_London Times_ declare that the wisest man that was writing English in\nour day wrote under the name of Dooley in Chicago, that the one thing\nabove all that made life worth living was to be tired enough at the\nend of every day so that one would sleep well every night. Without\nthat life is indeed a burden.\n\nThe practice of hard work, some of it physical, is a very good rule\nfor the physical as well as the spiritual life. A hard-working man has\nlittle time to be grouchy and to throw wet blankets over the good that\nothers are trying to do. He is likely to be a lifter and not a leaner,\na doer and not a talker. Nothing keeps people from finding fault so\nwell as having so much to do that they can scarcely find the time in\nwhich to do it all. Especially is this important for those who have to\nspend a good deal of time in each other's company, and who must learn\nto bear with each other's faults and go on with their own work to the\nbest of their ability. It must not be forgotten that a great many of\nthe faults of others are to be attributed rather to the state of their\nhealth than to their disposition, and once this is rightly understood\ncharity will readily help us to gloss them over or forgive them. Any\none who makes his own faults the subject of excuse {323} on the score\nof health, when his health is something that by a little care he could\nimprove, is of course imposing on himself if he does it at all\ndeliberately, and he is trying to impose on good nature if he thinks\nthat other people do not appreciate that his ill health is really an\nexcuse and not a reason for his faults.\n\nIn the chapter on Abstinence it is suggested that one of the best\nthings that men and particularly women could practice to advantage\nfrom the standpoint of religious abstinence would be abstinence from\nexcessive rest. Rest is one of the most dangerous remedies that we\nhave, nearly as dangerous as opium and with a definite tendency for a\nhabit to be acquired by the system for it whenever it is indulged in\nto excess, exactly as is true of the opiates. If mortification of the\nspirit were to be practiced by abstinence from overrest and by a\ndefinite amount of exercise every day it would be an excellent thing\nfor the religious as well as the physical life. This is one of the\nmost frequent advices of those interested in the spiritual life as\nwell as the bodily health for many generations. What people need is to\nkeep busy. This is good for both their minds and their bodies. It\nrequires a great deal of mortification of the inclinations to keep at\nwork and above all to take exercise voluntarily when one might sit\naround and enjoy the delightfully lazy feeling of doing nothing, but\nthat way lies serious disturbance of health. The men who have been\nvery hard workers, especially from a sense of duty and not for mere\nselfish reasons, taking a great deal of exercise and going to bed so\nthoroughly tired every night that they went to sleep as soon as their\nhead touched the pillow, have been long-lived as a rule, unless they\nmet with some accident or infection.\n\n{324}\n\nAbove all, it is important for any one who wishes to retain his\nself-respect and keep from that sluggishness which is so fatal to the\npower to pray and to meditate not to permit his abdominal and flank\nmuscles to become overstretched and to allow fat to accumulate within\nthe abdomen until it is actually a burden. There is almost no excuse\nfor any one permitting his waist line to become larger in girth than\nhis chest, unless of course he happens to have some deformity that\nmakes exercise very difficult or practically impossible. To keep these\nmuscles in good condition prevents slouchiness and makes the\nindividual ever so much more ready for activity of any kind. The only\nway that these muscles can be kept in tone to hold in the abdomen\nproperly and keep the circulation within it in such vigor as will\nsupport the digestive tract so as to permit and encourage its proper\nactivities is by exercising them. This requires the performance of\ncertain exercises every day. Stooping, bending, stretching, all these\nmust be practiced if the muscles are not to be allowed to degenerate.\nThere is no harder task than to keep up the custom of performing these\nexercises regularly a couple of times a day, for though only from five\nto ten minutes is needed night and morning to maintain the muscles in\ncondition or even to restore them when they have once begun to sag,\nall sorts of excuses come in to prevent the regular practice of the\nexercises, and it is the regularity above all that counts.\n\nA man who keeps these muscles in good shape will be much readier for\nevery sort of activity than if he allowed them to yield, and one of\nthe secrets of the army officers' power as the years go on so that,\nquite contrary to the usual rule in life it is men well beyond sixty\nwho make some of the greatest successes as leaders, is because their\n{325} regular training and discipline keep them from letting their\nmuscles lose tone and their powers deteriorate. The setting-up\nexercises of the army or navy indulged in for fifteen minutes a\nday--and this could be divided into two periods--would keep men in\ncondition and prove at the same time a very salutary mortification and\nabove all an exercise in self-control and persistent application to a\ngood purpose that would constitute a magnificent factor for that\ntraining of the will that is so important for religion.\n\nNerve irritation is oftener a function of insufficient exercise and\nair with overfeeding than of any other factor. This same thing is true\nfor suspicion and jealousy and envy and other of the supposed inner\nemotions of the soul. They will disappear very often before the fresh\nair, while they will be fostered by life indoors and by the coddling\nof ills by rest and high living generally. The passions, by which a\ngreat many people mean mainly the sexual feelings, though of course\nthey also include the tendency to overeat and especially to stimulate\none's self to eating in various ways, are all fostered by being much\nindoors and not getting enough fresh, outdoor air and particularly\ncold air.\n\nThere are a great many people who seem to forget that air is\nabsolutely the most important requisite for life, and that when it is\ncold it takes heat away from the animal body and sets all the cell\nfunctions working at their best. Human beings are practically heat\nengines, and we keep on manufacturing heat all the time. As our\ntemperature never rises except when we suffer from fever, some outlet\nmust be found for this heat, and unless there is exposure to the air\nand especially air in motion that will carry heat away from us, the\nheat is consumed in {326} various large organs and almost invariably\nsucceeds in making us quite miserable. It is under these circumstances\nof sluggish indoor living particularly that irritability of all kinds\nis heightened and that the tendency to lack of self-control is most\nmanifest. It is a form of intoxication actually that comes over people\nand would remind us not a little of the intoxication that follows from\nsmaller amounts of alcohol with the resultant lack of inhibition.\n\nWhen people are much out in the air it is surprising what they can\nstand in the shape of injury without great suffering. Our young\nsoldiers learned during the war that their outdoor life in camps and\nat the front made the slighter wounds appear almost as nothing to them\nand even the severer wounds caused them nothing like the pain which\nthey had anticipated or which they actually would have caused if the\nsoldiers continued to be in the same state of mind and body as regards\nthe reaction to pain which had been true during their civilian days.\nIt requires much less courage to be heroic when one has been living\nthe outdoor life and has been hardening muscles by exercise and plain\nfood and not too much sleep than when one is living the indoor,\nrelaxed over-rested life. That does not lessen the merit of what they\ndid, but helps to account for its development in just ordinary mortals\nand above all helps to explain why now they modestly prefer not to\ntalk about it, for to them it seems to have been just all in the day's\nwork.\n\nNot infrequently oversensitiveness of disposition which resents even\nthe slightest imputation and which is often prone to translate what\nwas a mere conventional remark into a fancied insult is due to lack of\nsufficient outdoor air to keep the individual in good health. On the\nother {327} hand men and women who spend a good deal of time outside\nare capable of standing even severe insults without wincing under them\nand sometimes this rebounds greatly to the benefit of the cause for\nwhich they are working. Father Lockington has dwelt on this in one of\nhis chapters rather interestingly.\n\n  \"Good health helps us to be patient and silent under insult and\n  wrong, when this makes for duty better done. The souls for whom we\n  labour are often unreasonable, often ungrateful, often crooked, but\n  the trained worker never hesitates. Strong and self-contained he\n  moves serenely on; no display of temper mars his work, no hasty word\n  is uttered, however great the provocation. Like the missionary\n  calmly wiping his face, when spat upon in the Japanese street, or\n  that Little Sister of the Poor, who, struck across the face when\n  begging food for her old people, calmly answered, 'That is for\n  myself, and I deserve it; please now give me something for Christ's\n  poor,' such a worker sees only souls here below, and Christ above,\n  waiting for them. A healthy body will keep the mind broad and even;\n  it has no place for brooding suspicion to lurk; it will help the\n  soul to take a wide view of life and prevent that narrowness of\n  thought, so fatal to work, to which our life of continual\n  introspection tends.\"\n\nA great many of the vicious impulses in connection with suspicion and\njealousy and envy may be traced to a lack of diversion in life. There\nare some people who take no pains to organize existence in such a way\nthat they have definite diversion at certain times. Every human being\nought at some time on every Sunday to decide that on certain days of\nthe following week, and above all on certain evenings, he will do\nthings in which he is {328} particularly interested and which he can\nlook forward to with pleasant anticipation. Those who can should\narrange either to go to the theater, or to a lecture in which they are\ninterested, or to visit friends whom they care to see, or to go to a\nlibrary and look up something that they have been wanting to find out\nabout; or, if it is pleasant weather, to go for a short excursion or a\nboat ride or something of that kind and they should make two or three\nappointments with themselves for definite occasions of recreation for\nthe ensuing week. As a rule all that is necessary for this is to make\nup one's mind to do it, though there is a tendency on the part of a\ngreat many people just to let each evening be like every other evening\nand because of lack of sufficient interest they lose that variety\nwhich is the spice of life. As a result existence becomes dreadfully\nmonotonous, and those who live such narrow lives become the subjects\nof all sorts of unfortunate suggestions with regard to those around\nthem.\n\nOver and over again I have found that when women patients particularly\nwere the subjects of various of these nervous irritabilities so that\nthey were permitting themselves actually to be led into being deluded\ninto various suspicions, there was a prompt disappearance or\nsignificant minimization of these thoughts when diversions were\nproperly introduced into their lives. The founders of religious orders\nwere very wise in this matter. In all the religious orders the members\nare required by rule to spend a certain time in recreation, that is in\nconversation and lighter occupation, usually several times every day.\nThis must be spent in company with the others and the members of the\nhouse are not allowed to absent themselves without good reason. Young\nreligious sometimes feel like resenting the rule requiring {329} them\nto be present day after day at recreation as if it represented a waste\nof time, but they learn later on in life how wise it is. The various\nfeast days of the Church are celebrated in such a way that there is a\ndefinite diversion from the usual routine of life and then there are\nspecial indulgences at table and in the matter of spending time in the\nopen and receiving visitors and other things of that kind which mean a\nvery great deal in breaking the monotony of the religious life.\n\nVery often scruples are, as we have pointed out in the chapter on\nNervous Diseases, only a manifestation of a nervous disposition\nsometimes on a hereditary, but sometimes on an acquired basis. The\nacquired basis is very often a lack of nutrition due to insufficient\nfood, for people who are underweight are much more subject to dreads\nand obsessions of all kinds than are those who are up to weight.\nLiving on the will, as it is called, when one is underweight and does\nnot eat very much, certainly not sufficient to supply the energy for\nwhat has to be accomplished, is a fruitful source of irritability of\nany and every kind. It keeps people on edge, that is in a condition of\nunstable equilibrium, and almost anything that touches them has a\ntendency to put them into a state of disequilibrium. Bringing people\nup to normal health and especially up to normal weight is often the\nbest possible means to lessen their tendencies to scruples and to\nvarious other manifestations supposed to be spiritual yet which\nrepresent only conditions and symptoms that are frequently seen in\nthose who have no religion and no conscientious obligations with\nregard to anything.\n\nIt is surprising how often a sluggish state of the bowels proves to be\nseriously disturbing to the spiritual life. {330} People find it hard\nto pray without distraction or to meditate without getting sleepy, and\nthey are liable to think of themselves as perhaps being the object of\nvery special attention on the part of certain evil spirits who make it\ntheir business to distract and obtund those who are trying to put\nthemselves in communication with the Most High, when all that is\nreally the matter is that they are absorbing certain materials which\nought to be excreted promptly but which are being delayed in their\nintestinal tract longer than is good for the individual.\n\nI am not one of those who believe that intestinal auto-toxemia is a\nvery serious condition which produces dire results, but I know very\nwell that absorption in any quantity of residual materials from the\nintestinal tract that were meant to be excreted will produce langour\nand sluggishness. The present fad among certain physicians for\nattributing a great many serious symptoms to intestinal\nauto-intoxication has no basis in physiological chemistry and\nrepresents only one of those exaggerations of a minor truth for which\nmedicine is so famous. The idea of self-poisoning, which is all that\nauto-intoxication means, is a very old one in medicine and the use of\ndrastic purgatives such as calomel in large doses and the antimonial\npurges and then of blood letting represent the responses to this idea\nwhich doctors made in an older time. We know that they did harm and\nthose who would exaggerate the meaning of auto-intoxication in our\ntime are likely to do just as much harm, but there is no doubt at all\nthat obstipation will make the majority of human beings uncomfortable\nand take away their initiative and keep them from being up to their\nbest in mental and spiritual matters. To use some of the greatly\nadvertised remedies or modes of treatment which are suggested for\n{331} it, however, would probably do more harm than good. There are a\nnumber of simple sensible methods of treatment by which the affection\nmay be overcome. Above all the formation of good habits, of taking an\nabundance of water, of eating coarse food, the peelings of baked\npotatoes and the parings of baked apples and an occasional orange with\nits peel, and using marmalade rather freely as well as eating whole\nwheat bread will gradually overcome the condition. The important thing\nis not to mistake the merely physical affection for a spiritual\ndisturbance.\n\nIt requires persistence to form good habits and it is ever so much\neasier just to take something that will supposedly do the same good\nwork \"while you sleep\" and are not bothered by the exertion of the\nwill power necessary to form the habits that are required. Many a\ndisturbance of health is due to sloth and laziness rather than to\nignorance of what ought to be done or to any inherent tendency to ill\nin the body. Any number of people blame Providence for ills which they\nhave brought on themselves by neglect of their own health and the\nhabits necessary to maintain it.\n\nNothing so conduces to good health as the regularity of life without\nhaste and without worry which the rational practice of religion brings\nin its train. The attitude of mind that a trusting faith in the\nAlmighty fosters is particularly likely to prevent the neurotic\nsymptoms and exaggerations of feelings which are responsible for so\nmuch of the modern suffering of mankind. It makes the real pains and\naches ever so much more bearable and eliminates those which to a great\nextent are imaginary. The success of all sorts of curious therapeutic\nsystems which prove after a time to be utterly without beneficial\n{332} effect on the human body shows how much faith in anything may\nmean for health and restoration to health, even in the midst of what\nis supposed to be rather serious illness, and as men are bound to have\nfaith in something and a living faith in a Providence that somehow,\neven though we may not be able to understand it, cares for men,\ndrawing good even out of evil, can accomplish an immense amount in\nmaking men less amenable to suffering even in this world. It would be\ntoo bad to reduce religion merely to this status, but this should be\none of its benefits. As the Scriptures said, \"For it is not a vain\nthing for you because it is your life, and through this thing you\nshall prolong your days in the land.\"\n\n\n{333}\n\nINDEX\n\n{334}\n\n{335}\n\nINDEX\n\n\nAbernethy, 169\nAbortion, 316\nAbstinence from exercise, 114\nAccommodation of the eye, 204\nAdvent, 111\nAEschylus, 255\nAgnosticism, 30\nAid, mutual, 106\nAlcohol, 207\nAltruism, 82\nAmpere, 15, 18, 38\nAneurysm, 173\nAnthony, St., 298\nAntonius, St., 130\nApoplexy, 110\nAristotle, 147\nArkwright, 122\nArmageddon, 187\nArnold, Matthew, 3, 4, 165\nArteriosclerosis, 112\nAsceticism, 151, 155, 198\n\"Assent, Grammar of\", 3\nAtrabilious, 320\nAtterbury, Bishop, 199\nAugustine, St., 2, 11\nAusterity, 165\nAuto-intoxication, 330\nAuto-toxemia, 330\nAvalanche, Law of, 87, 273\n\nB\n\nBacchus, 138, 173\nBacon, Francis, 11, 28, 163\nBarrett, 214, 224\nBartholomew, 215\nBelief in immortality, 291\nBell, Alexander Graham, 78\nBenedict, St., 35, 36\nBenedictines, longevity, 300\nBernard, Claude, 25\nBernheim, 246\nBiliousness, 320\nBlind children, 188\n\"Blue devils\", 47, 93, 319\n\"Blues\", 319\nBoissarie, Doctor, 252\nBone setter, 248\nBotticelli, 19\nBoulger, Professor George, 27\nBrethren of the Common Life, 276\nBreuil, Abbe, 39\nBrewster, 15\nBright's disease, 110, 115\nBrowne, Sir Thomas, 84\nBuchner, 28\nBurdett, 89, 90\nBurke, Thomas, 6\nByron, Lord, 199\n\nC\n\nCalderon, 255\nCamoens, 259\nCampbell, Lord, 152\nCancer, 260\nCard playing, 101\nCarnival, 128\nCarroll, 172, 264\nCastelnau, General de, 41\nCatherine, St., of Siena, 96, 227\nCave man, 39, 69\n\n{336}\n\nCervantes, 269\nCharity, law of, 106\nChest, girth, 324\nChevreul, 280\nChicago, 49\nChrist, Imitation of, 276\nChristianity, pillars of, 7\nChrystal, Professor George, 20\nCicero, 2, 261\nCid, 126\nCimabue, 136\nCirce, 170\n\"Civilization and Health\", 301\nClarke, 197\nCoddling, 325\nCode, Hebrew Health, 309\nCohan, George M., 252\nCold, 244\nColton, 263\nColumbus hospitals, 49\nComfort, increase of, 265\nConklin, Professor, 164\nContagion, 313\nCorrigan, 25\nCoulomb, 16\nCulture Sciences, Glenmore School of the, 262\n\nD\n\nDamien, Father, 71\nDancing, 138\nDante, 100, 126, 269, 276, 292\nDavidson, Thomas, 262\nDavy, Sir Humphry, 12, 16\nDearness of fellow mortals, 95\nDecadence, 200\nDegenerate, 199\nDegeneration, 145\nDelusions, 206;\n  of grandeur, 211;\n  of persecution, 213\nDenver, 49\nDescartes, 19\nDexter, Professor Edmund T., 282\nDiabetes, 115, 312\nDionysus, 138\nDiscomfort, neurotic, 273\nDisease, conveyance of, 314\nDisease,\n  mental, 142;\n  statistics, 187;\n  venereal, 184\nDissipation, barbaric, 136\nDiversion of mind, 140\nDowie, 250\nDramatics, 139\nDreads, 57;\n  in life, 249;\n  of punishment, 289\nDrug addictions, 178\n\nE\n\nEdmund of Canterbury, 154\nElectricity, delusions, 206\nElijah, 250\nElizabeth, St., of Hungary, 97\nElsmere, Robert, 6\nEmber days, 115\n\"Energies of Men\", 175\nEnvironment, 164\nEpileptics, 188\nErethism, sexual, 99, 203\nEsculapius, 309\nEuripides, 148\nExercise, 114\nExercises, setting up, 325\nExistence, strenuous, 279;\n  struggle for, 105\nExorcism, 214\nExpectancy of life, 295\n\nF\n\nFaraday, 15\nFashion, 143, 201\nFasting and sex impulses, 118\nFaust, 65, 255\nFayolle, General, 43\nFear thoughts, 234, 250\nFerdinand, St., 96\nFirst Cause, Divine, 29\nFittest, survival of the, 108\nFoch, Marshal, 53\nFoerster, 155, 190, 197, 231\n_Folie du doute_, 220\nForbes, 16\nFrancis, St., of Assisi, 161\nFrankfort on Main, 317\n\n{337}\n\nFreud, 231\nFreudianism, 232\nFrightfulness, 207\nFurth, 318\n\nG\n\nGalvani, 15, 38\nGhetto, 315, 317\nGladstone, 121, 141, 163, 258\nGoethe, 151\nGoldsmith, 199\nGoodell, President, 36\nGouraud, General, 42\nGraham, 15\nGraves, Robert, 25\nGreatrakes, 250\nGrenfell, Doctor Wilfred, 73\nGrouch, 182\nGuilds, 137\n\nH\n\nHabit, 179\nHaelo, 3\nHaelu, 3\nHaig, 54\nHaleness, 3\nHamilton, 15\nHamlet, 255, 289\nHands in contagion, 313\nHappiness, formula of, 63\nHarrison, Frederic, 29, 32\nHazard, moral, 295\nHealing, metaphysical, 250\nHeart disease, 110;\n  impulses, 98\nHebrew Sanitary Code, 307\nHenry VIII, 153\nHeredity, 164;\n  and longevity, 295\nHerodotus, 126\nHerschel, 15\nHobby, 101, 140\nHolidays,\n  bank, 124;\n  in the year, 122\n  _et seq._\nHoliness, 3\nHolmes, Oliver Wendell, 24, 294\nHomer, 170, 275\nHomicide, increase in, 290\nHorace, 52, 64\nHospitality, 94\nHospitals, 49\nHughes, Justice, 160\nHuman engines, 325\nHumility, 212\nHungry, feed the, 86\nHutchinson, Woods, 301, 302\nHuxley, 49, 82, 166\n\"Hygiene, Divine\", 307\nHygiene and Sanitation, 270\nHypnotism, 246\nHyslop, Doctor Thomas, 209\nHysteria, 225;\n  major, 241\n\nI\n\nIgnatius Loyola, 36\nImbeciles, 188\nImitation of Christ, 275\nImmortality, 279;\n  belief in, 291\n_Imponderabilia_, 233\nImpurity, 184\nInfinite, 44\nInfluenza, 157, 313\nIngersoll lecture, 70\nInsane, increase in, 209\nInsanity,\n  alcoholic, 211;\n  delusions, 206;\n  limitations of, 213;\n  religious, 208\nInstinct, religious, 8\nInstincts of helpfulness, 105\nIrritability\n  of life, 320;\n  of temper, 117;\n  of tissues, 117\n\nJ\n\nJacopone da Todi, 165\nJames, Professor William, 34, 67, 151, 162, 176, 262, 269\nJesuits, General of the, 267\nJewish\n  Ghetto, 317;\n  longevity, 318;\n  resistance to disease, 315\nJob, 255\nJoshua, 311\nJoy, 139\n\nK\n\nKeats, 199\nKelvin, Lord, 11, 12, 15, 16, 20\n\n{338}\n\nKempis, Thomas a, 1, 276\nKennan, George, 285\nKentucky, mountains of, 94\nKepler, 13\n_Kosher_, 312\n\nL\n\nLactantius, 2\nLaennec, 25, 38\nLaplace, 19\nLaughter and sanity, 230\n\"Layman, The Creed of a\", 29\nLecky, 85\nLegoit, 318\nLeisure, 133\nLent, 111\nLeo XIII, 280\nLeverrier, 37\nLeviticus, 306\nLiberty, 132\nLicense, 132\nLiebault, 246\nLiebig, 12\nLife,\n  factors in, 238;\n  prolongation of, 298;\n  The Mystery of, 99\nLinnaeus, 12\nLister, Lord, 25\nLiving on the will, 329\nLockington, Rev. William J., 319, 327\nLondon, 316\nLongevity, 295;\n  and monasticism, 299;\n  Jewish, 318;\n  of Benedictines, 300;\n  of professions, 297;\n  of Trappists, 299;\n  religious, 297;\n  trades, 297\nLouis, St., 96\nLourdes, 251\nLowell, James Russell, 5, 281\nLoyola, Ignatius, 36\nLubricity, goddess of, 170\nLumbago, 246\nLuther, 88\nLuxury, 197\n\nM\n\nMabie, Hamilton, 276\nMacaulay, 121\nMacaulay, Jerry, 179\nMagician, The Wonder Working, 255\nMagna Charta, 126\nMaistre, Joseph de, 157\nMalingerers, 240\nManchester slums, 314\nMania doubting, 223\nManning, Cardinal, 303\nMargaret, St., of Scotland, 97\nMarne, first battle of the, 54\nMarriage, 196\nMartineau, Jacques, 2\nMatthew, Father, 175\nMaud, Queen, 97\nMaxwell, Clerk, 12, 15\nMeat eating, 112\nMeditation, 43\nMephistopheles, 65\nMercier, Cardinal, 52\nMercy,\n  corporal works of, 88;\n  works of, 87\nMesmer, 250\nMichelangelo, 38, 157\nMicrobes, ultramicroscopic, 157\nMilton, 84, 259\nMind,\n  diseases of the, 142;\n  diversion of the, 140;\n  \"Unsoundness\", 208\n\"Miracle Man\", 252\nMisophobia, 221\nMitchell, Dr. John K., 218\nMitchell, S. Weir, 203\nModeration, 296\nMolokai, 71\nMoly, 170\nMore, Sir Thomas, 147, 152, 225\nMorgagni, 38\nMorley, John, 163, 258\nMortification, 325\nMosaic Code, 307\nMoses, 310\nMother,\n  foreign born, 315;\n  native born, 315\nMueller, Johannes, 25\nMulry, Thomas, 103\nMuensterberg, Professor Hugo, 209\nMutiny, Indian, 266\n\n{339}\n\nN\n\nNapoleon, 28\nNature, human, 296\nNeptune, 37\nNerve irritation, 325\nNerves, 241\nNervous, breakdown, 235;\n  diseases of Jews, 218\nNervousness, 229\n\"Nervousness, Mastery of\", 172, 264\nNetherlands, 276\nNeurotic tendencies, 217\nNewman, Cardinal, 3, 4, 28, 303\nNewspapers, 136\nNewton, Sir Isaac, 13, 28\nNew York, 49\nNibelungen, 126\nNietzsche, 56, 150\n\nO\n\nObermaier, Father, 39\nObesity, 312\nObsessions, 222\nOersted, 15, 16, 18\nO'Grady, Standish, 125\nOhm, 15, 20\nOlympian religion, 161\n_Ora et labora_, 35, 322\nO'Reilly, John Boyle, 43, 202\nOsler, Professor, 70\nOvereating, 110\nOverindulgence, 117\nOversensitiveness, 326\nOverwork, 172\nOwen, Sir Richard, 23\nOxygenation of tissues, 320\nOzanam, 18, 19, 38, 100\n\nP\n\nPaget, Sir James, 24\nParalysis,\n  general, of the insane, 210;\n  infantile, 157\nPark, public, 129\nPascal, 19\nPasteur. 12, 26, 37\nPatience, 270\nPan, General, 41\nPaul of Aegina, 215\nPearson, Doctor Karl, 77\nPellico, Silvio, 23\nPericlean period, 125\nPetain, Marshal, 42, 54\nPity, 279\nPlato, 148, 236\nPoggendorf, 39\nPoor in spirit, 161\nPoor, Little Sisters of the, 327\nPope, 199\nPorritt, Dr., 316\nPoverty, voluntary, 159\nPractitioners, irregular, 249\nPredispositions toward irrationality, 213\nPrison existence, 92\nPrometheus, 255\nPrudery, 185\nPrussia, 318\nPsychology of humanity, 149\nPsychoneuroses, 68, 225, 242, 248\nPsychotherapy, 219\nPtah Hotep, 168\nPythagoras, 148\n\nQ\n\nQuintilian, 196\n\nR\n\nRamon y Cajal, 273\nRanke, 280\nRattray, Doctor Alexander, 307\nRay, John, 28\nRayleigh, Lord, 16\nReading, 136, 202\nReasonableness, 149\nRecreation, 328\n_Relegere_, 2\n_Religare_, 2\n_Religio_, 2\n_Religio Medici_, 84\nReligion\n  and health, 316;\n  and science, 9;\n  and suicide, 286;\n  foundations of, 7;\n  requiem of, 6\n\n{340}\n\nRepression, sexual, 203\nRest,\n  dangerous, 323;\n  sons of, 182\nReticence, 195;\n  religious, 196\nRich, Mabel, 154\nRichardson, Sir Benjamin Ward, 314, 317\nRoberts, Lord, 70, 171\nRomance of the Rose, 257\nRomanes, Professor George, 27\nRowan, 15\nRuskin, 86, 99\n\nS\n\nSabbath, 128\nSaint Anthony, 298\nSaint Antoninus, 130\nSaint Augustine, 2, 11\nSaint Benedict, 35, 36\nSaint Bon, 42\nSaint Catherine of Siena, 96, 227\nSaint Edmund of Canterbury, 154\nSaint Elizabeth of Hungary, 97\nSaint Francis of Assisi, 161\nSaint Ignatius Loyola, 36\nSaint Louis, 96\nSaint Margaret of Scotland, 97\nSaint Theresa, 40, 53, 189, 227, 228\nSaint Vincent de Paul, 18, 81, 100\nSanity and laughter, 230\nSchlatter, 250\nSchurman, President, 6, 31, 82\nSciatica, 245\nScience and religion, 9\n\"Scientists, Religious Beliefs of'\", 15\nScruples, 220\nSecchi, 39\nSeeing life, 189\nSeeley, Professor A. D., 238\nSelf-consciousness, 274\nSelf-mastery, 232\nSelf-pity, 56\nSelf-poisoning, 330\nSeneca, 148\nSenility, 173\nSensuality, 199\nService, social, 84\nSettlement work, 18, 97\nSex\n  education, 192;\n  hygiene, 190;\n  irregularities, 189;\n  problem, 198\nSexuality, 98\nSexual repression, 203\nShakespeare, 199, 255, 275, 289\nShame, 190\nShows, 134\nSilence, 43;\n  conspiracy of, 185;\n  policy of, 190\n\"Silly seventies\", 107\nSins, seven deadly, 181\nSistine Chapel, 158\nSlave labor, 124\nSleep, 113\nSmith, Doctor Goldwin, 259, 264\nSocrates, 148\nStandard Oil Company, 107\nStokes, 15\nStores,\n  drug, 130;\n  tobacco, 130\nSuffering\n  and Providence, 254;\n  mystery of, 255\nSugar, consumption of, 180\nSuggestion, 191\nSuicide\n  and religion, 286;\n  and sunlight, 282;\n  and war, 285;\n  in December, 281;\n  frequency, 278;\n  in Ireland, 287;\n  in June, 280;\n  in Switzerland, 288;\n  \"The Problem of\", 286\nSuperman, 108, 150\n_Superstes_, 5\nSwinburne, 227\nSybarite, 267\nSympathy, 56\n\nT\n\nTabrum, 16\n_Taedium, vitae_, 66\nTait, Professor P. G., 14\nTalbot, 15\nTalmudic writings, 314\nTangi, 222\nTaylor, Professor John W., 26\nTemptation, 189\nTemptations, sexual, 193\nTheresa, St., 40, 53, 189, 227, 228\n\n{341}\n\nThistleton-Dyer, Sir W., 82\nThoreau, 127\nThucydides, 163, 258\nTracadie, 71\nTrappist longevity, 299\nTuberculosis, 312\n\nU\n\nUlysses, 170\nUndereating, 110\nUnderwork, 172\n\nV\n\nVacation, yearly, 120\nVaughan, Cardinal, 40\nVenus, 173\nVerdun, 42\nVesalius, 37\nVincent de Paul, St., 18, 81, 100\nVinci, Leonardo da, 39\nVirtue, 178\nVirtues, cardinal, 177\nVolta, 15, 21, 38\nVon Moltke, 171\nVulcan, 173\n\nW\n\nWaist line, 324\nWallace, Alfred Russel, 214, 224\nWar and suicide, 285\n\"War, Moral Equivalent of\", 68\nWar neuroses, 242\nWard, Mrs. Humphry, 6\nWatts, 122\nWeight, normal, 329\nWells, H. G., 69, 266\nWhite, Andrew D., 290\nWhittaker, Professor, 62\nWhittington, Dick, 97\nWilde, Oscar, 64\nWilks, Sir Samuel, 24\nWill, training of the, 325\nWindle, Sir Bertram, 67\nWood, Sir Evelyn, 70, 171\nWoodhead, Professor Sims, 25\nWork for idle hands, 143\nWorkers, hard, 323\nWorld, flesh and devil, 201\nWorld invisible, 233\nWorry not work, 296\n\nZ\n\nZone, temperate, and suicide, 283\n\n------------------------------\n\nBy the Author of \"RELIGION and HEALTH\"\n\n  HEALTH THROUGH WILL POWER\n\nBy JAMES J. WALSH, M. D.\n\n_Medical Director of Fordham University School of Sociology_\n\n12mo.   Cloth.   288 pages.\n\n-----\n\n\"The American Public sorely needs the gospel of health\nthat Dr. Walsh preaches to it in his new book.\"\n       --_The Pilot, Boston_.\n\n\"I do not wonder that your splendid book 'Health Through\nWill Power' has met with such great success. I know that\nI could hardly leave the book out of my hands, it was so\ninteresting and instructive.\"\n      --_Archbishop Patrick J. Hayes, of New York_.\n\n\"'Health Through Will Power' is packed with medical\nwisdom translated into the vernacular of common sense.\"\n      --_The Ave Maria_.\n\n\"Your book is capable of adding largely to happiness, as\nwell as health. It is also wonderful, spiritually. I feel like\nrecommending the book to everyone I know.\"\n      --_Mgr. M. J. Lavelle, of New York_.\n\n\"This book should find a place in every home, as it will\nhelp to bring us back to a more natural manner of living.\"\n      --_The Rosary Magazine_.\n\n--------\n\nLITTLE, BROWN & CO., Publishers\n34 Beacon Street, Boston\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<pre id=\"pg-footer\">","title":"Religion And Health","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":101912}